Doesn't matter -- box 18w only asks about "nontraffic convictions (felonies or misdemeanors)", so you won't need to check that box no matter how this turns out.
Then you have to report it on your next FAA medical application by checking box 18v "yes" and explaining in the space below. What ramifications that has would be best answered by Bruce Chien.
The question to which you refer is 18v, and as it is worded (and explained in the instructions), the only answer is absolutely yes.
2 pt driving tickets for speeding? Yup! I'm not talking about multiple reckless endangerment citations here!
(emphasis added)FAA Form 8500-8 said:
Did you get that from the FAA Chief Counsel, or an attorney with an aviation practice, or is that just your own guess? Personally, I don't think the FAA Chief Counsel would agree with your legal logic, since the attendance did result from the ticket -- without the ticket, and the points it accrued, you would never have taken the class (ask an attorney about the "but for" test). Absent a Chief Counsel agreement with your logic, omit that attendance at your own serious legal risk.
It says "conviction...which resulted attendance at an educational or rehabilitation program." It doesn't differentiate between in-person and electronic attendance, and it doesn't set a time limit between the conviction and the program. The fact remains that you would not have done the program if you hadn't been convicted (the old "but for" test that lawyers love so much). Beyond that, if you want to play semantics games with the Federal government, go right ahead, but don't expect it to end well for you.
You may be correct in theory, but I'm pretty sure this attorney is correct in practice.
No, you have to understand the way the FAA legal folks think. Since they get to determine what their own regulations mean, what you or anyone believes about Virginia law just doesn't matter when it comes to question 18v on FAA Form 8500-8.
Tim, post the counsel's response again, would you? I can't seem to get to it to come up on the O&I page....
No, they told you that if attendance was purely voluntary (and they went to some length to emphasize that point) it was not reportable. That's not the same as what you said above, and is subject to FAA interpretation. If you're doing it to take off your record points that were assessed because of a conviction, the FAA can still consider that not purely voluntary, and say it's a result of the conviction.
The question on the form says "as a result," not "mandatory." The fact that you had several options does not change the fact that but for the traffic infraction, you would never have attended that educational program.
It is because the FAA sees a correlation in pilots between bad decisions behind the wheel and bad decisions in the air. If your traffic offense history is sufficient to motivate the state which issued your DL to give you some remedial driver training, the FAA wants to look at the situation further in order to determine whether your judgment and decision-making are bad enough to create a flying safety concern.
And that logic would make sense if you were specifically offered the remedial training as an option because of your specific infraction. But it sounds as if the OP lives in a state where the remedial training is ALWAYS an option and you get credit for it to offset points on your record whether you need them or not. In that case there is no demonstrable connection between any specific infraction and attendance at remedial training, so how said attendance would have any bearing on your judgment and decision making is beyond me.
