Congress restricts airport surveillance-for-profit, requires fee transparency

What it does

This bill restricts how aircraft surveillance data (ADS-B broadcasts) can be used. It prohibits anyone from using this data to identify aircraft for revenue collection without the aircraft owner's consent, while preserving air traffic controllers' safety use. It also creates new rules for public airports: before charging general aviation aircraft landing or takeoff fees, airports must publicly disclose their cost-reduction efforts, alternative revenue sources, safety project costs, and the fee's impact on local aviation. Any fees collected must go only to airside safety projects.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is dual: it restricts surveillance-based revenue extraction (privacy protection) and imposes transparency/disclosure requirements on airport fee-setting (accountability). Both are regulatory constraints on entities' unilateral power, not subsidies or carve-outs.

What the text implies

• The requirement that airports disclose 'all efforts' to reduce non-airside expenses and obtain alternative revenues may create litigation risk if airports cannot demonstrate sufficient cost-control, potentially exposing airport operators to legal challenge.
• The Secretary of Transportation's discretionary authority to approve non-safety uses of ADS-B data 'after notice and opportunity for public comment' creates a regulatory approval pathway that could eventually expand data use beyond safety, subject to political pressure.
• General aviation operators may face higher fees if airports shift cost burdens away from commercial carriers; the bill does not cap fee levels, only requires disclosure and safety-project dedication.
• The definition of 'general aviation aircraft' excludes scheduled airline and military operations, potentially creating a two-tier fee structure where general aviation bears disproportionate airport cost burden.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Aircraft owners and general aviation operators gain explicit privacy protections against surveillance-based revenue extraction and transparency requirements before airports impose new fees. Citizens benefit from mandatory public disclosure of airport cost-cutting efforts and fee justification, strengthening accountability in airport governance.

Named in the bill

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Secretary of Transportation, General aviation aircraft operators, Public-use airports, Air traffic controllers

Where it stands

9 cosponsors: 9 Republicans.

• Jun 25, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Jun 25, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

14 lobbying clients named this bill on 17 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $3,812,911 in lobbying spend. A filing names 14 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 94% of bills with at least one filing.

Robert Onder, the sponsor, reported $438,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• American Association of Airport Executives — $1,172,100 on 1 filing
• National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies — $1,005,758 on 2 filings
• Airports Council International -- North America — $775,201 on 1 filing
• Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association — $320,000 on 1 filing
• Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association — $120,000 on 2 filings

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.