You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Thomas Phillip Nehez v. National Transportation Safety Board and Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration

Citations: 30 F.3d 1165; 94 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5695; 94 Daily Journal DAR 10438; 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18740; 1994 WL 385174Docket: 93-70764

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; July 26, 1994; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, an airline transport pilot challenged the National Transportation Safety Board's (NTSB) decision that he violated Federal Aviation Regulation (FAR) 91.9, which prohibits careless or reckless aircraft operations that endanger life or property. The pilot, serving as second in command on a commercial flight, took off with a runway visual range (RVR) below the minimum stipulated by his airline's operational specifications. He argued that the evidence of potential harm was insufficient and contended that the suspension of his license was arbitrary. The Ninth Circuit court affirmed the NTSB's decision, stating that the correct legal standard was applied and the evidence supported a finding of potential harm. The court also addressed the issue of regulatory compliance, noting that the pilot’s actions failed to meet the safety standards required by his airline. Although the 30-day suspension was initially imposed, it was not enforced because the pilot filed a timely report under the Aviation Safety Reporting Program (ASRP), entitling him to a waiver. The court found no merit in the pilot's claims and upheld the NTSB's ruling.

Legal Issues Addressed

Application of Federal Aviation Regulation 91.9

Application: The Ninth Circuit affirmed the NTSB's finding that a violation of FAR 91.9 occurred due to a potential for endangerment created by the pilot's actions.

Reasoning: The primary legal issue was whether the NTSB correctly found Nehez created a potential for endangerment under FAR 91.9.

Regulatory Compliance with Operational Specifications

Application: The court found that the pilot's failure to adhere to his airline’s RVR requirements constituted a violation of operational specifications.

Reasoning: Nehez was bound by his airline’s safety operations which required using RVR reports when available.

Standard for Potential Harm under FAR 91.9

Application: The court applied the 'unacceptably high risk' standard from precedent to affirm the NTSB's decision regarding potential harm.

Reasoning: In Essery, the court referenced Administrator v. Reynolds, where the NTSB applied the 'unacceptably high risk' standard to helicopter operations.

Waiver of Sanctions under the Aviation Safety Reporting Program

Application: The court upheld the waiver of the 30-day suspension due to the pilot's compliance with the Aviation Safety Reporting Program.

Reasoning: The ALJ did not enforce the suspension due to a stipulation that Nehez timely filed a report with the Aviation Safety Reporting Program (ASRP), which entitled him to a waiver of sanctions.