Follow Up to Certified Letter from the FAA

[GEUAviator]

Well, I opened the mail.

Basically, my pass/fail rate for students exceeded 30% during the most recent 24-month period, and the FSDO wishes to possibly re-examine my instructor knowledge regarding this matter.

I called the FSDO and spoke with an Aviation Safety Inspector. He told me that in no way is this a "punitive" action since it falls under Title 49 USC Section 44709(a). The person who sent me the letter is out of town and will have to get back to me next week.

Also, the letter was stated that "if you do not accept this opportunity for re-examination... it will be necessary for us to start proceedings to suspend your certificate unless other arrangements are made."

I have not even instructed since February 2004. As I stated before, I am now a First Officer with a regional and am not even allowed to instruct on the side due to timing out issues.

I may have to dust off the old instructor manuals (or buy the most updated) if they insist that I be "re-examined." I would sure hate to risk having my instructor ratings taken away!

By the way, I had a string of failures when I first started out as an instructor. I chalk that up to inexperience. I ended up becoming a good instructor and have received many compliments on my teaching abilities from local DPEs.

Thanks for all the replies! I believe I did the right thing by contacting the FSDO, however, I am open to criticism!

GEUAviator

 

[AirSeattle]

Sounds like a form letter to me. I wouldn't dust off/buy new books til you actually talk to the inspector that sent you the letter. He could be reasonable....!

joel

 

[vclean]

Send the FSDO a nice holiday fruit basket. Perhaps it will end with a phone call.

 

[Flywrite]

Even though you dont instruct anymore I wouldn't just let it slide. The wording makes it sound like you would end up doing some explaining on future applications when they ask "Has your certificate ever been suspended".

Good luck with it!

 

[Flywrite]

Another idea may be contacting some of the DPEs who complimented your teaching. Ask if they would be willing to write letters on your behalf attesting to your students' level of preparedness.

I would think if the feds see a pattern of failures early on followed by good results combined with favorable comments from examiners you may be able to work something out.

Again, good luck!

 

[FN FAL]

Well, I opened the mail.

Basically, my pass/fail rate for students exceeded 30% during the most recent 24-month period, and the FSDO wishes to possibly re-examine my instructor knowledge regarding this matter.

By the way, I had a string of failures when I first started out as an instructor. I chalk that up to inexperience. I ended up becoming a good instructor and have received many compliments on my teaching abilities from local DPEs.

Thanks for all the replies! I believe I did the right thing by contacting the FSDO, however, I am open to criticism!

GEUAviator

That's funny. I had a 100 percent pass rate teaching instrument students in complex airplanes in a 10 day sylabus, but with 4,600 hours and 1,700 135 PIC mulitengine hours I couldn't get trough Mesaba's fantastic BAC jet FO training.

Let's deal...You teach a Captain how to be an FO and I'll teach you how to recognize when it's probably not a good idea to sign off students.

 

[RS6]

When does your CFI expire? If it's soon, this may be a non-issue. How could you be "re-examined" for a certificate that is not valid?

 

[IP076]

One question....did you do your instructing out of the airport in your user name?

From my experience, and other people's experience, this FSDO is hit or miss. I did my CFI ride with an inspector from there, was a pretty nice guy. Then, I've heard horror stories about other people there.

I do know that they went on a spree basically canning all the DPE's around. I know several, some of which I have taken rides with, who are no longer DPE's because the FSDO revoked their DPE qualification.

I would still recommend talking to some of those DPE's who commended you on your instructing ability. Maybe even get a letter of rec or reference or something from them. Let them know whats going on, I'm sure they'll be willing to help. I may still have the phone numbers of some, pm me some names if you want, I'll see what I can find.

That is, if I'm right guessing where you were flying from, if not, you can probably ignore most of my post!

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Well, I opened the mail.

Basically, my pass/fail rate for students exceeded 30% during the most recent 24-month period, and the FSDO wishes to possibly re-examine my instructor knowledge regarding this matter.

I called the FSDO and spoke with an Aviation Safety Inspector. He told me that in no way is this a "punitive" action since it falls under Title 49 USC Section 44709(a). The person who sent me the letter is out of town and will have to get back to me next week.

Also, the letter was stated that "if you do not accept this opportunity for re-examination... it will be necessary for us to start proceedings to suspend your certificate unless other arrangements are made."

I have not even instructed since February 2004. As I stated before, I am now a First Officer with a regional and am not even allowed to instruct on the side due to timing out issues.

I may have to dust off the old instructor manuals (or buy the most updated) if they insist that I be "re-examined." I would sure hate to risk having my instructor ratings taken away!

By the way, I had a string of failures when I first started out as an instructor. I chalk that up to inexperience. I ended up becoming a good instructor and have received many compliments on my teaching abilities from local DPEs.

Thanks for all the replies! I believe I did the right thing by contacting the FSDO, however, I am open to criticism!

GEUAviator

Take your Part 121 training documentation along and show that your are well schooled in FARs. Also, if your CFI expires in the next 3 months try and get in renewed. Turn this into a postive... good luck....

 

[atrdriver]

Well, I opened the mail.

Basically, my pass/fail rate for students exceeded 30% during the most recent 24-month period, and the FSDO wishes to possibly re-examine my instructor knowledge regarding this matter.

You gotta love the FAA...When they have a good instructor who has students that are prepared and pass the first time, they want to investigate him/her. When they have a crappy instructor who has a bad pass/fail rate they figure everything is jake...

 

[JediNein]

My pass/fail rate just hit 66%. I just don't do that many ratings, so when only the third of three applicants total failed, 66%. ARRGGH!! The good news is soon it might go all the way up to 75% if #4 passes, if she takes her ride in this century.... Great, now I can expect a certifed letter. . .

Do not ignore this 709 letter. There is no stale complaint exception. You could lose all of your certificates for failing to respond. I'm working with a client that ignored a 709 letter 25 years ago. Even though he may pass the 709 ride, the FAA has reserved the right to deny him certificates anyway because he failed to "exercise the degree of care, judgment, and responsibility" required.

Probably that FSDO has to show that they are 'doing something' to solve an apparent problem. The 709 letter should state clearly what tasks from what PTS are required on this ride and what tasks will have special emphasis. Pay close attention to those special emphasis items.

Also, let your employer know. If you are still on probation, this can be fun. Go straight into your chief pilot's office (or union, other FOs can pipe in) and let them know immediately. Failure to disclose can be a career ending maneuver. You might have the CP think this is a pile of bull-hockey and soundly chew out the ASI making this go away. Your airline's POI may also make it go away. You may be able to have a 121 check satisfy the requirement.

And after the ride, get your CFI renewed. After all, you just demonstrated your competence.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein

 

[Styles]

Send the FSDO a nice holiday fruit basket. Perhaps it will end with a phone call.

I find that a case of Scotch works better

 

[xjcaptain]

FN FAL: I take if from your statement you had some trouble with the XJ training department. Just curious. Are you saying you didn't make it through? If not, was that because of the training department or some other reason?

 

[bobbysamd]

609 (709) re-examination

Basically, my pass/fail rate for students exceeded 30% during the most recent 24-month period, and the FSDO wishes to possibly re-examine my instructor knowledge regarding this matter.

I called the FSDO and spoke with an Aviation Safety Inspector. He told me that in no way is this a "punitive" action since it falls under Title 49 USC Section 44709(a). The person who sent me the letter is out of town and will have to get back to me next week.

Also, the letter was stated that "if you do not accept this opportunity for re-examination... it will be necessary for us to start proceedings to suspend your certificate unless other arrangements are made."

(emphasis added)

You are being 609'd. This is bullsh!t. It sounds like a witchhunt by an overzealous, or bored, fed.

Along with the other excellent suggestions above, maybe you should discuss this with an aviation lawyer. There is no reason why the FAA should make trouble for you this way. A point to raise is when was the last time you renewed your CFI, and how. If you renewed based on activity, your pass/fail rate would have been reviewed at that time.

In my $0.02 opinion, the FAA is hosing you over nothing. By any chance, did this come from the MCO FSDO?

Sure wouldn't find seeing our member, JAFI's, take on this.

 

[deez_nutz2000]

Do not ignore this 709 letter. There is no stale complaint exception. You could lose all of your certificates for failing to respond. I'm working with a client that ignored a 709 letter 25 years ago. Even though he may pass the 709 ride, the FAA has reserved the right to deny him certificates anyway because he failed to "exercise the degree of care, judgment, and responsibility" required.

Probably that FSDO has to show that they are 'doing something' to solve an apparent problem. The 709 letter should state clearly what tasks from what PTS are required on this ride and what tasks will have special emphasis. Pay close attention to those special emphasis items.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein

Jedi mentioned infroming your employer. I had the same problem, I recieved a letter from the FAA about a year after I had one student out of three applicants not pass, and they mentioned it was just and audit. I called and spoke with the FSDO and they explained to me they are doing this because of the degradation in applicant knowledge and skill, and it basically dates back to the guys that were teaching well before 9/11 and getting hired right away. You know, the lucky SOB's who taught for a summer, etc. and landed that sweet regional job they all bitch about (which many do have the right to bitch about, but they all forget how bad instructing was) but anyhow, it has taken the feds this long to initiate the program. Well, I did infrom my employer and they gave me nothing but 110% support. They even mentioned that I was one of their best and that this now became an audit of our flight school, not just me. When it came down to it, the inspector said he wasn't worried and it was never followed through upon. He said they were looking for people that had 1 pass in 7-8 signoffs, etc. One other instructor of ours got audited by another inspector, this guy actually came out and watched him to a pre-flight breifing on the days activities. And that was it. He said good job, and went to lunch. And this instructor happened to be the NAFI CFI of the year a few years ago. I wouldnt worry about it. Just like everyone always says, if you know your stuff, you'll be fine.

Also, Jedi, this is NOT a 709 ride. Nowhere near it. A 709 ride is a post incident/accident examination by an FAA inspector. There is a big difference in what is happening here, so dont let the "709" scare you.

 

[wmuflyguy]

This worries me, I jsut signed off my first guy last week and he didn't pass cause of a brain fart he decided to have. So right now i have a big 0% pass rate. I hope my other guy i signed off that is going tomorrow does well.

 

[Rhoid]

This worries me, I jsut signed off my first guy last week and he didn't pass cause of a brain fart he decided to have. So right now i have a big 0% pass rate. I hope my other guy i signed off that is going tomorrow does well.

That's not too good dude, heck even The Guat has never had a student fail a checkride yet!

 

[rumpletumbler]

Doesn't your pass/fail rate get a break if you are gold seal?

 

[rumpletumbler]

This worries me, I jsut signed off my first guy last week and he didn't pass cause of a brain fart he decided to have. So right now i have a big 0% pass rate. I hope my other guy i signed off that is going tomorrow does well.

will you have a -100% if he fails?

 

[LXJ31]

That wasn't the SDL FSDO, was it?

 

[Weasil]

Firstly,
re-examinations conducted under section 44709 (otherwise known as a 709) are not just post incident/accident. The FAA can choose to reexamine you for many other reasons, including ability as a flight instructor or ability of your students. I have known people to receive a 709 when they had done nothing wrong but the FSDO had suspected the Examiner of giving them their rating of being incompetent.

Now JediNein is absolutely correct. the POI for your airline can make this go away by observing you during recurrent in the sim or on the line or by arranging for you to rent a plane and take the ride with somebody from the FSDO at which your POI is based. it does not have to be done by the guy sending you the letter. Make sure you tell your CP.

Good Luck

 

[bobbysamd]

609 (709) as an FAA strongarm tool

Firstly,
re-examinations conducted under section 44709 (otherwise known as a 709) are not just post incident/accident. The FAA can choose to reexamine you for many other reasons, including ability as a flight instructor or ability of your students. I have known people to receive a 709 when they had done nothing wrong but the FSDO had suspected the Examiner of giving them their rating of being incompetent.

Then, there was the time twelve years ago when I went to the MCO FSDO to renew my CFI. I had resigned my job for a job in California. I wanted to renew early because the MCO knew my school and I did not want to walk into some California FSDO as a complete unknown. I had renewed early based on activity in SDL at least twice, with no problem whatsoever.

I walked into the MCO FSDO expecting the same, professional, courteous treatment I received in Scottsdale, and also at the PWA FSDO when I lived in Oklahoma City. Uh-uh. The MCO inspector starting giving me the third degree. When I asked her why, she said she could always 609 me if I didn't answer her questions. Once again, I only wanted to renew my d@mn CFI.

So much for a 609 (709) being a post-incident/accident investigative tool only. I would submit a 609 is a more powerful coercive tool than shining bright lights on a suspect during a police interrogation.

Really, as reiterated below, do consult with counsel. This episode is unfair.

 

[Corona]

By all means, do NOT call the FSDO until you have good legal advice. You need someone with experience on your side. The posts about contacting your CP are good; they have a lot more experience dealing with the Feds, and it won't cost you anything, except maybe your job. (Kidding!)

The part 709 ride concerns your instructor certificate, not the Commercial/ATP certificate you use for the airlines.

Any certificate is fair game, and, yes, they can Pt. 709 you for any reason at any time. Most places that aren't managed by azzholes won't do it recreationally, though.

C

 

[JAFI]

Bobby, You wrote: "Sure wouldn't find seeing our member, JAFI's, take on this."

I think there is a type-o in there some where, so I will add my 2 cents if you ment to type "mind" and not "find".

GEU,

Every flight school has an Inspector assigned to over see the school. Inspectors will periodically track the success (pass rate) of the school and it's instructors. If the Inspector did so they would look at any instructor with more than a 30% fail rate over a period of time. (see reference below.) The number should be with a good number of students. If you had three students and one failed, it would be a 33% fail rate but this would be statistacally inacurate or skewed data. It may be possible to discuss this with the FSDO.

IMHO Having DE's, Chief Pilot, DO, etc. call with a positive recommendation cannot hurt. Only the recommendating Inspector or his office can stop the process, not your POI. A re-examinination letter can be recinded at the discression of the FSDO. You must convince the Inspector/FSDO that there is not a need for a 709 ride. I'm sure they have bigger battles to fight. SO DO NOT PISS THEM OFF! Show them (with your records) you screwed up as a young instructor but you corrected the pass rate. Mention that you are not instructing now but employed as a FO. The reexamination can be some questions or some touch and go's or a full PTS Flight Instructors exam, so behave your self.

You can call all the lawyers you want. I think they will tell you if the FSDO wants to conduct a 44709 exam there is little you can do to stop it. That being said, The FSDO decides on the 44709, The airman decides on the location. See the below reference. The letter will say what is to be re-examined. read it carefully.

My personal advice,

Be truthful, Be Professional, Be Calm, Be willing to discuss your instructing ability. Be willing to take a flight to show your ability. Be willing to work with the Inspector, convince him/her the low number of students have skewed the data and you are a good instructor.

It has been a long day for me so PM me if you have specific questions.

JAFI
------------------------------------

FAA Order 8700.1

Volume 2

CHAPTER 12. SURVEILLANCE OF A CERTIFICATED

FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR

Section 1 Background

5. GENERAL.

D. Initiation of Surveillance. There are many circumstances that may result in an inspector initiating the surveillance of a flight instructor. For example, an inspector may initiate surveillance because of observations made during a pilot school inspection. A flight instructor may be subject to an inspection during an inspector’s random visit to an airport, or as a result of that instructor’s visit to a Flight Standards District Office (FSDO). An instructor may be subject to surveillance because of an accident, an incident, or if deficiencies in the instructor’s students become apparent. High activity CFI’s should be inspected when applicant failure rates of 30 percent or greater are observed.



CHAPTER 26. CONDUCT A REEXAMINATION TEST OF AN AIRMAN UNDER TITLE 49 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE

SECTION 1. BACKGROUND

5. GENERAL.

A. Authority. Under Title 49 of the United States Code (49 USC) § 44709 (formerly section 609 of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958), the Administrator is authorized to reexamine any airman at any time



9. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS.

A. Handling an Airman's Response to a Reexamination Letter at an Office Other than the Requesting Office. Usually, the FSDO that requested the reexamination by letter conducts the reexamination test and follows up with any needed enforcement action.

However, an airman may respond to a reexamination letter by contacting a FSDO that did not issue the letter. In such a case, the inspector at the other FSDO must contact the FSDO that requested the reexamination.

 

[PropsForward]

Doesn't your pass/fail rate get a break if you are gold seal?

No, the gold seal denotes an 80% or better pass rate with 10 students in the previous 24 months. While I am sure it happens, I would gander to say that a CFI that has earned the gold seal knows what it takes, and knows when a student is ready for a checkride.

 

[PropsForward]

GEUAviator,
Which FSDO sent you this letter?

 

[JediNein]

.....

 

[bobbysamd]

609 (709) re-exams and airman records

Bobby, You wrote: "Sure wouldn't find seeing our member, JAFI's, take on this."

I think there is a type-o in there some where, so I will add my 2 cents if you ment to type "mind" and not "find".

You are absolutely write abowt the typoe. Thanks for posting the re-examination section from your manual.

With all due respect, review of the manual section suggests that inspectors have discretion in these particular situations and, as you observed, it seems that FSDOs would have more important things to do than to 609 flight instructors with lower-than-normal pass rates. As you undoubtedly can appreciate, a 609 (709) in one's airman file could harm a career. Therefore, is there any way a re-examination such as the situation presented here be handled to the initiating inspector's satisfaction without it showing up in an airman's file?

Thanks again for your insight and adding perspective to this topic.

 

[Weasil]

JAFI, good reply. I will disagree with you though based purely on experience. The POI for this guy's airline can help him deal with this if they so choose. Of course they would have to do it by contacting the initiating inspector but they could still make it go away. I've seen it happen. You have to remember, even the FAA Inspectors are just people, there's always a difference between procedure and what can happen in the real world.

In my previous position I was a chief pilot for a 141 school and I saw several instructors receive these rides. Not one of them ever failed it though. I don't know why the FAA equates failing students to an instructor's ability. It seemed to me more often to be the fault of examiners who were not standardised. One person wanted it done this way, another wanted something completely different.

The FAA should periodically observe checkrides to see how their DE's are doing and occasionally sit in on lessons taught by instructors to get a feel for how they are doing. Just like riding my jumpseat on a line flight, come take a look sometime, instead with flight instructors they just wait til it looks like they are screwing up and then go after them.

Also as previously posted, be sure to contact a lawyer before saying anything to the FSDO, do you have AOPA legal? They may be perfectly polite, but then again they may not and anytime you are discussing this with them they are supposed to be questioning you to gather evidence. Make sure you get legal advice before talking to them.

 

[rumpletumbler]

Ever notice that the pink slip pad is always more empty than the one with the certificates in it?