Pilot maintenance under Part 91.
My boss wants us to fly airplanes under FAR91 with small defects such as nav lights, inop radios etc, which is not a problem. But he wants the pilots to record those defects in the airplane deficiency log with the pilot name, certificate number and a statement that the airplane is safe to fly.
I have tried to identify something in the FARs that would allow this but cannot. Part 91.213 says that flights are permitted, provided the inoperative instruments or equipment are not required under some specific rule or regulation (at night, under an AD etc) with two conditions:
1. The item is removed or deactivated, placarded, and this is recorded in the defect log, AND
2. A pilot or mechanic determines that flight without this item is safe.
The regulation that deals with maintenance, including repairs, is Part 43 and it makes no mention of a pilot being authorised to perform repairs, except for preventive maintenance. How is a radio, for example, to be deactivated or removed? I see how a pilot can remove a GPS in order to install a new data card, but I see nothing that would permit a pilot to remove a radio. Does deactivation mean turning it off? How is a pilot to know if the underlying problem is not the radio but an electrical fault that might lead to a fire? My reading of the regulations lead me to believe that only a qualified mechanic can carry out either of these actions. A pilot can replace a nav light, or add hydraulic fluid, but can he determine if a dent in an elevator or an inoperative EGT gauge is acceptable and write this up in the log? I have no problem with a pilot deciding to continue flight(s) back to base with small defects, but if he writes it up as acceptable, that would put pressure on the next pilot to accept this determination as well. Where would pilot A stand if pilot B, using the statement of pilot A as justification, got into trouble if the flight was not in fact safe without that piece of equipment and he did not make it back?
If the maintenance activity is not specifically approved under Appendix A para (c) of Part 43, I think a pilot is risking enforcement action should he fly an airplane that has not properly been released for flight, and especially if he puts his name and certificate number to a statement in the defect log to the effect that the airplane is safe for flight when he is assuming powers not delegated to him by the regulations.
Has anyone else come up against this before and was it resolved?