FAA Enforcement Actions Webinar - Join the discussion
FAA enforcement action is something we all wish to avoid. In this webinar we discussed ways to avoid making mistakes that could cause enforcement actions, along with a discussion on what to do if you are ever involved in an enforcement action. Lean concepts that could help you keep from making matters worse if you receive a letter of investigation.
Join the discussion and post your comments.
Watch the Webinar
Post a Question or Discuss this Issue
This forum page is a great opportunity to have your questions and voice heard on this topic while seeing what your peers are thinking and doing. Come to AskBob to see who agrees with your views or not. Please add you voice on AskBob for this unique event and opportunity. Post a question or opinion for our panel or start a discussion on this topic by clicking here
The Powerpoint is attached and may be downloaded.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Webinar-9-16-10.pdf | 309.05 KB |
Email this pageLoretta responds: The question re how long an action is on your record: (expunction applies to individuals and not companies): informal actions - no record;
administrative action (from Flight Standards) - record expunged after two years;
legal actions (from FAA Counsel) - suspensions and civil penalties - expunged after 5 years;
revocations - never expunged.
No actions (where matter is dropped) are expunged within 60 days.
To Loretta's response to the nolo contendere question: Nolo is a plea of no contest. It's a plea where the defendant neither admits nor disputes a charge, serving as an alternative to a pleading of guilty or not guilty.
A no contest plea, while not technically a guilty plea, has the same immediate effect as a guilty plea, and is usually often offered as a part of a plea bargain.
Interpolating her response, would it be safe to say a plea of nolo, as it applies here, only applies to legal actions? As opposed to informal and administrative...
__________________
May you always have a tail wind and keep your scarf out of your rudder...
Loretta adds:
There are no provisions in FAA actions for pleas of no contest, or nolo contendere. However, civil penalty cases can sometimes be settled for a "compromise" order, which would require payment of a civil penalty but no finding of violation.
In rare cases, the FAA may allow settlement of a certificate action for a deferred suspension where, if specified actions were taken (usually additional training), no suspension would be imposed but there would be a record of violation.
In most certificate actions, there is no opportunity for a plea comparable to no contest - if an airman accepts a suspension in settlement, he or she would serve the period of suspension and there would be a violation on his/her record.
Informal and administrative actions are not adjudications so there are no pleas.
Q: Is there training available to the mec's on their responsibilities vs the owner operator's responsibilities? Or How to do proper ""Return to Service"" paper work?
Not really a simple or short answer to this one. It is the struggle the maintenance community has been fighting for years. You are responsible for the airworthiness of every component and for the total aircraft when you release it to the owner. The owner can decide what gets done but you must maintain control on if the aircraft is returned to the owner in a airworthy or unairworthy condition. This dictates your log entry between simply recording the work you performed (unairworthy) and supplying a Return to Service (Airworthy).
I have been away from the FBO for 20+ years so lets hear some advice from the community. And as Loretta suggests in the Webinar, If you see a conflict brewing document exactly what you did, what you saw, and why you made the logbook entries you did.
There's no such thing as "Return to Service" paperwork! FAR Part 43.9 and 43.11 are all you need to know and obey...
__________________
May you always have a tail wind and keep your scarf out of your rudder...
This is a critical discussion for every working mechanic.I would give this webinar as a gift to every A&P I know. It could save their job, their reputation and their credibility. We need more information like this . Thanks Bob for making it happen. Thanks for John and Loretta for their wisdom. Worth every minute of the 30 minutes to listen
Posted by Robin Lamar via LinkedIn
Relevent article in DOM Magazine says:
If you are a DOM for a Part 135 air carrier, you have likely signed an airworthiness release to return an aircraft to service after an inspection or repair. You may have even done so without doing any of the actual work, but rather relying upon other mechanics that actually performed the inspection or repair. However, as a recent opinion issued by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) shows, you may be signing the airworthiness release at your own peril.
http://www.dommagazine.com/Newsletter_stories/legalcornerdomsrelianceonw...
I am trying to make the public aware of the misuse of FAA emergency revocation. the following links to You tube made by someone else. says it all
If you want to see how much power a single FAA inspector has to unilaterally destroy a business, check this out:
FAA Air Trek deposition Part 1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0W_42CGdgrw
FAA Air Trek deposition Part 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UF7XRmlqvT0&feature=related
Q: If you get the equivalent of a nolo contendre how long will it stay in the file?