Text of the Bill being sent to the President

JoseCuervo said:
I flew 4 hours today with an OB/GYN I. The back seat. This topic came up, and she already had heard about it.

She said she would have no problem signing the forms. She said she would even do a better examination than the current ones.

I re-asked the question, and asked what her insurance company would say, and she just laughed.. She said the insurance company would appreciate her doing stuff that didn't involve high risk delivery of babies.

Worrying about Dr's did not seem to be a rational fear.
Click to expand...


Thanks. I'll have my wife's GYN do mine.
 
Ben said:
I agree. Maybe the FAA will fix the process when the law is instituted/systems are reestablished but I doubt it.. maybe I'm just naturally pessimistic.
Click to expand...

yeah I am not holding my breath. My complaint about the whole thing is that any GP can throw a kid on ADD meds but now that same kid must go through a plethora of testing to disprove it.
 
midcap said:
yeah I am not holding my breath. My complaint about the whole thing is that any GP can throw a kid on ADD meds but now that same kid must go through a plethora of testing to disprove it.
Click to expand...
This is something that really does need to be addressed. Many many diagnosis of ADD that are bogus. My step son was Dx'd ADD young, his dad had died in a car accident and his 21 year old mother was doing the best she could to finish college and raise him alone. The schools answer to his OBVIOUS adjustment issues was medication and mom was too naive to understand. She fully regrets it now, but what do you do?
 
midcap said:
yeah I am not holding my breath. My complaint about the whole thing is that any GP can throw a kid on ADD meds but now that same kid must go through a plethora of testing to disprove it.
Click to expand...

That's the cruelty in this. The diagnosis can occur in a five minute Dr visit. Proving that five minute diagnostic was wrong is a long, involved, expensive ordeal. It's a travesty.
 
Mike Smith said:
This is something that really does need to be addressed. Many many diagnosis of ADD that are bogus. My step son was Dx'd ADD young, his dad had died in a car accident and his 21 year old mother was doing the best she could to finish college and raise him alone. The schools answer to his OBVIOUS adjustment issues was medication and mom was too naive to understand. She fully regrets it now, but what do you do?
Click to expand...

that's the rub. there needs to be a streamlines process or lets say 365 days with out meds and a clean driving record. If your ADD was truly that bad being off the meds for a year and having a clean driving record should put a cork in any concerns.

Also, isn't there a check ride we need to pass to get a PPL?
 
flyingriki said:
Good to hear!
What I'm not getting out of any of this is WHEN? if your C3 expires in the next year this has no effect at all - right?
Click to expand...

I understand it to mean that once the ruled are implemented, provided you've had a class 3 medical that was active at some point up to ten years before the signing of the bill, you can use the "drivers license medical" provided you aren't in one of the special circumstances AND you have the physician's affidavit.

If you've read the first two pages of the bill, what do YOU think it says?
 
iflyatiger said:
I hate to be the one to say this and I hope that I am wrong but what non aviation doctor is going to sign this ?

?
Click to expand...

I know my primary care doctor would sign it without any reservations. The physicals, blood work, etc. that he has me do every year or two is about 1000 times more thorough than anything any AME does.
 
Do most primary care docs have the equipment to check...

(XX) vision (distant, near, and intermediate vision, field of vision, color vision, and ocular alignment);
Click to expand...

I know I've never had these things checked on a regular physical.
 
Everskyward said:
Do most primary care docs have the equipment to check...



I know I've never had these things checked on a regular physical.
Click to expand...
Can you read a business card? Or a pocket sized eye chart held in your hand? Thats near. Can you read an eye chart on the wall? That distant. Field of vision can be roughly assessed by using the doc's finger and your honest report of when it comes into view. Color? The same old plates in crappy light that folks have always used.. ocular alignment... "gee.. you dont LOOK crosseyed to me".
 
Doggtyred said:
Can you read a business card? Or a pocket sized eye chart held in your hand? Thats near. Can you read an eye chart on the wall? That distant. Field of vision can be roughly assessed by using the doc's finger and your honest report of when it comes into view. Color? The same old plates in crappy light that folks have always used.. ocular alignment... "gee.. you dont LOOK crosseyed to me".
Click to expand...
I had a physical today at my PCPs office and I didn't notice an eye chart (which is why I asked the question). But the requirements for third class were pretty low anyway, as I remember. I guess if you can pass the driver's license test. But the past two times I have renewed by mail so I can't remember how long it's been since I had a vision test at the DMV.
 
Doggtyred said:
I understand it to mean that once the ruled are implemented.....you can use the "drivers license medical" provided you aren't in one of the special circumstances AND you have the physician's affidavit.

If you've read the first two pages of the bill, what do YOU think it says?
Click to expand...

Certainly NOT a driver's license medical. Says we are waiting for the FAA to make up the rules. Far cry from what we were told it would be. But, like most things these days, something is better than nothing with this crap ass government. Given the long drag out to date I have no faith in the bureaucratic bozo in charge of the FAA. He's an embarrassment to his ancestry.
 
Last edited:
flyingriki said:
Certainly NOT a driver's license medical. Says we are waiting for the FAA to make up the rules. Far cry from what we were told it would be. But, like most things these days, something is better than nothing with this crap ass government. Given the long drag out to date I have no faith in the bureaucratic bozo in charge of the FAA. He's an embarrassment to his ancestry.
Click to expand...
The long drag out was due to the head of the DOT, not the FAA. The latter had a third class medical reform NPRM ready to go two years ago, but DOT has been refusing to let it see the light of day ever since. :mad:
 
These new exam requirements look to be more extensive and costly than a normal Class III exam.
 
orange said:
These new exam requirements look to be more extensive and costly than a normal Class III exam.
Click to expand...
How do you figure more costly? The doc does them in the office as part of the physical. He might charge more than he would for an annual physical, but the real cost of a 3rd class comes when you need a SI and the FAA asks for a battery of tests for which you have to go to some outside provider, e.g. a hospital. Nuclear stress tests, CT scans or ultrasounds, sleep studies, are all expensive tests, and if not medically necessary, will not be paid for by insurance. I expect there will be little to none of that under the new rules, unless you need a SI for one of the conditions listed in the bill.
 
I am over 50, Ill bet my insurance will pay for this, although i haven't checked. Its really just a physical.
 
Palmpilot said:
The long drag out was due to the head of the DOT, not the FAA. The latter had a third class medical reform NPRM ready to go two years ago, but DOT has been refusing to let it see the light of day ever since. :mad:
Click to expand...

That was the LAST hold up. Huerta sat on it too. I think Paul said it best after Osh last year:

"I have yet to hear Huerta offer a substantive answer on the burning issue of the day, the reform of the Third Class medical. But this week, he reached a new low, suggesting that pilots should contact their congressional representatives to urge action on medical reform. Isn’t this tantamount to saying I can’t do my job, please have congress force me to?

GA’s relationship with the FAA has, under Huerta, eroded to a point I never thought it could reach. And given that the FAA feels it no longer has to respond to legitimate press inquiries, ours is even worse than that."
 
Palmpilot said:
The long drag out was due to the head of the DOT, not the FAA. The latter had a third class medical reform NPRM ready to go two years ago, but DOT has been refusing to let it see the light of day ever since. :mad:
Click to expand...
That explains the requirements for Insulin Dependent Diabetics. To fly a Cessna 172, you have to have the same requirements as a Commercial Truck Driver carrying 50,000 lbs 3-6 feet from you on the freeway.
 
I was just put on a one year Special Issuance for a retina disorder called Lattice Degeneration. The eye tests required by the FAA are extensive and my ophthalmologist says many are completely unnecessary for my condition, especially since it's stable.

I'm hoping the new law lets me avoid having to get all these extra tests and submit them for review by the FAA every year, but now I wonder how difficult it will be to get a doctor to sign the new checklist. It appears that I'll have to put down Lattice Degeneration on the form before I give it to the doctor, and I would imagine that would make him question signing off that he is unaware of any conditions that as presently treated will interfere with my ability to safely operate an aircraft.

I plan on going to my ophthalmologist and retina specialist every year anyway, and I suppose I could try to get one of them to write a letter to my doctor that the condition is stable. Maybe I'll have better luck if I go to my AME and ask them to do the exam and checklist under the new law. This could get complicated.
 
MassPilot said:
I plan on going to my ophthalmologist and retina specialist every year anyway, and I suppose I could try to get one of them to write a letter to my doctor that the condition is stable. Maybe I'll have better luck if I go to my AME and ask them to do the exam and checklist under the new law. This could get complicated.
Click to expand...

I have reports, from my specialists, sent to my PCP. He is already up to speed when this is put into operation.
 
MassPilot said:
I was just put on a one year Special Issuance for a retina disorder called Lattice Degeneration. The eye tests required by the FAA are extensive and my ophthalmologist says many are completely unnecessary for my condition, especially since it's stable.

I'm hoping the new law lets me avoid having to get all these extra tests and submit them for review by the FAA every year, but now I wonder how difficult it will be to get a doctor to sign the new checklist. It appears that I'll have to put down Lattice Degeneration on the form before I give it to the doctor, and I would imagine that would make him question signing off that he is unaware of any conditions that as presently treated will interfere with my ability to safely operate an aircraft.

I plan on going to my ophthalmologist and retina specialist every year anyway, and I suppose I could try to get one of them to write a letter to my doctor that the condition is stable. Maybe I'll have better luck if I go to my AME and ask them to do the exam and checklist under the new law. This could get complicated.
Click to expand...
Form 8500-7 will be your friend...
http://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/form/faa form 8500-7.pdf
 
Whiskey Romeo said:
I have reports, from my specialists, sent to my PCP. He is already up to speed when this is put into operation.
Click to expand...

My worry is that since my PCP of course lacks an ophthalmology background, he won't be able to understand the reports enough to determine if I'm safe to fly or not and won't be willing to sign the form for someone with a complicated eye issue.
 
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this:

"LOGBOOK.—The completed checklist shall be retained
in the individual’s logbook and made available on request."

So instead of keeping your medical in your wallet, we will be required to carry a doctor's checklist at all times? Splendid. (Maybe Sportys will invent a logbook with the checklist printed in the back?)

The most potentially problematic part, however, is the new requirement to complete some sort of on-line test, (aka: the "Medical Education Course"). I can see this starting off as fairly simple, but -- as the bureaucrats see how easy it is to expand the breadth and scope -- I foresee it gradually morphing into something no one wants.

Implementation of this new law now depends on two completely uncontrollable things:

1. How GP doctors react to this new requirement.

2. How the FAA structures the details of this reform. Given past history, I see little cause for optimism in that regard.

Bottom line: Neither the doctors nor the FAA have any incentive to make this easy on us.

The end result of this bill is a very long way from the original goal of "drivers license self-certification". I'm frankly surprised that EAA and AOPA are crowing about this "great success", because, from where I'm sitting, going through the old 3rd class medical procedure may actually be easier. Although I am hoping for the best, I regretfully doubt that this bill will do much to resurrect General Aviation.
 
Jay Honeck said:
So instead of keeping your medical in your wallet, we will be required to carry a doctor's checklist at all times? Splendid. (Maybe Sportys will invent a logbook with the checklist printed in the back?)
Click to expand...
You already carry your paper medical in your wallet along with the plastic pilot certificate. So what's the problem with carrying a copy of this new completed form?

And @EricBe of MyFlightBook has already stated that creating a space in his eLogbook to retain a copy (maybe a PDF, maybe a photograph) for quick access is a simple task and will be implemented once the applicable rules and form are published.
 
Jay Honeck said:
[snip]
The end result of this bill is a very long way from the original goal of "drivers license self-certification". [snip] Although I am hoping for the best, I regretfully doubt that this bill will do much to resurrect General Aviation.
Click to expand...

With the possible exception of ADD and ADHD proliferation, I seriously doubt that the 3rd class medical is what keeps General Aviation down. There are many factors: cost (and frankly even at 57 the medical cost is a drop in the bucket for me compared to rental, currency, etc.), there isn't a large pool of trained pilots to draw from (think post WW2), and it's just not desirable to most young people. Pilots were venerated celebrities in the 1910's-1950's, then during the 1960's it was astronauts (who all started as pilots in those days).

Don't expect even doing away with all medical requirements (which won't happen) to resurrect GA.

John
 
jsstevens said:
With the possible exception of ADD and ADHD proliferation, I seriously doubt that the 3rd class medical is what keeps General Aviation down. There are many factors: cost (and frankly even at 57 the medical cost is a drop in the bucket for me compared to rental, currency, etc.), there isn't a large pool of trained pilots to draw from (think post WW2), and it's just not desirable to most young people. Pilots were venerated celebrities in the 1910's-1950's, then during the 1960's it was astronauts (who all started as pilots in those days).

Don't expect even doing away with all medical requirements (which won't happen) to resurrect GA.

John
Click to expand...

that may help GA 10-20 years from now.

Most of the kids who were medicated are only 20-30 years old and not normally your standard new pilot age. Gen X folks probably never heard of ADD while in school, while millennials were sought out to get treated for ADD due to various reasons.
 
midcap said:
that may help GA 10-20 years from now.

Most of the kids who were medicated are only 20-30 years old and not normally your standard new pilot age. Gen X folks probably never heard of ADD while in school, while millennials were sought out to get treated for ADD due to various reasons.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and it's a big maybe. While my perception is many were medicated, I really don't know the raw numbers. If it's 10% it's a lot of kids, but not a needle mover for GA when you factor the population of want to be pilots by 10%.

John
 
jsstevens said:
Yeah, and it's a big maybe. While my perception is many were medicated, I really don't know the raw numbers. If it's 10% it's a lot of kids, but not a needle mover for GA when you factor the population of want to be pilots by 10%.

John
Click to expand...

You are right, but I would wager those sames kids that they got on meds are the same type of kids that were born in the 50s/60s who now are pilots.

So, it wouldn't surprise me that only 10% of kids were given ADD treatment, but of that 10% it made up a higher percentage of those who wanted to be pilots.

There should be no reason why you have to go through all those test to prove you don't have a disease when a GP have came to a conclusion that you do in a 5 minute office visit.
 
midcap said:
You are right, but I would wager those sames kids that they got on meds are the same type of kids that were born in the 50s/60s who now are pilots.

So, it wouldn't surprise me that only 10% of kids were given ADD treatment, but of that 10% it made up a higher percentage of those who wanted to be pilots.
Click to expand...

Possible, but without any real data it's all just hand waving. (My math is as well.) Possibly good aerobic exercise, but not informing any thing.
 
jsstevens said:
With the possible exception of ADD and ADHD proliferation, I seriously doubt that the 3rd class medical is what keeps General Aviation down. There are many factors: cost (and frankly even at 57 the medical cost is a drop in the bucket for me compared to rental, currency, etc.), there isn't a large pool of trained pilots to draw from (think post WW2), and it's just not desirable to most young people. Pilots were venerated celebrities in the 1910's-1950's, then during the 1960's it was astronauts (who all started as pilots in those days).

Don't expect even doing away with all medical requirements (which won't happen) to resurrect GA.

John
Click to expand...

It would certainly help to have more people in their mid 20s-early 30s get into GA than less, right? I agree with you, we don't know the numbers here.. but they are high enough where the conversation needs to be had.

midcap said:
You are right, but I would wager those sames kids that they got on meds are the same type of kids that were born in the 50s/60s who now are pilots.

So, it wouldn't surprise me that only 10% of kids were given ADD treatment, but of that 10% it made up a higher percentage of those who wanted to be pilots.

There should be no reason why you have to go through all those test to prove you don't have a disease when a GP have came to a conclusion that you do in a 5 minute office visit.
Click to expand...

Exactly my point.
 
Ben said:
It would certainly help to have more people in their mid 20s-early 30s get into GA than less, right? I agree with you, we don't know the numbers here.. but they are high enough where the conversation needs to be had.



Exactly my point.
Click to expand...

Yep, especially for boys. Imagine being 13 again. At that age, things are new to you. You are paying attention to everything in class except the teacher, gentlemen here will know what I mean.

Then your grades aren't what they used to be, 4.0 to 3.0. Your teachers recommend to your parents to go to the Doc and see about ADD.

So you go to the peds, the doc says hey try some Concerta, Adderall, Vivanse, etc etc, you then get a script and your parents pay their $20 co pay and now you have been labeled with the Scarlet letters ADD according to the FAA until you spend your time and money to prove you do not have ADD.
 
Jay Honeck said:
I'm surprised no one has mentioned this:

"LOGBOOK.—The completed checklist shall be retained
in the individual’s logbook and made available on request."

I read that to mean, made available just like our log book now, dont have to carry it, but have to produce it if asked

So instead of keeping your medical in your wallet, we will be required to carry a doctor's checklist at all times? Splendid. (Maybe Sportys will invent a logbook with the checklist printed in the back?)

The most potentially problematic part, however, is the new requirement to complete some sort of on-line test, (aka: the "Medical Education Course"). I can see this starting off as fairly simple, but -- as the bureaucrats see how easy it is to expand the breadth and scope -- I foresee it gradually morphing into something no one wants.

Implementation of this new law now depends on two completely uncontrollable things:

1. How GP doctors react to this new requirement.

I dont see this being any problem, my doctor has no problem signing as long as I really meet the requirements of the checklist.

2. How the FAA structures the details of this reform. Given past history, I see little cause for optimism in that regard.

FAA hasn't been the problem with C3 reform, SecTrans has.

Bottom line: Neither the doctors nor the FAA have any incentive to make this easy on us.

The end result of this bill is a very long way from the original goal of "drivers license self-certification". I'm frankly surprised that EAA and AOPA are crowing about this "great success", because, from where I'm sitting, going through the old 3rd class medical procedure may actually be easier. Although I am hoping for the best, I regretfully doubt that this bill will do much to resurrect General Aviation.
Click to expand...

Do you remember what they were originally asking for? Day VFR, one passenger, single engine only....this is far better than what they asked for. Lets wait until it turns into a steaming pile before calling it one.
 
FastEddieB said:
I do not read "made available on request" as meaning "must be carried at all times".
Click to expand...
Hmmm. I hope you're right.

Either way, it wont be a big deal if the checklist can be made part of the logbook. Then we could just have our GP sign our logs like a CFI at biennial time.
 
I don't read "logbook" so literally. Just as it is now, you don't need your various endorsements, etc. attached to a physical "logbook". You only need a written (or nowadays electronic) record of them. I think you could carry the checklist like you do your current medical. You might not even need to do that, since it says "made available on request".
 
Jay Honeck said:
Hmmm. I hope you're right.

Either way, it wont be a big deal if the checklist can be made part of the logbook. Then we could just have our GP sign our logs like a CFI at biennial time.
Click to expand...
Section 2307.b.3:
(3) LOGBOOK.—The completed checklist shall be retained in the individual's logbook and made available on request.​

In my line of work, it's always better to quote the spec. This one is pretty black and white.
The 3 cases for SI in the law (Section 2307.e.1) states:
(1) IN GENERAL.—An individual who has qualified for the third-class medical certificate exemption under subsection (a) and is seeking to serve as a pilot in command of a covered aircraft shall be required to have completed the process for obtaining an Authorization for Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate for each of the following:
​
Gives us all kinds of weirdness, like:
  • You have to pass all of subsection (a), you're good to go.
  • If you fail one of the parts of subsection (a), then you're in no-man's land
  • If you never went for one of the parts of subsection (a), then you have to go for SI for one of the 3 conditions (psychological, neurological, or cardiovascular)
Then again, regulations made from a law tend to have totally different meanings than what the text of the law actually says.

I guess, in 175 days, we'll see what kind of fun this produces.
(*edit* I took out a part that didn't add to the discussion - like what I put does... :confused:)
 
What I find interesting is that the new law plainly states that the FAA has 180 days to get the rules published. But
the EAA write-up mentions a full year, and gives the date of Jul 2017 as the deadline. Last time I checked 180 days
would be closer to six months.
 
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