Narrative:

2 events, same flight, same day. Event #1) I fly the traffic watch at 1200 ft MSL as directed by a contract entered into by my company and the tower and approach control for the past 2 yrs. It wasn't until a terminated disgruntled employee called the FAA hotline on me (event #2) for unsafe altitude and attitude that the local FSDO said there might be an inadvertent violation here, due to the fact that you must maintain 1000 ft AGL in congested areas. My altitude assigned puts me below 1000 ft AGL. Corrective action here would be to get the different branches of the FAA to communicate with each other. Event #2) the aforementioned disgruntled employee called the FAA hotline on me for unsafe altitude and attitude 12 days after he had a +/-20 min flight with me in which he became airsick. This hotline call came on the heels of his termination with the traffic watch company in which he also filed numerous lawsuits, including affirmative action, suing the company, the owner of the aircraft, and me, the pilot. The local FSDO wants to violate me on the fabrication of lies by this nonaviator, airsick, scared, individual. I have done no wrong, adhered to safety regulations, and was really quite friendly and accommodating to this individual trying to get him on the ground as soon as possible so I wouldn't have to clean vomit out of my airplane. How can a nonaviator that's airsick with no witnesses carry enough clout to warrant a full blown investigation. Do we not have enough problems to solve using our tax money than spin the FAA's wheels on lies! The individual could not even pin down the date he flew with me. Corrective action would be to make it not so easy to just call up the hotline for personal reasons -- and instruct our FAA FSDO personnel to not have the attitude of guilty until proven innocent.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF TFC WATCH ACFT WAS FLYING BELOW THE MSA UNDER AN AGREEMENT WITH ATC.

Narrative: 2 EVENTS, SAME FLT, SAME DAY. EVENT #1) I FLY THE TFC WATCH AT 1200 FT MSL AS DIRECTED BY A CONTRACT ENTERED INTO BY MY COMPANY AND THE TWR AND APCH CTL FOR THE PAST 2 YRS. IT WASN'T UNTIL A TERMINATED DISGRUNTLED EMPLOYEE CALLED THE FAA HOTLINE ON ME (EVENT #2) FOR UNSAFE ALT AND ATTITUDE THAT THE LCL FSDO SAID THERE MIGHT BE AN INADVERTENT VIOLATION HERE, DUE TO THE FACT THAT YOU MUST MAINTAIN 1000 FT AGL IN CONGESTED AREAS. MY ALT ASSIGNED PUTS ME BELOW 1000 FT AGL. CORRECTIVE ACTION HERE WOULD BE TO GET THE DIFFERENT BRANCHES OF THE FAA TO COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER. EVENT #2) THE AFOREMENTIONED DISGRUNTLED EMPLOYEE CALLED THE FAA HOTLINE ON ME FOR UNSAFE ALT AND ATTITUDE 12 DAYS AFTER HE HAD A +/-20 MIN FLT WITH ME IN WHICH HE BECAME AIRSICK. THIS HOTLINE CALL CAME ON THE HEELS OF HIS TERMINATION WITH THE TFC WATCH COMPANY IN WHICH HE ALSO FILED NUMEROUS LAWSUITS, INCLUDING AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, SUING THE COMPANY, THE OWNER OF THE ACFT, AND ME, THE PLT. THE LCL FSDO WANTS TO VIOLATE ME ON THE FABRICATION OF LIES BY THIS NONAVIATOR, AIRSICK, SCARED, INDIVIDUAL. I HAVE DONE NO WRONG, ADHERED TO SAFETY REGS, AND WAS REALLY QUITE FRIENDLY AND ACCOMMODATING TO THIS INDIVIDUAL TRYING TO GET HIM ON THE GND ASAP SO I WOULDN'T HAVE TO CLEAN VOMIT OUT OF MY AIRPLANE. HOW CAN A NONAVIATOR THAT'S AIRSICK WITH NO WITNESSES CARRY ENOUGH CLOUT TO WARRANT A FULL BLOWN INVESTIGATION. DO WE NOT HAVE ENOUGH PROBS TO SOLVE USING OUR TAX MONEY THAN SPIN THE FAA'S WHEELS ON LIES! THE INDIVIDUAL COULD NOT EVEN PIN DOWN THE DATE HE FLEW WITH ME. CORRECTIVE ACTION WOULD BE TO MAKE IT NOT SO EASY TO JUST CALL UP THE HOTLINE FOR PERSONAL REASONS -- AND INSTRUCT OUR FAA FSDO PERSONNEL TO NOT HAVE THE ATTITUDE OF GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT.

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.