"Bob Gardner" wrote in message
. ..
This is AOPA counsel John Yodice's take on the subject:

(The article is by Kathy Yodice, not John Yodice).

http://www.aopa.org/members/ftmag/ar...m?article=4421

Better treat it as regulatory.

Hm, that's a peculiar article. It begins by asking if the AIM is regulatory
and it concludes, "Those cases suggest that you may be held responsible for
complying with FAA guidance". But of the only two cases mentioned, neither
description supports that conclusion. In the first case mentioned, an
unnamed pilot in an unspecified case "attempted to justify" a decision by
citing the AIM--but there is no mention of whether the "attempt" succeeded.
And the second case mentioned makes no reference at all to the AIM or any
other FAA publication.

--Gary