Signed by Prez! Well done EAA and AOPA!
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-...ed-legislation
ted
Printable View
Signed by Prez! Well done EAA and AOPA!
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-...ed-legislation
ted
OK; so now the questions start.
I read the law from the link TedK posted above.
Background: I'm a Private Pilot. My last Class III medical was issued 12/2004, and expired 12/2006. So I'm covered by the 10-year part of the law. I've been flying under Sport Pilot provisions since 2007.
Reading the law, I'm under the impression that I cannot fly as a Private Pilot again until I have a comprehensive medical exam, signed certificate, and complete the medical education class that will be issued online.
Since neither the checklist (format) or online class exist at this date, am I correct in asserting that I cannot fly as PP until things are formalized in the next 180 days, and I complete both of those requirements?
Actually it may and will likely be more than 180 days. The law states that the FAA cannot punish a pilot who meets the criteria you describe starting one year from the date the law was signed. So.... if the FAA doesn't act on this, in one year if we have a means to complete the requirements we are safe. This was added to prevent the FAA from ignoring the law.... something they have done in the past.Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlOrton
One would hope that the FAA could move faster than is required in the Law. There is an existing 3rd Class Medical proposed regulation (notice of proposed rule making...NPRM) that has been staffed within the FAA and held hostage in DOT since July 2014. There is no reason this can't be dusted off and tweaked to match the requirements of the Law.
i expect that FAA and DOT will now act in accordance of th Law and hope they will publish the NPRM in a matter of months vice 180 days. I hate to admit it, but I won't be a OSH this year, but this needs to be a question for Administrator Huerta.
ted
Well, it has been a month. The FAA should have seen this about to happen and must have been already working on the new regulations. Of course they are a U.S. Government Agency, what was I thinking?
Anyone at EAA or AOPA have any insight into what is going on at 800 Independence Ave. in Washington? How many FAA people are assigned to this task? Do they expect to have a NPRM out in time to meet the deadline in the law?
Brings to mind something very interesting heard a few weeks ago. Peggy Gilligan, FAA Associate Administrator for Aviation Safety admitted that the "FAAs own rules get in the way of making aviation safer." IAOPA Conference, July 2016. I applaud her amazing honesty, but am not holding my breath awaiting action.
My guess is that they will assemble a team, with membership from every part of the country. After team building training, they will wrestle with defining their objective, then struggle to achieve consensus until next summer, when they will decide that, since the law implements the intended rule whether the FAA acts or not, no rule is required.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunslinger37
Yes, I have dealt with federal and state regulators and bureaucrats.
BJC
Don't hold your breath. ;) It will probably take 18 to 24 months MINIMUM for the FAA to actually codify the new regulations. To meet the congressional mandate, all the FAA has to do is to have DRAFT regulations that conform verbatim*** to the actual statute language issued by the 180-day deadline. If they do that, then the 360-day "ultimatum" clause is nulled out and pilots can't avail themselves of the "good faith effort to comply" language of the law (note that the language of the statute is written as an either / or. Once the FAA comes up with ANYTHING in writing, the "or else" language is moot, and the FAA can then take as long as they want to produce the actual new regulations.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunslinger37
After the FAA publishes the NPRM with the draft language in the Federal Register, they legally have to allow at least 90 days (usually they allow 120 - 180 days) for written public comments. Then, the FAA can elect to hold public oral comment sessions / hearings; THEN they can take as long as they damned well please to address and dismiss / incorporate the public comments into the final rule and change the regulations into something that will actually work given our litigious society and the fact that most GP physicians aren't going to stick their necks out to certify the "airworthiness" of pilots who couldn't otherwise pass a 3rd class medical exam.
*** Anyone who reads the statute's provisions, as written, and compares them to the language of the FARs, will realize that the statute can not be codified directly into the Federal Regulations. (Compare the statute language to that of 14 CFR 67.) The language will have to be significantly modified while preserving the actual INTENT of each clause of the statute, then re-written again into a working set of criteria lists with pass / fail parameters attached such that GP physicians can actually make a valid assessment. This last iteration will be what the Medical Standards Division uses to make the examination checklists that doctors will use. That "third pass" language also will be put out for comments again, etc., ad nauseum.
So, 18 months MINIMUM, 5 years MAXIMUM. First approximation estimate for a "said-and-done" set of regs to be in place? Three years. Pessimistic? You bet - BUT, I've been around long enough to see the FAA drag out even simple EMERGENCY changes to the regs for two to three years.
sorry to say, but this is as close to the truth as you are going to get. when all the celebrating was going on after it became law, I was the gloomy gus reminding folks the FAA now gets a cut on it.....both for content and time required.
Here is what it says:Quote:
Originally Posted by Copapilot
Here is (a) (5):Quote:
(i) Prohibition on enforcement actions.—Beginning on the date that is 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator may not take an enforcement action for not holding a valid third-class medical certificate against a pilot of a covered aircraft for a flight if the pilot and the flight meet, through a good faith effort, the applicable requirements under subsection (a), except paragraph (5) of that subsection, unless the Administrator has published final regulations in the Federal Register under that subsection.
Quote:
(5) the individual has completed a medical education course described in subsection (c) during the 24 calendar months before acting as pilot in command of a covered aircraft and demonstrates proof of completion of the course;
BJC
The other dynamic is how the FAA personnel will respond to being "ordered" to act by Congress. I don't believe they will be responding favorably, and will likely respond punitively. At least that's what Bob Hoover says.
I'll bet the whole feet dragging thing comes down to no more than four or five people within the FAA and DoT that have some sort of deep animosity towards General Aviation.
Then again, I'd bet the FAA just wishes General Aviation would just go away so they could concentrate on the "real" responsibilities of commercial air.
The 180 days since the law was signed is almost up. We anxiously await something in writing from the FAA.
Latest news is the FAA has reviewed the AOPA online course and confirmed that it meets the requirements of the new rules. This is the course that pilots must pass every two years in addition to seeing your personal doctor every four years.
Will the EAA have a similar course for us members?
If adopted by the FAA the AOPA course will be applicable to all pilots certifying under the new regulation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunslinger37
Both the AOPA and the Mayo Clinic have filed on the docket (and met with the FAA) with the intent of offering such a course.
New FAR Part 68 for BasicMed. Effective May 1, 2017.
mayday 2017, how appropriate!
A nearly perfect new Rule. Great job by EAA and AOPA.
I recommend one tweak to it to avoid a near term pitfall since it is going to take a while for the Physician community (and their Insurers) to catch up with this, participate and enable this.
So to get over that, recommend the FAA tweak the Rule to grandfather an existing active FAA Medical to fulfill the BasicMed requirement. That way, a pilot with a June 2015 Medical could complete the Online Course, and Drivers License Registry consent, and continue to use that to fly till June of 2019.
ted
The new rule is entitled "Medical Certification of Certain Small Aircraft Pilots".
I'm 6'1", do I qualify?
Probably not.......I fly taildraggers...........
Oh. I thought they meant pilots of certain small aircraft, like this one:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam Buchanan
I agree with Tedk. My 3rd class medical expires March 2017. According to the AOPA a 3rd Class Medical does not satisfy the checklist in the new Basicmed process. Sounds crazy to me. Is Basicmed going to be a more thorough examination than the 3rd Class Medical? Can someone from EAA get clarification from the FAA on this?
Joel Marketello
According to the REGS it doesn count (screw AOPA)., If your medical is even one day past the expiration date (either the SI "not valid for any use after" or the 2/5 normal expiration), you must have both the certificate of the education class completed and the checklist from a state-licensed doctor.
I'm too lazy (or busy - your choice) to read the regulations. So help me out a bit.
In what circumstances is this new improved set of regulations an improvement over the old 3rd class medical?
This one seems to be at least as much hassle as getting the third class. The short answer... I think the only ones who are really celebrating may well be the ones with SIs they'll never have to get again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle Boatright
If you're over 40, it lets you get by with four years and if you go in for a regular checkup you can likely piggy back this one on.
I'd be interested in seeing what percentage of the pilot population has actually benefited from this legislation, that is those that had been previously excluded from acting as PIC due to inability to pass a medical exam. Seems this was one of those "pick your battles" that could have fought from a different angle.Quote:
Originally Posted by DaleB
In my case at age 77 I basically have no health issues but have heard horror stories about someone misdiagnosed with some imagined aliment which triggers being a pen pal with the FAA and takes many dollars and paperwork to sort out. I think I'm quite capable of deciding whether or not I'm fit to fly. I get a through physical every years. In addition this allows me to raise the gross weight on my L16 to 1350# legally and fly my 1350# Chief legally or a Cessna 150, Cherokee or anything else that qualifies with the new regulations.
I whole hardly agree. Having a whole year's worth of pilots going to their doctors in May to test fly this process is not going to make the process as smooth or as thorough as spacing them out over more time.Quote:
Originally Posted by TedK