Aviation... and DWI right at the beginning of my journey.

E

ExtremeA79

Pre-Flight
Joined
Dec 7, 2024
Messages
30
Display Name
Display name:
ExtremeA79
Hey y'all. I just created this account to post this and gain as much insight I can into how screwed I am pursuing what was until Thursday the 5th a fruitful blooming path that I was following. Here are the details.
I got DWI on the 5th, my absolute only offense, not even a speeding ticket on my record at 23 years of age(Texas). I haven't gotten to the point of conviction or what have you since this just occurred, but I'll likely just get probation and perhaps a license suspension for a few months at the worst. The judge at the correctional facility said that because this is my only offense and not a trouble maker I would likely be able to expunge or seal my record at the least.

Here's the crappy part I'm sure you guys reading up to this point are already thinking -- doesn't do much right? FAA can still see it regardless. I just want some advice, I've just started my PPL, looking to get into commercial, what extra steps would I have to do to have so much as a shot at this? Maybe not airlines but do you guys think other aviation jobs would still hire me? And if I built up enough hours at other jobs would airlines after a certain amount of years pass between the DWI and that future point consider me? Should I shoot this dream in the head?

Other question... heard some people in another thread on this topic say I'd need a HIMS AME, do a cogscreen, etc. is that information up to date? Can anyone provide a list of the things I will need to do to get even near an even footing on this? For example, in order to do this I'd need- - cogscreen, HIMS ame, this, that ... etc.

Help me out here guys, I'm on this precipice and really love flying but I don't know if I can continue.
 
Or were you righteous and refused to blow? (In which case you made you life very difficult?)

And HAVE YOU STOPPED drinking……
Or Is this not YOUR problem?
And even worse, if there was an admin. DL suspension, the 61.15 clock is running…..
 
wellknow said:
what was bac?
Click to expand...
They actually haven't told me my BAC but ill find out soon obviously i cant say its below .15, but im fairly confident it is.I will say I dont drink often and definitely dont have a tolerance, and had like three glasses of bourbon and ate good meals before and after and plenty of water (weightlifting boxing, hydrohomie)
 
bbchien said:
Or were you righteous and refused to blow? (In which case you made you life very difficult?)

And HAVE YOU STOPPED drinking……
Or Is this not YOUR problem?
And even worse, if there was an admin. DL suspension, the 61.15 clock is running…..
Click to expand...
So because it just happened the suspension hasn't hit, but I have everything bookmarked and I will be reporting it asap. I didn't drink often before, and had done it that night because my friend came from out of town and we were at a jazz lounge concert. Unfortunate. I accept I made a mistake for sure and fully believe in the idea that your actions have consequences, but I am trying to see if this is the right move for me going forward. *edit -- also I accepted a blood test at a hospital I didn't do anything like deny tests, and the county doesnt do breathalyzer actually only a blood test with consent.
 
but you didn't answer the quetion. HAVE VYOU STOPPED DRINKING
DID YOU REFUSE TO BLOW
 
bbchien said:
but you didn't answer the quetion. HAVE VYOU STOPPED DRINKING
DID YOU REFUSE TO BLOW
Click to expand...

He said his county doesn’t do breathalyzer, they do blood tests. I’d say surely the FAA can fault him for the sheriff’s legal processes, but I’m afraid there is a chance they will.

The rule for pilots who drive is not even one.
 
bbchien said:
but you didn't answer the quetion. HAVE VYOU STOPPED DRINKING
DID YOU REFUSE TO BLOW
Click to expand...

bflynn said:
He said his county doesn’t do breathalyzer, they do blood tests. I’d say surely the FAA can fault him for the sheriff’s legal processes, but I’m afraid there is a chance they will.

The rule for pilots who drive is not even one.
Click to expand...


Hmm, Doc, are you drinkin'?
 
Fiveslide, sometimes readying very quickly i'll miss that. But his BAC measured in ANY way makes a huge difference. A one off with BAC <0.15 is not huge deal. A refuse to blow or no BAC is treated as if it were bertween 0.15 and 0.199. 0.20 or more is alcohol dependency by agency definition. But I think his refusal to answer if he's stilldrinking- tells the tale of loving his liquor more than aviation. And I'm done here. A DUI is a HIT over the head and bids one take action and change....
 
Last edited:
bbchien said:
Fiveslide, sometimes readying very qickly i'll misst that. But his BAC measured in ANY way makes a huge difference. A one off with BAC <0.15 is not huge deal. A refuse to blow or no BAC is treated as if it were bertween 0.15 and 0.199. 0.20 or more is alcohol dependency by agency definition. But I think his refusal to answer if he's stilldrinking- tells the tale of loving his liquor more than aviation. And I'm done here. A DUI is a HIT over the head and bids one take action and change....
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm just messing with you. You can just about spot in the first post of each of these threads, those who are going to take your expert advice and direction seriously and those that think the rules and FAA hoops shouldn't apply to them.
 
bbchien said:
Fiveslide, sometimes readying very qickly i'll misst that. But his BAC measured in ANY way makes a huge difference. A one off with BAC <0.15 is not huge deal. A refuse to blow or no BAC is treated as if it were bertween 0.15 and 0.199. 0.20 or more is alcohol dependency by agency definition. But I think his refusal to answer if he's stilldrinking- tells the tale of loving his liquor more than aviation. And I'm done here. A DUI is a HIT over the head and bids one take action and change....
Click to expand...
Hey man, I'm 23. I haven't even been able to drink long enough to even develop an addiction. Disregard that for a sec and let me explain why I don't even drink a lot in the first place... I'm a health person. I lift weights, I've been boxing for 3 years at this point and liquor and smoking are things that just make me fat -- a shot of liquor is like 90 calories, and marijuana just makes me hungry. My point in this exposition is that OF COURSE I'M DONE DRINKING!! This crap is TRAUMATIZING to me. Getting pulled over on an empty road when you know you're smoked is a horrible feeling, and even more so when it's the rare occasion you even chose to drink! A literal rare occasion.
 
Fiveslide said:
Yeah, I'm just messing with you. You can just about spot in the first post of each of these threads, those who are going to take your expert advice and direction seriously and those that think the rules and FAA hoops shouldn't apply to them.
Click to expand...
I definitely accept the consequences of my poor decision making. There were multiple opportunities for me to avoid this, but that wasn't my intention making this post. I want to see what other experienced pilots have to say in their experience how a first time DUI with no prior record might affect my future and any advice etc etc they might have.
 
bflynn said:
He said his county doesn’t do breathalyzer, they do blood tests. I’d say surely the FAA can fault him for the sheriff’s legal processes, but I’m afraid there is a chance they will.

The rule for pilots who drive is not even one.
Click to expand...
"Refusal to blow" is just a generic term for refusing ANY of the post-arrest tests, be they blood, breath, or urine. It doesn't mean "While you did submit to a blood test, you opted not to blow so we're gonna get you on that".
 
ExtremeA79 said:
Hey man, I'm 23. I haven't even been able to drink long enough to even develop an addiction. Disregard that for a sec and let me explain why I don't even drink a lot in the first place... I'm a health person. I lift weights, I've been boxing for 3 years at this point and liquor and smoking are things that just make me fat -- a shot of liquor is like 90 calories, and marijuana just makes me hungry. My point in this exposition is that OF COURSE I'M DONE DRINKING!! This crap is TRAUMATIZING to me. Getting pulled over on an empty road when you know you're smoked is a horrible feeling, and even more so when it's the rare occasion you even chose to drink! A literal rare occasion.
Click to expand...
There's how you see it, and there's how the FAA sees it. You don't have to convince yourself. The FAA is who you have to convince.

I suggest you learn 14 CFR 67.307 and just how they define "substance abuse" and "substance dependence". These diagnoses don't even exist in real world medicine, but the Federal Aviation Regulations in regards to mental health disorders (which this falls under) were written back in the days of DSM III, while the rest of the world goes by DSM-V-TR.

The reason you don't know your BAC yet is because you had the blood draw done, and results take time to come back from the lab. It's not an instantaneous result like a breathalyzer.

From this point forward, I highly suggest you make the decision to walk away from ALL forms of alcohol for good. This is what the FAA will expect of you throughout the remainder of your aviation career, and they make no exceptions. You may as well kiss your flying dream goodbye if you are unwilling to do this, no matter how "unfair" you perceive it to be.

Be prepared for a very unfair fight for your medical, and be willing to take whatever punches they throw your way. As Dr Bruce @bbchien would say, "It's their game, they own the stadium and the football."
 
ExtremeA79 said:
Hey man, I'm 23. I haven't even been able to drink long enough to even develop an addiction. Disregard that for a sec and let me explain why I don't even drink a lot in the first place...
Click to expand...
It's a fallacy that you can't have developed an alcohol addiction at 23, even if you didn't start until you were 22. It can't be "disregarded." Driving more than once drunk (whether caught or not) is substance abuse by the psychological standards. Continuing to drink after you've been arrested for DUI, is also within the definition of abuse. The inability to STOP DRINKING in the light of these is called substance dependence. The latter the FAA takes extremely seriously (not that even abuse is not serious).

As Dr. Chien points out, once you're alerted to the issue, continued consumption of alcohol is inconsistent with flying. When he (and the FAA) says sober at this point, they mean complete abstinence.
 
Jon Wilder said:
"Refusal to blow" is just a generic term for refusing ANY of the post-arrest tests, be they blood, breath, or urine. It doesn't mean "While you did submit to a blood test, you opted not to blow so we're gonna get you on that".
Click to expand...
No no, they quite literally dont do breathalyzer. I actually requested breathalyzer because the idea of the government acquiring my essence for law enforcement rubs me the wrong way
 
flyingron said:
It's a fallacy that you can't have developed an alcohol addiction at 23, even if you didn't start until you were 22. It can't be "disregarded." Driving more than once drunk (whether caught or not) is substance abuse by the psychological standards. Continuing to drink after you've been arrested for DUI, is also within the definition of abuse. The inability to STOP DRINKING in the light of these is called substance dependence. The latter the FAA takes extremely seriously (not that even abuse is not serious).

As Dr. Chien points out, once you're alerted to the issue, continued consumption of alcohol is inconsistent with flying. When he (and the FAA) says sober at this point, they mean complete abstinence.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I understand that. This was my absolute first offense, not even a ticket on my record. My point in saying I couldn't have developed an addiction is just hyperbole, but I just meant that I don't love alcohol, and it's an occasional social thing at best and not something I indulge in, say, the way marijuana smokers smoke daily/weekly.
 
Jon Wilder said:
There's how you see it, and there's how the FAA sees it. You don't have to convince yourself. The FAA is who you have to convince.

I suggest you learn 14 CFR 67.307 and just how they define "substance abuse" and "substance dependence". These diagnoses don't even exist in real world medicine, but the Federal Aviation Regulations in regards to mental health disorders (which this falls under) were written back in the days of DSM III, while the rest of the world goes by DSM-V-TR.

The reason you don't know your BAC yet is because you had the blood draw done, and results take time to come back from the lab. It's not an instantaneous result like a breathalyzer.

From this point forward, I highly suggest you make the decision to walk away from ALL forms of alcohol for good. This is what the FAA will expect of you throughout the remainder of your aviation career, and they make no exceptions. You may as well kiss your flying dream goodbye if you are unwilling to do this, no matter how "unfair" you perceive it to be.

Be prepared for a very unfair fight for your medical, and be willing to take whatever punches they throw your way. As Dr Bruce @bbchien would say, "It's their game, they own the stadium and the football."
Click to expand...
I am absolutely prepared to never drink. It's not something I have ever felt pull towards, unlike marijuana, which I already ceased usage MONTHS prior to any of this. Yes, you're right it's likely just time for those lab results to come in. Unfair fight for my medical, indeed. I've been told by an airline pilot I spoke on the phone with that if I sign up for BasicMed I can train all the way up to commercial, and by the time that's all done I'll have acquired a means of working past this.
 
ExtremeA79 said:
I am absolutely prepared to never drink. It's not something I have ever felt pull towards, unlike marijuana, which I already ceased usage MONTHS prior to any of this. Yes, you're right it's likely just time for those lab results to come in. Unfair fight for my medical, indeed. I've been told by an airline pilot I spoke on the phone with that if I sign up for BasicMed I can train all the way up to commercial, and by the time that's all done I'll have acquired a means of working past this.
Click to expand...
So BasicMed requires that you've held a medical certificate at any point after July 14th, 2006. However, this incident will undo any medical you currently hold, which means you will have to go through the HIMS process to acquire a medical certificate all over again before you can fly on BasicMed.

Now...once the new medical certificate expires, you can walk away from it and go BasicMed.

If you currently hold an airman certificate of the pilot variety (even a Student Pilot Certificate), 14 CFR 61.15(d) states you must report all motor vehicle actions within 60 days from the date of the action. Reference 14 CFR 61.15(d) for additional details.
 
ExtremeA79 said:
No no, they quite literally dont do breathalyzer. I actually requested breathalyzer because the idea of the government acquiring my essence for law enforcement rubs me the wrong way
Click to expand...
I get it. I was simply clarifying that "refusal to blow" is a generic term to mean that you refused any and all post-arrest BAC testing. A blood test is not a "refusal to blow".
 
ExtremeA79 said:
I've been told by an airline pilot I spoke on the phone with that if I sign up for BasicMed I can train all the way up to commercial, and by the time that's all done I'll have acquired a means of working past this.
Click to expand...
Nope. You need a medical first before you can go on basicmed. If you already have a medical you'll lose it when you notify the FAA of your DWI.

ExtremeA79 said:
marijuana, which I already ceased usage MONTHS prior to any of this.
Click to expand...
The medical application asks about any drug use within the past two years. Making a false statement on this form is a felony. Just sayin'.


Hmmm... unrelated to the OP's question, but I wonder what happens when a pilot with no medical (a Sport Pilot or other pilot flying as PP) reports a DWI? If there's no medical to revoke, to they revoke the pilot certificate instead?
 
Dana said:
Nope. You need a medical first before you can go on basicmed. If you already have a medical you'll lose it when you notify the FAA of your DWI.


The medical application asks about any drug use within the past two years. Making a false statement on this form is a felony. Just sayin'.


Hmmm... unrelated to the OP's question, but I wonder what happens when a pilot with no medical (a Sport Pilot or other pilot flying as PP) reports a DWI? If there's no medical to revoke, to they revoke the pilot certificate instead?
Click to expand...
Read 61.15. They can suspend or revoke ANY certificate, rating, or authorization. It's not limited to the medical.
 
Let's be clear about one thing - being a pilot and drinking are not incompatible, btu they are hard to coordinate. If you're flying or driving, you're not drinking alcohol in any form.
 
bbchien said:
but you didn't answer the quetion. HAVE VYOU STOPPED DRINKING
DID YOU REFUSE TO BLOW
Click to expand...

Actually Doc the correct question is did you refuse a test or tests, which in must states may be breath, urine or blood at the direction of the charging officer.
 
bflynn said:
Let's be clear about one thing - being a pilot and drinking are not incompatible, btu they are hard to coordinate. If you're flying or driving, you're not drinking alcohol in any form.
Click to expand...
Once you have substance abuse/dependence on your record, they pretty much are. The FAA only believes in provable abstinance as a way to demonstrate you've gotten over your issues.
 
ExtremeA79 said:
The judge at the correctional facility said that because this is my only offense and not a trouble maker I would likely be able to expunge or seal my record at the least.
Click to expand...
You need a good lawyer yesterday. If you can find one who also knows pilot stuff, that would be great. If you're in NTX, DM me for a recommendation.

Everyone else needs to chill out because you seem to have the right attitude and be doing the right things. But some are hammers and only see nails.
 
Jon Wilder said:
I get it. I was simply clarifying that "refusal to blow" is a generic term to mean that you refused any and all post-arrest BAC testing. A blood test is not a "refusal to blow".
Click to expand...
Perhaps some use it that way. But often "refusal to blow" means a court order for a blood draw or a request for a blood draw instead of a breathalyzer (which is what you'd want if you're innocent). "No BAC result" would be a less ambiguous way to refer to cases without a BAC result.
 
bflynn said:
He said his county doesn’t do breathalyzer, they do blood tests. I’d say surely the FAA can fault him for the sheriff’s legal processes, but I’m afraid there is a chance they will.

The rule for pilots who drive is not even one.
Click to expand...
Hmmm . . ..

So, I'm not supporting drunk-driving, or refusing to cooperate with reasonable requests by authorities. I understand that both driving and flying are privileges extended by the state (state meaning both levels of government) . . ..

And I'm not offering an opinion as to whether or not any person's actions were reasonable, or being accurately reported.

But, in the United States, a person's natural right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures is enshrined in our most significant foundational document.

I know that we agree to surrender certain rights to the government when we request driving or flying privileges. And I don't doubt that the state or federal DOT can enforce the agreements we make.

But to me, there would have to be some supporting evidence to not consider a blood draw to be an unreasonable seizure. (As in enough to warrant a court order.)

Jack - Whose opinions, like an old S&H Green Stamp, have a cash value of 1/1000 of one cent.
 
Last edited:
JackL-3J said:
But to me, there would have to be some really substantial supporting evidence to not consider a blood draw to be an unreasonable seizure.
Click to expand...
They'll either get your consent or an order from a judge, either of which satisfies the fourth amendment, if you refuse. They won't take your blood based on implied consent, but they will take your license, and they will use it against you. All constitutional.
 
Last edited:
bflynn said:
If you're flying or driving, you're not drinking alcohol in any form.
Click to expand...

It was a long time before I realized we are being silly thinking "I'll be ok with one drink" before driving - or teasing the 'drink to fly' window.

I quit my social drinking, and evening wine drinking about 2 years ago (since I started flying people around) and I gotta say it's a relief.
I no longer have to worry about those flashing lights in the mirror ending my aviating.

These weekly stories of dui vs aviation medical add to my conviction.
It's a word that needs to be delivered to all aviation hopefuls somehow.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I quit my social drinking, and evening wine drinking about 2 years ago (since I started flying people around) and I gotta say it's a relief.
I no longer have to worry about those flashing lights in the mirror ending my aviating.
Click to expand...
Designated drivers and Uber/Lyft also exist. If drinking, don't drive. If driving, don't drink. But at 23, the OP's executive brain function isn't even fully developed.
 
Lindberg said:
They'll either get your consent or an order from a judge, either of which satisfies the fourth agreement, if you refuse. They won't take your blood based on implied consent, but they will take your license, and they will use it against you. All constitutional.
Click to expand...
I would think that evidence that would allow a judge to order a blood test would meet my standard of "really substantial", but in the interest of clarity I moderated my language.

I don't support driving (or boating, cycling, and flying) while impaired. I don't disagree with the rather obvious (to me) fact that society is a social compact where we have all agreed to give up a LITTLE autonomy in order to be organized.

But, I worry about the changes that I have seen in my lifetime where the presumption of innocence, requirement that an accuser substantiate a claim, and both procedural and substantive due process is being replaced by presumptions of guilt and forcing the accuser to prove thier innocence.

Thankfully I have never been in the situation, but I have seen where policies, such as the FAA's on alcohol use, have been weaponized by those with a grudge (like an ex-). And I have seen the cost of having a government actor with massive resources come after a citizen based on information later proven to be spurious.
 
JackL-3J said:
I would think that evidence that would allow a judge to order a blood test would meet my standard of "really substantial", but in the interest of clarity I moderated my language.
Click to expand...
Is your "really substantial" standard more or less than the "probable cause" the fourth amendment calls for?
 
Lindberg said:
Is your "really substantial" standard more or less than the "probable cause" the fourth amendment calls for?
Click to expand...
Probably about the same, which is why I went back and removed the words "really substantial". No system (or person) is perfect. You or I sitting in for a judge may come to a slightly different conclusion after hearing the alleged facts, but procedurally having someone else hear the allegation is a safeguard.

My thought is that no citizen should have to prove thier innocence in order to be free from the effects of an unsubstantiated accusation, that an accusation by itself is not a justification for a fishing expedition, that accusers need to be responsible for thier words, and government only act to impose additional restrictions on citizens after establishing responsibility.

My intent is not to protect the guilty, although that is the way many frame procedural safeguards.
 
So to the OP- if you're willing to volunteer what your Blood Alcohol was I can tell you what's ahead. But if you're not....I can't help you.....and that bit about are you abstinent - it's going to matter. You're going to get randomed. They can do that, and they do. Some more than once. And if you're positive you're into a multi year expensive path back, e.g no beginning your journey and a lot of requriements "for quite some time".

HIMS AME
 
23 sure is old enough to be addicted. There was a young lady where I worked as a LEO who was racking up arrests for public intoxication, along with hospital stays. The DA finally prosecuted her to try and force her into treatment. A judge ordered a medical evaluation, and it came back that at age 22, her liver was 50% functional. She had started drinking at 14, and by 18 was up to a fifth of vodka a day.
 
Back
Top