SEAT REMOVED BY PLT AND FAA INSPECTOR NOTED HE WAS IN VIOLATION OF FEDERAL AVIATION REG.

Narrative

THE FLT TO NAKNEK WAS A CARGO ONLY FLT WITH NO PAX; AND AS SUCH WAS CONDUCTED UNDER PART 135 OF THE FAR'S. DURING UNLOADING OF THE CARGO; A CARGO RESTRAINT STRAP BECAME WEDGED UNDER A SEAT ROLLER. SINCE THE RETURN FLT FROM NAKNEK TO DILLINGHAM WAS GOING TO BE EMPTY (NO PAX OR FREIGHT) AND COULD THEREFORE BE OPERATED UNDER PART 91 OF THE FAR'S; I DECIDED TO REMOVE THE SEAT IN ORDER TO FREE THE CARGO STRAP. SEAT REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION IS ALLOWED TO BE PERFORMED UNDER PART 91 OF THE FAR'S BY THE PLT/OPERATOR. AFTER I HAD REMOVED THE SEAT I WAS APPROACHED BY AN FAA INSPECTOR WHO PERFORMED A RAMP CHK OF THE ACFT. THE ACFT AND PAPERWORK WERE IN ORDER; BUT WHEN THE INSPECTOR SAW THE SEAT SITTING OFF THE TRACKS; HE STATED THAT I WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE FAR'S. I THEN RETURNED TO DILLINGHAM AND HAD A MECH INSPECT THE SEAT AND SIGN THE ACFT LOGBOOKS BEFORE IT WAS RETURNED TO SVC. HOWEVER; FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE DAY; I WAS SO DISTRACTED BECAUSE OF CONCERN OVER POSSIBLE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS THAT MY JUDGEMENT WAS AFFECTED CAUSING A LOSS OF SAFETY DURING SUBSEQUENT FLTS. THIS SITUATION OCCURS BECAUSE THE FAA IS NOT SUBJECT TO A SYS OF CHKS AND BALS LIKE THOSE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYS. PLTS KNOW THIS AND ARE FREQUENTLY TRAUMATIZED BY INSPECTORS WHO FLIPPANTLY TALK ABOUT CERTIFICATE ACTIONS. THIS HAS AN EXTREMELY NEGATIVE IMPACT ON SAFETY OF THE SYS.