Narrative:

We were on an IFR flight plan direct bis to ean. The forecast and current conditions at douglas, cheyenne, and scottsbluff were VFR. On descent into ean, which has no instrument approach, it was noted that there was a low cloud layer. ZDV had vectored us south around R7001 and cleared us to 10000 ft MSL. By our navigation, we were clear of R7001 and requested direct ean and a cruise clearance. We were cleared direct ean to cruise 10000 ft. The airport elevation is 4775 ft and we started to descend to 6800 ft, our lowest IFR altitude in designated mountainous terrain. The center loses radar coverage at about 8000 ft and requested our altitude. At that point we were at 7000 ft and informed him of that. We were within 2 NM of the airport looking for breaks in the overcast. The controller was getting all excited stating that we were only cleared to 10000 ft. It was a very poor time to be having an in-depth conversation about rules. In any case there were no breaks in the overcast and we informed the controller that we were unable to get into wheatland and would like to climb back up to 10000 ft and proceed to cheyenne. He cleared us to cheyenne and in the backgnd either a controller or another pilot said on the air 'it's a good thing too, after what you just did!' we proceeded to cheyenne and landed VFR, arranged ground transporation for our passenger to ean and filed a new flight plan from cheyenne to sny, northeast. We needed to deviate south for thunderstorms and shot the VOR/DME 30 approach at sidney. Almost immediately after landing, I called area manager at ZDV to discuss the ean cruise clearance. I informed him that we were on the ground at sidney, however, I forgot to inform him to cancel our IFR flight plan. He had to call me back to confirm cancellation. We reviewed the cruise clearance which he read from publication 71-10- 65. Before reading that, even he thought that the cruise clearance cleared the pilot from the altitude at which the clearance was given to the altitude in the cruise clearance. We discussed that,and he agreed that given the cruise clearance we could descend to within 2000 ft of obstructions within 4 NM of our path. Upon review, it looks like the stacks northwest of the airport are within 4 NM of the airport so the lowest altitude we could descend to should have been 7200 ft. The lowest altitude we did descend to was 7000 ft over the airport. Several things stick out at me. The controller did not know the rules on cruise clrncs, and started arguing with the copilot at a critical/busy time of flight. The backgnd comments added to the perception that we might be facing enforcement action. In addition, we had to take care of the passenger and refile for sidney. This all resulted in a very high workload. You can tell yourself to not worry about it until you get onto the ground, but when the 'violation' bells goes off, it's pretty hard to ignore.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CORP PLT REQUESTS 'CRUISE CLRNC' DSNDS TO LOWER ALT. CTLR UPSET.

Narrative: WE WERE ON AN IFR FLT PLAN DIRECT BIS TO EAN. THE FORECAST AND CURRENT CONDITIONS AT DOUGLAS, CHEYENNE, AND SCOTTSBLUFF WERE VFR. ON DSCNT INTO EAN, WHICH HAS NO INST APCH, IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WAS A LOW CLOUD LAYER. ZDV HAD VECTORED US S AROUND R7001 AND CLRED US TO 10000 FT MSL. BY OUR NAV, WE WERE CLR OF R7001 AND REQUESTED DIRECT EAN AND A CRUISE CLRNC. WE WERE CLRED DIRECT EAN TO CRUISE 10000 FT. THE ARPT ELEVATION IS 4775 FT AND WE STARTED TO DSND TO 6800 FT, OUR LOWEST IFR ALT IN DESIGNATED MOUNTAINOUS TERRAIN. THE CTR LOSES RADAR COVERAGE AT ABOUT 8000 FT AND REQUESTED OUR ALT. AT THAT POINT WE WERE AT 7000 FT AND INFORMED HIM OF THAT. WE WERE WITHIN 2 NM OF THE ARPT LOOKING FOR BREAKS IN THE OVCST. THE CTLR WAS GETTING ALL EXCITED STATING THAT WE WERE ONLY CLRED TO 10000 FT. IT WAS A VERY POOR TIME TO BE HAVING AN IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION ABOUT RULES. IN ANY CASE THERE WERE NO BREAKS IN THE OVCST AND WE INFORMED THE CTLR THAT WE WERE UNABLE TO GET INTO WHEATLAND AND WOULD LIKE TO CLB BACK UP TO 10000 FT AND PROCEED TO CHEYENNE. HE CLRED US TO CHEYENNE AND IN THE BACKGND EITHER A CTLR OR ANOTHER PLT SAID ON THE AIR 'IT'S A GOOD THING TOO, AFTER WHAT YOU JUST DID!' WE PROCEEDED TO CHEYENNE AND LANDED VFR, ARRANGED GND TRANSPORATION FOR OUR PAX TO EAN AND FILED A NEW FLT PLAN FROM CHEYENNE TO SNY, NE. WE NEEDED TO DEVIATE S FOR TSTMS AND SHOT THE VOR/DME 30 APCH AT SIDNEY. ALMOST IMMEDIATELY AFTER LNDG, I CALLED AREA MGR AT ZDV TO DISCUSS THE EAN CRUISE CLRNC. I INFORMED HIM THAT WE WERE ON THE GND AT SIDNEY, HOWEVER, I FORGOT TO INFORM HIM TO CANCEL OUR IFR FLT PLAN. HE HAD TO CALL ME BACK TO CONFIRM CANCELLATION. WE REVIEWED THE CRUISE CLRNC WHICH HE READ FROM PUB 71-10- 65. BEFORE READING THAT, EVEN HE THOUGHT THAT THE CRUISE CLRNC CLRED THE PLT FROM THE ALT AT WHICH THE CLRNC WAS GIVEN TO THE ALT IN THE CRUISE CLRNC. WE DISCUSSED THAT,AND HE AGREED THAT GIVEN THE CRUISE CLRNC WE COULD DSND TO WITHIN 2000 FT OF OBSTRUCTIONS WITHIN 4 NM OF OUR PATH. UPON REVIEW, IT LOOKS LIKE THE STACKS NW OF THE ARPT ARE WITHIN 4 NM OF THE ARPT SO THE LOWEST ALT WE COULD DSND TO SHOULD HAVE BEEN 7200 FT. THE LOWEST ALT WE DID DSND TO WAS 7000 FT OVER THE ARPT. SEVERAL THINGS STICK OUT AT ME. THE CTLR DID NOT KNOW THE RULES ON CRUISE CLRNCS, AND STARTED ARGUING WITH THE COPLT AT A CRITICAL/BUSY TIME OF FLT. THE BACKGND COMMENTS ADDED TO THE PERCEPTION THAT WE MIGHT BE FACING ENFORCEMENT ACTION. IN ADDITION, WE HAD TO TAKE CARE OF THE PAX AND REFILE FOR SIDNEY. THIS ALL RESULTED IN A VERY HIGH WORKLOAD. YOU CAN TELL YOURSELF TO NOT WORRY ABOUT IT UNTIL YOU GET ONTO THE GND, BUT WHEN THE 'VIOLATION' BELLS GOES OFF, IT'S PRETTY HARD TO IGNORE.

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.