What code are you working to? And what is the material? I am guessing D1.1

CLH1978,
This is something that is not clearly addressed by the code. Typically I use static. I believe the intent of this examination is actually to help the fabricator/contractor. By performing NDT the contractor is not in the position of sending out a pqr with discontinuities in it. Helps cut down on expenses.

Your question appears to have 2 parts to it, and I am assuming D1.1 because of the static/cyclic reference:

I can't see why you would need to list what the PQR is being qualified for.  All the welding is pretty much the same, the static/cyclic differences are mainly in the application of the weld (design) and the acceptance criteria, and doesn't affect how the PQR is run.

As far as documenting UT results, you should note the PQR test number and the criteria you used to evaluate it by, along with the results.  If there are any contractual requirements, you need to document enough to show compliance.  If you want to show that the test was intended for static or cyclic welding, that does no harm but isn't really needed.

RT is frequently used for PQR evaluation, with UT being performed prior to RT to avoid wasting time on a rejection.  If your UT was done under those circumstances, and is not actually required, you can record anything you want to.

That is a good question CLH1978 I would think that you would want to have the ut report with the PQR To show that the PQR was welded for cyclically and that the UT was done with the cyclically acceptance criteria.  just to be sure that a static loaded PQR was not used for a cyclically loaded stucture!