|
Because the FAA enforcement process and enforcement action takes place BEFORE the appeal process, the appeal process can only be redemptive, or keep the status quo. Neither the Administrative Law Judge, full NTSB board, or court of appeals will apply punitive measures or increase the penalty, the appeals process cannot be punitive, of course.
Under administrative law one is convicted by the FAA, and then one has an opportunity to present one's case in appeal, after having become the subject of enforcement action. If enforcement action does not take place (no punitive, or administrative action--eg, no suspension or revocation), then there's nothing to appeal. A successful appeal may see the FAA's action reduced, or reversed. An unsuccessful appeals action will see the status quo remain. |
[MOD INPUT] Everybody lay off the insults now, keep it civil.
|
Originally Posted by JBird
(Post 3691110)
Really? Travel vouchers are reviewable years after they are filed. Pay inquiries (at least for the DoD) can be initiated by a simple pay clerk. You really don’t think that a federal pension holding entity cant reach out and touch your wallet?
But if you're getting paid what you're supposed to be getting paid, no they can't mess with your pension. Also I'm fairly certain congress recently enacted a statute of limitations to prevent .gov from finding overpayments from 30 years ago, adding up the interest and then billing pensioners for hundreds of thousands $ (that did happen in the past, at least a couple times). |
Originally Posted by Drifter123
(Post 3691244)
One of the three people I personally know just received a permanent airman certificate revocation and is now expecting charges. The other two are still in the records submission process with the FAA. The pilot who received the revocation had a 100% disability rating and was being compensated for service connected sleep apnea, PTSD and depression that he did not report on FAA medical application for the past several years since receiving the rating.
If they stick it to those people, and don't prosecute the ones who forgot to report 5% ratings for tinnitus or shin splints, then I can't argue with what they're doing. |
Originally Posted by JBird
(Post 3691339)
No doubt people who dishonestly fill out a VA or FAA document should suffer appropriate punishment when it comes to light. But because there is a ver small number of people who do that, shouldn’t give the FAA blanket authority to investigate a pilot group in secret and apparently outside the scope of due process. Your painting with too wide of a brush.
But there's no obvious reason that it's not legal, they are comparing databases for which they have legal access since HIPAA does not apply to all federal admin or financial data. IIRC congress actually enacted law to ALLOW the FAA and VA to share this data, some years back. Your opinion isn't unreasonable, but it's just an opinion, the law says different and it has been exercised in this fashion at least twice this century. If you don't like it, write your congress critters, AOPA, and ALPA and see if someone will take up the cause. Kind of doubt it, since protecting pilots who hide fraudulent medical applications isn't going to be high on anyone's sympathy list. Worst case, the FAA might decide (or be told) to add a written disclaimer on the 8500 form, just like what they have for the NDR. Also this has been a known thing for a number of years, it's been in the news and I've made a point of publicizing it here to help get the word out. Why do people think they can still get away with it? It's not 1985... This is from 12 years ago, I warned back then that this might be coming. They did wait until we pulled out of IQ/AF first, bad optics picking on vets during a hot war. https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/p...-payments.html |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 3691589)
One can certainly appeal it all the way to the full board.
Prior to that, it's appealed to an ALJ. After the full board, it's appealed to the US Court of Appeals. In the interim, and forever after, it's part of one's FAA record, and before one gets a change to appeal, one is the subject of an FAA Order; eg, enforcement action. Conviction first, then the opportunity to defend one's self. Any defense up to that point is simply an evidence-gathering exercise to be used against the airman. If it doesn't go to enforcement action, the FAA places the letter of investigation in the airman's file, and that will do nearly as much damage as enforcement action. Even if the FAA generates a letter following the initial investigation to state that evidence has not been found to further the enforcement process, the FAA will state it in terms that establish guilt. We have been unable to find evidence that you violated x regulation, but doing x is a violation of that regulation and that letter will remain in the airman's file. It's damaging, without question, and the FAA knows this. The LOI is not placed in "the airman's file". The "airman's file" is kept at OKC and contains 8710s, disapprovals, etc. The LOI is at the office-level and there is no "airman's file" there. A letter of no-action does not state what you claim, here's the template version from the current order: Figure 14-2-3D. No Action Letter FAA letterhead June 30, 2002 Aviator, Jonathan 123 Golden Dr. Anytown, US 54321 File Number: 2002DC050024 Reporting Inspector: SMITH, MARY The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has investigated an alleged violation that reportedly occurred on January 2, 2002, in the vicinity of Springfield, MO. This letter is to inform you that the investigation did not establish a violation of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR), and you may consider the matter closed. Should you have questions, feel free to contact our office. Manager Anytown FSDO 123 Whispering Lane If there's an enforcement or warning notice, those do go into the airman's file, not LOIs. Anytown, US 54321 |
|
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes
(Post 3691762)
There's a lot that is incorrect here.
The LOI is not placed in "the airman's file". The "airman's file" is kept at OKC and contains 8710s, disapprovals, etc. The LOI is at the office-level and there is no "airman's file" there. A letter of no-action does not state what you claim, here's the template version from the current order: You may be thinking of the old warning notice process. These days it is not part of any normal process, because if not eligible for compliance action (similar qualification as ASAP), it has to be enforcement. Warning notice was used pre-CA similar to how CA is used now. If there's an enforcement or warning notice, those do go into the airman's file, not LOIs. Anytown, US 54321 In short, Iv'e seen both show up in the airman's record. During the kinder, gentler FAA phase, I've not found that to be the case among inspectors who work in a field where one of the application requirements is that the applicant cannot have had more than two aircraft accidents in the prior five years, for which the applicant as at fault. My respect level for inspectors and their knowledge and understanding of the regulation and associated process is low; the FAA sets the bar low, and it shows. It's for that reason that I was able to have two LOI's and warning letters. One of those I received after a call from an inspector in the LAS FSDO a number of years ago, who told me he wanted evidence to use against my employer; he told me that if I would obtain the records and files from the employer and provide them to the inspector, he would table the matter, because he knew it had no merit (company records showed 1/2 hour too little rest on one date; it was a clerical error and it was obvious. I refused to spy on the employer or steal records. Subsequently, I received a letter of investigation, and. later a warning letter in my file stating that while the FAA could find no evidence of wrong doing, it was wrong of me to do it. Another event involved the head of a FSDO that called me into his office and told me to buy his secretary a dozen red roses, or he'd find a reason to violate me. I kid not. One can't make that **** up. |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3691833)
https://i.ibb.co/rckBcr8/IMG-6421.jpg
https://thehill.com/regulation/court...efit-payments/ https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/f...bmitting-false |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3691892)
Is this guy a pilot? Sounds like he can't decide whether he's stealing money, valor, or both.
https://www.recorder.com/Former-Mari...rvice-47373525 Just posted as a counter to someone’s allegation that the government was picking on pilots. |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 3691853)
The Warning Letter is what I referred to, and it does exactly what I claim. I can attest to that personally; for investigations that resulted in no action, a warning letter placed in the file states that no evidence was found of wrong doing, and then goes on to state that doing XXX is a violation of 14 CFR XXX. The employer, or future employer who asks if one has had enforcement action or received a warning letter may not ever read the letter (which states insufficient evidence found to proceed with enforcement. The warning letter, however, has a damaging effect on the career of the airman; in the past, these were supposed to be removed after two years, and this was very frequently not done. Moreover, I can personally attest to employers in PRIA checks receiving not only the warning letter on file, but also a letter of investigation, because I have had new employers tell me about them after receiving my FAA information. I realize the FAA states that this doesn't happen, and that the LOI is a local affair; real-world experience (you can dismiss as anecdotal, if you wish) has proven otherwise.
In short, Iv'e seen both show up in the airman's record. During the kinder, gentler FAA phase, I've not found that to be the case among inspectors who work in a field where one of the application requirements is that the applicant cannot have had more than two aircraft accidents in the prior five years, for which the applicant as at fault. My respect level for inspectors and their knowledge and understanding of the regulation and associated process is low; the FAA sets the bar low, and it shows. It's for that reason that I was able to have two LOI's and warning letters. One of those I received after a call from an inspector in the LAS FSDO a number of years ago, who told me he wanted evidence to use against my employer; he told me that if I would obtain the records and files from the employer and provide them to the inspector, he would table the matter, because he knew it had no merit (company records showed 1/2 hour too little rest on one date; it was a clerical error and it was obvious. I refused to spy on the employer or steal records. Subsequently, I received a letter of investigation, and. later a warning letter in my file stating that while the FAA could find no evidence of wrong doing, it was wrong of me to do it. Another event involved the head of a FSDO that called me into his office and told me to buy his secretary a dozen red roses, or he'd find a reason to violate me. I kid not. One can't make that **** up. And you are right, the warning notice wasn't exactly the best idea ever. Everyone I know is glad those days are past. As far as your roses story, I would be calling the IG and anyone else to report that if it happened. No way anyone should ever get away with something like that. I work with some people that do try to understand and get the right answers, rather than just their opinion on Tuesday at 3pm. I'm all for more accountability and higher standards. It only helps those of us trying to do the right thing. |
Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes
(Post 3691935)
No way anyone should ever get away with something like that.
And yet... I bought the roses, because the cost of the roses was far, far less than what it would have cost to fight whatever he might have dredged up, whether true or not. The power of the position is that it doesn't have to be true to be quite costly, wether it's direct costs in the fight (attorney, travel, time off, etc), or the secondary, long term damage that comes from ever having been i the fight in the first place. The job you don't get can opportunity cost millions. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3691676)
Your opinion isn't unreasonable, but it's just an opinion Back to the point, servicemembers volunteer to relinquish a lot of rights…most notably 1st amendment. But they do so on paper and with a lot of command emphasis. Best I can tell, they have not given up their right to due process and when the government uses secret tools for investigative reasons that violates due process. But again, I’m not a judge or constitutional scholar. Or that gooder in grramer. |
Originally Posted by JBird
(Post 3692353)
Exactly. It is my opinion…regardless of what the law is…that this is unfair to servicemebers. I think that it offers an opportunity for the FAA to provide additional regulatory oversight to a subgroup. That, in my opinion, is unfair. Not sure how anyone could label me a liar (or right winger) for expressing an opinion and if I misrepresented it as fact or myself as a constitutional scholar, then I would appreciate knowing where I did that and I will gladly correct the record.
Back to the point, servicemembers volunteer to relinquish a lot of rights…most notably 1st amendment. But they do so on paper and with a lot of command emphasis. Best I can tell, they have not given up their right to due process and when the government uses secret tools for investigative reasons that violates due process. But again, I’m not a judge or constitutional scholar. Or that gooder in grramer. I'd be more vocal about my rights in areas that are clearly constitutionally protected, not a fan of big brother in general. |
Something no one has mentioned, and is worth noting, is that the highest person in the FAA's Office of Aerospace medicine is a retired USAF colonel. She is the FAA's Federal Air Surgeon, the FAA's equivalent of the Surgeon General, but specific to aviation. During her 20 years of service, she served as a flight surgeon at Moody AFB, Chief of Operational Medicine at Bolling AFB, Chief of Aerospace Medicine at Pope AFB, and Chief of Aeromedical Services in Saudi Arabia at both Dhahran and Prince Sultan AB. She's board certified in aerospace medicine. She was Head of Delegation to the aeromedical working group at NATO. She's more than qualified, and has a lengthy list of accolades, awards, and associations in and out of the military. She's hardly averse to service personnel.
The Deputy Federal Air Surgeon is likewise a former service member, including four combat tours. He's presently still in the reserves, and has served the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, etc. Not someone who's anti-military, either. His son is USAF, his daughter is in the USAF academy. The present investigation touching on reporting of disability benefits was not initiated by the FAA, but by the VA. It is also not the only database-correlation dealing with disability benefits, as this has been conducted using the social security database on both coasts as well as state disability benefit databases. This isn't an assault on service members. It's also not a state secret. it's an investigation triggered by an external investigation. As the VA looked at the potential for fraud and began turning up cases warranting further investigation, the FAA was in turn unable to ignore the matter and had little choice but to reciprocate and investigate, although the FAA did so with significant enough reluctance that it was castigated by the VA and associated parties for it's slowness in producing airman records and in becoming involved. It's not a witch hunt. It's not anti-service. Anyone with a FAA medical certificate is subject to investigation, and it's not been restricted to service members in the past, nor will it be in the future. That the present investigation is a reciprocal one associated with the VA does not mean it's an assault on those who have served. |
Maybe not that straightforward.
First off I don't think it's a targeted witch-hunt, I tend to suspect those who are most vocal about that may have gotten letters, or be expecting to. They're doing it not because they're after vets, but because they can. They did the same with SS a number of years back. Again, because they can. I suspect there's a LOT more of this on the VA side than on the SS side, at least for commercial pilots, for the cultural and systemic reasons we've already discussed. Vets get led down the path to the water, it's up to them in the end to recognize the ethical and legal perils and not actually take a drink, or too large of a drink. I can't really fault the FAA for focusing on a large number of likely commercial pilots, as opposed to a smaller number of likely private pilots on the SS side. Plenty of civilians are lying on their 8500 too, but they can't catch them unless they have probable cause and a subpoena... that usually only comes from a very rare inflight incap, or more commonly a pizzed-off ex wife/GF. Regarding mil officers in the FAA... career active duty tend to have an elevated opinion of themselves relative to reserve/guard, and it's culturally common within that crowd to denigrate those who leave for the airlines. If you're career mil and then civil service, there's also some sour grapes about airline compensation. For much of this century during the hard years, rolling your mil time over for civil service retirement credit and settling into a modest but very secure career seemed like a good bet, and I knew some folks who were pretty smug about it. But now the tables have turned, and airline pilots can be in the $500K ballpark just for flying their line... I don't think it's a witch-hunt per se, but I wouldn't necessarily be counting on a lot of brotherly love from the career AD-to-GS crowd either. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3699300)
Maybe not that straightforward.
First off I don't think it's a targeted witch-hunt, I tend to suspect those who are most vocal about that may have gotten letters, or be expecting to. They're doing it not because they're after vets, but because they can. They did the same with SS a number of years back. Again, because they can. I suspect there's a LOT more of this on the VA side than on the SS side, at least for commercial pilots, for the cultural and system reasons we've already discussed. Vets get led down the path to the water, it's up to them in the end to recognize the ethical and legal perils and not actually take a drink, or too large of a drink. I can't really fault the FAA for focusing on a large number of likely commercial pilots, as opposed to a smaller number of likely private pilots on the SS side. Plenty of civilians are lying on their 8500 too, but they can't catch them unless they have probable cause and a subpoena... that usually only comes from a very rare inflight incap, or more commonly a pizzed-off ex wife/GF. I don't think it's a witch-hunt per se, but I wouldn't necessarily be counting on a lot of brotherly love from the career AD-to-GS crowd either. But on the other hand, active duty guys get harangued by all the ambulance chaser type disability lawyers that Reservists do. They know the temptations… https://www.woodslawyers.com/veteran...xoCkNYQAvD_BwE https://www.hillandponton.com/increase-your-va-rating/ https://www.idlawcenter.com/faqs/how...ity-rating.cfm |
Originally Posted by Excargodog
(Post 3699357)
Twas always thus… https://youtu.be/bJaSIUCPZKc?si=VHiUBjlbGrBUlIv2
But on the other hand, active duty guys get harangued by all the ambulance chaser type disability lawyers that Reservists do. They know the temptations… https://www.woodslawyers.com/veteran...xoCkNYQAvD_BwE https://www.hillandponton.com/increase-your-va-rating/ https://www.idlawcenter.com/faqs/how...ity-rating.cfm |
Originally Posted by ugleeual
(Post 3699367)
this is exactly the problem… these law offices push vets to use the 10% rule to obtain higher disability claims… in return they take a cut of your awarded disability. They push PTSD, mobility ailments, sleep apnea, etc…
If we were talking about 22 y/o E-4's I'd have more sympathy. Majors and Cols should know better when it comes right down to it. If you just gotta have that 100% rating, then get a non-flying job, they'll never know. |
If one weren't pursuing FAA certification or aviation employment, maximizing one's disability rating might be a good deal. A few extra dollars from uncle sam won't compensate for hearing loss, limb loss, mobility loss, or loss of sanity or sleep, but it's something. In the case of one making a career of aviation, the cost-benefit analysis of what one gets in compensation from the VA, insurance, social security, etc, should be weighed against the potential cost to one's career over the expected term of the career (lifetime, for example). The aggregate income up to retirement with a legacy airline will be substantially more than whatever one is able to achieve in a VA disability rating. So long as the two won't conflict (due diligence), no problem, but if a choice must be made, it's best to do the homework and decide where the priority lies. It should probably lie with one's lifetime career.
That said not everyone who comes into disability benefits does so with the foresight of an aviation career. I asked a fairly young gung-ho staff sergeant in Basrah one night if he had a sinus or other condition that would preclude a rapid altitude change on the way to the airport. He said he had just one ear drum. I told him we'd take a little more time and care getting down. I asked what happened to his other ear. RPG in Baghdad. "It's okay, sir," he said cheerfully, "If the army wants me to have another ear drum, they'll issue one." Admirable, but of course, wrong. I mention this relevant to the reference of sour grapes and prejudices about the great unwashed separating and seeking a white collar career as airline pilots; not everyone leaves the service in a pilot, or as an officer, or even with the intent to fly. Additionally, not everyone has any idea that disability benefits might have a bearing on medical certification (or that reporting them might). For those reasons and many more, t's always wise to do extra due diligence in researching the impact to career, what must be reported, what's allowed, etc. Just like planning a takeoff, know before you go, and just like a clearance (Clarence) that isn't clear, clarify. Far better than falling afoul. |
Yeah I'm sure some of those affected got out as enlisted or non-pilot officers, and pursued flight training via the GI Bill. Few of those folks would have had any reliable advice available, or even known that resources such as APC existed at the time.
|
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3699405)
Yeah I'm sure some of those affected got out as enlisted or non-pilot officers, and pursued flight training via the GI Bill. Few of those folks would have had any reliable advice available, or even known that resources such as APC existed at the time.
|
Originally Posted by WhisperJet
(Post 3699597)
don’t forget the FAA also cross checks with NDR
They probably need to put a similar warning for VA and SS. Shouldn't have to, but they probably should. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3699377)
As I've said before they certainly lead you to the water... but you have to decide whether or not to drink, and how much.
If we were talking about 22 y/o E-4's I'd have more sympathy. Majors and Cols should know better when it comes right down to it. If you just gotta have that 100% rating, then get a non-flying job, they'll never know. |
Originally Posted by PineappleXpres
(Post 3699625)
Weed is legal too. I fail to see the excuse.
After my last extended AD recall, I went in because my feet hurt from running a lot in boots (in my 40's go figure). They looked at my DD214 and tried to talk me into claiming TBI and PTSD because "combat zone". My combat zone service on that trip consisted of staff duty at the 'Deid. Left the wire exactly once... to go to the Doha airport and go home. "Oh but that doesn't rule out PTSD" PTSD from what? Working out on the ellipticals behind the row of treadmills being used by young women in lycra? |
Meanwhile, the VA goes DENY-DENY-DENY on things that are actually wrong with me (Sleep apnea from having my face reconstructed, a host of orthopedic stuff) but every time I go there for appeals or exams, they tell me "if you just claim TBI or PTSD that would put you over 100%" when I have claimed everything but.
They did the same thing with my dad. Was fighting them for years for issues from a helicopter crash (back/neck/burns, it's a family tradition it seems) and later on agent orange exposure. Never claimed PTSD. When he could not longer work or hold a medical he said F it I have PTSD and boom 100% in 5 months. After 30+ years of "nothing wrong with you except age" from the VA. |
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3699761)
Left the wire exactly once... to go to the Doha airport and go home. "Oh but that doesn't rule out PTSD"
Forget not, camel spiders.
Originally Posted by rickair7777
(Post 3699761)
PTSD from what? Working out on the ellipticals behind the row of treadmills being used by young women in lycra?
Disorder, too. Pretty damn traumatic, come to think about it. |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 3656056)
Perhaps, except for two things: this is the exact opposite of what you're describing, and the government isn't looking for military disability fraud. When the military determines disability, it's not a case of a soldier claiming a disability and that simply being granted: the military looks at each case and assigns a percentage of disability. While it's beyond question that many military disabilities are quite valid, it's also very well known that many are not; I know a number personally who have received disability ratings based on a military assessment, who are anything but disabled. This isn't a case of fraud: the military has made the determination.
The question arises thereafter regarding a disability determined by the military, and its impact on FAA medical qualification. It's very possible for a legitimate disability claim in the military to have no impact on an FAA medical certificate. One can meet military disability standards and be determined worthy of collecting benefits, while at the same time one is perfectly capable of passing a flight physical. The question here is one of disclosure. If an airman has hearing loss, for example, which is the single most common disability that the Department of Defense processes, then the question is whether the airman can meet the standards under 14 CFR Part 67, to hold a medical certificate. The military disability rating does not invalidate the medical or prevent its issue: these are two different organizations and two different standards. One can hold a military disability and yet qualify for a FAA medical certificate. FAA regulation requires disclosure of the disability and any documentation that goes with it, and the FAA medical standards are what determines the airman's ability to hold FAA medical certification. On its face, anyone claiming a disbility, and at the same time claiming perfect health raises a question: reconciliation is warranted, either for financial/fraud reasons, or for (in this case) ensuring that one meets the FAA medical standard. The key here is that this isn't a matter of searching the FAA airman database to find soldiers who might be committing fraud: that would be irrelevant, because the military has already made the disability determination. Rather, it's the opposite: the FAA requires disclosure of numerous conditions, including claims or assignments of disability. Upon that information having been declared, its a matter of determining how it impacts the FAA medical standard, and if it dos not, or if it does and a waiver can be issued, then the FAA medical process can proceed and the medical certificate issued, regardless of the military rating of disability. The Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI--FAA's medical hq) is well aware of the difference between military disability ratings and FAA aeromedical standards, and quite aware that one can hold both a valid FAA medical, while holding a military disability rating. The regulation requires reconciliation and verification: disclose it and document it, including any additional testing that might be required to verify compliance with Part 67 standards. Same as anyone else applying for a medical. When the matter becomes part of an investigation (we see you have a military disability that you didn't disclose...), then it becomes a matter that does need to be handled with counsel, because it's the start of the enforcement process. This process is the FAA looking at regulatory violation, and the violation isn't fraud, but failure to report, as required when applying for a medical certificate. In most cases, this can be handled easily, but one should tread lightly until one has consulted professional assistance. Services such as AMAS can help, but any letter of investigation should be reviewed by legal counsel before responding. Put another way, you've been handed a weapon which is not safe: don't just pull the trigger. There's a safe way to handle it, and there's a careless way to handle it. Get help. It seems for current and former military folks the FAA can easily harass them. What about us pure civilians? What if a civilian pilot has tennitis? What if they never disclose it? What about if a civilian has OSA? What if they never dislcose it? How is the FAA going to know? They won't. It's only the former mil folks that are getting this rub down, because the FAA knows there is a history and they can dig for it if they want. On the civilian side - no. If a civilian doens't want to disclose (stupid) there is no way the FAA can track that down. None (assuming said civilian never files fo SS disability for that condition). Your Part 67 comment is comical. Do you have any idea what additional tests they will ask for? No, you don't. Using tinnitis as an example, you could be jumping thru hopes for a ringing in your ears that most folks have after spending any time around airplanes or other loud noise polluted environments. Is it normal conversation test or a full on hearing test? If the FAA values hearing accuity then they should include it as part of the class 1 medical. But they don't, because it doesn't matter, unless youare one getting VA disability for it. A total contradiction that even you unknowingly point out in your post. JB do you disclose when you go see the doc for diarrhea? How about a head cold? Do you sneeze and cough during pollen season? Uh-oh, you've got allergies. Better self disclose. That's going to require an SI and lots of testing. Your comment "The Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI--FAA's medical hq) is well aware of the difference between military disability ratings and FAA aeromedical standards, and quite aware that one can hold both a valid FAA medical, while holding a military disability rating." Is a contradiction. Let's look at tinnitis. Can you hold a class 1 with it - yes. Does the FAA test hearing - no. Does the VA rate it as a disability - yes. If the FAA is not mandating for medical issuance, then why do they care if you have a disability rating for it from the VA? If the FAA knows that there is a difference, then why are they asking former mil folks for their veterans determination letters - again. The only reason the FAA konws they have them is becasue the servicemember submitted them for their SI to begin with in full disclosure. This whole thing - it's silly and some one needs to reign in the FAA on this ASAP. this is total low hanging fruit lazy bureucrat BS. Nothing more. And after they've stressed out, psychologically tortured the airman, caused them to jump thru hoops when the information is provided as part of a original SI issuance and continuation, what is the end objective? It seems very unfair the FAA is doing this to our veterans. Especially if they've disclosed. That should be it, shut the door. But now they want the VA stuff from my brother - again. He's ****ed. My brother's is 8 pages long. Heck the VA guy even put hypertension in there. My brother has never had an issue at any of his FAA Class 1 medicals with his blood pressure. They way he described it to me is the VA doc tries to find anything that will get a disablility rating, even zero - whereas the FAA, contrary, is looking for anything. It's a total fishing expedition and needs to be shutdown. That's my opinion. If you can pass your first class medical as given, then so be it. The FAA needs not to be concerned. If they don't like it the FAA can change the medical standards for issuance. How about we all get astronaut physicals (which include full pscyhe workups) then. I doubt 80% of us could pass one. My brother doesn't ***** about it. He just rolls with it. But this little easter egg they sent him this cycle really chapped him. I'm just relaying for him. |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 3699284)
Something no one has mentioned, and is worth noting, is that the highest person in the FAA's Office of Aerospace medicine is a retired USAF colonel. She is the FAA's Federal Air Surgeon, the FAA's equivalent of the Surgeon General, but specific to aviation. During her 20 years of service, she served as a flight surgeon at Moody AFB, Chief of Operational Medicine at Bolling AFB, Chief of Aerospace Medicine at Pope AFB, and Chief of Aeromedical Services in Saudi Arabia at both Dhahran and Prince Sultan AB. She's board certified in aerospace medicine. She was Head of Delegation to the aeromedical working group at NATO. She's more than qualified, and has a lengthy list of accolades, awards, and associations in and out of the military. She's hardly averse to service personnel.
The Deputy Federal Air Surgeon is likewise a former service member, including four combat tours. He's presently still in the reserves, and has served the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, etc. Not someone who's anti-military, either. His son is USAF, his daughter is in the USAF academy. The present investigation touching on reporting of disability benefits was not initiated by the FAA, but by the VA. It is also not the only database-correlation dealing with disability benefits, as this has been conducted using the social security database on both coasts as well as state disability benefit databases. This isn't an assault on service members. It's also not a state secret. it's an investigation triggered by an external investigation. As the VA looked at the potential for fraud and began turning up cases warranting further investigation, the FAA was in turn unable to ignore the matter and had little choice but to reciprocate and investigate, although the FAA did so with significant enough reluctance that it was castigated by the VA and associated parties for it's slowness in producing airman records and in becoming involved. It's not a witch hunt. It's not anti-service. Anyone with a FAA medical certificate is subject to investigation, and it's not been restricted to service members in the past, nor will it be in the future. That the present investigation is a reciprocal one associated with the VA does not mean it's an assault on those who have served. A servicemember is absolutely entitled to their benefits from service. So what if they fly planes and receive VA disability? You yourself have posted that the FAA knows the difference, yet here we are. Again, so what? unless you meet one of the big 4 disqualifiers for a Class 1 or 2 medical, then it should not matter. If the FAA wants to tighten up the issuance standards for ALL airmen, then they need to do so. Not target the ducks in the pond low hanging fruit former mil folks who just so happened to serve our country honorably and are merely seeking those benefits entitled them. My brother, who was a USAF pilot, has 8 or 9 pages from the VA ratings. Most of it is stuff he is rated at "zero". He gets no VA $$ for those. Only OSA is paid to him as disability. So many contradictions between you and rickair here I can't keep it straight. uugggghh. |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
It seems for current and former military folks the FAA can easily harass them. What about us pure civilians? What if a civilian pilot has tennitis? What if they never disclose it? What about if a civilian has OSA? What if they never dislcose it? How is the FAA going to know? They won't.
Paperwork can arise through other investigations, via insurance, and other avenues. I've relayed here the case of an airman I knew, violated by an inspector I knew, for remarks made during a church service. That case wasn't medical; the private pilot had flown a friend, and the friend bought him lunch. Compensation. The inspector was in the congregation that day, heard it, caught up with the private pilot in the foyer, and that was that. The private pilot left the church in tears. Pilots report other pilots. Word gets around. Rumors. The FAA finds out. Failure to disclose is a big deal. It's far from isolated to military aviators.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
It seems very unfair the FAA is doing this to our veterans.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
That should be it, shut the door.
I had kidney stones, a number of years ago now. The FAA allows one event, but the airman must show that repeat occurrences are not anticipated, and that the airman is stone-free. It can be a debilitating event. Most people don't get kidney stones again, but the FAA could very easily call for that documentation once more, and in the interest of verifying that no stones have occurred, request new evidence, such as x-rays, ultrasound, etc. Provide it, or find another career. Military or not. It doesn't matter.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
They way he described it to me is the VA doc tries to find anything that will get a disablility rating, even zero - whereas the FAA, contrary, is looking for anything.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
It's a total fishing expedition and needs to be shutdown. That's my opinion. If you can pass your first class medical as given, then so be it. The FAA needs not to be concerned. If they don't like it the FAA can change the medical standards for issuance. How about we all get astronaut physicals then. I doubt 80% of us could pass one.
Medical conditions are individualistic; one can't say "type II diabetes is approved," for example, and think that the FAA owes one certification when one is diagnosed with Type II diabetes. Some cases, the FAA AME may issue; others the FAA provides special issuance, and other cases, the FAA may decline to issue. It comes down to each individual case. If your buddy had type 2 and got a medical, and you have type II and are refused, you might think this unfair...after all, he got his medical, so you're owed one too. But not remotely so. Each airman's case is considered on its own merits, and it may be the specific condition, or it may be the relationship between multiple conditions, or the interaction of certain medications, etc. The FAA does have a reason for asking for certain documentation, though you may not always be informed about the specifics. When you say the FAA "need not be concerned," rest assured that the FAA is very concerned, and has every right, responsibility, and authority to be concerned, and to investigate and to obtain documentation today, tomorrow, and a year from tomorrow. The FAA issues the certificate and regulates it. If you've been issued a medical certificate, this doesn't grant carte blanche to use it without limitation until it comes due, again. Pull out your medical certifiate and read the limitations on the back. You must carry it at all times when exercising its privileges. The FAA can reverse it at any time within 60 days of issuance (and can revoke or suspend it at any time). You must continuously comply with the validity standards for your class of medical (if at any time you don't meet them, you can't use the privileges of the certificate). You must comply with any statement or limitation on the certificate (eg, corrective lenses required, etc). You Must also comply with standards relating to prohibition of operation during medical deficiency. You may feel fine, but that's irrelevant. If you don't meet the standard due to a deficiency, you can't use the certificate, as it's not valid during medical deficiency. It's a very unwise approach to think the FAA won't find out. If the FAA does find out, you've arrived at that undesirable point when the music stops and you have no chair. Don't expect it to go well, military, or not.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
JB do you disclose when you go see the doc for diarrhea?
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
How about a head cold?
As an aside, I can tell you about three cases when I had my sinuses blown out, in flight, and ended up receiving emergency care, and it hasn't happened to you, rest assured that you don't want that experience. It is incapacitating. Same for blown eardrums. Trust me on that, too. Same for filling that vents into the jaw and the nerve. I experienced that at eighteen thousand on a parachute jump, once. One of the less-pleasant things I recall in aviation. The specifics aren't necessary here, but I can't think of anything that I haven't discussed at length with my AME. It has cost me downtime. I'm grounded right now, as I have detailed on this site before. This isn't academic hot air.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
Uh-oh, you've got allergies. Better self disclose. That's going to require an SI and lots of testing.
Depending on the condition and individual a medical might be issued, declined, or conditions established, to include special issuance, and any medications must also be factored in.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
Your comment "The Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI--FAA's medical hq) is well aware of the difference between military disability ratings and FAA aeromedical standards, and quite aware that one can hold both a valid FAA medical, while holding a military disability rating." Is a contradiction.
One can hold disability with the VA/DoD, and still hold a medical certificate. That the VA cites something as a disability does not mean it prevents one from flying or holding a given class of airman medical certificate. Two diffent organizations, and two different standards. This is not contradictory. The does not set, observe, or determine FAA medical standards. The FAA does not utilize VA standards to deterine FAA medical certification. The VA can declare an individual disabled within its framework, for its purposes, and this places no burden on the FAA to declare that airman unairworthy. The FAA makes decisions related to its own jurisdiction. The FAA is certainly interested in disclosure of a disability rating, because this is a legal requirement, and because it may or may not represent an issue of airworthiness to the FAA. The FAA will make that decision, as it does in all cases regarding airman certification. The VA decides for the VA. The FAA decides for the FAA. Not a contradiction.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782079)
Let's look at tinnitis. Can you hold a class 1 with it - yes. Does the FAA test hearing - no. Does the VA rate it as a disability - yes. If the FAA is not mandating for medical issuance, then why do they care if you have a disability rating for it from the VA?
Does the FAA test for hearing? YES. You may not know it, but the FAA does, and when the AME issues your medical, he is certifying that he has determined that you meet the standard. There are more methods than one, to make that determination; like many other things, you may not realize that the AME has evaluated you or made that determination. The VA/DoD may issue a disability rating based on hearing loss of tinnitus. This places no burden on the FAA to limit an airman's medical standard, but each medical is individual. https://www.faa.gov/ame_guide/app_process/exam_tech/et/25-30/middle_ear The FAA, incidentally, by regulation (67.105, .205, .305) requires that an applicant hear a spoken voice at six feet, with his back turned to the speaker. You may have been spoken to, and not know you were being tested. Tinnitus is symptomatic; it may be indicative of a number of things, and it may be the underlying condition that's significant (eg, acoustic neuroma, or Meniere's syndrome. It may not. My ears ring all the time; it's loud. I can pass a medical and a hearing exam, but my hearing isn't great. Far too many years of turbojet engines, even louder radial engines, gunfire, etc. I sleep with a TV on for the noise, which lessens the effect of the constant ringing, but I hear it right now, and yes, it's been disclosed. While this, and many other things are valid for a military disability, they do not bar medical certification by the FAA; different standards, different purposes, different effects, different outcomes, different criteria and difficluties. This is not contradictory. If the VA/DoD finds a condition to be worthy of a disability rating, neither the VA or DoD presume to determine if the individual is physically fit to hold FAA medical certification. It's irrelevant. Likewise, the FAA's decision to grant an airman medical certificate does NOT invalidate a DoD disability rating. https://www.aviationmedicine.com/article/hearing-loss/ |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 3782095)
Don't bank on that. We can spend from now until the second coming sharing anecdotes about such discoveries. I've seen it first hand, and have shared and listened to and read enough others to fill vollumes, but the FAA can and does get wind of failures to disclose. A favorite was the pilot who lost a son, who was buried at an airport that the pilot flew over on his departure. During a conversation with a reporter, the pilot remarked that every time he flew over that cemetary, he silently said a prayer for his son. It made print, human interest. Touching, and all that. The FAA got hold of it. Grounded him. His remark, they said, showed, an inability to adjust. He was grieving far too long. A very expensive journey back to the cockpit.
Paperwork can arise through other investigations, via insurance, and other avenues. I've relayed here the case of an airman I knew, violated by an inspector I knew, for remarks made during a church service. That case wasn't medical; the private pilot had flown a friend, and the friend bought him lunch. Compensation. The inspector was in the congregation that day, heard it, caught up with the private pilot in the foyer, and that was that. The private pilot left the church in tears. Pilots report other pilots. Word gets around. Rumors. The FAA finds out. Failure to disclose is a big deal. It's far from isolated to military aviators. The. FAA enforces and investigates everyone. The FAA didn't start the most recent investigation of military personnel receiving benefits. The FAA refused the DoD's efforts to get the FAA to become involved, until the DoD took legal action to force the FAA to comply. This is not the first time. The FAA has also done similar investigations with State databases that were not military, with social security, etc. In this particular case, the FAA did not go to the DoD. The Department of Defense (VA) went to the FAA and pressured the FAA. Negative. The FAA may request and review at any time, and does. Because you provided documentation once, doesn't mean you won't have to provide it again. That documentation may be the same as previously provided, but the investigation may be tangential to the existing special issuance, medical certificate, airman file, it. The FAA may be investigating a doctor, or AME. One is subject to investigation as the holder of an FAA certificate, be it medical pilot, mechanic, instructor, flight engineer, etc. Every bit as much as an airman inside the SiDA, or John Q Public, is always subject to search of person or property at any time, badged and credentialed or not, as a condition of entry. One is subject to inspection and review at any juncture, by the FAA. I had kidney stones, a number of years ago now. The FAA allows one event, but the airman must show that repeat occurrences are not anticipated, and that the airman is stone-free. It can be a debilitating event. Most people don't get kidney stones again, but the FAA could very easily call for that documentation once more, and in the interest of verifying that no stones have occurred, request new evidence, such as x-rays, ultrasound, etc. Provide it, or find another career. Military or not. It doesn't matter. The FAA Adminstrator is charged by an Act of Congress to promote aviation, regulate aviation and oversee aviation safety, the three prong charter from which the FAA is responsible for issuance of medicals and pilot certificates. There is no right to either one. Both are privileges. Those privileges are congtingent on adherence to the regulation and policy, as well as safety. The FAA is concerned with both . One may take a common medication over the counter, and the FAA may not have a concern about the medication (or may), but is always concerned with the underlying condition for which the medication is taken. Aviation medicine is not taken lightly, nor should it be. The Standards for a first class medical go far beyond what you may have read in Part 67 (you have read it, right?). It's medicine. It's not simply black and white, pass-fail. A lot of it is subjective. Some of it is likely completely transparent to you, when you get our exam. Did you know that you'd been evaluated psychologically, to the satisfaction of the AME, each time you'd been in, just as a function of the conversation you had? What you think is no big deal, may be. What you think is insurmountable, may not be. Special issuances are not forever; they come with conditions and renewal/expirations, and are subject to review. A first class medical is not what most think it to be. Get a head-cold,and your medical certificate is not valid for use; it's only valid when you meet the standards, and if you operate in an unairworthy condition (blocked sinus, for example), you're operating without a valid medical certificate. Most airmen know they shouldn't fly if sick, but many do anyway, and many don't really grasp the true meaning of the validity of their certificate. Simply because you have the paper in hand doesn't mean one-and-done. It doesn't work that way, and I find far fewer who know that, than are ignorant of the fact. Medical conditions are individualistic; one can't say "type II diabetes is approved," for example, and think that the FAA owes one certification when one is diagnosed with Type II diabetes. Some cases, the FAA AME may issue; others the FAA provides special issuance, and other cases, the FAA may decline to issue. It comes down to each individual case. If your buddy had type 2 and got a medical, and you have type II and are refused, you might think this unfair...after all, he got his medical, so you're owed one too. But not remotely so. Each airman's case is considered on its own merits, and it may be the specific condition, or it may be the relationship between multiple conditions, or the interaction of certain medications, etc. The FAA does have a reason for asking for certain documentation, though you may not always be informed about the specifics. When you say the FAA "need not be concerned," rest assured that the FAA is very concerned, and has every right, responsibility, and authority to be concerned, and to investigate and to obtain documentation today, tomorrow, and a year from tomorrow. The FAA issues the certificate and regulates it. If you've been issued a medical certificate, this doesn't grant carte blanche to use it without limitation until it comes due, again. Pull out your medical certifiate and read the limitations on the back. You must carry it at all times when exercising its privileges. The FAA can reverse it at any time within 60 days of issuance (and can revoke or suspend it at any time). You must continuously comply with the validity standards for your class of medical (if at any time you don't meet them, you can't use the privileges of the certificate). You must comply with any statement or limitation on the certificate (eg, corrective lenses required, etc). You Must also comply with standards relating to prohibition of operation during medical deficiency. You may feel fine, but that's irrelevant. If you don't meet the standard due to a deficiency, you can't use the certificate, as it's not valid during medical deficiency. It's a very unwise approach to think the FAA won't find out. If the FAA does find out, you've arrived at that undesirable point when the music stops and you have no chair. Don't expect it to go well, military, or not. THe FAA does not require that. It is not a medical condition upon which medical certification is contingent. However, if one were to see a medical professional for whatever caused the diarrhea, then one would be required to disclose that. As previously noted, each case is individual: if one were to have severe diarrhea/dysentary as a result of contracting cholera, for example, you'd both ground yourself (your medical wouldn't be valid), and you'd report it ("disclose" it). A temporary condition may not require disclosure, but again, it's subjective. Moreover, if one isn't medically fit, as previously discussed, then one may not exercise the medical certificate. If one thinks one won't be caught, one may take one's chances. Very unwise. As an aside, I can tell you about three cases when I had my sinuses blown out, in flight, and ended up receiving emergency care, and it hasn't happened to you, rest assured that you don't want that experience. It is incapacitating. Same for blown eardrums. Trust me on that, too. Same for filling that vents into the jaw and the nerve. I experienced that at eighteen thousand on a parachute jump, once. One of the less-pleasant things I recall in aviation. The specifics aren't necessary here, but I can't think of anything that I haven't discussed at length with my AME. It has cost me downtime. I'm grounded right now, as I have detailed on this site before. This isn't academic hot air. It may, or may not, depending on the individual, and the FAA is conerned about both the medication and the underlying condition, and any interations with other medications, too. Seeing as you brought it up, however, severe allergies do require a FAA decision and supporting documentation: https://www.faa.gov/ame_guide/app_process/exam_tech/item35/amd/allergies Depending on the condition and individual a medical might be issued, declined, or conditions established, to include special issuance, and any medications must also be factored in. There is no contradiction. One can hold disability with the VA/DoD, and still hold a medical certificate. That the VA cites something as a disability does not mean it prevents one from flying or holding a given class of airman medical certificate. Two diffent organizations, and two different standards. This is not contradictory. The does not set, observe, or determine FAA medical standards. The FAA does not utilize VA standards to deterine FAA medical certification. The VA can declare an individual disabled within its framework, for its purposes, and this places no burden on the FAA to declare that airman unairworthy. The FAA makes decisions related to its own jurisdiction. The FAA is certainly interested in disclosure of a disability rating, because this is a legal requirement, and because it may or may not represent an issue of airworthiness to the FAA. The FAA will make that decision, as it does in all cases regarding airman certification. The VA decides for the VA. The FAA decides for the FAA. Not a contradiction. Hearing loss is the most common disability among servicemen, by orders of magnitude. Does the FAA test for hearing? YES. You may not know it, but the FAA does, and when the AME issues your medical, he is certifying that he has determined that you meet the standard. There are more methods than one, to make that determination; like many other things, you may not realize that the AME has evaluated you or made that determination. The VA/DoD may issue a disability rating based on hearing loss of tinnitus. This places no burden on the FAA to limit an airman's medical standard, but each medical is individual. https://www.faa.gov/ame_guide/app_process/exam_tech/et/25-30/middle_ear The FAA, incidentally, by regulation (67.105, .205, .305) requires that an applicant hear a spoken voice at six feet, with his back turned to the speaker. You may have been spoken to, and not know you were being tested. Tinnitus is symptomatic; it may be indicative of a number of things, and it may be the underlying condition that's significant (eg, acoustic neuroma, or Meniere's syndrome. It may not. My ears ring all the time; it's loud. I can pass a medical and a hearing exam, but my hearing isn't great. Far too many years of turbojet engines, even louder radial engines, gunfire, etc. I sleep with a TV on for the noise, which lessens the effect of the constant ringing, but I hear it right now, and yes, it's been disclosed. While this, and many other things are valid for a military disability, they do not bar medical certification by the FAA; different standards, different purposes, different effects, different outcomes, different criteria and difficluties. This is not contradictory. If the VA/DoD finds a condition to be worthy of a disability rating, neither the VA or DoD presume to determine if the individual is physically fit to hold FAA medical certification. It's irrelevant. Likewise, the FAA's decision to grant an airman medical certificate does NOT invalidate a DoD disability rating. https://www.aviationmedicine.com/article/hearing-loss/ However, with the former mil folks, they can. Again, the VA guys, from what I'm told, look for anything in your med records to get you a favorable disability rating. The FAA now has access and can ask for your records of such. So as they look at the laundry list of things on it that inlcudes your paid disability rating(s) (my brother's is 8-9 pages of stuff) - what if you have on your VA form Right Hyperphoria? It's not disqualifying for the FAA, heck they don't even test for it. So by one being honest and self disclosing and providing the information ALREADY for your SI, and totally unrelated to such, they ask for it again? Maybe now they decide that you need to get that right hyperphoria checked, but wait, you pass the first class medical. But no, we see it here in the record, that you already provided and we've looked at for the last X years, that now we the FAA have suddenly decided that you are now required to resolve it to their satisfaction even though no other medical holder is tested for it. What if you had a rotator cuff rating, say it was zero (no $$). The Faa could ask for you to undergo a mobility check couldn't they? Not required by any other class medical holder. The SI received was totally unrelated, but the FAA decided that you needed to go thru this only becasue now they have all the "conditions" the VA rated (even zero) for service and non-service connected disabilities. this isn't about meds, this isn't about any of that. This is guys and gals, like my brother, who followed the rules, self disclosed, worked thru the SI process, provided ALL the information and yet are being asked for it again. This is not what happens to civilians. I'm a civilian, I have an SI, and I've never been asked for any records other than what is required to maintian my SI. They have never asked me for the records I used 15 years aog when I originally applied for the SI. I only provide them with what is required annually to maintain my SI. Nothing more. Fishing expedition. Targeted against one group. Truly, if the FAA wanted to they could tell the DoD, specifically the VA, to pound sand. As you said earlier - "certain conditions that are rated as disability do not preclude issuance of the FAA medical" You said that came directly from CAMI. So why is the FAA asking for these VA records again? You didn't answer my original question. |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782106)
this isn't about meds, this isn't about any of that. This is guys, like my brother, who followed the rules, self disclosed, worked thru the SI process, provided ALL the information and yet are being asked for it again. This is not what happens to civilians. I'm a civilian, I have an SI, and I've never been asked for any records other than what is required to maintian my SI.
Your brother holds a special issuance. He is subject to a requirement to provide any and all information requested by the FAA at any time during the valid period of his special issuance. All airman, and all holders of special issuance are subject to this same requirement; the FAA issues the certificate, and the exemptions, and the FAA can take them away, re-examine them, or require more data. That is the FAA's perrogative. Whether you have been asked for additional information is irrelevant, and poses no burden on the FAA; the FAA can and does ask whom it will, what it will, for its purposes, as the authority who has the responsibility to do so. You don't get to dictate what the FAA asks for. The FAA dictates; you provide. It's that simple. This is not about military vs. civilian, and your brother does not hold a military special issuance. That's a FAA special issuance. Military, or civilian makes no difference. The FAA has requested documentation, and he will provide it, or may find himself without a special issuance or medical. Again, it's that simple.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782106)
There is no way the FAA can ask a civilian for their records. None.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782106)
Get wind of it? How? If you had a condition and kept it from your AME and never discussed it with anyone, there is no way the FAA could go on a fishing expedition to find you out. None (unless they filed for SS disability). So long as they continue to pass their class 1 no one is going to know anything. I'm not talking about getting in a major car wreck that requires hospitalization, cancer or other stuff. Just simple things that a mil person would require an SI for but undisclosed a civilian would never have to deal with.
Your argument seems to be that you can get away with it. You sure that's how you want to roll? Your argument seems to be that military personnel who seek a military disability rating (somthing military personnel must seek, to obtain benefits) are somehow rooted out by the FAA in a quest to unfairly target disabled military personnel. This is not true, and you do not understand either process. The FAA did not target military personnel. The VA targed FAA certificate holders, while the VA was looking for disability fraud. The FAA tried to stay out of it, until the VA brought legal action. The FAA has long required applicants to disclose diability claims. Read your airman medical application form. Item 18.y doesn't cite military disability benefits. The applicant is asked if (s)he has, or has ever had medical disability benefits . You could argue that you could get away with some benefits by hiding them from the FAA, and maybe you could, for a time. The FAA can and does discover such things by other means than self-disclosure. Perhaps you hide it for ten years but it shows up during an application for a special issueance for something entirely unrelated, in insurance paperwork, etc (which may become relevant and discovered); now you have a crime on your hands, instead of something you could have disclosed properly. Hide and violate the regulation at your peril, and kepe chanting to yourself that the FAA won't find out. Good luck. Most of your comments are flawed in premise, and we could address that, but you're not listening, you're beating a drum for your own benefit, and you are agenda-driven here. Your implicit bias is wrong, but very apparent, and any effort to educate you on this matter is clearly wasted. Your commentary smacks of a fantasy world, and is far removed from reality. I focus on reality. If you make it back this way, stop in and say hi...but don't bring your assumptions and agenda with you. We won't be having that conversation again. |
JohnBurke:
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782106)
However, with the former mil folks, they can. Again, the VA guys, from what I'm told, look for anything in your med records to get you a favorable disability rating. The FAA now has access and can ask for your records of such. So as they look at the laundry list of things on it that inlcudes your paid disability rating(s) (my brother's is 8-9 pages of stuff) - what if you have on your VA form Right Hyperphoria? It's not disqualifying for the FAA, heck they don't even test for it. So by one being honest and self disclosing and providing the information ALREADY for your SI, and totally unrelated to such, they ask for it again? Maybe now they decide that you need to get that right hyperphoria checked, but wait, you pass the first class medical. But no, we see it here in the record, that you already provided and we've looked at for the last X years, that now we the FAA have suddenly decided that you are now required to resolve it to their satisfaction even though no other medical holder is tested for it. What if you had a rotator cuff rating, say it was zero (no $$). The Faa could ask for you to undergo a mobility check couldn't they? Not required by any other class medical holder. The SI received was totally unrelated, but the FAA decided that you needed to go thru this only becasue now they have all the "conditions" the VA rated (even zero) for service and non-service connected disabilities.
The VA provides a laundry list of things to include that which is service connected and disability rating to include those things that one recevied payments from the VA. My brother has 8 or 9 things on his report. Only one is what he receives disability $$ for and that is for his OSA and why he has an SI. The rest are just things the VA reviewer pulled out from his 25 years of medical records. He sent that report in to the FAA already, for his original SI issuance. The other 7 or 8 items are not paid, and of those, 3 are not service connected. Why is the FAA asking him for this again? Why? No civilian has to go thru this. Like I said, I have an SI as well. For my initial issuance I provided all the tests and titration info for my prescirbed medication. I provide only what I need annually to renew my SI. The FAA doesn't get a laundry list of my medical records review. They only get, by law, what is required to maintain my SI and they never ask for additional information outside of that which is salient to my SI renewal. These mil folks are giving the FAA a list of things, many are not applicable to holding a class 1 medical, yet now the FAA can, if they so decide, to have something "else" looked and verified. That is not fair, it's wrong and that is why I called it a fishing expedition. No other demographinc has to submit to this level of intrusion. Now, if the FAA was looking for things relating to his SI, then that is fair. But they are not. They want the VA disability rating report, something he's already provided, to be submitted again. If he doesn't they will withhold his medical. That is not fair, right or just. |
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 3782116)
Again, you are wrong .
Your brother holds a special issuance. He is subject to a requirement to provide any and all information requested by the FAA at any time during the valid period of his special issuance. All airman, and all holders of special issuance are subject to this same requirement; the FAA issues the certificate, and the exemptions, and the FAA can take them away, re-examine them, or require more data. That is the FAA's perrogative. Whether you have been asked for additional information is irrelevant, and poses no burden on the FAA; the FAA can and does ask whom it will, what it will, for its purposes, as the authority who has the responsibility to do so. You don't get to dictate what the FAA asks for. The FAA dictates; you provide. It's that simple. This is not about military vs. civilian, and your brother does not hold a military special issuance. That's a FAA special issuance. Military, or civilian makes no difference. The FAA has requested documentation, and he will provide it, or may find himself without a special issuance or medical. Again, it's that simple. Oh, there is, and the FAA does it all the time. You can refuse to provide data to the FAA. The FAA can also refuse to issue a medical certificate. Keep in mind that you do not have a right to a FAA airman medical certificate, nor to a pilot certificate. You're going to have to explain this "military SI" thing. A "mil person" requires a special issuance, but a civilian doesn't? If a person has a condition which requires a special issuance, it doesn't matter if that person has a military background or not. That person has a legal requirement to declare it, and failure to declare it is a violation which may result in suspension or revocation (administrative action), up to and including criminal charges and fines/imprisonment, depending on the circumstances. There are penalties for failing to disclose, or faiilure to make truthful statements on a legal document (eg, airman medical application). Your argument seems to be that you can get away with it. You sure that's how you want to roll? Your argument seems to be that military personnel who seek a military disability rating (somthing military personnel must seek, to obtain benefits) are somehow rooted out by the FAA in a quest to unfairly target disabled military personnel. This is not true, and you do not understand either process. The FAA did not target military personnel. The VA targed FAA certificate holders, while the VA was looking for disability fraud. The FAA tried to stay out of it, until the VA brought legal action. The FAA has long required applicants to disclose diability claims. Read your airman medical application form. Item 18.y doesn't cite military disability benefits. The applicant is asked if (s)he has, or has ever had medical disability benefits . You could argue that you could get away with some benefits by hiding them from the FAA, and maybe you could, for a time. The FAA can and does discover such things by other means than self-disclosure. Perhaps you hide it for ten years but it shows up during an application for a special issueance for something entirely unrelated, in insurance paperwork, etc (which may become relevant and discovered); now you have a crime on your hands, instead of something you could have disclosed properly. Hide and violate the regulation at your peril, and kepe chanting to yourself that the FAA won't find out. Good luck. Most of your comments are flawed in premise, and we could address that, but you're not listening, you're beating a drum for your own benefit, and you are agenda-driven here. Your implicit bias is wrong, but very apparent, and any effort to educate you on this matter is clearly wasted. Your commentary smacks of a fantasy world, and is far removed from reality. I focus on reality. If you make it back this way, stop in and say hi...but don't bring your assumptions and agenda with you. We won't be having that conversation again. The FAA is asking for something that no civilian has to provide. That is wrong. Becasue civilians aren't under the purview of the VA. VA is a defined benefit for service members. That is all. Again, you yourself delineated that conditions exist from the military that don't preclude issuance of the FAA medical. You;ve explained how the FAA got invovled, but in my borhters case and many others I've read here they've already provided the information to the FAA as part of an issuance. Which is all they are required. If no issuance is sought, no disability $$ is being recevied, then they don't have to comply. This is akin to the FAA asking all pilots who hold a medical to provide a bullet point list of their medical records. They don't, they can't. This is specifically realted to VA and that means former military folks. That = witch hunt. Your are obviously not familiar with the VA Ratings Document. Ask a military person about it. In short the VA doc will go thru your entire military medical history and pull out things, some very insignificant, they think will attribute to the person getting the highest disability rating possible. Many things are mundane, some are not. And like my brother, he had OSA so had to get an SI for that. He also had 8 other things listed that he recevied no $$$ for but are listed as service connected medical conditions with disablity rating of zero. None are disqualifying or require any other testing outside of a class 1 medical. However, the FAA has those findings and nothing precludes them from having my brother get one of those "investigated" or tested for further means should they so decide. No civilian is exposed to that level of disclosure. None. As I said earlier, I'm a civilian, I have an SI and I only have to provide that information to the FAA which is pertinent and salient to my continuation. The FAA has asked for nothing more of my medical history. They can't. the FAA just can't randomly ask any pilot for their medical history. SI or not. If it's an SI, then it has to be a condition related to the SI. I'm not arguing about the SI, yes, they can ask for anything related to support that issuance. Nothing more though. No fishing expeditions allowed. Unless you are military, receiving disability $$$. The only way they know that is they have disclosed the condition due to an SI requirement. So again, I'll ask, why is the FAA asking him for a document he has already provided them? Why? Are they hunting for PTSD stuff?? IDK. They don't ask me, they don't ask any other civilian for that level of background, why are they targeting military folks? |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782118)
No civilian has to go thru this.
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782118)
This message is hidden because Hotel Kilo is on your ignore list.
|
Originally Posted by JohnBurke
(Post 3782133)
This is not true (far from it), and becasue it is not true, and you insist on repeating the same tired falsehoods, you're not worthy of further discourse.
I've been in the major airline business for about 30 years. Never heard of it. Do you have documentation and case history to support? When I got my SI, I did not. And the FAA has never asked for it. Only the conditions salient to my issuance. Don't deflect, just asking a simple question. And you can't deny that military is being treated differently than civilians. There is ample proof of that here on these forums. |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782134)
Outside of an SI what civilian has ever had to provide the FAA their complete medical history?
I've been in the major airline business for about 30 years. Never heard of it. Do you have documentation and case history to support? When I got my SI, I did not. And the FAA has never asked for it. Only the conditions salient to my issuance. Don't deflect, just asking a simple question. And you can't deny that military is being treated differently than civilians. There is ample proof of that here on these forums. |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782094)
The FAA doesn't ask you for your SS disability do they?
Just not many 121 pilots claiming SS disability. but they got some guys in CA a few years ago. |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782106)
That's a lot of words but you didn't answer my juxtaposition of a civilian versus a former mil person. There is no way the FAA can ask a civilian for their records. None. Get wind of it? How? If you had a condition and kept it from your AME and never discussed it with anyone, there is no way the FAA could go on a fishing expedition to find you out. None (unless they filed for SS disability). So long as they continue to pass their class 1 no one is going to know anything. I'm not talking about getting in a major car wreck that requires hospitalization, cancer or other stuff. Just simple things that a mil person would require an SI for but undisclosed a civilian would never have to deal with.
It is easier for them to troll records of disability payments, VA, SS, state or what have you. Government financial info is not HIPAA protected. But a vet can side-step all of that by simply not applying for any VA disability. Then he's like any other civilian. FAA cannot peruse military medical records without probable cause. |
Originally Posted by Hotel Kilo
(Post 3782134)
Outside of an SI what civilian has ever had to provide the FAA their complete medical history?
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:06 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands