Statute Of Limitations?
09-15-2009, 01:33 PM
#2
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,253
Since FAA violations are under admin law, no there is not a formal SOL. However, in general constitutional terms you might be able to get a dated violation thrown out based on the "stale complaint" premise.
But there is nothing to stop the FAA from violating you, except common sense.
But there is nothing to stop the FAA from violating you, except common sense.
09-15-2009, 07:44 PM
#4
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,253
Originally Posted by boeingt7
I remember hearing somewhere it is 6 months from the date of infraction? Anyone else know?
But if they never knew about the occurrence and found out later, all bets are off. Also if they sat on something for a long time and later decided they wanted to pursue it for whatever reason there is nothing stopping them.
09-16-2009, 05:14 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 826
The 6-month stale complaint rule is an NTSB procedural rule appearing at 38 C.F.R. §821.33:
Where the complaint states allegations of offenses which occurred more than 6 months prior to the Administrator's advising the respondent as to reasons for proposed action under 49 U.S.C. 44709(c), the respondent may move to dismiss such allegations as stale pursuant to the following provisions:
==============================
Not the clearest thing in the world. The cases tend to focus on what is considered " good cause" for the delay and what is considered to be "lack of qualifications" But the way it's been applied generally is that if there was no good reason for the delay, certificate actions will generally go away 6 months after the incident is reported. IOW, you have an airspace incursion, talk to the FAA telephone number you are given, and 6 month go by without receiving a Notice of Proposed Certificate Action, you are probably home free.
But the twists in this hardly give the certainty of a true statute of limitations.
Where the complaint states allegations of offenses which occurred more than 6 months prior to the Administrator's advising the respondent as to reasons for proposed action under 49 U.S.C. 44709(c), the respondent may move to dismiss such allegations as stale pursuant to the following provisions:
==============================
(a) In those cases where
the complaint does not allege lack of qualification of the respondent:(1) The Administrator shall be required to show, by reply filed within 15 days after the date of service of the respondent's motion, that good cause existed for the delay in providing such advice, or that the imposition of a sanction is warranted in the public interest, notwithstanding the delay or the reasons therefor.
(2) If the Administrator does not establish good cause for the delay, or for the imposition of a sanction in the public interest notwithstanding the delay, the law judge shall dismiss the stale allegations and proceed to adjudicate the remaining portion of the complaint, if any.
(2) If the Administrator does not establish good cause for the delay, or for the imposition of a sanction in the public interest notwithstanding the delay, the law judge shall dismiss the stale allegations and proceed to adjudicate the remaining portion of the complaint, if any.
(b) In those cases where the complaint alleges lack of qualification of the respondent, the law judge shall first determine whether an issue of lack of qualification would be presented if all of the allegations, stale and timely, are assumed to be true. If so, the law judge shall deny the respondent's motion. If not, the law judge shall proceed as in paragraph (a) of this section.
==============================Not the clearest thing in the world. The cases tend to focus on what is considered " good cause" for the delay and what is considered to be "lack of qualifications" But the way it's been applied generally is that if there was no good reason for the delay, certificate actions will generally go away 6 months after the incident is reported. IOW, you have an airspace incursion, talk to the FAA telephone number you are given, and 6 month go by without receiving a Notice of Proposed Certificate Action, you are probably home free.
But the twists in this hardly give the certainty of a true statute of limitations.
09-16-2009, 10:28 AM
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 826
It depends. Unless "pulled" it a fairly short time, though I forget exactly what. It may even depend of the facility itself.
But if there is some action contemplated, they would be "pulled" right away anyway and kept for investigation and enforcement purposes.
So, for example, if you were flying along and heard the magic words, "N1234X Possible Pilot Deviation Advise You Contact City Approach at 123-456-7809," the chances are that the ATC paperwork of preparing pilot deviation reports and the segregation of the ATC audio and track information, has begun.
But if there is some action contemplated, they would be "pulled" right away anyway and kept for investigation and enforcement purposes.
So, for example, if you were flying along and heard the magic words, "N1234X Possible Pilot Deviation Advise You Contact City Approach at 123-456-7809," the chances are that the ATC paperwork of preparing pilot deviation reports and the segregation of the ATC audio and track information, has begun.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
