RANDOM ACFT RAMP CHK.

Narrative

AT FXE THE PERSONNEL FROM FAA FSDO 17 CONDUCTED A RAMP INSPECTION. AFTER INSPECTION OF THE ACFT FLT LOG; THE FAA WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THE DATE THE ACFT WAS LAST WEIGHED; THE TIME OF THE NEXT INSPECTION DUE; AND DISCOVERED DISCREPANCIES FOUND TO BE WRITTEN IN THE FLT LOG ABOUT 2 WKS PRIOR TO THIS FLT. ACFT OPERATED UNDER FAR 91 ARE NOT REQUIRED TO BE RE-WEIGHED; ONLY CALCULATIONS MADE FOR ANY CHANGES TO WT AND BAL. THE ACFT LOG SHOWED AN INSPECTION DUE; BUT THIS INSPECTION HAD BEEN CHANGED IN THE LEAR 35 FACTORY MAINT PROGRAM AND NO ONE HAD CHANGED THE DUE TIME IN THE ACFT LOG. THIS WAS CONFIRMED PRIOR TO DEPARTING ON THE TRIP/TRAINING FLT. THIS ACFT IS OPERATED UNDER FAR 91 WITH NO MEL. COMPANY PROC HAD ALWAYS BEEN TO PROVIDE ANY DISCREPANCIES TO THE ACFT/MAINT MGR WHICH MUST BE CORRECTED PRIOR TO THE NEXT FLT. MY UNDERSTANDING OF FAR 91 MAINT REQUIREMENTS WAS THAT THERE WAS NO PROVISION OR REQUIREMENT FOR A DISCREPANCY LOG TO BE KEPT SEPARATE FROM THE MAINT RECORDS; AND THERE WAS ALSO NO PROVISION OR REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMPANY WHICH MAINTAINED THE ACFT TO RECORD MAINT IN OTHER FORM THAN THE ACFT MAINT LOG. THESE DISCREPANCIES HAD BEEN REPAIRED AND RECORDED IN THE WORK ORDER OF THE COMPANY PROVIDING THE MAINT. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT A WORK ORDER IS CONSIDERED PART OF THE MAINT RECORDS OF THE ACFT. I DID NOT SEE THESE DISCREPANCIES RECORDED IN THE FLT LOG PRIOR TO THE FLT. I SHOULD HAVE; BUT SINCE RECORDING DISCREPANCIES IN THE ACFT LOG WAS NOT THE NORMAL COMPANY POLICY; SINCE THE ACFT IS OPERATED UNDER FAR PART 91 WITH NO MEL; THERE CAN BE NO DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO FLT; I DID NOT. THE PREFLT OF THE ACFT SHOWED NO DISCREPANCIES; AND THE FLT LOG SHOWED NO MAINT DUE. THE ACFT WAS AIRWORTHY AND ALL MAINT REQUIREMENTS WERE PROPERLY PERFORMED. THE DISCREPANCIES WERE CORRECTED AND RECORDED IN THE WORK ORDER OF THE MAINT COMPANY; BUT SINCE THESE DISCREPANCIES WERE INCORRECTLY RECORDED IN THE ACFT LOG THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN SIGNED OFF PRIOR TO FLT.