I think it's likely something that will rarely come into play; it's more the legal nuances applicable to filing, sharing, and using the ASRS in the event of an investigation and subsequent enforcement action. In my experience, very few airmen are aware that the title strip, which is separated from the body of the report and returned to the pilot with the date-stamp, is outside the protected body of the report.

While the intent of the program is safety and one should provide adequate detail in the report to enhance safety, one should also not go out of one's way to incriminate one's self; the wording of the title strip can do just that, and while the body of the report cannot be used for discovery or used against the pilot so long as he/she falls within the scope of the program, the title strip does not enjoy that protection.

A pilot is called on the carpet for an altitude deviation at the base of Class B airspace. He has filed an ASRS report. He attends an informal meeting, or responds by mail and sends a copy of the title strip, anxious to show that he's done his part. The inspector receives the title strip, the title of which is "Altitude Bust While Joyriding and Performing Low Level Aerobatics Without a Parachute in Class B Airspace."

The inspector is surprised to learn that there is more here than an altitude deviation, that multiple other regulations have been broken, and that the pilot has elected to send a legal confession.

The pilot thinks he's covered himself, when he's done just the opposite, and opened another can of worms.

He may have been better off entitling his report "Altitude error," or better, "Altitude issue," to preclude placing himself in jeopardy.

The above is only an example, with and does not intentionally represent any specific person, living or dead; intelligent, or brain-dead.

I think that likely is a result of AOPA and their lawyers/other aviation attorneys not studying the 2150.3 Order and 8900.1 guidance and simply telling an airman to do all of these things without really understanding what it is they are telling an airman to do. Likely, the AOPA and others beat the drum of "file the ASRS", which is great, no problem with that, but they are probably making it out to be, or the perception exists, that it's a "get out of jail free card" and that the airman should present this during investigation to somehow have it "dropped". Like I said, it's nothing the FAA has access to, unless for some reason the airman hands over a copy or receipt like you describe. I must say that my early understanding of ASRS when I was a pilot learning certificates and ratings was the "get out of jail free card" thing. Many of the attorney articles I see in AOPA and other resources still have gross misunderstandings of the guidance and orders that should be easily obtainable common knowledge.

This has been my experience as well, but obvious risk here. Given that the OP didn't clam up and lawyer up right away, he might be better off trying out the compliance philosophy at this point. He could of course get a lawyer's advice. But some lawyers will prefer top drag out the process $$$. They don't make much money from compliance philosophy.

Career funeral over accidentally busting an airspace? Negative. However, if somebody keeps busting airspace, there’s a problem. From the way it reads, this is the OPs first time.

Just be cooperative with them, give them the information they request, be proactive, be enthusiastic about learning from the experience and you will be just fine. If you do all of that the worst you get is some retraining. The FAA doesn’t really suspend or revoke anymore. Only if you are avoiding them and denying what you did or did it intentionally will they do that. Trust me the FAA are not monsters. They have a new compliance culture that they are trying to grow. Do what I said and you’ll be just fine, no worries.

I may be wrong about this part I’m not 100% sure about this but if you are offered retraining and you successfully complete it I believe that doesn’t even show up on your records as enforcement, or if it does that it is taken off after two years. It’s really not a career ender at all. All pilots are humans and humans do stupid ******, learn from it. It’s ok.

A Compliance Action is not an enforcement. If the airman accomplishes the retraining the CA is closed. The only record is internal to the FAA and essentially used for tracking data to look for trends, such as if multiple airman are having the same problem in the same areas identified in the CA.

Correct. If the altitude bust was inadvertent and the airman is compliant this results in a Compliance Action which is not an enforcement.

Any idea if that info is subject to FOIA?

It's not FOIA the way it was explained to me.

Ah, then it must be Double Secret Probation.