New Federal Legislation Affecting Airmen

[murphey]

Has this been kept under wraps or am I just now hearing about it?

New legislation has recently been passed suspending the FAA’s longstanding policy of expunging records of a violation after 5 years. The new law, passed in August, 2010 and effective November, 2010 now requires the FAA to keep all information about a violation, including the airman’s identifying information, in an electronic database, until they are given notice that the airman is deceased. The last expunction was done in November, 2010.


This legislation was enacted in response to the Buffalo Colgan crash and was intended to enhance the Pilot Records Improvement Act for airlines attempting to make a hiring decision. However, the legislation also applies to GA pilots, and its effect on GA pilots will be far reaching and negative.
AOPA and EAA staff and advisory attorneys are working on the issue to attempt to mitigate the effect on airmen. No industry groups were notified of the new legislation which was inserted into the Airline Safety and Federal Aviation Administration Extension Act of 2010 which was passed August 1, 2010.


Please see: http://www.ofr.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2011-03101_PI.pdf for more information.

 

[wsuffa]

Something AOPA should have been on top of.

 

[N801BH]

Something AOPA should have been on top of.

Yup.. I agree 100%. During AOPA's renewal dance they send us, that is a main topic in their line up of why we should renew...Always claiming they have a pulse on all bills and regulations that could harm/ degrade/ alter the way the government treats GA.... Oops . !!!!

In their defense they were probably at a wine tasting bragging to all their friends on how they are pulling in a six figure salary and just forgot to mind the store.. It could happen to any of us idiots ya know.

 

[TMetzinger]

Um - I believe this provision was inserted at the very last minute, and nobody was told of the change. Now, the next thing to happen will probably be an NPRM from the FAA to modify the appropriate FAR(s).

There is a LOT about this law to hate, and at the very foundation of it is having congress legislate instead of having the FAA regulate.

 

[murphey]

Also remember you only have until Feb 17 (Thursday) to comment on the NPRM concerning photo ids on the cert. Last time I looked, about 1300 comments. More important than the NPRM, email/fax comments to your congressional delegation - they're the ones demanding it.

 

[steingar]

More important than the NPRM, email/fax comments to your congressional delegation - they're the ones demanding it.

Past tense there fella, they demanded it in the Patriot act many years ago. Now they're just making the FAA obey the law.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Past tense there fella, they demanded it in the Patriot act many years ago. Now they're just making the FAA obey the law.

Maybe while they're at it ( just making the FAA obey the law) they'll also finally give the FAA the funding to do so.

 

[TMetzinger]

Maybe while they're at it ( just making the FAA obey the law) they'll also finally give the FAA the funding to do so.

Amen!

 

[poadeleted20]

Maybe while they're at it ( just making the FAA obey the law) they'll also finally give the FAA the funding to do so.

Much easier to charge us for the service.

In any event, if it's in Congressional legislation, the FAA has no choice about implementation no matter how the comments on the NPRM come in. The FAA tried stonewalling on the pilot certificate photo issue, and the new Chair of the House committee covering the FAA (who was the guy behind it in the first place) is now beating on them for it. You can bet that if Congressman Mica supports the expungement of expungement, the FAA will be pressed very hard to get it done, and the only way to stop it from happening will be to get both houses of Congress to rescind the law -- good luck on that.

 

[Henning]

Easy killer, that's an extremely offensive term. I would appreciate you ceasing to use it.

Not on your life, they started it, and it's appropriate.

 

[RotorAndWing]

Much easier to charge us for the service.

In any event, if it's in Congressional legislation, the FAA has no choice about implementation no matter how the comments on the NPRM come in. The FAA tried stonewalling on the pilot certificate photo issue, and the new Chair of the House committee covering the FAA (who was the guy behind it in the first place) is now beating on them for it. You can bet that if Congressman Mica supports the expungement of expungement, the FAA will be pressed very hard to get it done, and the only way to stop it from happening will be to get both houses of Congress to rescind the law -- good luck on that.

The money has to be allocated to get the program up and running even if the plan to is to charge whatever amount to the customer.

Right now the Agency is in a huge push (by congress) to cut the budget.

Congressmen like to talk out of both sides of their mouth. While getting the "sound bite" or the ideal "photo op" for the nightly news on how they are "pounding the FAA" to get something done, then proceed behind closed doors and refuse to give the funding to do so.

We shall see.

 

[rotorhead1026]

Easy killer, that's an extremely offensive term. I would appreciate you ceasing to use it.

Seconded. The board is a nice place - let's keep it that way.

 

[wsuffa]

I thought the Tea Baggers blocked the re-authorization of the PATRIOT act.

House passed it yesterday. And only certain provisions were up for reauthorization - others were permanant from the start.

Folks, let's take the political comments about a certain group citizens to spin zone, why don't we? Would rather not have this thread closed.

 

[JeffDG]

House passed it yesterday. And only certain provisions were up for reauthorization - others were permanant from the start.

Folks, let's take the political comments about a certain group citizens to spin zone, why don't we? Would rather not have this thread closed.

They tried to pass it under accelerated rules requiring a 2/3 vote, and failed at that. This was brought up under regular order and succeeded.

**Note, not political spin, Just the technical details of the legislative process.**

 

[wsuffa]

They tried to pass it under accelerated rules requiring a 2/3 vote, and failed at that. This was brought up under regular order and succeeded.

**Note, not political spin, Just the technical details of the legislative process.**

Agree, and I don't see any issue talking about the legislation itself & how it passed. When we get into discussing how a certain political party acts, that's Spin Material.

 

[Henning]

House passed it yesterday. And only certain provisions were up for reauthorization - others were permanant from the start.

Folks, let's take the political comments about a certain group citizens to spin zone, why don't we? Would rather not have this thread closed.

As for me, I wasn't making a political comment, I was making a personal comment about a groups lack of understanding the meaning, depths or ramifications of what they say and lack the foresight to look at issues from all the perspectives. Their adoption of the phrase just serves as evidence of their shallow thinking.