Narrative:

How the problem arose: after accepting in apr/xx/94 to fly for a far 135 operator that was going to accept a cessna/citation that belonged to an acquaintance of mine, on their certificate, I made preparations to attend that company's far 135 ground school and was given company indoctrination for newly hired crewmembers. Then on sep/xx/94 I was asked to give the far 135 cessna/citation system ground school because of the fact that I was more familiar with cessna/citation system. After conducting the ground school (next section) how it was discovered: I became familiar with far 135-337 and have found that I was able to situation down and talk about the aircraft system with the students on a far-61 basis only for far-91 operations: and told the students that any portion of the training that I taught them was void for far-135 purposes and that any endorsement made by any parties involved for the purpose of meeting the crewmember requirement of far-135, regarding the far-61 ground school that I have taught them, would be a direct violation of far-61-59. Also, I told them that any involvement in the situation would have drastic career-affecting consequences for them -- the students, the party(ies) making the false endorsement that they taught, and myself for knowing that the party(ies) endorsement was for something I did without written approval in the operator's training manual and furthermore, without an ATP -- certificate. Contributing factors: not being thoroughly informed on far regulations for 135 operations and a team of people at the company that did not have my best interest at stake and proceeded to perform illegal far-135 ground school for the 135 company without written permission/approval by the FSDO. Corrective actions: once learning of what was taking place, I immediately told my acquaintance (one of the students) to have a talk with the company director of operations to either make everything that they do in the company in relation to this situation in a legal and a proper manner before going to take the 135-crewmember chkrides with the FAA. If that cannot be done, then I told him that I could not continue with this company and attempt to take a chkride and fly for them because it could jeopardize my certificates as well as my record as a fraudulent person that attempted to defraud the FAA. I am an honest and decent person and I shall in no way be involved in any dishonest and illegal situation. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states that he was discussing the regulations with people who know them better than he and determined that he was not legal to teach as he was not named in the 135 FAA approved paperwork. He immediately informed company that he could no longer teach the ground school. No follow up of any kind has occurred.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ILLEGAL GND INSTRUCTION IN PREP FOR 135 CHKRIDES.

Narrative: HOW THE PROB AROSE: AFTER ACCEPTING IN APR/XX/94 TO FLY FOR A FAR 135 OPERATOR THAT WAS GOING TO ACCEPT A CESSNA/CITATION THAT BELONGED TO AN ACQUAINTANCE OF MINE, ON THEIR CERTIFICATE, I MADE PREPARATIONS TO ATTEND THAT COMPANY'S FAR 135 GND SCHOOL AND WAS GIVEN COMPANY INDOCTRINATION FOR NEWLY HIRED CREWMEMBERS. THEN ON SEP/XX/94 I WAS ASKED TO GIVE THE FAR 135 CESSNA/CITATION SYS GND SCHOOL BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT I WAS MORE FAMILIAR WITH CESSNA/CITATION SYS. AFTER CONDUCTING THE GND SCHOOL (NEXT SECTION) HOW IT WAS DISCOVERED: I BECAME FAMILIAR WITH FAR 135-337 AND HAVE FOUND THAT I WAS ABLE TO SIT DOWN AND TALK ABOUT THE ACFT SYS WITH THE STUDENTS ON A FAR-61 BASIS ONLY FOR FAR-91 OPS: AND TOLD THE STUDENTS THAT ANY PORTION OF THE TRAINING THAT I TAUGHT THEM WAS VOID FOR FAR-135 PURPOSES AND THAT ANY ENDORSEMENT MADE BY ANY PARTIES INVOLVED FOR THE PURPOSE OF MEETING THE CREWMEMBER REQUIREMENT OF FAR-135, REGARDING THE FAR-61 GND SCHOOL THAT I HAVE TAUGHT THEM, WOULD BE A DIRECT VIOLATION OF FAR-61-59. ALSO, I TOLD THEM THAT ANY INVOLVEMENT IN THE SIT WOULD HAVE DRASTIC CAREER-AFFECTING CONSEQUENCES FOR THEM -- THE STUDENTS, THE PARTY(IES) MAKING THE FALSE ENDORSEMENT THAT THEY TAUGHT, AND MYSELF FOR KNOWING THAT THE PARTY(IES) ENDORSEMENT WAS FOR SOMETHING I DID WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL IN THE OPERATOR'S TRAINING MANUAL AND FURTHERMORE, WITHOUT AN ATP -- CERTIFICATE. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: NOT BEING THOROUGHLY INFORMED ON FAR REGS FOR 135 OPS AND A TEAM OF PEOPLE AT THE COMPANY THAT DID NOT HAVE MY BEST INTEREST AT STAKE AND PROCEEDED TO PERFORM ILLEGAL FAR-135 GND SCHOOL FOR THE 135 COMPANY WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION/APPROVAL BY THE FSDO. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: ONCE LEARNING OF WHAT WAS TAKING PLACE, I IMMEDIATELY TOLD MY ACQUAINTANCE (ONE OF THE STUDENTS) TO HAVE A TALK WITH THE COMPANY DIRECTOR OF OPS TO EITHER MAKE EVERYTHING THAT THEY DO IN THE COMPANY IN RELATION TO THIS SIT IN A LEGAL AND A PROPER MANNER BEFORE GOING TO TAKE THE 135-CREWMEMBER CHKRIDES WITH THE FAA. IF THAT CANNOT BE DONE, THEN I TOLD HIM THAT I COULD NOT CONTINUE WITH THIS COMPANY AND ATTEMPT TO TAKE A CHKRIDE AND FLY FOR THEM BECAUSE IT COULD JEOPARDIZE MY CERTIFICATES AS WELL AS MY RECORD AS A FRAUDULENT PERSON THAT ATTEMPTED TO DEFRAUD THE FAA. I AM AN HONEST AND DECENT PERSON AND I SHALL IN NO WAY BE INVOLVED IN ANY DISHONEST AND ILLEGAL SIT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THAT HE WAS DISCUSSING THE REGS WITH PEOPLE WHO KNOW THEM BETTER THAN HE AND DETERMINED THAT HE WAS NOT LEGAL TO TEACH AS HE WAS NOT NAMED IN THE 135 FAA APPROVED PAPERWORK. HE IMMEDIATELY INFORMED COMPANY THAT HE COULD NO LONGER TEACH THE GND SCHOOL. NO FOLLOW UP OF ANY KIND HAS OCCURRED.

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.