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

The FAA, like all federal agencies, is not immune from the law. Each agency has administrative judges that review agency actions for legal compliance. Their rulings can be challenged at the Court of Federal Claims. CoFC decisions can be appealed to the Supreme Court.
 
Ed Haywood said:
The FAA, like all federal agencies, is not immune from the law. Each agency has administrative judges that review agency actions for legal compliance. Their rulings can be challenged at the Court of Federal Claims. CoFC decisions can be appealed to the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
The issue is having the funds to fight them. No one individual is going to take on the FAA. It's going to take a special interest group to do it. AOPA and EAA don't seem too keen on the idea (otherwise they'd have done it already).
 
I’m curious as to how this works flying under light sport? If no medical is required and the arrest does not end up with the license being suspended are there any consequences for the pilot?

I don’t drink and drive but symptoms from my MS at times would likely make me look like I’m drunk or high if pulled over and asked to do the standard field sobriety tests (forget about walking a straight line toe to toe). Say I get pulled over, get arrested for DWI but the charges get dropped when the blood or other tests later come back clean? Am I done flying or would I need to jump through hoops costing thousands to keep flying just because I was falsely arrested?
 
Jon Wilder said:
The issue is having the funds to fight them. No one individual is going to take on the FAA. It's going to take a special interest group to do it. AOPA and EAA don't seem too keen on the idea (otherwise they'd have done it already).
Click to expand...
Jon, you omit that in 2009 Congress gave the FAA the authroity to establish their own defintiions of aeromedical disease. The charge was "no accidents". The cost? sigh.
 
bbchien said:
Jon, you omit that in 2009 Congress gave the FAA the authroity to establish their own defintiions of aeromedical disease. The charge was "no accidents". The cost? sigh.
Click to expand...
Then let’s repeal that. No accidents is, bluntly, stupid.
 
WDD said:
But the FAA cares that he got issued the DUI, not if he got convicted.
Click to expand...

They care on a medical application, but he already has a medical and presumably won't be renewing. The reporting requirement outside of a medical application is under part 61 (see @jbarrass post above), which relates to airman certificates, not medicals, and he might not be required to report depending on the details as that does require that there be a motor vehicle action.

jbarrass said:
"requires all Part 61 certificate holders to send a written report to the FAA within 60 calendar days of any drug- and/or alcohol-related MVA". MVA is defined in this section and is not the same as your states definition.
Click to expand...

Here's the FAA definition of MVA:
For the purposes of paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of this section, a motor vehicle action means:​
​
(1) A conviction after November 29, 1990, for the violation of any Federal or State statute relating to the operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated by alcohol or a drug, while impaired by alcohol or a drug, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug;​
​
(2) The cancellation, suspension, or revocation of a license to operate a motor vehicle after November 29, 1990, for a cause related to the operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated by alcohol or a drug, while impaired by alcohol or a drug, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug; or​
​
(3) The denial after November 29, 1990, of an application for a license to operate a motor vehicle for a cause related to the operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated by alcohol or a drug, while impaired by alcohol or a drug, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug.​

Regarding #1, it is possible that he won't receive a conviction for operating while intoxicated, depending on his attorney and the court and what sort of deal he can cut. Sometimes on a first offense people get "reckless" driving. #2 might get dicier, since it doesn't require a specific conviction, but if he skates without license action it would be moot. #3 is not applicable; he already has a license. So there's a (perhaps slim) possibility he won't have to report under Part 61.

Basic Med has a 2-year time-out for substance abuse, so IF he doesn't get a DWI conviction and IF no action is taken against his driver's license, it's possible his problem could be solved by waiting a couple of years.

But this is all legal arm waving. What worries me is that, as in most of these sorts of threads, we're getting the story piecemeal. We don't know the BAC, further along we hear about marijuana use, then we get a mention of ADHD. It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, and the more we learn the more screwed he seems to be. I'm just waiting for the posts that mention anxiety, suicide attempts, paranoia, fits of psychotic rage,......

I suspect that, if we ever hear the whole story, he's screwed. Self-screwed, as it's all on him.
 
Jon Wilder said:
The issue is having the funds to fight them. No one individual is going to take on the FAA. It's going to take a special interest group to do it. AOPA and EAA don't seem too keen on the idea (otherwise they'd have done it already).
Click to expand...
My business sued a federal agency in CoFC. Costs $100-$200K. Well within the means of many individuals.
 
Half Fast said:
They care on a medical application, but he already has a medical and presumably won't be renewing. The reporting requirement outside of a medical application is under part 61 (see @jbarrass post above), which relates to airman certificates, not medicals, and he might not be required to report depending on the details as that does require that there be a motor vehicle action.



Here's the FAA definition of MVA:
For the purposes of paragraphs (d), (e), and (f) of this section, a motor vehicle action means:​
​
(1) A conviction after November 29, 1990, for the violation of any Federal or State statute relating to the operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated by alcohol or a drug, while impaired by alcohol or a drug, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug;​
​
(2) The cancellation, suspension, or revocation of a license to operate a motor vehicle after November 29, 1990, for a cause related to the operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated by alcohol or a drug, while impaired by alcohol or a drug, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug; or​
​
(3) The denial after November 29, 1990, of an application for a license to operate a motor vehicle for a cause related to the operation of a motor vehicle while intoxicated by alcohol or a drug, while impaired by alcohol or a drug, or while under the influence of alcohol or a drug.​

Regarding #1, it is possible that he won't receive a conviction for operating while intoxicated, depending on his attorney and the court and what sort of deal he can cut. Sometimes on a first offense people get "reckless" driving. #2 might get dicier, since it doesn't require a specific conviction, but if he skates without license action it would be moot. #3 is not applicable; he already has a license. So there's a (perhaps slim) possibility he won't have to report under Part 61.

Basic Med has a 2-year time-out for substance abuse, so IF he doesn't get a DWI conviction and IF no action is taken against his driver's license, it's possible his problem could be solved by waiting a couple of years.

But this is all legal arm waving. What worries me is that, as in most of these sorts of threads, we're getting the story piecemeal. We don't know the BAC, further along we hear about marijuana use, then we get a mention of ADHD. It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, and the more we learn the more screwed he seems to be. I'm just waiting for the posts that mention anxiety, suicide attempts, paranoia, fits of psychotic rage,......

I suspect that, if we ever hear the whole story, he's screwed. Self-screwed, as it's all on him.
Click to expand...
The original post said:
OriginalPost said:
"I've just started my PPL, looking to get into commercial...."
Click to expand...

And there is the barrier. He's going to have to deal with it.
 
Lindberg said:
On what basis would most argue that a single arrest for DUI with the stated facts means you no longer meet the requirements of a class 3 medical?

How does a single DUI arrest with the stated facts meet the FAR definition of substance dependence?
Click to expand...
Well I personally certainly wouldn't make that argument, it's kind of silly. But if you look at the POA threads, most do. At least the vocal ones.

In the real world, common sense says a single DUI arrest with the stated facts does not meet the medical definition of substance dependence. But unfortunately and relevantly, the regulations bounce you to the definition in 14 C.F.R. § 67.307(a)(4) which defies common sense, but seems to be the rule.

I'm not very invested in this specific rule, but regulatory overreach is an area I fight hard, as a hobby and passion really. Bureaucrats make up policies and tell the public they are rules or laws. Changing policies is usually easier than changing rules and both are easier than changing laws (sometimes).
 
bbchien said:
Jon, you omit that in 2009 Congress gave the FAA the authroity to establish their own defintiions of aeromedical disease. The charge was "no accidents". The cost? sigh.
Click to expand...
Do you have a citation for that? I can't seem to find it.
 
bbchien said:
And there is the barrier. He's going to have to deal with it.
Click to expand...

Yes, but he also wrote:
ExtremeA79 said:
Maybe not airlines but do you guys think other aviation jobs would still hire me?
Click to expand...

With Basic Med he can work as a CFI or do glider tows, for example, while documenting a few years of abstinence. And of course there numerous non-pilot aviation jobs.

I doubt it will matter, though. He’d have to be pretty lucky to skate.
 
So.. can a doctor really DIAGNOSE outside the current DSM? Or is he really just opining that in his opinion you meet some arbitrary administrative criteria? Sounds a little like a doctor tryin to be a lawyer.
 
Tools said:
So.. can a doctor really DIAGNOSE outside the current DSM? Or is he really just opining that in his opinion you meet some arbitrary administrative criteria? Sounds a little like a doctor tryin to be a lawyer.
Click to expand...
An FAA doc can he’s “not practicing medicine….”
 
ExtremeA79 said:
I don't have any problems with marijuana, I don't smoke. If someone has a problem with me having smoked when I was a teen, I don't know why I should be so scared about being honest and open if that's what you're implying. I put that behind me, learned how to control myself as someone who is a little ADHD and used it to self medicate.
Click to expand...
I’d suggest controlling yourself by shutting up and stop posting in public. you’ve now admitted to 3 FAA red flags.
 
bbchien said:
I'm old, UTL. When I heard Secretary Pena's acceptance speech, he declaimed: "We will accept no accidents..."
and I'm thinking....."he's gonna be taking the bus a whole lot"
Click to expand...
Fred was wierd at parties in law school (UT) didn’t change when he got older.
 
Tools said:
So why necessary to be a MD or DO?
Click to expand...
It helps to be a medical graduate to understand wth is going on. The SMS5s and 6s do most of the work, and they only have an outline of what's going on. And to be one, you don't have to be licensed in the state where the airman resides. You only need to be licensed in ANY state.
 
Ed Haywood said:
A lot of kids do. The role of older adults is supposed to be helping them through it. Too many on this forum would rather mock them for their own gratification.
Click to expand...
We’re not mocking him.

Look at his attitude the entire post.

First it’s DUI.

Then there’s marijuana.

Then the marijuana was used to self medicate ADHD.

I can guarantee you he did not disclose the latter two to the FAA on his first application.

He comes on here spoonfeeding rather than giving the entire story. We give him what we can based on what he tells us. Then he discloses a bit more. Then a bit more. Then a bit more.

He has demonstrated that he’s willing to withhold necessary information in hopes of manipulating the outcome in his favor.

That doesn’t exactly look good for him. This is the kind of thing that Dr Bruce drops clients for. Not exactly a problem solving attitude.
 
Dana said:
It doesn't matter. You have a medical now, so you can do basicmed. But as soon as you notify the FAA of your DWI, they'll revoke your medical, which means you can't use basicmed any more either.

As for drugs, you said:

So you did smoke? If it's less than 24 months prior, you have or had to answer "yes" to the question about drug use, and you get denied. Or you answer "no", which is a felony. Now, I'm sure more than a few pilots have falsely answered that question and gotten away with it... but once you're in HIMS for drinking, you're under their microscope. And if you ever mentioned marijuana usage to a doctor, it's in you medical records, and when the FAA sees that tidbit, you'll be in HIMS for that as well. It may not be fair or reasonable, but they set the rules you have to play by or you don't play at all.
Click to expand...
Years ago in high school I'd smoke. I'm not worried about some felony for "lying" about marijuana. I don't smoke.
 
r298416123456 said:
Existing Basic Med pilot/CFI with recent DUI here. 40+ years pilot (civilian & military) and CFI. Years of military & civilian medicals. Past special issuance medicals (nothing to do with alcohol/DUI).

Sorry, but to be clear you can't do Basic Med until you've held a medical certificate first. Unfortunately you'll have to endure the medical certificate (Part 67) process before you could be eligible for Basic Med.

If I've read your thread here correctly, if you already have a medical application in MedExpress, if that application is denied you won't be eligible for Sport Pilot either. Not good news I'm afraid. But you're young, and all is not lost.

Basic Med and Sport Pilot are not "get out of jail" cards either. Look up CFR section 61.53 sometime. I'm currently proceeding cautiously as I consider my future under Basic Med (ref. CFR sections 68.9 and 68.11). I empathize.

Don't give up. You're young and have time ahead to sort things out. Path could be difficult and expensive. But if you really want it you can find a way.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was told by a few people basicMed might work, but I do need to research it a little more. Oh well. I do want this though, as of even today they haven't even processed my case or given me the results of my blood alcohol test back... What do you think I could do? They revoke my medical, then what? How would I go about getting that back? Also by the way, I do have a medical currently.
 
Palmpilot said:
He wrote "I already have a medical..."

Of course, he could still be grounded under 61.53.
Click to expand...
I'm looking at 61.53 and a little confused. Could you elaborate on what part of that grounds me/would ground me? I apologize.
 
WDD said:
Substance abuse grounds him under Basic Med rules.
If you are flying under Basic Med, you don’t need to report it to the Security Division. Substance dependance for holders of Basic Med is handled via Federal Aviation Regulation Part 67 “substance dependance within the previous two (2) years.” In this case, a Special Issuance is required before a Basic Med can be obtained.

When we find out what his blood alcohol level was we can revisit the question of 3rd class revoke.

I do see where he had three bourbons at dinner. Seems like a lot, but again let’s see what the lab says.
Click to expand...
Yeah, so 3 bourbons, ate before, ate after, like 3 hours passed after the last drink. Additionally I'm endurance and weight trained and I'm ~170lbs and 5'8".
 
Dry Creek said:
Oh, Johnson county. Good luck with that bunch of yahoos. I had to deal with those bozos with a civil matter. Since they knew the person I was attempting to have charges pressed against (hot check) they did their best to send me from one office to the next at the courthouse there in Cleburne.
Click to expand...
It's horrendous there. Genuinely a different universe within the system. All of it, for money.
 
Jon Wilder said:
Once you notify the FAA, they're going to revoke your medical, which will also revoke any existing BasicMed and your eligibility to obtain BasicMed. Getting BasicMed before reporting will not change this. I wouldn't waste your time with BasicMed at this point. You're going to have to come at it with a fresh medical, and this is going to be a bit of a process.


Oh boy, this is getting more interesting the deeper it gets.

This is something that is talked about repeatedly by Dr Bruce @bbchien (the use/abuse of substances to self medicate an underlying mental disorder). ADHD is something else the FAA is going to look at, and it will come out when you have to go for the substance abuse psych evaluation. If you think this is something you're going to be able to hide from a psychiatric professional...

I HIGHLY suggest you come to terms with the fact that you don't make the rules here. If you want to regain your medical certificate, you're going to have to stop trying to find ways to manipulate the outcome in your favor, accept the rules of the issuing authority, and decide that you're going to play by their rules. Otherwise, as Dr Bruce would say, you're going to end up taking the bus.

You need to get any and all relevant paperwork together for EVERYTHING you have ever been diagnosed with before you ever consult with a HIMS AME, and yes...that means any and all prior ADHD diagnosis and treatment paperwork. So your new case is going to be HIMS for BOTH alcohol AND your ADHD.

Now for everyone else...the phrase "REFUSAL TO BLOW" is a slang phrase. The correct phrase is "refusing a chemical test". The chemical test is done once you have been arrested, taken into custody, and transported to the police station. This test can be either breath, blood, or urine.

Some counties only do blood or urine testing, which must be sent to a lab to obtain results of said tests. This takes time, and the results have not yet been received by the requesting authorities, so the OP does not yet have them. The OP submitted to the chemical test that was required by the arresting authority. He did not refuse said chemical test, so he is covered.

The FAA cannot decide that it will only recognize a breath test. An attorney would see right through this nonsense and easily get it thrown out
Click to expand...

I was never diagnosed, my brother had it much worse and I realized similar patterns. It never really got bad, it just made me gravitate towards it when I was younger. I'm pretty sharp, I take care of myself, I know how to solve my own problems. I don't believe I'm 'manipulating' anything. It's literally the truth. Anyways, as I mentioned before I asked for a breathalyzer which they claim the county doesn't do. I took a blood alcohol test and even as far as today they still havent processed my case or gotten results of my BAC. Lord help me.
 
ExtremeA79 said:
Great thoughtful response.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome. That was the intent of my comment. You should have some self awareness to see how this looks to the experienced community here, most of whom are older and have made or seen plenty more mistakes than you can imagine, if you care.
 
Jon Wilder said:
QUOTE=jbarass]"requires all Part 61 certificate holders to send a written report to the FAA within 60 calendar days of any drug- and/or alcohol-related MVA".
Click to expand...

Medical certificates are issued under Part 67. Pilot certificates are issued under Part 61. So this only applies to pilot certificate holders. OP never mentioned whether they hold a student pilot certificate yet or not.
[/QUOTE]
I do have my student pilot cert.
 
Jon Wilder said:
We’re not mocking him.

Look at his attitude the entire post.

First it’s DUI.

Then there’s marijuana.

Then the marijuana was used to self medicate ADHD.

I can guarantee you he did not disclose the latter two to the FAA on his first application.

He comes on here spoonfeeding rather than giving the entire story. We give him what we can based on what he tells us. Then he discloses a bit more. Then a bit more. Then a bit more.

He has demonstrated that he’s willing to withhold necessary information in hopes of manipulating the outcome in his favor.

That doesn’t exactly look good for him. This is the kind of thing that Dr Bruce drops clients for. Not exactly a problem solving attitude.
Click to expand...
I wasn't ever diagnosed for ADHD, I just noticed strong ADHD patterns in my brother that were reflected less so in me. I'm 23. I haven't smoked in years since high school. It's quite irrelevant and I only brought it up to exemplify that I'm able to quit things that "feel" good. Good on you for being skeptical though. And no, I didn't disclose it to the FAA on my first application because who does? I wasn't even a legal adult when I did those things. I don't think any adult would potentially compromise themself on that application by explaining their undiagnosed MAYBE adhd, and marijuana use. Seriously, I get being honest and disciplined is important certainly but be realistic. Would you screw yourself over on that?
 
Well you put it into public domain so you kinda did already, then made the situation worse by following it up with confirmatory statements that you did so knowingly, and did so on a forum that has members whom are employed by the agency you are ranting against, so idk, but to me that in itself would be another red flag against your judgment or materially significant improvement on maturity and responsible thinking. User names are not a free “nobody will know who you are” way of remaining anonymous. IP address from the poster (which I think would never be brought into question short of a major investigation from something else), but more likely disclosure of lots of details that start to ring bells of a reviewer when you case file comes across their desk for them to put two and two together. Just my hillbilly gut feeling.
 
Back
Top