Narrative:

At fxe the personnel from FAA FSDO 17 conducted a ramp inspection. After inspection of the aircraft flight log, the FAA was concerned about the date the aircraft was last weighed, the time of the next inspection due, and discovered discrepancies found to be written in the flight log about 2 weeks prior to this flight. Aircraft operated under far 91 are not required to be re-weighed, only calculations made for any changes to weight and balance. The aircraft log showed an inspection due, but this inspection had been changed in the lear 35 factory maintenance program and no one had changed the due time in the aircraft log. This was confirmed prior to departing on the trip/training flight. This aircraft is operated under far 91 with no MEL. Company procedure had always been to provide any discrepancies to the aircraft/maintenance manager which must be corrected prior to the next flight. My understanding of far 91 maintenance requirements was that there was no provision or requirement for a discrepancy log to be kept separate from the maintenance records, and there was also no provision or requirement for the company which maintained the aircraft to record maintenance in other form than the aircraft maintenance log. These discrepancies had been repaired and recorded in the work order of the company providing the maintenance. It was my understanding that a work order is considered part of the maintenance records of the aircraft. I did not see these discrepancies recorded in the flight log prior to the flight. I should have, but since recording discrepancies in the aircraft log was not the normal company policy, since the aircraft is operated under far part 91 with no MEL, there can be no discrepancies prior to flight, I did not. The preflight of the aircraft showed no discrepancies, and the flight log showed no maintenance due. The aircraft was airworthy and all maintenance requirements were properly performed. The discrepancies were corrected and recorded in the work order of the maintenance company, but since these discrepancies were incorrectly recorded in the aircraft log they should have been signed off prior to flight.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RANDOM ACFT RAMP CHK.

Narrative: AT FXE THE PERSONNEL FROM FAA FSDO 17 CONDUCTED A RAMP INSPECTION. AFTER INSPECTION OF THE ACFT FLT LOG, THE FAA WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE DATE THE ACFT WAS LAST WEIGHED, THE TIME OF THE NEXT INSPECTION DUE, AND DISCOVERED DISCREPANCIES FOUND TO BE WRITTEN IN THE FLT LOG ABOUT 2 WKS PRIOR TO THIS FLT. ACFT OPERATED UNDER FAR 91 ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE RE-WEIGHED, ONLY CALCULATIONS MADE FOR ANY CHANGES TO WT AND BAL. THE ACFT LOG SHOWED AN INSPECTION DUE, BUT THIS INSPECTION HAD BEEN CHANGED IN THE LEAR 35 FACTORY MAINT PROGRAM AND NO ONE HAD CHANGED THE DUE TIME IN THE ACFT LOG. THIS WAS CONFIRMED PRIOR TO DEPARTING ON THE TRIP/TRAINING FLT. THIS ACFT IS OPERATED UNDER FAR 91 WITH NO MEL. COMPANY PROC HAD ALWAYS BEEN TO PROVIDE ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ACFT/MAINT MGR WHICH MUST BE CORRECTED PRIOR TO THE NEXT FLT. MY UNDERSTANDING OF FAR 91 MAINT REQUIREMENTS WAS THAT THERE WAS NO PROVISION OR REQUIREMENT FOR A DISCREPANCY LOG TO BE KEPT SEPARATE FROM THE MAINT RECORDS, AND THERE WAS ALSO NO PROVISION OR REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMPANY WHICH MAINTAINED THE ACFT TO RECORD MAINT IN OTHER FORM THAN THE ACFT MAINT LOG. THESE DISCREPANCIES HAD BEEN REPAIRED AND RECORDED IN THE WORK ORDER OF THE COMPANY PROVIDING THE MAINT. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT A WORK ORDER IS CONSIDERED PART OF THE MAINT RECORDS OF THE ACFT. I DID NOT SEE THESE DISCREPANCIES RECORDED IN THE FLT LOG PRIOR TO THE FLT. I SHOULD HAVE, BUT SINCE RECORDING DISCREPANCIES IN THE ACFT LOG WAS NOT THE NORMAL COMPANY POLICY, SINCE THE ACFT IS OPERATED UNDER FAR PART 91 WITH NO MEL, THERE CAN BE NO DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO FLT, I DID NOT. THE PREFLT OF THE ACFT SHOWED NO DISCREPANCIES, AND THE FLT LOG SHOWED NO MAINT DUE. THE ACFT WAS AIRWORTHY AND ALL MAINT REQUIREMENTS WERE PROPERLY PERFORMED. THE DISCREPANCIES WERE CORRECTED AND RECORDED IN THE WORK ORDER OF THE MAINT COMPANY, BUT SINCE THESE DISCREPANCIES WERE INCORRECTLY RECORDED IN THE ACFT LOG THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN SIGNED OFF PRIOR TO FLT.

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.