deadstick
Well-Known Member
Thanks.
CFI Records
- Thread starter got2av8
- Start date
Thanks.
tgrayson
New Member
Yes, there are always outliers who read a sentence and sees what no one else sees, but that's irrelevant as to whether there is a reasonable interpretation. The law considers what "a reasonable man" would think and this is a statistical construction; in other words, how would most people read this sentence?
Most people read it the way that I do, because that's they way they behave. The fact that the vast majority of flight instructors are NOT logging all these other endorsements proves my point. This Inspector's interpretation is so unlike what the "reasonable man" might think that the question has never arisen in either the old Part 61 FAQs or Letters of Interpretation.
Guy
Well-Known Member
I saw a very similar situation back in the 70s when regarding "high performance" and "complex" when it was introduced. In that case, a new inspector interpreted the regulation differently than the commonly accepted interpretation. In the long run, the FAA went to the interpretation the new inspector was using. However, in the short run, the matter was settled by having a quiet talk with one of the "old heads" (in this case the Safety Program Manager) at the FSDO who had a talk with the office manager who in turn told then new inspector to cool his jets and back off.
One thing you should be aware of is that the only records maintained by the FAA are those where your signature appears on an FAA Form 8710-1. So, if you have a laundry list of many of the endorsements that an instructor makes but doesn't normally record, who is to say that isn't a complete list. If student log books are kept at the school, you can look through those to add to your endorsement list. Then, should you be asked for your list of endorsements, you can present it and thereby avoid raising the issue regardless if it is a valid or invalid issue.
It is always easier to stay out of a fight than it is to win one and in this case, a half-way list of endorsements will almost certainly ensure you avoid having to try to win a fight.
Having written that, I'll go back to my earlier recommendation. Have one of the school managers call the inspector he has been working with and seek his assistance.
Guy
Well-Known Member
Passionate, but not compelling.
tgrayson
New Member
I don't really see the relevance of these judgments to the present discussion? They all concern whether or not the student pilot has received the proper endorsements, not whether the flight instructor kept track of them.
nosehair
Well-Known Member
The fact that the vast majority of flight instructors are not logging all these other endorsements only underscores the vast lack of record keeping most instructors practice. Myself included - I am as guilty as the rest.
I do, however, consider "solo flight privileges", as contained within the regulation 61.189 concerning records an instructor must keep of a student, to mean all endorsements required for any solo flight, which would include x/c, night, other airports, etc.
Remember that these endorsements were not required once upon a time. So, as the regulations have increasingly required these endorsements for solo flight by student pilots, I have always read this regulation -61.189(b)(1) to include all the required endorsements - the instructor is required to keep a record of all solo flight privileges - endorsements.
tgrayson
New Member
Yeah, but most of your interpretations of the regulations tend to be rather...idiosyncratic.
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
"Safety in air commerce and air transportation and the public interest could require certificate suspension even though, in a particular case, no threat to aviation safety was established. Indeed, we have stated:
Proper endorsement of all prescribed documents is a
legitimate regulatory requirement whose purpose is to give
notice to all concerned parties, such as FAA inspectors,that the airman is qualified for the operation in which he is engaged.Administrator v. Slotten, 2 NTSB 2503, 2505 (1976), footnote omitted.
Proper endorsement of all prescribed documents is a
legitimate regulatory requirement whose purpose is to give
notice to all concerned parties, such as FAA inspectors,that the airman is qualified for the operation in which he is engaged.Administrator v. Slotten, 2 NTSB 2503, 2505 (1976), footnote omitted.
6 That accurate recordkeeping is critical to the FAA's safety enforcement program and, therefore, required by the public interest and safety in air commerce and air transportation cannot seriously be questioned. Respondent failed in his recordkeeping duty under the FAR; the Administrator brought enforcement action; and adjudication of respondent's appeal is properly before this Board. That no harm was done as a result of respondent's failure is a boon, not a ground for dismissal."
"It is also useful to note that, in Slotten, we rejected a
claim by respondent that the failure to endorse a student pilot certificate was a "mere technicality" or "harmless oversight."
claim by respondent that the failure to endorse a student pilot certificate was a "mere technicality" or "harmless oversight."
tgrayson
New Member
The significance still escapes me.
No one questions the value of record keeping, the topic is which records we need to keep. Those rulings do not pertain.
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
"§ 61.189 Flight instructor records.
(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.
(b) A flight instructor must maintain a record in a logbook or a separate document that contains the following:
(1) The name of each person whose logbook or student pilot certificate that instructor has endorsed for solo flight privileges, and the date of the endorsement; and
(2) The name of each person that instructor has endorsed for a knowledge test or practical test, and the record shall also indicate the kind of test, the date, and the results.
(c) Each flight instructor must retain the records required by this section for at least 3 years."
Administrator v. Reno:
"That accurate recordkeeping is critical to the FAA's safety enforcement program and, therefore, required by the public interest and safety in air commerce and air transportation cannot seriously be questioned. "
tgrayson
New Member
It's not clear to me that you understand what the discussion is about. We are not discussing whether or not the flight instructor must keep records, or that records are valuable, or even whether or not the flight instructor must keep a record of solo signoffs. We are discussing whether "solo signoffs" includes every signoff that pertains at all to solo privileges, including cross country privileges, individual cross countries, repeated cross countries, night endorsements, class B endorsements, etc.
Nothing in the rulings you posted has any connection to those issues that I can see.
Guy
Well-Known Member
In your opinion.But correct.
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
OP-
"Under 61.189(b)(1), which endorsements are supposed to be listed? I was under the impression (for the last two years) that this record needed to reflect the endorsement for an initial solo flight. I've been told now that each endorsement for each cross country, each repeat landing within 25 nm endorsement, etc needs to be recorded...He was under the same impression and is now facing a 90 day suspension of his CFI certificate."
"61.189 Flight instructor records.
(a) A flight instructor must sign the logbook of each person to whom that instructor has given flight training or ground training.
(b) A flight instructor must maintain a record in a logbook or a separate document that contains the following:
(1) The name of each person whose logbook or student pilot certificate that instructor has endorsed for solo flight privileges, and the date of the endorsement; and
...
(c) Each flight instructor must retain the records required by this section for at least 3 years."
Administrator v. Reno:
"That accurate recordkeeping is critical to the FAA's safety enforcement program and, therefore, required by the public interest and safety in air commerce and air transportation cannot seriously be questioned. "
Blackhawk, please correct me if I'm wrong but in the case you cite the certificate action took place because of a failure on the part of the CFI to properly endorse the student's logbook for certain solo operations. The student apparently made several flights, at least one of which drew the attention of ATC as a result of his inadequate training for the environment in which he was operating. The student (later pilot's) position was that the CFI was partly at fault for failing to properly endorse the logbook. The question of record keeping in that case refers to the student's knowledge that the endorsements were required prior to the flight and reflects his shared responsibility for insuring that they were in his logbook prior to commencing the flight. I certainly don't dispute those findings in the least; both the student and the instructor share the fault of allowing an unendorsed student to operate solo.
My question stems from the wording of 61.189(b)(1). I did note that you highlighted the 's' in privileges, and I understand that this is the point our local FAA operative is attempting to drive home. What I had hoped to find here was either a general opinion of the community at large as to whether or not the accepted definition was in line with what I had been taught and have used for the last 2 1/2 years. I am not disputing the very real value inherent in the requirement for appropriate record keeping, and if I'm in the wrong the ONLY thing I want is to be corrected. (I'd point out that that little want of mine specifically excludes being corrected via a suspension from an overly zealous inspector...) So the question at this point is, since the requirements for the other endorsements are so plainly spelled out, including results of tests based on said endorsements, is it reasonable to assume that if the record requirement meant each individual cross country flight, each Class B training endorsement, etc, it would say so in plain language? It's fairly obvious to me that even among this relatively small group the interpretation could go either way, with compelling arguments from each point of view.
The answer I hoped for was a simple yes or no, but I think that at this stage the only appropriate answer is going to have to come from someone higher up at the FAA. tgrayson and anyone else who said so, I appreciate very much you offering that advice, it really should have been my first course of action. But since all of this came to my attention today I'd hoped I might find something to put my mind at ease rather than spending the rest of a rainy weekend stressing over it. Guess not, but what's one more sleepless night? In this line it sure won't be the last...
Thanks again to all who took the time to try to help me work this one through.[FONT=Courier New, monospace] [/FONT]I hate to add to the flaming you're getting here, but you are making an assumption you aren't qualified to make. How do you know what me and most other people will think when they read this?
Personally I am on the other side, I read solo as just that solo flights. I don't see anything that clearly states "initial" solo. All I see is a regulation that says solo, thus I would conclude any solo sign off falls into this regulation. I am not saying I am right, but instead pointing out that my opinion conflicts with your statement in this case.
Blackhawk: Sorry but you lost me too bud. I have no idea how those links assist in this discussion. Where has anyone argued that record keeping is irrelevant or unimportant?
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
If a precedent is made in one case the specifics of that case do not have to directly relate to subsequent cases in order to have the precedent apply as long as the precedent set has a correlation to subsequent cases. This is why I keep quoting the specific wording on record keeping and the FAA checking these records.
The FAR has "s", plural, meaning more than one solo not initial. I don't see any limiter in the FAR on endorsement records that must be kept.
The case cited is very specific about the importance of keeping records and the importance of inspectors checking records.
So the question as I understand it from the OP is, "Must a CFI keep a record of all endorsements?"
You can do what you want or what someone recommends on this board, but if the FAA demands to see records that they feel you must have you will either need to produce them or face legal action. You can try all day long to say it did not affect safety of flight, but the precedence has been set. You may win the legal action, but as the CFI cited by the OP will find out it will be expensive in time and money. Is there a possibility that the inspector in question is trying to make a name? Sure. There have been more than one of those around in the past. I'd just like to avoid being the target of his power trip.
The FAR has "s", plural, meaning more than one solo not initial. I don't see any limiter in the FAR on endorsement records that must be kept.
The case cited is very specific about the importance of keeping records and the importance of inspectors checking records.
So the question as I understand it from the OP is, "Must a CFI keep a record of all endorsements?"
You can do what you want or what someone recommends on this board, but if the FAA demands to see records that they feel you must have you will either need to produce them or face legal action. You can try all day long to say it did not affect safety of flight, but the precedence has been set. You may win the legal action, but as the CFI cited by the OP will find out it will be expensive in time and money. Is there a possibility that the inspector in question is trying to make a name? Sure. There have been more than one of those around in the past. I'd just like to avoid being the target of his power trip.
Guy
Well-Known Member
Sam hit the essence of what is important to understand. The OP’s question was what must be recorded. Until I read MidlifeFlyer’s (Mark’s) post, I thought it was pretty clear. However, looking at it another way, I can see how someone would interpret it differently. Also, as MidlifeFlyer pointed out, there is no formal interpretation or guidance from the FAA one way or the other. So, as Blackhawk (Sam) points out if the same words can be interpreted two ways, the safe course of action is to go with the more conservative route. In this case, it is almost certain nobody would fault a CFI for keeping records that are more than the required minimum.
As far as the inspector involved, there is no telling what the story is. Power trip, inexperience, miscommunication, who knows what the root issue is. A new inspector who is wise would go back to the office and talk with his or her supervisor before jumping on something, but people are people and they don’t always take the wisest course of action.
As Blackhawk wrote, battling this out with someone is going to be painful and expensive regardless of the outcome. Therefore, in the short run, try to deal with it in a spirit of cooperation. In the long run, a letter to the office of the chief counsel for the FAA asking for an interpretation would be in order.