Legislature considers drunken flying law

[John R]

HARRISBURG -- A proposal to create penalties for pilots who fly
drunk, prompted by a January incident in Limerick, moved forward
in the Pennsylvania House.

The House Transportation Committee approved the measure, known as
the Flying While Impaired Bill, sending it to the full House for
consideration, according to state Rep. Kate Harper, R-61st Dist.

The committee sent the measure to the full House only two days
after it was introduced.

"Pilots, whether commercial or private, have no business flying
while under the effects of drugs or alcohol," said Harper, a
co-sponsor of the proposal. "We are one of the last states in the
country to enact such legislation. This bill will solve that
shortcoming."
....
"Pennsylvania simply must step up to the plate and join with
nearly every other state in the union in creating this law," said
Crahalla, whose district includes parts of Upper and Lower
Providence and West Norriton. "Alcohol- or drug-impaired pilots
put innocent people in danger."
....
Assistant District Attorney John Gradel had argued that state DUI
laws applied because the runway Salamone used to land the plane
was a public highway and the airspace over the county could be
considered a highway.
[the judge didn't buy that argument because the public-use
airport involved was privately owned.]
....
The FAA has suspended and revoked Salamone’s commercial pilot’s
license, and Salamone has voluntarily surrendered his FAA medical
certificate, according to his lawyer, Joseph P.Green Jr.

full story
http://www.pottsmerc.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=11934465&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=18041&rfi=6

[Dave S]

While I think this is a wonderful idea, didnt two airline pilots "get
away" with this in Florida because the judge ruled that flying
activities were in the purview of the feds and not the states?

Dave

John R wrote:

> HARRISBURG -- A proposal to create penalties for pilots who fly
> drunk, prompted by a January incident in Limerick, moved forward
> in the Pennsylvania House.
>
> The House Transportation Committee approved the measure, known as
> the Flying While Impaired Bill, sending it to the full House for
> consideration, according to state Rep. Kate Harper, R-61st Dist.
>
> The committee sent the measure to the full House only two days
> after it was introduced.
>
> "Pilots, whether commercial or private, have no business flying
> while under the effects of drugs or alcohol," said Harper, a
> co-sponsor of the proposal. "We are one of the last states in the
> country to enact such legislation. This bill will solve that
> shortcoming."
> ...
> "Pennsylvania simply must step up to the plate and join with
> nearly every other state in the union in creating this law," said
> Crahalla, whose district includes parts of Upper and Lower
> Providence and West Norriton. "Alcohol- or drug-impaired pilots
> put innocent people in danger."
> ...
> Assistant District Attorney John Gradel had argued that state DUI
> laws applied because the runway Salamone used to land the plane
> was a public highway and the airspace over the county could be
> considered a highway.
> [the judge didn't buy that argument because the public-use
> airport involved was privately owned.]
> ...
> The FAA has suspended and revoked Salamone’s commercial pilot’s
> license, and Salamone has voluntarily surrendered his FAA medical
> certificate, according to his lawyer, Joseph P.Green Jr.
>
> full story
> http://www.pottsmerc.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=11934465&BRD=1674&PAG=461&dept_id=18041&rfi=6
>
>
>
>
>

[TaxSrv]

"Dave S" wrote:
> While I think this is a wonderful idea, didnt two airline pilots
"get
> away" with this in Florida because the judge ruled that flying
> activities were in the purview of the feds and not the states?
>

As I recall, there is a federal criminal statute against drunk
operation applicable to transportation workers. Issue before the
court was the fact that they were drunk under Florida's law, but not
under the higher BAC standard in fed law. Thus principally an equal
protection problem, not federal preemption, but with no fed criminal
law against Part 91 drunks, this case is irrelevant here.

Fred F.