PBOR2 passes Senate Committee

oldShar

oldShar

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
1,033
Location
Rio Rancho, NM
Display Name
Display name:
Gwen
The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation has passed the Pilot's Bill of Rights 2, legislation that would make it possible for most private pilots to continue flying without ever again having to obtain a medical certificate.
The legislation, which appears to have strong support in the Senate but has a less certain fate in the House, eliminates the need for private pilots to obtain a third class medical certificate, provided the aircraft they fly weighs no more than 6,000 pounds, has no more than five passenger seats (plus the pilot seat), and remains below altitudes of 18,000 feet and speeds of 250 knots. Pilots, if appropriately rated, can fly VFR or IFR, day or night, single or twin, in qualified aircraft.
New student pilots would need to obtain a third-class medical to set a baseline of health, as would pilots whose medicals expired more than 10 years from enactment of the law. Pilots with special issuance medicals would also need a one-time exam from an Aviation Medical Examiner.
After that, those pilots could fly indefinitely without ever obtaining an FAA medical again. Pilots with current medicals also would never need to visit an AME again.
However, all pilots would be required to visit their personal doctor and supply the physician with a checklist of things to test for. The FAA would never see the results; instead, the pilot would simply make a logbook entry stating the exam had been performed.
Lastly, all pilots would be required to medically self-assess their fitness to fly (which is actually a current regulation) as well as take a free online aeromedical training course once every two years.
"This is great news for the pilot community because it brings us closer than ever to meaningful third class medical reform," said AOPA President Mark Baker. "Bringing the legislation this far has required persistence and compromise in order to get the very best possible deal for pilots while winning the support needed to keep medical reform on the table. Today's action signals that lawmakers are continuing to move legislation that will help hundreds of thousands of pilots fly safely while saving them millions of dollars and countless hours now wasted on the medical certification process."




http://www.flyingmag.com/third-clas...2&spJobID=701087183&spReportId=NzAxMDg3MTgzS0
 
I was chatting with a friend about this, makes you think getting your 14 year old kid a 3rd class medical once "just incase" might be a good bet. Then they'd be in the game forever and if they want to go fly all they need to do is start making logbook entries about doc visits.
 
airheadpenguin said:
I was chatting with a friend about this, makes you think getting your 14 year old kid a 3rd class medical once "just incase" might be a good bet. Then they'd be in the game forever and if they want to go fly all they need to do is start making logbook entries about doc visits.
Click to expand...
Why wait until they are 14?
 
Last minute amendment from Diane Feinstein (D-Umbass)

The amendment modifies the physicians statement from
(iv) to sign the checklist, stating: “I certify that I discussed all items on this checklist with the individual during my examination, discussed any medications the individual is taking that could interfere with their ability to safely operate an aircraft or motor vehicle, and performed an examination that included all of the items on this checklist.”; and

...

(iv) a certification by the individual that the checklist described in subsection (b) was followed in the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7); and​
to
(iv) to sign the checklist, stating: “I certify that I discussed all items on this checklist with the individual during my examination, discussed any medications the individual is taking that could interfere with their ability to safely operate an aircraft or motor vehicle, and performed an examination that included all of the items on this checklist. I certify that I am not aware of any medical condition that, as presently treated, could interfere with the individual’s ability to safely operate an aircraft.”; and

...

(iv) a certification by the individual that the checklist described in subsection (b) was followed and signed by the physician in the comprehensive medical examination required in subsection (a)(7); and​
and adds this:
(l) Authority To Require Additional Information.— (1) IN GENERAL.—If the Administrator receives credible or urgent information, including from the National Driver Register or the Administrator’s Safety Hotline, that reflects on an individual’s ability to safely operate a covered aircraft under the third-class medical certificate exemption in subsection (a), the Administrator may require the individual to provide additional information or history so that the Administrator may determine whether the individual is safe to continue operating a covered aircraft. (2) USE OF INFORMATION.—The Administrator may use credible or urgent information received under paragraph (1) to request an individual to provide additional information or to take actions under section 44709(b) of title 49, United States Code. ​
 
Last edited:
My medical comes up in February. Hope it is the last one that would be nice and save me a few dollars every year and the hassle of getting it all coordinated. I have an SI for sleep Apnea it is a pain to coordinate my annual physical in a reasonable time frame to meeting with the AME. The end result is having physicals in a months time. Just seems silly.
 
What does my anus have to do with flying?

The list of items for the doctor to cover in the examination are now part of the third-class medical exam and are typical to those found in any routine physical. These items include:

Head, face, neck, scalp

Nose, sinuses, mouth, throat

Ears and eardrums

Eyes

Lungs and chest

Heart

Vascular system

Abdomen and viscera

Anus

Skin

G-U system

Upper and lower extremities

Spine, other musculo-skeletal

Body arks, scars, tattoos

Lymphatics

Neurologic

Psychiatric

General systemic

Hearing

Vision

Blood pressure and pulse
Click to expand...
 
The AOPA piece is very vague about the bill's status in the House. 152 co-sponsors isn't a majority and almost certainly the bill in the House is slightly different than what the Senate passed. I'd be curious to know a little more about its potential tenure and fate there.
 
Being one of the resident curmudgeons, it aint gonna happen this year. Probably not next year, either. House will adjourn as soon as the funding bill is passed & signed (expect this Friday 12/18). Each new Congress must convene, or assemble, for the first time at noon on January 3, then it's the next Congress's responsibility and we start all over again.
 
Here is the list of 152 co-sponsors.

List of Sponsors in the House


If your Rep is not one of them, start writing nasty emails to them, start questioning the legitimacy of their parent's marriage at the time of the Rep's birth.

Let them know if they don't sign on as a sponsor, you will write checks to any and every opponent they ever face in any election.
 
And the House Version still has the following:

1) the individual possesses a valid State driver's license and complies with any medical requirement associated with that license;

(2) the individual is transporting not more than 5 passengers;

(3) the individual is operating under visual flight rules or instrument flight rules; and

(4) the relevant flight, including each portion thereof, is not carried out—

(A) for compensation, including that no passenger or property on the flight is being carried for compensation;

(B) at an altitude that is more than 14,000 feet above mean sea level;

(C) outside the United States, unless authorized by the country in which the flight is conducted; or

(D) at an indicated air speed exceeding 250 knots.

(b) Covered Aircraft Defined.—In this section, the term “covered aircraft” means an aircraft that—

(1) is not authorized under Federal law to carry more than 6 occupants; and

(2) has a maximum certificated takeoff weight of not more than 6,000 pounds.
Click to expand...
 
I wrote to my Representative (Mark Amodei, R-NV) and asked that that be changed to 18,000. Mr. Amodei is a co-sponsor.
 
murphey said:
Being one of the resident curmudgeons, it aint gonna happen this year. Probably not next year, either. House will adjourn as soon as the funding bill is passed & signed (expect this Friday 12/18). Each new Congress must convene, or assemble, for the first time at noon on January 3, then it's the next Congress's responsibility and we start all over again.
Click to expand...

What I thought all along. By the time this passes, I will have passed. :rolleyes2:

Cheers
 
murphey said:
Being one of the resident curmudgeons, it aint gonna happen this year. Probably not next year, either. House will adjourn as soon as the funding bill is passed & signed (expect this Friday 12/18). Each new Congress must convene, or assemble, for the first time at noon on January 3, then it's the next Congress's responsibility and we start all over again.
Click to expand...

The next Congress will convene in January 2017. In 2016 the current Congress will still be in place, replaced after the 2016 elections.....
 
As I understand it, part of the new rule is that every four years you must have a physical with your doctor and he must certify that he knows of no condition that would make it unsafe for you to fly.

Does anyone think there may be a reluctance for doctors to sign this? Puts more liability on them, does it not?
 
RalphInCA said:
As I understand it, part of the new rule is that every four years you must have a physical with your doctor and he must certify that he knows of no condition that would make it unsafe for you to fly.

Does anyone think there may be a reluctance for doctors to sign this? Puts more liability on them, does it not?
Click to expand...

Yeah, given that most of them are not knowledgeable about aviation, it seems odd to expect them to certify such a thing.
 
murphey said:
Being one of the resident curmudgeons, it aint gonna happen this year. Probably not next year, either. House will adjourn as soon as the funding bill is passed & signed (expect this Friday 12/18). Each new Congress must convene, or assemble, for the first time at noon on January 3, then it's the next Congress's responsibility and we start all over again.
Click to expand...

Umm, Congress sessions are every two years. The current Congress (the 114th) runs until January 3 of 2017.
 
flyingron said:
Umm, Congress sessions are every two years. The current Congress (the 114th) runs until January 3 of 2017.
Click to expand...

Close...

A Congress is 2 years in length (between House elections).

Each Congress consists of 2 1 year Sessions.

Legislation that is not passed by both houses dies at the beginning of a new Congress and has to start over. Legislation can carry from Session to Session without losing progress.
 
I'm going to be the voice of caution here.

Having been around the regulatory & legal process for many years, be very careful what you wish for.

This bill legislatively mandates "comprehensive" medical exams, which means the FAA can't change it later on.

It allows for the elimination of the third-class medical, which in some cases is a simple "rubber stamp" for all but a set of disqualifying conditions. While it eliminates those conditions, per se, it also means that the examining doctor potentially has more liability and may insist on more extensive & expensive tests that medical insurance (and possibly government-run healthcare if the ACA fails) won't pay for.

The FAA can define "comprehensive" but I'd be willing to bet that most docs will go beyond that. And I'd bet some won't sign off at all.

Also, given what we saw on BFR/IPC recurrent training (8710 recommended in an AC), I could see the FAA "recommending" or requiring a medical form.

So, while I am cautiously optimistic, I am not confident that this will be as much of a benefit as most people hope. And given that some of the definitions will now be LAW (and not regulatory rules), it'll be more difficult to change in the future.

YMMV. This is just my humble opinion.
 
DFH65 said:
What does my anus have to do with flying?
Click to expand...


Congratulations. You may have just started the longest thread in POA history with a question like that.

My answer: have you seen the number of pilots that have suffered from a severe case of cranial-rectal inversion?
 
RalphInCA said:
As I understand it, part of the new rule is that every four years you must have a physical with your doctor and he must certify that he knows of no condition that would make it unsafe for you to fly.



Does anyone think there may be a reluctance for doctors to sign this? Puts more liability on them, does it not?
Click to expand...


That's the first thing I thought of. Fortunately we have the ACA so there should be no worries that you will lose the doctor that you have built a long-term relationship with.
 
wsuffa said:
I'm going to be the voice of caution here.

Having been around the regulatory & legal process for many years, be very careful what you wish for.

This bill legislatively mandates "comprehensive" medical exams, which means the FAA can't change it later on.

It allows for the elimination of the third-class medical, which in some cases is a simple "rubber stamp" for all but a set of disqualifying conditions. While it eliminates those conditions, per se, it also means that the examining doctor potentially has more liability and may insist on more extensive & expensive tests that medical insurance (and possibly government-run healthcare if the ACA fails) won't pay for.

The FAA can define "comprehensive" but I'd be willing to bet that most docs will go beyond that. And I'd bet some won't sign off at all.

Also, given what we saw on BFR/IPC recurrent training (8710 recommended in an AC), I could see the FAA "recommending" or requiring a medical form.

So, while I am cautiously optimistic, I am not confident that this will be as much of a benefit as most people hope. And given that some of the definitions will now be LAW (and not regulatory rules), it'll be more difficult to change in the future.

YMMV. This is just my humble opinion.
Click to expand...

The exam stays with the airman, not the FAA. If the doc won't sign off, go to another that will.
 
garyb said:
The exam stays with the airman, not the FAA. If the doc won't sign off, go to another that will.
Click to expand...

And how many are really going to be interested in signing the document? Opening themselves up to potential judgement and all of the ramifications that entails?

PBOR sounds great in theory, in practice I don't feel it's going to help a lot of us.
 
I have to agree with Bill. Someone on the red board started calling this a 4th class medical. Somewhat less restrictive, but in exchange we add a lot of gatekeepers who'll know very little about what's required physiologically to pilot an aircraft. At least it takes OKC out of the equation after the first cert.

I think I'll just continue to see my AME once every four years should his thing pass.

Would a medical doctor's liability policy include coverage for certification, or will underwriters start to exclude? Never seen one, I assume liability would be similar to CDL exams.
 
Last edited:
Are you saying a physician who is competent and required by law to call the DMV about patients driving ability might be incapable of performing airmen services due to liability?








:rofl:
 
How about AMEs that fought so hard to screw us into keeping the 3rd class. Maybe they will see it as a way to keep the cash cow and provide the sign-offs?
 
Given the "requirement" (per the Red Board) that the examining physician use the 8500-8 as a checklist AND that they are both given the discretion and authority AND liability for determining whether to grant the examinee the authority to fly, it might be well that future "sign-offs" be done by AMEs (who are experienced as pilots) rather than relegating that decision (pass/fail) to "airman UNqualified" general physician to decide "life or death" relative to continued flying (?designating medical denial?).
(Thank Diane Feinstein for that)

This might be a can of worms undesired for future operations
 
Does anyone know if Board Certified Nurse Practitioners will be able to give the sign-off?
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top