an airman's personal statement and events of his DUI

[lbfjrmd]

airman putting together his 1st package to the FAA following his DUI with a BAL of 0.156 (My comments at the end).

*******************************

I have never, and never will, use alcohol prior to or during the piloting of any airplane. I have possessed a PP SEL since 1985 and Instrument Rating since 1999. I have owned two Mooney’s over the course of 20 years, currently owning a Mooney M20J since 2002 and prior to that a Mooney M20C.

Pertaining to the Offense, Legal and Direct Outcomes:

12/15/2016 arrest, Jefferson Parish, LA. The incident was subsequent to an over-indulgence at Christmas get-together of friends and former co-workers in New Orleans and happened less than ½ mile from home. My BAC was tested at 0.156. This is not an excuse but only a statement of background.

3/27/2017 Notified of Driver License suspension by the Louisiana DMV (had voluntarily surrendered License 2/23 in order to start the Program below).

4/26/2017 Sent the FAA MO Notification Letter.

2/23/2017 - 6/1/2017 90-day (minimum, up to 180 days) Jefferson Parish District Attorney Office (JPDA), LA 1st Offender Program (Program) consisting of:

• 90-day total abstinence – tested by twice/day breath test (automobile ignition interlock device w/automatic uploaded communication to JPDA’s Office)
  
  
• Driver License surrendered and replaced with temporary “Hardship” limited license (requiring interlock device, above).
  
  
• Random urine tests (daily call-in to receive instructions) (6 times during 90-day period)
  
  
• Eight-week (once/week) counseling (group) sessions at a JPDA-registered facility (Maison Vie Alcohol and Drug Education Therapy).
  
  
• Participation in a Mothers Against Drunk Driving awareness session.
  
  
• Submittal of hair-analysis samples (beginning, mid, and final 90-days).
  
  
• 16 hours community service at JPDA-approved facility (Jefferson Parish Animal Shelter)
  
  
• Regular interviews w/the JPDA case manager.

• 5/25/2017 Successfully completed the JPDA Program with no infractions and clear final hair-analysis.
  
  
• 6/5/2017 Received letter from JPDA advising successful completion of the Program and that the DWI charges would be refused and would not be prosecuted.
  
  
• 6/6/2017 Re-gained unrestricted LA Driver License.
  
  
• 7/12/2017 Received letter from JPDA advising that the DWI charges were refused 6/1/2017 and would not be prosecuted.
  
  
• 9/29/2017 3rd Class Medical Applied-for and Exam.
• Prior to Offense - Use or Abuse:

Prior to the event of Dec. 15, 2016, my use of alcohol was occasional-to-moderate, social drinking. I have no record of abuse, over-indulgence nor impaired driving. I have no chronic drinking problem nor am I dependent of alcohol for any reason. I have a well-balanced life with minimal stress. I have no adverse factors, such as economic, that would influence me. I am retired since December 2015 and my wife and I live in the home we designed and built in 1994 – which is paid-for. Having worked in the commercial nuclear industry (and contracted to at least two Federal agencies, including holding security clearance) for the most part of 1979 – 2015, I was subject to 1) personal psychological evaluations, 2) FBI background investigations, 3) CBOP (Continuous Behavioral Observation Programs) and 4) Random drug and alcohol testing. I have never been recommended for a “for-cause” test and never failed a random test nor any employment entrance test. I have no arrests (other than the one reported here), stops, accidents or other alcohol-related police action in my Louisiana OMV records. I believe this information helps to qualify my statement that I have had no history of alcohol abuse. In hindsight, however, the consumption of alcohol and driving was and is unwise and dangerous.

Post Offense - Use or Abuse Plans:

After the arrest I abstained, for the most part, until accepted into the JP DA’s First Offender Diversion Program (Program) – during which (90 days) I totally abstained from consumption as demonstrated by the negative urinalyses, real-time data from the vehicle ignition interlock device, and hair tests. Contrition and acceptance of responsibility for my actions of course were a condition of acceptance to the Program that allowed me to avoid a criminal charge. The circumstances during and after the arrest caused me great circumspection and reflection and allowed me to recognize the negative effect that this had on my wife, and to myself, also. The eight-week education program attended also helped me recognize any negative inputs that may influence drinking and to concentrate on more positive activities in lieu of. Upon release from the Program and the refusal of charges by the DA’s office, my use of alcohol has been light and sporadic-to-occasional, once every other week or so – usually with dinner with my wife, without driving. I plan near-abstinence for the future and am convinced that both the negative and positive aspects of the arrest and following activities will prevail on me to be successful. Again; no drinking and driving nor flying.


I have obtained the services of Dr. Fowler (below) for advice and guidance through this process. Dr. Fowler has already assisted me greatly.


cc: Louis Blanding Fowler Jr., M.D.


************************************

so 1st ever DUI. the problem will be how the FAA interprets the BAL! The airman's lengthy personal statement (his right) defends his right to continue to drink responsibly. If they come back with full HIMS requirement he will have to pledge sobriety. The 6 month clock will then begin with monitoring. Otherwise he will get the slap on the wrist and his certificate in the mail.
I wish for the airman it had been a 0.146. will keep all posted.

note to mods: i posted same but was not logged in in so it appears as anonymous - please delete it

 

[James331]

Being drunk and operating things which can kill you is a bad idea.

That said we do still have a good bit of puritanical crazy running in the clogged up veins of our yuuuge government.

 

[Brad Z]

I kind of look at it this way...when you drive with a BAC of .15, there's a good chance something bad will happen. You might back into your kids bike in the driveway...at the other extreme you might run over someone crossing the street. In the grand scheme of things, a DUI arrest that is dropped for participation in a program is a pretty good outcome, all things considered. Going the abstinence route is a small price to pay to keep your ticket.

 

[bbchien]

I kind of look at it this way...when you drive with a BAC of .15, there's a good chance something bad will happen. You might back into your kids bike in the driveway...at the other extreme you might run over someone crossing the street. In the grand scheme of things, a DUI arrest that is dropped for participation in a program is a pretty good outcome, all things considered. Going the abstinence route is a small price to pay to keep your ticket.

He has a bit of tolerance and doesn’t “get it” which is is soon “continued use in the face of know bad consequences”. Thus, this will result in the HIMS psychiatry demand. They are lookin hi-res for dependency.

In this setting (>.15, less than .20) every time my airman sez he can control it, he gets the HIMS psych eval demand letter (esp 2nd and 1st class) and if the HIMS psych is respectful of the part 67 definitions and doesn't contradict them, he then either gets a warning or he gets the diagnosis of dependency.

The problem with this airman is to be tolerant to 0.15 operating a vehicle, the agency already knows he drinks a lot and often.

The guy who “gets it” will cease immediately and be wanting to demonstrate it (urines) and has no problem logging AA (signed off). He usually gets the 67.307 warning: The HIMS psych notes that the man stopped on his own and demonstrated it, and sought colleagueship. Stopping on your own is not something a dependent guy does. Thus 4 of 5 FAA criteria for dependency go away. If he can the verify the number an timing if drinks and the a/m did poorly on the roadside sobriety chechs, tolerance goes away. Single known episode does’t satisfy 67.307 abuse and a/m gets a warning.

By not swearing it off, this airman tells us there us a problem....

That’s different than <.15 which Dr. Lou rightly wishes for his man.

 

[idahoflier]

Why go down this path? Why not just fly under BasicMed?

 

[LDJones]

Why go down this path? Why not just fly under BasicMed?

Can’t. Once you lose your medical for legal action BasicMed isn’t available until you requalify and are issued a new medical. See Q8 on the BasicMed FAQ.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Being drunk and operating things which can kill you is a bad idea.

That said we do still have a good bit of puritanical crazy running in the clogged up veins of our yuuuge government.

In this case, the government is just following society, not leading it. I've been around long enough to have actually watch drinking and driving go from "there but for the grace of God" acceptance to zero tolerance of any human foible.

 

[tawood]

He has a bit of tolerance and doesn’t “get it” which is is soon “continued use in the face of know bad consequences”. Thus, this will result in the HIMS psychiatry demand. They are lookin hi-res for dependency.

In this setting (>.15, less than .20) every time my airman sez he can control it, he gets the HIMS psych eval demand letter (esp 2nd and 1st class) and if the HIMS psych is respectful of the part 67 definitions and doesn't contradict them, he then either gets a warning or he gets the diagnosis of dependency.

The problem with this airman is to be tolerant to 0.15 operating a vehicle, the agency already knows he drinks a lot and often.

The guy who “gets it” will cease immediately and be wanting to demonstrate it (urines) and has no problem logging AA (signed off). He usually gets the 67.307 warning: The HIMS psych notes that the man stopped on his own and demonstrated it, and sought colleagueship. Stopping on your own is not something a dependent guy does. Thus 4 of 5 FAA criteria for dependency go away. If he can the verify the number an timing if drinks and the a/m did poorly on the roadside sobriety chechs, tolerance goes away. Single known episode does’t satisfy 67.307 abuse and a/m gets a warning.

By not swearing it off, this airman tells us there us a problem....

That’s different than <.15 which Dr. Lou rightly wishes for his man.

A question for you Doctor: Is it possible for different people to naturally have different tolerance levels (regardless of past drinking history/experience)?

The reason I ask...I worked over 20 years as a patrol officer, and I've encounter literally thousands of drunk people. Although I would say most would fall under what I would expect when it comes to drunkenness vs. tolerance, every now and then I would encounter some that just didn't seem to make sense. I remember a few cases, for example, of seeing daily drinkers that are fall down drunk at .10%, while also have seen a few 16 year olds that had never been intoxicated before, that could walk and talk with little difficulty, all the while blowing a .25%.

Although most of us might fit under the defined limits of tolerance, I've often wondered if it doesn't fit ALL of us...

 

[lbfjrmd]

variability in response to alcohol is a sign of tolerance!

 

[The Exception]

Just a quick data point.

I have 2 DUIs on my record. They happened several years ago. I had to go through the counseling and AA visits for both my drivers license and my faa medical. Most of that process really didn't seem to apply to me since I didn't consider myself to be an alcoholic. I still don't. However, I did discover something about myself. In the process of trying to answer the repeated question of why do you want to get drunk, I found it difficult to answer that to the satisfaction of the folks that were asking. The problem was that I didn't really drink to get drunk. I drank for the flavor. I really like beer and wine. The "drunk" part was a side effect that I really didn't think of at the time. I also realized, and this is key, that I have a nervous habit of drinking when I'm in a party type atmosphere. So, couple the impulsive drinking with the fact that I like the flavor of certain alcoholic drinks, I ended up eventually doing a lot of drinking and running afoul of the law. The good news is that I'm just as happy to be drinking a coke or some other soft drink in those situations. As a side effect, I'm saving a whole bunch of money since refills of soft drinks are typically free. This has worked for me for years and years now.

So, just because someone has built up a tolerance, doesn't actually mean they're addicted. Of course, I know I'm the exception, not the rule. It drove my counselors nuts.

 

[tawood]

variability in response to alcohol is a sign of tolerance!

So...are some people born with tolerance? Or is all tolerance from repeated past drinking?

 

[James331]

It's amazing how much they know about your physiology and psychology by one instance, I mean we are talking dependence, tolerance, etc based off one drunk act and a butt load of speculation, kinda reminds me of those 900 number psychics.

One must remember the DUI industry is a industry and many people make a very good living off of it and no doubtfully lobby accordingly.

I'm all for some punishment when a cop happens on a driver who is actually drunk, not just legally drunk, but the above is going waaaay overboard.

With that I'll get off my soapbox

 

[lbfjrmd]

So...are some people born with tolerance? Or is all tolerance from repeated past drinking?

tol is acquired ... the more you drink ... the more you can drink! Meanwhile mr liver, bone marrow and brain cells die.

 

[tawood]

tol is acquired ... the more you drink ... the more you can drink! Meanwhile mr liver, bone marrow and brain cells die.

And as I said, my experience seems to show that this is true most of the time, but definitely not all the time. I'm not sure how else to explain it.

 

[idahoflier]

Can’t. Once you lose your medical for legal action BasicMed isn’t available until you requalify and are issued a new medical. See Q8 on the BasicMed FAQ.

I understand that, but I don't see that the pilot in question had his medical certificate revoked. He reported as noted above but nowhere do I see he lost his medical. I don't believe a DUI arrest results in an immediate revocation of a medical certificate. It looks to me like the pilot in question would have been better served to go the BasicMed route instead of applying for another third class and starting this process...

 

[Brad Z]

12/15/2016 arrest, Jefferson Parish, LA. The incident was subsequent to an over-indulgence at Christmas get-together of friends and former co-workers in New Orleans and happened less than ½ mile from home. My BAC was tested at 0.156. This is not an excuse but only a statement of background.

I read this and think "the guy knew he was drunk but since home was only .5 miles away he thought he'd chance it." That's demonstration of at least two FAA hazardous attitudes.

 

[Clark1961]

And as I said, my experience seems to show that this is true most of the time, but definitely not all the time. I'm not sure how else to explain it.

There are some other influences which the medical profession and associated bureaucrats may or may not note. Live at high altitude for more than six weeks then go down to sea level - drink like a fish with little apparent intoxication.

Note that I do not advocate the activity or claim that anyone who does won't be impaired.

 

[CC268]

I read this and think "the guy knew he was drunk but since home was only .5 miles away he thought he'd chance it." That's demonstration of at least two FAA hazardous attitudes.

So just curious...do you think this guy should be allowed to fly again?

 

[CC268]

Just reading through it...I think it would be way overkill to not let this guy fly again.

 

[Brad Z]

So just curious...do you think this guy should be allowed to fly again?

I've never met the guy and I don't have the full story. But making that little statement suggests he knew at the time what he was doing was risky but did it anyway. He could have just left it out and it would not effect his story regardless.

All that said, this guy has no doubtedlty been counseled to the contrary and insists on pushing his intent to continue drinking. It's worth noting that no describes their drinking as problematic.

 

[James331]

So just curious...do you think this guy should be allowed to fly again?

Based on what was written here, yes.

Also based on his age, profession and record, seems like hes overall a good guy and based on his work, probably quite responsible, let us not forget we all make mistakes, Id also be interested to know what they pulled him over for and how he did on the field sobriety test.

 

[CC268]

I've never met the guy and I don't have the full story. But making that little statement suggests he knew at the time what he was doing was risky but did it anyway. He could have just left it out and it would not effect his story regardless.

All that said, this guy has no doubtedlty been counseled to the contrary and insists on pushing his intent to continue drinking. It's worth noting that no describes their drinking as problematic.

Hmm...I think we will have to agree to disagree on this subject, but I don't quite extrapolate that the guy has a "drinking problem". I think that is really jumping to a conclusion that does not have much merit at this point. But your right, I don't know the guy or know the full story. All I know is that there are MANY folks out there just like this guy who are social drinkers. I have many friends who are social drinkers. Nothing wrong with that and it doesn't make them a bad person (I am not saying that excuses drunk driving). I think it would be very easy to paint a lot of folks like this guy with a broad stroke. The guy made a mistake that unfortunately really cost him.

I mean look at the guys work background, flying background, etc. I think that says a lot right there. People seem to get very slap happy with disciplining others or taking away someone else's privileges, but never their own. Maybe you follow the straight and narrow and have never exhibited any bad behaviors. If so, I commend you sir!

 

[mryan75]

Just a quick data point.

I have 2 DUIs on my record. They happened several years ago. I had to go through the counseling and AA visits for both my drivers license and my faa medical. Most of that process really didn't seem to apply to me since I didn't consider myself to be an alcoholic. I still don't. However, I did discover something about myself. In the process of trying to answer the repeated question of why do you want to get drunk, I found it difficult to answer that to the satisfaction of the folks that were asking. The problem was that I didn't really drink to get drunk. I drank for the flavor. I really like beer and wine. The "drunk" part was a side effect that I really didn't think of at the time. I also realized, and this is key, that I have a nervous habit of drinking when I'm in a party type atmosphere. So, couple the impulsive drinking with the fact that I like the flavor of certain alcoholic drinks, I ended up eventually doing a lot of drinking and running afoul of the law. The good news is that I'm just as happy to be drinking a coke or some other soft drink in those situations. As a side effect, I'm saving a whole bunch of money since refills of soft drinks are typically free. This has worked for me for years and years now.

So, just because someone has built up a tolerance, doesn't actually mean they're addicted. Of course, I know I'm the exception, not the rule. It drove my counselors nuts.

If anyone is interested in reading the self-justification of literally every addict in history, see above. This is called "denial", folks. It drove your counselors nuts because they've each heard it 1,000 times.

"The Exception" = every drunk in history.

 

[mryan75]

It's amazing how much they know about your physiology and psychology by one instance, I mean we are talking dependence, tolerance, etc based off one drunk act and a butt load of speculation, kinda reminds me of those 900 number psychics.

One must remember the DUI industry is a industry and many people make a very good living off of it and no doubtfully lobby accordingly.

I'm all for some punishment when a cop happens on a driver who is actually drunk, not just legally drunk, but the above is going waaaay overboard.

With that I'll get off my soapbox

Someone with no tolerance wouldn't be able to walk to the car at .15+, much less get in and drive it. Just because you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't mean these people don't.

 

[mryan75]

One qualification I noted, which I'm guessing they will notice, too:

I have no arrests (other than the one reported here), stops, accidents or other alcohol-related police action in my Louisiana DMV records.

Okay, so what about elsewhere?

 

[mryan75]

Hmm...I think we will have to agree to disagree on this subject, but I don't quite extrapolate that the guy has a "drinking problem". I think that is really jumping to a conclusion that does not have much merit at this point. But your right, I don't know the guy or know the full story. All I know is that there are MANY folks out there just like this guy who are social drinkers. I have many friends who are social drinkers. Nothing wrong with that and it doesn't make them a bad person (I am not saying that excuses drunk driving). I think it would be very easy to paint a lot of folks like this guy with a broad stroke. The guy made a mistake that unfortunately really cost him.

I mean look at the guys work background, flying background, etc. I think that says a lot right there. People seem to get very slap happy with disciplining others or taking away someone else's privileges, but never their own. Maybe you follow the straight and narrow and have never exhibited any bad behaviors. If so, I commend you sir!

Tolerance and denial. That's evidence of a drinking problem. Don't try and equate .15 to "social drinking". It takes 9 drinks in an hour for a 220-pound male to get to .15. When was the last time you had 9 drinks in an hour?

 

[CC268]

Tolerance and denial. That's evidence of a drinking problem. Don't try and equate .15 to "social drinking". It takes 9 drinks in an hour for a 220-pound male to get to .15. When was the last time you had 9 drinks in an hour?

Last night. Just kiddingggg. Hey man maybe your right I don’t know. Hard to tell from an online post. Just sharing my thoughts and opinions. They’re worth what you paid for em.

 

[tawood]

Someone with no tolerance wouldn't be able to walk to the car at .15+, much less get in and drive it. Just because you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't mean these people don't.

I would disagree, from my own observations of dealing with/or arresting 1000's of drunks. I have found first time drinkers, at .15, that do fine.

Here is a personal example: when I was in college, three of my friends and I are what you would describe as "nerds" and none of us had ever had so much as a drop of alcohol. The four of us decided to get drunk together, and record each other, on a camcorder. Although I can't be sure that my friends had ever had a drink (although I believed that they hadn't), I knew for a fact that I had never drank.

We had a case of beer between us. We divided that case 4 ways, with each of us getting 6 beers. We all sat at a table, and each of us drank our 6 beers, pretty much at the same rate. All four of us were about the same age, same size (+-20lbs), same shape physically. We then recorded ourselves on the camcorder.

The next day, we watched the recording...one of my friends, and I, appeared completely sober. We talked fine, we walked fine, we seemed to show no effect what so ever. 2 of my friends were COMPLETELY WASTED. One threw up. Neither could talk in any way that was understandable. My sober-appearing friend and I, at first, thought they were bluffing. They weren't. It would appear my friend and I had tolerance...yet none of us had drank before.

 

[CC268]

I swear to drunk I’m not God ocifer.

 

[Brad Z]

Hmm...I think we will have to agree to disagree on this subject, but I don't quite extrapolate that the guy has a "drinking problem". I think that is really jumping to a conclusion that does not have much merit at this point. But your right, I don't know the guy or know the full story. All I know is that there are MANY folks out there just like this guy who are social drinkers. I have many friends who are social drinkers. Nothing wrong with that and it doesn't make them a bad person (I am not saying that excuses drunk driving). I think it would be very easy to paint a lot of folks like this guy with a broad stroke. The guy made a mistake that unfortunately really cost him.

I mean look at the guys work background, flying background, etc. I think that says a lot right there. People seem to get very slap happy with disciplining others or taking away someone else's privileges, but never their own. Maybe you follow the straight and narrow and have never exhibited any bad behaviors. If so, I commend you sir!

OK, maybe not a drinking problem, but how about he had a problem when he was drinking? That problem being that he had enough alcohol to be twice the legal limit and still thought it was fine to go out and drive a car instead of walking home. I'm sure he was reeeeaaally unlucky and this was the first time it ever happened, but I would not have enough faith in this guy to put my signature on a piece of paper saying he's good to go commit acts of aviation without some agreement for behavior modification to go along with it.

Would your opinion of the guy be any different if the circumstances were exactly the same, except that he managed to crash his car in the process? Answer carefully, it's a trick question.

 

[mryan75]

I would disagree, from my own observations of dealing with/or arresting 1000's of drunks. I have found first time drinkers, at .15, that do fine.

Yeah, yeah. "This is the first time I've ever even drank, ossifer!"

C'mon...

 

[tawood]

Yeah, yeah. "This is the first time I've ever even drank, ossifer!"

C'mon...

C'mon yourself...I'm sure I'm lied to all the time...but not ALL the time.

 

[CC268]

OK, maybe not a drinking problem, but how about he had a problem when he was drinking? That problem being that he had enough alcohol to be twice the legal limit and still thought it was fine to go out and drive a car instead of walking home. I'm sure he was reeeeaaally unlucky and this was the first time it ever happened, but I would not have enough faith in this guy to put my signature on a piece of paper saying he's good to go commit acts of aviation without some agreement for behavior modification to go along with it.

Would your opinion of the guy be any different if the circumstances were exactly the same, except that he managed to crash his car in the process? Answer carefully, it's a trick question.

I agree with bolded statement.

 

[mryan75]

C'mon yourself...I'm sure I'm lied to all the time...but not ALL the time.

Anyone who is "fine" at .15 is an all-star drunk. Sorry.

 

[tawood]

Yeah, yeah. "This is the first time I've ever even drank, ossifer!"

C'mon...

I suppose in my own story,I've lied to...myself?

I think alcohol is a horrible drug for many people. But I think that the statements about tolerance is only valid for some, or maybe most, people...but DEFINITELY not all people.
And I also think, you do a disservice by claiming ANYONE at a .15 is an all star drunk.

 

[CC268]

It’s a known fact that all government officials/employees and LEO have never done anything wrong or broken any laws. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been hired in the first place? Am I right??

I’m just stirring the pot carry on

 

[mryan75]

I suppose in my own story, I'm I've lied to...myself?

I think alcohol is a horrible drug for many people. But I think that the statements about tolerance is only valid for some, or maybe most, people...but DEFINITELY not all people.

Okay!

 

[tawood]

Anyone who is "fine" at .15 is an all-star drunk. Sorry.

I would say they appear fine or do fine when they are observed in conversation or some tasks (which MAY be an indication of tolerance), but they still have delayed reactions and poor judgment, and they are not okay to fly or drive.

 

[Ravioli]

It takes 9 drinks in an hour for a 220-pound male to get to .15. When was the last time you had 9 drinks in an hour?

When was the last time a human with self control swelled up to 220 pounds?

Edit unless they are 6' 6"

 

[James331]

Based on all the DUI industries "standards", 95% of the US are probably "alcoholics", which is great for business.