I actually got a phone call from Dean Heller's office thanking me for my letter. It's interesting to me that I've contacted his office by e-mail twice or three times before with no response but this time it was a stamped envelope.

If you send them something make sure that it's not all complaint. Let them know what they are doing right.

Mister701 wrote:......If you send them something make sure that it's not all complaint. Let them know what they are doing right.

As soon as my legislators do something right, I'll let them know I appreciate it.
(I'm not gonna hold my breath though.....)

So,

I just got this email from my Senator. I still don't know what it means though? Is he in support? Is he against it? Is he simply saying nothing and waffling? Here is the email I received. Any BCP readers/lawyers here who can help me interpret this fine letter, and recommend what, if anything, I ought to do next?

Thank you for contacting me about general aviation in Virginia. It was good to hear from you.

I am an avid supporter of general aviation and the economic development it brings to local communities. Virginia is home to 58 local general aviation airports, which are used for aviation activity other than passenger or military operations. In 2010, according to the Virginia Department of Aviation, our general aviation airports contributed $728 million to the state economy and were responsible for nearly 5,200 jobs.

Senator Jim Inhofe has introduced the Pilot's Bill of Rights 2, which is intended to expand the Pilot's Bill of Rights that was signed into law in 2012. Part of this legislation would require the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to grant a medical exemption to pilots of general aviation aircraft. Current law requires pilots flying certain aircraft to have a third class medical certificate, while pilots of many types of small, light aircraft are exempt from this requirement. Like currently-exempt pilots, general aviation pilots would still undergo a flight review that includes a medical exam every two years. The Pilot's Bill of Rights 2 has been referred to the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.

Our network of community airports is the envy of other states. It is important that restrictions on pilots prioritize safety without putting undue burdens on the general aviation sector. I will be certain to keep your views in mind if the Senate considers this legislation.

Again, thank you for contacting me.

He didn't say hes against it, but he sure didn't say he's in favor. Typical politician- talk a lot, say nothing.

http://www.eaa.org/en/eaa/eaa-news-and- ... f-rights-2

More sponsors have signed up, which is certainly good news.

A line has been added that says:
3) Any pilot who has not held a valid medical certificate within the past ten years or new pilots would be required to obtain a one-time 3rd class medical or special issuance to establish a health baseline. Once approved, no further AME visit or FAA certification would be required.

not necessarily what some of us were wanting to see but at least the list of sponsors has grown to 65

More information at the above link.

Pardon my ignorance, but the part about a valid medical cert in the past 10 years would appear to be contradictory. Section (3) says that a "one time" 3rd class medical older than 10 years would still be required.

Isn't this the same as the "lifetime gym membership" that expires every 10 years?

This needs clarification. Perhaps they mean something along the lines of once the reg is made law, the requirement to see an AME only exists for those for whom the 10-year gap is relevant to, and those who saw an AME 9.999 years from the date of the law being put into effect are good for life.

Or re-write the proposal so it makes sense. Then again, perhaps the section makes more sense to others than it does to me.

Easy Riser wrote:A line has been added that says:
3) Any pilot who has not held a valid medical certificate within the past ten years or new pilots would be required to obtain a one-time 3rd class medical or special issuance to establish a health baseline. Once approved, no further AME visit or FAA certification would be required.

not necessarily what some of us were wanting to see but at least the list of sponsors has grown to 65

I'd go so far as to say this is not in the spirit of the bill, as the Sport Pilot data that's been used to support the argument isn't subject to this kind of one-time certification. This is disappointing.

Disappointing, yes.

But if it passes with that additional restriction, its still much better than what we have now.

c170pete wrote:Disappointing, yes.

But if it passes with that additional restriction, its still much better than what we have now.

I totally agree with this position, Pete.

I'd rather get 90% of what we are looking for than get nothing.

From another aviation website


Loc: houston, texas
bill of rights 2 changes
09/28/15 03:03 PM
Reply to this post Reply Reply to this post Quote

from avweb:
Pilot's Bill Of Rights Changes; One-Time Medicals For Some
By Elaine Kauh


Legislation designed to waive the third-class medical for private pilots flying light aircraft has turned into a plan to require one-time medicals for new pilots or those who haven't had one for more than 10 years, according to remarks made Thursday on the Senate floor by Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla. Inhofe, who introduced the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 earlier this year in efforts to push the FAA for the medical exemption, said the bill as it stands now would require pilots to do three things: take an online aeromedical course every two years, make logbook entries certifying they’ve seen their personal doctors at least once every four years (and received any needed treatment for medical conditions), and what Inhofe described as “a comprehensive medical review by the FAA” for new pilots. Pilots without medicals for more than 10 years also would need the one-time certification. Pilots with current medicals or those lapsed within 10 years would be exempt.

The proposal also would provide relief for pilots who have special-issuance medicals, as repeated visits to an aviation medical examiner would no longer be required, Inhofe said. “This bill as modified gives pilots a break from the bureaucracy,” he said. Inhofe’s original Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 had included exemptions for private pilots from the third-class medical for VFR and IFR flights under 14,000 feet, provided their aircraft carried a maximum of five passengers and weighed under 6,000 pounds. AOPA, EAA and other GA groups rallied behind that proposal. "The legislation still allows tens of thousands of pilots to fly without having to go through the medical process ever again. Or in some cases, go through the medical process only one time," AOPA spokeswoman Katie Pribyl told AVweb. "We don’t believe this version invalidates our efforts."

AOPA said as of Thursday, 67 senators and 140 representatives from both parties had signed on to co-sponsor the legislation. “We’ll keep working to build momentum for PBR2 and we’ll continue to look for opportunities to have medical reform language included in other types of legislation that are moving through Congress,” AOPA said. The bill “gives the FAA the authority to look one time at an airman to establish their baseline eligibility to fly, then places the ongoing care and monitoring of a pilot’s health in the hands of the pilot and their personal physician, which is where EAA believes it should rightfully be,” EAA said in a statement Friday.



vid of inhofe explaining:

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/1 ... ail#224918

--------------------
reflexive, anti-regulatory attitude

Does this mean that private pilots who fly LSA would also need to get a medical exam every 10 years?

If so, that's a poison pill that I'd be firmly opposed to. Hopefully that's not the case but I'd hate to see LSA rules screwed up in an attempt to get "90%" for the non-LSA fliers. The devil is in the details and If they truly mean one time certification that would be OK but not if it gets worded in such a way that it's every 10 years recurring.

I agree with GroundLooper, doesn't help the current LSA guys at all as most for them would not be able to pass the initial exam and if it did away with the current LSA a number of pilots would loose their right to fly. The original EAA and AOPA proposal and what currently appears to be on hold with FAA may be more helpful to more people. It has turned into meeting the needs of those who want to keep flying their Barons, 210, Bonanzas, Twin Cessnas, you get the idea, instead of a 172 or Cherokee. I know a number of guys who would go LSA if the useful load would allow for a starter and a passenger. Same old deal, don't care what happens to the little guy as long as they get what they want.

Tim

I read it different than you guys. I read it as those that have held a medical in the last 10 years are good and will never need one again. New pilots and those that let their medicals expire more that 10 years ago would need to go to an AME for a 1 time visit. While I don't see a difference between a J3 and a C182 someone apparently does. The bill is great for the majority of us but does nothing for a few of us. Yes for the few it sucks and I'd rather see it passed in the original forum but even its current revision is better than nothing.

I read it the same as Whee. I might be wrong, though.

lesuther wrote:Pardon my ignorance, but the part about a valid medical cert in the past 10 years would appear to be contradictory. Section (3) says that a "one time" 3rd class medical older than 10 years would still be required...

This needs clarification. Perhaps they mean something along the lines of once the reg is made law, the requirement to see an AME only exists for those for whom the 10-year gap is relevant to, and those who saw an AME 9.999 years from the date of the law being put into effect are good for life.

The way the legislation reads is that if you had a valid 3rd class medical, your do not require anything else. So, from the date King O signs the law, and you had your last AME exam 11.99999 years ago; you had a VALID medical within the 10 years.

I can live with this. In fact, I am starting to plan a party at E79 for the demise of the 3rd.

Long live the Pilot's Bill of Rights!

I'll believe it when I see it passed into law....

Was perusing the ALPA bulletin board at SFO yesterday (an actual, real bulletin board!) and had to take a picture of this:

Glad you shared that Cannon. Was well written.

I wish I could write that well. Well said!
Thanks for posting that Cannon

From the EAA, answers some of the questions on why and where we are on this……

September 30, 2015 - Last week’s announcement by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), the author of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2, about modifications to the bill’s language have raised plenty of questions among EAA and AOPA members.

We’ll be up front with you: EAA and AOPA fully support Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 including these modifications. For more than 25 years, our two organizations have been pushing for aeromedical reform. Our most recent exemption request was made in 2012 and was much less expansive than the bill as it now stands, but it did not gain the traction needed for approval. We are further along the road to substantive aeromedical reform than at any time in history.

We’ve also been digging after answers on some of your most common questions, which include:

Why the changes in the bill’s language?

Simply put, the original language of the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 did not have enough support in the Senate, despite your thousands of contacts with your senators. It was not going to pass or move forward in its original form. Inhofe knows the workings of the Senate extremely well, so he looked for a way to get support to move meaningful reform forward. They went directly after the objections voiced by fellow senators, and in doing so built bipartisan support from 67 senators across the entire political spectrum.

What if I will only support the original language in the bill?

Again, we’re going to be frank here. Accepting only the original Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2 language would mean failure of the entire bill. We would end up with nothing, the same way previous efforts for meaningful aeromedical reform have ended.

Will this affect me if I still want to fly as a sport pilot?

No. This bill does not change any provision of the sport pilot rule. You may still fly light-sport eligible aircraft with at least a sport pilot certificate and a valid driver’s license in lieu of a third-class medical certificate.

Isn’t the requirement to have had a medical certificate within the past 10 years only a move to a 10-year renewal of a medical?

No. If you are a private pilot and have a valid medical certificate (regular or special issuance) within 10 years from the date when the bill is signed into law, you may never have to visit an AME again. You will simply have to take an online medical education course every two years, and visit your personal physician once every four years and note that visit in your logbook. No requirement will exist to report the outcome of the visit to the FAA.

Even though I have held a special issuance within the past 10 years, I understand that I may have to get another if I have been diagnosed with certain conditions. What conditions are those?

Those conditions are described in the FARs and are limited to an established medical history of the following:

Cardiovascular: myocardial infarction (heart attack); coronary heart disease that has been treated by open heart surgery; cardiac valve replacement; and heart replacement.
Neurological: epilepsy; a transient loss of control of the nervous system; and disturbances of consciousness without satisfactory medical explanation of the cause.
Psychological: personality disorder that is severe enough to have repeatedly manifested itself by overt acts; manifested or may reasonably expected to manifest delusions, hallucinations, grossly bizarre or disorganized behavior, or other commonly accepted symptoms of psychosis; severe bipolar disorder; and substance dependence within the previous 2 years as defined in FAR 67.307(4).

What is this online aeromedical course and who will administer it?

The online aeromedical course, taken once every two years, would be a requirement to keep your flying privileges. It would be free of charge to all pilots, whether or not they are AOPA or EAA members. We believe education is more effective than regulation, and this is the best way to get the important health information to everyone. It would also include information on how over-the-counter medications can affect our fitness for flying. The course will be run and maintained through the GA community’s communications channels, such as AOPA’s Air Safety Institute. The FAA would only approve the content of the online course. If we as a flying community fail to show that we can be responsible for educating ourselves, more regulation will be put upon us.

I feel fine. Why do I have to go to a doctor every four years to prove it?

We’re pleased that you feel fine, but even if you weren’t a pilot, avoiding the doctor’s office isn’t the way to assure that you’re in good health. Most people see their personal physician for a physical every year or two regardless. This legislation eliminates the cost, paperwork, and extra hassle of regularly seeing a different doctor just to fly. It also eliminates many of the burdens placed on private pilots just because they’re pilots.

Will this help me if I need a special issuance?

Yes! One of the biggest problems with the current special issuance process is that it’s a continual renewal, with all the cost, paperwork, and hassle associated with it each time. Under the bill’s language, you receive the third-class medical special issuance once and you’re good to go, with only future visits to your personal physician at least every 48 months. In addition, the bill requires the FAA to streamline its special issuance process, so even that one time might not be as much of a burden in the future.

I’ve heard that the FAA denies most special issuance medical requests, so I’m reluctant to even try.

Whoever told you this is wrong. The FAA issues medical certificates to the vast majority — more than 98 percent, in fact — of people who complete the medical certification process. That includes those who are seeking a special issuance medical. And, under the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2, you will only need to complete the special issuance process once.

Doesn’t this just help old pilots? What about new private pilots who can’t get a third-class medical?

Inhofe heard clearly from fellow senators that in order to support the bill, they needed one initial medical approval by the FAA to ensure that a new pilot was in sufficiently good health to fly. That’s a one-time approval, compared to the biennial medical exam — sometimes more if certain conditions are involved —that is now required. That’s a pretty substantial step forward for everyone.

Will I be able to get insurance if I fly under the rules set out in the Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2?

Insurance companies have not yet addressed how they will handle medical reforms and are unlikely to do so until medical reform becomes law. Our 10 years of experience with the sport pilot regulations and other pilots flying sport pilot eligible aircraft without a medical certificate showed little or no impact on insurance availability or rates. Since each company uses slightly different language regarding medical requirements, the best thing to do is to contact your insurance broker or company and ask how they will handle anticipated reforms. History indicates that compliance with the applicable regulations is typically all that is required by insurance companies, and the new regulations would not require an additional medical certificate for many pilots in the future.

So, where do we go next? What’s the timeline?

Even with all the progress, there’s still work to do. Few things move forward quickly in Congress. Inhofe would love to get more senators on board as co-sponsors — so, if your senator is on the list of those still not signed on, continue to contact them. Inhofe is also working to get the bill to the Senate floor. If approved there, it would move to the House, where nearly 150 representatives are co-signers of the original parallel Pilot’s Bill of Rights 2. We are seeking every potential avenue for progress in both houses of Congress.

Predicting the pace of legislation is a fool’s game, but we’ll say it again: This needed reform is further along now than ever before and we are working daily to get this done as soon as possible. It has support of GA groups, aeromedical groups, and several large airline pilot groups. Everybody would love it to move faster, but discouragement and doubt do not help. Let’s push this across the finish line!

PBOR2