[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 65 (Friday, May 10, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E773-E774]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                           FAA AGE 60 RULING

                                 ______


                      HON. WILLIAM H. ZELIFF, JR.

                            of new hampshire

                    in the house of representatives

                          Friday, May 10, 1996

  Mr. ZELIFF. Mr. Speaker, Federal Aviation Administration regulations 
currently prohibit anyone age 60 or older from piloting commercial 
aircraft carrying 30 or more passengers. The Age 60 Rule was 
implemented in 1959, 8 years before the enactment of the Age 
Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. Over the past 35 years, 
thousands of highly experienced and medically healthy individuals have 
been forced to retire well before the Social Security retirement age of 
65 due to this rule. Now, after three decades of efforts to establish 
age equality in aviation, the Federal Aviation Administration on 
December 11, 1995, made a final ruling to maintain the 60 years age 
limit for part 121 pilots and to extend that age limit to pilots of 
part 135 commercial aircraft carrying 30 or fewer passengers. FAA's 
ruling merely maintains the status quo discrimination against those 
healthy and experienced pilots 60 years of age and older.
  When considering raising the mandatory retirement age for commercial 
passenger aircraft pilots, public safety is of course the most 
important consideration. Under current FAA regulations, part 121 pilots 
are required to undergo two physicals a year and continual proficiency 
checks. These exams ensure that all pilots are physically able to 
safely operate

[[Page E774]]

commercial flights. The existing medical exams work well for 59-year-
old pilots and would work just as well for those pilots age 60 and 
above. Medical technology has advanced significantly since 1959, and 
potentially disabling health conditions can be detected, diagnosed and 
treated much more quickly and effectively than in past decades. In 
addition, individuals are leading longer and healthier lives because of 
a greater awareness of the importance of proper diet and exercise in 
daily life.
  The FAA has based its decision to maintain the mandatory retirement 
age for pilots of part 121 aircraft in part on recent studies on the 
impact of age in aircraft flight safety. However, none of the studies 
have conclusively proven what, if any, airline safety problems are the 
result of age. A 1981 National Institute on Aging [NIA] study concluded 
that ``no medical significance could be attached to age 60 as a 
mandatory retirement.'' And the authors of the 1990 FAA Hilton study, a 
2-year study to consolidate accident data and correlate it with flying 
experience and age of pilots, found ``no hint of an increase in 
accident rates for pilots of scheduled air carriers as they neared 
their 60th birthday.'' It is particularly interesting to note that 
National Transportation Safety Board data does not cite ``sudden 
incapacitation'' or ``subtle incapacitation,'' that have been cited by 
FAA in defense of maintaining the Age 60 Rule, as a contributing factor 
in part 121 accidents. Instead, NTSB accident investigations have found 
inexperience, rather than age, to be a factor in aviation accidents. In 
fact, post-age-60 pilots have captained part 135 aircraft for years 
without safety problems, and it is arguably more demanding to pilot 
part 135 aircraft because of the large numbers of takeoffs and 
landings. In short, to mandate retirement on the basis of age, without 
any consideration of the individual pilot's continued ability to safely 
operate the aircraft, amounts to nothing more than age discrimination.

                          ____________________