Ouch! $50 for a pilot certificate?

Ken Ibold

Ken Ibold

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 21, 2005
Messages
5,889
Location
Jacksonville, Florida
Display Name
Display name:
Ken Ibold
The FAA has published its new rule proposal to require pix on your pilot certificate. Expect to pay $22 to get your smiling face plastered to the plastic, and the FAA expects that price to go up to $50 soon. As an added plus, you will get to pay each time you add a rating etc., and if you don't add a rating you can STILL pay every 8 years when your photo "expires."

See the NPRM here: http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/recently_published/

Edit: Plus, since someone has to verify your picture is actually of YOU, a third party will be involved who, the FAA "anticipates" will charge an additional fee.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info. I had forgotten that was still in the works.

edit: now there will be one more expiration date to remember, the date your photo expires.
 
The FAA can contact the US State Department, and get a copy of my passport photo already in the system. With everything being digital, this whole "it costs $50 to make a cert" is BS. It's a digital photo, in the system. Get a new rating, go into the database and reissue. The plastic doesn't cost $50.
 
To be honest, it actually sounds reasonable. It costs about half that to get a driver's license, where they have some economy of scale. It costs over $100 to get a passport.

I don't like it one bit, I feel the plastic I have is fine. But the FAA is just responding to Congress, I think they dragged their feet on this as long as they dared. In the grand scheme of things it isn't that bad, but I do agree that it is an utterly useless waste of government and private resources. Blame Congress, and perhaps contact your Congresscritter. I doubt you'll get much action, but you might get a bit of false sympathy.
 
EdFred said:
The FAA can contact the US State Department, and get a copy of my passport photo already in the system. With everything being digital, this whole "it costs $50 to make a cert" is BS. It's a digital photo, in the system. Get a new rating, go into the database and reissue. The plastic doesn't cost $50.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it would take 'em millions of dollars to write the software to transfer that digital photo from one incompatible system to another. :rolleyes:
 
steingar said:
To be honest, it actually sounds reasonable. It costs about half that to get a driver's license, where they have some economy of scale. It costs over $100 to get a passport.

I don't like it one bit, I feel the plastic I have is fine. But the FAA is just responding to Congress, I think they dragged their feet on this as long as they dared. In the grand scheme of things it isn't that bad, but I do agree that it is an utterly useless waste of government and private resources. Blame Congress, and perhaps contact your Congresscritter. I doubt you'll get much action, but you might get a bit of false sympathy.
Click to expand...

And if we already have the passport photo, we've already been verified, so the FAA can just grab the photo from the State Department. I think the adding a new rating requires a new photo is BS - even though I don't plan on adding a rating anytime soon.
 
EdFred said:
And if we already have the passport photo, we've already been verified, so the FAA can just grab the photo from the State Department. I think the adding a new rating requires a new photo is BS - even though I don't plan on adding a rating anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you in the slightest, indeed I find the whole thing BS. But asking for $50 for a photo ID does not strike me as being all that unreasonable.
 
I agree that they should be able to get the already verified photo from the government, either state DMV or the State Department. That will eliminate one of the burdensome pieces of this.

The other thing that is problematic is that now every student pilot will need to go to an FAA designee (FSDO, DPE, or knowledge testing center) to get their student pilot certificate (which won't expire), and will be unable to solo until it arrives in 6 to 8 weeks! I thought we were trying to make it easier for people to get into flying?

Note also that they won't allow you to use the temporary certificate after your picture has expired, even if you have another unexpired government issues picture with you. So if they drag their feet in issuing the certificate and you don't receive the new one before your expiration date, you're grounded with no recourse. It seems as if they should allow you to print a receipt showing that you've ordered the replacement certificate and allow you to fly with that and an alternate means of identification.
 
Bottom of page 6, top of page 7, Grant.

The student requirement is insane though, because I know a lot of people that go from solo to private in less than the time that it would take to get the photo certificate back. Then they have to get another certificate? Dumb, Dumb, Dumb.
 
Last edited:
EdFred said:
Bottom of page 6, top of page 7, Grant.
Click to expand...
That's only when upgrading or when you've lost a certificate. For an expiring photo, see p15ff:
Under this proposal, it would be the pilot’s responsibility to apply for a replacement certificate and provide a new, current photo before the photo expiration date. It is important to note that the issuance of a pilot certificate with photo could take up to 6 to 8 weeks. Therefore, a pilot should plan to submit an application, with a new photo, well before the photo expiration date on the current pilot certificate. If the photo expiration date passes before the pilot receives a replacement pilot certificate with photo, the FAA would not issue temporary privileges, and the pilot could not exercise pilot privileges.
Click to expand...
 
did i read right that this is going to cost 387 million dollars in the next 20 years?
 
ScottM said:
So pilots should be paying more than $50/certificate?
Click to expand...

it wasn't clear to me if the 387 million was the money that is was going to cost individual pilots or the money it was going to cost the FAA, or both.
 
tonycondon said:
it wasn't clear to me if the 387 million was the money that is was going to cost individual pilots or the money it was going to cost the FAA, or both.
Click to expand...

Both...costs borne by pilots and the FAA.
 
tonycondon said:
it wasn't clear to me if the 387 million was the money that is was going to cost individual pilots or the money it was going to cost the FAA, or both.
Click to expand...
Yeah I am not sure either. That is why I was asking the question. I guess the question really should be phrased if it is the pilots responsibility to ensure that this program does not impact non-pilot taxpayers?

I don't like the idea of pictures at all and think that Congress passed a stupid law. But that is my opinion.
 
gprellwitz said:
That's only when upgrading or when you've lost a certificate. For an expiring photo, see p15ff:
Click to expand...

We do that with passports now. But yeah, if the FAA screws up that's horse crap.
 
EdFred said:
We do that with passports now. But yeah, if the FAA screws up that's horse crap.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but just to add pages to a passport costs $80 now. I think it's on the order of $120 to renew. But you get 10 years out of it.

6-8 weeks is entirely too long to turn it around.

"Out of abundance of caution.... we are concerned about your security".
 
And why is a passport picture good for ten years but a pilot photo would only be good for eight?

And will this now be considered an actual ID?
 
well that would be a federally issued govt photo ID... so i'm for it. not for the $50, but really... it's not that painful.... $50 every 8 years... I think I'll live.. but yes, its the principle i'm with ya
 
rpadula said:
Yeah, but it would take 'em millions of dollars to write the software to transfer that digital photo from one incompatible system to another. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Tell me about it. The last company I contracted with spent millions to get two incompatible systems to talk to each other because some VP didn't want his department to change to a newer version of the same software.

I hate corporatist idiots like that. Even with retraining costs it would have been cheaper to buy the new package. Still, it was his little pond, f*ck anyone else.
 
EdFred said:
The FAA can contact the US State Department, and get a copy of my passport photo already in the system. With everything being digital, this whole "it costs $50 to make a cert" is BS. It's a digital photo, in the system. Get a new rating, go into the database and reissue. The plastic doesn't cost $50.
Click to expand...
The government isn't allowed to share personal information. Each one has to develop its own; right or wrong. Just ask the IRS or the INS.
Since I can run over to my local town clerk or post office to file for a new passport, don't you think this would be an acceptable way to deal with it? Or have your local DMV handle the photos. The town clerk takes (if I recall correctly) $15 for the service. Now you have another revenue stream for the local government.
 
May I suggest that we start thinking of reasons people can use in their comments to the NPRM on why this proposal is baloney? Here are a couple possibilities:

We're already required to carry government photo ID. It is trivial to cross-check the name and other info on the photo ID with the name and info on the pilot certificate, so the requirement is a redundant expense.

Photo IDs provide no extra security for aviation. Proponents of the regulations should be required to state some specific scenarios (in detail) in which the photo IDs would improve security over existing aviation precautions.

The "abundance of caution" is never valid per se because it is so easily abused.
 
ahhh yes... so... would we then be required to carry with us a SEPARATE govt issued photo id?
 
I like it!
I went to rent a plane and the owner (jokingly) said I needed 5 forms of photo ID. After rummaging through my wallet, i could only find 4 :( But now with this new rule, I'll have that 5th photo ID and I'll finally be able to rent that little old cub!
And the added security of having yet another photo ID is unmeasurable.

Jim Logajan said:
May I suggest that we start thinking of reasons people can use in their comments to the NPRM on why this proposal is baloney? Here are a couple possibilities:

We're already required to carry government photo ID. It is trivial to cross-check the name and other info on the photo ID with the name and info on the pilot certificate, so the requirement is a redundant expense.
Click to expand...

Probably true. In fact the FAA suggests as much in the NPRM:
FAA in NPRM said:
The FAA has determined two photo identifications are unnecessary and do not serve a safety or security interest.
Click to expand...
However, my quick skim of the document showed that this rule is in direct response to a law requiring photos on the certificates. So the FAA really has no choice about doing this? Wouldn't that make the proper avenue of complaint your friendly, local, possibly clueless, congresscritter? Maybe ask them something like "why do you support a law that will cost $700+million when the FAA itself implies it's useless?"

If you read the proposal, they have a list of questions they are specifically looking for comments on. Noticeably absent is "do you think this new process has any value at all?"
 
shenanigans said:
However, my quick skim of the document showed that this rule is in direct response to a law requiring photos on the certificates. So the FAA really has no choice about doing this?
Click to expand...
That's about the size of it.

Wouldn't that make the proper avenue of complaint your friendly, local, possibly clueless, congresscritter?
Click to expand...
It would.
 
The FAA got beat up by congress a couple of months ago about dragging their feet on this.

Congress made the rule, now that Oberstar is history they could potentially change it.
 
Published in the Federal Register today. The clock for comments has started.
 

Attachments

  • 2010-29192.pdf
    93.2 KB · Views: 15
they need to stop the jibber jabber and make it either 5 or 10 years. 8 years is dumb
 
steingar said:
I don't disagree with you in the slightest, indeed I find the whole thing BS. But asking for $50 for a photo ID does not strike me as being all that unreasonable.
Click to expand...
So the price shouldn't be tied to direct costs? Why stop at $50? why not make it $500?

The point is, whether it be $1 or $50 or $500, this new rule would create an additional burden. Is it reasonable or just?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top