Narrative:

On jul/sun/06; as an a&P/ia; I completed an annual inspection on a C210 belonging to mr X. Mr X is the object of an FAA witch hunt which resulted in he having to complete a check ride with an FAA flight pilot examiner. The examiner told him that in addition to the examiners; an FAA airworthiness would inspect his airplane; logbooks and files. There is no question that if an expert wants to; he can find something wrong with the airplane; logbooks or paperwork; no matter how minor. This would include my entries. In view of the problems mr X is having with the local FSDO; I could have refused to be of service to him; thus relieving myself of possible scrutiny and exposure. But instead of passing the problem off to others and being a man of high integrity; I spent over 2 weeks going over the airplane; completely revising the airworthiness directives and painstakingly completing the logbook entries. But like I said; I can be sure that if the wrong airworthiness inspector is on the scene he can always find some discrepancy; no matter how minor. I say that because (based on) of my 57 yrs in the business. I have even observed FAA representatives disagreeing with each other on things like the interpretation of the regulations and other minor matters of administrative position. Having said all that; I can state with utmost certainty that if an error in my work is uncovered it will be the result of an inadvertent and unintentional error; and not negligence. It is for the above reasons that I am completing this NASA report. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated the owner of the airplane failed an instrument check ride due to not having the proper approach plate. The FAA inspector also told the owner that at the next check ride the airplane will be inspected by 2 FAA safety inspectors before flight. The 2 inspectors will make an inspection of the airplane; including logbooks and files. The reporter is concerned that due to what he feels is a prejudicial attitude of the inspectors; they will absolutely find something wrong with the airplane; logbooks or files. The reporter has annually inspected this airplane for yrs and the airplane is well maintained and can pass any normal inspection; but not what the reporter believes is a witch hunt.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A C210 WAS JUST RELEASED FROM ANNUAL INSPECTION. INSPECTOR CONCERNED THAT FAA SAFETY INSPECTOR MAY FIND FAULT WITH ACFT DUE TO A PERCEIVED PREJUDICIAL ATTITUDE TOWARD THE ACFT OWNER.

Narrative: ON JUL/SUN/06; AS AN A&P/IA; I COMPLETED AN ANNUAL INSPECTION ON A C210 BELONGING TO MR X. MR X IS THE OBJECT OF AN FAA WITCH HUNT WHICH RESULTED IN HE HAVING TO COMPLETE A CHK RIDE WITH AN FAA FLT PLT EXAMINER. THE EXAMINER TOLD HIM THAT IN ADDITION TO THE EXAMINERS; AN FAA AIRWORTHINESS WOULD INSPECT HIS AIRPLANE; LOGBOOKS AND FILES. THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT IF AN EXPERT WANTS TO; HE CAN FIND SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE AIRPLANE; LOGBOOKS OR PAPERWORK; NO MATTER HOW MINOR. THIS WOULD INCLUDE MY ENTRIES. IN VIEW OF THE PROBS MR X IS HAVING WITH THE LCL FSDO; I COULD HAVE REFUSED TO BE OF SVC TO HIM; THUS RELIEVING MYSELF OF POSSIBLE SCRUTINY AND EXPOSURE. BUT INSTEAD OF PASSING THE PROB OFF TO OTHERS AND BEING A MAN OF HIGH INTEGRITY; I SPENT OVER 2 WKS GOING OVER THE AIRPLANE; COMPLETELY REVISING THE AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES AND PAINSTAKINGLY COMPLETING THE LOGBOOK ENTRIES. BUT LIKE I SAID; I CAN BE SURE THAT IF THE WRONG AIRWORTHINESS INSPECTOR IS ON THE SCENE HE CAN ALWAYS FIND SOME DISCREPANCY; NO MATTER HOW MINOR. I SAY THAT BECAUSE (BASED ON) OF MY 57 YRS IN THE BUSINESS. I HAVE EVEN OBSERVED FAA REPRESENTATIVES DISAGREEING WITH EACH OTHER ON THINGS LIKE THE INTERP OF THE REGS AND OTHER MINOR MATTERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE POSITION. HAVING SAID ALL THAT; I CAN STATE WITH UTMOST CERTAINTY THAT IF AN ERROR IN MY WORK IS UNCOVERED IT WILL BE THE RESULT OF AN INADVERTENT AND UNINTENTIONAL ERROR; AND NOT NEGLIGENCE. IT IS FOR THE ABOVE REASONS THAT I AM COMPLETING THIS NASA RPT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE OWNER OF THE AIRPLANE FAILED AN INST CHK RIDE DUE TO NOT HAVING THE PROPER APCH PLATE. THE FAA INSPECTOR ALSO TOLD THE OWNER THAT AT THE NEXT CHK RIDE THE AIRPLANE WILL BE INSPECTED BY 2 FAA SAFETY INSPECTORS BEFORE FLT. THE 2 INSPECTORS WILL MAKE AN INSPECTION OF THE AIRPLANE; INCLUDING LOGBOOKS AND FILES. THE RPTR IS CONCERNED THAT DUE TO WHAT HE FEELS IS A PREJUDICIAL ATTITUDE OF THE INSPECTORS; THEY WILL ABSOLUTELY FIND SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE AIRPLANE; LOGBOOKS OR FILES. THE RPTR HAS ANNUALLY INSPECTED THIS AIRPLANE FOR YRS AND THE AIRPLANE IS WELL MAINTAINED AND CAN PASS ANY NORMAL INSPECTION; BUT NOT WHAT THE RPTR BELIEVES IS A WITCH HUNT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.