Congress Examines Pilot Medical Record Fraud
Larry Dighera
CONGRESS EXAMINES PILOT MEDICAL RECORD FRAUD
(http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/910-full.html#195656)
Does the FAA need to do more to ensure that pilots are not lying
about dangerous medical problems so they can keep their
certification? That's the question that was discussed in
Washington, D.C., on Wednesday at a hearing
(http://transportation.house.gov/hearings/hearingdetail.aspx?NewsID=217)
before the House Subcommittee on Aviation. Investigators with the
DOT Office of Inspector General say they have discovered thousands
of "egregious cases" of airmen lying about debilitating medical
conditions on their applications for airman medical certificates.
The FAA said it would be too labor-intensive to cross-check and
verify every application, and the safety risk would not justify
the resources it would consume. The subcommittee said that
response was "unacceptable," and this week's hearing was part of
the continuing effort to address the issue. Among the witnesses
was AOPA President Phil Boyer, who proposed some simple steps
(http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070717medical.html)
to inform and educate pilots and cross-check a random sample of
applications.
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/910-full.html#195656
This begs the question, by what means did the DOT IG substantiate the
thousands of alleged "egregious cases" of airmen lying about
debilitating medical conditions on their applications for airman
medical certificates?
Gig 601XL Builder
Well they either lied to the FAA or they lied to the SSA.
Larry Dighera
<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in
<139v5g7...@news.supernews.com>:
Why do you feel that this alleged lying _only_ concerns airmen who are
receiving disability compensation from the government? Is it not
plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that might
document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their FAA medical
application?
Dallas
> Is it not
> plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that might
> document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their FAA medical
> application?
We have some very strong medical privacy laws in effect, does the
government even have the power to snoop into someone's medical records for
any reason?
--
Dallas
Gig 601XL Builder
>>> This begs the question, by what means did the DOT IG substantiate
>>> the thousands of alleged "egregious cases" of airmen lying about
>>> debilitating medical conditions on their applications for airman
>>> medical certificates?
>>
>> Well they either lied to the FAA or they lied to the SSA.
>>
>
> Why do you feel that this alleged lying _only_ concerns airmen who are
> receiving disability compensation from the government? Is it not
> plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that might
> document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their FAA medical
> application?
I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases is
where this came from.
Do you have reason to think that they are getting the data from somewhere
else?
RomeoMike
Larry Dighera wrote:
>
> CONGRESS EXAMINES PILOT MEDICAL RECORD FRAUD
> (http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/910-full.html#195656)
> Does the FAA need to do more to ensure that pilots are not lying
> about dangerous medical problems so they can keep their
> certification? That's the question that was discussed in
> Washington, D.C., on Wednesday at a hearing
>
I was discussing the health of airline pilots with a recently retired
captain of a major airline. He commented that the flying public would be
upset if they knew the truth about medical conditions being hidden. He
also told of pilots going to MEs on the other side of the country from
home to get their physicals with sympathetic examiners.
C Gattman
"RomeoMike" <romeo...@nojunk.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9c05n4-...@news.infowest.com...
I'm curious: Is there an actual problem based on statistics suggesting that
pilots lying on their medical exams is
a significant contributor to accidents, or is this more likely driven by
paranoia, ignorance or politics?
-c
Gig 601XL Builder
No statisticly you are probably more likely to get shot in the face by the
Vice President. What SHOULD be pissing folks off is that there are people
getting SSA payments who shouldn't be.
Ken Finney
"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in message
news:139vc8f...@news.supernews.com...
Being that at least one airplane manufacturer (Diamond?) has a option to get
it configured for being flown by disabled pilots, is it not possible that a
person can be disabled "enough" to draw SS but not disabled enough to not
have a medical?
Larry Dighera
<Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in
<sk3tpn564cbc.1d4f2l4ed60eg$.d...@40tude.net>:
It would seem the Bush administration has the power, if not the
authority, to snoop at will. :-(
Larry Dighera
<wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in
<139vc8f...@news.supernews.com>:
>Larry Dighera wrote:
>>>> This begs the question, by what means did the DOT IG substantiate
>>>> the thousands of alleged "egregious cases" of airmen lying about
>>>> debilitating medical conditions on their applications for airman
>>>> medical certificates?
>>>
>>> Well they either lied to the FAA or they lied to the SSA.
>>>
>>
>> Why do you feel that this alleged lying _only_ concerns airmen who are
>> receiving disability compensation from the government? Is it not
>> plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that might
>> document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their FAA medical
>> application?
>
>I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases is
>where this came from.
Can you cite a source that corroborates that assertion? I've heard it
alleged before, but I've seen nothing to substantiate it.
>Do you have reason to think that they are getting the data from somewhere
>else?
No. But I try not to make unfounded assumptions.
Morgans
"Ken Finney" <kenneth....@boeing.com> wrote
>
> Being that at least one airplane manufacturer (Diamond?) has a option to
> get it configured for being flown by disabled pilots, is it not possible
> that a person can be disabled "enough" to draw SS but not disabled enough
> to not have a medical?
I would certainly think so, but I don't have anything but gut feeling to
back that up.
At some point, I will probably be drawing disability, for a wretched back.
I could certainly see a point where I could not stand being at work for more
than a couple hours at a time (without laying down flat), but if I could
stand 2 hours at work, I could fly for two hours.
--
Jim in NC
Dallas
>>I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases is
>>where this came from.
>
> Can you cite a source that corroborates that assertion? I've heard it
> alleged before, but I've seen nothing to substantiate it.
Yeah, I can.. it came from following one of your links. Page one, last
paragraph.
SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER:
http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
--
Dallas
Gig 601XL Builder
Sure, but the point is that they lied to either the FAA or the SSA because
the FAA database did not list the problems they were getting benefits for
from the SSA.
Gig 601XL Builder
Can you show a single cite showing that the Bush administration has obtained
private medical records without the proper warrants?
Gig 601XL Builder
> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:44:35 -0500, "Gig 601XL Builder"
> <wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net> wrote in
> <139vc8f...@news.supernews.com>:
>
>> Larry Dighera wrote:
>>>>> This begs the question, by what means did the DOT IG substantiate
>>>>> the thousands of alleged "egregious cases" of airmen lying about
>>>>> debilitating medical conditions on their applications for airman
>>>>> medical certificates?
>>>>
>>>> Well they either lied to the FAA or they lied to the SSA.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why do you feel that this alleged lying _only_ concerns airmen who
>>> are receiving disability compensation from the government? Is it
>>> not plausible that there exists a medical reporting database that
>>> might document medical conditions undisclosed by airmen on their
>>> FAA medical application?
>>
>> I don't, but the cross-referencing between the SSA and FAA databases
>> is where this came from.
>
> Can you cite a source that corroborates that assertion? I've heard it
> alleged before, but I've seen nothing to substantiate it.
Sure I can. Does a case that ended with a criminal conviction provide the
level corroboration you need?
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cae/press_releases/docs/2007/03-20-07PenningtonConviction.pdf
"This case is the product of an extensive/joint investigation by the Office
of Inspector General, Department of Transportation, and the Office of
Inspector General, Social Security Administration. The investigation began
in 2004 as part of Operation Safe Pilot, a joint effort between the Federal
Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Social Security Administration (SSA)
to cross-check their databases for people receiving social security
disability payments who were also being licensed to fly aircraft."
>
>> Do you have reason to think that they are getting the data from
>> somewhere else?
>
> No. But I try not to make unfounded assumptions.
Bullshit, you love to do that. In fact just 4 minutes before you posted this
completely reasoned message you posted...
"It would seem the Bush administration has the power, if not the
authority, to snoop at will. :-("
...when talking about the same subject.
Larry Dighera
<Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in
<l1ksr86098x9.j...@40tude.net>:
That is an interesting document indeed.
Here's the relevant cite:
In July 2005, a Department of Transportation Inspector General
("IG") investigation uncovered "egregious cases" of airmen lying
about debilitating medical conditions on their applications for
Airmen Medical Certificates. In a sample of 40,000 airmen
certificate-holders, the Inspector General found more than 3,200
airmen holding current medical certificates while simultaneously
receiving Social Security benefits, including those for medically
disabling conditions. While the U.S. Attorney's Office ultimately
prosecuted more than 40 cases, the IG believes that hundreds more
could have been pursued if the U.S. Attorney's resources had not
been constrained. These cases involved pilots with a variety of
medical conditions including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
The extent of the problem of falsified Airmen Medical Certificate
applications is unknown beyond the initial IG investigation.
As a result of this investigation, the Inspector General
recommended that the FAA coordinate with the Social Security
Administration and other providers of medical disability to
identify individuals whose documented medical conditions are
inconsistent with sworn statements made to the FAA. The IG also
recommended that the application for an Airman Medical Certificate
be amended to ask applicants whether they are currently receiving
medical disability payments from any disability provider.
But that only addresses airmen receiving medical disability. Consider
those airman medical certificate applicants who are using
disqualifying drugs prescribed by a private physician who fail to
report it on their applications. The above sample of 40,000 airmen
revealed that 8% were receiving disability; the percentage would
doubtless be considerably larger if all "egregious cases" were
discovered.
Here's another quote from the document:
The FAA's own researchers have documented hundreds of fatal
accidents where pilots failed to disclose potentially
disqualifying medical conditions on their Airman Medical
Certificate applications. In a research study that analyzed the
post-mortem toxicology reports in every fatal accident (386)
during a ten-year period (1995-2005), the FAA research team found
toxicology evidence of serious medical conditions in nearly 10
percent of pilots. Fewer than 10 percent of these medical
conditions (or medications used to treat the conditions) were
disclosed to the FAA. Furthermore, of the 386 pilots included in
the FAA study, 38 percent (147) were rated for Air Transport or
Cargo operations. Fifty-seven percent (219) were private or
student pilots. Of the total number of pilots involved in fatal
accidents, one-third (127) held first or second class medical
certificates. These statistics imply that the falsification issue
is not limited to recreational general aviation pilots.
And that study was limited to only those airmen who were killed. The
implications are ominous.
It looks like the court sentence for failing to report disqualifying
medications on airman medical application is $1,000 and three years
probation. Ouch!
Dallas
> That is an interesting document indeed.
I don't know where to come down on this issue... On the one hand I think
the government has better things to do than fix a non-problem.
On the other hand, do you really want to share the sky with a pilot taking
Oxycontin?
--
Dallas
C Gattman
"Dallas" <Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in message
news:11tzesaehyg8u.1dyf6fyhp9ezw$.dlg@40tude.net...
> I don't know where to come down on this issue... On the one hand I think
> the government has better things to do than fix a non-problem.
>
> On the other hand, do you really want to share the sky with a pilot taking
> Oxycontin?
It depends. Are there any demonstrated problems with pilots taking
oxycontin? (I kinda shudder at the thought, but, what if there are no
accidents involving oxycontin?)
The FAA has a pretty interesting system for random drug testing that rewards
the industry for lack of positive results. As long as the flying community
stays below the rate of failure threshold, the random testing rate is
halved.
-c
Larry Dighera
<Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in
<11tzesaehyg8u.1dyf6fyhp9ezw$.d...@40tude.net>:
>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:18:11 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:
>
>> That is an interesting document indeed.
>
>I don't know where to come down on this issue...
It think the issue is pretty clear. Those who violate FAA regulations
are dishonest in addition to causing a hazard to themselves and
others.
>On the one hand I think the government has better things to do than fix a non-problem.
What criteria did you use to come to the conclusion that violating FAA
medical regulations is a "non-problem?" As I recall, one study showed
10% of fatal accidents had a pilot aboard who violated FAA medical
regulations.
>On the other hand, do you really want to share the sky with a pilot taking
>Oxycontin?
Not only that, but I don't want her commanding my airline flight nor
over-flying my home, nor person, nor those of those I love.
If you believe the rigor of FAA medical regulations should be
reformed, that's another issue.
C Gattman
"Larry Dighera" <LDig...@att.net> wrote in message
news:fj12a3t8buvsohsiq...@4ax.com...
>>On the one hand I think the government has better things to do than fix a
>>non-problem.
>
> What criteria did you use to come to the conclusion that violating FAA
> medical regulations is a "non-problem?" As I recall, one study showed
> 10% of fatal accidents had a pilot aboard who violated FAA medical
> regulations.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just throwing out thoughts. Here's one:
If the study showed that 10% of fatal accidents had a pilot onboard who had
violated regs, might that indicate:
1) It was a direct cause of the accident, or
2) It demonstrates that 10% of pilots are in violation of FAA medical
regulations
I wonder how much the medical conditon of that 10% actually had anything to
do with the accidents.
>>On the other hand, do you really want to share the sky with a pilot taking
>>Oxycontin?
>
> Not only that, but I don't want her commanding my airline flight nor
> over-flying my home, nor person, nor those of those I love.
Again, I'm only playing devil's advocate here, but, so what? Does it matter
what we want if we're not passengers? FWIW, I live under the approach for
both Portland International and Portland Troutdale; I've got jets and props
thundering overhead so often it doesn't even wake our baby. I don't
particularly want some methed-out pilot either, but, on the other hand, as
long as the airline flies -over- my home and not through it, in the absence
of statistics what right do I have to demand anything in the matter except
as a taxpayer?
> If you believe the rigor of FAA medical regulations should be reformed,
> that's another issue.
Well.... I hear they're a little more, eh, detailed once you hit 40 and, not
being there just yet, I'd REALLY not mind it at all of they relaxed certain
procedures in the exam. *cough* :> My .02!
-c
Al G
"Morgans" <jsmo...@charterJUNK.net> wrote in message
news:IyTni.878$q7....@newsfe05.lga...
I flew with a vet who was medically disabled, and he had no problem
getting a 2nd class med, and going to work as a flight instructor. I think
his medical problem was his back.
Al G
Dallas
> What criteria did you use to come to the conclusion that violating FAA
> medical regulations is a "non-problem?"
I'm using ole Uncle Phil:
"Boyer said that only 0.25 percent of all general aviation accidents were
caused by medical incapacitation, and only nine accidents in nine years
were caused by the incapacitation of a pilot flying with a fraudulent
medical certificate."
Everybody is playing fuzzy math games.
--
Dallas
Larry Dighera
<Cybnorm@spam_me_not.Hotmail.Com> wrote in
<19p97wteaihof$.105k0clbegdkr$.d...@40tude.net>:
>On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 19:08:16 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:
>
>> What criteria did you use to come to the conclusion that violating FAA
>> medical regulations is a "non-problem?"
>
>I'm using ole Uncle Phil:
>
>"Boyer said that only 0.25 percent of all general aviation accidents were
>caused by medical incapacitation, and only nine accidents in nine years
>were caused by the incapacitation of a pilot flying with a fraudulent
>medical certificate."
Well, if the DOT IG's intent in pursuing this issue is to reduce GA
accidents, and AOPA's information is correct, than its not going to be
very fruitful. If, on the other hand, the DOT IG's intent is to
collect fines, or reduce other medical incapacitation fatalities,
s/he's probably on the right track. I would guess, it's more likely
the SSA looking to expose fraudulent claims that precipitated this
issue.
In any event, the airman who fraudulently fails to accurately complete
his Airmans Medical Certificate application, so that s/he can continue
flying, despite the hazard it may cause to the public and himself, not
to mention his friends and family, is probably criminally negligent at
least. The PIC is expected to place the wellbeing of his passengers
above his own selfinterest, IMHO.
Tina
disqualifying for a medical certificate and really saw nothing that
was awful.
Some conditions, like loss of conciousness, seem fairly obvious. Many
things that would allow someone to collect disability (back problems
are an obvious example) are not reasons to lose one's medical.
I had really been looking to see if signing the medical certificate
also gave 'informed consent' for a waiver of privicy with respect to
medical records, but did not find that. You might remember whenever
you do have a medical condition that involves a third party payer you
sign away some rights so that the insurance company can get the
information they want.
If the FAA wants to 'send a message' all they need do is enforce this
a few hundred times.
"FAR 67.403 Falsification of the airman medical application form
8500-8 may result in adverse action including fines up to $250,000,
imprisonment up to 5 years and revocation of medical and all pilot
certificates."
Larry Dighera
in <1184979492.7...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>:
>I had really been looking to see if signing the medical certificate
>also gave 'informed consent' for a waiver of privicy with respect to
>medical records, but did not find that.
I didn't see that either:
http://www.leftseat.com/8500.htm
http://www.leftseat.com/pdffiles/8500-8new.pdf
20. APPLICANT'S DECLARATION - Two declarations are contained
under this heading. The first authorizes the National Driver Register
to release adverse driver history information, if any, about the
applicant to the FAA. The second certifies the completeness and
truthfulness of the applicant's responses on the medical application.
The declaration section must be signed and dated by the applicant
after the applicant has read it.
Denny
There is no herd of pilots flying over your head while impaired...
There is no crises other than the cynically created media blitz...
The public is not in danger - other than from special interest groups
(anti gun, anti GA, etc.)...
There is no pilot medical record fraud other than the isolated
incident that will always pop up now and then...
If you want fraud, better look at drivers - no licenses, expired
licenses, mis-tagged cars, drunk, stoned, epileptics, nearly blind,
psychotic, road ragers, arrest warrants, and on, and on... Both the
absolute numbers and the percentages vastly exceed anything that
general aviation has to offer...
And being disabled under SSI criteria does not necessarily mean that
you cannot and should not fly... The FAA has provisions in the
regulations that allow for demonstration of ability, fer cripes sake..
There are paraplegics flying and they certainly meet the SSI criteria
for disability... There are one arm pilots... There are diabetics
flying... There are one eyed pilots flying... There are post heart
attack pilots flying... There are post stroke pilots flying... And all
of them have valid medical certificates...
You are being manipulated - time to wake up and pay attention to who
is manipulating you and why...
denny
Vaughn Simon
> The FAA said it would be too labor-intensive to cross-check and
> verify every application, and the safety risk would not justify
> the resources it would consume.
The answer to that problem is so obvious that it should hit you right
between the eyes...eliminate the third class medical and concentrate the FAA's
resources on what remains. But alas, that was apparently not even mentioned.
Vaughn Simon
> On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 16:38:34 GMT, Dallas
> medical regulations is a "non-problem?" As I recall, one study showed
> 10% of fatal accidents had a pilot aboard who violated FAA medical
> regulations.
This demonstrates how one can lie with statistics.
Most of those accidents had nothing to do with the medical condition.
According to statistics that were presented at the hearing, only 0.25 percent of
all general aviation accidents were caused by medical incapacitation, and only
nine accidents in nine years were caused by the incapacitation of a pilot flying
with a fraudulent medical certificate.
This is a non-problem! The best way to virtually eliminate the
"non-problem" is to eliminate the third-class medical certificate.
Vaughn
Larry Dighera
in <1185017474.4...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>:
>There is no pilot medical record fraud other than the isolated
>incident that will always pop up now and then...
This government document seems to contradict your subjective
assessment of the issue:
http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
Larry Dighera
<vaughnsimo...@att.FAKE.net> wrote in
<iymoi.183379$Sa4....@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>:
>According to statistics that were presented at the hearing, only 0.25 percent of
>all general aviation accidents were caused by medical incapacitation, and only
>nine accidents in nine years were caused by the incapacitation of a pilot flying
>with a fraudulent medical certificate.
I haven't seen a transcript of the hearing. Are you able to provide a
link to it?
Tina
valid medical certificate are not mutually exclusive. There was an
analysis of GA accidents (I posted the URL on the weekend insurance
thread, don't have it handy now) that looked at the causes of GA
accidents, and I don't remember medically unift pilots being high on
the list.
It may be a case of someone with authority solving a non-problem.
Tina
Bob Noel
Larry Dighera <LDig...@att.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:31:14 -0700, Denny <k8...@mailblocks.com> wrote
> in <1185017474.4...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>:
>
> >There is no pilot medical record fraud other than the isolated
> >incident that will always pop up now and then...
>
> This government document seems to contradict your subjective
> assessment of the issue:
"seems" is an important word here.
caveat: I'm not defending anyone falsifying information on their
medical application. My primary motiviation in this response is
to try to point out the egregious misuse of statistics and lack of
useful information in the hearing document.
>
>
> http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
>
> In July 2005, a Department of Transportation Inspector General
> ("IG") investigation uncovered "egregious cases" of airmen lying
> about debilitating medical conditions on their applications for
> Airmen Medical Certificates. In a sample of 40,000 airmen
> certificate-holders, the Inspector General found more than 3,200
> airmen holding current medical certificates while simultaneously
> receiving Social Security benefits,
Which is not proof of a problem since receiving social security
benefits is not necessarily inconsistent with holding a valid medical
certificate.
> including those for medically
> disabling conditions.
What would be much more useful would be the number of those
with medically disabling conditions. Unfortunately the IG apparently
didn't bother to count those, implying that all 3200 had disqualifying
conditions. I hope people can understand that this is not necessarily
true.
The hearing document references a research study (without attribution)
where approximately 9% of the toxicology reports from fatal accidents
indicate an airment with a serious unreported medical condition. One flaw
in the document is that it doesn't indicate whether or not the fatal accident
was a result of the unreported medical condition. A second flaw is that
it doesn't indicate if the serious unreported medical condition should have
disqualified the airman from having a valid medical. A third flaw is that
there is no discussion of whether or not the unreported medical condition
had existed prior to the airmen's last medical (e.g., was the condition new?).
In any case, the document indicates some 9% of the pilots in fatals accidents
had a unreported serious medical condition. Then the document makes the
claim that since ~1/3 of the pilots held first or second class medical
certificates that "the falsification issue is not limited to recreational general
aviation pilots." The reality is that there is insufficient information
presented to determine whether or not ANY of the pilots with first or second
class medicals falsified anything. In fact, there isn't sufficient information
presented to determine if any of the "recreational" pilots falsified anything.
Someone had the information, why didn't they indicate how many people
with first class medicals failed to report their serious medical condition?
How many with second class failed to report? How many with third
class? And how many of each these contributed the fatal accident?
If that pdf file is representative of the information that will be provided
at the hearings and used for future policy changes (if any), then I have
zero confidence that anything of any value will come of the hearings.
--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)
Larry Dighera
http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 13:05:19 -0000, Tina <tbake...@gmail.com> wrote
in <1185023119....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>:
>It has been pointed out that collecting SSI benefits and holding a
>valid medical certificate are not mutually exclusive.
I'm aware of that. Unfortunately, it does not address the issue
raised in the article to which I was following up. (I have included
that article above for your convenience.)
>There was an analysis of GA accidents (I posted the URL on the weekend insurance
>thread, don't have it handy now)
Would that be this one?:
http://www.hf.faa.gov/docs/508/docs/gaFY04HFACSrpt.pdf
>that looked at the causes of GA accidents, and I don't remember
>medically unift pilots being high on the list.
The issue I followed up was 'pilot medical record fraud' not the cause
of GA accidents.
>It may be a case of someone with authority solving a non-problem.
It may be a case of someone in authority unearthing fraudulent airmen
medical certificate applications.
While those alleged, or real, cases of omitting required information
on airmen medical certificate applications may not result in a
significant number of aviation accidents, they none the less
apparently do constitute chargeable offences.
You aren't attempting to make a case for relaxing federal judicial
statuates against fraud, are you?
Airmen who willfully violate federal law for their own self-interest
do not possess the sort of character worthy of airmen.
Larry Dighera
<ihates...@netscape.com.invalid> wrote in
<ihatessppaamm-E71...@news.isp.giganews.com>:
>In article <gg04a3pohelsc8qdt...@4ax.com>,
> Larry Dighera <LDig...@att.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Jul 2007 04:31:14 -0700, Denny <k8...@mailblocks.com> wrote
>> in <1185017474.4...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>:
>>
>> >There is no pilot medical record fraud other than the isolated
>> >incident that will always pop up now and then...
>>
>> This government document seems to contradict your subjective
>> assessment of the issue:
>
>"seems" is an important word here.
>
>caveat: I'm not defending anyone falsifying information on their
>medical application. My primary motiviation in this response is
>to try to point out the egregious misuse of statistics and lack of
>useful information in the hearing document.
>
The hearing document was written by politicians not scientists or
scholars. Granted it seems to make some implications that may or may
not be relevant to fraudulent airman medical applications:
The purpose of this hearing is to examine the Federal Aviation
Administration's oversight of the Airman Medical Certification
process. Pilots who are physically or mentally unfit not only
pose a danger to themselves and the flying public, they also
jeopardize the lives and safety of anyone in their flight path.
It merely raises an issue of fraud, and calls for a hearing.
>>
>> http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
>>
>> In July 2005, a Department of Transportation Inspector General
>> ("IG") investigation uncovered "egregious cases" of airmen lying
>> about debilitating medical conditions on their applications for
>> Airmen Medical Certificates. In a sample of 40,000 airmen
>> certificate-holders, the Inspector General found more than 3,200
>> airmen holding current medical certificates while simultaneously
>> receiving Social Security benefits,
>
>Which is not proof of a problem since receiving social security
>benefits is not necessarily inconsistent with holding a valid medical
>certificate.
It's not indicative of a "problem" concerning the cause of aviation
accidents, perhaps. But it is apparently indicative of criminal
fraud, isn't it?
>> including those for medically disabling conditions.
>
>What would be much more useful would be the number of those
>with medically disabling conditions.
Why? It would seem that such information would be beyond the scope of
the hearing document.
>Unfortunately the IG apparently didn't bother to count those, implying
>that all 3200 had disqualifying conditions.
Unfortunately we don't have a copy of the July 2005 DOT IG's
investigation, so don't know what the IG did.
But the hearing document indicates that forty pilots were charged,
fined, and placed on probation for falsifying their FAA airmans
medical certificate applications. That is a small subset of the 3,200
to which you refer, and seems to demonstrate the DOT IG's intent not
to imply that all airmen receiving disability benefits are guilty.
Perhaps your misconception is a result of your not having access to
the IG's investigation.
>I hope people can understand that this is not necessarily true.
Those who read the DOT IG's investigation probably figured that out.
>The hearing document references a research study (without attribution)
Here's what was written in the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, Oversight and Investigations Staff Subcommittee on
Aviation Hearing on "FAA's Oversight of Falsified Airman Medical
Certificate Applications" document:
http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
The FAA's own researchers have documented hundreds of fatal
accidents where pilots failed to disclose potentially
disqualifying medical conditions on their Airman Medical
Certificate applications. In a research study that analyzed the
post-mortem toxicology reports in every fatal accident (386)
during a ten-year period (1995-2005), the FAA research team found
toxicology evidence of serious medical conditions in nearly 10
percent of pilots. Fewer than 10 percent of these medical
conditions (or medications used to treat the conditions) were
disclosed to the FAA. Furthermore, of the 386 pilots included in
the FAA study, 38 percent (147) were rated for Air Transport or
Cargo operations. Fifty-seven percent (219) were private or
student pilots. Of the total number of pilots involved in fatal
accidents, one-third (127) held first or second class medical
certificates. These statistics imply that the falsification issue
is not limited to recreational general aviation pilots.
>where approximately 9% of the toxicology reports from fatal accidents
>indicate an airment [sic] with a serious unreported medical condition. One flaw
>in the document is that it doesn't indicate whether or not the fatal accident
>was a result of the unreported medical condition.
I don't see that as a flaw in providing evidence of airman medical
certificate application fraud; it's another issue entirely, and is
being (erroneously?) used to justify the hearing.
>A second flaw is that it doesn't indicate if the serious unreported medical
>condition should have disqualified the airman from having a valid medical.
While your "second flaw" is meritorious in its intent to ascertain the
IMPACT of airman medical certificate application fraud on aviation
safety, it doesn't address the issue the DOT IG is raising: the fact
that airman medical certificate application fraud is occurring.
>A third flaw is that there is no discussion of whether or not the unreported
>medical condition had existed prior to the airmen's last medical (e.g., was the condition new?).
That is apparently true, and relevant.
>In any case, the document indicates some 9% of the pilots in fatals [sic] accidents
>had a [sic] unreported serious medical condition. Then the document makes the
>claim that since ~1/3 of the pilots held first or second class medical
>certificates that "the falsification issue is not limited to recreational general
>aviation pilots." The reality is that there is insufficient information
>presented to determine whether or not ANY of the pilots with first or second
>class medicals falsified anything. In fact, there isn't sufficient information
>presented to determine if any of the "recreational" pilots falsified anything.
The hearing document's conclusion seems to be based on a lot of
possibly erroneous assumption, not hard fact. But it indicates that
there is probable cause adequate to hold a hearing on the issue.
Presumably, the "faults" you raise would be addressed in that hearing.
>Someone had the information, why didn't they indicate how many people
>with first class medicals failed to report their serious medical condition?
>How many with second class failed to report? How many with third
>class? And how many of each these contributed the fatal accident?
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Oversight and
Investigations Staff Subcommittee on Aviation Hearing on "FAA's
Oversight of Falsified Airman Medical Certificate Applications"
document is not a definitive study; it is a call for a hearing. You'd
have to have access to the DOT IG's investigation to see if the issues
you raised were addressed by the IG.
>If that pdf file is representative of the information that will be provided
>at the hearings and used for future policy changes (if any), then I have
>zero confidence that anything of any value will come of the hearings.
It is disappointing to see the hearing document with its flaws, but
airmen are used to seeing that all the time in the news media. I
guess we should expect a little more insight from those congressmen
who write the laws.
Unfortunately, my expectations of congressmen have fallen
substantially in light of the absolute crap (Terri Shivo resolution,
...) and fraud (Abramoff, Cunningham, De Lay, ear marks, ...)
occurring in that branch of our government. But I digressed.
There is fraud occurring on airman medical certificate applications,
and it should be addressed, or the application process should be
changed.
Jim Logajan
> http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
>
> In July 2005, a Department of Transportation Inspector General
> ("IG") investigation uncovered "egregious cases" of airmen lying
> about debilitating medical conditions on their applications for
> Airmen Medical Certificates. In a sample of 40,000 airmen
> certificate-holders, the Inspector General found more than 3,200
> airmen holding current medical certificates while simultaneously
> receiving Social Security benefits, including those for medically
> disabling conditions. While the U.S. Attorney's Office ultimately
> prosecuted more than 40 cases, the IG believes that hundreds more
> could have been pursued if the U.S. Attorney's resources had not
> been constrained. These cases involved pilots with a variety of
> medical conditions including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
> The extent of the problem of falsified Airmen Medical Certificate
> applications is unknown beyond the initial IG investigation.
This is OLD news and contains the _deliberately_ misleading statement "the
Inspector General found more than 3,200 airmen holding current medical
certificates while simultaneously receiving Social Security benefits,
including those for medically disabling conditions."
It is deliberately misleading because the only important number, for
"including those for medically disabling conditions," was excluded. If they
had an estimate, they refused to disclose it. If they didn't have a number,
that didn't stop them from deliberately impugned the reputation of
thousands of retired aviators for their private political gain. It is
disgusting motivation and they should be held to account for it.
The closest the U.S. AG comes to stating the important number is where they
state "the IG believes that hundreds more could have been pursued...." So
the it appears even the IG believes the number is probably under 1000. That
means about 2.5% tops.
Jim Logajan
> This is OLD news and contains the _deliberately_ misleading statement
Argh. Please try to disregard the posting referenced above since it is
redundant to what others have already written and debated.
Larry Dighera
wrote in <Xns99746EE9B303...@216.168.3.30>:
>Larry Dighera <LDig...@att.net> wrote:
>> http://transportation.house.gov/Media/File/Aviation/20070717/SSM71707.pdf
>>
>> In July 2005, a Department of Transportation Inspector General
>> ("IG") investigation uncovered "egregious cases" of airmen lying
>> about debilitating medical conditions on their applications for
>> Airmen Medical Certificates. In a sample of 40,000 airmen
>> certificate-holders, the Inspector General found more than 3,200
>> airmen holding current medical certificates while simultaneously
>> receiving Social Security benefits, including those for medically
>> disabling conditions. While the U.S. Attorney's Office ultimately
>> prosecuted more than 40 cases, the IG believes that hundreds more
>> could have been pursued if the U.S. Attorney's resources had not
>> been constrained. These cases involved pilots with a variety of
>> medical conditions including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.
>> The extent of the problem of falsified Airmen Medical Certificate
>> applications is unknown beyond the initial IG investigation.
>
>This is OLD news and contains the _deliberately_ misleading statement "the
>Inspector General found more than 3,200 airmen holding current medical
>certificates while simultaneously receiving Social Security benefits,
>including those for medically disabling conditions."
I agree; the hearing notice does appear to contain unsupported
inflammatory rhetoric.
>It is deliberately misleading because the only important number, for
>"including those for medically disabling conditions," was excluded. If they
>had an estimate, they refused to disclose it. If they didn't have a number,
>that didn't stop them from deliberately impugned the reputation of
>thousands of retired aviators for their private political gain.
I'm having a little difficulty parsing your last sentence above.
>It is disgusting motivation and they should be held to account for it.
Unfortunately, we don't know the true motivation. The rhetoric could
be being used to generate enough interest among congressmen to compel
them to attend the hearing.
>The closest the U.S. AG comes to stating the important number is where they
>state "the IG believes that hundreds more could have been pursued...." So
>the it appears even the IG believes the number is probably under 1000. That
>means about 2.5% tops.
Without a copy of the DOT IG's investigation, we aren't really able to
conclude much about what was found except that a number of airmen
apparently failed to disclose disqualifying information on their
airman medical certificate applications.
I wonder if there's a copy of the DOT IG's investigation on-line
someplace. It should be here: http://www.oig.dot.gov/Room?type=2
I don't see it, but there are numerous cases that were prosecuted
on-line.
Here's some additional information (that I haven't had time to digest
yet):
http://www.aerolegalservices.com/AviationLawDiscussions.shtml
July 17, 2007
DOT Inspector General Testifies About Falsification Of FAA Airman
Medical Certificate Applications By Disability Recipients
The Department of Transportation's Inspector General testified
this morning before the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, Subcommittee on Aviation regarding the issue of
falsification of FAA airman medical certificate applications by
disability recipients. The IG discussed efforts to mitigate the
safety risks posed by airmen who falsify their Airman Medical
Certificate applications to conceal disqualifying medical
conditions including the FAA's Airman Medical Certification
Program itself and the IG's joint investigation with Social
Security Administration Office of Inspector General, Operation
Safe Pilot, that resulted in convictions of 43 airman who omitted
disqualifying medical conditions from their medical applications
even though they were receiving social security disability
benefits for those same conditions.
The IG also feels that the FAA can take several actions to ensure
that disabled pilots are not circumventing the medical
certification process. These actions include developing a matching
process with the social security administration and other Federal
disability providers and revising the airman medical application
to include questions regarding whether the applicant has ever
received or submitted a claim for disability benefits from any
provider. Apparently the FAA is currently pursuing both of these
options.
The IG also recommended that the FAA: (1) conduct "an education
and outreach effort to ensure pilots are fully aware of their
responsibilities for accurately disclosing their medical histories
on the Airman Medical Certificate application and discussing their
histories with AMEs during periodic medical examinations;" and (2)
offer a grace period to hold harmless any pilots who self-identify
to the FAA previously undisclosed and potentially disqualifying
medical conditions to provide an incentive for airman to come
clean and avoid the fines and other penalties associated with
making false statements on a medical application. (This is similar
to the program offered in the late 1980s to identify previously
undisclosed drug or alcohol-related convictions). However, it is
important to note that after such a disclosure, the FAA would
evaluate the disclosed condition, and, unless the airman was found
to be medically fit to fly, his or her medical certificate would
be subject to revocation.
This issue has been, and will continue to be, a hot issue for the
FAA. As I predicted, it appears as though Operation Safe Pilot
http://www.oig.dot.gov/StreamFile?file=/data/pdfdocs/opsafepilot.pdf
type investigations will continue and, indeed, will eventually
become part of the certification process. If you would like to
read the IG's testimony in full, it is available here.
http://www.oig.dot.gov/StreamFile?file=/data/pdfdocs/SAFE_PILOT_Testimony_july17.pdf
Before the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Subcommittee on Aviation
United States House of Representatives
For Release on Delivery
Expected at 10:00 a.m. EDT
Tuesday July 17, 2007
CC-2007-063
Falsification of FAA Airman Medical
Certificate Applications by Disability Recipients Statement of
Calvin L. Scovel III
Inspector General
U.S. Department of Transportation
1Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
We appreciate the opportunity to testify today regarding
falsifications of the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA’s)
“Application for Airman Medical Certificate.” Pilots must have a
valid Airman Medical Certificate before they are allowed to
operate an aircraft. Our testimony today is primarily based on an
investigation called “Operation Safe Pilot,” which we conducted
with the Social Security Administration’s (SSA’s) Office of
Inspector General (OIG) and U.S. Attorney Offices (USAOs) in
California, with assistance from FAA’s Western Pacific Region
Flight Surgeon and Chief Counsel offices.
At the outset, it is important to note that while the United
States has the most complex aviation system in the world, it also
is the safest. Multiple layers of controls in air carrier
operations and maintenance processes, along with FAA’s oversight,
are largely responsible for the extraordinary level of safety that
we have seen in the last 5 years.
Fraud committed against FAA’s aviation safety programs has been an
investigative priority for our office for more than 10 years.
During that period we have investigated numerous schemes involving
falsified maintenance records, fraudulent certifications for
replacement parts, and fraudulently obtained pilot and mechanic
certificates.
Operation Safe Pilot was initiated in 2003 consistent with the
emphasis we have placed on investigating fraud schemes that impact
aviation safety. It was a risk-based, targeted initiative (versus
a random sample) based in part on a 2002 investigation conducted
by OIG special agents in California. The investigation identified
a private pilot who, for about 14 years, had been receiving SSA
medical disability payments while at the same time maintaining his
FAA-issued Airman Medical Certificate, which is required for
issuance of a pilot certificate (aka, license).1
This situation did not seem possible to us—someone who represented
to FAA that he was medically fit to fly while at the same time
claiming medical disability benefits. This appeared to indicate a
serious gap between FAA’s safety regulatory program and SSA’s
medical disability program, wherein one or the other program
was being defrauded. To determine if this was indicative of a more
widespread problem, we began Operation Safe Pilot, looking at a
universe of about 40,000 1FAA-issued pilot certificates include:
Airline Transport (pilots who can serve as pilot-in-command for a
scheduled air carrier), Commercial (pilots who can fly for
compensation or hire, including cargo), Private (pilots who fly
for pleasure or personal business without accepting compensation),
and Student (pilots who are being trained by an instructor for the
purpose of obtaining their first full operating certificate).
2pilots residing in Northern California. These pilots were part of
a larger group of more than 600,000 pilots in the United States
who held Airman Medical Certificates.
Of these 40,000 pilots, approximately 3,220 were found to be
collecting some type of SSA benefits, including disability
benefits. In coordination with SSA, FAA, and USAO officials, we
focused our efforts on a smaller group of pilots receiving
disability benefits and—following consultation with FAA—selected
48 pilots from this smaller group for investigation and potential
prosecution, (a) recognizing that the USAOs could pursue at most
50 cases due to their own resource constraints, and (b) focusing
on the most serious cases that the USAOs felt warranted criminal
prosecution. It is important to note that Operation Safe Pilot
was a criminal investigation and that it is not possible to
substitute criminal investigations for regulatory enforcement,
which we believe is generally the most appropriate way to police
Airman Medical Certificate applications.
As a result of Operation Safe Pilot, the USAOs charged 45 of these
48 pilots with making false statements to FAA on their Airman
Medical Certificate applications. All 45 pilots either plead
guilty or were convicted at trial. Two pilots died during the
investigation (both held commercial pilot certificates), one from
complications stemming from his undisclosed medical condition and
the other from causes that were not conclusively linked to that
pilot’s undisclosed condition. Prosecution by the USAO against
another pilot was declined due to the pilot’s severe mental
incapacity.
In addition, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) and
FAA have documented hundreds of instances where pilots failed to
disclose potentially disqualifying medical conditions. We believe
such findings, when combined with the results of Operation Safe
Pilot, reinforce the need to strengthen oversight of FAA’s Airman
Medical Certification Program. For example, on June 25, 2007,
NTSB issued safety recommendations2to FAA identifying examples of
pilots involved in accidents who had substance dependence
histories, that FAA was or should have been aware of, that were
not considered in the medical certification process. Similar to
the circumstances identified in Operation Safe Pilot, NTSB’s
report highlighted problems with undisclosed medical conditions
and the fact that other government agencies often have information
relevant to FAA’s medical certification decision-making process
that FAA should access and use.
Mr. Chairman, my testimony today will address three key points
essential to any discussion regarding how best to mitigate the
safety risks posed by airmen who 2NTSB Safety Recommendation
report; recommendation numbers A-07-41 through A-07-43. 3falsify
the Airman Medical Certificate application to conceal
disqualifying medical conditions.
•The Airman MedicalCertification Program is a key safeguard to
ensure pilots are medically fit to fly; •Operation Safe Pilot
disclosed a potential systemic problem that requires greater
attention and oversight by FAA; and
•FAA can take several actions to ensure that disabled pilots
are not circumventing the medical certification process.
The Airman Medical Certification Program is a Key Safeguard to
Ensure Pilots are Medically Fit to FlyFAA requires that each pilot
have a valid medical certificate before being allowed to operate
an aircraft. To receive a medical certificate, pilots must
complete an Airman Medical Certificate application3and be examined
by an FAA-designated Aviation Medical Examiner (AME)4. To a great
extent, the medical certification process relies on an applicant’s
honesty in self-disclosing his or her medical history, especially
any information about possibly disqualifying medical conditions.
In other words, an AME’s assessment to identify symptoms or
medical conditions requiring further review is highly dependent on
the medical history the applicant provides. Those who meet the
appropriate medical standards—based on an in-person medical
examination and an evaluation of medical history—are issued a
medical certificate.5
Three classes of medical certificates exist: first, second, and
third. The first-class certificate requires the most stringent
medical examination, followed by the second-class, then the
third-class, which is the least stringent of all the medical
certificates. Airman Medical Certificate standards vary to
accommodate all pilots, from those who fly aircraft in commerce to
those who fly for pleasure. For example, airline transport
pilots—who operate larger passenger aircraft—are required to hold
a first-class medical certificate, must meet stricter health ?????
3FAA Form 8500-8, “Application for Airman Medical Certificate or
Airman Medical and Student Pilot Certificate”4An AME is a medical
doctor authorized by FAA to perform physical examinations for
issuance of FAA Airman Medical Certificates. 5The FAA medical
examination is a general exam that reviews medical history (with
attention to disqualifying medical conditions) and current
medications; measures blood pressure, pulse, vision, and hearing;
and includes a urine test. The examination is not designed to be a
comprehensive physical. 4standards, and are reexamined on a more
frequent basis than private pilots who typically operate smaller
aircraft not capable of carrying large numbers of passengers, and
therefore are only required to maintain a third-class
certificate.6
The Federal Air Surgeon also has identified certain medical
conditions as specifically disqualifying for issuance of all
classes of Airman Medical Certificates because these conditions
could compromise a pilot’s ability to safely operate an
aircraft.7These include conditions ranging from heart problems to
neurological and psychiatric disorders, for which psychotropic
drugs are often prescribed—the use of which in itself is
disqualifying.
As of June 2007, FAA’s database included 625,922 pilots with
current Airman Medical Certificates, consisting of 111,222
certificates with first-class privileges, 118,250 with
second-class privileges, and 396,450 with third-class privileges.
During calendar year 2006, FAA received 439,390 Airman Medical
Certificate applications, issued 421,106, and denied 5,947.
Ninety-one percent of the denied applications (5,421) resulted
from applicants who failed to provide additional information
requested in conjunction with their application or to take other
actions required by FAA, such as a letter from their doctor about
a particular condition. FAA was awaiting additional information on
the remaining 12,337 applications, which as of December 30, 2006,
were still pending an issuance or denial decision. Multiple
Indicators Show Problems with Pilot Disclosures About Potentially
Disqualifying Medical Conditions. In addition to Operation Safe
Pilot, both NTSB and FAA have published reports reflecting that
pilots did not disclose serious medical conditions, which
sometimes resulted in accidents and fatalities.
For example, a May 2006 FAA research report8of post-mortem
toxicology for 4,143 pilots who died in aviation accidents between
1993–2003 disclosed that 387 (nearly 10 percent) were taking some
type of psychotropic, cardiovascular, or neurological medication
not reported on their Airman Medical Certificate applications. The
report’s authors concluded that pilots who took psychotropic or
neurological medications and were involved in fatal accidents
rarely reported the medications or their underlying medical
conditions to FAA. In addition, our examination of the NTSB
Aviation Accident/Incident Database, using keyword searches,
identified 128 aircraft accidents attributable to pilot ???
6Generally speaking, first-class certificates are valid for 6
calendar months after issuance, second-class certificates for 1
year, and third-class certificates for 3 years for pilots under
age 40 or for 2 years age 40 and over. 7Under certain
circumstances, FAA may exercise discretionary authority—under
special issuance provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations—to issue an Airman Medical Certificate to applicants
with some of these conditions. 8FAA, May 2006, Comparison of Pilot
Medical History and Medications Found in Postmortem Specimens
(Final Report), Civil Aerospace Medical Institute, Oklahoma City,
OK. 5medical issues (excluding substance abuse) over the last 11
years9from a universe of 22,927 accidents. Examples of these
accidents include the following: •On January 31, 2004, while
flying as a private pilot, a retired commercial airline pilot
experienced an in-flight loss of control and crashed into the
Pacific Ocean near San Pedro, California. Six months prior to the
accident the pilot reported to FAA that he did not have a notable
medical history and was not taking any prescription medication.
However, a review of the pilot’s medical records after the
accident revealed he had multiple medical conditions, including
severe heart disease and dementia. NTSB determined the cause of
this fatal accident was “incapacitation” during descent, which
resulted in the pilot’s loss of control of his aircraft and an
in-flight collision with water. •On July 15, 2001, a private pilot
lost control of his aircraft and died while flying near
Bridgeville, Delaware. A post-crash review of his medical and
pharmacy records disclosed a history of Hodgkin’s disease,
substantial damage to his gastrointestinal tract, hypothyroidism,
gall bladder disease, and coronary artery bypass surgery. In
addition, he required most of his calories to be delivered
intravenously through a surgically placed port in his chest.
However, on the pilot’s most recent Airman Medical Certificate
application, he disclosed only that he was taking a medication for
hypothyroidism. Toxicology reports indicated prescription
antidepressant and narcotic-like painkiller medications in his
blood at the time of the accident were more than 5 times higher
than would be expected from the maximum recommended dosage. It was
also discovered that the pilot was a doctor who wrote his own
prescriptions. NTSB cited the cause of the accident as
“incapacitation” due to the pilot’s inappropriate use of
medication and depression. NTSB also cited FAA’s “inadequate
certification/approval of the pilot’s medical certificate” as a
contributing factor.
Possible Regulatory Changes to Extend Medical Certificate
Expiration Dates and Raise the Airline Pilot Retirement Age to 65
Underscore the Importance of the Medical Certification Process. On
April 10, 2007, FAA published a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking10to
extend the period for which Airman Medical Certificates are valid.
Specifically, for pilots under age 40, the validity of first-
class certificates would be extended from 6 months to 12 months,
and third-class 9From January 1, 1996 through December 31, 2006.
10FAA, “Modification of Certain Medical Standards and Procedures
and Duration of Certain Medical Certificates,” 72 FR 18092.
6certificates from 3 to 5 years. Since extending certificate
expiration dates will result in fewer opportunities for AMEs to
evaluate pilot medical fitness, it will be even more important for
FAA to take steps to ensure that pilots’ medical conditions are
fully disclosed when applications for Airman Medical Certificates
are processed.
In addition, FAA is currently considering possible rulemaking
action to change the mandatory retirement age for airline pilots
from age 60 to age 65. Since the age limit is in part directly
related to the health and medical condition of pilots, FAA
actions to ensure compliance with disclosure requirements will be
important in light of this potential change.
Many differing views may exist within the aviation industry and
medical community regarding these possible rule changes.
Notwithstanding the merits of these proposed changes, one thing is
clear—if either rule change is made, ensuring the integrity of
applicant disclosures on Airman Medical Certificate applications
will become even more important for FAA in administering its
Airman Medical Certification Program.
Operation Safe Pilot Disclosed a Potential Systemic Problem that
Requires Greater Attention and Oversight by FAA In 2003, our
office initiated a proactive investigation, termed “Operation Safe
Pilot,” in part to determine whether a fraud scheme uncovered in
2002 reflected a systemic problem. During a 2002 joint criminal
investigation in California with SSA/OIG, we determined a pilot
had defrauded both FAA and the SSA Disability Insurance Trust Fund
Program by making false statements to doctors for the purpose of
maintaining his FAA private pilot’s certificate and obtaining SSA
benefits.
For approximately 14 years, this pilot had used two different
doctors: one to conclude he was in good physical health in order
to maintain his airman medical certificate and one to diagnose him
with a disabling disease in order to fraudulently receive SSA
benefits. In 2002, following a 4-day trial in Federal court, the
pilot was found guilty of fraud. He was subsequently sentenced to
serve 21 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release, as
well as pay nearly $200,000 in restitution to the Federal
government. FAA also revoked his pilot’s certificate and Airframe
and Power Plant (A&P) mechanic’s license. 7Operation Safe Pilot
began with a universe of about 40,000 pilots, residing in
Northern California, who held current FAA-issued medical
certificates. SSA compared these pilots against its databases and
produced an initial list that identified approximately 3,220
pilots who were receiving some type of SSA benefits, including
disability benefits. This list of pilots was further refined after
seeking advice from the FAA Regional Flight Surgeon about what
medical conditions might disqualify a pilot from holding an Airman
Medical Certificate.
Then, in consultation with USAOs in California, we selected
potential investigative targets focusing on:
•Pilots collecting disability benefits from SSA’s Disability
Insurance Trust Fund and Supplemental Security Income Program;
•The apparent seriousness of the medical condition and
falsification of the FAA Airman Medical Certificate
application;and
•Cases meeting USAO prosecutive requirements.
At our request, the FAA Regional Flight Surgeon then reviewed SSA
disability case files11and FAA medical files for selected pilots
and, after doing so, provided us a written assessment for 48
regarding their medical qualification to hold an Airman Medical
Certificate. The Flight Surgeon determined that these 48 pilots
would not have passed the airman medical examination had the
physicians conducting the examinations on behalf of FAA known
about the pilots’ disqualifying medical conditions. FAA issued
Emergency Revocation Orders against 16 of these individuals and
notified the remainder that their Airman Medical Certificates were
being suspended.
Criminal prosecutions were initiated against these 48 pilots, who
held all classes of pilot certificates.12Forty-five, including two
medical doctors, were subsequently indicted for and convicted of
making false statements to FAA on their Airman Medical Certificate
applications.13In all 48 cases, the pilots failed to notify FAA
about their well-documented, severe, pre-existing medical
conditions as required when completing and certifying the
truthfulness of their Airman Medical Certificate applications.
11These files include physician evaluations, test results, and
other medical evidence to support disability claims, as well as
SSA initial and recurrent determinations of disability. In a few
instances, SSA case files were not available for review.
Alternatively, SSA provided other information describing the
disabling conditions the disability recipients claimed. 12The 48
subject pilots ranged in age from 25 to 71, with an average age of
53 years, 7 months.13Two pilots died during the investigation, and
the USAO declined prosecution against another pilot. 8These
pilots’ pre-existing medical conditions included heart, back, and
mental disorders and substance dependence. Many of these pilots
had multiple disqualifying conditions, with the most common
condition (approximately 54 percent) being some type of mental
disorder such as schizophrenia. This illustrates the importance of
ensuring that Airman Medical Certificate applicants fully disclose
their medical history to AMEs as these types of disorders may not
always manifest themselves during a general examination. Two
examples of cases prosecuted as a result of Operation Safe Pilot
are summarized below:
•An airline transport-rated pilot who flew cargo for a
regional airline also received SSA disability benefits based on a
diagnosis of schizophrenia and bipolar and psychotic disorders.
The severity of this pilot’s disability was illustrated by medical
file notations made by his therapist when the pilot disclosed that
voices were telling him to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge.
In addition, in 1992, the pilot had been committed to a mental
crisis unit after being apprehended for trespassing on the grounds
of San Quentin State Prison, at which time he said he was under
the control of voices directing him to hike until exhaustion.
However, when applying for FAA Airman Medical Certificates from
1991 to 2005, this pilot denied ever having any mental health
disorder. He did not mention on any of these medical certificate
applications his extensive history of mental illness, the doctors
he visited, the institutions where he had been committed, or the
medications he had been prescribed. At the same time, he did not
mention the fact that he had been granted SSA disability benefits
because he was deemed mentally incapable of maintaining any
employment. He was prosecuted for making false statements on his
Airman Medical Certificate application, and FAA revoked both his
medical and airline transport pilot’s certificates.
•A private pilot was receiving SSA disability benefits and
100% disability from the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs based
on a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and
anxiety-related disorders. This pilot also had been convicted for
misdemeanors involving fighting and domestic violence. In
addition, he once told a doctor that he had previously attempted
suicide. During an interview with a DOT/OIG special agent, the
pilot admitted to previously being arrested for the manufacture
and use of methamphetamines and for relapsing and failing a urine
test for methamphetamines while on a pre-trial diversion program.
Nonetheless, when submitting applications for his Airman Medical
Certificate in 2002 and 2004, he denied any mental disorders or
criminal convictions. He was prosecuted for making false
statements on these 9applications, and FAA revoked both his
medical and private pilot’s certificates.
FAA Can Take Several Actions to Ensure that Disabled
Pilots are Not Circumventing the Medical Certification
ProcessIn July 2005, we sent a memorandum to the DOT Secretary,
Deputy Secretary, and FAA Administrator highlighting the results
of Operation Safe Pilot. We pointed out that FAA did not have a
mechanism for (1) identifying certificated pilots who are
receiving medical disability benefits from Federal disability
providers such as SSA, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs,
and the U.S. Department of Labor and (2) determining whether the
documented medical conditions of those disability recipients would
disqualify them from maintaining their Airman Medical
Certificates. We recommended that FAA:
•Work with SSA and the other disability benefits providers to
expedite development and implementation of a strategy to carry out
these checks and take appropriate certificate regulatory
enforcement action where falsifications are found; and
•Consider revising its “Application for Airman Medical
Certificate” to require applicants to explicitly identify whether
they are receiving medical disability benefits.
In the past, FAA has implemented improved controls to strengthen
oversight of the Airman Medical Certification Program. For
instance, as a result of FAA rulemaking activities initiated in
the late 1980s, the medical certification process now requires use
of the National Driver Register14to help identify airmen whose
driver’s licenses were revoked or suspended because of driving
while intoxicated to better detect undisclosed substance abuse.
This action was taken, in part, in response to our February 1987
audit report15that concluded that, procedurally, the Airman
Medical Certification Program was overly dependent on
self-reporting by pilots because 71–76 percent of pilots with
prior convictions were not disclosing convictions for drug and/or
alcohol problems. 14The National Driver Register is a computerized
database of information provided by State motor vehicle agencies
about drivers who have had their licenses revoked or suspended or
who have been convicted of serious traffic violations such as
driving while impaired by alcohol or drugs. 15DOT/OIG, “Report on
Audit of Airmen Medical Certification Program,” Report No.
AV-FA-7- 018. 10
Subsequent to this audit, OIG also conducted a proactive criminal
investigative initiative, Operation Pilot Match, which resulted in
prosecution of numerous pilots for falsifying their Airman Medical
Certificate applications by failing to disclose convictions for
drug- and/or alcohol-related offenses.
In response to our recommendations, in April 2007 FAA initiated
discussions with SSA to match the FAA database of pilots with
current medical certificates against relevant SSA databases of
disability benefits recipients. Both agencies have been discussing
how such a process could be structured under the Privacy Act to
ensure compliance with the law. We understand that FAA plans to
(a) revise its Privacy Act rules to specifically state that
information collected may be shared with other agencies for the
purpose of identifying undisclosed medical conditions, and
(b) conduct periodic matches with SSA using the new process. We
believe these are appropriate first steps and once FAA refines a
matching process with SSA, it can begin developing similar
processes with other Federal disability providers, such as the
U.S. Department of Labor.
FAA has also expressed its intention to revise the “Application
for Airman Medical Certificate” to explicitly ask the applicant
about the receipt of medical disability benefits. To obtain
maximum benefit from this action, FAA should ensure this question
asks not only about the current receipt of medical disability
benefits, but also about whether the applicant has ever received
or submitted a claim for such benefits from any provider.
In conjunction with the foregoing actions, FAA should consider two
additional measures:
•Conducting an education and outreach effort to ensure pilots
are fully aware of their responsibilities for accurately
disclosing their medical histories on the Airman Medical
Certificate application and discussing their histories with AMEs
during periodic medical examinations. •Administratively offering a
grace period to hold harmless any pilots who self-identify to the
FAA previously undisclosed and potentially disqualifying medical
conditions. Such a measure could be designed to relieve pilots of
fines and other penalties associated with violating certain FAA
regulations, thereby providing an incentive for them to
participate.16FAA would need to make absolutely clear that all
medical conditions disclosed would be evaluated, and, unless
pilots were found to be medically 16FAA previously offered a
similar program in the late 1980s to identify previously
undisclosed drug- or alcohol-related convictions, resulting in
more than 11,000 pilots making disclosures. 11fit to fly, their
Airman Medical Certificates would be subject to revocation. We
believe such a measure would provide an immediate opportunity to
prospectively mitigate the safety risk posed by undisclosed and
potentially disqualifying medical conditions.
This concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman. I would be pleased to
address any questions that you or other Members of the
Subcommittee may have.
#
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2007/070327medical.html
Pilot medical applications center of congressional investigation
On March 27, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Chairman James Oberstar (D-Minn.) charged the FAA with developing
a system to identify fraud and to periodically spot-check medical
applications for false information. He also called for a hearing
on the subject later this spring.
"AOPA does not condone pilots who make false statements or omit
known disqualifying medical conditions on their medical
application," said AOPA President Phil Boyer. "But we do want to
ensure that pilots who make unintentional omissions on the
application do not face FAA enforcement actions or criminal
charges."
This action comes from a 2005 investigation in which the Inspector
General's Office cracked down on Northern California pilots who
had allegedly provided false information on their FAA medical
certificate application. The pilots were being investigated for
possibly covering up the fact that they were receiving disability
checks for disqualifying medical conditions. This resulted in the
U.S. Attorney's Office prosecuting more than 40 cases.
The report says that pilots who are physically or mentally unfit
pose a danger to themselves, other pilots in the air, and those on
the ground.
"Pilot incapacitation is very rare," said Gary Crump, AOPA
director of medical certification, "not only because the FAA has
rigorous medical standards, but also because diligent pilots
ground themselves if they feel that they cannot safely act as
pilot in command."
According to statistics from the AOPA Air Safety Foundation,
medical incapacitation accounted for .25 percent of general
aviation accidents and 1.03 percent of fatal GA accidents from
1995 to 2004.
"AOPA offers many resources to help pilots understand the FAA's
medical requirements, including issues associated with
disqualifying conditions," said Crump.
AOPA medical certification experts are available weekdays to help
members successfully through the medical process. Simply call
800/872-2672 or e-mail pilot...@aopa.org. AOPA's interactive
TurboMedical online form is an important tool available for pilots
to comply with the FAA's safety medical standards.
"Nevertheless, there is no excuse for pilots who falsify their
medical applications," Boyer said.
March 27, 2007
http://www.oig.dot.gov/StreamFile?file=/data/pdfdocs/opsafepilot.pdf
McGregor W. Scott
United States Attorney
Eastern District of California NEWS RELEASE
Sacramento Fresno
501 I. Street, Ste 10-100 1130 O. Street, Rm 3654
Sacramento CA 95814 Fresno, CA 93721
(916) 554-2700 (559) 498-7272
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Patty Pontello, 916-554-2706
July 19, 2005 http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cae/home/
OPERATION SAFE PILOT
40 AIRPLANE PILOTS CHARGED ACROSS 5 MAJOR CALIFORNIA CITIES
IN CRIMINAL AIR TRAFFIC SAFETY INVESTIGATION JOINTLY
SUPERVISED BY THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS IN
EASTERN AND NORTHERN DISTRICTS OF CALIFORNIA
Defendants charged with lying to the Federal Aviation
Administration about disqualifying medical conditions and criminal
histories in order to obtain pilot’s licenses. Operation targeted
“most blatant” instances of fraud.
SACRAMENTO--McGregor W. Scott, United States Attorney for the
Eastern District of California; Kevin V. Ryan, United States
Attorney for the Northern District of California; Kenneth M. Mead,
Inspector General, U.S. Department of Transportation; Patrick P.
O'Carroll, Jr., Inspector General, Social Security Administration
and Marion C. Blakey, Administrator of the Federal Aviation
Administration announced today the results of Operation Safe
Pilot, an 18-month investigation into the falsification of medical
records required by the Federal Aviation Administration to secure
airplane pilot’s licenses. While claiming to be medically fit to
fly an airplane, the defendants were also collecting disability
benefits from the Social Security Administration based on serious
medical and psychological conditions which would have prevented
them from operating an aircraft.
This operation is the product of an extensive investigation
jointly conducted by the U.S. Department of Transportation’s
Office of Inspector General and the Social Security
Administration’s Office of Inspector General - San Francisco
Region. The Federal Aviation Administration and the Social
Security Administration assisted the two criminal investigative
agencies. In the Eastern District of California, Assistant United
States Attorneys Carolyn K. Delaney and Marlon Cobar are the
prosecutors in this operation. In the Northern District of
California, Assistant United States Attorneys Jeffrey R. Finigan
and Gary G. Fry and Special Assistant United States Attorney
Candice Jan are the prosecutors assigned to the operation.
Comments from Federal Law Enforcement
McGregor W. Scott, United States Attorney for the Eastern District
of California stated, “This operation underscores the Department
of Justice efforts to ensure transportation safety as one
component of homeland security.” United States Attorney Scott
added, “In conjunction with our federal law enforcement partners,
this office is committed to safeguarding the integrity of our
air traffic safety system.” Kevin V. Ryan, United States Attorney
for the Northern District of California said “Air
transportation safety and the protection of our airspace are of
paramount importance to our security. As demonstrated in Operation
Safe Pilot, the Department of Justice and my office remain
committed to ensuring safe skies through productive collaborations
with other federal agencies. I wish to thank all of the federal
agencies, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of
California, U.S. Department of Transportation's Office of
Inspector General, Social Security Administration’s Office of the
Inspector General, the Federal Aviation Administration involved in
this operation.” Said U.S. Department of Transportation's Office
of Inspector General Kenneth M. Mead, “Safety is the Department of
Transportation's top priority.” Mead added that, “Pilots who
provide false information about their health to the FAA on their
medical certification not only violate the law, but could pose
potential threats to safety as well.” Social Security
Administration Inspector General Patrick P. O'Carroll, Jr. stated,
“As one participant in the national law enforcement effort to
maintain homeland security, the SSA-OIG is gratified to see this
operation come to a successful conclusion.” O'Carroll added that,
“The SSAOIG will continue to work with U.S. Attorneys and our law
enforcement partners on similar projects to ensure that misused
Social Security numbers do not aid those seeking to commit other
crimes or threaten the security of our nation.” Said FAA Associate
Administrator for Aviation Safety, Nicholas Sabatini, “The fraud
and falsification allegedly committed by these individuals is
extremely serious and adversely affects the public interest in air
safety.” Sabatini added that, “The FAA has cooperated closely
with the Department of Transportation’s Office of Inspector
General at every phase of its investigation and has begun revoking
the Airman and Medical Certificates of those individuals found to
have falsified their certificate applications.”
The Charges
Grand Juries for the Eastern and Northern federal judicial
districts of California, sitting in the cities of Sacramento,
Fresno, San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose, returned indictments
charging 30 defendants with violations of Title 18, United States
Code, Section 1001 - False Statements to a Government Agency.
Federal prosecutors have also charged 10 additional defendants
with similar criminal violations, including Title 18, United
States Code, Section 1018 - Making and Delivering a False Official
Writing. As appropriate, arrest warrants or summonses to appear
for initial appearances in the coming days have been variously
issued by the U.S. District Courts in the Eastern and Northern
Districts of California. The charges arising from this operation
are only allegations and the defendants are presumed innocent
until and unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The Investigation
Beginning in July 2003, Department of Transportation Office of
Inspector General (DOT-OIG) and Social Security Administration
Office of Inspector General (SSA-OIG) launched a joint effort to
identify the misuse of Social Security numbers by pilots operating
with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certificates in the
interest of promoting both safety and security. During the
investigation, agents identified numerous pilots who were
receiving Social Security disability benefits. Concerned for
aviation safety and fraud implications with the Social
Security disability benefits program, DOT-OIG and SSA-OIG launched
Operation Safe Pilot in coordination with the United States
Attorney’s Offices for the Eastern and Northern Districts of
California.
Operation Safe Pilot began with a review of 40,000 pilots residing
in the northern half of the State of California. Federal agents
identified numerous pilots with current flight medical
certificates, who were receiving disability benefit payments.
Although the operation identified pilots who claimed to be
suffering from an array of illnesses, agents focused only on the
most egregious claims of disabilities. The illnesses ranged from
schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, drug or alcohol addiction,
disabling back condition, or the presence of severe heart
condition.
Federal Agents selected the most blatant instances of fraud which
totaled 40 pilots. Of those 40 pilots, a number were airline
transport and commercial pilots, as well as medical doctors.
DOT-OIG and SSA-OIG then presented this list to the United States
Attorneys Offices for the Eastern and Northern Districts of
California for criminal charges. These pilots committed
fraud when they failed to report on their FAA Medical Airman’s
Certificates that they suffered from a disabling condition. The
Medical Airman Certificate is the key document to obtaining
and maintaining an active FAA pilot’s license. In addition to
those pilots claiming they had disabling conditions, other pilots
were identified for having failed to report that they had prior
criminal convictions. This too constituted fraud committed by
these pilots.
In every case, the pilots failed to notify the FAA about their
medical conditions when completing their FAA medical applications.
In addition, the pilots failed to disclose their flight medical
examination results to the SSA. Through this failure to disclose
FAA’s determination that they were fit to fly, some of the
defendants also fraudulently obtained disability benefits
from SSA. To insure that the disabilities claimed by the 40 pilots
would have disqualified them from obtaining an FAA Medical
Airman’s Certificate, investigators coordinated their findings
with the FAA’s Western Pacific Region Aerospace Medicine Division.
FAA’s medical staff determined that all disabilities claimed by
the pilots might or would have disqualified them from obtaining a
Medical Airman Certificate had they disclosed those medical
conditions to the flight surgeons during their FAA medical
evaluations.
Following the Aerospace Medicine Division’s review, FAA has
performed administrative immediate Emergency Revocations of 14
pilots’ licenses and medical certificates. In addition to
the 14, FAA has notified the remaining pilots in this operation
that their pilots’ licenses and medical certificates may be
suspended based on the falsification of their FAA Medical Airman
Certificate by failing to report their disabling conditions to FAA
flight surgeons and on their FAA Medical Certificates. In addition
to the 40 defendants criminally charged in this operation,
DOT-OIG and SSA-OIG have referred two pilots for prosecution to
the United States Attorney’s Office for the District of Nevada in
both Las Vegas and Reno.
The Defendants
The pilots charged in this operation are listed below.
Jorma Aaltonen, Rocklin, CA, 69
Michael Ascarte, Fresno, CA, 30
Amy Aucutt, San Francisco, CA, 36
Calvin Bartholomew, Salinas, CA, 55
Daniel Battershell, Brownsville, CA, 52
Mark Boyd, Antioch, CA, 41
Frank Buckenmeyer, Galt, CA, 26
Edward Calcote, Chico, CA, 64
Stanmore Cooper, San Francisco, CA, 63
David Cunningham, Salinas, CA, 25
Thomas Darrow, Pacifica, CA, 56
Kenneth DeBolt, Sonora, CA, 58
Arnold Dolgins, Felton, CA, 61
John D'Onofrio, Caliente, CA, 36
Walter Fraser, Lower Lake, CA, 55
Kenneth Gulick, St. Helena, CA, 61
Darrell Haskin, Georgetown, CA, 59
Kenneth Ingram, Kauai, HI, 51
Robert Jameson, Wasco, CA, 61
Russell Johansen, Sacramento, CA, 61
Ward Joiner, Loomis, CA, 54
Kenneth Jones, Pittsburg, CA, 52
Raymond Jones, Sacramento, CA, 56
Lynn Jorgensen, Blackhawk, CA, 52
Dr. James Katzel, Ukiah, CA, 59
Roger Lebichuck, Santa Rosa, CA, 56
Robert Lessman, Sacramento, CA, 68
Gregory Moeller, Rescue, CA, 58
Dr. Roger Musso, Greenwood, CA, 60
Michael Pennington, Susanville, CA, 55
Karl Redmon, San Leandro, CA, 40
Harold Sanborn, Wasco, CA, 54
Kirk Smeltzer, Fresno, CA, 46
Robert Silva, Roseville, CA, 45
Althea Stevens, Corning, CA, 62
Jeff Stump, Kentfield, CA, 39
Susan Tobin, Pacifica, CA, 58
Timothy Voors, Grass Valley, CA, 55
Leroy Wachsmuth, Trinity Center, CA, 71
Daniel Woodhurst, Red Bluff, CA, 61
Further Information:
A copy of this press release and related court filings may be
found on the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s website at
www.usdoj.gov/usao/can or http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/cae/home/.
All press inquiries to the U.S. Attorney’s Office should be
directed to Patty Pontello at (916) 554-2706, or Luke Macaulay at
(415) 436-6757 or by email at Luke.Ma...@usdoj.gov.
###