Narrative:

I was hired by XXX company salt lake city, ut (a part 135 operator) as a line pilot to perform all 135 work currently being done by the company. I came to XXX with a recent part 135 check ride already completed by another operator's check airman. My training with XXX occurred in july. I accepted my first revenue (part 135) flight on an evening in july, and continued flying until I was informed that I was not legal to fly 135 operations with XXX helicopters. The FAA poi (principal operations inspector) had made a visit to the challis national forest where I had been performing a forest service 'call when needed' contract. The poi stated that myself and the relief pilot had not been trained per the provisions of a recent revision to the company training manual which was apparently approved in july 91. Unknown to me at the time of my hiring was the fact that XXX training program had been suspended back in april 91 as a result of an operations inspection. I was unaware of any problem with XXX training program and felt that I had been adequately trained for the work expected of me. Poi feels that the company should not have hired and trained me with himself being consulted or advised beforehand. When we were told of this problem, I returned to the chief pilot for all training to be redone as per the july revised training manual. This was accomplished by aug. I then met with poi to take an oral examination to comply with far 135.293A and was released to go to work. During the course of the oral he advised me of possible enforcement action against XXX, myself, and my relief pilot for violations involving the training of pilots without FAA authorization. I explained that anything done by myself or the relief pilot was purely inadvertent and not deliberate. Throughout my meeting with poi I stressed that I and the company would be more than glad to work towards resolving any inadequacies or problems with the company training program. I merely needed to obtain employment and accepted on good faith the thought that XXX was in a position to hire and train me prior to starting any revenue producing jobs. My past work experience has not provided much opportunity to work closely with the FAA. This has certainly opened my eyes to the challenges of having to do so. I hardly think that I'm guilty of any wrong doing on my part that would warrant any enforcement action directed to me or the relief pilot directly.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HELI PLT CHALLENGED BY ACI REF CURRENT QUALIFICATION AND TRAINING RECEIVED.

Narrative: I WAS HIRED BY XXX COMPANY SALT LAKE CITY, UT (A PART 135 OPERATOR) AS A LINE PLT TO PERFORM ALL 135 WORK CURRENTLY BEING DONE BY THE COMPANY. I CAME TO XXX WITH A RECENT PART 135 CHK RIDE ALREADY COMPLETED BY ANOTHER OPERATOR'S CHK AIRMAN. MY TRAINING WITH XXX OCCURRED IN JULY. I ACCEPTED MY FIRST REVENUE (PART 135) FLT ON AN EVENING IN JULY, AND CONTINUED FLYING UNTIL I WAS INFORMED THAT I WAS NOT LEGAL TO FLY 135 OPS WITH XXX HELIS. THE FAA POI (PRINCIPAL OPS INSPECTOR) HAD MADE A VISIT TO THE CHALLIS NATIONAL FOREST WHERE I HAD BEEN PERFORMING A FOREST SVC 'CALL WHEN NEEDED' CONTRACT. THE POI STATED THAT MYSELF AND THE RELIEF PLT HAD NOT BEEN TRAINED PER THE PROVISIONS OF A RECENT REVISION TO THE COMPANY TRAINING MANUAL WHICH WAS APPARENTLY APPROVED IN JULY 91. UNKNOWN TO ME AT THE TIME OF MY HIRING WAS THE FACT THAT XXX TRAINING PROGRAM HAD BEEN SUSPENDED BACK IN APRIL 91 AS A RESULT OF AN OPS INSPECTION. I WAS UNAWARE OF ANY PROBLEM WITH XXX TRAINING PROGRAM AND FELT THAT I HAD BEEN ADEQUATELY TRAINED FOR THE WORK EXPECTED OF ME. POI FEELS THAT THE COMPANY SHOULD NOT HAVE HIRED AND TRAINED ME WITH HIMSELF BEING CONSULTED OR ADVISED BEFOREHAND. WHEN WE WERE TOLD OF THIS PROBLEM, I RETURNED TO THE CHIEF PLT FOR ALL TRAINING TO BE REDONE AS PER THE JULY REVISED TRAINING MANUAL. THIS WAS ACCOMPLISHED BY AUG. I THEN MET WITH POI TO TAKE AN ORAL EXAMINATION TO COMPLY WITH FAR 135.293A AND WAS RELEASED TO GO TO WORK. DURING THE COURSE OF THE ORAL HE ADVISED ME OF POSSIBLE ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST XXX, MYSELF, AND MY RELIEF PLT FOR VIOLATIONS INVOLVING THE TRAINING OF PLTS WITHOUT FAA AUTHORIZATION. I EXPLAINED THAT ANYTHING DONE BY MYSELF OR THE RELIEF PLT WAS PURELY INADVERTENT AND NOT DELIBERATE. THROUGHOUT MY MEETING WITH POI I STRESSED THAT I AND THE COMPANY WOULD BE MORE THAN GLAD TO WORK TOWARDS RESOLVING ANY INADEQUACIES OR PROBLEMS WITH THE COMPANY TRAINING PROGRAM. I MERELY NEEDED TO OBTAIN EMPLOYMENT AND ACCEPTED ON GOOD FAITH THE THOUGHT THAT XXX WAS IN A POS TO HIRE AND TRAIN ME PRIOR TO STARTING ANY REVENUE PRODUCING JOBS. MY PAST WORK EXPERIENCE HAS NOT PROVIDED MUCH OPPORTUNITY TO WORK CLOSELY WITH THE FAA. THIS HAS CERTAINLY OPENED MY EYES TO THE CHALLENGES OF HAVING TO DO SO. I HARDLY THINK THAT I'M GUILTY OF ANY WRONG DOING ON MY PART THAT WOULD WARRANT ANY ENFORCEMENT ACTION DIRECTED TO ME OR THE RELIEF PLT DIRECTLY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.