February 2, 2012 

 

 

 

Mr. David Wartofsky 

Potomac Airfield 

10300 Glen Way 

Fort Washington, MD 20744 

Dear Mr. Wartofsky: 

On May 6, 2009, you petitioned the Secretary of Transportation to amend FAA’s medical 

requirements for pilots exercising private pilot privileges. We believe you proposed to amend 

14 CFR § 61.23 Medical Certificates: Requirement and Duration, which establishes the 

requirements for pilots to hold a medical certificate. Upon becoming aware of your request, 

the FAA opened the public docket (FAA 2009-0481) and we are treating this request as a 

petition for rulemaking. As we understand your request, you propose to change the rule 

language to include the following for exercising private pilot privileges for a powered 

aircraft: 

 

 “A valid driver’s license is required to pilot any aircraft,” and “A 3rd class medical is 

only required for operation of aircraft heavier than (an automobile) 6,000 lbs. max gross 

weight.” 

You propose that the option of holding a valid state driver’s license in lieu of a third-class 

airman medical certificate be expanded to include private pilots of aircraft whose weight and 

complexity are comparable to automobiles. 

In making the argument for comparing operations of “small aircraft” to automobiles, you refer 

as a demarcation point to a 6,000-pound maximum weight. In support of this demarcation, 

you contend that modern avionics technology has rendered flying an aircraft to be barely 

more complex than driving a standard automobile. You allege that the risk of small airplane 

flight operations is misperceived, and that pilots whose medical capability is certified under 

the option of a valid state driver’s license in lieu of a third-class airman medical certificate 

will self-assess their capability and stop flying as they decide to stop driving. In addition, you 

suggest that biennial flight reviews and instrument competency checks are a more effective 

means of assessing a pilot’s competency level than a medical examination. 
2

In accordance with. §11.75, the FAA generally does not invite public comment on petitions 

for rulemaking. While this petition was not published in the Federal Register for comment, 

the FAA notes that the public docket has received over 1000 comments in response to trade 

and newspaper articles on the petition that identified the docket number. The vast majority of 

the comments submitted to the docket are from individuals commenting regarding their 

personal experiences. Many comments refer to unnecessary expense, inconvenience, and 

compare operation of “small aircraft” to Sport Utility Vehicles on the highway. Numerous 

commenters support the petition with the rationale that it would be a cost savings to them and 

that they believe it would allow them to continue to fly after they would not otherwise qualify 

for a third-class medical certificate. Quite a few commenters mention that the requirement 

that pilots complete a flight review with a flight instructor every 2 years is a better screening 

mechanism than the third-class medical certificate. 

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) commented stating that it has long 

supported expansion of the eligible population and kinds of operations that can use a “driver’s 

license medical” or rely on self-certification. AOPA also states that great strides have been 

made with regard to other aspects of the FAA medical certificate. There are now more than 

35 specific medical conditions that are approved for 6-year special issuance authorizations. 

The first and third-class medical certificates for pilots under age 40 have expanded durations 

and new policy allows special issuance for certain airman using antidepressants. AOPA 

states that it supports the concept and believes that reducing economic and regulatory burden 

to being a pilot would promote the growth of general aviation. 

 

The FAA reviewed your petition and determined that your recommendations do not raise any 

immediate safety concerns that would merit initiating rulemaking action. Expanding the 

option of relying on a valid state driver’s license in lieu of a third-class airman medical 

certificate to include private pilots exercising privileges in aircraft whose performance and 

handling qualities typically are well above current LSA limitations would require complex 

amendments to FAA aircraft certification, operational, and medical standards that, absent 

more substantive safety evidence, may prove unwise. 

Whereas current sport pilot medical qualification standards have provided an adequate level 

of safety for LSA operations, the FAA does not have evidence to support private pilots 

operating without medical oversight in aircraft that are considerably more complex. Certain 

single- and multi-engine complex operations, including complex turboprop and high-altitude 

turbojet aircraft, even certain normal-category helicopter operations, may fall under your 

proposed threshold, and the FAA has no experience allowing pilots who exercise privileges in 

such highly complex aircraft to medically qualify without FAA airman medical certification. 

Continual advancements in jet engine and aircraft technology present certain pilot 

certification challenges and the FAA continues to approach any broadening of safety 

standards with an abundance of caution in light of emergent complexities presented with 

some newer aircraft models. 
3

The FAA notes that the driver’s license approach does not permit people who have had their 

medical certificate revoked or suspended for cause or have failed their medical exam to 

operate LSAs. 

Therefore, the FAA has made the determination that your petition be denied. We will take no 

further action on your petition and we are closing Docket No. FAA-2009-0481. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

John M. Allen 

Director, Flight Standards Service