Annual Question

[Tom-D]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

During my last IA seminar renewal, William O'Brien, brought this subject to the attention of all attending IAs

Any Time the owner requests an A&P to look at their aircraft this is an inspection. This inspection must be loged in the aircraft logs, and the owner must be informed of the discrepancies found.

The problem is in the method of informing the owner.

Do I write these discrepancies in the log? or should I give the owner a sheet of paper with the discrepancies listed?

So this is what the FAA is advising IAs to do.

If ANY owner asks an A&P reguardless if that A&P is has inspection authorization, to look at (inspect) their aircraft, that A&P should log the discrepancies in the aircraft log.

and here is why, an owner CAN throw away the real list and have his buddy the A&P sign off to return the aircraft to service with a bogus list.

Let us say, the aircraft is due for its annual in sept. an A&P-IA discovers at an oil change in june that the engine has metal in the oil filter. that A&P should make an entry in that engine log stating that. The owner can deal with that in anyway they see fit.

But that aircraft does need a ferry permit, or a return to service, by someone to fly anywhere.

 

[Ed Guthrie]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

Let us say, the aircraft is due for its annual in sept. an A&P-IA discovers at an oil change in june that the engine has metal in the oil filter. that A&P should make an entry in that engine log stating that. The owner can deal with that in anyway they see fit.

But that aircraft does need a ferry permit, or a return to service, by someone to fly anywhere.

Real world example and why this thread is an issue for me:

Many years ago during an unrelated event an IA looked at my Mooney's logbooks and discovered that, in his opinion, the engine was out of compliance with the infamous oil pump gear AD. According to the IA the aircraft could not be flown again until the oil pump gears were replaced. He made a note to that effect in the logbook. Reasonable discussion could not convince him that the engine S/N was specifically exempted within the AD. No good--his notation stayed in the logbook.

Being the only shop on the field he was perfectly happy to do the work for me, for a price, of course.

The particular engine S/N was contained in a sub-paragraph of exemptions to the AD that began, "...helicopter..." In the IA's opinion that entire sub-paragraph pertained only if the engine was installed in a helicopter. Never mind that the topic changed later in the paragraph (prior to the serial number appearing). Never mind that Lycoming disagreed. Never mind that his opinion made absolutely zero sense.

I consulted my regular IA. I consulted Lycoming. They both started laughing and told me not to worry.

As I prepared to depart that particular airport the IA threatened to call the FAA. Apparently he never placed the call, or if he did call then the FAA must have pointed out his error. I considered sending a copy of the log entry and the AD to his FSDO but never acted on that thought. I kept a copy of the AD with the aircraft logs and happily ignored the notation for ~2+ years and 3 annuals. However, twice during those years and annuals I had to explain to someone why the IA's notation didn't apply.

 

[poadeleted20]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

Not sure why the FAA is telling Tom what they did, since it directly contradicts the direction in Part 43 to limit the entry to saying the inspection was done and there were discrepancies, and to keep the list separate. If the IA is concerned, he should keep a copy of the list with a "receipt acknowledged" signature from the owner (acknowledging only receipt, not agreement).

 

[Tom-D]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

Not sure why the FAA is telling Tom what they did, since it directly contradicts the direction in Part 43 to limit the entry to saying the inspection was done and there were discrepancies, and to keep the list separate. If the IA is concerned, he should keep a copy of the list with a "receipt acknowledged" signature from the owner (acknowledging only receipt, not agreement).

There is no requirement for getting a statement from the owner saying they know about the list.

Yes it is a good idea, but no requirement and I don't know any IAs that do it that way.

Placing the discrepancy list in the log is a legal CYA thing for the IA, that is NOT ,, NOT required also.

The only requirement is the inspection is logged, and a list generated, and given to the owner, It's the method of giving the owner the discrepancy list that becomes a CYA thing with the A&P-IA

and the FAAs advice was place it in the log books, their rathional is the work to be completed must be logged, so leave a space between each discrepancy to log the repair, and return to service.

In Eds case he could have made an entry to the effect "IAW AD para. X, a, 3 this engine is exemped from this AD" and he would have been covered.
(But that oil pump AD is a Lycoming CYA gaggle any way)

IAs can make mistakes too, and in many cases they are wrong, DO NOT be afraid to call FSDO and gain clearification on issues when you know you are correct.

There is a young Lady who owns a Commanchee that was required to overhaul her IO-540 at mid life, because her mechanic said it was quick stopped 500 hours earlier, the new AD did not apply.. 30k later..... she is flying again.

 

[Jeff Oslick]

I'm actually dealing with this issue right now. I've completed an annual inspectionwhile in the middle of a paint job (stripped, but not painted). Very long story, which I'll fill in when we're done (hopefully a couple weeks). Basically, for scheduling reasons, I intentionally put my plane in for an annual inspection where I knew it would not pass because of discrepancies (i.e. no flight controls installed). After we're repainted and reassembled, the IA will confirm all discrepancies were addressed. In one way this turned out to be very smart, since we were able to catch a problem that may have been hidden by new paint, and which required replacement of a piece of wing skin.

Jeff

 

[poadeleted20]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

There is no requirement for getting a statement from the owner saying they know about the list.

That's why I said "should," not "must."

Yes it is a good idea, but no requirement and I don't know any IAs that do it that way.

I don't either, but I think a mechanic who asked a lawyer would be told it's a good idea.

Placing the discrepancy list in the log is a legal CYA thing for the IA, that is NOT ,, NOT required also.

While I agree that it's not required, I do NOT think it's a good idea, as it opens the mechanic to serious legal repercussions if a jury of twelve bozos taken off the street at random finds he overstated the seriousness. If he provides the list to the owner, and obtains proof of that (see "signed acknowledgement," above), his legal A is C'd, and he does not incur the potential liability of placing his findings in a permanent record which could degrade the value of the aircraft (see "injury" in your favorite legal lexicon).

The only requirement is the inspection is logged, and a list generated, and given to the owner, It's the method of giving the owner the discrepancy list that becomes a CYA thing with the A&P-IA

If one complies with the regulation, and can prove compliance, one's A is C'd. If one goes beyond the legal requirement, one is taking chances with one's assets.

and the FAAs advice was place it in the log books, their rathional is the work to be completed must be logged, so leave a space between each discrepancy to log the repair, and return to service.

FAA airworthiness inspectors are not lawyers, and they are definitely NOT your lawyer. They are not at risk of legal action if you take their verbal advice to go beyond the requirements of the law. And I'm not all that sure of how legal folks would look at blank spaces and post-dated log book entries between other ante-dated entries.

IAs can make mistakes too, and in many cases they are wrong, DO NOT be afraid to call FSDO and gain clearification on issues when you know you are correct.

Exactly the reason for the IA to NOT put these items in the log -- you can always retract the list and replace it, but you cannot retract something written in a log book.

Choose wisely.

 

[Tom-D]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

Not sure why the FAA is telling Tom what they did, since it directly contradicts the direction in Part 43 to limit the entry to saying the inspection was done and there were discrepancies, and to keep the list separate. If the IA is concerned, he should keep a copy of the list with a "receipt acknowledged" signature from the owner (acknowledging only receipt, not agreement).

Where does the reg say ""Part 43 to limit the entry""?

(5) Except for progressive inspections, if the aircraft is not approved for return to service because of needed maintenance, noncompliance with applicable specifications, airworthiness directives, or other approved data, the following or a similarly worded statement- "I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with (insert type) inspection and a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items dated (date) has been provided for the aircraft owner or operator."

 

[Tom-D]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

FAA airworthiness inspectors are not lawyers, and they are definitely NOT your lawyer. They are not at risk of legal action if you take their verbal advice to go beyond the requirements of the law. And I'm not all that sure of how legal folks would look at blank spaces and post-dated log book entries between other ante-dated entries.

Exactly the reason for the IA to NOT put these items in the log -- you can always retract the list and replace it, but you cannot retract something written in a log book.

Choose wisely.

When I choose to use the sign off as stated in 43,11, (5)

I write

"I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with an annual inspection and was determined to be in an unairworty condition due to the following items:
1.

2.

I have met thr requirement of the FARs and the owner is forced to comply with 91,403-409.

Any pilot who is operating the aircraft has a ready readable discrepancy list and a return to service for each, including the inspection.

this forces the owner operator to comply with,

91.417 Maintenance records.

(a) Except for work performed in accordance with §§91.411 and 91.413, each registered owner or operator shall keep the following records for the periods specified in paragraph (b) of this section:

(1) Records of the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alteration and records of the 100-hour, annual, progressive, and other required or approved inspections, as appropriate, for each aircraft (including the airframe) and each engine, propeller, rotor, and appliance of an aircraft. The records must include-

There have been several occasions where the aircraft was returned to service with out the whole list completed.

Your way, I'll give you a list, but I won't sign the annual off with out seeing the discrepancies repaired and then you get an "airworthy" sign off.

 

[poadeleted20]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

Where does the reg say ""Part 43 to limit the entry""?

(5) Except for progressive inspections, if the aircraft is not approved for return to service because of needed maintenance, noncompliance with applicable specifications, airworthiness directives, or other approved data, the following or a similarly worded statement- "I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with (insert type) inspection and a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items dated (date) has been provided for the aircraft owner or operator."

Looks like you answered your own question.

 

[poadeleted20]

Re: Annual Question, Ed & Ron

Your way, I'll give you a list, but I won't sign the annual off with out seeing the discrepancies repaired and then you get an "airworthy" sign off.

Keep in mind that signing the statement in 43.11(a)(5) is not "sign[ing] the annual off." If you write that in the logs, the owner is on notice that the aircraft is not airworthy, and you haven't said it is. -- you are completely covered and the owner is on the hook if he flies the plane. If someone questions one of your findings, and turns out to be right, there's no big deal, since it's just a matter of correcting a list that isn't a part of the aircraft's official maintenance records. OTOH, if you write in a bunch of discrepancies, and it turns out one of them isn't correct, you are on the hook for making an erroneous entry in the logs.

BTW, in my 27 years of aircraft ownership, you are the ONLY mechanic who has ever suggested writing that stuff in the logs rather than on a separate list. And I have been handed plenty of those lists over the years, although I've always had the work done at the inspecting shop so there was never any need for a 43.11(a)(5) entry in the logs.

 

[Gary Sortor]

Where do the regulations state that an AI has a right to deviate from the wording in the regulation and list the discrepancies in the aircraft log book simply to CYA? If an AI attempts to add extraneous entries, I think the owner would have a right to object and refuse to allow the entry (it's not his to write whatever he wants). Some unnecessary entries could certainly devalue the aircraft even if they weren't airworthy issues and, at the very least, cost the AI a lot of goodwill.

"I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with (insert type) inspection and a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items dated (date) has been provided for the aircraft owner or operator."

 

[Tom-D]

"I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with (insert type) inspection and a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items dated (date) has been provided for the aircraft owner or operator."

And where does it say WHERE the list must be written?

If it is in the logs, doesn't the owner/operator get the logs?

That DOES comply with the FAR.

Read the WHOLE FAR

(5) Except for progressive inspections, if the aircraft is not approved for return to service because of needed maintenance, noncompliance with applicable specifications, airworthiness directives, or other approved data, the following or a

similarly worded statement-

"I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with (insert type) inspection and a list of discrepancies and unairworthy items dated (date) has been provided for the aircraft owner or operator."


I would write ""I certify that this aircraft has been inspected in accordance with an annual inspection and have determined this aircraft to be unairworthy due to the following discrepancies,
1 a large crack in the engine cases between #3 & #5cylinders
2 Exfoliating corrosion in the right main wing spar at the attachment fitting.
3 AD 87-03-01 has been over due for 500 hours.

If I inspect your aircraft and find it unairworthy, and you don't want to get it fixed before the annual is completed, you get the discrepancies placed in your log book and you'll not sneek it past any A&P for a ferry permit.

You see, I am not protecting just me, I am giving warning to every one who may want to fly, or sign off on the ferry permit.

How would you like an operator to ask you to ferry this aircraft not knowing I found these grips? there are operators who would throw the list I gave them away and try to get you to take it to there buddy for a rubber stamp annual.

You see It's not my butt I'm trying to save, it might be yours.

OBTW do you read the logs before you fly a strange aircraft?

 

[Henning]

OBTW do you read the logs before you fly a strange aircraft?

No way, ignorance is bliss.