FAA Instant Denial

[Jon Wilder]

Hi all.

As was brought up after the passing of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, the FAA was talking about issuing instant denials, followed by a "for further consideration". It was supposed to take effect January 1st, 2025. Their defense was that Section 308 of the most recent reauth bill allowed this practice.

This caused all sorts of backlash within the aviation industry. Congress fired back stating Section 308 only strengthens Pilots Bill of Rights and in no way, shape, nor form allowed the practice, to which the FAA backpedaled with "Oh...well...we're just trying to clear the backlog".

The date to go into effect was postponed to allow time for the FAA to get the word out to AMEs and the industry, allow for questions, etc etc. By the end of April, the FAA announced that they would NOT be moving forward with the new policy, and that instead they will be working with AOPA and other organizations on a pilot medical education campaign to help applicants prepare for medical exams and reduce delays.

However, very recently, I have heard of a couple of instances of instant denial, followed by "for further consideration".

So is this one of those "we're going to say that we're not doing that, but in practice..." things? As much as they talk about gaining pilot trust, their actions and policies certainly state otherwise.

 

[Tools]

It’s their MO, through and through.

They’ve never faced a consequence for, well, anything.

northrup just said in an interview they are being more transparent. Yeah… what ev.

A well known AME seems to have just lost his practice for unknown reasons. Still trying to get details. The tidbit I know is from his website and his online petition. Legit? I dunno… but it fits their pattern.

This is how an administrative state works. It helps to have compliant participants… so get your toes back behind the line!! Ha!

And by the way, clever way to fix your problem, don’t do your job. Wow…

The IRS should adopt that philosophy, just don’t pay taxes until we figure out your bill…

 

[DaleB]

The IRS should adopt that philosophy, just don’t pay taxes until we figure out your bill…

No, it would be "We'll just take it all, and eventually decide if you get anything back".

 

[Clip4]

Hi all.

As was brought up after the passing of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024, the FAA was talking about issuing instant denials, followed by a "for further consideration". It was supposed to take effect January 1st, 2025. Their defense was that Section 308 of the most recent reauth bill allowed this practice.

This caused all sorts of backlash within the aviation industry. Congress fired back stating Section 308 only strengthens Pilots Bill of Rights and in no way, shape, nor form allowed the practice, to which the FAA backpedaled with "Oh...well...we're just trying to clear the backlog".

The date to go into effect was postponed to allow time for the FAA to get the word out to AMEs and the industry, allow for questions, etc etc. By the end of April, the FAA announced that they would NOT be moving forward with the new policy, and that instead they will be working with AOPA and other organizations on a pilot medical education campaign to help applicants prepare for medical exams and reduce delays.

However, very recently, I have heard of a couple of instances of instant denial, followed by "for further consideration".

So is this one of those "we're going to say that we're not doing that, but in practice..." things? As much as they talk about gaining pilot trust, their actions and policies certainly state otherwise.

I would have more trust in the FAA if AOPA kept their BS out of the process and let the FAA do their job.

When a pilot presents for a medical and is denied, there will be a discussion with the AME concerning what will be required to obtain a medical. Some of those folks due to factors such as age, cost and odds to obtain will not pursue a certificate. There is zero reason for the FAA to automatically reconsider all these people.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

I would have more trust in the FAA if AOPA kept their BS out of the process and let the FAA do their job.

When a pilot presents for a medical and is denied, there will be a discussion with the AME concerning what will be required to obtain a medical. Some of those folks due to factors such as age, cost and odds to obtain will not pursue a certificate. There is zero reason for the FAA to automatically reconsider all these people.

One would hope to be only deferred at the AME office (as I was), and told to gather information (which I had at the appointment).
Getting an absolute denial would be kind of rare, if one simply looked at what and what is not allowed.

 

[flyingron]

Complying with congressional orders has never been an overriding concern for the FAA.

 

[Lindberg]

A well known AME seems to have just lost his practice for unknown reasons.

Who?

 

[TCABM]

Who?

Likely https://av8rmed.com/

 

[Kenny Phillips]

Likely https://av8rmed.com/

This is more to the point:

Sign the Petition

Mandate the immediate re-designation of Dr. Thomas B. Faulkner, AME

www.change.org

 

[Half Fast]

This is more to the point:

Sign the Petition

Mandate the immediate re-designation of Dr. Thomas B. Faulkner, AME

www.change.org

Being discussed at https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/delta/153220-av8rmed.html . Nobody really has a reliable explanation. I certainly wouldn’t sign a petition on his behalf without knowing the whole story.

 

[Clip4]

One would hope to be only deferred at the AME office (as I was), and told to gather information (which I had at the appointment).
Getting an absolute denial would be kind of rare, if one simply looked at what and what is not allowed.

Hopefully there is a discussion beyond getting additional information. Additional medical tests cost $ not covered by health insurance and there should be a risk discussion of not qualifying with the additional information. If the applicant is unwilling or unable to move forward in the process, the process should end there and then.

The other issue is too many AMEs want nothing to do with SIs.

 

[Tools]

Ain’t gonna be much longer and they ain’t gonna want anything to do with hims, smartly so…. Wonder how that’s gonna play out?

 

[Kenny Phillips]

Hopefully there is a discussion beyond getting additional information. Additional medical tests cost $ not covered by health insurance and there should be a risk discussion of not qualifying with the additional information. If the applicant is unwilling or unable to move forward in the process, the process should end there and then.

The other issue is too many AMEs want nothing to do with SIs.

I required additional tests that my glaucoma doctor normally doesn't do. He was very good with filling in the paperwork, as well. I had consulted with a Senior HIMS AME, which cost $$. He called OKC before I put in my paperwork, and they wouldn't move until they had the paperwork. So I paid $$ to have him babysit, and make the calls for me. Took only six weeks, and less than two grand, all-in. With 1.5 working eyes (and at this point, no SODA, but a short leash of one year on the SI.)
But I had no psych or drug issues ... and those are what seems to rack up the massive time and money and additional paperwork traps.

 

[bbchien]

I believe I had already made the comment that they are doing this....
From DaleB above:

The IRS should adopt that philosophy, just don’t pay taxes until we figure out your bill…

No, it would be "We'll just take it all, and eventually decide if you get anything back".

No, that would be Illinois.

 

[Half Fast]

This is more to the point:

Sign the Petition

Mandate the immediate re-designation of Dr. Thomas B. Faulkner, AME

www.change.org

Reading the material at that link, I see Dr Faulkner wrote this:

The FAA has suggested that I lack integrity and professionalism, and knowingly and willfully engage in "misconduct" as an aeromedical specialist. Let me know what you think. The FAA seems fit not to tell me, so I hope you can give it to me straight.​

It would be nice to know some specifics, but lawyers are probably restricting public disclosures on both sides.

 

[Tools]

Faa didn’t seem to care a different hims ame got sued, and lost, for malpractice, against a hims patient.

But, this seems normal for the faa. I reckon he’s in for the same treatment the faa gives airmen.

 

[Jon Wilder]

I believe I had already made the comment that they are doing this....

You were the one who shined the light on the issue when they were talking about implementing the policy.

However, they were faced with a bunch of industry backlash. They ended up delaying it, held some listening sessions from people high up in the industry, etc. According to an AOPA article dated April 24th, 2025, the FAA withdrew the instant denial policy in April, opting instead to partner with AOPA and the aviation industry on pilot medical education campaign.

FAA withdraws medical denial policy proposal

The FAA withdrew its proposed policy that would have replaced the longstanding practice of deferring incomplete medical applications with the issuance of immediate denials.

www.aopa.org

According to a few reported accounts, they seem to have gone back on this.

 

[tspear]

Reading the material at that link, I see Dr Faulkner wrote this:

The FAA has suggested that I lack integrity and professionalism, and knowingly and willfully engage in "misconduct" as an aeromedical specialist. Let me know what you think. The FAA seems fit not to tell me, so I hope you can give it to me straight.​

It would be nice to know some specifics, but lawyers are probably restricting public disclosures on both sides.

The FAA does not care about Libel/slander. Legal has no bearing on what they can say. What matters is perception.
Also, there is a general philosophy, you can always get fired for saying yes. You can never get fired for saying no. Changing this culture is would dramatically help the general public, and pilots specifically.

Tim