ICAO and its Age Rule
The ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) is a treaty association among sovereign nations (member States). As sovereigns, each member State (e.g., the U.S.) can make any rule for its own carriers and pilots - to apply world-wide. However, the ICAO treaty requires that a member State (i.e., the U.S.) may not impose a more restrictive rule than the ICAO standard on foreign carriers (and their pilots) operating in their respective national airspace.
The ICAO "age 60" standard is an enforceable limit of age 60 for PIC (pilots in command), but only a recommended maximum age 60 limit for co-pilots. These rules appear as paragrpahs 2.1.10.1 (captains) and 2.1.10.2 (co-pilots) in a document titled "Annex 1 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation." (Annex 1)
Thus, as a member of ICAO, the U.S. can restrict its own pilots (captains and co-pilots) to age 60 world-wide, and captains of foreign carriers to age 60 when operating in U.S. airspace, but may not limit co-pilots of foreign carriers to any upper age limit. And by the same terms, Canada, for example, can choose to impose no upper age limit on its own carriers and pilots, to apply world-wide, and allow foreign carriers to operate in Canadian airspace with any or no upper age limit for their pilots. And the U.S., for example, can restrict captains of Canadian registered carriers to 60, but not their co-pilots.
The ICAO stantard (captains limited to age 60, co-pilots "recommended") was adopted in 1972, to become effective (enforceable) in 1978.
Challenges to the ICAO Age Standard
As early as 1986, Canada, having earlier abandoned its National upper age limit on Constitutional grounds, filed a "difference" with ICAO on its age limits, requesting, without success, that the ICAO limts be modified or revoked. In 1989, noting that the rule was controversial, outdated and widely ignored, member State Chile formally petitioned ICAO to evaluate the rule, and, if warranted, delete it. See: 1989 submission by Chile to ICAO. (.pdf, 488 Kb.) The review was assigned to ICAO's Air Navigation Commission (ANC), as ANC Task No. MED-7101:Upper age limits for flight crew mwmbers.
An introduction to, and history of, the ICAO age rule appears in a May, 1990 ANC paper titled: Reassessment of the Issue, and Approval of an Executive Summary. (.pdf, 464 Kb.) In August of that year, the ICAO Secretariat initiated a survey of the member States. 1990 Survey and Questionaire. (.pdf, 464 Kb.) The results of this survey were tabulated in a March, 1991 "Working Paper": 1991 ANC Survey Results. (.pdf, 464 Kb.) The next month (April, 1991) the ANC considered and commented on data presented to it by the FAA. The data - falsely depicting an increase in risk beginning precisely at age 60 - had been prepared by the FAA from the rejected and discredited (1983) Golaszewski Flight Time Study. See: 1991 ANC Review of FAA's Golaszewski Charts. (.pdf, 256 Kb.)
[ Editorial Note : Obviously awed by the pseudo-science of the FAA's presentation, the Commission reviewers uncritically equated these false and misleading representations of rejected and disredited data as "Stages of Human Performance" to those of "Machine Performance" with not even a smidgen of, or reference to, an iota of relevant data from actual medical, aviation, or engineering experience. Ref. Appendix B, pg. 5.]
Not surprisingly, the upper age limit working group of the ANC prepared a (1994) report concurring that change to the ICAO upper age limit was "not advisable" at that time. See: 1994 ANC Director's Report. (.pdf, 256 Kb.)
In March of the next year, however (1995), ICAO initiated another survey of its member States on the age 60 rule. This survey is missing from my files. However, the results, with "Questions" intact, were reported in February, 1996, and are available here. This time, a majority of responding States (63%) reported de facto age limits of 63-65 years, some States with no regulatory established limit, and in yet other States, limits set by labor contract. See: 1996 Survey Ressults. (.pdf, 256 Kb.) With the Secretariat concluding, and ANC agreeing, that "increasing the upper age limit" may be warranted.
Editorial Note : The ICAO survey followed immediately upon, and was clearly driven by, the European Joint Aviation Authority's (JAA's) adoption of age 65 for one pilot in multi-pilot crews the initiated in 1995, enacted in 1995 to become effective in 1999, and the U.K.'s immediate implementation of the change. In the same year, on the other hand, the U.S. forced the larger (10-30 seat, multi-engined) Part 135 aircraft into Part 121 certification, imposing for the first time an age-60 limit on these formerly Part 135 pilots, as well -- to become effective in 1999. The ICAO's moderting position in 1995-96 was clearly influenced by the JAA/UK actions, not that of the U.S. (See para. 6.2 (page 5) of the ANC document.)
In January, 2004, the Aerospace Medical Association (ASMA) abandoned its more than 20-year position supporting the rule on medical gronds. The Association's new position held that "there was insufficient medical evidence to restrict pilot dertification based on age alone." See: 2004 ASMA Postion Paper. (.pdf, 48 Kb.)
The Current ICAO Effort at Change
In December, 2003, ICAO began a new survey of its member States on the rule. This new survey clearly states an interest in "harmonizing" the ICAO rule with those of States (specifically Europe and the JAA) that have alread increased their age limits. See: 2003 ICAO Survey and Questionaire. (.pdf, 20 Kb.)
By 2005, ICAO, as an organization, had decided that it was time to modify the ICAO rule to conform with that of the JAA: one pilot in a multi-pilot crew to age 60. In doing so, ICAO cited to both the JAA rule and the new ASMA position paper. See: 2005 ICAO Rule Change Cover Letter. (.pdf, 208 Kb.), and 2003 Survey Replies and Analysis. (.pdf, 208 Kb.)
ICAO expects the responses to the proposed rule change to be positive, and the change to become effective on 23 November, 2006.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
|
COMMENTS/CRITICISMS Send your criticisms, questions and/or suggestions regarding this website to the Age60Rule.com Webmaster: |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
= = = = END = = = =