FAR 61.15 Offenses involving alcohol or drugs

[MD80DRVR]

A family member (No it really wasn't me) who is a pvt. pilot was arrested for DWI. Do they have 60 days from the offense or 60 days from conviction (if convicted) to report to the FAA? The reg is kind of vague because it states conviction in one paragraph and motor vehicle action in another.


Thanks.

 

[NW_Pilot]

A family member (No it really wasn't me) who is a pvt. pilot was arrested for DWI. Do they have 60 days from the offense or 60 days from conviction (if convicted) to report to the FAA? The reg is kind of vague because it states conviction in one paragraph and motor vehicle action in another.


Thanks.

Well, All I have to say is how much dose one want to spend or loose? $30.00 to $50.00 for a Taxi or Little More For A Tow! or Jail & Large Fines Loss Of Auto, Impound Fees, Then You Face Loss of Job, Driving Privileges, Medical, Higher Insurance, Etc. Is it Worth It?

Myself I would go with Taxi/Tow option If I go out drinking otherwise I stay home and drink with family and neighbors.

 

[avbug]

MD80Driver,

Look at the regulation a little more closely. The requirement to submit a report is based on a motor vehicle action, and is found in 14 CFR 61.15(e). It states that one must submit a report to the Administrator detailing the circumstances of the MVA (motor vehicle action) within 60 days after the action.

This naturally brings up the question as to what constitutes a motor vehicle action. The Administrator has included this definition in the same section, under 61.15(c). The purpose of this paragraph is to define what constitutes a MVA. It states that a motor vehicle action could be any of the following:

A. A conviction under any state or federal statute for operating a vehicle while intoxicated or under the influence--61.15(c)(1)

B. The cancellation, revocation, or suspension of driving privileges related to intoxication or being under the influence--61.15(c)(2)

C. The denial of an application for driving privileges due to operating a motor vehicle intoxicated or under the influence--61.15(c)(3)

Your question then asks which one...conviction, or the suspension? Either one constitutes a motor vehicle action, and after this has occured (either one, which ever comes first, as both constitute a MVA for the purposes of this regulation), one has 60 days to report.

Failure to report, of course, is a violation of 61.15(f), and carries with it the same penalties to which one might be subject if on does report and is therefore penalized.

 

[MD80DRVR]

OK, so they didn't suspend his drivers license, so he can wait until his court date to see if he gets convicted? If no conviction, then no report is required?? Thanks. Reading that reg. is worse than going to the dentist.

 

[avbug]

I guess I don't see what isn't clear. A motor vehicle action is one of three things:

A. Conviction, or

B. Cancellation, revocation, suspension, or

C. Denial of an application.

Your friend hasn't had A, B, or C happen, and therefore doesn't need to file the report until A, B, or C happens. The regulation is fairly clear about that.

In such matters, of course, you should always consult an attorney.

 

[svcta]

Well, All I have to say is how much dose one want to spend or loose? $30.00 to $50.00 for a Taxi or Little More For A Tow! or Jail & Large Fines Loss Of Auto, Impound Fees, Then You Face Loss of Job, Driving Privileges, Medical, Higher Insurance, Etc. Is it Worth It?

Myself I would go with Taxi/Tow option If I go out drinking otherwise I stay home and drink with family and neighbors.

Yeah, you'd only drive drunk if it were over water in ice.

 

[Doc Holiday]

Well, All I have to say is how much dose one want to spend or loose? $30.00 to $50.00 for a Taxi or Little More For A Tow! or Jail & Large Fines Loss Of Auto, Impound Fees, Then You Face Loss of Job, Driving Privileges, Medical, Higher Insurance, Etc. Is it Worth It?

Myself I would go with Taxi/Tow option If I go out drinking otherwise I stay home and drink with family and neighbors.

Thanks for the advice, mom. Too bad you didn't answer the question......

 

[midlifeflyer]

OK, so they didn't suspend his drivers license

They didn't? That sounds a bit unusual. Most states (I thought all at this point) provide for on-the-scene administrative suspensions in DUI cases. Did he refuse the field sobriety tests?

Assuming that your friend's drivers license was not suspended at the point of the stop, that still does not necessarily mean that he can wait until he is convicted (if he is). I have no idea what state this is, but there could be some other form of pre-conviction suspension procedure that will apply.

avbug's explanation of what I agree is a pretty clear reg is correct, but his final piece of advice is even better:

In such matters, of course, you should always consult an attorney.

If it were me, I'd want to know for sure what the state process I am about to go through entails and whether or not any of those procedures constitutes a "motor vehicle action" under the FAR, triggering a report (btw, 61.15 may well require multiple reports for the same dui charge).

 

[macey]

Midlifeflyer is correct. If your license was temporarily suspended until your court date that is a MVA and has to be reported. After your court date and you get convicted of a DUI and a suspended license that is also an MVA and also has to be reported. You would have to report both suspensions. Like avbug said 61.15 is pretty clear in what you have to do.

 

[TxPilot0878]

Dui/dwi!

Both Midlifeflyer/Macey are correct...but different states have different laws. 2 for example are Texas (HOME OF MADD) vs. Michigan...with MI you are Revoked the second you are pulled over with Texas the state has to prove you are guilty! In MI they can take your blood if you refuse a field sobriety test...in TX they just take you to jail...all laws follow the same path...but in some states you are guilty before proven innocent...other states believe in Drinking And Driving until getting caught and proven!!!

Michigan you are guilty until proven innocent and revoked immediately
Texas you are innocent until your tape, FST, or BAC prove you guilty...at that point you are REVOKED!!!!

TEX

 

[Way2Broke]

Well, All I have to say is how much dose one want to spend or loose? $30.00 to $50.00 for a Taxi or Little More For A Tow! or Jail & Large Fines Loss Of Auto, Impound Fees, Then You Face Loss of Job, Driving Privileges, Medical, Higher Insurance, Etc. Is it Worth It?

Myself I would go with Taxi/Tow option If I go out drinking otherwise I stay home and drink with family and neighbors.

Were you drunk when you typed that? Your post has absolutely nothing to do with the question at hand. Everyone knows that Drinking And Driving is wrong. The only thing there is to debate is what is considered drinking and driving? One beer, two beers, etc. Well, right or wrong, your local law makers have made up your mind for you on this one and most of them say .08 is drunk, and man that is not much alcohol at all. The one problem with drinking and driving laws is that the first thing alcohol affects is judgment. Its easy to say you will not drink and drive when your sober, but it becomes increasingly more difficult as you drink more. This is why it is just plain dumb to go out and have a few without first having a plan on how you are getting home, or how you are going to avoid driving. If you have already had a few and try to make that decision on a whim, chances are you might make a poor decision.

Now, on the reg question I agree with AvBug. A MVA is pretty clearly defined here, and if you have any questions concerning something this serious I would at the very least contact AOPA with the question. I'm sure they get this one all the time. I wish your friend luck and hope he learned from his mistake. Alot of people learned their lessons much harder ways, and have to live with the consequences of their actions for the rest of their lives. Or worse yet, someone else's family and friends have to live with that decision.

 

[DrewBlows]

Both Midlifeflyer/Macey are correct...but different states have different laws. 2 for example are Texas (HOME OF MADD) vs. Michigan...with MI you are Revoked the second you are pulled over with Texas the state has to prove you are guilty! In MI they can take your blood if you refuse a field sobriety test...in TX they just take you to jail...all laws follow the same path...but in some states you are guilty before proven innocent...other states believe in Drinking And Driving until getting caught and proven!!!

Michigan you are guilty until proven innocent and revoked immediately
Texas you are innocent until your tape, FST, or BAC prove you guilty...at that point you are REVOKED!!!!

TEX

You are right on the money with this post. Michigan's law is so blatantly unconstitutional it's not funny. The problem is there isn't a politician on earth who wants to be accused of being "lax on crime" or take a postion against mad mothers. The other problem is, while it's very expensive to get a DUI, it's exponentially more expensive to appeal it to the supreme court (though it probably would be overturned at the state supreme court level). I, for one, am not jumping at the chance to be in the history books at the expense of my career, so we'll have to deal with it until one of Geoffry Fieger's clients gets pulled over.

 

[avbug]

Drew,

This isn't really the place to argue constitutionality, but you're barking up the wrong tree. Driving, like flying, is a privilege not a right, and you become subject to the regulation prescribed to govern those privileges. Just as the FAA may conduct an emergency revocation of your pilot certificate in a case involving safety or when it is in the public's best interest, so may a state enact such regulation or policy to govern the privileges extended by that state with respect to a driver's license.

With an annual death toll on the roads due to drunk drivers that exceeds the death toll in ten years of armed combat in Vietnam...this in peace time involving the mere act of driving from place to place in our own country, drunk driving is a terrible, terrible crime for which harsh punishment most definitely should be meted. Personally, I'm all for revoking a driver's license as soon as the driver tests positive, either by BAC, or a field sobriety test...let the driver prove himself innocent or show himself innocent.

When I had an engine failure last summer, a breathalizer test was not prescribed for me. Therefore, I insisted on it. I wanted on record the fact that I hadn't been drinking, or otherwise under the influence. I went to great lengths to meet all the demands and requests of investigators from the various involved agencies.

Like millions of other citizens, I've had the effects of drunk drivers strike close to me, causing death and injury and heartache, and I have zero tolerance for those who will drive under the influence, and every bit as little sympathy for those who will elect to fly under the influence. Likewise, I have no tolerance for the pilot who drives under the influence, but expects to retain his or her flying privileges after such a grossly negligent act. None at all. No more than if one would take the largest firearm in the world and fire it with abandon down crowded streets...that car is bigger than any gun, and the potential to harm much greater on a crowded street.

Cry unfair all you like, but it's far from unconstitutional.

Whereas in criminal procedings, one is presumed innocent until proven guilty, under administrative law, one is generally guilty until proven innocent...it doesn't work quite the same when dealing with a regulatory agency such as the FAA or the State Drivers License Division, as what you may be used to seeing on Law & Order.

 

[midlifeflyer]

You are right on the money with this post. Michigan's law is so blatantly unconstitutional it's not funny. The problem is there isn't a politician on earth who wants to be accused of being "lax on crime" or take a postion against mad mothers. The other problem is, while it's very expensive to get a DUI, it's exponentially more expensive to appeal it to the supreme court (though it probably would be overturned at the state supreme court level). I, for one, am not jumping at the chance to be in the history books at the expense of my career, so we'll have to deal with it until one of Geoffry Fieger's clients gets pulled over.

The administrative pulling of a license for a DUI stop or refusal to comply with requests for breath or blood tests has been tested for constitutionality in a number of states and a number of contexts. I wouldn't be at all surprised if it has already come up to the Michigan Supreme Court. The expense of appeal doesn't really mean that much. There are plenty of DUI cases where the accused is represented by public defenders who are more or less required to pursue meritorious appeals.

 

[dickburns]

Not all states immediately suspend or take any action on licenses during a DUI.

I had a friend in Mass (fortunately their laws are pretty liberal) recently get into an accident, he was cited for OUI but never had any action taken on his license, the police handed it right back to him and he went on his was to the hospital to get checked out and released. Never did a breathalizer, no field sobriety test, as soon as he crashed his car and the police arrived he requested he be taken to the hospital, once there he said he would not let them draw blood and there is nothing in Mass law that says they legally can take the blood like in MI. He now has a pretty good case against the violations since there is no substantial evidence. I'm not saying go out and booze it up and get behind the wheel by any means at all, I'm not defending my friends poor judgement, he is now paying big time dividends with the injury he received in the accident, luckily he has healed up but dealing with a big time faa disclosure headache for the injury which has almost cost him his flying career let alone dealing with the intox stuff and the faa.

Everyone at some point or another has had too much and gotten behind the wheel, I don't care what you say or who you are, it has happened at some point, unfortunate the inevitable happens and people hurt themselves and others from the it, fortunately my friend only hurt himself and hopefully learns from his dumbA55 mistake.

 

[TxPilot0878]

Like Mr."DickBurns" Said,

Everybody screws up and for you with low hours and very little time in the game...PROTECT YOURSELVES!!!! Most pilots go to a party or put themselves in "harms" way. If you can avoid it by all means do....this isn't an interview question you want that destroys your chances at moving on.
It is very easy...and I know that most the drinking happens early in your career...the reason the rest of us don't is because we have seen its ugly face....A $50.00 cab ride out beats a $10,000 (at least) get out of jail card....by 200%!

Make the right choice....I am not lecturing...5 of my immediate friends now suffer from this devastating blow! Thats the only reason I don't!

Tex

 

[indefinitehold]

Just get a aviation attorney. He will answer your questions and provide the proper guidance in min.the issue/violation.

C.Y.A. baby!

 

[avbug]

Everyone at some point or another has had too much and gotten behind the wheel, I don't care what you say or who you are, it has happened at some point, unfortunate the inevitable happens and people hurt themselves and others from the it, fortunately my friend only hurt himself and hopefully learns from his dumbA55 mistake.

If that's a confession, so be it. The assertion that everybody drinks is ridiculous. Not everybody drinks. The assertion that everybody gets behind the wheel while intoxicated or under the influence is also assinine and false. Speak for yourself.

 

[dickburns]

I figured you would have some stupid Jerry Falwell like comment for everyone, since you are so high and mighty and have never made a mistake yourself mister self-proclaimed self-righteous golden boy pilot. I don't need to make a confession, I've gotten behind the wheel after I've had too much, you heard I'VE DRIVEN DRUNK, so has about 99.9% of the human population. I realized my mistake and I'm a better man for it now, no one was hurt, I didn't hurt myself, woke up the next day and made sure it never happened again, too much to lose. You must be a great guy to fly with, probably preach to the other pilot about morals and life, things that you have never done but criticizze and how everyone else is wrong. You just continue to prove that you have some stupid little conservative opinion, probably only have missionary sex when it is used for pro creation, don't fly on sundays, and get all bent out of shape when your uniform has one little wrinkle in it because then its not professional looking. I think I speak for the rest of us, we'll all continue to live in reality.

 

[avbug]

I've gotten behind the wheel after I've had too much, you heard I'VE DRIVEN DRUNK, so has about 99.9% of the human population.

If you're done now, a simple statement that you're a bloody idiot would have sufficed.