Viewing page 31 of 45

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

Mr. Michael A. Gitt - 2
November 3, 1967

We have also been advised that Dr. H. L. Reighard wrote the current rule as found in the Federal Air Regulations on orders from topside. It is our further understanding that FAA did not have sound medical reasons for developing such a rule nor have they such sound reasons at the present time. On the other hand, in an effort to modify or change the current rule, it appears that FAA at least would require sound medical and possibly other reasons that would justify such a change, and from what I gather, they would be looking toward some medical records of consequence encompassing approximately a fifteen year period in order for them to develop any justification for even considering changing the rule.

I am taking the liberty of copying Harry Orlady, Chairman of the Aeromedical Coordinating Committee of ALPA, in order that that Committee may take into consideration the over-all problems associated with such a program.

The analysis made by Mr. Weiss concerning the age 60 retirement rule does not indicate a very strong likelihood of dealing with the matter effectively through the legal process or, for that matter, the waiver route through FAA. The legislative route, at least at the present time, looks like it might be the only possible means of bringing the matter to the attention of parties who could influence some change. Again the requirement to develop meaningful facts undoubtedly would constitute a necessary exhibit if we were to have any possible influence for a change in the regulations. I am hopeful that the Aeromedical Coordinating Committee may be able to develop some supporting evidence in these areas.

Best personal regards,

Sincerely yours,
AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION
Charles H. Ruby.
Charles H. Ruby, President

CHR/vc
cc: Harry Orlady
John Richardson