For several decades,
ANN and its predecessor publications have advocated the
need for an Airman's Bill of Rights to deal with
the often Draconian hardships imposed on aviators who run afoul of
the FAA and its system of 'justice.' While the ANPRM did not go
nearly far enough, it was a solid step in the right direction... if
only to raise the dialogue over the rights of airmen in dealing
with the FAA.
Last December, the NTSB listed three main reasons for its
undertaking a review of 49 CFR parts 821 and 826: (1) to respond to
parties' suggestions for changing the rules; (2) to update rules
that may be outdated; and (3) to modernize the rules to accommodate
prospective electronic filing and document availability in case
dockets.
The NTSB explains that the ANPRM indicates that certain parties
have approached it concerning emergency certificate actions,
which involve cases in which the FAA issues an immediately
effective order revoking or suspending a certificate. In such
cases, the NTSB's procedural rules allow a party to challenge the
emergency status of the case, and provide an expedited timeline for
doing so. The rules currently require the NTSB's administrative law
judges to "consider whether, based on the acts and omissions
alleged in the Administrator's order, and assuming the truth of
such factual allegations, the Administrator's emergency
determination was appropriate under the circumstances." The ANPRM
invites public comments concerning this standard of review, as well
as other aspects of the emergency review process, such as whether a
hearing should occur to allow parties to provide evidence
concerning whether the case should be treated as an emergency. The
ANPRM further invites comments concerning whether parties should
have an opportunity for another level of appeal to challenge the
emergency status determination.
In addition, the ANPRM also solicits comments concerning
electronic filing of documents for aviation certificate cases, and
requests specific consideration as to whether such electronic
filing is feasible for individuals who opt not to retain an
attorney. The ANPRM further seeks feedback concerning whether any
outdated information exists in the current procedural rules.
Former FAA Inspector,
Ed Jeszka (who has more than a little experience with the
FAA's 'dark' side), tells ANN that,
"It would appear that the FAA has been held to a much lower
standard than the rest of us. It would also appear that comments,
as directed in this article, are way overdue and should be
submitted according to appropriate procedures. There is a little
over a week left to submit. We should not delay. The industry is
painfully aware that allegations brought by the FAA should be
scrutinized for truthfulness. They have not been in the past. Every
airman that has had a case brought against him or her has started
with a very discernible disadvantage. He was guilty without ever
having an opportunity to defend himself. Then when he appeared
before an NTSB ALJ it was overwhelmingly obvious that he was
considered a liar because he had simply been accused by the FAA.
And they never falsify anything as we all know.
This is an opportunity to comment on the proposal but having
seen the NTSB respond to allegations such as this previously
indicates that it would be monumental to modify the rules to even
the playing field. The FAA produces cases without adequate evidence
to present it to a real court but they don't have to. You are
guilty simply because the FAA says you are. Not that you have been
found guilty in a real court. The NTSB has historically, the
numbers would verify this, simply rubber stamped 'guilty' to most
every case brought by even the worst of the worst FAA thugs and
rogue offices simply as a vendetta.
Aviation would be far better served if all the FAA cases, even
the sham cases, were brought before a real judge and jury, not the
kangaroo courts we have been saddled with. It is about time to fix
what has been broken. How about the 'New FAA' as promised? This may
be the perfect opportunity for Administrator Babbitt to stand up
and agree conceptually that airman have rights which is missing as
a result of the absence of justice in the ALJ system presently in
place.
Let's make the straight forward comments, truthful and factual,
and then just sit back and watch. We will see if justice is
foremost in the NTSB ALJ judicial system or simply a record of how
many wins and destruction of innocent companies and individuals
continues to occur."