Sports license with dui

[bullwinkle]

Wow, was I distracted when I posted this.

...but it doesn't impact either the medical self-certification of a SP or nor the application to be a SP.

If people think about what they're saying, it boils down to "This person needs help and I don't think they shouldn't be flying, so I'm going to see how the FAA can keep them from flying." So now there's a suggestion that the FAA might do a background check when the SP certificate is applied for and deny it based on the background check because they (FAA) don't like a lifestyle choice.

What's next? Should one be denied because there was a drug conviction in the past, a felony, misdemeanor, traffic ticket? How about if they're a different kind of addict, maybe a child abuser or have OCD? (which should have the letters in order and be CDO) Straight, gay, something in between? Perhaps they should be denied for being Christian, a veteran (aka right wing terrorist) or because they don't pray before a flight. Is anyone really suggesting the FAA should be able to apply a personal judgement about lifestyle in order to prevent a pilot from flying?

Who has said anything about preventing the OP from flying? My suggestion is that he manage his issues with alcohol *himself*, not that government or anybody else manage them for him.

I don't see anybody else suggesting he be prevented from flying either, other than pointing out the ways the existing regulations might already be preventing him from legally doing so.

 

[bullwinkle]

I know of no medical reason in my state to lose your drivers license. Your eyes get tested when you first get it, but for most people that is many years ago. If there is a reason I'm unaware.
Now, losing your drivers license due to a DUI is very real. I wonder if DUI is the main focus behind the license in lieu of medical??

Most states will not allow you to drive with a seizure disorder, as one example.

 

[ktup-flyer]

so if I walk in and say hey lets teach me to fly sport what will they ask for? I could do 103 or fly my rc plane above the clouds if its best to wait

Flying RC planes above the clouds isn't a good idea, either...

 

[txflyer]

I am so lucky I was one of the 'good 'ol boys' when they pulled me over ... one of the deputies that showed up was a High School alum.

They took our beer and other illegal refreshments and asked me "do you know how to get home without going through town?" I said "you know I know these dirt roads like the back of my hand."

They let me go... that's the difference between the seventies and now. I'm no better than anyone else. It's just luck of the draw...

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm certain Dr Chien does know the answer because there isn't one for SP.

Do you really think that for Sport Pilots the FAA will only care about a DUI that occurs after the person gets a pilot certificate when they reject medicals for Student Pilots who have three DUI's in the past ten years? I think you might just be wrong about that, and I'm sure Bruce knows the answer on that question.

 

[Kritchlow]

Do you really think that for Sport Pilots the FAA will only care about a DUI that occurs after the person gets a pilot certificate when they reject medicals for Student Pilots who have three DUI's in the past ten years? I think you might just be wrong about that, and I'm sure Bruce knows the answer on that question.

That brings up an interesting question. If the Sport candidate is vetted for DUI's when filling the app, what happens if they get 35 DUI's after they get the SP? I realize if they lose their license its no fly, but as soon as they get it back those 35 DUI's are irrelevant...??

 

[Henning]

Do you really think that for Sport Pilots the FAA will only care about a DUI that occurs after the person gets a pilot certificate when they reject medicals for Student Pilots who have three DUI's in the past ten years? I think you might just be wrong about that, and I'm sure Bruce knows the answer on that question.

Does Bruce want to deal with it though?

 

[ClimbnSink]

Do you really think that for Sport Pilots the FAA will only care about a DUI that occurs after the person gets a pilot certificate when they reject medicals for Student Pilots who have three DUI's in the past ten years? I think you might just be wrong about that, and I'm sure Bruce knows the answer on that question.

So the sp standard is a valid DL and the absence of X in your driving history. Where X is some number of DUIs. Finding out at or after your check ride is harsher then getting punted presolo

 

[poadeleted20]

That brings up an interesting question. If the Sport candidate is vetted for DUI's when filling the app, what happens if they get 35 DUI's after they get the SP? I realize if they lose their license its no fly, but as soon as they get it back those 35 DUI's are irrelevant...??

Sport Pilots still have to make the same 61.15 report for any DUI conviction or other motor vehicle action, and the FAA will take appropriate action, including either suspension or revocation of their pilot certificates. Note that 61.15(d)(2) allows suspension or revocation of any certificate you have, not just a medical. Typically, it's the medical against which they take action for Private Pilots and above, because that effectively grounds most powered aircraft pilots, but they'll go after whatever certificate they have to go after in order to put you on the ground when they feel that is necessary.

 

[Kritchlow]

Sport Pilots still have to make the same 61.15 report for any DUI conviction or other motor vehicle action, and the FAA will take appropriate action, including either suspension or revocation of their pilot certificates. Note that 61.15(d)(2) allows suspension or revocation of any certificate you have, not just a medical. Typically, it's the medical against which they take action for Private Pilots and above, because that effectively grounds most powered aircraft pilots, but they'll go after whatever certificate they have to go after in order to put you on the ground when they feel that is necessary.

Good point. Forgot about the self reporting.

 

[poadeleted20]

So the sp standard is a valid DL and the absence of X in your driving history. Where X is some number of DUIs.

I don't know what the standard is, but I'm pretty darn sure Bruce does. And note that you make application for your Student Sport Pilot certificate on the same 8710-11 on which you later apply for your Sport Pilot certificate, and the DL data goes on that form. I suspect the FAA runs that against the NDR right away so you'd not get very far before they discovered those three DUI's, but Bruce would probably know for sure.

Finding out at or after your check ride is harsher then getting punted presolo

Agreed.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Gotcha thanks.

 

[Ravioli]

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this... but here it goes:

The OP is asking a LEGAL question about certification for Sport Pilot, and everyone is referring him to a Dr. who specializes in difficult issues with Medical certification which the OP has stated he isn't after.

Isn't something like the AOPA legal service or a really great (expensive) aviation attorney a better source to refer him to.

(I'll go hide for a while now)

 

[JeffDG]

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this... but here it goes:

The OP is asking a LEGAL question about certification for Sport Pilot, and everyone is referring him to a Dr. who specializes in difficult issues with Medical certification which the OP has stated he isn't after.

Isn't something like the AOPA legal service or a really great (expensive) aviation attorney a better source to refer him to.

(I'll go hide for a while now)

Not a bad point.

The thing is, this type of issue is, 99% of the time, dealt with as a medical issue. So, someone who deals with it from the medical side knows a lot more about how the FAA looks at such issues than others, and I include lawyers.

 

[Henning]

I'm sure I'll get flamed for this... but here it goes:

The OP is asking a LEGAL question about certification for Sport Pilot, and everyone is referring him to a Dr. who specializes in difficult issues with Medical certification which the OP has stated he isn't after.

Isn't something like the AOPA legal service or a really great (expensive) aviation attorney a better source to refer him to.

(I'll go hide for a while now)

No, I referred him to the FAA, they ARE the authority on the matter, and they don't charge a retainer.

 

[Henning]

Not a bad point.

The thing is, this type of issue is, 99% of the time, dealt with as a medical issue. So, someone who deals with it from the medical side knows a lot more about how the FAA looks at such issues than others, and I include lawyers.

Excpet SP runs under an entirely different rule book.

 

[RJM62]

What I personally suspect is that FAA doesn't prevent issuance of a SP certificate based on past DWIs. In fact, I suspect that they don't even check the applicant's driving record at all beyond verifying the current validity of the driver's license and determining whether it has any restrictions.

Even if they do check further and find the DWIs, I suspect that all they do is make a note somewhere to check again on a periodic basis, if they even do that much, which I seriously doubt.

My reasons for these suspicions (and that's all they are) are simply that the only objective, codified words FAA has to say on the matter can be summed up as follows:

1. SP must have a valid state DL.
2. SP cannot have had their most-recent FAA medical denied, revoked, or non-issued once applied for.
3. Any limitations and restrictions on the DL also apply to flying.

That's the only objective law on the matter. There is nothing in the rule about previous DWIs or anything else driving-related. FAA, in effect, delegates that whole matter to the state DMV and accepts their decision as binding. If they say the person is fit to drive, then they can fly SP (subject, of course, to the more vague and subjective provisions of FAR 61.53(b); but those provisions apply to self-grounding and will not prevent initial issuance).

In fact, FAA's whole attitude toward SP and the DL medical suggests that they want to know as little as possible about the airman's medical condition. If they do know, they're theoretically on the hook if the SP augers and takes someone with him. That's why a previously denied, revoked, or not-issued-once-applied-for medical DQs a candidate. Once any of those things happens, FAA knows.

It therefore makes me chuckle to suggest that FAA is going to go looking into a person's past to find problems that they really would rather not know about in the first place. If they do check, then they have to start drawing lines. How many DWIs are okay? One? Two? Ten? Where do they draw the line? And based on what law do they draw it?

Furthermore, what if they do draw that line and deny the guy who has ten DWIs, but not the guy who has one DWI; but then the guy who has one DWI get ****faced and augers his Tecnam with a pax on board? Then the lawyer for the dead passenger gets to ask the FAA why the SP was issued in the first place, even though the FAA knew the applicant had a past DWI.

Such nasty situations and thorny questions can be avoided by the time-honored technique of intentional ignorance, and I strongly suspect that's how the FAA approaches these matters. The very idea that anyone at FAA goes out of their way to probe into an applicant's driving record beyond verifying the current validity and restrictions on the DL comes close to giving me belly laughs.

Nonetheless, I don't know that for sure; so if I were in OP's position, I would check first before I wasted my money on lessons. I would either take Ron's advice and call Dr. Bruce, or I would call the Light Sport Aviation Branch at 405-954-6400 and ask them.

By the way, if I were in OP's position and I chose the latter option, I would not give them my name; and moreover, neither would they ask me for it. They really would rather not know.

Rich

 

[Henning]

I suspect you're right. FAA is so 'hands off' SP and LSA for a reason, they don't want the extra work load. This whole issue was forced on them.

 

[James331]

What I personally suspect is that FAA doesn't prevent issuance of a SP certificate based on past DWIs. In fact, I suspect that they don't even check the applicant's driving record at all beyond verifying the current validity of the driver's license and determining whether it has any restrictions.

Even if they do check further and find the DWIs, I suspect that all they do is make a note somewhere to check again on a periodic basis, if they even do that much, which I seriously doubt.

My reasons for these suspicions (and that's all they are) are simply that the only objective, codified words FAA has to say on the matter can be summed up as follows:

1. SP must have a valid state DL.
2. SP cannot have had a previous FAA medical denied, revoked, or non-issued once applied for.
3. Any limitations and restrictions on the DL also apply to flying.

That's the only objective law on the matter. There is nothing in the rule about previous DWIs or anything else driving-related. FAA, in effect, delegates that whole matter to the state DMV and accepts their decision as binding. If they say the person is fit to drive, then they can fly SP (subject, of course, to the more vague and subjective provisions of FAR 61.53(b); but those provisions apply to self-grounding and will not prevent initial issuance).

In fact, FAA's whole attitude toward SP and the DL medical suggests that they want to know as little as possible about the airman's medical condition. If they do know, they're theoretically on the hook if the SP augers and takes someone with him. That's why a previously denied, revoked, or not-issued-once-applied-for medical DQs a candidate. Once any of those things happens, FAA knows.

It therefore makes me chuckle to suggest that FAA is going to go looking into a person's past to find problems that they really would rather not know about in the first place. If they do check, then they have to start drawing lines. How many DWIs are okay? One? Two? Ten? Where do they draw the line? And based on what law do they draw it?

Furthermore, what if they do draw that line and deny the guy who has ten DWIs, but not the guy who has one DWI; but then the guy who has one DWI get ****faced and augers his Tecnam with a pax on board? Then the lawyer for the dead passenger gets to ask the FAA why the SP was issued in the first place, even though the FAA knew the applicant had a past DWI.

Such nasty situations and thorny questions can be avoided by the time-honored technique of intentional ignorance, and I strongly suspect that's how the FAA approaches these matters. The very idea that anyone at FAA goes out of their way to probe into an applicant's driving record beyond verifying the current validity and restrictions on the DL comes close to giving me belly laughs.

Nonetheless, I don't know that for sure; so if I were in OP's position, I would check first before I wasted my money on lessons. I would either take Ron's advice and call Dr. Bruce, or I would call the Light Sport Aviation Branch at 405-954-6400 and ask them.

By the way, if I were in OP's position and I chose the latter option, I would not give them my name; and moreover, neither would they ask me for it. They really would rather not know.

Rich

Sounds about right.

Here's another thought too, at least in CA, you can have your driving record purged after 5 years, I had to call Sacramento and get some details for my local office, which had zero experience with it. I'm my case it was just a couple old speeding tickets, but I'd imagine it's the same with anything on your driving record

I'd imagine if he got his new clean and clear license, since all his DUIs are over 5 years old, he could purge his record and there wouldn't be anything to find even if the Feds ran his driving record.

 

[bullwinkle]

My reasons for these suspicions (and that's all they are) are simply that the only objective, codified words FAA has to say on the matter can be summed up as follows:

1. SP must have a valid state DL.
2. SP cannot have had a previous FAA medical denied, revoked, or non-issued once applied for.
3. Any limitations and restrictions on the DL also apply to flying.

That's the only objective law on the matter. There is nothing in the rule about previous DWIs or anything else driving-related.

That's true. But what started the conversation down this road was the fact of your "point 3" above, combined with the fact the OP has a restriction requiring a breath testing ignition lock. That restriction would also apply to an LSA as well.

Since no such device exists for an aircraft, he's effectively barred from flying an LSA (at the very least solo) until that restriction is lifted. Once lifted, he's essentially like any other Sport Pilot, assuming FAA doesn't run his license info and throw a penalty flag.

 

[RJM62]

That's true. But what started the conversation down this road was the fact of your "point 3" above, combined with the fact the OP has a restriction requiring a breath testing ignition lock. That restriction would also apply to an LSA as well.

Since no such device exists for an aircraft, he's effectively barred from flying an LSA (at the very least solo) until that restriction is lifted. Once lifted, he's essentially like any other Sport Pilot, assuming FAA doesn't run his license info and throw a penalty flag.

Oh, absolutely. He needs to wait until that's cleared up.

Rich

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

'Splain where my reasoning when wrong here (or if I missed a regulation)

61.15 Offenses involving alcohol or drugs.

(a) A conviction for the violation of any Federal or State statute relating to the growing, processing, manufacture, sale, disposition, possession, transportation, or importation of narcotic drugs, marijuana, or depressant or stimulant drugs or substances is grounds for:
​

Nope – does not apply given the narrative supplied by yea olde o.p.

(b) Committing an act prohibited by §91.17(a) or §91.19(a) of this chapter is grounds for:
​

Nope

(c) 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;
​

Yup - this applies

(d) Except for a motor vehicle action that results from the same incident or arises out of the same factual circumstances, a motor vehicle action occurring within 3 years of a previous motor vehicle action is grounds for:
​

Yup - applies as well

(1) Denial of an application for any certificate, rating, or authorization issued under this part for a period of up to 1 year after the date of the last motor vehicle action; or
​

Nope – more than one year since the last motor vehicle action.

(2) Suspension or revocation of any certificate, rating, or authorization issued under this part.
​

Nope

(e) Each person holding a certificate issued under this part shall provide a written report of each motor vehicle action to the FAA, Civil Aviation Security Division (AMC-700), P.O. Box 25810, Oklahoma City, OK 73125, not later than 60 days after the motor vehicle action. The report must include:
​

Nope – doesn’t have a certificate

(f) Failure to comply with paragraph (e) of this section is grounds for:
​

Not an issue

 

[DesertNomad]

Like you guys haven't ever drank and drove home even once in highschool.

Nope. I didn't drink at all in high school. I have only had alcohol on a handful of occasions since and have never driven in that state.

 

[Unregistered]

Let's just be real here. The odds of ever having your history researched for light sport Is so low it is not an issue. Just do what you want, you don't need a medical and you can bribe any doctor to vouch for you if that really makes you feel better. I have bipolar and fly gliders and light sport all the time. BFD the FAA has much bigger fish to fly. Even if they find out what are they going to do pull a medical I don't even have?

 

[Old Geek]

Despite all the rampant speculation of what the FAA might do if they find out a Sport Pilot has past DUI's, nobody has quoted an FAR empowering the FAA to do anything. That's because such an FAR does not exist. As I've reminded Ron before, in this country, our basis for law is "what is not forbidden is permitted". Call the FDSO, the FAA counsel, and Dr. Chien, but when it's all said and done, the FAA has no FAR and no grounds for an enforcement action for past DWI's before the issuance of light sport certificates.

OTOH, our OP would do well to properly and accurately disclose the DWI's when asked, and go and sin no more. Because there are several well-written and enthusiastically enforced FAR's covering those issues.

 

[JeffDG]

Actually, such a FAR does exist.

The light sport medical requires that you not have any condition that prevents the safe operation of the aircraft. The FAA has determined that alcohol abuse and/or dependence is such a condition. They have also determined that the number of DUis reported here is clear evidence of such until rebutted.

 

[Old Geek]

Actually, such a FAR does exist.

The light sport medical requires that you not have any condition that prevents the safe operation of the aircraft. The FAA has determined that alcohol abuse and/or dependence is such a condition. They have also determined that the number of DUis reported here is clear evidence of such until rebutted.

I'm aware of that FAR. I seem to recall that within its context, you and your physician were to make the decision.

 

[poadeleted20]

I'm aware of that FAR. I seem to recall that within its context, you and your physician were to make the decision.

The FAA has the authority to second-guess you and your physician. The only question is whether they will if they see someone applying for Sport Pilot with three DUI's in the last ten years. And since that's an Aeromedical decision, not the Chief Counsel's office, I reiterate that Bruce Chien is the person most likely t be able to provide a reliable answer. But let us know what you find out otherwise.

 

[RJM62]

Actually, such a FAR does exist.

The light sport medical requires that you not have any condition that prevents the safe operation of the aircraft. The FAA has determined that alcohol abuse and/or dependence is such a condition. They have also determined that the number of DUis reported here is clear evidence of such until rebutted.

Actually, not really. The requirement for SP for someone using a DL as a medical is:

(b) Operations that do not require a medical certificate. For operations provided for in §61.23(b) of this part, a person shall not act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember, while that person knows or has reason to know of any medical condition that would make the person unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner.

The requirement for airmen who do possess a medical (including SPs, if they do have a medical) is a bit different:

Operations that require a medical certificate. Except as provided for in paragraph (b) of this section, a person who holds a current medical certificate issued under part 67 of this chapter shall not act as pilot in command, or in any other capacity as a required pilot flight crewmember, while that person:

(1) Knows or has reason to know of any medical condition that would make the person unable to meet the requirements for the medical certificate necessary for the pilot operation; or

(2) Is taking medication or receiving other treatment for a medical condition that results in the person being unable to meet the requirements for the medical certificate necessary for the pilot operation.

It's a not-so-subtle difference. When using a medical, the standard is "unable to meet the requirements for the medical certificate necessary for the pilot operation." When using a DL, the standard is "any medical condition that would make the person unable to operate the aircraft in a safe manner." Meeting the requirements for a medical certificate is not mentioned because the requirements for a medical certificate are completely irrelevant if the pilot is using a DL medical.

Although the myth that a condition that is DQing for a medical grounds a sport pilot persists, and is frequently asserted here, all you need to do is make a phone call to the Light Sport Aviation Branch and they will tell you that it is not true. They will advise the airman to talk it over with his or her doctor, which is the same advice FAA has published on their Web site. Ask your doctor.

In short, the requirements for an FAA medical certificate are irrelevant for an SP who uses his or her DL as a medical. If you have any doubts, call the FAA and ask. They actually answer the phone on the first ring in that branch. But I personally find it a bit bizarre that the myth persists despite the fact that the FARs and every single bit of advice FAA has ever published on the matter say otherwise.

Rich

 

[ClimbnSink]

We are crabs pulling each other back in the bucket. Cya all in the oven.

 

[Unregistered]

All legal issues aside I have one question for the op. Do you still drink. If so, after 3 dui's you are showing that you do not have the right thought processes to pilot an aircraft.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

All legal issues aside I have one question for the op. Do you still drink. If so, after 3 dui's you are showing that you do not have the right thought processes to pilot an aircraft.

But, apparently, you have no problem with him driving a car...

Youse guys crack me up.

 

[mtuomi]

So, how many times did OP drink and drive if he got caught three times? Im guessing tens if not hundreds of times.

 

[EminiTrader]

I'm thinking the OP is long gone...

 

[SbestCFII]

There is nothing to prevent you from starting your dual training, only that you couldn't fly solo or obtain your sport pilot's license with the restriction in place. After you obtain your new license, absent the restriction, then you could complete your solo requirements and obtain your license.

 

[Henning]

All legal issues aside I have one question for the op. Do you still drink. If so, after 3 dui's you are showing that you do not have the right thought processes to pilot an aircraft.

That's your opinion, what difference is it to you how he dies? I'd rather have him drunk in an airplane than a car, less chance of affecting me.

 

[mtuomi]

That's your opinion, what difference is it to you how he dies? I'd rather have him drunk in an airplane than a car, less chance of affecting me.

Sometimes I feel people like that should be encouraged to invent new ways to participate in Darwin Awards...

 

[bullwinkle]

Sometimes I feel people like that should be encouraged to invent new ways to participate in Darwin Awards...

Instead of Hunger Games we could have the Darwin Games!

Put each participant alone in a warehouse full of vehicles, power tools, weapons, whiskey, and fireworks.

 

[vintage cessna]

Pappy Boyington would have no chance today.

 

[Henning]

Sometimes I feel people like that should be encouraged to invent new ways to participate in Darwin Awards...

There has to be a development in quantum physics for that to happen. Under the current rules, they are pretty much all already in use.