Narrative:

I was flying jumpers for skydiving club. At XA00 local, I flew a group of skydivers to approximately 5000 ft MSL where I opened the door to check the conditions over the drop zone. The first jumper was a static line jump and the drop zone was clearly visible. I gave the signal to release the jumper and all went well. Then, off to the west, I saw a ceiling of overcast approaching. I advised seattle approach that I would discontinue dropping over shn. However, after turning back over the drop zone, I realized that the overcast ceiling had not yet reached the aircraft, leaving the drop zone unobscured. I asked seattle approach if I could commence the drop and they approved. Subsequently the 3 jumpers departed the aircraft where they parachuted safely to the ground. At all times, the jumpers adhered to 14cfr105.29 (cloud clrncs). The problem lies with an observer on the ground who contends that the jumpers did not adhere with 14cfr105.29 during their descent from the aircraft to the ground. Their reasoning and justification was never explained to me, but apparently not everyone was satisfied with the conditions that this jump run was conducted under. I am filing this report because I feel that everything I did on my end as PIC was safe, legal and appropriate. From my advantage, the drop zone where the parachuting was conducted was completely visible from the start of the jump, through the descent, and until the final jumper had reached the ground. However, someone felt otherwise so I found it necessary to fill out this report. What this person objected to exactly I never found out or even talked with him. It was through another pilot talking to this person I became aware of the objection.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA DROPPING JUMPERS IN SKYDIVING OP IN SEA AIRSPACE DISPUTES GND OBSERVERS OBJECTION CONCERNING SAFETY OF OP WITH REGARDS TO WX CEILING AND CLOUD COVER.

Narrative: I WAS FLYING JUMPERS FOR SKYDIVING CLUB. AT XA00 LCL, I FLEW A GROUP OF SKYDIVERS TO APPROX 5000 FT MSL WHERE I OPENED THE DOOR TO CHK THE CONDITIONS OVER THE DROP ZONE. THE FIRST JUMPER WAS A STATIC LINE JUMP AND THE DROP ZONE WAS CLRLY VISIBLE. I GAVE THE SIGNAL TO RELEASE THE JUMPER AND ALL WENT WELL. THEN, OFF TO THE W, I SAW A CEILING OF OVCST APCHING. I ADVISED SEATTLE APCH THAT I WOULD DISCONTINUE DROPPING OVER SHN. HOWEVER, AFTER TURNING BACK OVER THE DROP ZONE, I REALIZED THAT THE OVCST CEILING HAD NOT YET REACHED THE ACFT, LEAVING THE DROP ZONE UNOBSCURED. I ASKED SEATTLE APCH IF I COULD COMMENCE THE DROP AND THEY APPROVED. SUBSEQUENTLY THE 3 JUMPERS DEPARTED THE ACFT WHERE THEY PARACHUTED SAFELY TO THE GND. AT ALL TIMES, THE JUMPERS ADHERED TO 14CFR105.29 (CLOUD CLRNCS). THE PROB LIES WITH AN OBSERVER ON THE GND WHO CONTENDS THAT THE JUMPERS DID NOT ADHERE WITH 14CFR105.29 DURING THEIR DSCNT FROM THE ACFT TO THE GND. THEIR REASONING AND JUSTIFICATION WAS NEVER EXPLAINED TO ME, BUT APPARENTLY NOT EVERYONE WAS SATISFIED WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THIS JUMP RUN WAS CONDUCTED UNDER. I AM FILING THIS RPT BECAUSE I FEEL THAT EVERYTHING I DID ON MY END AS PIC WAS SAFE, LEGAL AND APPROPRIATE. FROM MY ADVANTAGE, THE DROP ZONE WHERE THE PARACHUTING WAS CONDUCTED WAS COMPLETELY VISIBLE FROM THE START OF THE JUMP, THROUGH THE DSCNT, AND UNTIL THE FINAL JUMPER HAD REACHED THE GND. HOWEVER, SOMEONE FELT OTHERWISE SO I FOUND IT NECESSARY TO FILL OUT THIS RPT. WHAT THIS PERSON OBJECTED TO EXACTLY I NEVER FOUND OUT OR EVEN TALKED WITH HIM. IT WAS THROUGH ANOTHER PLT TALKING TO THIS PERSON I BECAME AWARE OF THE OBJECTION.

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.