Beta Technologies is working toward type certification of its CX300 electric conventional-takeoff-and-landing aircraft.
A bipartisan group of lawmakers has introduced legislation aimed at streamlining parts of the FAA’s type certification process, with a particular focus on eVTOL and advanced air mobility aircraft.
The proposed Aviation Innovation and Global Competitiveness Act would require the FAA to publish clearer timelines for certification reviews, define when issue papers are necessary and expand the use of delegated authority for routine compliance findings. Supporters say the bill is designed to increase transparency, predictability and efficiency in a process that many manufacturers describe as inefficient and inconsistent.
At its core, the legislation directs the FAA to establish standard expected timelines for key certification milestones, including review of issue papers and agency responses to applicant proposals. Within 270 days of enactment, the FAA would be required to create ranges for expected response times and report annually to Congress on its performance against those benchmarks.
The bill also encourages the FAA to use industry-developed consensus standards “to the maximum extent possible” as acceptable means of compliance. In addition, it would clarify when issue papers are required—aimed at limiting them to novel or complex matters—and formalize guidance on delegation of routine certification tasks to approved company representatives.
Supporters say these changes would allow FAA engineers to focus on safety-critical decisions rather than administrative bottlenecks.
“This bipartisan legislation brings consistency and transparency to certification while upholding the FAA’s gold-standard safety oversight. It turns innovation into action,” said Kyle Clark, CEO of Beta Technologies, in a statement. “It gives companies like us the confidence to invest, create jobs and deploy next-generation aircraft. The next era of aviation will be designed, built and certified in the United States first.”
The National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), which helped advocate for the bill, framed it as a broader certification reform effort rather than eVTOL-specific streamlining.
“The legislation would enhance transparency, predictability and accountability in the FAA’s aircraft type certification process,” NBAA said in a statement. The association noted that manufacturers currently face “unpredictable and inconsistent” timelines and limited agency resources. NBAA President and CEO Ed Bolen added that the growing AAM sector could reach $115 billion annually by 2035 and support nearly 300,000 jobs.
Dean Rudolph, AAM practice lead at Collinear Group and a designated airworthiness representative, said clearer timelines could improve predictability in early stages of certification, but cautioned that statutory targets alone will not resolve chronic staffing and resource constraints at the FAA.
“The shortage of personnel—and frankly, experienced and appropriately skilled personnel more specifically—is a real friction point,” he said. “They’ve had significant turnover, and they’re trying to immediately place people and bring in resources.”
Rudolph said that while the FAA likely represents the “long pole in the tent” in many certification programs, the applicants themselves can also contribute to delays.
“I have seen applicants submit insufficient documentation, repeatedly clogging up the works and slowing the process themselves,” he said.
Not everyone in the industry views the proposal positively. David Smith, CEO of Robinson Helicopter Company, criticized the legislation in a sharply worded LinkedIn post, characterizing the proposal as “winner-picking” and arguing that it effectively prioritizes eVTOL certification over conventional aircraft programs.
“Instead of promoting and supporting bills that would be in the interest of all aviation safety, this bill as currently drafted would place higher priorities on the certification of eVTOL aircraft [versus] the aircraft that fly today and those that have been in development for the last few years like the Bell 525,” Smith wrote.
While the bill does not mandate faster approvals, it would formalize expected timelines and require the FAA to justify delays in annual reports to Congress. It also includes language stating that the establishment of expected timelines would not create formal penalties or expose the agency to judicial review if timelines are missed.
Related Content
