BE20 PLT AND 2 FSDO INSPECTORS HAD A DISAGREEMENT ABOUT THE MAINT STATUS OF NEWLY PURCHASED ACFT.

Narrative

WHILE PREFLTING THE ACFT FOR AN UPCOMING FLT; I WAS CHKING THE DOCUMENTS ON THE ACFT. I SEARCHED THE ACFT AND COULD NOT FIND THE AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE. SINCE THE ACFT WAS RECENTLY SOLD AND HAD CHANGED REGISTRATION NUMBER; I FOUND THAT A NEW AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE WOULD BE NEEDED WITH THE NEW N-NUMBER. I CALLED FSDO AND SET AN APPOINTMENT TO OBTAIN A REPLACEMENT CERTIFICATE. MY MEETING WAS QUITE CONTENTIOUS. THERE WAS INTIMIDATING TONES ABOUT POSSIBLE ENFORCEMENT ACTION AND THE 2 FSDO EMPLOYEES ARGUED WITH ME ABOUT THE 'LOST' AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE. I SAY 'LOST' BECAUSE SUBSEQUENTLY; THE CERTIFICATE WAS FOUND IN THE ACFT. WHILE REVIEWING THE ACFT LOGBOOKS FOR CAUSE TO ISSUE A NEW AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE; THE 2 FSDO EMPLOYEES SAID THAT THE ACFT WOULD NEED A COMPLETE PHASE 1-4 INSPECTION BEFORE IT WOULD BE ISSUED A NEW AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE. I DISAGREED AND THEY CITED A NUMBER OF LETTERS AND I SITED A NUMBER OF EXAMPLES. THEY THEN INFORMED ME THAT IN ADDITION TO THE AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE; THAT THE ACFT HAD BEEN FLOWN PAST AN INSPECTION INTERVAL OF 24 HRS. DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHO 'OWNED' THIS DISCREPANCY; THE PREVIOUS OWNER OR THE CURRENT OWNER ENSUED. IT BECAME CLEAR THAT THEY WERE STICKING TO THEIR INTERP AND THAT THEY WERE NOT GOING TO ISSUE A NEW AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE. SO I GATHERED MY PAPERS AND PREPARED TO LEAVE WHEN WHAT APPEARED TO BE A SENIOR FSDO EMPLOYEE CAME BY OUR MEETING ROOM ON THE WAY TO LUNCH AND ASKED TO REVIEW MY PAPERWORK. HE TOTALLY DISAGREED WITH THE OTHER 2 FSDO MEN; CITED DIFFERING OPINIONS BTWN THE ZZZ FSDO AND THE YYY FSDO AND SAID THE ACFT WAS FINE AND TO ISSUE AN AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATE. I THEN RECEIVED A CALL FROM ONE OF THE FSDO EMPLOYEES THAT HINTED THAT THEY HAD INTENTIONS TO VIOLATE BOTH MYSELF AND MR Y; THE OWNER OF COMPANY Y; FOR EXCEEDANCE OF THE MAINT INTERVAL. I SAID THAT THE ACFT HAD A PHASE 2 INSPECTION ON SEP/MON/02; AND THAT A LICENSED MECH AND A CERTIFICATED INSPECTION FACILITY VERY FAMILIAR WITH KING AIR INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS HAD INSPECTED THE ACFT AND SAID IT MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE FAR'S AND THE BEECHCRAFT MAINT SCHEDULE PROCS. AS A PLT; IF ALL OTHER REQUIRED INSPECTIONS (PITOT/STATIC; ETC) HAD BEEN PERFORMED THEN THE ACFT WAS LEGAL FOR USE AND I WAS NOT LIABLE FOR A PREVIOUS ERROR OR LAPSE OF MAINT INTERVALS; EVEN THOUGH I CONTEST THAT AN ILLEGAL LAPSE OCCURRED. HE DISAGREED AND DUE TO THE INTIMIDATING NATURE OF BOTH OF THESE FSDO EMPLOYEE'S ZEALOUS ACTIONS; I DECIDED TO FILE THIS RPT.