Thanks to all for the comments so far...none the wiser but, are we?. .Sorry for the reference to "BFR" or "Bienniel", ozoilfield,; I am well aware these terms appear no where in the CAR - however, every one knows what they mean, nevertheless (just like another colloquialism I hate such as "low flying endorsement"). .All I am trying to do is draw your collective attention to the fact that the subject is under heavy discussion in the regulator's crew rooms in various offices and further, that they are hanging their hats on the "definition" of the appropriate Review in CAR 2, which includes the word "test". The implication that I understand is being made is that they regard it as a "test" and is therefore subject to a pass or fail assessment. I'm personally not sure that the word "test" in this context, necessarily requires this decision....eg. when you have your eyes tested, it maybe for the purpose of meeting a certain standard (licence?) or it may simply be to see if your glasses need upgrading?. .Anyway, all I am suggesting is that all those who conduct reviews may be out on a limb in the absence of any protocols as to what we do with the guy who "fails"..at the moment, if he has a mind to the guy can simply say "thanks for nothing, pal" and get back in his aircraft to go on with maybe being a danger to himself and all who sail with him (and yes, I am mindful of the fact that he may not then have a current review status stamped in his log book and that remains his problem)