Narrative:

After unloading the aircraft, 2 FAA inspectors approached us for a ramp check. The first thing they asked to see was our weight and balance. I showed it to them, pointing out the different parts (total weight, cargo weight, center of gravity limits, etc). 1 inspector asked if that was it. I said yes. He asked to see how I arrived at these figures so I showed him our weight and balance graph. What's this, he asked! I said, it's our weight and balance graph derived from the lear jet weight and balance plotter. He replied that this was no bleeping lear jet graph.' I personally know the guy who designed this 17 yrs ago and it has nothing to do with lear jet. He then wanted to see a second copy of the weight and balance figures. We are not required to have a second copy. He didn't like that answer. He wanted to know if our poi approved these procedures. We wouldn't be using if he didn't, I said. Still frustrated, he asked to see our licenses and aircraft documents. The first officer arrived back from the FBO and told the inspectors that we were late and needed to go. He said fine, just let me finish. He then asked to see our operations specifications. The first officer again said to the inspector that we were late and that he could not hold us up. The inspector told him to go ahead and get in and get ready to go. He got in, still arguing that they couldn't hold us up. The first officer proceeded to start the engines with me and the inspectors in the doorway. He was astounded that a first officer would be allowed to start engines without the captain in the cockpit with him, plus he didn't see him use a checklist. Some of our check airmen allow us to perform a task and then use the checklist to back it up. This is probably what the first officer was doing here, but didn't get a chance to before the inspector berated him. I got the first officer to shut down the left engine so I could talk to the inspector. I told him that we don't have a policy against first officer starting the engines. The first officer again told the inspector that we needed to leave. The inspector then said that if he wanted to continue to argue with him they could go inside and he would violate him right then and there. I asked the inspector if there was a problem, he said no. I asked for his name and number so I could turn it in to our company per policy. He said that he would be talking with them before I could. I again asked if there was a problem and he said no, and walked away. The inspector seemed to be looking for an argument the moment he walked up and started asking questions. The first officer did not help matters by arguing with him. By the time we got home the first officer had been on duty for 13.6 or 13.7 hours. He was concerned about not getting 10 hours rest before coming back on duty that night. That is why he was stressing on the need to leave. We were also 20-30 mins behind our assigned schedule. The argument seemed to be confined between the inspector and the first officer. There didn't seem to be anything I could do to step between them, nor did the other inspector attempt to step in and help. To further update this report, it seems as if the persons who ramp checked us may not be FAA employees. Our poi is checking up on him. His identify number does not match anyone in mia! Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states he has heard that the FAA inspector is a part 121 aci, not part 135. He overstepped his authority/authorized. Company poi has spoken with the aci and there will be no further action. Captain indicated he has had rather specific conversations with the first officer as to proper conduct when experiencing a ramp check. His behavior has improved.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PART 135 CARGO FLT IS GIVEN RAMP CHK. ARGUMENT ENSUES BTWN ACI AND FO, ACI CLAIMS WT AND BAL PAPERS DO NOT BELONG TO THE LEAR JET.

Narrative: AFTER UNLOADING THE ACFT, 2 FAA INSPECTORS APCHED US FOR A RAMP CHK. THE FIRST THING THEY ASKED TO SEE WAS OUR WT AND BAL. I SHOWED IT TO THEM, POINTING OUT THE DIFFERENT PARTS (TOTAL WT, CARGO WT, CTR OF GRAVITY LIMITS, ETC). 1 INSPECTOR ASKED IF THAT WAS IT. I SAID YES. HE ASKED TO SEE HOW I ARRIVED AT THESE FIGURES SO I SHOWED HIM OUR WT AND BAL GRAPH. WHAT'S THIS, HE ASKED! I SAID, IT'S OUR WT AND BAL GRAPH DERIVED FROM THE LEAR JET WT AND BAL PLOTTER. HE REPLIED THAT THIS WAS NO BLEEPING LEAR JET GRAPH.' I PERSONALLY KNOW THE GUY WHO DESIGNED THIS 17 YRS AGO AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LEAR JET. HE THEN WANTED TO SEE A SECOND COPY OF THE WT AND BAL FIGURES. WE ARE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE A SECOND COPY. HE DIDN'T LIKE THAT ANSWER. HE WANTED TO KNOW IF OUR POI APPROVED THESE PROCS. WE WOULDN'T BE USING IF HE DIDN'T, I SAID. STILL FRUSTRATED, HE ASKED TO SEE OUR LICENSES AND ACFT DOCUMENTS. THE FO ARRIVED BACK FROM THE FBO AND TOLD THE INSPECTORS THAT WE WERE LATE AND NEEDED TO GO. HE SAID FINE, JUST LET ME FINISH. HE THEN ASKED TO SEE OUR OPS SPECS. THE FO AGAIN SAID TO THE INSPECTOR THAT WE WERE LATE AND THAT HE COULD NOT HOLD US UP. THE INSPECTOR TOLD HIM TO GO AHEAD AND GET IN AND GET READY TO GO. HE GOT IN, STILL ARGUING THAT THEY COULDN'T HOLD US UP. THE FO PROCEEDED TO START THE ENGS WITH ME AND THE INSPECTORS IN THE DOORWAY. HE WAS ASTOUNDED THAT A FO WOULD BE ALLOWED TO START ENGS WITHOUT THE CAPT IN THE COCKPIT WITH HIM, PLUS HE DIDN'T SEE HIM USE A CHKLIST. SOME OF OUR CHK AIRMEN ALLOW US TO PERFORM A TASK AND THEN USE THE CHKLIST TO BACK IT UP. THIS IS PROBABLY WHAT THE FO WAS DOING HERE, BUT DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO BEFORE THE INSPECTOR BERATED HIM. I GOT THE FO TO SHUT DOWN THE L ENG SO I COULD TALK TO THE INSPECTOR. I TOLD HIM THAT WE DON'T HAVE A POLICY AGAINST FO STARTING THE ENGS. THE FO AGAIN TOLD THE INSPECTOR THAT WE NEEDED TO LEAVE. THE INSPECTOR THEN SAID THAT IF HE WANTED TO CONTINUE TO ARGUE WITH HIM THEY COULD GO INSIDE AND HE WOULD VIOLATE HIM RIGHT THEN AND THERE. I ASKED THE INSPECTOR IF THERE WAS A PROB, HE SAID NO. I ASKED FOR HIS NAME AND NUMBER SO I COULD TURN IT IN TO OUR COMPANY PER POLICY. HE SAID THAT HE WOULD BE TALKING WITH THEM BEFORE I COULD. I AGAIN ASKED IF THERE WAS A PROB AND HE SAID NO, AND WALKED AWAY. THE INSPECTOR SEEMED TO BE LOOKING FOR AN ARGUMENT THE MOMENT HE WALKED UP AND STARTED ASKING QUESTIONS. THE FO DID NOT HELP MATTERS BY ARGUING WITH HIM. BY THE TIME WE GOT HOME THE FO HAD BEEN ON DUTY FOR 13.6 OR 13.7 HRS. HE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT NOT GETTING 10 HRS REST BEFORE COMING BACK ON DUTY THAT NIGHT. THAT IS WHY HE WAS STRESSING ON THE NEED TO LEAVE. WE WERE ALSO 20-30 MINS BEHIND OUR ASSIGNED SCHEDULE. THE ARGUMENT SEEMED TO BE CONFINED BTWN THE INSPECTOR AND THE FO. THERE DIDN'T SEEM TO BE ANYTHING I COULD DO TO STEP BTWN THEM, NOR DID THE OTHER INSPECTOR ATTEMPT TO STEP IN AND HELP. TO FURTHER UPDATE THIS RPT, IT SEEMS AS IF THE PERSONS WHO RAMP CHKED US MAY NOT BE FAA EMPLOYEES. OUR POI IS CHKING UP ON HIM. HIS IDENT NUMBER DOES NOT MATCH ANYONE IN MIA! CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES HE HAS HEARD THAT THE FAA INSPECTOR IS A PART 121 ACI, NOT PART 135. HE OVERSTEPPED HIS AUTH. COMPANY POI HAS SPOKEN WITH THE ACI AND THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER ACTION. CAPT INDICATED HE HAS HAD RATHER SPECIFIC CONVERSATIONS WITH THE FO AS TO PROPER CONDUCT WHEN EXPERIENCING A RAMP CHK. HIS BEHAVIOR HAS IMPROVED.

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.