Flight instructors carry a certain stature in the aviation community. After all, if you want to be a pilot, you have to go through a flight instructor. They are the people who first teach us about prudence, safety, and compliance. We often look to flight instructors to guide us through challenging times in our flight training, such as difficulty mastering a maneuver or visualizing a radial, or dealing with a mistake and learning a lesson.
Such was the case with a student pilot who took his girlfriend for a flight when he did not yet hold a private pilot certificate (see "Legal Briefing: Breaking the Rules," April 2009 AOPA Flight Training).
Among other things, Federal Aviation Regulation 61.89(a)(1) provides that "A student pilot may not act as pilot in command of an aircraft is carrying a passenger." In the case of our student pilot, he was planning to make a solo flight when his then-fianc�e came to the airport and wanted to accompany him. The student agreed, apparently against his better judgment. After landing, the student was met by his former flight instructor--who, in consultation with his current instructor, decided not tell the FAA about the student's infraction in lieu of some remedial training.
The National Transportation Safety Board administrative law judge seemed quite concerned with the fact that the student pilot had met with his flight instructors and, in the judge's words, "contrived a scheme not to report" the student's activities to the FAA.
In the judge's view, the student pilot "proceeded to conspire with his two CFIs in devising a scheme which was intended to preclude the FAA from becoming aware of the violation." The judge's language seems to suggest that the three worked together to withhold the information from the FAA, but there was no mention of anyone lying to the FAA or hiding information that the FAA was seeking to discover. And, although it was not an issue before him, the judge also stated, "The actions of the CFIs, in this judge's view, show a lack of the degree of judgment and responsibility expected of a CFI."
The judge did not provide any authority for this conclusion.
To be sure, the student pilot's actions in carrying a passenger were contrary to the explicit language of the regulation, thereby creating a potentially unsafe condition. As pilots, we would not want to condone such behavior. However, the case raises a question as to what regulatory responsibility the CFI, or any pilot, has to affirmatively report an apparent or suspected violation of the FARs to the FAA. Certainly, the FAA would welcome receipt of information that potentially or actually affects the agency's mission of aviation safety. For example, the FAA encourages reports from persons with knowledge of unsafe aviation situations, improper record keeping, or safety violations, and provides a means for reporting these kinds of things to its 24-hour Aviation Safety Hotline (800-255-1111). Such reports can be made anonymously, or the caller can give his or her identity and contact information and the FAA will provide the caller with the results of any investigation that was conducted.
In addition, through the Aviation Safety Reporting System, the FAA encourages pilots, controllers, flight attendants, maintenance personnel, and other users of the National Airspace System to submit reports to NASA about actual or potential discrepancies and deficiencies involving the safety of aviation operations. These reports generally are made anonymously.
And, there are other means of reporting concerning circumstances to the FAA. But, is there a requirement to make these kinds of reports so that your failure to make a report would demonstrate that you lack the care, judgment, and responsibility to hold your pilot certificate? I am not aware of any such requirement.
Kathy Yodice is an attorney with Yodice Associates in Washington, D.C., which provides legal counsel to AOPA and administers AOPA's legal services plan. She is an instrument-rated private pilot.
Related Articles
