CFI needs a BFR?

[A Squared]

I just got off the phone with the CLT FSDO and they are saying that any additional RATING qualifies as a BFR. i.e. instructor RATING. Someone clrify this for me before I go blow $100 bucks on a stupid BFR.

Your FSDO is wrong. Go back and ask the inspector who told you that to write and sign an official legal interpretation that says what he told you. He won't. he is not authorized to do that. The folks who are authorized to issue official binding legal interpretations (FAA counsel) say it doesn't count.

When you're in front of the NTSB judge, it's going to be the legal folks you are facing, not the inspector. They say no. Who's word do you want to take?

 

[BGSkyGuy]

When you're in front of the NTSB judge, it's going to be the legal folks you are facing, not the inspector. They say no. Who's word do you want to take?[/quote]

No offense but I'm going to take the FSDO's word over a pilot forum this time. The back of my instructor ticket says the word ratings. You can argue about it not being a pilot certificate but it sure as h$ll isn't a CDL. To be honest this whole thing is making my head spin. I'm just a stupid pilot.....

 

[A Squared]

No offense but I'm going to take the FSDO's word over a pilot forum this time. The back of my instructor ticket says the word ratings. You can argue about it not being a pilot certificate but it sure as h$ll isn't a CDL. To be honest this whole thing is making my head spin. I'm just a stupid pilot.....

OK. you have official guidance that tells you that it's not valid.

You have a lucid explanation of why it's not considered valid.

You have an example of somone who got an enforcement action because it wasn't valid.

and you have an explanation why the answer you got from the FSDO is not an official legal opinion.

Yet you're going to ignore that.

If you're interested in understanding, read on, maybe I can put it in a way that makes sense to you. If you're absolutely not interested in learning something new, which could save you some grief, please skip the next part as it will be a waste of your time:

Your instructor certificate is not a pilot certificate. Take it out of you pocket. Look at it. The only place it says "pilot" is the part where ir reminds you that it's only valid if accompanied by a *pilot* certificate. Additionally, the regulations consistently distinguish between a pilot certificate and an instructor certificate. This is why they are two seperate pieces of plstic. because they are not one and the same. A flight instructor certificate is no more a pilot certificate than is a flight engineer certificate or a flight navigator certificate, or a ground instructor certificate.

Now, the regulations specify a PILOT cerificate, rating or operating privelege. Is a flight instructor certificate a pilot certificate. Absolutely not. it's a flight instructor certificate. Is a rating on your instructor certificate a pilot rating? again, absolutely not. pilot ratings are those ratings on your pilot certifcate. the ratings on you flight instructor certificate are flight instructor ratings.

DOes a fiight instructor certificate give you *any* pilot operating priveleges? again, absolutely not. Go down to your local FBO and attempt to rent an airplane with only your flight instructor certificate. They'll laugh at you. Next time you're ramp chacked, only show the inspector your flight instructor certificate. He'll proably laugh too, unless you persist, they he'll proably start an enforcement proceeding against you.

A CFI checkride, whether initial or not doesn't give you any pilot certificate, pilot rating or pilot operating privilege. That's what is required by the regulation.

 

[avbug]

No offense but I'm going to take the FSDO's word over a pilot forum this time. The back of my instructor ticket says the word ratings. You can argue about it not being a pilot certificate but it sure as h$ll isn't a CDL. To be honest this whole thing is making my head spin. I'm just a stupid pilot.....

Based on your statements, the only accurate thing you said was the incomplete last sentence. You believe the FSDO. Believe the tooth fairey and the easter bunny too. I hear they're very accurate, and quite authoritative. Almost as much as what you'll get at the FSDO level...which isn't granted the authority to interpret regulation.

Ignorance of the regulation is no excuse.

 

[Amish RakeFight]

No offense but I'm going to take the FSDO's word over a pilot forum this time. The back of my instructor ticket says the word ratings. You can argue about it not being a pilot certificate but it sure as h$ll isn't a CDL. To be honest this whole thing is making my head spin. I'm just a stupid pilot.....

Based on your statements, the only accurate thing you said was the incomplete last sentence. You believe the FSDO. Believe the tooth fairey and the easter bunny too. I hear they're very accurate, and quite authoritative. Almost as much as what you'll get at the FSDO level...which isn't granted the authority to interpret regulation.



.
Ignorance of the regulation is no excuse.

 

[toflyseeme]

O.K. guys, here's ther real reason the CFI initial and CFI add-ons dont qualify as a FR. Check the PTS.....the checkrides for other "ratings(pvt.,comm., instr.,etc) have to demonstrate "pilot proficiency." The CFI tickets have to demonstrate "instructional knowledge" only. Theoretically the CFI applicant could demonstrate a maneuver and be all over the sky, yet be able to teach it very well to a student.

 

[CFIse]

No offense but I'm going to take the FSDO's word over a pilot forum this time. The back of my instructor ticket says the word ratings. You can argue about it not being a pilot certificate but it sure as h$ll isn't a CDL. To be honest this whole thing is making my head spin. I'm just a stupid pilot.....

If you can get the FSDO inspector to put it in writing then it'll probably help you get off from a first offense. However - if it's not in writing then it's not worth the paper it's not written on.

You won't get it in writing because FSDO inspectors rarely put anything in writing they don't have to. If you insist, the inspector you talked to will go away and check what he/she is saying is correct before sending you the letter, at which point they will find out they were wrong and they won't give you the answer you want in writing.

So right now you have a verbal from a FSDO inspector that is counter to long-standing interpretation.

I know how this works - my boss once wanted to get around all that sticky Part 135 regulation stuff and start transporting people under the guise of providing them with instruction. God Bless them the FSDO told him this was OK, multiple times, on the phone. I told him none of the instructors would be flying these trips without written confirmation. He could never get it, the FSDO wouldn't even respond to his e-mails, they'd pick up the phone and call him back. He never got anything in writing to support the interpretation, and we never flew any trips.

 

[BGSkyGuy]

FSDO disagrees

I'm not trying to start a p!ssing match here but I called four different FSDO's this morning and every single one of them has made me feel like a dumb#ss for asking this question. I understand where you are coming from and that the language is vague in the reg but the fact remains that the people in charge of ramp checking me and enforcing this reg are telling me that I do not need a BFR. I have been told by each inspector that any additional FAA rating that involves a flight check constitutes a BFR. I have called the Charlotte, Greensboro, Cleveland, Detroit, and Columbus FSDO's and I feel confident in my response.

Now that I got that out of the way I would like to address several of your arguments. I would like to emphasize the fact that I do not want to start an argument only an intelligent discussion.

"You have official guidance that tells you it's not valid"
I also have five FAA Inspectors who tell me it is valid.

"You have a lucid explanation as to why it isn't valid"
True

"And you have an explanation why the answer you got from the FSDO is not an official legal opinion."
True, but as I stated above if the person in charge of ramping me says that I don't need a BFR then I tend to believe him. Especially when four of his coworkers tell me the same thing.

To be continued......

 

[FlySacto]

When you're in front of the NTSB judge, it's going to be the legal folks you are facing, not the inspector. They say no. Who's word do you want to take?

No offense but I'm going to take the FSDO's word over a pilot forum this time. The back of my instructor ticket says the word ratings. You can argue about it not being a pilot certificate but it sure as h$ll isn't a CDL. To be honest this whole thing is making my head spin. I'm just a stupid pilot.....[/quote]

You've got a pilot's certificate and an instructor's certificate. It'll be good in a future interview when you can explain the differences about the RATINGS on your PILOT certificate and your INSTRUCTOR certificate. I'd ask you in an interview to show me the words "flight review complete" in your logbook. Then I'd ask you why you were flying without a flight review. Then I'd ask you to leave. Then you could call your FSDO and tell them I suck and don't have a clue. Wanna go find the DPE who did your INSTRUCTOR rating and ask him/her to write those magic words in your logbook and date them?

Go spend your $100 and save yourself some future grief dude!

 

[FlySacto]

I'm not trying to start a p!ssing match here but I called four different FSDO's this morning and every single one of them has made me feel like a dumb#ss for asking this question. I understand where you are coming from and that the language is vague in the reg but the fact remains that the people in charge of ramp checking me and enforcing this reg are telling me that I do not need a BFR. I have been told by each inspector that any additional FAA rating that involves a flight check constitutes a BFR. I have called the Charlotte, Greensboro, Cleveland, Detroit, and Columbus FSDO's and I feel confident in my response.


To be continued......

Here's the key, Communication. You can, during an instructor checkride, also demonstrate your PILOT proficiency and have it DOCUMENTED along with the pass/fail of the INSTRUCTOR rating. EVERYONE has agreed, and even your FSDO folks have told you that a instructor checkride can also be a flight review. Have you communicated to those FSDO folks that you don't have any documentation that says you have a flight review complete? Call all of them back and ask them if you need to have any words like "BFR" or "flight review complete" somewhere in your logbook. If just one of them says yes then what are you going to do?

 

[nosehair]

people in charge of ramp checking me and enforcing this reg are telling me that I do not need a BFR. ....

Brewski, you are safe as long as you stay in your own backyard as far as the ramp checks go. It is true that most FSDO Inspectors won't go after an "undocumented" flight review... however, it is still illegal and could cause problems in an accident investigation and / or insurance claim.

...and you never know WHO you may run into in the big wide world of FAA ramp checks in other parts of the country.

Make your own informed decision.

 

[BGSkyGuy]

Here's the key, Communication. You can, during an instructor checkride, also demonstrate your PILOT proficiency and have it DOCUMENTED along with the pass/fail of the INSTRUCTOR rating. EVERYONE has agreed, and even your FSDO folks have told you that a instructor checkride can also be a flight review. Have you communicated to those FSDO folks that you don't have any documentation that says you have a flight review complete? Call all of them back and ask them if you need to have any words like "BFR" or "flight review complete" somewhere in your logbook. If just one of them says yes then what are you going to do?

The FSDO didn't say that it CAN count as a BFR they said that it DOES count as a BFR. I have been told five seperate times by five different inspectors that it fulfills the requirement of a BFR. If just one of them said differently I would tell you guys about. I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong here. On the contrary I'm trying to find out the truth. I have listened to all of your arguments and have called what I believe to be the final authority. If you feel that an FAA inspector doesn't have the right answer then tell me who does. I will call them as well. And if I am wrong I will be the first one to let you guys know about it. I will admit that all of you have VERY compelling arguments. But how can five different inspectors at five different FSDO's be wrong about this. Call your local FSDO. Ask them. If I am mistaken then I will gladly admit it.

 

[BGSkyGuy]

Brewski, you are safe as long as you stay in your own backyard as far as the ramp checks go. It is true that most FSDO Inspectors won't go after an "undocumented" flight review... however, it is still illegal and could cause problems in an accident investigation and / or insurance claim.

...and you never know WHO you may run into in the big wide world of FAA ramp checks in other parts of the country.

Make your own informed decision.

You raise a good point nose. And I am d$mn close to just going up for an hour and doing the BFR. The legality issue I am still not sure about, I'm trying to get ahold of someone at AOPA to see what they have to say about this whole thing. But I agree that it is a CYA type deal and I will probably just go do it.

By the way, who told you my nickname?

 

[A Squared]

I have listened to all of your arguments and have called what I believe to be the final authority.

Uhhhhh, that's just it. I'm not sure how many more times it has to be explained in how many different ways before it sinks in. An inspector at a FSDO is not a legal authority, not in any way shape or form.

If you feel that an FAA inspector doesn't have the right answer then tell me who does.

FAA legal counsel. FAA legal counsel is the only part of the FAA that has the authority to officially interepret regulations

Here's what FAA legal counsel has to say about the matter:

1 Aviation Plaza
Room 561
Jamaica, NY 11434

RE: Interpretation of FAR 61.56(d)

Dear Mr. Dennstaedt:

This is in response to your letter dated August 25, 2001, wherein you ask whether an airman can satisfy the flight review requirement under 14 C.F.R. (Federal Aviation Regulation [FAR]) 61.56 by passing a practical test to become a certified flight instructor (CFI), as required by FAR 61.183.

Under FAR 61.56(c)(1), one may not act as pilot-in-command of an aircraft unless, within the preceding 24 calendar months, he has "accomplished a flight review given in an aircraft for which that pilot is rated by an authorized instructor." Under FAR 61.56(c)(2), the airman must receive a logbook endorsement from the authorized instructor certifying that he has satisfactorily completed the review. Under FAR 61.56(a), a flight review must include: (1) a review of the current general operating and flight rules of Part 91; and (2) a review of those maneuvers and procedures that, at the discretion of the person giving the review, are necessary for the pilot to demonstrate the safe exercise of the privileges of the pilot certificate.

Under FAR 61.56(d), however, the flight review requirement of FAR 61.56(c)(1) does not apply to one who has "passed a pilot proficiency check conducted by an examiner, an approved pilot check airman, or a U.S. Armed Force, for a pilot certificate rating, or operating privilege."





The issue you raise is whether passing a practical test to become a CFI can fall within the exception to the flight review requirement that is provided by FAR 61.56(d). Under FAR 183(h), to be eligible for a flight instructor certificate or rating, the applicant must "pass the required practical test that is appropriate to the flight instructor rating sought." The FAA Practical Test Standards (PTS) for the airplane flight instructor examiner (sic) requires that the examiner ensure that the flight instructor applicant has the "ability to perform the procedures and maneuvers included in the standards to at least the commercial pilot skill level."

Thus, the instructor has broad discretion in conducting a flight review. A CFI practical test encompasses the demonstration of various basic maneuvers that an instructor is likely to cover in a flight review. Incorporating a flight review into the CFI practical test could be accomplished, therefore, with little, if any difficulty.

Accordingly, a CFI practical test will not per se fulfill the flight review requirement. A practical test for a CFI rating under FAR 61.183, taken within 24 months of a prior flight review, can readily meet the flight review requirement of FAR 61.56(d), however, if the examiner is satisfied that a flight review endorsement can be given. To ensure that the CFI applicant gets credit for successful completion of the flight review, however, he or she should ask the examiner to conduct the CFI oral and practical test so as to satisfy the flight review requirements as well, and to make a logbook endorsement for the flight review upon completion of the examination.

If you have additional inquiries, please contact Zachary M. Berman of this office at (718) 553-3258.

Sincerely,


Loretta E. Alkalay

As for those inspectors you talked to, well, as long as all your surveillance experiences are with those 5 guys, you should be OK. How are you going to guarentee that though? Have you stopped to think that you *could* have been switched to the guy sitting next to the guy you talked to and received an completely different answer? Especially if that guy knew the regs and had read the official interepretations form FAA counsel? So you have a little incident. A blown tire, not your fault and no damage, but it shuts down a runway for about 15 minutes. The FAA arrives to help. The fed very well may request to see your logbook (to be presented at a later time, assuming you're not carrying it with you) That is common, even in a inconsequential incident. I know pilots who have had thier logbook requested in this identical case; Blown tire, no damage. Anyway, this inspector is not one of the 5 you spoke with. This inspector has just read the previous official letter of interpretation from FAA legal counsel. How do you think this is going to go for you, if you don't have a flight review in the last 24 months?


Look, a previous poster wrote that a pilot he knew got a violation for this exact situation. Assuming that he's telling the truth, and we have no reason to beleive that he's not, why would you argue that a CFI check will count when pilots are getting violated because a CFI check doesn't count?

 

[FlySacto]

The FSDO didn't say that it CAN count as a BFR they said that it DOES count as a BFR. I have been told five seperate times by five different inspectors that it fulfills the requirement of a BFR. If just one of them said differently I would tell you guys about. I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong here. On the contrary I'm trying to find out the truth. I have listened to all of your arguments and have called what I believe to be the final authority. If you feel that an FAA inspector doesn't have the right answer then tell me who does. I will call them as well. And if I am wrong I will be the first one to let you guys know about it. I will admit that all of you have VERY compelling arguments. But how can five different inspectors at five different FSDO's be wrong about this. Call your local FSDO. Ask them. If I am mistaken then I will gladly admit it.

I'll ask you again. Did you tell them you don't have the words "flight review complete" in an endorsement? Get one inspector with a problem and you've got a problem. Read 61.56 line for line, tell us where your covered, and convince all of us trying to help you out with this that you've got a flight review. I'm not offended in any way about this and I hope your not! This whole flying business is about knowing your stuff and a double dose of CYA. If you just read 61.56(d) and then picture yourself in a court hearing with that paragraph read out loud then:

"Mr. (insert your name here), what was the purpose of your meeting with the Designated Pilot Examineer?"

"To become an Instrument flight instructor in addition to being a CFI"

"Did you take and pass an Instrument Instructor checkride?"

"Yes"

"So, this was not a Pilot Proficiency Check as required by 61.56(d)"

"But the FSDO inspectors...."

"Mr. (insert your name here), I represent the FAA in this matter. If you were to read 61.56(f) you'll see where a flight instructor is exempt from the one hour of ground training required for a flight review. Where does this exempt you from at least one hour of flight training to complete a flight review?"

"But that's covered by my instructor checkride!!!"

"I fail to see in your log book an endorsement for a PILOT proficiency check with a pilot certificate, rating, or operating privilege. Again, did you take an Instructor checkride but failed to recieve an endorsement for a pilot flight review because you didn't ask for it? Is this how you cover your arss? "

The FSDO folks can be real nice and very helpfull. They are not attorneys and can only start the ball rolling over you if they think their interpretation of the FAR's is being violated. Also, their opinion will not insulate you from problems because they fail to start an action when you have violated an FAR.

All I can say from here on is that MY logbooks/record shows from day one back in the 80's, an endorsment for flight reviews between pilot certificates, a flight review along with my checkride for my MEI, and proficiency checks for my part 121 job.

Good luck on your research! I'd be interested in hearing what you decide to do about this.