volume 2 air operator and air agency …fsims.faa.gov/wdocs/8900.1/change history/editorial... ·...

6/2/11 FY11 THIRD QUARTER EDITORIAL UPDATES 8900.1 CHG 79

1 UNCONTROLLED COPY WHEN DOWNLOADED

Check with FSIMS to verify current version before using

VOLUME 2 AIR OPERATOR AND AIR AGENCY CERTIFICATION AND APPLICATION PROCESS

CHAPTER 1 THE GENERIC PROCESS FOR CERTIFICATING ORGANIZATIONS

Section 4 Preparation of FAA Operating Certificates

2-71 FORMS TO USE. Use the following Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) forms to prepare the appropriate certificates (specific examples found in Figures 2-5 through 2-9A):

• FAA Form 8000-4, Air Agency Certificate. • FAA Form 8000-43, Training Center Certificate. • FAA Form 8430-18, Air Carrier Certificate. • FAA Form 8430-21, Operating Certificate.

2-72 REQUIRED INFORMATION. Enter the following information on the form.

A. Legal Name. Enter the certificate holder’s legal name directly below the words “This certifies that.”

B. Additional Business Names for Operators, Air Agencies, and Training Centers. For Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 125, 133, and 137 certificates and Air Agency and Training Center Certificates, place any additional business names on the certificate below the legal name.

1) The acronym “DBA” (doing business as) precedes the additional business name.

2) The certificate holder will provide evidence, as applicable, of the appropriate State or local government’s authorization of all business names.

3) The certificate-holding district office (CHDO) should not restrict the number of DBAs used by a certificate holder. Should there be insufficient space on the certificate to accommodate all DBAs, the legal name and address should appear on the certificate with a notation to see an accompanying letter for a list of DBAs. Part 125 operators will have DBAs placed on their operations specifications (OpSpecs).

C. Additional Business Names for 14 CFR Parts 121 and 135 Certificates. For parts 121 and 135 certificates, only place DBA names in the operator’s OpSpecs and not on the certificate.

D. Address of Principal Base. Enter the address of the certificate holder’s principal base of operations directly below the certificate holder’s name. A post office box address is not acceptable unless it also reflects the physical location of the principal base of operations.




E. Statement of Authority.

1) FAA Form 8430-21. Do not modify the preprinted certification statement of authority on FAA Form 8430-21. However, complete the statement of authority (as applicable) as follows:

a) Part 125 (Operations).

b) Part 133 (Rotorcraft External-Load Operations).

c) Part 135 (Operations).

1. Operating Certificate for Intrastate Common Carriage.

a. In the first space, enter “Intrastate Common Carriage Operations.”

b. In the second space, enter “and the terms, conditions, and limitations in the approved operations specifications.”

c. In the third space, enter “indefinitely.”

2. Operating Certificate for Private Carriage.

a. In the first space, enter “Private Carriage Operations.”

b. In the second space, enter “and the terms, conditions, and limitations in the approved operations specifications.”

c. In the third space, enter “indefinitely.”

d) Part 137 (Private Agricultural Aircraft Operations or Commercial Agricultural Aircraft Operations, as appropriate).

2) FAA Form 8430-18. Do not modify the preprinted certification statement of authority on FAA Form 8430-18.

F. Certificate Number. Obtain the certificate number from the Aviation Data Systems Branch (AFS-620) in accordance with Volume 2, Chapter 1, and enter it in the space provided on the form. For more information on Air Carrier Certificates, see Volume 2, Chapter 2, Section 2.

G. Effective Date. Enter the date that all the requirements for certification were met in the space provided for certificate effective date. Retain the date of original issuance on the amended certificate if there is a change in the address or the CHDO. A change of name to the air operator or a change in the certification states of authority has the effect of a new certification. Therefore, issue a new certificate and certificate number. For this situation, enter the issuance date of the new certificate in the space provided.

H. CHDO Designator. Enter the designator of the region and CHDO on the “issued at” line on the form.




I. Signature/Title. The district office manager signs the operating certificates issued to parts 125, 133, and 137 air operators, and part 135 air carriers complying with on-demand rules on the line provided. The regional Flight Standards division (RFSD) manager signs the Air Carrier Certificates to air operators complying with part 135 commuter rules. Enter the full title of the person signing the certificate in the space provided.

J. Region/Office Block (Form 8430-18). When the RFSD manager signs the certificate, enter the full name of the region in the “region/office” space (e.g., Southwest Region). When the Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) manager signs the certificate, enter the full name of the region and FSDO acronym and number in the “region/office” space (e.g., Southwest Region, FSDO-18).

2-73 CHANGE OF NAME. Except for repair stations, a change of the certificate holder’s legal name requires the issuance of a new certificate and certificate number. This does not include a change to a DBA. For a repair station name change see Volume 2, Chapter 11, Section 2, paragraph 2-1215.

A. Legal Authorization. The certificate holder must provide evidence that the appropriate State or local government (as applicable) authorized the change of legal name. The aviation safety inspector (ASI) must ensure that the certificate holder is not using the name change to circumvent initial certification requirements.

B. Sole Proprietor. Do not treat a sole proprietor, who incorporates under State law, as a name change only. This “new” person must meet all the initial certification requirements of the 14 CFR in order to receive an Operating Certificate. However, the certification process, in this case, may not be as detailed as usual.

2-74 INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION (ICAO) STANDARDIZED, CERTIFIED TRUE COPY OF THE AIR OPERATOR CERTIFICATE (AOC).

A. Amended Annex 6 Requirements. Annex 6 requires air operators to carry onboard their aircraft a standardized, certified true copy of their AOCs when operating internationally. See the following ICAO Web site for more information: http://www.icao.int/fsix/_Library/Annex%206-Part%20I%20-%20AOC%20Template%20en.pdf.

B. FAA Role. To enable certificate holders to fulfill this ICAO requirement, the FAA made an ICAO standardized AOC available as Template A999 in the Web-based automated Operations Safety System (WebOPSS). (See Figure 2-9A for a sample of Template A999.) Preload most of the data contained in the AOC from operator data already maintained in the WebOPSS. The principal operations inspector (POI) or the certificate holder must enter additional data specific to the AOC. This standardized ICAO AOC is in addition to the FAA Operating Certificate or Air Carrier Certificate. For compliance with Annex 6, operators must carry this ICAO AOC onboard their aircraft when operating internationally.




C. Certified True Copy. Annex 6 also requires that the copy carried onboard the aircraft is a “certified true copy” of the original. Template A999 contains a certification statement that the FAA will digitally sign. See subparagraph 2-74D.

D. Procedure.

1) After January 1, 2010, certificate holders who fly or intend to fly internationally must request and receive Template A999 in the WebOPPS from their POIs. When the POI receives such a request, the POI should:

• Work with the certificate holder to properly fill out the template. • Verify that the information in Template A999 is correct. • Sign and issue Template A999 in the WebOPSS.

2) The certification statement fulfilling the ICAO requirements is a certified true copy when the POI digitally signs and issues Template A999 in the WebOPSS.

3) When operating internationally, ICAO requires an air operator to carry a certified true copy of the AOC onboard his or her aircraft. The certificate holder may print a copy for each aircraft he or she operates internationally and place it onboard or, if the air carrier has the capability, carry it electronically onboard so that it is accessible to a foreign civil aviation authority (CAA) during an inspection.

4) If any information contained on the ICAO standardized AOC changes, the certificate holder will need to work with his or her POI to update the data in Template A999, print new copies, and, if necessary, have the FAA sign the certification statement.

2-75 TASK OUTCOMES. Completion of this task results in one of the following:

• Assignment of a precertification and final certificate number to a part 125 operator; • Assignment of a final certificate number to a 14 CFR part 121, 133, 135, 137, 141,

142, 145, or 147 air agency or operator; or • Assignment of a designator to a part 125 full deviation holder.

2-76 FUTURE ACTIVITIES. See related certification chapters.




Figure 2-5. FAA Form 8000-4, Air Agency Certificate




Figure 2-5A. FAA Form 8000-43, Training Center Certificate




Figure 2-6. FAA Form 8430-18, Air Carrier Certificate




Figure 2-7. FAA Form 8430-21, Operating Certificate for Intrastate Common Carriage




Figure 2-8. FAA Form 8430-21, Operating Certificate for Private Carriage




Figure 2-9. FAA Form 8430-21, Operating Certificate




Figure 2-9A. Sample Template A999, Air Operator Certificate (AOC) in the ICAO Format

AIR OPERATOR CERTIFICATE

State of the Operator1

United States of America 3

Issuing Authority2

Federal Aviation Administration

3

AOC #:4 Expiry Date:5 None

Operator Name6 DBA Trading Name7 Operator Address:9

Telephone:10 Fax: E-mail:

Operational Points of Contact:8 Contact details, at which operational management can be contacted without undue delay, are listed in ______________________11.

This certificate certifies that ___________________________12 is authorized to perform commercial air operations, as defined in the attached operations specifications, in accordance with the Operations Manual and the _________________________13.

Date of Issue:14 Name:15 Title:

CERTIFICATION STATEMENT

I hereby certify that the attached is a true copy of the [title of the AOC] issued at [place] on [date] by the FAA.

Signed at [place] on [date]

[Digital signature of FAA official] [Title]

1. Issued by the Federal Aviation Administration. 2. Support information reference: 3. These Operations Specifications are approved by direction of the Administrator. 4. Date Approval is effective: Amendment Number: 5. I hereby accept and receive the Operations Specifications in this paragraph.

Date:




Notes: 1. Auto-filled. 2. Auto-filled. 3. Reserved for future use. 4. Unique AOC number: this is the operator’s FAA certificate number. 5. Auto-filled. 6. Insert the operator’s registered name. 7. Operator trading name, if different. Insert “DBA” before the trading name (for “doing business as”). 8. The contact details include the telephone and fax numbers, including the country code, and the e-mail address (if available) at which operational management can be contacted without undue delay for issues related to flight operations, airworthiness, flight and cabin crew competency, dangerous goods, and other matters as appropriate. 9. Operator principal place of business address. 10. Operator principal place of business telephone and fax details, including the country code. Provide e-mail, if available. 11. Insertion of the controlled document, carried onboard, in which the contact details are listed with the appropriate paragraph or page reference. For example: “Contact details … are listed in the Operations Manual, Gen/Basic, Chapter 1, 1.1” or “… are listed in the Operations Specifications, page 1,” or “… are listed in an attachment to this document.” 12. Operator registered name. 13. Insert “14 CFR.” 14. Issuance date of the AOC (dd-mm-yyyy). 15. Title and name of the authority representative. An official digital signature stamp is applied to the certification statement on the AOC.

RESERVED. Paragraphs 2-77 through 2-100.

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0




CHAPTER 5 THE APPLICATION PROCESS—TITLE 14 CFR PART 91, SUBPART K

Section 2 Phase 1—Preapplication

2-556 INITIAL INQUIRIES OR REQUESTS.

A. Initial Inquiries. Initial application inquiries or requests may come in various formats from individuals or organizations. These inquiries may be in writing or in the form of meetings with Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) personnel.

B. Applicant Orientation. Upon initial contact, FSDO personnel should direct the applicant to the Web at: http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_cert/. This site provides additional information the applicant needs to complete the application process. The inspector should ask the applicant to schedule an appointment for an initial contact meeting. While the regulation does not require specific management personnel or qualifications (unless the program manager is requesting a Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP)), the program manager should identify management personnel, points of contact (POC) within the company, and persons authorized to sign the management specifications (MSpecs). These key personnel should attend the initial contact meeting and be prepared to discuss, in general terms, the plans of the proposed operation.

2-557 INITIAL CONTACT MEETING.

A. General. The applicant should be prepared to discuss, in general terms, specific aspects of the applicant’s proposed operation. FSDO personnel should discuss the application process in depth. Emphasis should be placed on the expectations of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), what the applicant should expect from the FAA, and the sequence of events. The five phases of application and the requirements of the gate system (see Figure 2-19, Five Phases of Certification and Requirements of the Gate System) should receive emphasis, and the applicant should be encouraged to ask questions during the discussion. Applicants should be thoroughly familiar with the gate system requirements before continuing with the process.

B. Preapplication Information. The initial contact meeting between the FSDO and the applicant sets the tone for the rest of the application process. Therefore, it is important that the FAA personnel be thoroughly prepared to conduct the meeting. The FSDO should provide an application package to the applicant containing the following documents:

• Guidance documents, including applicable sections of this order; • Fractional ownership rule and preamble; • Preapplication Statement of Intent (PASI) for fractional ownership programs

(see Figure 2-18, Statement of Intent for Fractional Ownership Programs); • Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 91, 119, and 135, as

applicable; and

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



• A Schedule of Events (SOE) that outlines the approval process (see Figure 2-14, Sample Schedule of Events).

2-558 SECOND CONTACT MEETING.

A. Applicant Submission of Completed Statement of Intent (SOI). The first item for discussion should be verification of the information on the SOI, such as the type of operation, types of aircraft, geographic areas of operation, and location of facilities. When changes to this information occur, the applicant must annotate the changes on the SOI. If the changes significantly affect the anticipated scope and/or type of operation, a copy of the revised SOI will be forwarded to the regional Flight Standards division (RFSD). If the changes indicate the need for reassignment of application responsibilities to another FSDO, the RFSD will notify, without delay, the affected FSDOs so that the application project can be reassigned. In this situation, it may be appropriate to terminate the preapplication meeting.

B. Additional Items Submitted by Applicant. At the second meeting, the applicant should submit, to the FSDO, a proposed application SOE and documentation to substantiate a fractional ownership program or business plan. In addition, the applicant will identify locations for training, maintenance, and a principal base of operations.

C. Phase I Completion. Once the FSDO has accepted everything in the preapplication phase, the applicant may advance to Phase II—Formal Application.

2-559 SOI FOR FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP PROGRAMS. See Figure 2-18.

A. Purposes of an SOI. Often, a program manager for a fractional ownership operation may not be fully aware of the regulatory and policy requirements as well as the resources necessary for the issuance of MSpecs. The principal inspectors (PI) should make the program manager aware of the following:

1) Volume 3, Chapter 18, Section 2, provides general guidance in regard to the automated Operations Safety System (OPSS) and the issuance of MSpec authorizations.

2) All program managers operating under part 91 subpart K (part 91K) are required to be on the Industry Operations Specifications Subsystem (IOPSS) at the beginning of operations.

3) The completed SOI denotes intent by the program manager to continue the application process. It also allows the FAA to plan activities and prepare to commit resources.

B. Processing the SOI. The FSDO manager uses the SOI to evaluate the complexity of the proposed fractional ownership operation and to determine whether appropriately trained and experienced inspectors are available in the FSDO to conduct the proper surveillance of the anticipated fractional ownership operation and its program manager. The SOI is used to initiate the FSDO files such as the Program Tracking and Reporting Subsystem (PTRS).

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



C. District Office Review of SOI.

1) Review Upon Receipt. Upon receipt of a signed SOI, the FSDO will review the form to ensure that there is sufficient information to further process the preapplication. The FSDO will ascertain that the proposed fractional ownership operation is consistent with part 91K, under which the program manager will be required to operate.

2) Unacceptable SOI. If the SOI is unacceptable, the reasons why it is unacceptable must be described in section 2 of the worksheet and returned to the future program manager. The FSDO will notify the program manager, either verbally or by letter, that the SOI is unacceptable for the reasons detailed in section 2 of the worksheet and that a new SOI is required. A copy of the rejected SOI will be retained in the FSDO files for 3 years.

3) Acceptance of a SOI. When the SOI is acceptable, the FSDO will check the “Action” box and complete section 2 of the form.

a) Within 5 working-days, the SOI will be forwarded electronically to 9-AWA-AVS-AFS-WebOPSS or [email protected].

b) The OPSS technical operations center will assign a unique identification number for that program manager in the OPSS. Please note that in 2009, MSpecs will be issued under Web-based automated Operations Safety System (WebOPSS).

c) The OPSS technical operations center will then notify the principal operations inspector (POI) of the identification number and that the program manager is available in IOPSS/WebOPSS for MSpec issuance.

d) The OPSS technical operations center will assist in the coordination of the IOPSS training for the program manager and its PIs.

Figure 2-14, Sample Schedule of Events

Company Name: _________________________________

Phase I—Preapplication:

1. Initial Contact Meeting Date:_____________

2. Second Contact Meeting Date:______________

Date Submitted/Received

Date Returned

Date Approved/Accepted

a. Statement of Intent (SOI).

b. Proposed Schedule of Events (SOE).

c. Management Specifications (MSpecs) Worksheet.

Phase II—Formal Application:

1. Formal Application Meeting Date:________________

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



2. Formal Application.

3. Formal Application Attachments:

• Management Personnel Documentation.

• Compliance Statement.

• Program Operating Manual (POM). Refer to 14 CFR part 91, § 91.1025.

• Requests for Deviations.

• Approved Inspection Program/General Maintenance Manual (GMM), as required.

• Weight and Balance (W&B) Procedures/Program.

• Internal Safety Reporting Procedures and Incident/Accident Response Procedures. Refer to § 91.1021.

• Training Programs.

• Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) or Aircraft Operations Manual.

• Minimum Equipment List (MEL).

• Cockpit Checklists (Normal, Abnormal, Emergency). Refer to § 91.1033.

• Passenger Briefing Cards. Refer to § 91.1035.

• Flight and Rest Scheduling Program.

• Hazardous Materials (hazmat) Recognition Program. Refer to § 91.1085.

• Certification and Execution of Agreements and Acknowledgement of Owners’ Operational Control Responsibilities.

• Pilot Safety Background Checks and Procedures (Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA)). Refer to § 91.1051.

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



• Drug and Alcohol Misuse Education Program. Refer to § 91.1047.

• List of Owners and Associated Aircraft. Refer to § 91.1027.

• Configuration Deviation List (CDL).

• Environmental Review. Refer to Volume 11, Chapter 6, Section 3.

• Destination Airport Analysis Program (DAAP). Refer to § 91.1037.

• Proving and/or Validation Test Plan. Refer to § 91.1041.

• Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP), if required. Refer to § 91.1411.

• Security Program.

• Flight Locating Procedures.

• Other Requested Authorizations.

Phase III—Document Compliance:

• Management Personnel Documentation.

• Compliance Statement.

• POM. Refer to § 91.1025.

• Requests for Deviations.

• Approved Inspection Program/GMM, as required.

• W&B Procedures/Program.

• Internal Safety Reporting Procedures and Incident/Accident Response Procedures. Refer to § 91.1021.

• Training Programs.

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



• AFM or Aircraft Operations Manual.

• MEL.

• Cockpit Checklists (Normal, Abnormal, Emergency). Refer to § 91.1033.

• Passenger Briefing Cards. Refer to § 91.1035.

• Flight and Rest Scheduling Program.

• Hazmat Recognition Program. Refer to § 91.1085.

• Certification and Execution of Agreements and Acknowledgement of Owners’ Operational Control Responsibilities.

• Pilot Safety Background Checks and Procedures (PRIA). Refer to § 91.1051.

• Drug and Alcohol Misuse Education Program. Refer to § 91.1047.

• Load Manifest. Refer to § 91.1027.

• List of Owners and Associated Aircraft. Refer to § 91.1027.

• CDL.

• Environmental Review. Refer to Volume 11, Chapter 6, Section 3.

• DAAP. Refer to § 91.1037.

• Flight Attendant (F/A) Manual.

• Proving and/or Validation Test Plan. Refer to § 91.1041.

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



• CAMP, if required. Refer to § 91.1411.

• Security Program.

• Flight Locating Procedures.

• Other Requested Authorizations.

Phase IV—Demonstration and Inspection:

• Monitor Training.

• Flightcrew Members—Proficiency Checks.

• Check Pilots.

• Maintenance Training.

• F/A—Competency Checks.

• Aircraft Conformity Inspections.

• Principal Base of Operations Inspection.

• Maintenance Base Inspection.

• Proving/Validation Testing.

• Table-Top Demonstrations.

• Operational Control Inspection.

• Maintenance Procedures Inspection.

• Passenger Handling Inspection.

• Recordkeeping Inspection.

Phase V—Documentation:

1. Issuance of MSpecs.

2. Program Tracking and Reporting Subsystem (PTRS) Completion.

3. Update Vital Information Subsystem (VIS) Information.

4. File Appropriate Documents.

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 2-18, Statement of Intent for Fractional Ownership Programs

STATEMENT OF INTENT FOR FRACTIONAL OWNERSHIP PROGRAMS

Section 1.

1. Name and mailing address 2. Address of principal base where operations will be conducted

3. Proposed startup date 4. Requested three-letter company identifier in order of preference

1. __ __ __K 2. __ __ __ K 3. __ __ __K

5. Program Manager Representative Name (last, first, middle) Company Name Telephone

(including area code)

6. Type of operation Other Certificate(s) Held:

Part 125 Certificate No: ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Part 121 Certificate No: ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Part 135 Certificate No: ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Other Affiliate Part 91K ID No ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Other Affiliate Part 91K ID No: ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Other Affiliate Part 91K ID No: ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



7. Aircraft data. 8. Geographic area of intended operations.

Number and types of aircraft (by make, model, and series) List may be attached

U.S.

U.S. and International

9. Additional information that provides a better understanding of the proposed fractional ownership.

10. The statements and information contained on this form denote an intent to apply for management specifications. Signature Date Name and Title

Section 2. To Be Completed By FAA District Office.

Received By (district office): Date Scheduled for IOPSS

Date: For: Action Information only

Has this program manager ever been assigned any 4-digit designator yes no Unknown Designator Code: Remarks:

4/12/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 2-19, Five Phases of Certification and Requirements of the Gate System


6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92




CHAPTER 11 CERTIFICATION OF A TITLE 14 CFR PART 145 REPAIR STATION

Section 2 Procedures for Certificating Part 145 Repair Stations/Satellites Located Within the United States and Its Territories

2-1211 PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODES.

A. Maintenance: 3230.

B. Avionics: 5230.

2-1212 OBJECTIVE. This section provides guidance for evaluating an applicant for certification under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 145 as a repair station. This section also provides guidance for evaluating an applicant for a satellite repair station under the managerial control of a certificated repair station. This guidance may be applied to a certificated repair station/satellite repair station transitioning to the Repair Station Manual (RSM)/Quality Control Manual (QCM) and training program currently used by the repair station with managerial control.

2-1213 THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS. This process provides for interaction between the applicant and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), from initial inquiry to issuance or denial of a repair station certificate within the territories of the United States. It ensures that programs, systems, and intended methods of compliance are thoroughly reviewed, evaluated, tested, and integrated throughout the repair station(s). The certification process consists of five phases:

• Preapplication phase, • Formal application phase, • Document compliance phase, • Demonstration and inspection phase, and • Certification phase.

A. Preapplication Phase.

1) The preapplication meeting should be held in the certificate-holding district office (CHDO) that will have oversight responsibility for the repair station. This will allow the applicant to become familiar with CHDO personnel. If the certification project manager (CPM) determines that a preview of the applicant’s housing and facility is necessary, the CPM may request to hold the preapplication meeting at the applicant’s facility to verify that it meets the requirements for the ratings requested.

2) The applicant should provide the FAA with a point of contact (POC) at this meeting. Open discussion of the applicant’s intent should take place, and the FAA should help

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



by answering any questions the applicant has regarding the application process. During the preapplication meeting, discuss the following items:

a) FAA Form 8400-6, Preapplication Statement of Intent. The applicant’s submittal of the Preapplication Statement of Intent (PASI) shows intent to initiate the certification process.

1. An applicant should conduct a thorough review of the appropriate regulations and advisory material to obtain guidance for personnel, facility, equipment, and documentation requirements.

2. The manager of the CHDO, or their designee, will use the PASI to evaluate the complexity of the proposed operation. This allows the complexity of the certification to be the basis for the establishment of the certification team. The FAA will designate a CPM as its principal spokesperson during certification.

NOTE: If the application includes satellite repair stations located in another district or region, the certificating office will initiate coordination with its region and other affected districts or regions as early as possible. Further coordination, will then be directed by the region identified with the managerial repair station CHDO. The certification coordination process will follow the applicable process found in paragraph 2-1214F, Transition to Satellite Repair Station System.

b) How to complete FAA Form 8310-3, Application for Repair Station Certificate and/or Rating.

c) Formal Application Attachments. These include:

1. RSM. This manual will establish how a certificated repair station will conduct business on a daily basis and comply with part 145, §§ 145.207 and 145.209.

2. QCM. This manual will ensure that any article(s) repaired or maintained by a repair station or its contractors will meet the airworthiness criteria established in § 145.211.

3. Training Program. The training program is approved by the FAA and must ensure that each employee assigned to perform maintenance, preventative maintenance, alterations, and inspection functions is capable of performing the assigned task.

4. Letter of Compliance. Although not required by part 145, encourage the applicant to complete a letter of compliance. The letter of compliance will ensure that the part 145 regulatory requirements are addressed during the certification process. This is accomplished by listing, in sequence, each section of part 145. After each section include a brief narrative or specific reference to a manual/document that describes how the applicant will comply with that regulation. Review the letter of compliance to ensure that the applicant has a clear understanding of the regulation and that the proposed method of compliance meets the intent of the regulation.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



5. Hazardous Material (hazmat). If the repair station and/or its contractors and subcontractors perform a job function concerning transportation of dangerous goods (hazmat), the repair station must train its employees on the hazmat standards. The repair station must also provide the FAA with a letter certifying the training of the appropriate employees. Retain this letter with the certification report and file. This letter is only required at the time of initial certification or anytime the repair station applies for a change to its certificate as defined in § 145.57, if not previously submitted.

NOTE: The CPM, at the time of application, will notify the repair station applicant that the repair station must address the requirements of § 145.53. The CPM should review the letter of compliance to assure the applicant has addressed the requirements of §§ 145.53 and 145.57. The FAA is required to have the certifying letter on file. However, the burden of surveillance and qualifications of hazmat requirements falls on the FAA Office of Security and Hazardous Material (ASH).

d) RSM and QCM Advisory Circular (AC). Encourage the applicant to use the current edition of AC 145-9, Guide for Developing and Evaluating Repair Station and Quality Control Manuals, for guidance in developing the manuals. It is the applicant’s responsibility to develop manuals and procedures that ensure safe operating practices and compliance with the rules. The manual should allow the user to understand its content without further explanation and must not contradict any regulatory requirements. The certification team can offer suggestions for improvement but must not “write” the material.

3) Personnel Requirements (§ 145.151).

a) Each repair station must have the management personnel necessary for the scope and complexity of its organization. The regulation requires an accountable manager, supervisory personnel, inspection personnel, and certificated personnel to approve the articles it maintains for return to service. The accountable manager for multiple satellite locations will typically be located at the repair station with managerial control. Whether the accountable manager is at the managerial repair station or at another repair station within the system, their manual should include how the accountable manager will operate. It may be necessary for the repair station to have other management or supervisory personnel that are not regulatory.

b) The repair station may use training, knowledge, experience, or practical testing of noncertificated employees performing maintenance functions as the basis for determining their abilities.

c) Qualifications of supervisory and inspection personnel, and those personnel authorized to approve an article for return to service, must meet the requirements of 14 CFR part 65 and §§ 145.153, 145.155, and 145.157. These personnel must be able to read, write, and understand English.

d) Inspection personnel not authorized to approve articles for return to service need only read, write, and understand English (see § 145.155).

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



B. Formal Application Phase. To begin the formal application phase, the team will receive the application and attachments. As a rule, the team will meet with the applicant after receiving the formal application package. Resolve all questions about the proposed operation, formal application, and attachments at this time. The meeting should consist of the certification team members and all key management personnel from the applicant’s organization.

NOTE: Determine the legal name and address of the owner at this point.

C. Document Compliance Phase. In this phase, the application receives a thorough review for approval or disapproval, and the manual and related attachments undergo review to ensure conformity to the applicable regulations and safe operating practices. The CHDO certification team completes this phase. The aviation safety inspector (ASI) will follow the guidelines as defined in Volume 3, Chapter 1, Section 1, when a document requires an acceptance and/or approval.

D. Demonstration and Inspection Phase. In this phase, the certification team ensures that the applicant’s proposed procedures are effective and that facilities and equipment meet regulatory requirements. The CPM must decide if demonstrations are necessary.

E. Certification Phase.

1) Issuance. Once the applicant meets the regulatory requirements of part 145, the certification team will issue the repair station certificate and operations specifications (OpSpecs) with the appropriate ratings.

2) Duration. A certificated repair station located in the United Sates has no expiration date.

2-1214 SATELLITE REPAIR STATIONS SYSTEM.

A. General.

1) A certificated repair station under the managerial control of the parent certificated repair station may operate as a satellite repair station if it meets all the requirements of § 145.107. If the applicant or person/corporation of multiple part 145 repair stations elects not to have all their repair stations under the satellite repair station system, the repair stations not incorporated into the repair station system will be stand-alone repair stations. For example, a corporation has six repair stations; five are under a satellite repair station system—one is the parent managerial repair station and the other four are satellite repair stations. The sixth will be a stand-alone repair station.

2) While a repair station may be authorized to temporarily perform work at another location under § 145.203, as described in Volume 6, Chapter 9, Section 13, such work on a permanent basis will require the location to be authorized as an additional fixed location in accordance with Volume 2, Chapter 11, Section 1, paragraph 2-1182, or certified as a satellite repair station.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



3) A satellite repair station is intended to be a permanent extension of the managerial repair station operating under a common manual system. The intent is to provide standardization of processes and procedures that are applicable to the repair station with managerial control and all associated satellites within the system. Acceptance of manuals and approval of the employee training program will be accomplished by the managerial repair station CHDO.

B. Satellite System Oversight Structure.

1) The CHDO for the repair station with managerial control has overall authority and coordination responsibility for acceptance/approval of the satellite repair station system manual(s) and employee training program, and coordination responsibility for the issuance of OpSpecs and repairman certificates. Additional responsibility includes the coordinated resolution of issues identified by satellite CHDO(s) and keeping satellite CHDO(s) informed of any certificate management issues relative to the satellite repair station system.

2) Repair station certificates, including satellites, are normally assigned to the CHDO with geographic responsibility, while a satellite CHDO has normal oversight of the satellite repair station to include Repair Station Assessment Tool (RSAT) accomplishment and issuing OpSpecs and repairman certificates. The satellite CHDO may recommend changes to the repair station’s manual(s) by contacting the CHDO of the managerial repair station; only the CHDO for the managerial repair station may accept/approve the change. The satellite CHDO also has the responsibility to coordinate with the managerial CHDO on issues relating to the associated satellite repair station encompassing the issuance of OpSpecs, repairman certificates, and surveillance findings. Disagreements between a satellite CHDO and the CHDO of the managerial repair station will be resolved before the issue is presented to the repair station. All RSM/QSM changes must be coordinated with each affected repair station. A formal risk management process (RMP) will be initiated if significant issues are identified or if the CHDO of the managerial repair station and the CHDO of any affected satellite cannot reach consensus.

3) Certification and oversight of the repair station with managerial control and its satellites will be accomplished using one of the following models:

a) Each repair station certificate is held by the CHDO having geographic responsibility;

b) All associated satellite repair station certificates are held by a certificate management unit (CMU) located near the repair station with managerial control. All ASIs may be assigned to and located at the CMU, or a Remotely Sited Geographic Aviation Safety Inspector (RSI) may be assigned to the CMU and located near one or more of the satellites. A CMU is defined as a CHDO that has complete oversight responsibility for satellite repair stations located outside of its geographical boundaries; or

c) A combination of the above. In this case, the repair station with managerial control and one or more satellites are located within the geographic area of responsibility of the managerial repair station CHDO, while additional satellites are located outside this geographic area and managed by the local geographic CHDO(s).

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



4) Regardless of the model used, the CHDO for the repair station with managerial control has overall responsibility for the acceptance/approval of the satellite repair station system manual(s), and coordination responsibility for the issuance of OpSpecs, repairman certificates, and document control. An additional responsibility includes the mitigation of issues identified by satellite CHDO(s). The managerial repair station CHDO will keep the satellite CHDO(s) informed of any issues related to certificate management applicable to the satellite repair station system.

5) A satellite repair station CHDO has responsibility for oversight of the satellite repair station, including the coordination of manual changes, coordinating the issuance of OpSpecs, coordinating document and training program revisions, and notifying the managerial repair station CHDO of any issues related to certificate management.

6) The acceptability or approval of required manuals will be coordinated with each responsible principal maintenance inspector (PMI)/principal avionics inspector (PAI). Differences should be coordinated and resolved between CHDO(s). Issues that cannot be resolved between CHDO(s) will be resolved at the regional level. A formal RMP will be initiated if significant issues are identified or if the CHDO of the managerial repair station and the CHDO of any affected satellite cannot reach consensus.

NOTE: Significant issues identified by either the satellite repair station CHDO or the managerial repair station CHDO require use of the RMP to clearly document the issues.

C. Formation of a CMU. A CMU is a CHDO that has complete oversight responsibility for satellite repair stations located outside the CHDO’s geographic area of responsibility. The FAA, not the repair station, will determine when a CMU is appropriate. The formation of a CMU is limited to certain situations that leverage the FAA’s ability to provide efficient and effective oversight of the managerial repair station and numerous associated satellite repair stations. Formation of a CMU requires Regional Office (RO) concurrence and coordination with the Aircraft Maintenance Division (AFS-300).

1) The initial request for the formation of a CMU is generated by the managerial repair station CHDO and must include justification. The formal written request will be forwarded to the region and should address the following:

a) Why the CMU is desired.

b) How the managerial repair station CHDO plans to establish the CMU.

c) Benefit to FAA, including a cost-benefit analysis.

d) How the CMU will affect standardization for participating repair stations.

e) Manpower requirements necessary to establish the CMU and provide continuing oversight of all affected repair stations.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



f) How the CMU will provide effective and efficient certificate management and oversight/surveillance.

g) Staffing structure.

h) Timeline and logistics.

2) The responsible region(s) will evaluate the package for validity and acceptance. The controlling region has responsibility for creation and acceptance of the CMU. Regional concurrence should be based on current and future assurance that the necessary resources are available to provide adequate oversight. After obtaining regional concurrence, the CHDO for the repair station with managerial control may complete the certification, add or amend ratings, and perform surveillance. When necessary, the CHDO for the repair station with managerial control may request certification assistance from the satellite repair station’s geographic CHDO.

NOTE: When a proposed CMU crosses regional boundaries, the managerial repair station’s CHDO RO will coordinate the formation of the CMU with all affected regions.

D. Certification Considerations for Satellite Repair Stations. The repair station certification process described in this chapter also applies to the certification of a satellite. Each satellite repair station will have its own air agency certificate issued by the FAA, but will operate under the managerial control of the parent certificated repair station.

1) An application for a satellite repair station will require coordination between the FAA office with geographic responsibility and the CHDO of the repair station with managerial control.

2) The repair station with managerial control shall specify the work to be performed by its satellite(s) and provide the manuals in the form of a RSM/QCM. Ratings issued to the satellite station are based upon the facilities, materials, equipment, and personnel at that location and are controlled by the RSM/QCM, which the managerial repair station has provided. The satellite repair station must meet the regulatory requirements for each rating that it seeks; however, it may not hold a rating that is not held by the repair station with managerial control unless an exemption is granted. The repair station with managerial control may hold additional ratings not held by its satellites.

3) The manual system including the RSM and QCM may be contained in one document or as separate manuals. Each satellite repair station will use the same manual system as its managerial repair station. The RSM/QCM should be nearly identical to that used by the repair station with managerial control, except it may include information/procedures detailing operational differences applicable to the satellite. Minor differences, such as the description of housing, are acceptable when annotated in an appendix or a similar manner.

4) The training program submitted by the satellite repair station should be the same program used by the repair station with managerial control, except it may include information/procedures detailing training differences applicable to the satellite(s). A separate manual is not required for the training program; however, if the training program is contained in

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



another manual, it must be segregated in such a way as to facilitate FAA approval of only the training program section.

5) When certificated repairmen are necessary to satisfy applicable personnel requirements, a completed FAA Form 8610-2, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application, and a letter of recommendation should be submitted for each repairman. Repairman certificates issued listing the certificate number of the repair station with managerial control allow the repairman to exercise the privileges of their certificate at any satellite repair station associated with the managerial repair station. If the repairman certificate is issued listing the satellite certificate number, the repairman may only exercise the privileges of the certificate for the satellite listed.

6) Personnel and equipment from the certificated repair station with managerial control and from each of the satellite repair stations may be shared in accordance with § 145.107(b). When applicable, the RSM/QCM should contain procedures for sharing personnel and the transfer of equipment between facilities. Shared personnel must be qualified and familiar with any procedural differences for each assigned location.

7) A satellite repair station may not be located in a country other than the domicile country of the certificated repair station with managerial control.

8) Whenever possible, a satellite repair station designator will contain the same first three characters as the repair station with managerial control. However, an existing repair station transitioning to a satellite is not expected to change its designator to comply. When obtaining a precertification number for a new satellite, advise the Aviation Data Systems Branch (AFS-620) that a satellite repair station number is required.

E. Personnel. Unless the FAA indicates otherwise, a repair station with managerial control and each of its satellite repair stations may share personnel provided:

• Inspectors, supervisors, and return-to-service personnel are identified and authorized on the appropriate station roster;

• The repairman certificates of shared personnel contain the certificate number of the repair station with managerial control if the repairman will exercise the privileges of their certificate; and

• Inspection personnel are designated and available at the satellite station any time a determination of airworthiness or return to service is made.

F. Transition to Satellite Repair Station System. A person holding two or more repair station certificates may transition to the satellite repair station system. The satellite system will consist of one or more satellite repair stations operating under the managerial control of the parent certificated repair station. The repair station with managerial control and each satellite will use a common RSM/QCM and training program. When necessary, the RSM/QCM and training program may contain an appendix or similar method of identifying operational differences. If the person of multiple part 145 repair stations elects not to transition all their repair stations to the satellite repair station system, the non-transitioning repair stations will be stand-alone repair stations. Example: A person/corporation has six repair stations; three

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



transition to a satellite repair station system, one is the parent managerial repair station, and two are satellite repair stations. The remaining three will be stand-alone repair stations.

NOTE: Many corporations with multiple repair stations are consolidating their operations, quality control (QC) systems, manuals, and recordkeeping systems. It is essential that principal inspectors (PI) coordinate their efforts when notified that the certificated repair station with managerial control and its satellite facilities desire standardized systems.

1) Upon receiving an Application for Repair Station Certificate and/or Rating (FAA Form 8310-3) for transition to the satellite repair station system, the CHDO will review the request and identify all affected certificates. The certificate holder will designate the repair station with managerial control in coordination with the FAA.

2) The CHDO will, when appropriate (the transition is complex, involving multiple facilities and or crossing office/regional boundaries), forward a copy of the application package to the region for coordination and assistance. If the satellite system will cross regional boundaries, the region responsible for the managerial repair station will coordinate with other affected regions to assist in the transition process.

3) The region will assist the CHDO to establish a transition team consisting of at least one member from each CHDO holding certificates. Team participants will normally be the PIs assigned to each affected certificate. The responsible regions, with headquarters (HQ) assistance when required, will provide facilitation and briefings of the processes as necessary.

NOTE: If the satellite repair station holds or desires to hold a rating that the repair station with managerial control does not hold, an exemption from § 145.107(a)(1) must be obtained under 14 CFR part 11.

4) The FAA transition team will establish a transition plan and bridging document with milestones and definitive timelines to ensure an orderly transition. The plan should be based on the number and complexity of certificates involved and include sufficient detail to identify any hazards that require mitigation. The following items will be considered when developing the transition plan and bridging document:

• Evaluation of each facility to include ratings, OpSpecs, and capability; • Transition period/length; • Geographic locations; • Complexity; • FAA budget for transition; • FAA personnel required; • Tasking/assignment; • Regional coordination; • CHDOs coordination; • Meeting logistics; and • Contingency plans—forward-looking decision plan based on the operator’s

capability to adhere to their transition plan.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



5) The applicant should also establish a transition plan and bridging document in collaboration with the FAA to establish milestones and definitive timelines for the orderly transition. The plan should include sufficient detail to identify any hazards that require mitigation. The following items should be considered:

• Geographic locations, • Complexity, • Training needs, • Changes to management structure, • Personnel requirements, and • Standardization of procedures (forms, manuals, etc.).

2-1215 AMENDMENT TO OR TRANSFER OF CERTIFICATE. Sections 145.51 and 145.57 require a repair station to submit a new application in the following situations:

A. Certificate Change. The holder of a repair station certificate must apply for a change to its certificate if the certificate holder changes the location of the repair station or requests to add or amend a rating. The FAA must receive notification in advance and may prescribe conditions that the repair station must follow while moving to the new address/location.

1) When preparing an amended or changed certificate, the “Date issued” field will retain the original certification date. For added ratings, the effective date of each rating will be in parentheses adjacent to the rating. The “Current Issue Date” entered in the Vital Information Subsystem (VIS) should reflect the most recent date the certificate was amended or changed.

2) A revised or amended rating does not require a change to FAA Form 8000-4, Air Agency Certificate. If a repair station only desires to amend its present rating by adding an additional aircraft type, the associated OpSpecs and capability list will undergo revision as necessary.

3) A simple name change without a change of ownership or transfer of asset does not require a new certificate number. The ASI must ensure the certificate holder is not using the name change to circumvent initial certification requirements.

B. Sale or Transfer of Assets. The privileges of a repair station certificate are not transferable. If the holder of the repair station certificate sells or transfers its assets, the new owner must apply for an amended certificate in accordance with § 145.51. There are occasions when repair station ownership changes without a corresponding change in location, facilities, or personnel.

1) The inspector should recommend a new certificate number due to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and liability issues. ASIs should inform prospective owners that they may be held liable for the work performed under previous management if they keep the same certificate number. New owners must stipulate in writing that they clearly understand the potential of release of information under the FOIA before receiving permission to retain the old certificate number.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



2) If the new owner elects to retain the original certificate number, the revised air agency certificate (FAA Form 8000-4) will show the original certification date in the “Date issued” field. If issuing a new certificate number, prepare a new air agency certificate using the effective date of the new certificate. The “Date issued” should always reflect the original certification date for the certificate number identified on the air agency certificate.

3) A change in ownership may or may not affect the status of a satellite repair station. If the operational relationship that established a repair station as a satellite continues unchanged, a change to the certificate number may not be required. If that relationship no longer exists, the certificate number identifying the repair station as a satellite cannot be retained by the new owner.

4) ASIs should contact their regional general counsel office when faced with questions concerning whether limited liability corporations or changes in stockholder ownership constitute a transfer of repair station assets.

2-1216 COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS. This task requires coordination among the ASIs (Airworthiness) and may require coordination with multiple regions.

2-1217 REFERENCES, FORMS, AND JOB AIDS.

A. References (current editions):

• Title 14 CFR parts 21, 39, 43, 45, 65, 91, 121, 125, and 135. • AC 145-9, Guide for Developing and Evaluating Repair Station and Quality

Control Manuals. • Volume 2, Chapter 11, Certification of a Title 14 CFR Part 145 Repair Station:

• Section 1, Introduction; • Section 4, Evaluate a Part 145 Repair Station and Quality Control Manual or

Revision; and • Section 5, Evaluate Part 145 Repair Station Facilities and Equipment.

• Volume 6, Chapter 9, Section 16, Inspect Part 145 Repair Stations Within the United States.

B. Forms:

• FAA automated repair station OpSpecs; • FAA Form 8000-4, Air Agency Certificate; • FAA Form 8060-4, Temporary Airman Certificate; • FAA Form 8310-3, Application for Repair Station Certificate and/or Rating; • FAA Form 8400-6, Preapplication Statement of Intent; and • FAA Form 8610-2, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application, if applicable.

C. Job Aids. None.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



2-1218 PREAPPLICATION PHASE.

A. Response to Initial Inquiry. Respond to an initial inquiry for a repair station certificate or satellites.

NOTE: Applications for a new repair station certificate will be managed in accordance with the Flight Standards Certification Service Oversight Process (CSOP). See the current edition of FAA Order 8000.92, AFS Certification Services Oversight Process.

B. Previously Surrendered or Revoked Certificate. If an applicant requests certification less than 1 year after surrender or revocation of its previous certificate, a formal RMP will be initiated to identify and evaluate any potential associated risk.

C. Topics for Discussion. Discuss with the applicant the following subjects:

1) The necessary technical expertise required by the applicant’s proposed organization, to include the following:

• Aviation-related experience, • Proposed organizational structure, and • Knowledge of the specific maintenance functions to perform.

2) The rating required for the type of work to accomplish.

3) The requirements for sufficient personnel to meet the demands of the proposed repair station. This includes at least one certificated person with appropriate ratings that coincide with the ratings sought.

NOTE: For repair stations located within the United States, the supervisor and the person authorized to approve an article for return to service must be certificated under part 65. In a small organization, the certificated person could perform both functions.

4) Facility requirements for the ratings sought, to include:

• The need for ventilation, lighting, and control of temperature, humidity, and other climatic conditions to ensure personnel can perform maintenance as required by this part;

• The size of the facility; • Manufacturers’ recommended or equivalent test equipment; and • Special tools, etc.

5) The requirements for current technical data appropriate for the work to perform. The following receive consideration as technical data:

• Airworthiness Directives (AD), • Instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA),

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



• Maintenance manuals, • Overhaul manuals, • Standard practices manuals, • Service Bulletins (SB), and • Other applicable data acceptable to or approved by the FAA.

NOTE: Appliance manufacturers’ maintenance manuals or instructions, though not specifically approved by the FAA, receive consideration as in compliance with part 43, § 43.7; part 65, § 65.95; part 121, § 121.379(b); part 135, § 135.437(b); and § 145.201.

6) The requirement to provide the FAA with a POC.

D. Paperwork and Timeframe. The CHDO will give FAA Form 8400-6 to the applicant with instructions for completion. Advise the applicant to submit the completed PASI to the CHDO. Inform the applicant that the certification process cannot continue until the review and acceptance of the PASI.

1) The FAA should advise the applicant of the complexity of the process and provide the applicant with an estimated timeframe for the completion of the project. (This is a recommendation only; the timeframe allows the applicant the ability to make the appropriate business decisions and is also dependent on the applicant’s ability to comply with the requirements.)

2) Advise the applicant to develop a time line so that all involved are aware of their commitments and obligations.

NOTE: The ASI should advise the applicant that there are time restrictions for processing applications due to FAA resource availability. An application for certification must not remain dormant. A lack of applicant activity for 90 days during the certification process will result in termination of the application.

E. Initiate the Certification Process.

1) The CHDO will review the PASI for acceptance and completeness.

2) The inspector will obtain the precertification number from AFS-620. For a satellite repair station, advise AFS-620 that a satellite repair station number is desired. Normally, the precertification number is the same as the final certificate number except it ends with the letter “P” denoting its precertification status. The applicant may require the certificate number to develop documents such as return to service tags for inclusion in the RSM.

3) In section 2 of the PASI, the inspector will check the “Information only” block and enter the date the office received and reviewed the PASI.

4) The CHDO manager or designee will assign an inspector or a team of inspectors (depending on the complexity of the application) to the certification process. The manager will also designate an inspector as the CPM.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



5) Satellite repair station certification requires coordination between the office with geographic responsibility and the CHDO of the certificated repair station with managerial control. See paragraph 2-1214, Satellite Repair Station System, for additional information.

6) A certificate management office (CMO) with oversight responsibilities for a part 121 air carrier that has a part 145 repair station(s) will be assigned certification and surveillance responsibilities for its part 145 repair station(s) and satellite(s), if applicable. The CMO must also provide adequate personnel to oversee the part 145 repair station(s) and its satellite(s) work activities appropriate to their size and complexity.

7) The CPM will contact the applicant to arrange a preapplication meeting.

F. Conduct Preapplication Meeting. Meet with the applicant to discuss questions concerning the certification process, regulatory requirements, the formal application and attachments, etc. Accomplish the following during the meeting(s):

1) Discuss the regulations applicable to the proposed maintenance operation.

2) Provide the applicant with the following material:

• A copy of AC 145-9, Guide for Developing and Evaluating Repair Station and Quality Control Manuals;

• A copy of AC 145-10, Repair Station Training Program; • A copy of FAA Form 8310-3, Application for Repair Station Certificate

and/or Rating; and • Copies of FAA Form 8610-2, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application, if

applicable.

3) Inform the applicant that a formal application package for a repair station certificate within the United Sates and its territories must contain the following material:

a) A completed FAA Form 8310-3.

b) A copy of the RSM and QCM in a format acceptable to the FAA. If the manual or manuals submitted are in electronic media format, they must be compatible with FAA electronic capabilities and free of any programs that would adversely affect that capability.

NOTE: Electronic media must be compatible with the CHDO’s system. If an applicant’s media is not compatible, then the FAA cannot consider it acceptable. The current version of AC 120-78, Acceptance and Use of Electronic Signatures, Electronic Recordkeeping Systems, and Electronic Manuals, provides guidance for the use of electronic media.

c) A training program applicable to employees assigned to perform maintenance, preventative maintenance, alterations, and inspection functions.

d) A letter requesting processing of the application, indicating when facilities, equipment, material, and data will be ready for formal inspection.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



e) A letter of compliance.

f) An application for a repairman certificate and letter of recommendation, if applicable.

g) When requesting a limited rating, the make and model of the particular item(s) to be maintained and the nature of the work to be performed.

h) When seeking approval of a Class 2 propeller rating, a list by make of the propeller.

i) When making a request for a limited specialized services rating, and the applicant develops the specification, advise the applicant that the CHDO and the Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) must review the specification, which may cause some delay in the repair station certification process. If the specification contains data that is a major repair or major alteration, then that data must be FAA-approved.

NOTE: The repair station may request a limited rating for specialized services utilizing a civil or military specification currently used by industry. The PI should carefully consider if this specification covers all areas required for the repair prior to approval. Will this repair, when completed, allow approval for return to service for the article? In some cases, the PI may need assistance from the ACO to determine if the specification is adequate for the rating requested. However, it is ultimately the PI’s responsibility to assure that the applicant can accomplish the work specified by the specification even though the ACO concurs with the specification. If the specification does not meet the requirements of § 43.13, then the PI should inform the applicant that the specification may be used as part of a process the applicant can develop under the provisions of § 145.61(c)(2). The PI should not accept the process at face value, but must evaluate if the process is appropriate for the article. The PI should annotate the need for additional limitations, if any, in the limitation section of the OpSpecs. Many civil and military specifications currently used by industry are generic. The PI should verify that the repair station has provisions in its manual for evaluation of the article to determine if anything would prohibit the specification utilization.

j) Repair stations are not issued ratings and/or limitations for hydrostatic testing of pressure cylinders. Certification of hydrostatic testing facilities (initial or renewal) is the responsibility of the Department of Transportation (DOT), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety, Administration, Special Permits and Approvals, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE, Washington, DC, 20590, 800-467-4922.

4) If the applicant requested certification of a repair station with managerial control in conjunction with certification of one or more satellites, the CPM should advise the applicant of the privileges, limitations, and responsibilities of each. The applicant must submit an application package for each repair station and identify which repair station will have managerial control. The repair station with managerial control is determined by the applicant, not FAA. Ownership, size of facility, or other factors may not necessarily indicate managerial control. This

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



is also true when an applicant applies for a satellite repair station certificate under the managerial control of an existing certificated repair station.

5) The FAA inspector/team will evaluate the results of the preapplication meeting; if acceptable, continue to next phase.

2-1219 FORMAL APPLICATION PHASE.

A. Receive the Formal Application. Ensure submission and completeness of all documents.

B. Evaluate the Application Package. Based on the initial survey of the application package, make a decision whether or not to continue with the certification process.

C. Conduct an Application Meeting. Answer any open questions concerning the package before proceeding to the next phase. Do this in the most effective way possible; e.g., meetings or correspondence.

2-1220 DOCUMENT COMPLIANCE PHASE.

A. Review the Application Package. Review the content of each submitted document for regulatory compliance. The documents for review include:

• A completed FAA Form 8310-3. For a satellite repair station, the request should not include any ratings not held by the managerial repair station unless an exemption is obtained.

• RSM. • QCM.

NOTE: One document may contain the RSM/QCM manuals. They do not have to be separate manuals. If a satellite repair station certificate is sought, the RSM/QCM should be the manual(s) submitted by the repair station with managerial control to include information/procedures detailing operational differences applicable to the satellite.

• Training program. If a satellite repair station certificate is sought, the training program submitted by the satellite should be the same program submitted by the repair station with managerial control to include information/procedures detailing training differences applicable to the satellite(s).

• Letter of compliance. • Hazmat training certification. When required, this must be submitted prior to

certificate issuance. • Application for a repairman certificate and letter of recommendation, if

applicable. For a satellite repair station, if a repairman certificate is issued with the certificate number of the repair station with managerial control, that repairman may also exercise the privilege of their certificate at any of the associated satellite repair stations, provided they are authorized by the repair station. If the repairman

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



certificate is issued with the satellite certificate number, that repairman is limited to the satellite.

• The list of makes and models of the particular item(s) to be maintained and the nature of the work to be performed for any limited ratings.

NOTE: Normally, the FAA will not issue a class rating on an initial certification. All new applications should receive a limited rating until the repair station performs enough work to establish a representative number of make and models that would qualify the repair station for a class rating. The PI should exercise discretion when using the term “representative number,” as this will vary with the type of application and the depth and complexity of the work performed. An applicant would normally receive an airframe Class 4 rating after demonstrating the ability to maintain one of each make in that class (i.e., Boeing 747, Airbus A300, or MD-11). An accessory, radio, instrument, etc., class rating would differ from the airframe rating because of the various makes/models of valves, radios, instruments, and other articles that are very similar in design and function. The issuance of a class rating would be at the discretion of the applicant and agreeable to the ASI when the applicant has demonstrated the capability to maintain several different articles. When a repair station with managerial control is issued a class rating, § 145.107(a)(1) is not intended to preclude the satellite from holding an associated limited rating. For example, it is acceptable for the repair station with managerial control to hold an airframe Class 4 rating, while the associated satellite holds a limited airframe rating.

• The list, by make, of the propeller for a Class 2 propeller rating. • A copy of the acceptable/approved specification for the work to be performed for

a specialized service rating, when applicable. • A copy of a capability list, if appropriate (§ 145.215).

B. Document Deficiencies. If any document has deficiencies, return it to the applicant with a letter outlining the deficient areas. Inform the applicant that the certification process will not continue until all deficiencies are resolved.

2-1221 DEMONSTRATION AND INSPECTION PHASE. During the demonstration and inspection phase, the CPM should verify that the repair station meets the requirements of § 145.51(b). Although the repair station is allowed to contract a maintenance function to an outside source, the CPM must verify that the repair station is capable of performing the maintenance under the rating requested. Contracted maintenance functions must not circumvent the certification requirements. Unless the FAA indicates otherwise, personnel and equipment from the certificated repair station with managerial control and from each of the satellite repair stations may be shared in accordance with § 145.107(b). Shared personnel must be qualified and familiar with any procedural differences at each assigned location.

A. Coordinate and Schedule Inspection. Coordination is required between the CPM, team members, and the applicant.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



1) During the inspection phase, the team should verify that the RSM and the QCM are followed.

2) The team should also use the repair station letter of compliance to confirm that the facility meets all the requirements of the regulations.

B. Perform a Housing and Facility Inspection. During the demonstration and inspection phase, inspect the repair station facilities to ensure that the work performed has protection from weather elements, dust, and heat. Ensure that the control of temperature, humidity, and other climatic conditions allow personnel to perform maintenance functions to the standards required by this part (see Volume 2, Chapter 11, Section 5). In addition, inspect for the following:

1) Tooling and equipment are properly stored and maintained in good working order:

a) Calibration is performed at established intervals and meets the requirements of § 145.109.

b) If the repair station obtains special equipment and tools as needed in accordance with § 145.109, verify that a contract is available for review to ensure that the tools and equipment will be available upon the repair station’s request.

NOTE: All tools and equipment must be in place at the time of initial certification or rating approval by the FAA (§ 145.51(b)).

2) Material. Ensure that all materials needed for the rating are on the premises and under the repair station’s control during work performance.

a) Ensure that the repair station has the proper controls for stored material and a recordkeeping system that has document traceability back to the place of purchase.

b) Traceability of all materials in the supply room must have documentation to show the material qualification (e.g., invoice, process specifications, and supplier qualifications).

c) If necessary, a repair station surveillance program of its suppliers to meet the above will meet these requirements.

3) Calibration Standards.

a) The calibration standards of all test and measuring equipment manufactured in the United States, except those used in continuity checks for troubleshooting, will receive testing at regular intervals to a standard derived from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) or a standard provided by the manufacturer.

b) Foreign-manufactured measuring and test equipment must meet the calibration standards of the manufacturer.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



NOTE: The part 145 rule states that tooling is calibrated to a standard acceptable to the Administrator. Those standards may be derived from the NIST, or to a standard provided by the equipment manufacturer. International agreements may also be acceptable as a means of compliance. A list of international agreements referred to as Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) or Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRA) is accessible from the NIST Web site (http://www.nist.gov). In addition, the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) provides third-party accreditation to testing and calibration laboratories. NVLAP establishes its accreditation programs in response to Congressional mandates, administrative actions by the Federal Government, or from requests by private-sector organizations. NVLAP is in full conformance with the standards of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), including ISO/IEC 17025 and ISO/IEC 17011. NVLAP identifies its accredited laboratories in a directory published on the NIST Web site. Additionally, for foreign equipment, a repair station may use the standard of the country of manufacture if approved by the Administrator. A repair station must have an exemption authorization if it uses equipment of a foreign manufacturer and an MOU or MRA does not address the method of calibration the repair station will use, or the FAA inspector cannot obtain the validity of the calibration laboratory. The issuance of an exemption per part 11 guidance grants exemption authorizations. Currently, exemptions of this type last for 2 years and are renewable if requested by the repair station.

c) Test and inspection equipment and special tooling (equivalent) manufactured by a repair station must meet the calibration standards recommended by the manufacturer of the article being measured or tested. This type of test equipment calibration will be traceable to a NIST standard or a standard acceptable to the FAA.

NOTE: Designated Engineering Representatives (DER) may not approve or determine equivalency of tooling and test equipment. Furthermore, neither the FAA nor a DER may approve equipment and/or test apparatus. The FAA and DERs may only make an acceptance of functional equivalency for special equipment or test apparatus. It is important to emphasize that the burden of demonstrating equivalency is borne by the repair station—not the FAA.

4) Facilities are adequate to perform the functions as defined in the RSM and QCM.

C. Evaluate Maintenance Organization. Ensure the following:

1) The inspection system is in place (see Volume 2, Chapter 11, Section 4) to ensure:

a) Employees are familiar with and are capable of performing their assigned duties,

b) The system for reporting serious defects or unairworthy conditions is in place to ensure compliance with § 145.221,

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



c) The maintenance recordkeeping system is in place to ensure compliance with part 43 and § 145.219, and

d) The repair station has a QC system in place that ensures the articles upon which the repair station or any of its contractors perform a maintenance function are Airworthy.

2) There are a sufficient number of personnel to satisfy the volume and type of work to perform, as required by part 145 subpart D:

a) Ensure the repair station designates an employee as the accountable manager;

b) Ensure the repair station provides qualified personnel to plan, supervise, perform, and approve for return to service the work for which it is rated;

c) Ensure it has a sufficient number of employees with training or knowledge and experience in accomplishing the work being performed; and

d) Determine the abilities of its noncertificated employees performing maintenance functions based on training, knowledge, experience, or practical tests.

3) A personnel roster(s) is available that includes management, supervisory, and inspection personnel responsible for the repair station operations, oversight of maintenance functions, and personnel authorized to sign a maintenance release for approving an article for return to service (see § 145.161); and

4) Management, supervisory, and inspection personnel employment summaries for those persons listed above are available (see § 145.161).

D. Analyze Deficiencies.

1) If you note deficiencies, notify the applicant in writing. If appropriate, meet with the applicant to review deficiencies in detail.

2) The applicant must take corrective action and notify the CPM in writing in order for the certification process to continue. Fully document and record each deficiency and corrective action in the certification file.

2-1222 CERTIFICATION PHASE.

A. Prepare Certificates. When the applicant has met all regulatory requirements, the CPM will accomplish the following:

1) Complete blocks 6–10 of FAA Form 8310-3, to show:

• Findings and recommendations, • Any remark or discrepancy noted during inspection, • Date of inspection, and • Office and signature of the CPM.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



2) Prepare FAA Form 8000-4, which the CHDO manager must sign.

3) Prepare FAA automated OpSpecs. The appropriate Airworthiness ASI will sign the OpSpecs showing the limitations issued. Separate OpSpecs pages may list these limitations.

4) If applicable, issue FAA OpSpecs with appropriate ratings.

NOTE: Air agency certificates and OpSpecs are legal documents. Language should clearly specify the authorizations, ratings, and/or limitations being approved. When filling out these forms, there must not be any erasures, strikeovers, or typographical errors on the completed document.

B. Prepare Air Agency Certificates. The certificate will include the following information (also see Volume 2, Chapter 1, Section 4):

1) After “Number,” insert the certificate number assigned to the facility. This will be in accordance with the current air agency numbering system. For a satellite repair station, ensure that the certificate number listed is appropriate for the satellite. For additional information on certificate number construction, see Volume 2, Chapter 1, Section 3.

2) Under “This certificate is issued to,” insert the official name of applicant’s business. This must be the same as shown on the application form. The acronym “DBA” (doing business as) will precede any additional business names listed.

3) Under “whose business address is,” insert the address/location of the applicant’s business. This must be the same as shown on the application form.

4) After “to operate an approved,” insert the words “repair station” or “satellite repair station” as appropriate.

5) Under “with the following ratings,” insert the ratings issued. List the ratings by the general category, such as airframe, powerplant, radio, etc.

6) If a repair station is issued a limited rating (e.g., limited radio), then the certificate must list it as such.

7) When ratings are added or amended, show the date of each issuance in parentheses following the added or amended rating.

8) After “must continue in effect,” for repair stations located in the United States, insert the word “indefinitely.”

9) Under “Date issued,” insert the issuance date of the certificate. This will be the date of original certification. Future changes or amendments to the certificate will not affect this date unless a new certificate number is issued.

10) Under “By direction of the Administrator,” insert the signature of the office manager and office identifier.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



C. Prepare OpSpecs.

1) Following “The rating(s) set forth on Air Agency Certificate Number,” insert the air agency certificate number from the respective certificate.

2) Following “is/are limited to the following,” insert, as applicable:

• Class ratings; • Limited ratings, to include makes, models, or parts; • Limited rating for specialized services, to include the specification used; • Line maintenance authorization (the repair station must meet the requirements

of § 145.205(d)); • Following “Delegated authorities,” insert “none”; • Under “Date issued or revised,” insert the date the inspection was

satisfactorily completed; and • Under “For the Administrator,” insert the signature block of the assigned

inspector.

D. Prepare Certification Report. Ensure preparation of a certification report. The report must include the name and title of each ASI on the certification team. The CPM signs the report, which contains at least the following:

• A copy of the PASI; • FAA Form 8310-3, completed; • A letter of compliance; • A copy of the air agency certificate issued; • A copy of the issued OpSpecs; • A copy of the hazmat letter if required; • A copy of any Temporary Airman Certificate issued; and • A summary of all discrepancies encountered during the inspection.

2-1223 TASK OUTCOMES.

A. Complete the PTRS Record.

B. Complete the Task. Completion of the certification task will result in one of the following:

• Issuance of a certificate and OpSpecs, or • A letter to the applicant indicating denial of the certificate, or • A letter to the applicant confirming termination of the certification process.

C. Distribute Certification Report. Retain the original certification report in the CMO/CHDO.

D. Document the Task. File all supporting paperwork in the certificate holder/applicant’s office file and update the VIS.

6/2/11 8900.1 CHG 92



2-1224 FUTURE ACTIVITIES. The CHDO must ensure that there is an orderly transition from the certification process to certificate management. Perform followup and surveillance inspections as required.


5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



VOLUME 3 GENERAL TECHNICAL ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 47 EVALUATE PART 121/125/135 (10 OR MORE AND TURBINE-POWERED AIRCRAFT) OPERATOR’S WEIGHT AND BALANCE

CONTROL PROGRAM

Section 1 Evaluating an Operator’s/Applicant’s Weight and Balance Control Program

3-3966 PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODES.

A. Operations: 1338, 1339.

B. Maintenance: 3328, 3329.

C. Avionics: 5328, 5329.

D. Surveillance Activity: 1639, 3639, 5639.

E. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 air carriers use the appropriate Air Transportation Oversight System (ATOS) Data Collection Tools (DCT).

3-3967 OBJECTIVE. This chapter provides guidance for evaluating an operator’s/applicant’s Weight and Balance control program procedures.

3-3968 GENERAL.

A. Approved Weight and Balance control program procedures are the only means for an operator/applicant to authorize the use of other than known weights for crew, passengers, carry-on baggage, or cargo. This program must be included in the operator’s/applicant’s manual system. The Weight and Balance control program is approved on the automated Operations Safety System (OPSS) by the principal maintenance inspector (PMI). If an operator chooses to use average passenger and baggage weights, the process for establishing these weights and surveys that validate them must be approved by the principal operations inspector (POI). Reports of the established average passenger and baggage weights and surveys are entered in the OPSS.

B. The operator/applicant may develop and submit for approval any method or procedure by which they can show that an aircraft:

• Is properly loaded according to approved configuration (loading schedules or charts);

• Will not exceed authorized Weight and Balance limitations during all ground and flight operations;

• Will be periodically reweighed and its data reevaluated; and • Will have its data recalculated, if needed due to changes.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



C. The operator’s/applicant’s Weight and Balance control program should be an independently controlled document that includes all the instructions and procedures for Weight and Balance control, or it may be included as a controlled part of another manual. The Weight and Balance control program should undergo periodic reviews to ensure compliance.

NOTE: Advisory Circular (AC) 120-85, Air Cargo Operations, defines cargo as freight, baggage, Company Materials (COMAT), or hazardous material (hazmat).

3-3969 CERTIFICATION BASIS (TYPE CERTIFICATE (TC)/AMENDED TC/SUPPLEMENTAL TYPE CERTIFICATE (STC)).

A. When the design of an aircraft is approved by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), an approved TC and Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) are issued. The TCDS includes all of the pertinent specifications for the aircraft. The Weight and Balance information is located in the TCDS under pertinent data to all models.

B. Conformity to type design is considered attained when the required and proper components are installed, and they are consistent with the drawings, specifications, and other data that are part of the TC. Conformity would include amended TCs, applicable STCs, and field-approved alterations.

C. Before an aircraft can be properly weighed and its empty-weight center of gravity (EWCG) computed, certain information must be known. This information is furnished by the FAA for every certificated aircraft in the TCDS or aircraft specifications available to all operators and can be accessed via the Internet at http://www.airweb.faa.gov/rgl.

NOTE: Additionally, the equipment list that comprises the basic operating weight (BOW) of the aircraft must be validated to ensure that it is current.

3-3970 MANUFACTURER DOCUMENTATION: AIRCRAFT FLIGHT MANUAL (AFM)/WEIGHT AND BALANCE DOCUMENT.

A. Review the manufacturer’s program in the approved Weight and Balance control document and AFM/Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM).

B. Verify that the Weight and Balance information in the Weight and Balance control document and AFM includes current Weight and Balance information such as:

• EWCG, • Loading graphs, • Center of gravity (CG) envelopes, • Loading schedules, • Index tables, and • Load manifest.

NOTE: The manual may refer to a Weight and Balance plotter. If so, ensure that this device is available.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



C. Ensure that the manufacturer’s procedures cover all aspects of the part 121 and 14 CFR parts 125/135 operator’s/applicant’s intended operation.

3-3971 OPERATOR/APPLICANT-DEVELOPED PROGRAM.

A. Submitted Program. The operator/applicant can submit any method or procedure by which it can show that all aircraft are properly loaded and will not exceed authorized Weight and Balance limitations during all operations.

1) These procedures can be provided in the operator’s manual or they may be an independently controlled document that includes all instructions and procedures for maintenance, operations, and cargo handling.

2) The Weight and Balance document must include company procedures and instructions for completing forms used in aircraft weight control and aircraft loading. Mathematical justification for loading provisions or schedules should be included in the submitted information.

3) The Weight and Balance document must indicate the source of the data used to develop the program. This data may come from the manufacturer’s Weight and Balance documentation referenced from the TCDS, the AFM/RFM, STC information, or other FAA-approved source.

4) The program shall contain the duties, responsibilities, and authority for flight, ground operations, maintenance, and management personnel.

B. Unusual or Complex Programs. If the operator/applicant proposes an unusual or complex Weight and Balance program, or if that program is substantially different from the Weight and Balance document or approved AFM/RFM, request assistance from regional specialists.

C. Load Schedules. The load schedule must include a manageable system for aircraft loading under all loading situations, including alternate procedures for nonstandard weight persons or groups. The operator’s procedures must provide all necessary information (charts, graphs, tables, etc.) with related instructions for the loading.

D. Major Alterations. Occasionally, an operator/applicant may request approval to operate an aircraft with an increase in gross weight and/or change in CG range. This constitutes a major design change, and requires approval by the FAA per 14 CFR part 21, § 21.113.

E. Determining the Loaded Weight and CG. An important part of preflight planning is to determine that the aircraft is loaded so that its weight and CG location are within the allowable limits. There are two ways of doing this: by the computational method using weights, arms, and moments; and by the loading graph method, using weight and moment indexes.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



F. Program Approval. The Weight and Balance control program is approved by the PMI. Coordination with POIs will be necessary relative to those pertinent parts of the program, such as calculation of average passenger and baggage weights, and surveys that require POI oversight responsibility.

3-3972 AIRCRAFT WEIGHTS.

A. Aircraft operated under parts 125/135 are required to be weighed at least once every 36 calendar-months. The operator’s/applicant’s OPSS and manual must reflect this requirement.

B. Aircraft operated under part 121 are required to be weighed at intervals contained in the FAA-approved Weight and Balance control program.

1) Aircraft may be weighed individually on a fixed interval schedule, such as every 36 months.

2) Aircraft may be weighed based on fleet weights, as defined in Figure 3-132, Glossary/Index of Definition and Terms.

NOTE: Procedures that establish BOW, establishment of zone weights and compartment weight within the aircraft, and tables or charts that depict proper weight and CG ranges and limitations are contained in the Original Equipment Manufacturer’s (OEM) Weight and Balance requirements, the STC holder’s Weight and Balance supplement, or other FAA-approved data. See AC 120-27, Aircraft Weight and Balance Control, current edition, for additional guidance.

3-3973 WEIGH SCALES.

A. Scales used to weigh passengers, aircraft, and cargo must be calibrated and traceable to a National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standard or equivalent. Calibration must be performed in accordance with the civil authority for weights and measures having jurisdiction over the area in which the scales are used. The frequency of calibration testing depends on use and handling. Certification documents should be in the English language.

B. Periodic testing of scales using a known weight to ensure accuracy should be included in an operator’s program.

C. If a scale is out of calibration, it may be used if there is a procedure in place to verify accuracy using a known weight that is representative of the load to be carried.

3-3974 LOADING SCHEDULE AND PROVISIONS.

A. Loading Schedule. Loading schedules should be simple and orderly and based on sound principles, thus reducing the elements of human error. Loading schedules may be applied to individual aircraft or to a complete fleet. When an operator uses several types or models of aircraft, a loading schedule, which may be index-type, tabular-type, or a computer, should be identified in the OPSS with the type or model of aircraft for which it is designed.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



B. Loading Provisions. All seats, compartments, and other loading stations should be properly marked, and the identification used should correspond with the instructions established for computing the Weight and Balance of the aircraft. When the loading procedures provide for blocking off seats or compartments to remain within the CG limits, the operator/applicant should provide effective means to ensure that such seats or compartments are not occupied during the operations specified. In such cases, instructions should be prepared for crewmembers, load agents, cargo handlers, and other personnel concerned, giving complete information regarding distribution of passengers, cargo, fuel, and other items. Information relative to maximum capacities and other pertinent limitations affecting the weight or balance of the aircraft should be included in these instructions. When it is possible by adverse distribution of passengers and/or cargo to exceed the approved CG limits of the aircraft, special instructions should be issued to the pilot in command (PIC) and appropriate personnel so that the load distribution can be maintained within the approved limitation.

C. Standard Passenger Weights. Actual weights or, when appropriate, average passenger weights are used to compute passenger loads over any segment of a certificate holder’s operations. Actual weights are generally used for operations with aircraft having nine or less passenger seats and aircraft carrying nonstandard passenger loads. The loading system should readily accommodate nonstandard weight groups and the manifest should indicate whether average or actual weights, or a combination thereof, were used in the computation.

NOTE: The intent of AC 120-27 is to provide methods and procedures for developing Weight and Balance control systems, not to address the entire spectrum of all possible weight configurations. Therefore, the operator will provide the FAA with a reliable survey to establish an average passenger weight for its specific operation.

1) Average Passenger Weights. The standard average passenger weights listed in AC 120-27 were developed for conventional airline passenger groups. They cannot be arbitrarily adopted for operations with passenger groups that appreciably differ from the basis or where the mix of male and female passengers is known to be different from a 60 percent male/40 percent female operation. Special average weights or special ratios may be established for particular operations based on surveys that:

• Indicate that those weights consistently provide for loading within prescribed Weight and Balance limits; and

• Meet the criteria for surveys and statistical analysis in AC 120-27.

2) Average Baggage Weight or Actual Weights. An operator may establish average passenger baggage weights predicated on a study of actual baggage weights for the operations or routes involved that consider seasonal and other variables.

NOTE: Unless otherwise authorized by the FAA-approved Weight and Balance control manual, the actual passenger and baggage weights shall be used in computing the Weight and Balance of charter flights and other special services involving the carriage of special groups.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



D. Passenger and Crew Baggage. Procedures should be provided so that all baggage, including that carried onboard by the flightcrew, is properly accounted for. If desired by the operator, a standard crew baggage weight may be used. Checked baggage average weights may be used as described below. Actual weights should be used for aircraft of nine or less passenger seats or when checked baggage noticeably exceeds the average weights.

3-3975 OPERATOR’S PASSENGERS AND CARGO LOADING PROCEDURES TRAINING.

A. Responsibility for Weight and Balance Control. Weight and Balance is one of the most important factors affecting safety of flight. An overweight aircraft, or one whose CG is outside the allowable limits, is inefficient and dangerous to fly. The responsibility for proper Weight and Balance control begins with the air carrier/operator, extends to ground operations persons who load the aircraft, the Aviation Maintenance Technician (AMT) who maintains the aircraft, and the pilot who operates the aircraft. Normal loading of an aircraft using load persons must have procedures and training to ensure proper Weight and Balance, with a system to direct the proper loading of the aircraft within limits. The system must comply with the load manifest requirements of part 121, § 121.665; part 125, § 125.383; and part 135, § 135.63(c).

1) Operator Personnel Qualification Identification. Employees involved in cargo loading must be trained, authorized, and qualified. This training must be easily identified by documentation in training records and authorization documents.

2) Responsibility. The operator’s training program must convey to the three employee groups (maintenance, ground operations, and flight operations) that although they have different functions in an approved Weight and Balance control program, each group has individual responsibilities that ensure safety in air cargo operations.

B. Weight and Balance (CG Control). Operators must have training programs for personnel involved with Weight and Balance calculations. These programs should contain the processes and procedures to maintain the weight and CG of aircraft dispatched. Topics in the training programs would include:

• Notification of flightcrew; • Position of cargo and baggage; • Calculations for average weights of persons and baggage, seasonal changes, and

unusual loads, such as sports teams, military, and manifest weights of cargo, etc.; • Calculations for actual weights and when to use them; • Processes that take into account CG offsets for containers, both loaded into unit

load devices (ULD) and loaded onto the aircraft; and • Computer programs used, and processes and procedures to certify personnel to

calculate Weight and Balance.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



C. Training Program Curriculum. Operators must provide:

1) Programs for Load Personnel. Training programs for aircraft loaders are to include:

• Basic aircraft load procedures, such as step loading containers on all-cargo aircraft, loading containers in passenger aircraft, and bulk loading in lower lobes and upper lobes on all-cargo and combi aircraft;

• Procedures for training load contractors and audit requirements for those contractors;

• Training on expectations of loaders and proper load procedures, including safety and hazmat; and

• Frangible load requirements for certain positions.

2) Programs for Load Supervisors. Training for persons responsible for the load on an aircraft must teach understanding of those responsibilities, to include ULD load, aircraft load, serviceability of ULDs, aircraft cargo handling, and restraint systems.

3) Training on ULD Buildup. Training on recognition of proper ULD configuration, including operational standards, net attachments, container configurations and condition, CG offsets, profiling, and authorization for use on particular aircraft. Training on how to build up a ULD to comply with CG control. Personnel to receive this training include contractors and freight forwarders.

4) Programs for Freight Forwarders. Programs should include procedures for training freight forwarders on air carrier/operator requirements, including ULD buildup with attention to CG offsets and profile.

5) Programs for Maintenance Personnel. Training for maintenance personnel must consist of:

• Aircraft weighing procedures; • Weight and Balance changes due to alterations; • Cargo-loading system maintenance; • Weight and Balance control program audit function under the Continuing

Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS) program (parts 121/135); • Repair of ULDs and cargo restraint systems; • Inspection requirements; • Receiving inspection requirements for components contracted out; and • Recording requirements.

6) Training on Records. Programs should include procedures to retain training records for personnel trained in cargo loading and checking serviceability of ULDs. Training should address computerized recordkeeping and recurrency requirements.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



7) Flightcrew Awareness Training. Programs should include procedures to train flightcrews in cargo loading awareness, to include examples of unserviceable ULDs, restraints, aircraft configuration, and duties and responsibilities of ground personnel.

3-3976 PASSENGER AND CARGO LOADING PROCEDURES. Procedures should be written in the air carrier’s/operator’s manuals and be consistent throughout the company.

3-3977 CARGO HANDLING PROCEDURES.

A. Cargo. Procedures must be provided for loading/unloading freight into upper main cargo compartments on all-cargo and combi aircraft and into lower lobe compartments on all aircraft. This includes forward and/or aft compartments on regional type aircraft as well as cargo pods. Cargo handling should include procedures for:

1) Loading, based on aircraft configuration (i.e., all-cargo, passenger, combi, and convertible). These procedures may vary depending on the type of cargo handling system installed, restraint equipment installed or used, and cargo door configuration.

2) Loading aircraft to ensure that tail tipping is not an issue on all-cargo aircraft.

3) Loading for passenger and cargo aircraft so that containers, if used, are loaded onto the aircraft and restrained.

4) Ensuring that, if bulk loaded on lower lobe, forward, aft compartments, or pods, cargo or baggage is properly restrained using the restraint system required by the airplane Weight and Balance documents.

5) Ensuring that cargo bulk-loaded on the main deck is loaded per the original equipment manufacturer’s and operator’s Weight and Balance procedures.

B. ULD. ULDs are certified to a Technical Standard Order (TSO), STC, production certificate, and military standard. Uncertified ULDs are built to an industry standard and are allowed only on certain aircraft as described in the aircraft Weight and Balance manual or STC Weight and Balance supplement. Operators must have procedures for the following:

1) Procedures on buildup of containers and pallets to ensure proper CG control so as not to exceed certification limitations for horizontal and vertical CG.

2) Buildup procedures for palletized and bulk cargo that ensure that the load fits the fuselage profile of the aircraft being loaded.

3) CG offsets control to ensure that loaded pallets or containers do not exceed certification limitations for horizontal and vertical CG. Bulk load procedures ensure that the load does not exceed CG offset for the compartment being loaded. This would include ULDs loaded in double configuration with vacant adjacent positions.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



4) Procedures to ensure that ULDs are operational before loading on an aircraft, and designate a responsible person to perform these checks and validate to the flightcrew on the load sheet, manifest, or other form, that operational checks have been performed.

5) Operators should have a program to maintain ULDs under the ULD manufacturer’s recommendations or procedures developed by the operator and acceptable to the FAA. This program should include serviceability limits, inspection limits, inspection frequency, and receiving inspection requirements. Control of ULDs should be shown along with reweigh procedures to establish tare weights.

6) Procedures to route unserviceable ULDs to repair facilities should be established, along with procedures to add repair facilities to approved vendor lists.

C. Active ULDs. Active ULDs are ULDs with active temperature control systems for transporting temperature-sensitive (Cool Chain) cargo.

1) Unlike the typical ULD (or “Can”), active ULDs are capable of heating and/or refrigerating as required. These systems consist of a highly insulated container with a battery-operated heating/cooling system integrated into the construction of the container. ULDs are battery-powered in flight and are only recharged while on the ground. The “active” component of these units consists of a vapor cycle refrigeration/heat pump type system that is powered by various types of large batteries, depending on the manufacturer.

2) Only Active ULDs approved under § 21.305(d), a TC, or a STC may be used on U.S.-registered aircraft (not applicable to part 129). In addition to the markings required by the above, they will also bear a placard as depicted in Figure 3-132A, Active Unit Load Device Markings. Additionally, if an operator intends to deploy these containers in their fleet, they should follow the guidance in AC 120-85, Air Cargo Operations, and, at a minimum, prepare the following in their manual:

a) Operators must have procedures that ensure that only containers that are properly prepared, and which meet the handling and airworthiness requirements of the manufacturer, are carried on an aircraft. The operator should address these requirements in the appropriate manual.

b) Although the certification basis (§ 21.305(d), TC, or STC) ensures that active ULDs do not present a hazard, aircrew and ground personnel need to recognize that they are different due to their design and contents.

c) The maintenance and inspection procedures are normally derived from the active ULD manufacturers’ instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA) and/or limitations documents. This program must also include training to ensure that only qualified personnel perform maintenance and return these devices to service in accordance with the operators’ procedures.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



3-3978 OTHER RESTRAINTS. Restraints, such as straps, tie-downs, nets, etc., may be certified by original type design, STC, or major alteration. The restraints that are allowed on an individual aircraft are listed in the Weight and Balance manual, STC Weight and Balance supplement, or major alteration documentation for each aircraft.

3-3979 CONTRACTORS. An operator/applicant may use a contractor to weigh items required to be weighed. However, the operator/applicant is responsible for ensuring that the contractor complies with the operator’s/applicant’s approved Weight and Balance control program. This includes ensuring that scales are calibrated and tested in accordance with the operator’s/applicant’s Policies and Procedures Manual (PPM). The operator/applicant must have procedures for the following:

A. Freight Forwarders. Procedures to train freight forwarders or contract loaders under the operator’s requirements. Procedures to audit forwarders or contractors.

B. Interlining. Procedures to ensure that ULDs received from other operators, whether U.S. or foreign, meet the gaining operator’s requirements for load and serviceability.

3-3980 CARGO HANDLING SYSTEMS.

A. Cargo handling systems, both upper and lower deck, are approved by various means. They may be certified as part of the certification basis of an aircraft, by STC, or by major alteration for an individual aircraft installation. These systems consist of locks, end stops, vertical side restraints, ball mats, roller sections, side guides, etc. Cargo handling systems are also designed as a conveyance for ULDs, allowing them to move easily in and out of the aircraft. In addition, some cargo handling systems are powered.

B. Repair of system components should be part of the operator’s manual system, along with the ability to substitute load-bearing components. Substitution should be based on FAA-approved data. Substitution would include those subparts of a load-bearing component. The operator should show that, if substitution is done, it is backed up with approved data. The operator’s manual system should show the modified configuration and how that configuration is controlled. That control may be in the form of an Engineering Order (EO), Engineering Report, or other vehicle described in the operator’s manual.

C. No matter the means of approval used, minimum equipment list (MEL) concerns should be addressed. This includes operation with missing restraint devices along with weight and/or performance penalties for the missing device.

3-3981 VERIFYING MAINTENANCE DOCUMENTATION PROCEDURES.

A. Addition or Removal of Equipment.

1) CG Change After Repair or Alteration. The largest weight changes that occur during the lifetime of an aircraft are those caused by alterations and repairs. It is the responsibility of the air carrier/operator doing the work to accurately document the weight change and record it in the aircraft record.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



a) When air carriers/operators make conversions, modifications, repairs, or major alterations to an aircraft that change the current Weight and Balance requirements and/or limitations, the FAA generally approves a Weight and Balance supplement or other control documents, such as STCs; FAA Form 337, Major Repair and Alteration (Airframe, Powerplant, Propeller, or Appliance); or other Weight and Balance reports. This supplementary information describes the effect of the conversion or modification on the aircraft, and the FAA generally approves it as part of an STC or major alteration.

b) When an air carrier/operator makes a conversion, modification, or major alteration to an aircraft that changes its Weight and Balance characteristics, the air carrier/operator should have a procedure in place to ensure that all supplemental information developed, issued, and approved for that aircraft is incorporated into the air carrier’s/operator’s Weight and Balance control program. An air carrier/operator must apply the most restrictive ranges of the incorporated modifications to the operation of that aircraft. For example, if multiple STCs apply, the air carrier/operator must use the STC with the most restrictive Weight and Balance limitations when incorporating the supplemental information into air carrier’s/operator’s Weight and Balance control programs. In all cases of multiple STCs applied to a single aircraft, the STCs should be evaluated for effect on each other and the appropriate limitations applied. At a minimum, an air carrier/operator should:

• Include the supplemental information described above or cross-reference the supplemental information in the air carrier’s/operator’s Weight and Balance manual; and

• Organize the supplemental information according to aircraft type or in a way that facilitates use by loading personnel.

c) Include the supplemental information in its air carrier’s/operator’s Weight and Balance manual and any charts or tables that indicate proper weight and CG range limitations.

2) Permanent Ballast.

a) If a repair or alteration causes the aircraft CG to fall outside of its limits, permanent ballast can be installed. Permanent ballast may consist of blocks of lead or other material. It should be marked, “Permanent Ballast/Do Not Remove.” It should be attached to the structure so that it does not interfere with any control action, and be attached rigidly enough that it cannot be dislodged by any flight maneuvers or rough landing.

b) Two things must first be known to determine the amount of ballast needed to bring the CG within limits: the amount the CG is out of limits, and the distance between the location of the ballast and the limit that is affected.

3) Temporary Ballast. Temporary ballast, in the form of lead bars or heavy canvas bags of sand or lead shot, is often carried in the baggage compartments to adjust the balance for certain flight conditions. The bags should be marked as ballast and secured. Removal may require recalculation of the aircraft BOW. Temporary ballast must be secured so that it cannot shift its location in flight, and the structural limits of the baggage compartment must not be exceeded. All temporary ballast must be removed before the aircraft is weighed.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



B. Weight and Balance Revision Record.

1) Each revision record should be identified by the date and the aircraft make, model, and serial number. The pages should be signed by the person making the revision.

2) The computations for a Weight and Balance revision are included on a Weight and Balance revision form. Appropriate fore and aft extreme loading conditions should be investigated and the computations shown. The Weight and Balance revision sheet should clearly show the revised empty weight, empty weight arm, and/or moment index, and the new BOW.

NOTE: BOW is defined as the weight of an aircraft with unusable fuel, all fluids, crew, and installed equipment, as defined by the operator’s program based on TC, STC, or other FAA-approved data.

3-3982 WEIGHT AND BALANCE RECORDS SURVEILLANCE.

A. Maintenance weighing records, training records, and air cargo operations audit records must reflect compliance with the Weight and Balance control program. Cargo handling systems and ULDs must have records of maintenance, preventive maintenance, and inspections located in the aircraft maintenance records.

B. Ground operations load manifest records, load verification sheets, and personnel training records must reflect compliance with the Weight and Balance control program.

C. Flight operations records (flight papers) and personnel training records must reflect compliance with the Weight and Balance control program.

3-3983 AUTHORITY FOR WEIGHT AND BALANCE (OPSS).

A. The Weight and Balance control program is not just an isolated program for maintenance to comply with weighing the aircraft. It covers all employee disciplines that must interact together to operate the aircraft within the Weight and Balance limitations. Manuals must be consistent in text to provide guidance for the Weight and Balance system to work properly.

B. Approval of Weight and Balance control programs is affected on operations specifications (OpSpecs). The OpSpecs will list the appropriate documents used for Weight and Balance control. Average passenger and baggage weights, along with surveys to validate these weights, will be entered into the OPSS.

NOTE: The guidance for OPSS can be found in FAA Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 18, Section 2.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



3-3984 CONTINUING ANALYSIS AND SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM (CASS) (PARTS 121/135). The CASS periodically monitors the performance of and audits the Weight and Balance control program to ensure constant compliance.

A. The CASS program should define how and when Weight and Balance control systems are audited to include, but not limited to:

• Aircraft loading, • ULD buildup, • Personnel training, and • Freight forwarders.

B. System performance should be monitored to include such items as load plans, load manifests, aircraft configuration changes, cargo handling system performance, and human factors issues with loaders, load supervisors, and contractors.

3-3985 FAA SURVEILLANCE.

A. The PMIs are to review their assigned air carrier’s/operator’s Weight and Balance control procedures. This review shall include the subject areas discussed in this chapter, along with the appropriate air carrier’s/operator’s manuals, OpSpecs, and wet lease agreements. It is imperative that any contractors used for cargo loading are qualified and authorized by the certificate holder to perform these functions. PMIs are encouraged to review any training program their certificate holder accomplishes for personnel who supervise the loading of aircraft, prepare load manifest forms, or qualify and authorize other persons to accomplish these requirements.

B. Air carriers/operators have a statutory mandate to perform their services with the highest possible degree of safety. Achievement of that goal requires a concerted effort between the FAA and the air carrier. Special emphasis ramp checks are to be conducted to validate the current state of Weight and Balance control procedures and cargo loading operations. The FAA should make special efforts to keep all air carriers apprised of the methods by which FAA inspections are carried out and inform them of any instances of noncompliance discovered in those inspections. Air carriers/operators are encouraged, in turn, to use such information to evaluate their own systems, programs, and operations.

NOTE: Aviation safety inspectors (ASI) assigned to an operator should be trained on the specific requirements of that operator’s Weight and Balance control program.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



3-3986 PREREQUISITES AND COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS.

A. Prerequisites:

• Knowledge of the regulatory requirements of parts 121, 125, and 135; • Successful completion of the Airworthiness Inspector Indoctrination course(s) or

equivalent; and • Previous experience with part 121, 125, or 135 Weight and Balance programs.

B. Coordination. This task requires close coordination between maintenance and Operations inspectors.



• Title 14 CFR Parts 21, 23, 25, 43, 91, 121, 125, and 135; • AC 43.13-1, Acceptable Methods, Techniques, and Practices—Aircraft Inspection

and Repair; • AC 120-27, Aircraft Weight and Balance Control; • Approved AFMs; • Aircraft Equipment Lists; • Aircraft Maintenance Records (Weight and Balance Records); • ATOS Element Performance Inspections (EPI)/Safety Attribute Inspections (SAI)

1.3.17, Weight and Balance Program, and 1.3.25, Cargo Handling Equipment, Systems, and Appliances;

• ATOS Element 1.3.17; • Civil Air Regulations (CAR) Part 3 , Airplane Airworthiness—Normal, Utility,

Acrobatic, and Restricted Purpose Categories; • FAA H-8083-1, Aircraft Weight and Balance Handbook (replaces AC 91-23,

Pilot’s Weight and Balance Handbook); • Approved Pilot’s Operating Handbooks (POH); • STCs; • TCDS and Aircraft Specifications; and • Approved Weight and Balance Manuals.

B. Forms. FAA Form 8400-8, Operations Specifications 1.

C. Job Aids:

• Automated OpSpecs Checklists and Worksheets; and • Job Task Analysis (JTA) 3.3.38.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



NOTE: This job aid is for use in evaluating an operator’s Weight and Balance control program. The job aid recommends six areas that can be used in the evaluation of the Weight and Balance control program. The option of using all of the parts of this job aid or any individual part is the decision of the inspector that is doing the evaluation.

3-3988 PROCEDURES.

A. Coordinate with the Operator/Applicant. The operator/applicant must submit the following for review:

• Manual or revision; • Weight and Balance program document (if not part of a manual); • Pertinent company procedures; • Instructions for completing forms used in aircraft weight control and aircraft

loading; and • Mathematical justification for loading provisions or schedules.

B. Review the Operator’s/Applicant’s Manual/Program Document. The manual must include procedures, levels of authority, and information appropriate to part 121, 125, or 135. In addition, the ASI must confirm that the following are included:

1) Ensure that the manual, as presented, adheres to the system safety attributes:

• Responsibility and authority, • Procedures, • Process measurement, • Control, and • Interface.

2) Manual introduction to include:

• Description of the philosophy and the goals of the manual; • Description of the division of contents between volumes, if more than one

volume; and • List of Effective Pages (LEP), including dates.

3) Manual revision and distribution procedures to ensure:

• Current information is provided to all manual holders; and • Manuals are available to maintenance, operations, and ground personnel and

are furnished to the certificate-holding district office (CHDO).

4) Definitions of all significant terms used in the program. The definitions must reflect their intended use and include any acronyms or abbreviations unique to the manual.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



5) Description of the organizational unit responsible for the control and maintenance of the Weight and Balance program, to include:

• Definitions of lines of authority; and • Description of the support structure.

6) Job descriptions for all elements (ATOS EPI/SAI).

7) Training programs for the following:

• Maintenance personnel; • Operations and dispatch personnel; and • Ground handling personnel.

8) A means of documenting and retaining individual training records.

9) Procedures for:

• Determining standards and schedules for calibration of aircraft scales; • Preweighing instructions and requirements; • Determining which aircraft are to be weighed; • Establishing and maintaining BOW equipment lists for each aircraft; • Recording the type and serial number for each scale used, airplane weight,

residual fluids, and scale tare weights; • Initial weighing of aircraft; • Monitoring and adjusting individual aircraft or fleet, empty weight, and CG; • Periodic reweighing of aircraft; • Ensuring aircraft are configured under approved data; • Control of ULDs, including serviceability standards, CG offset, and buildup;

and • Control and oversight of contractors, including freight forwarders.

10) A loading schedule consisting of graphs/tables or a special loading schedule for a calculator or computerized program. These schedules must ensure that pertinent data is available for all probable Weight and Balance conditions of the aircraft.

11) A load manifest on which all required loading information shall be entered by personnel responsible for Weight and Balance control, including procedures for:

• Completing the load manifest; • Ensuring the load manifest is carried on the aircraft; • Retaining the load manifest for the time periods specified in the CFRs; and • Distribution of the load manifest under §§ 121.695 and/or 121.697

(as applicable), § 125.405, and § 135.63(c).

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



12) Procedures to be used by crewmembers, cargo handlers, and other personnel concerned with aircraft loading, for the following:

• Distribution of passengers; • Distribution of fuel; • Distribution of cargo; • Verification and acceptance of actual cargo weights as listed on a bill of

lading; • Restriction of passenger movement during flight, if applicable; and • Hazmat requirements, if applicable.

13) A drawing of each cargo and/or passenger configuration that includes emergency equipment locations.

14) Mathematical justification for loading provisions or schedules. This may be included under separate cover and not as part of the company manual.

15) An alternate procedure for allowing manual computations, if a computerized Weight and Balance program is used.

16) Procedures for a weight range system, if applicable, that ensures:

• The range is typical of passengers carried on similar operations; • Computations for critical load considerations support the ranges; • Personnel responsible for loading the aircraft are required to prepare

appropriate loading records; • The system includes methods for loading passengers whose weights are

outside the range; and • Loading records indicate the number of passengers within the stated range and

account for passengers who fall outside the range.

17) A system for loading nonstandard weight groups, such as athletic squads or military groups and their baggage, which must use actual weights for both passengers and baggage.

18) Procedures to verify actual weight of cargo.

19) Standards and schedules for calibration of commercial scales used to determine baggage/cargo weights.

20) Procedures to ensure that carry-on baggage is limited to articles that may be placed in overhead compartments or under seats. Carry-on baggage weight must be accounted for in the same manner as checked baggage or added to the average passenger weight.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



C. Review the Operator’s/Applicant’s OpSpecs.

1) Review the draft OpSpecs to ensure that paragraph E096 includes the following:

a) Aircraft make/model/series.

b) Type of loading schedule.

c) Loading schedule instructions for:

• Passengers and crew (average or actual weight). • Baggage (average or actual weight) and cargo (actual). • Nonstandard weight groups.

d) Weight and Balance control procedures.

NOTE: The above items must be referenced by indicating the locations in the operator’s/applicant’s manuals (e.g., volume, chapter).

2) Review draft OpSpec A011 for accuracy of average passenger and baggage weight calculations along with Weight and Balance survey requirements and completion. Coordinate this activity with the POI.

D. Analyze the Results. Upon completion of review, analyze the results and determine whether the operator’s/applicant’s manual and OpSpecs meet all requirements.

E. Meet with Operator/Applicant. Discuss any discrepancies with the operator/applicant and advise them on areas that need corrective action.


A. Complete the PTRS Record. Part 121 air carriers use the appropriate ATOS DCT.

B. Complete the Task. Approve OpSpec E096 or A011 under Volume 3, Chapter 18.

C. Document the Task. File all supporting paperwork in the operator’s/applicant’s office file.

3-3990 FUTURE ACTIVITIES. Normal surveillance to be conducted using PTRS codes 3639/5639. Part 121 air carriers will use the appropriate ATOS EPI to document surveillance.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 3-132. Glossary/Index of Definition and Terms

Aircraft Arms, Weights, and Moments

The term arm, usually measured in inches, refers to the distance between the center of gravity (CG) of an item or object and the reference datum. Arms ahead or to the left of the datum are negative (-), and those behind or to the right of the datum are positive (+). When the datum is ahead of the aircraft, all of the arms are positive and computational errors are minimized. Weight is normally measured in pounds. When weight is removed from an aircraft, it is negative (-), and when weight is added to the aircraft, it is positive (+). A moment is a force that tries to cause rotation, and it is the product of the arm in inches and the weight in pounds. Moments are generally expressed in pound-inches (lb-in) and may be either positive or negative. A number of weights must be considered in aircraft Weight and Balance (Weight and Balance). Terms for various weights listed here are used by the General Aviation Manufacturer’s Association (GAMA).

Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-approved document, prepared by the holder of a type certificate (TC) for an airplane or rotorcraft, which specifies the operating limitations and contains the required markings, placards, and other information applicable to the regulations.

Aircraft Specifications Documentation containing the pertinent specifications for aircraft certificated under the Civil Aviation Regulations (CAR).

Approved Type Certificate (TC) A certificate of approval issued by the FAA for the design of an airplane, engine, or propeller.

Basic Empty Weight The empty weight of the aircraft plus the weight of the undrainable fuel, oils, and hydraulic fluid outlined in the manufacturer’s maintenance manual.

Basic Operating Index The moment of the airplane at its basic operating weight (BOW) divided by the appropriate reduction factor.

Basic Operating Weight (BOW) The weight of an aircraft with unusable fuel, all fluids, crew, and installed equipment as defined by the operator’s program based on the TC, the Supplemental Type Certificate (STC), or other FAA-approved data.

Cargo Cargo refers to passenger-checked baggage, freight, dangerous goods, Company Materials (COMAT), and hazardous materials (hazmats). Cargo does not include passenger carry-on baggage.

Emergency Equipment Required emergency equipment must be part of the preweight checklist and be stored in its assigned position specified by the operator’s manual.

Empty-Weight Center of Gravity (EWCG)

The CG of an aircraft when it contains only the items specified in the aircraft empty weight.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Empty-Weight Center of Gravity (CG) Range

The distance between the allowable forward and aft empty-weight CG limits.

Equipment List A list of items approved by the FAA for installation in a particular aircraft. The list includes the name, Part Number (P/N), weight, and arm of the component. Installation or removal of an item in the equipment list is considered to be a minor alteration.

Fleet Weight An average weight accepted by the FAA for aircraft of identical make and model that have the same equipment installed. When a fleet weight control program is in effect, the fleet weight of the aircraft can be used rather than having to weigh every individual aircraft.

Flyaway Kit A flyaway kit is considered part of the empty weight when it is installed. Spare parts loaded onboard must be considered as COMAT.

Index Point A location specified by the aircraft manufacturer from which arms used in Weight and Balance computations are measured. Arms measured from the index point are called index arms.

Manufacturer’s Empty Weight The manufacturer’s empty weight contains only the basic equipment when the aircraft is delivered to the operator. The operator may install additional equipment required for its specific operation, creating the basic empty weight for that operator.

Maximum Allowable Gross Weight

The maximum weight authorized for the aircraft and all of its contents as specified in the Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) or aircraft specifications for the aircraft.

Maximum Landing Weight The greatest weight that an aircraft normally is allowed to have when it lands.

Maximum Ramp Weight The total weight of a loaded aircraft, including all fuel. It is greater than the takeoff weight due to the fuel that will be burned during the taxi and run-up operations. Ramp weight is also called taxi weight.

Maximum Takeoff Weight (MTOW)

The maximum allowable weight at the start of the takeoff run.

Maximum Zero Fuel Weight (MZFW)

The maximum authorized weight of an aircraft without fuel. This is the sum of the BOW and payload.

Payload The weight of the passengers, baggage, and cargo that produces revenue.

Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH)

An FAA-approved document published by the airframe manufacturer that lists the operating conditions for a particular model of aircraft and its engines.

5/4/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Standard Empty Weight The weight of the airframe, engines, and all items of operation weight that have fixed locations and are permanently installed in the aircraft. This weight must be recorded in the aircraft Weight and Balance records. The basic empty weight includes the standard empty weight plus any optional equipment that has been installed. Depending upon the part of the Federal regulations under which the aircraft was certificated, either the undrainable oil or full reservoir of oil is included.

Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) Data

Provided it specifically applies to the item being repaired/altered, such data may be used in whole or in part as included within the design data associated with the STC.

Unit Load Device (ULD) A device for grouping, transferring, and restraining cargo for transit. The Unit Load Device (ULD) may consist of a pallet and net or may be a container.

Figure 3-132A. Active Unit Load Device Markings


6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



VOLUME 4 AIRCRAFT EQUIPMENT AND OPERATIONAL AUTHORIZATIONS

CHAPTER 6 AIRPLANE AUTHORIZATIONS AND LIMITATIONS

Section 3 Extended Operations Surveillance and Oversight

4-1054 PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODES/AIR TRANSPORTATION OVERSIGHT SYSTEM (ATOS) DATA COLLECTION.

A. Operations:

1) PTRS Code: 1634.

2) ATOS: Element Performance Inspection (EPI) 5.1.8.

B. Airworthiness:

1) PTRS Codes: 4633/6633.

2) ATOS: EPI 5.1.8.

4-1055 OBJECTIVE.

A. Surveillance Activities. The objective of Extended Operations (ETOPS) surveillance is to ensure that the certificate holder continually maintains the highest possible level of safety in its ETOPS operation. Since extended-range programs have such a great potential for adverse safety impact if not properly administered, aviation safety inspectors (ASI) with oversight responsibility for an ETOPS certificate holder must place special emphasis on surveillance activities. Surveillance consists of the following:

• Trend analysis, • Problem identification and resolution, and • Implementation of corrective action.

B. Daily Oversight. In addition to the normally scheduled surveillance (ATOS and National Program Guidelines (NPG)), daily oversight of the certificate holder’s ETOPS program is essential to ensure the continued highest possible level of safety required for an effective ETOPS operation. Examples may include, but are not limited to, reviewing the certificate holder’s daily fleet performance, event reports, adverse trends, and pilot reports. Daily oversight will lead to constant process improvement. Process improvement can only be achieved if good communications exist between the certificate holder and the certificate-holding district office (CHDO).

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



NOTE: Although oversight of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121 certificate holders is conducted primarily through the use of the ATOS Data Collection Tools (DCT), some daily reports such as Service Difficulty Reports (SDR) and utilization reports should be reported using the appropriate PTRS code.

NOTE: Additional information on the ETOPS surveillance process can be found in the current editions of Advisory Circular (AC) 120-42, Extended Operations (ETOPS and Polar Operations), and AC 135-42, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and Operations in the North Polar Area, as applicable.

4-1056 GENERAL.

A. Phases of Oversight. There are generally two distinct phases of ETOPS oversight. They are:

1) Initial Period. The initial period usually encompasses a heightened period of surveillance during the first 6 months after a certificate holder receives its ETOPS authorization. This is further broken down into two 3-month segments.

a) The first segment is a period of time where the CHDO and the certificate holder evaluate the new ETOPS programs in action. This is the “wring out” phase to identify any program weaknesses or potential problem areas missed during the validation process.

b) The second segment of time is used to address issues found in the first segment. The certificate holder and the CHDO make adjustments or fine-tune the ETOPS programs. This ensures they consistently meet the requirements of the applicable rules, and the objective of ensuring the highest possible level of safety in the certificate holder’s ETOPS operation.

NOTE: During the first 6 months of ETOPS operations many newly authorized certificate holders request additional ETOPS authority, such as an increase from 120 minutes to 180 minutes and/or the addition of new areas of ETOPS operation. Such requests illustrate another reason why the heightened surveillance period is particularly important.

2) Normal Surveillance. Normal surveillance follows the initial period. During normal surveillance, the inspectors must ensure that the certificate holder maintains their ETOPS program in accordance with the authorizations granted and continues to follow the policies and procedures contained in their program, including any revisions. Normal surveillance also includes required ETOPS reporting. You can find more information regarding ETOPS reporting later in this section.

B. Types of Oversight. There are two types of oversight:

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



1) Proactive Oversight. Proactive oversight focuses on prevention. It should include observation of actual ETOPS operations as they are being conducted, as well as thorough review of the certificate holder’s ETOPS policies, procedures, documents, and manuals for deficiencies. In addition, ETOPS reports, flight records, training, facilities, and human factors should all be evaluated whenever possible. The focus here is prevention by actively and constantly looking for latent hazards that may exist in the ETOPS programs or the organization.

2) Reactive Oversight. This typically occurs after the fact when the ETOPS event has already occurred. These events include: in-flight shut downs (IFSD) of engines, diversions, and/or turnbacks, lack of auxiliary power unit (APU) in-flight start reliability, and ETOPS significant systems reliability. Obviously, this list is not all-inclusive. In reactive oversight, you review and analyze ETOPS event reports to determine the root cause of an event and ensure the certificate holder has taken appropriate corrective action.

4-1057 OPERATIONS OVERSIGHT.

A. Requirements. In addition to the requirements of AC 120-42 or AC 135-42 (as applicable), the emphasis areas listed in Volume 4, Chapter 6, Section 2, paragraph 4-1036 for the validation flights are also applicable for flight operations surveillance and oversight. Additionally, the CHDO should ensure that the certificate holder is adhering to the time limitations authorized in their operations specification (OpSpec) B342 or B344.

B. Advance Notification. The CHDO of a 14 CFR part 135 certificate holder should request advance notification of ETOPS operations during the first 6 months following ETOPS approval. This will allow the CHDO to observe these operations as they occur.

4-1058 MAINTENANCE OVERSIGHT. Due to the critical nature of maintenance on a certificate holder’s ETOPS program and its relationship to safety, place special emphasis on surveillance of the authorized ETOPS maintenance program.

A. The Intent of ETOPS. The intent of ETOPS is to preclude a diversion and (if it does occur) to have programs in place to protect that diversion. ASIs should ensure that the certificate holder follows their ETOPS maintenance programs as outlined in the maintenance manual sections referenced in the OpSpec. The ASI should closely monitor any revisions to the certificate holder’s program that could adversely affect the ETOPS program.

B. ETOPS Culture. Oversight should include conformation of a positive ETOPS culture at all levels of the organization. Surveillance and oversight will provide evidence that the corporate culture and infrastructure to support the ETOPS operation continues to exist. Additionally, surveillance will ensure the maintenance program continues to provide safe ETOPS operations.

NOTE: If the certificate holder’s reliability program (Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS) (as applicable)) is marginal, an effective ETOPS program is questionable.

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



4-1059 ETOPS REPORTING. Normally, the principal inspector (PI) accomplishes ETOPS reporting by entering information into the appropriate databases at the ETOPS reporting site (https://avssharepoint.faa.gov/afs/AEG/etops/default.aspx). You can access this site by entering your regular Aviation Safety (AVS) username and password.

NOTE: In the unlikely event that the ETOPS Reporting Site is not available (Web site down, etc.), the PI should make the reports directly to the Boston Aircraft Evaluation Group (BOS-AEG). The PI may accomplish this via a PDF document using e-mail.

A. Reporting an ETOPS Event.

1) In addition to the reporting requirements in part 121, § 121.703, and part 135, §§ 135.415 and 135.417, the certificate holder must report the following items on their ETOPS airplanes (regardless of ETOPS or non-ETOPS operation) within 96 hours to its CHDO:

a) IFSDs, except planned IFSDs performed for flight training.

b) Diversions (including time) and turnbacks for failures, malfunctions, or defects associated with any ETOPS significant systems.

c) Uncommanded power or thrust changes or surges.

d) Inability to control the engine or obtain desired power or thrust.

e) Inadvertent fuel loss, unavailability, or uncorrectable fuel imbalance in flight.

f) Failures, malfunctions, or defects associated with ETOPS significant systems.

g) Any event that would jeopardize the safe flight and landing of the airplane on an ETOPS flight.

NOTE: If an event occurs on an ETOPS airplane during a non-ETOPS flight, the certificate holder has an obligation to report this event even though it was not an ETOPS flight. The key here is that because it is an ETOPS airplane, it is still a reportable event.

2) The CHDO will enter ETOPS event report information in the ETOPS database within 5 business-days for the AEG’s review and distribution. The AEG can access items reportable to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) under §§ 121.703, 135.415, and 135.417 through the applicable FAA database.

B. ETOPS NorMal Reporting. In addition to the 96-hour requirements, the certificate holder is also responsible to submit a comprehensive report to the CHDO on a regular basis (customarily monthly) for part 121 and quarterly for part 135. Although the FAA does not have a rule mandating these monthly or quarterly reports, AC 120-42 and AC 135-42 identify the requirement.

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



1) Part 121. Customarily, part 121 CHDOs will post the following information (received from the certificate holder) to the ETOPS document database (for the applicable certificate holder) on a monthly basis:

• Summaries of IFSD rate—12-month rolling average, • Delays and cancellations related to the ETOPS event, • Number of ground events; i.e., aborted takeoff, power shortfall or loss, and

unscheduled engine removals, and • Number of events; i.e., APU failed to start, or failed in use, while intended for

ETOPS or during an ETOPS event.

NOTE: The monthly information is submitted as one report—generally called the ETOPS report.

2) Part 135. On a quarterly basis, the part 135 CHDO will post the following information (received from the certificate holder) to the ETOPS document database (for the applicable certificate holder): Each airplane authorized for ETOPS containing the hours and cycles for each airplane.

C. ETOPS Reporting Requirements Summarized.

1) ETOPS Events:

• The certificate holder reports ETOPS events within 96 hours to the CHDO (as they occur).

• The CHDO posts reports to the ETOPS database within 5 business-days of receipt of notification from certificate holder. This satisfies the 5-day reporting requirements of AC 120-42.

2) Normal Reporting to CHDO:

• Part 121 certificate holders submit a comprehensive report to the CHDO (usually monthly).

• Part 135 certificate holders submit a comprehensive report to the CHDO quarterly.

3) Normal Reporting to the ETOPS Document Database: The CHDO will post these reports to the ETOPS document database (for the applicable certificate holder) monthly for part 121, and quarterly for part 135.

4-1060 ETOPS NORMAL MAINTENANCE SURVEILLANCE.

A. Review the Certificate Holder’s Manual. In addition to the processes and procedures required to conduct ETOPS, the manual should also represent the certificate holder’s ETOPS philosophy and define the airline’s infrastructure. These elements should be evident at all levels of the company. The overall intent is to preclude and (if it happens) protect the diversion.

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



B. Observation. Each of the ETOPS maintenance requirements described below must be evaluated against the applicable rule requirements and the guidance described in AC 120-42 or AC 135-42. To this end, the inspector must ensure that the ETOPS maintenance program contains at least the following supplemental programs:

NOTE: The following paragraphs provide a brief description of the ETOPS supplemental requirements. For complete details of the required ETOPS Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP) and its supplemental programs, consult the applicable parts within the 14 CFR and AC 120-42 and AC 135-42. It is imperative that the inspector workforce understand that the information provided below is only an overview. It is absolutely essential that you review the applicable rules and ACs prior to evaluation of these activities for initial ETOPS authorization and for ongoing ETOPS oversight.

NOTE: An important prerequisite to a certificate holder’s ETOPS CAMP is to first ensure that the certificate holder’s non-ETOPS CAMP is capable of supporting the ETOPS supplemental elements. Specifically, does the basic CAMP contain the maintenance and inspection program’s instructions for continued airworthiness (ICA) necessary to support an ETOPS operation?

1) ETOPS Maintenance Document. The ETOPS maintenance document(s) must reflect the actual policies and procedures that the certificate holder expects their ETOPS maintenance personnel to adhere to accomplish the required ETOPS program elements. The document(s) should be user-friendly and accessible to all affected personnel.

2) Procedural Changes. The certificate holder’s ETOPS maintenance document must contain procedures to gain approval from the CHDO for any changes to its ETOPS maintenance procedures. These procedures should ensure that changes are submitted in a timely manner. This will allow the CHDO time for review before the certificate holder incorporates the change into its ETOPS document.

NOTE: Each revision or procedural change to the ETOPS maintenance document will require a revision to the certificate holder’s OpSpecs paragraph D086. The CHDO must receive and approve all revisions or procedural changes to the ETOPS program. The certificate holder must receive a new paragraph D086 that reflects the new ETOPS maintenance document date prior to implementation.

3) Predeparture Service Check. The certificate holder must have an ETOPS predeparture service check to verify that the airplane and certain significant items are airworthy and ETOPS-capable immediately before the ETOPS flight. In the United States, an appropriately trained and certificated airman (Airframe and Powerplant (A&P) mechanic) must complete the predeparture service check. Outside the United States, under certain circumstances, the person completing and documenting the predeparture service check may not need to hold a U.S. or Canadian certificate. See AC 120-42 or AC 135-42 as applicable to the operation in question for specific details. In this case, one should generally accept the word “immediately” to mean “2 to 4 hours” prior to departure on the ETOPS flight segment. Each certificate holder’s predeparture

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



service check may vary in form and content. The specific certificate holder’s needs should drive the content and suitability for an acceptable predeparture service check.

NOTE: Part 135 allows a pilot who holds an A&P certificate and received proper training in accordance with the certificate holder’s approved ETOPS program to accomplish the predeparture service check.

4) Dual Maintenance. The certificate holder must establish procedures that minimize scheduling dual maintenance actions to multiple similar elements in any ETOPS significant system during the same routine or non-routine maintenance visit. In order to manage this requirement, the certificate holder must develop a list of fleet-specific ETOPS significant systems and include them in their ETOPS maintenance document(s). The certificate holder should include a clear definition of what constitutes dual maintenance in their ETOPS maintenance document. In the event that the certificate holder performs dual maintenance, their procedures must ensure the verification of positive corrective action prior to entry into ETOPS airspace. The procedures must ensure that such maintenance actions are performed by a different qualified technician, or if performed by the same technician, then he or she must be under the direct supervision of a second qualified individual. In either case, a qualified individual must conduct a ground verification test and ensure that any in-flight test that is required by the certificate holder be done as well. A certificate holder may choose to conduct a functional check flight after a heavy maintenance visit to address dual maintenance actions in addition to first performing ground verification action.

5) Verification Program. The certificate holder must establish a verification program to verify corrective actions on ETOPS significant systems. The certificate holder must have procedures that prevent an airplane from being dispatched for ETOPS (after propulsion system shutdown, any primary system failure, or significant adverse trends on a previous flight) unless appropriate corrective action has been taken. Anytime a positive corrective action is not verifiable on the ground (could not duplicate malfunction, etc.) for any reason, there is a requirement for an in-flight verification.

a) Certificate holders with authority to conduct ETOPS must have ground and in-flight verification flight procedures described in their supplemental maintenance program for events involving propulsion system shutdown, engine or major engine module change, primary system failure, and for certain adverse trends or prescribed events.

b) It is permissible to designate the period of time from airport departure to entry into the ETOPS environment as maintenance verification flight, in combination with a regularly scheduled ETOPS revenue flight, provided the verification phase is found satisfactory prior to reaching the ETOPS Entry Point (EEP). It is important to note when the certificate holder conducts this type of ETOPS verification flight:

• Written procedures exist to ensure that the flightcrew receives a full briefing prior to dispatch concerning the event and/or the maintenance performed.

• Appropriate maintenance personnel should convey to the flightcrew the specific observations and/or actions required of them during the

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



verification portion of the flight, as well as the method used to properly record the satisfactory completion of that verification flight.

• All flightcrew observations and/or actions must be complete prior to entering the ETOPS portion of the flight.

• Documentation of pass/fail. Communications with the dispatch or flight following center and maintenance control, and an appropriate logbook entry must be completed in accordance with the certificate holder’s ETOPS maintenance document.

6) Task Identification. The certificate holder must identify all tasks that need to be completed and certified as complete by ETOPS-qualified maintenance personnel. The intent is to have ETOPS-trained maintenance personnel accomplish these tasks because they are related to ETOPS. If the certificate holder does not specifically identify the tasks, an ETOPS-trained maintenance person must accomplish all maintenance tasks.

7) Centralized Maintenance Control Procedures. A certificate holder conducting ETOPS (regardless of the size of its ETOPS fleet) must have a centralized entity responsible for oversight of the ETOPS maintenance operation. The certificate holder must develop and clearly define in its ETOPS maintenance document specific procedures, duties, and responsibilities for involvement of their centralized maintenance control personnel in their ETOPS operation.

8) ETOPS Parts Control. The certificate holder must have an ETOPS parts control program that ensures only parts approved for ETOPS are utilized to maintain the integrity of the systems that are unique to ETOPS. This program must include provisions to verify that parts placed on aircraft through parts borrowing and pooling agreements meet this requirement as well.

9) Reliability Program/Enhanced Continuous Analysis and Surveillance System (ECASS). Certificate holders conducting ETOPS may modify their FAA-approved reliability program to include the ETOPS maintenance elements, or if they do not have a reliability program, the certificate holders’ existing CASS must be enhanced to include ETOPS elements. The certificate holders should design their program primarily to prevent, identify, and correct problems. The program should incorporate reporting criteria for use by the carrier and the FAA as a measure of ETOPS reliability.

a) For part 135, the certificate holder must enhance the CASS program to include all of the ETOPS maintenance elements and the certificate holder should design their CASS program primarily to identify, correct, and prevent problems.

b) Regardless of which program the certificate holders have, it must include the additional reporting procedures for significant events detrimental to ETOPS flights contained in § 121.374 or part 135 appendix G (as applicable).

10) Engine Condition Monitoring (ECM). There is a requirement for parts 121 and 135 certificate holders who conduct ETOPS to have an ECM program. The certificate holder should design this program to ensure their engines can continue to operate at maximum continuous thrust (MCT) for extended periods of time within operating limits, in the event

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



single-engine operation is required because of an IFSD or failure of other powerplant systems. This program may be a recognized program from an engine manufacturer, a contractor, another airline, or it may be the certificate holder’s own program. Regardless of origin, the ECM program should provide a system for data collection and timely analysis to detect engine deterioration and preclude failure. The purpose of the program is to recognize and ensure timely correction of engine problems.

11) Propulsion System Monitoring. Parts 121 and 135 both require certificate holders who conduct ETOPS to have a propulsion system monitoring program to monitor and detect adverse trends in their propulsion systems. This program requires each certificate holder to conduct an investigation into the cause of each IFSD and submit findings to the CHDO. If the certificate holder or CHDO determines that corrective action is necessary, the certificate holder must implement a corrective action. The part 121 program also contains a fleet average IFSD rate system. (See AC 120-42 for current part 121 IFSD calculations, values, and reporting requirements.)

a) A part 121 certificate holder may include the IFSD rate statistics of all engines that are configured for ETOPS (i.e., meet the Configuration Maintenance Procedures (CMP)). The certificate holder must ensure these engines are maintained in that configuration and in accordance with the certificate holder’s ETOPS program. However, these engines (while installed on non-ETOPS aircraft) do not have to be maintained by ETOPS-qualified mechanics. Including non-ETOPS engines is advantageous to small fleet size certificate holders to minimize the statistical impact. In order to qualify for this proviso, the certificate holder must gain approval from the CHDO through coordination with BOS-AEG.

b) Prior to use of these engines on an ETOPS aircraft, an ETOPS-qualified mechanic must accomplish an inspection to ensure the engine still meets the certificate holder’s ETOPS configuration. While the engine is in ETOPS operation (installed on an aircraft listed on the operator’s OpSpec paragraph D086), a qualified mechanic must accomplish all maintenance in accordance with the certificate holder’s approved ETOPS maintenance document.

12) Oil Consumption Monitoring. The oil consumption monitoring program must monitor oil consumption on a flight-by-flight basis, with verification of the oil system integrity made prior to each ETOPS leg. Although there is a flight deck indication system for engine oil quantity, the FAA and other aviation authorities highly recommend that before ETOPS departure, the engine oil levels are physically checked at the engine using the sight gauge (if installed) or via the oil tank filler neck. The certificate holder’s program must include a process for reporting and analyzing oil consumption. The oil consumption monitoring program should be capable of tracking oil usage trends and recognizing a sudden spike in the oil consumption rate. If increased oil consumption is found, it must be corrected prior to release for ETOPS flight. Any corrective actions taken regarding oil consumption must be verified in accordance with the ground and in-flight verification process (as required) prior to ETOPS entry. Additionally, if ETOPS operations require the APU, the oil consumption monitoring program must include it as well. If available, the APU oil level can be determined using the flight deck oil quantity indication system.

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



13) APU In-Flight Start Program. The certificate holder must have an APU in-flight start program for each applicable specific airframe/engine combination. The certificate holder must ensure each airplane’s APU is periodically sampled. Periodic sampling customarily begins with the certificate holder sampling each APU every 30 days. After an agreed upon length of time with the CHDO, if the sampling data confirms the reliability level consistently tracks at 95 percent or better, then the sampling intervals can be systematically escalated to no more than every 120 days. APU in-flight starts should be made on flights of 4 hours or more and be subject to the following conditions:

• In-flight APU starts do not need to occur on ETOPS flights. The APU must be in the ETOPS configuration in accordance with the applicable CMP document in order to allow credit.

• If in-flight APU starts occur on an ETOPS flight, the start should occur on the return leg to the United States.

• The start attempt should occur just before top of descent, or at such time that will ensure at least a 2-hour cold soak at altitudes that are representative of the ETOPS routes flown.

• If the APU fails to start on the first attempt, subsequent start attempts may be made within the limits of the airframe and APU manufacturer design specifications.

• If less than 95 percent of in-flight start reliability is achieved, question the certificate holder’s APU reliability. This may warrant a thorough review of the APU maintenance and reliability programs, including consideration for performing the task more often until positive corrective action is confirmed.

NOTE: For some parts 121 and 135 ETOPS certificate holders conducting ETOPS, depending on the airplane/engine combination in question, the regulations may not require an APU in-flight start program. Specifically, some APUs are required to be operational upon entering ETOPS airspace. Therefore, an APU in-flight start program is not required in such instances.

14) CMP. The CMP standard specifies any additional configuration, maintenance, or operational requirement, including non-optional Service Bulletins (SB), Service Letters (SL), and maintenance instructions that are uniquely applicable to ETOPS. This does not relieve the certificate holder of the responsibility to review all additional SBs and SLs that are issued against the certificate holder’s fleet. The FAA establishes the requirements in the CMP at the time of initial ETOPS type design approval of the airplane/engine combination. Typically, the airplane manufacturer publishes and maintains the CMP document and the document includes identified CMP requirements. Although there is no requirement for the certificate holder to update their configuration beyond the baseline CMP that was in effect at the time they received their ETOPS authorization (unless mandated by an Airworthiness Directive (AD)), PIs should ensure that certificate holders have procedures in their manual to review applicable CMP documents for changes on a regular basis. PIs should encourage the certificate holders to incorporate applicable changes to the CMP into their ETOPS program. To this end, they should have procedures in their manual to review applicable CMP documents for changes on a regular basis. The FAA may impose additional CMP requirements via the AD process.

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119



NOTE: Not all part 135 airplanes will have a CMP document.

15) Maintenance Training. The certificate holder is responsible for ensuring that all maintenance personnel who perform maintenance on its ETOPS airplanes, including repair stations, vendors, and contract maintenance, have received adequate technical training for the specific airplane/engine combination it intends to operate in ETOPS. The maintenance training program should focus on ETOPS awareness for all personnel involved in the ETOPS program. The certificate holder may include the maintenance training program in the normal maintenance training but should emphasize the special nature of ETOPS maintenance requirements. For additional information, see AC 120-42 or AC 135-42 for more details concerning the ETOPS maintenance training program requirements.

C. CASS. The air carrier’s normal CASS must receive supplements to require regular surveillance of the ETOPS program. The carrier should use the program’s analysis as a means to ensure the integrity of, and to adjust, their ETOPS programs. All ETOPS stations/facilities should be inspected at least every 3-years to ensure they continue to meet the requirements of the certificate holder’s ETOPS program under ATOS. The 3-year requirement may be less due to risk assessment. The CHDO should make every effort to schedule complementary inspections, during the same station/facility visit. For example, also conduct contract maintenance, fuel facility, CAMP requirements, etc., as applicable.

NOTE: Under part 121, in accordance with ATOS guidelines, the 3-year requirement may be reduced based on risk assessment.

D. Points of Contact (POC). For questions regarding an ETOPS authorization, contact:

• AFS-220, Part 121 Air Carrier Operations Branch. • AFS-330, Air Carrier Maintenance Branch. • AEGs. • Aircraft/Engine Certification Directorate.


A. Prerequisites:

• Knowledge of the ETOPS regulatory requirements of part 121 and/or part 135 (as required).

• Successful completion of the Air Carrier Maintenance and Electronic Indoctrination Course.

B. Coordination. This task requires coordination between maintenance, avionics, and Operations inspectors, AFS-200, AFS-300 (for part 121, AFS-900 (ATOS) might require coordination), the responsible Regional Office (RO), and the certificate holder.

6/16/11 8900.1 CHG 119





• AC 120-42, Extended Operations (ETOPS and Polar Operations), or AC 135-42, Extended Operations (ETOPS) and Operations in the North Polar Area, as applicable for the certificate holders that receive evaluations;

• Certificate holder’s manuals; and • FAA Order 8900.1, Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS).

NOTE: ASIs with oversight responsibilities for part 121 certificate holders must use ATOS Safety Attribute Inspection (SAI) and EPI 5.1.8. ASIs with oversight responsibility for part 135 certificate holders may find the SAI and EPI to be helpful as tools in the evaluation of a part 135 ETOPS operation.

B. Forms. Review Gate Matrix (Table 4-22, Extended Operations Authorization Review Gate Matrix Example).

C. Job Aids. Automated OpSpecs guidance documents.

4-1063 TASK OUTCOMES. Successful completion of these tasks will result in the following:

• Part 121: Complete SAI or EPI 5.1.8, as applicable. • Part 135: Record using PTRS activity codes 1634/4633/6633, as applicable. • Issuance of OpSpec paragraph B342 or B344, as applicable.

4-1064 FUTURE ACTIVITIES. Normal surveillance.

6/16/2011 8900.1 CHG 119



Table 4-22. Extended Operations Authorization Review Gate Matrix Example

Responsible Organization

GATE Item Description Date Submitted to FAA Certificate

Holder FAA

FAA Action

Date ofFAA Action

Date Resubmitted to FAA (if returned for revision)

Item Completed Comment

1 Letter of Intent Submission 2 Develop Review Gates 3 ETOPS Meeting with

Certificate Management Office (CMO)

4 Review Certificate Holder’s Basic Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP)

5 Develop Certificate Holder’s ETOPS Maintenance Program

5a ETOPS Manual(s) 5b ETOPS Predeparture

Service Check

5c Limitations on Dual Maintenance

5d Verification Program 5e Task Identification 5f Centralized Maintenance

Control Procedures

5g Parts Control Program 5h Reliability Program or

Enhanced Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS)

6/16/2011 8900.1 CHG 119





Holder FAA

FAA Action

Date ofFAA Action



5i Propulsion System Monitoring Program

5j Engine Condition Monitoring Program

5k Oil Consumption Monitoring Program

5l Auxiliary Power Unit (APU) in-flight start program

5m Maintenance Training—Classroom

5n Maintenance Training—On-the-Job Training (OJT)

5o Configuration Maintenance Procedures (CMP) Document

5p Procedural Changes 5q Maintenance/Flight

Operations Interfaces

6 Develop Flight Operations ETOPS Program

6a Flight Operations Manual(s) 6b Flight Operations Training 6c Dispatcher Training 7 Simulated ETOPS Flight 8 ETOPS Validation Flights 9 Revise Operations

Specifications (OpSpecs) to Permit ETOPS

6/16/2011 8900.1 CHG 119





Holder FAA

FAA Action

Date ofFAA Action



10 Review of ETOPS Operation Including In-Service Problems and Their Resolution (3-Month)

11 Review of ETOPS Operation Including In-Service Problems and Their Resolution (6-Month)

RESERVED. Paragraph 4-1065.

5/31/11 8900.1 CHG 0


Check FSIMS to verify this version is current prior to use


CHAPTER 14 GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES—MAINTENANCE ISSUES

Section 10 Reserved


5/24/11 8900.1 CHG 0




CHAPTER 14 GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES—MAINTENANCE ISSUES

Section 12 Powerplant Repairs

4-1621 BACKGROUND. This section provides classifications of turbine engine structural parts and the general classifications of engine repairs.

4-1622 TURBINE ENGINE PART CLASSIFICATIONS. Although each manufacturer may not use the identical terminology used below, what they use will be equivalent to the following:

A. Structural engine parts include the following:

• All frames, • All casings/housings, • Engine mounts and associated engine structures, and • Complete rotor assemblies.

B. Engine frames include the following:

• Front frames or front bearing support, • Compressor rear frame, • Turbine mid-frame, and • Turbine rear-frame or rear bearing support.

C. Engine combustion casings/housings include the following:

• Fan casing, • Compressor (low and high), • Combustor casing/housing, • Turbine casing/housing, and • Accessory gear-case housing.

4-1623 ENGINE REPAIR CLASSIFICATIONS. The following will apply to modular-designed turbine engines, non-modular-designed turbine engines, and reciprocating engines, as applicable:

A. Modular Design Turbine Engines. The following repair classifications will apply:

1) The changing of modules is not considered a major repair.

2) The disassembly of a module may be a major repair. This will be determined by the engine manufacturer’s repair/overhaul manual.

5/24/11 8900.1 CHG 0



B. Non-Modular Design Turbine Engines. The disassembly of any of the main sections of a turbine engine should be considered a major repair. The main sections consist of the following:

• Fan section, • Compressor section (low and high pressure), • Combustion section, • Turbine section, and • Accessory section.

C. Reciprocating Engines. Major and minor repairs to structural parts of reciprocating engines are classified as follows:

1) Major repairs include the following:

• Welding of crankcases, • Machining operations necessitated by a weld repair, • Crankshaft grinding, • Camshaft recontouring and similar complex precision machining, • Boring of crankshaft and camshaft bosses, and • Machining of oil-pump housings and accessory drive pads following weld

repairs.

2) Minor repairs include simple machine operations, such as spot facing, lapping and grinding valves, and reaming valve guides in accordance with the manufacturer’s overhaul and service instructions.

D. Further Guidance. Further guidance on major and minor repairs, approved data, and approval for return to service can be found in Volume 4, Chapter 9, Section 1, Perform Field Approval of Major Repairs and Major Alterations.


4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



VOLUME 5 AIRMAN CERTIFICATION

CHAPTER 2 TITLE 14 CFR PART 61 CERTIFICATION OF PILOTS AND FLIGHT INSTRUCTORS

Section 6 Issue a Student Pilot Certificate

5-341 PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODE. 1502.

5-342 OBJECTIVE. The objective of this task is to determine an applicant’s eligibility for a student pilot certificate under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 61. Completion of this task results in the issuance or denial of a student pilot certificate.

5-343 GENERAL.

A. Applicant Minimum Ages. An applicant for a student pilot certificate must be at least:

• Sixteen years of age when seeking an airplane, rotorcraft, airship, weight-shift-control, powered parachute, or powered-lift rating.

• Fourteen years of age when seeking a balloon or glider rating.

B. Student Pilot Certificates. There are two types of student pilot certificates: the student medical certificate and the student pilot certificate.

1) An Aviation Medical Examiner (AME) issues Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Form 8420-2, Student Medical Certificate, to a qualified applicant who meets the requirements of part 61 subpart C for an unrestricted student pilot certificate. This student certificate serves as both a medical certificate and a student pilot certificate. An applicant who needs a medical certificate and does not have one may apply to an AME for either a combined student pilot/medical certificate or a medical certificate only.

2) Aviation safety inspectors (ASI), aviation safety technicians (AST), and designated pilot examiners (DPE) issue FAA Form 8710-2, Student Pilot Certificate, to qualified student pilot applicants. This student certificate serves as a standard student pilot certificate.

3) For student pilots who have not reached their 40th birthday, the student pilot certificate does not expire until 60 calendar-months after the month of the date of the examination shown on the medical certificate. For student pilots who have reached their 40th birthday, the student pilot certificate does not expire until 24 calendar-months after the month of the date of examination shown on the medical certificate. For student pilots seeking a glider rating, balloon rating, or a sport pilot certificate, the student pilot certificate does not expire until 60 calendar-months after the month of the date issued, regardless of the person’s age.

4) A definition of “student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate” is established in part 61, § 61.1. This definition is added to differentiate these student pilots from all other student pilots. Only an authorized instructor will provide training to a student pilot seeking a sport pilot

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



certificate. An endorsement given to a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate must include at least one of the limitations specified in § 61.89(c). A student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate may not act as pilot in command (PIC) of an aircraft other than a light-sport aircraft (LSA), as defined in 14 CFR part 1, § 1.1.

C. Limitations. An applicant for a student pilot certificate must be able to read, speak, write, and understand the English language.

1) Early in the process of issuing a student pilot certificate, it must be determined whether the applicant can read, speak, write, and understand the English language. Advisory Circular (AC) 60-28, English Language Skill Standards Required by 14 CFR parts 61, 63, and 65, explains how to determine English language abilities required for pilot certification. If the applicant cannot read, speak, write, or understand the English language, then the student pilot certificate may not be issued, unless the reason is because of a medical disability.

2) If the reason for the applicant being unable to read, speak, write, and understand English is because of a medical disability (i.e., a hearing impairment or speech impairment that is medically substantiated by a certified medical physician), then an operating limitation may be placed on the person’s pilot/instructor certificate. A medical disability of this kind may require that an operating limitation be placed on the person’s pilot certificate that prohibits the pilot from operating in airspace that requires the use of communication radios. However, as a matter of clarification, this limitation would not necessarily prohibit a pilot from operating in airspace that requires the use of communication radios if the pilot has received prior authorization from the jurisdictional air traffic facility where the flight is being conducted, and if the pilot is able to receive instructions from that air traffic facility via light signals or some other form of electronic means of communication.

3) If the applicant is unable to meet one of these requirements due to medical reasons, the Administrator may place such operating limitations on that applicant’s student pilot certificate as are necessary to ensure the safe operation of the aircraft (§ 61.83(c)).

NOTE: This applies only if the inability to meet the requirements is due to a medical condition/disability. It does not apply to applicants unable to meet the requirements due to lack of fluency, inadequate articulation and/or comprehension of the English language, or accent to the degree that speech is not clearly understood.

4) Only an FAA inspector may issue a student pilot certificate to an applicant unable to meet the requirements due to medical reasons. In this case, the FAA inspector must consider what limitations should be placed on the student pilot certificate to ensure the safe operation of the aircraft. For example, if the applicant is hearing impaired, a limitation must be placed on the pilot certificate that requires the person to have a fully qualified and current PIC onboard the aircraft.

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



5) Several questions have been raised concerning the standards and the testing to determine whether an applicant can read, speak, write, and understand the English language. While there are no practical test standards (PTS) established to ascertain the applicant’s English language ability, the following examples may be used as guidelines in this evaluation:

a) An inspector may ask the applicant to listen to a tape recording of an air traffic control (ATC) clearance or instruction, then ask the applicant to speak and explain the clearance or instruction back to the examiner in the English language.

b) An applicant may be asked to write in English the meaning of an ATC clearance, instruction, or weather report, then be asked to speak and explain the clearance, instruction, or weather report back to the inspector in the English language.

6) The intent of § 61.83(c) is not to require the applicant to read, speak, write, and understand the English language at college level standards. A common sense approach should be used in evaluating an applicant for this requirement.

5-344 RENEWAL.

A. Expiration. A student pilot certificate is valid for 24 or 60 calendar-months, depending on age and rating sought. Student pilot certificates are not renewable. Upon expiration of a student pilot certificate, the applicant may reapply for a new student pilot certificate. The application process is the same as for the original issuance. The student pilot should keep the original student pilot certificate bearing any or all endorsements that remain valid. The holder of an expired student pilot certificate may be issued a new student pilot certificate only if he or she meets the same requirements as for the original student pilot certificate.

B. Endorsement Space Full. If the allotted space for flight instructor endorsements is full and the student seeks endorsements for additional types of aircraft, issue a second student pilot certificate clearly marked “For Record Purposes Only.” The second student pilot certificate will have the same expiration date as the original. The original will be issued to the student and the copy destroyed.

5-345 STUDENT PILOT CERTIFICATES⎯GLIDER AND LIGHTER-THAN-AIR. For these two aircraft, an applicant only needs to be 14 years old and does not need to have a medical certificate. Applicants for glider or lighter-than-air are issued FAA Form 8710-2. If the holder of a student pilot certificate for gliders or lighter-than-air aircraft desires a pilot certificate or rating in a powered aircraft, he or she must meet the appropriate medical requirements of 14 CFR part 67.

5-346 MEDICAL ELIGIBILITY FOR A STUDENT PILOT CERTIFICATE.

A. Operations Requiring a Medical Certificate. Except as provided in subparagraphs 5-346B and C, a person must hold at least a third-class medical certificate when exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate.

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



B. Operations Not Requiring a Medical Certificate. A person is not required to hold a valid medical certificate when exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking a:

1) Sport pilot certificate with glider or balloon privileges; or

2) Pilot certificate with a glider category rating or balloon class rating.

C. Operations Requiring Either a Medical Certificate or U.S. Driver’s License. A person must hold and possess either a valid medical certificate issued under part 67 or a current and valid U.S. driver’s license when exercising the privileges of a student pilot certificate while seeking sport pilot privileges in an LSA other than a glider or balloon. A person who has applied for or held a medical certificate may exercise the privileges of a student pilot certificate using a current and valid U.S. driver’s license only if that person:

1) Has been found eligible for the issuance of at least a third-class airman medical certificate at the time of his or her most recent application; and

2) Has not had his or her most recently issued medical certificate suspended or revoked or most recent Authorization for a Special Issuance of a Medical Certificate withdrawn.

5-347 STUDENT PILOT CLASS B AIRSPACE ENDORSEMENTS. A discussion of the requirements of § 61.95 concerning student pilot operations (other than those seeking a sport pilot or recreational pilot certificate) in Class B airspace or at airports within Class B airspace is found in Volume 5, Chapter 2, Section 5.

5-348 STUDENT PILOT SEEKING A SPORT PILOT CERTIFICATE OR A RECREATIONAL PILOT CERTIFICATE. Requirements for student pilots seeking a sport pilot or a recreational pilot certificate include:

A. A student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate or a recreational pilot certificate who wants to obtain privileges to operate in Class B, C, and D airspace at an airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace, and to, from, through, or at an airport having an operational control tower, must receive and log ground and flight training from an authorized instructor in the following aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation:

1) The use of radios, communications, navigation systems and facilities, and radar services.

2) Operations at airports with an operating control tower. This must include three takeoffs and landings to a full stop, with each landing involving a flight in the traffic pattern, at an airport with an operating control tower.

3) Applicable flight rules of 14 CFR part 91 for operations in Class B, C, and D airspace and ATC clearances.

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



4) Ground and flight training for the specific Class B, C, or D airspace for which the solo flight is authorized, if applicable, within the 90-day period preceding the date of the flight in that airspace. The flight training must be received in the specific airspace area for which solo flight is authorized.

5) Ground and flight training for the specific airport located in Class B, C, or D airspace for which the solo flight is authorized, if applicable, within the 90-day period preceding the date of the flight at that airport. The flight and ground training must be received at the specific airport for which solo flight is authorized.

B. The authorized instructor who provides the training must provide a logbook endorsement that certifies the student has received that training and is proficient to conduct solo flight in that specific airspace or at that specific airport and in those aeronautical knowledge areas and areas of operation specified in subparagraph 5-348A.

C. See the current edition of AC 61-65, Certification: Pilots and Flight and Ground Instructors, for specific guidance and a listing of recommended endorsements for the issuance of a sport pilot certificate.

5-349 RECREATIONAL PILOT CERTIFICATES. See Volume 5, Chapter 2, Section 16.


A. Prerequisites. This task requires knowledge of part 61 and FAA policies, and qualification as an ASI (Operations) or AST.

B. Coordination. This task requires coordination with the Airman Records section of the Airmen Certification Branch, AFS-760.



• Title 14 CFR parts 1, 61 (subpart C, Student Pilots), and 187 (appendix A, Fees). • PTRS Procedures Manual (PPM). • AC 61-65, Certification: Pilots and Flight and Ground Instructors.

B. Forms:

• FAA Form 8000-36, PTRS Transmittal Form, or electronic PTRS. • FAA Form 8420-2, Medical Certificate ______ Class and Student Pilot

Certificate. • FAA Form 8710-1, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application. • FAA Form 8710-2, Student Pilot Certificate. • FAA Form 8710-11, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application—Sport Pilot.

C. Job Aids. Sample letters and figures.

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



5-352 PROCEDURES.

A. Schedule Appointment. Inform the applicant that he or she must bring acceptable identification to the appointment (see Volume 5, Chapter 1, Section 3).

B. Applicant Arrives for Appointment.

1) Determine if the applicant is a student pilot seeking a sport pilot certificate or seeking a recreational pilot certificate or higher.

2) Collect the FAA Form 8710-1 application from those student pilots who are seeking a recreational pilot certificate or higher. Collect the FAA Form 8710-11 application from those student pilots who are seeking a sport pilot certificate.

3) Verify the applicant’s identification.

4) Open the PTRS.

C. Aircraft Category. Determine which category of aircraft the applicant intends to fly.

1) If it is a glider or balloon, provide the applicant a copy of FAA Form 8710-1. Explain what must be filled out.

2) If it is an airplane, rotorcraft, powered-lift, weight-shift-control aircraft, powered parachute, or airship, determine if the applicant holds at least a current third-class medical certificate if seeking other than a sport pilot certificate. If the applicant is seeking a sport pilot certificate, the applicant must hold at least a current third-class medical certificate issued under part 67 or a current and valid U.S. driver’s license, and submit a completed FAA Form 8710-11.

3) If an applicant does not hold a medical certificate and a medical certificate is required, inform the applicant that a medical certificate is required. Advise the applicant to make an appointment with an AME to obtain FAA Form 8420-2 (see Figure 5-33, Student Medical Certificate). Also, inform the applicant that the application may be resubmitted for a student pilot certificate, FAA Form 8710-2, if the applicant holds a medical certificate.

4) If the applicant has a current medical certificate, provide the applicant with an FAA Form 8710-1 application or an FAA Form 8710-11 application, as appropriate, to complete.

D. Review Application. Verify that the application is filled out accurately and in ink or typed (see Figures 5-30, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application, and 5-31, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application—Sport Pilot).

1) In Section I, ensure that the applicant has checked the box labeled “Student.”

2) Ensure that the remainder of the application is filled out according to Volume 5, Chapter 1, Section 3. Sections II and III do not have to be completed for issuance of an original student pilot certificate.

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



E. Verify Applicant’s Identity. Inspect acceptable forms of identification to establish the applicant’s identity. Compare the identification with the personal information provided on FAA Form 8710-1 or 8710-11 (see Volume 5, Chapter 1, Section 3).

1) If the applicant’s identity can be verified, proceed with issuing the pilot certificate.

2) If the applicant’s identity cannot be verified because of lack of identification or inadequate identification, explain what types of identification are acceptable. Instruct the applicant to return with appropriate identification to reapply.

3) If the applicant’s identity appears to be different from the information supplied on FAA Form 8710-1, or it appears that an attempt at falsification has been made, do not issue FAA Form 8710-2. See Volume 7, Chapter 6.

F. Establish Eligibility.

1) Determine if the applicant for a student pilot certificate meets the requirements regarding age, language (see subparagraph 5-343B3) and 4)), and medical qualifications (see §§ 61.23 and 61.83).

2) If the applicant proposes to operate an airplane, rotorcraft, powered-lift, weight-shift-control aircraft, powered parachute, or airship, determine if the applicant holds at least a current third-class medical certificate if seeking other than a sport pilot certificate. If the applicant is seeking a sport pilot certificate, he or she must hold at least a current third-class medical certificate issued under part 67 or a current and valid U.S. driver’s license.

3) If the applicant does not meet the requirements of § 61.83, prepare FAA Form 8060-5 in duplicate (see Volume 5, Chapter 1, Section 6).

a) Inform the applicant of the reasons for denial.

b) Give an adequate explanation of how the applicant may correct the discrepancies.

G. Applicant Meets Requirements. If the applicant meets all of the requirements for a student pilot certificate:

1) Prepare the student pilot certificate in duplicate (see Figure 5-32, Student Pilot Certificate) as per Volume 5, Chapter 1, Section 5.

2) Sign and have the applicant sign in ink both the original and the copy.

3) Issue the original to the applicant.

4) Inform the applicant that the student pilot certificate expires 2 years after the date it was issued (i.e., the last day of the month).

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



5) Enter (when appropriate), “Not valid for flights requiring the use of radio” on the space provided on the student pilot certificate if the applicant is hearing or speech impaired.

6) If the student pilot certificate is issued in a foreign country, and if the applicant is neither a citizen of the United States nor a resident alien of the United States, then the applicant must comply with § 61.13(a)(2)(i) and the fee schedule contained in appendix A of part 187.

7) Complete the ASI or AST certification section of the application and sign the reverse side of the FAA Form 8710-1 application or the FAA Form 8710-11 application, as appropriate.

8) Forward the file to AFS-760.

H. Subsequent Issuance.

1) If a student pilot certificate has expired, follow the procedures for original issuance.

2) If the allotted space for flight instructor endorsements is full on a valid student pilot certificate, issue a second student pilot certificate as follows:

a) Clearly mark on the front of the second student pilot certificate, “For Record Purposes Only.”

b) Enter the same expiration date on the second student pilot certificate that is on the original student pilot certificate.

c) Issue the original of the new student pilot certificate to the student and destroy the copy.

I. Forward File.

1) If the applicant was issued a student pilot certificate, forward the completed file to AFS-760. The file consists of the:

• Completed, signed FAA Form 8710-1 application or FAA Form 8710-11 application, as appropriate, and

• Copy of FAA Form 8710-2.

2) If the applicant was issued a notice of disapproval of application, forward the completed and signed FAA Form 8710-1 application or FAA Form 8710-11 application (as appropriate) and FAA Form 8060-5 to AFS-760.

J. PTRS. Complete FAA Form 8000-36 or electronic PTRS in accordance with the PPM.

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



5-353 TASK OUTCOMES. Completion of this task will result in one of the following:

• Student pilot certificate. • Notice of disapproval of application.

5-354 FUTURE ACTIVITIES.

A. Upon expiration of an issued student pilot certificate, the applicant may reapply for a reissuance.

B. The applicant may return for a sport pilot, recreational pilot, or private pilot certification.

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 5-30. FAA Form 8710-1, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 5-31. FAA Form 8710-11, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application—Sport Pilot

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Selected Sections of Reverse Side

If certificate is issued by a DPE, these marked and shaded areas of the form will be completed:

If certificate is issued by an ASI or AST, the marked and shaded areas of this area of the form will be completed:

When a pilot certificate is issued, the marked and shaded areas of this section must be completed by the DPE, ASI, or AST:

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 5-32. FAA Form 8710-2, Student Pilot Certificate

4/20/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 5-33. FAA Form 8420-2, Student Medical Certificate


5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



VOLUME 5 AIRMAN CERTIFICATION

CHAPTER 9 OTHER AIRMEN AUTHORIZATIONS

Section 2 Airman Qualification Requirements for Aircraft for Which the Operating Limitations Require an FAA-issued Authorization to Act as Pilot in Command

5-1576 PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODE. 1579.

5-1577 OBJECTIVE. This task provides guidance on procedures and policies for issuing an authorization for an airman to fly an aircraft as a pilot in command (PIC) for which the operating limitations require a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)-issued authorization to act as PIC. This authorization may be listed on an airman certificate designating other authorized aircraft that the airman is qualified to fly. These aircraft are generally aircraft with Special Airworthiness Certificates that identify them as “large” aircraft, turbojet-powered aircraft, or other aircraft specifically identified by the Administrator, as described in this chapter, that require a specific authorization for a person to act as PIC during flight. Figure 5-173, Experimental Aircraft Authorizations, lists some of the aircraft so identified.

Figure 5-173. Experimental Aircraft Authorizations

The previous information has been removed. This information can be found at http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificates/vintage_experimental/authorized/media/aircraftlist.xls.

5-1578 GENERAL.

A. Background. There has been an increase in requests for authorizations to operate aircraft in the experimental category, including surplus military, turbojet-powered, experimental/amateur-built, or other foreign-manufactured aircraft for which no type rating exists. Examples of such models are the Tiger, Invader, MIG-15, Fouga Magister, and the BD-5J.

1) Operating limitations issued for aircraft such as these may require the PIC to either hold a type rating on his or her pilot certificate for aircraft that have a type rating designation, or obtain an authorization from the FAA to fly such aircraft.

2) Because type rating designations for many of these aircraft have not been established, a type rating is not available to operate certain aircraft. In the absence of type ratings for these aircraft, it is the FAA’s objective to ensure for the pilots flying these aircraft a level of safety and proficiency similar to what is available for an aircraft with a type rating.

3) The National Program Office (NPO) for Vintage and Experimental Aircraft provides policy, guidance, and oversight of large vintage and experimental/exhibition aircraft. Questions concerning these areas should be directed to the NPO.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



4) This chapter provides guidance to aviation safety inspectors (ASI), instructors, and experimental aircraft examiners (EAE) on the appropriate methods for a pilot to become qualified to operate U.S. and non-U.S. experimental/exhibition aircraft (see Figure 5-173) that the operating limitations require an FAA-issued authorization to act as PIC. Additional guidance is provided for issuing an authorization to fly these aircraft and listing any applicable limitations on an airman certificate.

B. Definitions.

1) Aircraft Sets. Aircraft sets, for the purposes of this chapter, means aircraft of similar design and construction. Specific aircraft sets, such as piston-powered, single-engine, and conventional gear, are listed in Figure 5-173.

2) Aircraft Type. Aircraft type, as stated in this chapter, means a specific make and model such as the Mustang, MiG-15, or Dauntless.

3) Authorization. An authorization issued by the FAA or by an authorized representative of the FAA on an airman certificate for a particular U.S. or non-U.S. experimental/exhibition aircraft for which the operating limitations require an FAA-issued authorization to act as PIC. Issuance of this authorization parallels the issuance of a type rating under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 61. This aircraft authorization is listed specifically on the airman certificate or may be in the form of a letter of authorization (LOA).

4) Authorized Instructor. This authorization is issued to an individual, granting the authority to serve as an authorized instructor in specific aircraft that have been issued a special airworthiness certificate and for which the operating limitations require an FAA-issued authorization to act as PIC. Issuance of this authorization parallels that of a certificated flight instructor (CFI) under part 61. This authorized instructor may provide training and a recommendation for the evaluation of applicants for authorizations to operate specific aircraft in a special airworthiness category for which the operating limitations require an FAA-issued authorization to act as PIC. Authorized instructor certificates were issued to the holders of letters of operational authority (LOOA). The issuance of authorized instructor certificates ended on July 31, 2005. No new authorized instructor certificates will be issued under this program.

5) Comparable Sets of Aircraft. Comparable, as stated in this chapter, means an aircraft with similar characteristics. For an aircraft to be considered comparable, it must have sufficient similar characteristics that a pilot’s proficiency in one make and model is qualifying for the other, allowing for some minor differences in flying characteristics. Similar characteristics that may be identified are:

• Original intended use, such as student training or advanced combat roles. • Number of engines. • Piston- or turbine-powered. • Landing gear configuration. • Wing design (swept or straight-wing). • Performance factors (subsonic, transonic, or supersonic design).

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



NOTE: The application of comparability is discussed in paragraph 5-1583.

6) EAE. An individual designated by the FAA to conduct evaluations of applicants who wish to add an aircraft authorization to their pilot certificate. These pilot certificate authorizations are applicable to aircraft certificated in the experimental category for the purposes of exhibition (14 CFR part 21, § 21.191 (d)). EAEs serve in a national capacity and may be authorized to conduct evaluations in one or more types of aircraft. (The process to become an EAE is described in Volume 13, Chapter 3.)

NOTE: Only ASIs specifically authorized by the NPO may conduct practical tests. These ASIs authorized by the NPO may perform tasks in this chapter that are otherwise accomplished by an EAE.

7) The NPO. The General Aviation and Commercial Division, AFS-800, is the National Program Office for Vintage and Experimental Aircraft and has oversight authority of the EAE program.

8) Sponsoring Organization. A recognized organization such as a museum or pilot’s association that has developed procedures acceptable to the FAA for nominating individuals for selection as an authorized instructor or an EAE.

9) Surplus Military Aircraft. Unless otherwise stated in this chapter, the term applies to both U.S. and non-U.S. manufactured, turbine and piston-powered aircraft declared as surplus by an appropriate governmental body.

10) Temporary LOA. An LOA may be issued to an airman for practice in a single-place (or single-control) aircraft. The issuance of temporary LOAs should be coordinated with the NPO. (See Figure 5-174, Sample Temporary Letter of Authorization.)

C. Title 14 CFR. The following paragraphs primarily pertain to the issuance of an authorization for restricted (§ 21.185) and experimental category aircraft with airworthiness certificates issued for the purpose of exhibition (§ 21.191(d)), air racing (§ 21.191(e)), and operating amateur-built aircraft (§ 21.191(g)). Experimental or other foreign aircraft certificated for other purposes such as research and development (§ 21.191(a)), showing compliance with regulations (§ 21.191(b)), crew training (§ 21.191(c)), and market survey (§ 21.191(f)) are normally granted only to manufacturers and will not be discussed here. See the current edition of FAA Order 8130.2, Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products, for further guidance. Aircraft issued an experimental certificate under § 21.191 are issued operating limitations per 14 CFR part 91, § 91.319.

Figure 5-174. Sample Temporary Letter of Authorization

NOTE: The temporary letter of authorization is issued by the NPO or by the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) in coordination with the NPO.

FAA Letterhead

[Date]

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



[Name and address]

Dear [name]:

This temporary letter of authorization allows you to act as Pilot-in-Command (PIC) in the following experimental category aircraft:

North American F-86 Sabre (VFR Only)

Flights made under this authorization will be conducted in accordance with the Special Airworthiness Certificate operating limitations and all applicable Federal aviation regulations. This letter does not authorize the performance of aerobatics in air shows.

Flights made under this letter must only be for proficiency and practice flying in preparation for a practical test.

Operations are limited to the following geographical area:

[Inspectors should describe an area large enough to reasonably conduct proficiency and practice flying in preparation for a practical test for the type airplane.]

This authorization expires on [60 days from date of issuance] unless sooner modified, suspended, or revoked by this Agency.

Sincerely,

[POI signature]

5-1579 AIRCRAFT REQUIRING AUTHORIZATIONS. Part 61, § 61.31(a) requires type ratings for certain aircraft. This section of the rule specifies that persons who act as PIC of large aircraft, turbojet-powered airplanes, and other aircraft specifically identified by the FAA must hold a type rating for that aircraft. Type rating designations are supplied by AFS-800 after recommendation by a Flight Standardization Board (FSB) and are only applied to aircraft that have completed the type certification process. If the manufacturer (or builder) has not applied for a type certificate (TC), no type rating is available.

A. However, § 61.31(b) does provide for an authorization, in the form of an LOA, to operate, on a temporary basis, an aircraft that would normally have a type rating. When applied to aircraft that have a type rating, Volume 5, Chapter 9, Section 3 should be used for guidance. When applied to operation of aircraft for which the operating limitations require an FAA-issued authorization to act as PIC, the authorization is part of part 91 and special procedures apply, with limitations.

NOTE: A manufacturer (or type-certificate holder (TCH)) who wishes to obtain a type approval for an aircraft so that a pilot may obtain a rating based on that designation must submit the aircraft for an evaluation to an FSB. The FSB determines the type rating, certification, and training requirements for new or modified aircraft.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



1) A person may act as PIC of an aircraft that has a type designation if that person holds a type rating for that aircraft. The type rating is also valid for the experimental or restricted category version of the same aircraft.

2) An airman who holds a type rating for that aircraft model may act as PIC for all of the aircraft of the same model, regardless of the type of airworthiness certificate held for the aircraft. The applicant may complete the appropriate aircraft type rating practical test in the subject aircraft. The holder of such an aircraft type rating must adhere to the applicable provisions of parts 61 and 91 and any limitations appropriate to the operation of an aircraft with an experimental airworthiness certificate.

B. Certain aircraft that have been issued special U.S. airworthiness certificates, and for which a type rating designation has not been established, require an authorization (previously an LOA) for the operation of the aircraft by the PIC. Aircraft requiring authorizations for operation include:

1) Those aircraft that would normally require a type designation and require the PIC to hold a type rating, and which fall under the requirements of § 61.31(a)(1) through (3), including:

• Aircraft with a maximum gross weight in excess of 12,500 pounds (§ 61.31(a)(1)).

• Turbojet-powered aircraft (§ 61.31(a)(2)).

2) Piston-powered surplus military experimental aircraft with more than 800 horsepower and with a never-exceed speed (VNE) in excess of 250 knots (e.g., Bearcat, certain Trojan models, and the Messerschmitt BF-109).

3) Any turbine-powered surplus military or turbojet-powered experimental aircraft for which the FAA has not established a type rating. Examples include the MiG-15, Skyhawk, Mohawk, and BD-10.

4) Both piston- and turbine-powered rotorcraft whose maximum gross weight exceeds 12,500 pounds.

5) Non-U.S. registered aircraft operating under a special flight authorization and operated by a pilot with only a U.S. pilot certificate may require an aircraft authorization.

C. If a second-in-command (SIC) is required by the aircraft operating limitations, the SIC must be qualified in accordance with § 61.55. The SIC need not hold an aircraft authorization.

NOTE: A limited number of aircraft, such as the Mustang P-51 C, D, and K series, are currently certificated in the limited category. Since these aircraft have been issued a TC, no additional aircraft authorization is required for an airman to act as PIC. However, should the aircraft be recertificated in the experimental category, an aircraft authorization is required.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



5-1580 ELIGIBILITY FOR AN AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZATION. Aircraft authorizations may be issued by either an EAE or an ASI (Operations) authorized by the NPO. Since “other aircraft authorizations” are similar to type ratings, the eligibility, application, issuance, and limitations will be similar to a type rating. By the same reasoning, once an “other aircraft authorization” is issued to an individual, then (like a type rating) it should be issued for an indefinite period of time or without an expiration date. Requirements for eligibility for an authorization include completion of training, testing, and evaluation in the same manner as would be required for a type rating.

A. To be eligible for an authorization to act as PIC of a surplus military turbojet-powered aircraft, an applicant must:

• Possess at least a U.S. private pilot certificate with an appropriate category and class rating (e.g., airplane, single-engine land);

• Hold an instrument rating; • Possess at least a valid U.S. third-class medical certificate; • Have logged a minimum of 500 hours of pilot flight time in the aircraft category

and have completed the U.S. armed services qualification checkout described in subparagraph 5-1582A1) of this section; or

• Have logged a minimum of 1,000 hours pilot flight time, including 500 hours as PIC in the aircraft category, and have completed one of the training requirements of subparagraph 5-1582B.

B. To be eligible to serve as PIC of a surplus military propeller-driven airplane that has a maximum gross takeoff weight exceeding 12,500 pounds, or which has a horsepower rating of more than 800 horsepower and a VNE that exceeds 250 knots, an applicant must:


• Possess at least a valid U.S. third-class medical certificate; • Have logged a minimum of 500 hours of pilot flight time; and • Have completed one of the training requirements of subparagraph 5-1582B.

C. To be eligible to serve as PIC of a turbojet- or turbofan-powered aircraft not considered to be a surplus or replica military aircraft, an applicant must:

• Possess at least a U.S. private pilot certificate with an appropriate category and class rating;

• Possess at least a valid U.S. third-class medical certificate; • Hold an instrument rating if the aircraft is equipped for instrument flight rules

(IFR) flight operations per § 91.205(d) and (e); and • Have completed either of the training requirements of subparagraph 5-1582B(2).

D. To be eligible to serve as PIC of a large aircraft (more than 12,500 pounds maximum gross takeoff weight) not considered a surplus or replica military aircraft, an applicant must:

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



• Possess at least a U.S. private pilot certificate with an appropriate category and class rating;

• Possess at least a valid U.S. third-class medical certificate; and • Have completed either of the training requirements of subparagraph 5-1582B2.

E. To be eligible for an authorization to serve as PIC of a surplus military piston-powered aircraft that has a horsepower rating of more than 800 and a VNE that exceeds 250 knots, an applicant must:


• Possess at least a valid U.S. third-class medical certificate; • Have logged a minimum of 500 hours of pilot flight time; • Have completed one of the training requirements of subparagraph 5-1582B; and • Have logged 50 hours complex time.

5-1581 APPLICATION FOR AN AIRCRAFT AUTHORIZATION.

A. Submissions. An applicant who meets the requirements of subparagraph 5-1582B1) may submit an application letter; FAA Form 8710-1, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application; and appropriate documentation showing PIC qualification or assignment (per subparagraph 5-1581B) to an EAE or the FSDO where the applicant’s primary base of operations is located. An evaluation will be made of the documentation to determine if the applicant meets the minimum requirements for issuance of an aircraft authorization without further testing.

B. Documentation. An applicant for an authorization must provide copies of his or her training records or logbook records to document his or her ground and flight training to the EAE who will conduct the practical test. An evaluation will be made of the documentation to determine if the applicant meets the minimum requirements for the issuance of an aircraft authorization. Upon successful completion of the practical test, the EAE will issue an aircraft authorization.

NOTE: Aliens seeking flight training must register with the Transportation Security Administration’s (TSA) Alien Flight Student Program (AFSP) at the following Web site: https://www.flightschoolcandidates.gov, or call 703-542-1222.

5-1582 TRAINING REQUIREMENTS. The FSDO or EAE must receive documented evidence of appropriate training before it can issue the authorization (Figure 5-175, Letter of Authority (Issued Only by the National Program Office)). If the applicant has received training under subparagraph 5-1582A1) or 2), he or she must provide appropriate documentation of the training before the EAE or FSDO issues an authorization.

A. Training Options. The applicant’s training program may consist of any one of the following:

https://www.flightschoolcandidates.gov/�

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



1) The applicant may have completed a U.S. military service qualification checkout to act as PIC in a specific type of aircraft. The applicant must also have logged 10 hours as PIC in the specific type of aircraft during the preceding 12 calendar-months. Authorizations may only be issued for the operation of civil aircraft. Authorizations will not be issued based upon military competence unless the applicant can show a need for a civil authorization. Typically, this would be shown by a letter from a civil operator requesting an authorization for the particular airman.

a) The applicant must present this documentation to an EAE for issuance of an authorization for this specific type of aircraft.

b) If more than 12 calendar-months have elapsed since acting as PIC in the specific aircraft, the applicant must meet the minimum recency of experience requirements of paragraph 5-1587 and successfully complete a practical test/evaluation given by an EAE.

2) The applicant must receive and log both ground and flight training as listed in paragraph 5-1582B. Upon completion of the training program, the CFI or authorized instructor must endorse the applicant’s training record and certify that the applicant is proficient to take the required practical test/evaluation. This endorsement must be made in the applicant’s logbook and on the back of Form 8710-1 within the 60-day period preceding the date of the practical test/evaluation.

a) Training in the specific aircraft type may be provided by a CFI or the holder of an authorized instructor certificate for multiseat aircraft that have functioning dual controls.

b) For single-seat aircraft, ground and flight training in a comparable aircraft (multiseat with functioning dual controls), as defined in paragraph 5-1583, may be provided by a CFI or authorized instructor. However, the applicant must complete a transition training program in the specific single-seat aircraft type with ground instruction provided by a CFI or authorized instructor for that specific aircraft. Upon successful completion of the training, the applicant must have a logbook endorsement for solo flight from a CFI or authorized instructor before flight in the single-seat aircraft. This endorsement for solo flight can be used for proficiency flying in preparation for the practical test/evaluation. The endorsement must be limited to 30 days and will limit the applicant’s area of operation to the local area with takeoffs and landings only at the applicant’s home base airport. No cross-country authorizations should be included. The solo endorsement can include any other limitations deemed necessary by the authorized instructor. Solo endorsements may only be issued if the aircraft operating limitations permit operations based on a logbook endorsement. If the operating limitations do not permit logbook endorsements after completion of the training, the airman should contact the local FSDO and obtain a temporary LOA to permit limited local area solo practice. Temporary LOAs should be issued only when required by the aircraft operating limitations and when necessary for solo practice and to complete the practical test for an authorization to be added to the airman certificate (Figure 5-174).

B. Training Requirements.

1) Training must meet the standards specified in the appropriate parts of the practical test standards (PTS) for type ratings (FAA-S-8081-5, Airline Transport Pilot and Aircraft Type

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Rating, Practical Test Standards for Airplane, current edition). At a minimum, an applicant’s ground training program must include the following requirements:

• The airplane’s systems and components. • Ground emergency procedures, including abnormal procedures, if described in

the airplane’s checklist. • Flight emergency procedures, including abnormal procedures, if described in

the airplane’s checklist. • Use of performance charts, including (but not limited to) takeoff, climb,

cruise, and landing. • Fuel requirements and fuel management. • Runway requirements and limitations (e.g., minimum runway lengths and

crosswind limits of the airplane). • Contents of the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) or equivalent. • Operating limitations prescribed for the specific airplane, both the

manufacturer’s and FAA-issued. • Operation of the airplane in the high-altitude realm, if applicable. • Recovery from abnormal flight profiles based on specific aircraft

characteristics.

2) The applicant’s flight training program must meet the standards established in FAA-S-8081-5. The recommending instructor must have personally flown with the applicant in the airplane type (for multiseat with functioning dual controls) or a comparable type (for single-seat). This training must include the following requirements:

• Airplane preflight. • Crew Resource Management (CRM), including single pilot, as appropriate. • Powerplant start procedure, taxiing, and pretakeoff checks. • Normal and crosswind takeoff. • Powerplant failure during takeoff. • Rejected takeoff. • Flight at critically slow airspeeds in all appropriate configurations. • Approaches to and recovery from stalls, as appropriate. • Recovery from normal and abnormal flight profiles based on specific aircraft

characteristics, including unusual attitudes. • Normal, emergency, and abnormal procedures. • Landing with simulated powerplant failure. • Normal and crosswind landings. • Landing from a no-flap or a nonstandard flap approach. • Rejected landing. • Fuel-low level/return to base procedures. • Aerobatics, if appropriate to the airplane and requested by the applicant, if the

applicant can provide operating limitations required by § 91.319 authorizing aerobatics and specific maneuvers.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 5-175. Letter of Authority (Issued Only by the National Program Office)

NOTE: The temporary letter of authorization is issued by the NPO or by the local Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) in coordination with the NPO.

FAA Letterhead

[Date]

[Name and address]

Dear [name]:

This temporary letter of authorization allows you to act as Pilot-in-Command (PIC) in the following experimental category aircraft:


Flights made under this authorization will be conducted in accordance with the Special Airworthiness Certificate operating limitations and all applicable Federal aviation regulations. This letter does not authorize the performance of aerobatics in air shows.

Flights made under this letter must only be for proficiency and practice flying in preparation for a practical test.


[Inspectors should describe an area large enough to reasonably conduct proficiency and practice flying in preparation for a practical test for the type airplane.]

This authorization expires on [60 days from date of issuance] unless sooner modified, suspended, or revoked by this Agency.

Sincerely,

[POI signature]

5-1583 COMPARABLE AIRCRAFT. Some single-seat aircraft have two-seat models that may be available for the applicant’s use in training. Some two-seat aircraft are unique and require training in comparable aircraft. Other unusual circumstances may also require the use of comparable aircraft and must be coordinated with the NPO.

A. Single-Seat Airplane. An applicant with a single-seat airplane (e.g., MiG-15) must accomplish the training described in subparagraph 5-1582B2). However, the applicant may accomplish that training in a comparable two-seat airplane (e.g., MiG-15-UTI).

B. Determining Comparable Aircraft. In determining comparable aircraft for training purposes and for issuing authorizations, the FAA requires the applicant to receive training in the

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



most complex aircraft that most nearly duplicates the characteristics of the specific aircraft for which the authorization is issued.

C. Initial Training. When a comparable aircraft is used for initial training, the applicant should contact an EAE, who will coordinate with the NPO, to ensure that the proposed aircraft meets the requirements of this chapter.

1) Include transition ground and flight training appropriate to the aircraft.

2) Provide the applicant with training at least equivalent in scope and content to the requirements as outlined in subparagraphs 5-1582B1) and 2).

D. Training in Comparable Aircraft. In general, a comparable aircraft is one that duplicates the flight characteristics with enough similarity that flight training in one would qualify the pilot (with aircraft-specific ground training being the only further training required) to safely operate the actual aircraft.

1) With all the varieties of foreign and military aircraft that have been produced over the years, reducing this concept to a definitive formula is not practical. However:

a) Generally, fighters built before 1960 or jet trainers from any period are not comparable to current first-line fighters, regardless of wing design.

b) Attack helicopters are not comparable to large transport helicopters, and so on. The type of wing, thrust ratios, specific flight characteristics, and installed engineering and systems must all be taken into account.

2) Sets of aircraft have been established to indicate comparable aircraft that may be used for training and maintaining recency of experience. If an airman is unable to determine whether the aircraft are comparable, the airman may contact the NPO.

3) No pilot will be found qualified for issuance of an authorization for a specific aircraft based entirely on initial training in a comparable aircraft. If the applicant completes initial training in a comparable aircraft, the applicant must then complete transition training and complete a flight evaluation before issuance of a specific aircraft authorization.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



E. Sets of Aircraft. The following sets of aircraft are established as comparable:

• Set I. Piston-powered, single-engine, conventional landing gear. • Set II. Piston-powered, single-engine, tricycle landing gear. • Set III. Piston-powered, multiengine, two-engine. • Set IV. Piston-powered, multiengine, more than two engines. • Set V. Turbojet-powered, single-engine, straight-wing. • Set VI. Turboprop or turbojet-powered, multiengine, straight-wing. • Set VII. Turbojet-powered, single-engine, swept wing, subsonic. • Set VIII. Turbojet-powered, single-engine, swept wing, supersonic. • Set IX. Turbojet-powered, multiengine, swept wing, supersonic. • Set X. Helicopters.

NOTE: The sets identifying each specific aircraft make and model are located in Figure 5-173.

F. Initial Qualification Training. For single-seat aircraft, the following guidance must be used concerning the use of comparable aircraft for initial qualification training. The comparable multiseat aircraft used during training must be equipped with functioning dual controls per § 61.45.

1) Set I. Comparable aircraft is either the Texan or any multiseat aircraft from Set I.

2) Set II. Comparable aircraft is the Trojan.

3) Set III. Comparable aircraft is the Mitchell or any aircraft approved by the NPO.

4) Set IV. These are generally crew-served aircraft; therefore, no comparable aircraft will be listed.

5) Set V through Set X. The many technically different design characteristics of these turbojet-powered aircraft must be acknowledged and respected. Therefore, no comparable aircraft will be listed for these sets. The use of a multiseat aircraft for initial qualification training will be approved by the NPO.

G. All Types and Makes of Piston-Powered Airplanes. In the past, airmen have been issued LOAs with the authorization for all types and makes of high-performance single-engine or multiengine piston-powered airplanes, commonly known as an “unlimited LOA.” An individual who holds such an LOA and applies for an authorization will have an all-makes/models, or single-engine or multiengine piston-powered (as appropriate), authorization on his or her reissued airman certificate. In addition to the above-listed authorization, each aircraft that the individual has flown as PIC will be listed on the airman certificate.

1) Individuals who have this authorization may become qualified in additional Set I, II, III, and IV aircraft by completing training for the aircraft.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



2) The ground and flight training program must meet the requirements listed in subparagraphs 5-1582B1) and 2).

3) The ground training, including cockpit familiarization, will be conducted by a CFI or an authorized instructor who will make an endorsement indicating completion of the ground training in the airman’s logbook. The authorized instructor or CFI will make a solo endorsement in the airman’s logbook to complete the flight training. If the aircraft is a multiseat with functioning dual controls, the authorized instructor or CFI will complete the flight training with the airman. Once both portions of the training are completed, the individual will be considered qualified in the aircraft.

4) Within 60 days of completion of the qualification training, the airman may present a completed Form 8710-1 along with the logbook endorsements to an EAE. Upon verification of the aircraft qualification, the aircraft will be added as an authorized aircraft to the airman’s certificate.

5) The presence of the “all makes and models” authorization indicates that the holder need only obtain aircraft-specific training and a logbook endorsement from an authorized instructor to show qualification to add an additional Set I, II, III, or IV aircraft to the pilot certificate. The “all makes and models” authorization does not grant an authorization to act as PIC of an aircraft not listed on the pilot certificate.

H. Experimental Aircraft of Same Make and Model as Type-Designated Aircraft.

1) Some makes and models of surplus military aircraft were originally TC’d in the limited or restricted category after World War II. At that time, they were issued TCs with type ratings, if appropriate. Examples of these aircraft are the Fortress F/G designations, Havoc B/C/G/H/J, Lightning G/J/M/L, Mitchell, and Marauder C version. All of these aircraft received type ratings and require the PIC to hold an appropriate type rating since they are large aircraft. Subsequently, many of the aircraft have been certificated in the experimental category. For operation of these aircraft, an airman may elect to satisfactorily complete either of the following procedures to serve as PIC of the aircraft:

a) The applicant may complete the appropriate aircraft type rating practical test in the aircraft. Upon successful completion of all of the required tasks, the established type rating may be placed on the airman’s certificate. The airman may then serve as PIC of aircraft of that make and model, regardless of the category of certification.

b) The applicant may complete an acceptable program of training and satisfactorily complete the practical test/evaluation for the issuance of an aircraft authorization on the airman’s certificate. The airman may only serve as PIC of aircraft of that make and model certificated in the experimental category.

2) Aircraft with either a standard airworthiness certificate, or that conform to a type design in accordance with §§ 21.27 and 21.31 and have been issued a TC, require no additional authorization for an airman to act as PIC, other than that required by part 61 certification.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



5-1584 FLIGHT EVALUATION. Practical tests/evaluations are required for those authorization applicants who do not meet the military program requirements of subparagraph 5-1582A1) (except for airmen with all-makes/models, single-engine or multiengine piston-powered authorizations in Set I, II, and III aircraft). These evaluations must be conducted in accordance with FAA-S-8081-5.

A. Conduct of the Flight Evaluation. An EAE (or a qualified ASI (Operations) authorized by the NPO) must conduct the knowledge and flight evaluation. The evaluation will be conducted in the specific aircraft the applicant has applied for an authorization in (for multiseat aircraft). For those applicants using comparable aircraft (for single-seat or multiseat aircraft), the evaluation will be conducted in the comparable aircraft. The final portion of the flight evaluation must be conducted in the specific aircraft and may be observed from the ground or in a chase aircraft.

1) The EAE who conducts the evaluation is responsible for determining whether the applicant meets the standards outlined in the objective of each task within the areas of operation in FAA-S-8081-5D.

a) The EAE will meet this responsibility by determining whether the applicant’s knowledge and skill meets the objective in all required tasks.

b) The EAE may observe the flight from the ground (for single-seat aircraft) or from the aircraft being used for the test. If the EAE is onboard the aircraft and serves as a required flightcrew member, he or she must be qualified and current in the aircraft and the aircraft must have fully functioning dual controls.

2) ASIs conducting flight checks must be authorized by the NPO and must meet the qualification and currency requirements of Volume 5, Chapter 2, Section 1 and the current edition of Order 4040.9, FAA Aircraft Management Program, appendix K.

B. Unsatisfactory Flight Evaluation. If an applicant does not perform satisfactorily, the EAE will issue FAA Form 8060-5, Notification of Disapproval of Application. The applicant may reapply after receiving additional training and submitting Form 8710-1.

5-1585 ISSUANCE. After the EAE has received a completed application, accepted the training documentation, reviewed the recommendation, and conducted a practical test/evaluation with a satisfactory result, the EAE issues the authorization on the airman certificate.

5-1586 LIMITATIONS.

A. Visual Flight Rules (VFR).

1) Based on the recommendation of an authorized instructor or CFI and the completion of the flight evaluation by an EAE, the following limitation for each specific aircraft may be placed on the airman certificate: VFR ONLY.

2) This limitation applies unless the applicant meets the requirements of paragraph 5-1588.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



3) This limitation may not be placed on a specific turbojet-powered aircraft.

B. Instrument Rating. All applicants for type ratings in turbojet-powered aircraft must possess an instrument rating.

5-1587 RECENCY OF EXPERIENCE. ASIs should encourage holders of authorizations to complete a flight review in at least one aircraft for which an authorization is held every 24 calendar-months. This flight review may be conducted in a comparable aircraft per the appropriate aircraft sets referenced in paragraph 5-1582. The flight review will be conducted in accordance with § 61.56 by a CFI or an authorized instructor.

5-1588 INSTRUMENT PRIVILEGES.

A. Requirements for Instrument Privileges. If an applicant for an authorization or an authorization holder desires to exercise instrument privileges in an authorized aircraft, then the applicant must meet the following requirements:

• Hold an instrument rating or an air transport pilot (ATP) certificate. • Meet the instrument currency requirements per § 61.57(c) or (d). • Demonstrate instrument competency to an EAE during the flight evaluation or to

an authorized instructor or CFI during the training in a comparable aircraft in accordance with the ATP PTS.

NOTE: Instrument endorsements can only be conducted by an EAE or an ASI authorized by the NPO.

B. Removal of the VFR ONLY Limitation. A pilot may have a VFR ONLY limitation removed by meeting the following requirements:

1) Demonstrating instrument flight competence in the actual aircraft, in a simulator, or in a similarly equipped aircraft that has comparable performance characteristics (see paragraph 5-1583). A comparably equipped aircraft should contain equipment similar to that of the airplane for which the authorization is held.

2) An instrument competence demonstration may be conducted in conjunction with that required by another operating rule or a military instrument proficiency check (IPC).

3) When a demonstration is conducted in a simulator or a comparably equipped aircraft, the applicant must demonstrate competence based solely upon the equipment/crew complement for the aircraft for which the authorization is held. For example, if an aircraft does not require an SIC or have an autopilot system, the applicant may not use an SIC or the autopilot for the instrument competence demonstration.

5-1589 AIRCRAFT TYPES NOT PREVIOUSLY OPERATED IN THE UNITED STATES. On occasion, an aircraft that belongs in one of the sets described in paragraph 5-1583E is brought into the U.S. registry, which requires the pilot to hold an authorization in accordance with subparagraph 5-1579.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



A. Field personnel who receive inquiries about such aircraft should contact the NPO.

B. If designators for authorized aircraft are not listed or are otherwise incorrect or unavailable, ASIs are instructed to bring the omission or required correction to the attention of the NPO. Inclusion in the lists will be made through coordination with AFS-800 and the Airmen Certification Branch, AFS-760.

5-1590 TEMPORARY LETTERS OF AUTHORIZATION.

A. For one-of-a kind aircraft, first-of-a-type aircraft, amateur-built aircraft, practice in a single-place aircraft, or other special cases, a temporary LOA may be issued. Temporary LOAs may only be issued for a specific purpose and should be for a specified, limited duration. ASIs who receive requests for temporary LOAs for operating experimental aircraft must coordinate with the NPO before issuing them. These LOAs may be required to ensure compliance with the aircraft operating limitations.

B. Temporary LOAs for the operation of experimental aircraft should not be confused with temporary LOAs for the operation of TC’d aircraft. Section 61.31(b) permits operating TC’d aircraft under limited circumstances. These LOAs are issued in accordance with the guidance in Volume 5, Chapter 9, Section 3.


A. Prerequisites. This task requires knowledge of part 61 requirements, FAA policies, and qualification as an ASI (Operations) authorized by the NPO. Additionally, if an ASI conducts a flight proficiency demonstration in certain turbine-engine or large aircraft, the ASI must meet specific aircraft qualifications.

B. Coordination. This task requires coordination with the NPO and may require coordination with the airworthiness unit, EAEs, other Operations ASIs, or industry organizations.



• Title 14 CFR parts 1, 61, and 91. • FAA Order 8130.2, Airworthiness Certification of Aircraft and Related Products. • FAA-S-8081-5, Airline Transport Pilot and Aircraft Type Rating Practical Test

Standards for Airplanes.

B. Forms:

• Form 8710-1, Airman Certificate and/or Rating Application. • Form 8060-4, Temporary Airman Certificate. • Form 8060-5, Notice of Disapproval of Application.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



C. Job Aids:

• Sample letters and figures. • Job Task Analysis (JTA): O3.1.55.

5-1593 PROCEDURES.

A. Receive Initial Inquiry.

1) Upon inquiry from an applicant, explain the application procedures and eligibility requirements for an aircraft authorization.

2) Determine which training option the applicant will complete.

3) If the applicant meets the eligibility requirements of paragraph 5-1580, advise the applicant to provide the following documents to the EAE:

• A completed and correct Form 8710-1, in ink or typewritten. • A valid airman certificate. • A valid medical certificate. • A personal logbook or other records substantiating the flight experience

requirements. • An endorsement from an authorized instructor. • Documentation of completion of training. • An acceptable form of photo identification.

B. Review Application. Collect and review the documents and records listed in subparagraph 5-1593A3).

1) Verify the applicant’s identity by inspecting an acceptable form of identification (see Volume 5, Chapter 1, Section 1).

a) Compare the identification with the personal information provided on Form 8710-1.

1. If the applicant’s identity can be verified, review Form 8710-1.

2. If the applicant’s identity cannot be verified because of lack of identification or inadequate identification, explain what type of identification is acceptable. Instruct the applicant to return with appropriate identification to reapply.

b) If the applicant’s identity appears to be different from the information on Form 8710-1 or it appears that an attempt at falsification has been made, do not continue with this task. See Volume 7, Chapter 6, Section 1. Open a PTRS file using activity number 1733.

c) Ensure completion of the airman certification information.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



d) Ensure completion of the recommending instructor information.

e) Determine if the applicant needs a temporary authorization to conduct practice or proficiency flying, and if so, issue a temporary authorization in accordance with the procedures shown in subparagraph 5-1582A2)b).

2) Review Form 8710-1 for the following:

a) In Section I, verify that the applicant has marked the appropriate box for grade of certificate and has marked the box labeled Other and has written “Aircraft Authorization” in the blank.

b) Ensure that the applicant has completed Section I, items A through V.

c) Ensure that the applicant has completed the appropriate portion of Section II.

d) Ensure that the applicant has completed the relevant portions of Section III.

e) Ensure that the applicant checked “Yes” or “No” in Section IV.

f) Ensure that the applicant has signed and dated the application form in Section V.

g) An authorized instructor’s or CFI’s recommendation (reverse side of Form 8710-1) is required for an application for authorization. Additionally, an endorsement must be made in the pilot’s logbook for the knowledge and practical test/evaluation.

h) If Form 8710-1 is not complete, do not accept the application; indicate the incomplete areas and return the application to the applicant for correction.

i) If Form 8710-1 is complete and accurate, determine if the applicant is eligible for the issuance of an authorization or for a practical evaluation.

j) Substantiate the applicant’s eligibility by examining the pilot’s logbook or other records, comparing the data with that listed on the Form 8710-1 and the requirements from paragraph 5-1580.

3) If the applicant is not eligible, indicate the areas that are deficient and close out the PTRS with an appropriate comment.

4) If the applicant is eligible for the issuance of an authorization, complete FAA Form 8060-4 with the specific aircraft listed (Figure 5-176, Temporary Airman Certificate (With the Specific Aircraft Listed)).

5) Complete PTRS with comments.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



C. Conduct Aeronautical Knowledge and Practical Test/Evaluation. An ASI (Operations) or an EAE may accomplish the aeronautical knowledge and practical test/evaluation.

1) Operations ASIs are qualified to conduct flight evaluations in particular aircraft if they:

• Have prior experience in that or comparable aircraft. • Meet the recency of experience requirements, including FAA Order 4040.9

requirements for airman certification. • Have listed their experience requirements with the Flight Standards Inspector

Resource Program (FSIRP) in the Southwest Regional Office, ASW-200. • Are designated by the NPO.

2) If an ASI is to conduct the flight evaluation in the aircraft, the Operations ASI should coordinate with the airworthiness unit to examine the aircraft and/or the airworthiness documentation.

3) If the Airworthiness ASI determines that the aircraft is not in safe condition for flight or that the documentation is not adequate, reschedule the flight demonstration.

4) An Operations ASI may conduct the aeronautical knowledge test with the applicant and observe a flight evaluation either from the ground or in a chase aircraft.

5) If the demonstration is unsatisfactory, the ASI should perform the following:

a) Debrief the applicant on the deficient areas.

b) Reschedule the demonstration.

c) Issue a notice of disapproval, granting credit for the maneuvers passed.

d) Reissue a temporary authorization for the applicant to conduct proficiency and practice flights, if necessary.

e) On Form 8710-1, in the Aviation Safety Inspector or Technician Report section:

• Check the box labeled Disapproved. • Indicate the location and duration of the flight and ground tests. • In the field for Certificate or Rating for Which Tested, enter “Aircraft

Authorization.” • Indicate the type of aircraft and the registration number. • Enter the date of the test, sign the report, and identify the FSDO by

acronym. • In the Attachments section, check the box marked Airman’s Identification.

Indicate what was used to verify the applicant’s identity.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



6) If the demonstration is satisfactory, issue FAA Form 8060-4 with the aircraft authorization and any appropriate limitations (Figure 5-176).

a) Explain the authorization limitations and instrument privileges (paragraph 5-1588).

b) On FAA Form 8710-1, in the Aviation Safety Inspector and Technician Report section:

• Check the box labeled Approved. • Indicate the location and duration of the flight and ground tests. • In the field for Certificate or Rating for Which Tested, enter Aircraft

Authorization. • Indicate the type of aircraft and the registration number. • Enter the date of the test, sign the report, and identify the FSDO by

acronym. • In the attachments section, check the box marked “Airman’s

Identification.” Indicate the document used to verify the applicant’s identity.

D. Complete Certification File. Complete the certification file.

1) Ensure the Aviation Safety Inspector and Technician Report section of Form 8710-1 is complete.

2) Forward the completed certification file to AFS-760.

3) Complete PTRS with comments.

E. PTRS Action.

1) The PTRS is available for field use through the national PTRS.

2) Transmittal information:

a) Activity number: 1579.

b) Make-Model-Series: If the aircraft is not listed in the lookup table, use:

• EXHIB-EXPER-DOM for other domestic experimental aircraft; and • EXHIB-EXPER-FOR for other foreign experimental aircraft.

c) Applicant and Instructor Name: Self-explanatory.

d) Section III, Equipment: Manufacturer, model designation (e.g., L-39 or TU-144), serial number, remarks (N-number).

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



e) Section IV, Comment: Use appropriate comment and opinion codes, and list potential problems, certification information, limitations, authorizations, and any other descriptive information, including “nice to know” information for other ASIs.

Figure 5-176. Temporary Airman Certificate (With the Specific Aircraft Listed)

5-1594 TASK OUTCOMES. Completion of this task results in one or more of the following:

• Issuance or reissuance of an authorization. • Denial of an authorization. • Issuance or reissuance of a temporary authorization. • Issuance of a letter of discontinuance with credit given for flight procedures

demonstrated.

5-1595 FUTURE ACTIVITIES.

• Issuance of additional authorizations for other aircraft. • Removal of a limitation from an authorization. • Possible enforcement investigation if the holder of an authorization operates contrary

to 14 CFR, with action against the pilot certificate held.

Figure 5-177. Job Aid for Creating a Letter of Authorization

The following items are to be covered in the LOA:

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



• Applicant’s name, address, and telephone number. • Applicant’s grade of certificate; certificate number; category, class, and type ratings;

and limitations. • Description of the pilot’s aviation background. • Total time (if not indicated on FAA Form 8710-1) • Time in type or similar type • Date and class of airman medical certificate, including any limitations. • Indication of whether the pilot has had high altitude physiological training and the

date of that training. • Make, model, and manufacturer of the aircraft. • The pilot’s plan for transition training (may be a separate document). • Name of the airport where the aircraft will be based. • Description of the proposed flights, including purpose, departure point, en route

airports, and destination.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 5-178. FAA Form 8710-1 Filled Out for Letter of Authorization

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 5-179. Letter of Operational Authority

FAA Letterhead

[Date]

[Name and address]

Dear [name]:

This letter authorizes [individual or company name] to recommend applicants for letters of authorization (LOA). This letter also authorizes any required endorsements for continued solo practice after a period of 6 calendar-months of inactivity. Recommendations or endorsements may be made for the following airplanes:

[List airplanes authorized]

Recommendations or endorsements may only be made after you have personally evaluated an applicant’s performance and consider the evaluation satisfactory.

This authorization is valid only when you possess a current LOA for the airplane in which an evaluation is conducted.

Recommendations for LOAs may be signed by you [or by other appropriately qualified company personnel] and submitted to an FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) within 14 days for issuance of an LOA.

This authorization remains in effect indefinitely unless sooner modified, suspended, or revoked by this agency.

Sincerely,

[FSDO manager’s signature]

Figure 5-180. Recommendation for Letter of Authorization

[Date]

[Address of FAA FSDO LOA where applicant submitted application]

As the holder of an FAA Letter of Operational Authority for [type airplane], I submit the following as a result of my evaluation of Mr./Ms. [name] [address] holder of [type] pilot certificate no. [certificate number].

On [Date] I evaluated Mr./Ms. [name] on the [type airplane] and find him or her adequately knowledgeable of:

(1) The airplane’s systems and components.

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



(2) Normal and emergency procedures (abnormal if described in the airplane’s checklist).

(3) Use of performance charts including, but not limited to, takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, and landing.

(4) Fuel requirements and management.

(5) Runway requirements and limitations (minimum length and crosswind limits of the airplane).

(6) Contents of the airplane flight manual or equivalent.

(7) Operating limitations prescribed for the [airplane type], including the adverse effects of exceeding any limitation.

(8) Operation of the airplane in the high altitude regime.

In addition, on [Date] I observed Mr./Ms. [name] during a preflight inspection and in flight in a [type airplane] [registration number] and consider him or her competent to safely perform the following:

(1) Airplane preflight.

(2) Cockpit resource management, as appropriate.

(3) Powerplant start procedure, taxiing, and pretakeoff checks.

(4) Takeoffs and landings (normal, crosswind, and arrestment procedures), if appropriate.

(5) Aborted takeoffs.

(6) Flight at critically slow airspeeds.

(7) Approaches to stalls (if appropriate to the airplane used).

(8) Recovery from specific flight characteristics.

(9) Normal and emergency procedures (abnormal if described in the airplane’s checklist).

(10) Maneuvering to landings with simulated powerplant failure multiengine airplane.

(11) Zero-flap landings, as appropriate.

(12) Rejected landings.

Based upon the above satisfactory evaluation, I recommend Mr./Ms. [name] for a letter of authorization (LOA) in a [type airplane]. In addition, I recommend the following limitations be placed on his/her letter: (for example, no aerobatic flight, VFR only etc.)

Sincerely,

[Signature of Letter of Operational Authority Holder]

Figure 5-181. Logbook Endorsement

Inspectors who have evaluated an applicant for operational authority should enter the following endorsement in the applicant’s logbook:

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



“I have personally evaluated Mr./Ms. [name] holder of [type] pilot certificate no. [certificate number] in the normal and emergency (abnormal if contained in the airplane’s checklist) procedures and maneuvers in a [type airplane] [registration number] and consider him or her competent to safely operate a [type airplane].”

[Date of evaluation]

[Inspector’s printed name]

[Date of Letter of Operational Authority]

Figure 5-182. Temporary Letter of Authorization

FAA Letterhead

[Date]

[Name and address]

Dear [name]:

This temporary letter authorizes you to act as pilot in command (PIC) in the following experimental category aircraft:


Flights made under this authorization will be conducted in accordance with the Special Airworthiness Certificate operating limitations and all applicable Federal aviation regulations. This letter by itself does not authorize the performance of aerobatics in airshows.

Flights made under this letter shall be for proficiency and practice flying in preparation for a practical test.


[Inspectors should prescribe an area large enough to reasonably conduct proficiency and practice flying in preparation for a practical test for the type airplane.]

This authorization expires on [60 days from date of issuance] unless sooner modified, suspended, or revoked by this agency.

Sincerely,

[POI signature]

Figure 5-183. Letter Issuing Credit for Satisfactory Maneuvers During Flight Proficiency Demonstration

FAA Letterhead

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



[Date]

[applicant name and address]

Dear [name]:

On this date you successfully completed the aeronautical knowledge portion of the flight proficiency demonstration for a letter of authorization (LOA) to act as pilot in command (PIC) of a [make and model of airplane]. The flight proficiency demonstration was discontinued because of [reasons].

If application is made by [date 60 days from date of letter], this letter may be used to show that the following portions of the flight proficiency demonstration were completed satisfactorily:

Indicate pilot operations completed

After [expiration date] you must repeat the entire test.

Sincerely,

[Signature of the inspector conducting the proficiency demonstration]

Figure 5-184. Letter of Authorization—Piston-Powered Aircraft

FAA Letterhead

[Date]

[Name and address]

Dear [name]:

This letter authorizes you to act as pilot in command (PIC) in the following experimental category aircraft: North American P51 H Mustang (VFR Only).

Flights made under this authorization will be conducted in accordance with the Special Airworthiness Certificate operating limitations and all applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This letter by itself does not authorize the performance of aerobatics in airshows.

The privileges of this letter of authorization (LOA) may not be exercised unless:

(1) Within the preceding 6 calendar-months, you have made at least three takeoffs and landings in either one of the models authorized or a comparable model; and

(2) After the 6 calendar-month inactive period, you obtain a flight review including the normal and emergency (and abnormal, if contained in the airplane’s checklist) procedures

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



and maneuvers in the particular type or comparable type airplane and have had your logbook so endorsed by:

1. The holder of a current and appropriate LOA, who is authorized to make this endorsement, and who has found you competent to safely operate the airplane; or

2. The holder of a Letter of Operational Authority issued by the FAA.

This authorization expires on [24 calendar-months from the date of issuance] unless sooner modified, suspended, or revoked by this agency. [If a reissuance, the authorization is valid indefinitely.]

Sincerely,

[POI signature]

Figure 5-185. Letter of Authorization (Original and Reissuance)—Turbine-Powered Aircraft

FAA Letterhead

[Date]

[Name and address]

Dear [name]:

This letter authorizes you to act as pilot-in-command (PIC) in the following experimental category aircraft: North American F-86 Sabre (VFR Only)

Flights made under this authorization will be conducted in accordance with the Special Airworthiness Certificate operating limitations and all applicable Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This letter by itself does not authorize the performance of aerobatics in airshows.

The privileges of this letter of authorization (LOA) may not be exercised unless:

(1) Within the preceding 6 calendar-months, you have made at least three takeoffs and landings in one of the models authorized or a comparable model;

(2) After the 6 calendar-month inactive period, you obtain a night review including the normal and emergency (and abnormal. if contained in the airplane's checklist) procedures and maneuvers in the particular type or comparable type airplane and have had your logbook so endorsed by the following:

1. The holder of a current and appropriate LOA, who is authorized to make this endorsement, and who has found you competent to safely operate the airplane; or

5/16/11 8900.1 CHG 0



2. The holder of a Letter of Operational Authority issued by the FAA.

This authorization expires on [24 calendar-months from the date of original issuance or reissuance] unless sooner modified, suspended, or revoked by this agency.

Sincerely,

[POI signature]


5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



VOLUME 6 SURVEILLANCE

CHAPTER 2 PART 121, 135, AND 91 SUBPART K INSPECTIONS

Section 38 Evaluate a Part 121/135.411(a)(2) Operator Aircraft Storage Program

6-1036 PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) ACTIVITY CODES AND AIR TRANSPORTATION OVERSIGHT SYSTEM (ATOS) REPORTING ELEMENT.

A. Maintenance: 3341, 3342 (as applicable).

B. Avionics: 5341, 5342 (as applicable).

C. ATOS Reporting. All Data Collection Tool (DCT) elements are to be documented in accordance with chapter 10 of this volume.

D. Non-ATOS Certificate Holder Reporting. All activities are to be documented in accordance with the PTRS Procedures Manual (PPM).

6-1037 OBJECTIVE. This section provides information and guidance to evaluate aircraft storage programs used by air carriers operating under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 121 and 135 for acceptance.

6-1038 BACKGROUND. The primary purpose of an aircraft storage program is preservation. Storage programs are intended to preserve the aircraft in a known state through methods, techniques, and procedures designed to mitigate or eliminate the adverse effects of the storage environment and non-operation of the aircraft. An effective storage program will allow the operator to readily return the stored aircraft to an operational status.

6-1039 DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this section, the following definitions apply.

A. Storage (General). An air carrier’s aircraft is considered stored when it is removed from active, operational status for any reason while the aircraft remains on the certificate holder’s operations specifications (OpSpecs). The level of preservation depends on the length of storage, the aircraft design features, and the storage environment (inside/outside, etc.).

B. Short Term Storage. An aircraft is subject to short term preservation procedures when it is removed from operational status for less than 60 days.

C. Intermediate Term Storage. An aircraft is subject to intermediate term preservation procedures when it is removed from operational status for more than 60 days, but less than 120 days.

D. Long Term Storage. An aircraft is subject to long term preservation procedures when it is removed from operational status for 120 days or more.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



6-1040 GENERAL.

A. Occasionally, and for a variety of reasons, an air carrier will take an aircraft out of service (OTS) for a period of time. Depending on the circumstances, the time period can be a couple of days to a number of years to indefinitely.

B. The level of preservation depends on variables, such as the planned length of storage and the storage environment. For example, a large transport category aircraft taken OTS due to excess capacity and stored for an indefinite period outside on the ramp at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) should have a more comprehensive level of preservation than an identical aircraft taken OTS for storage and placed in a desert climate like Roswell, New Mexico.

6-1041 AIR CARRIER AIRCRAFT STORAGE PROGRAMS. As stated earlier, aircraft storage programs are intended to mitigate or eliminate the effects of a non-operational status by implementing various levels of preservation.

A. Consistent with 14 CFR part 1, preservation is included in the scope of the maintenance function along with inspection, repair, overhaul, and the replacement of parts.

B. Aircraft storage programs are an integral part of the air carrier maintenance programs required by part 121, § 121.367 and part 135, § 135.425. Storage programs are developed and documented consistent with 14 CFR part 43, § 43.13(c) in the manual as required by §§ 121.135, 121.369, and 135.425. Air carrier aircraft storage programs do not require any specific Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approvals other than the § 43.13(c) process.

C. Each air carrier should have a storage program that is unique to its type of aircraft make/model/series (M/M/S), storage environment, and operational needs. Inspectors should not expect a storage program to be exactly the same from one carrier to the next.

D. Generally, aircraft storage programs will have procedures for placing the aircraft in various levels of preservation, for de-preserving the aircraft when placing it back in service, for accomplishing inspections or other maintenance designed to mitigate or eliminate the effects of preservation, and de-preservation, and for documenting all of these actions.

E. Some aircraft manufacturers have recommended storage programs currently in place. These programs are not to be considered mandatory for air carriers to implement. Air carriers may use all, some, or none of these recommendations while developing their own specific storage program. However, it is important to note that some manufacturers may have specific airworthiness requirements based on proper storage/preservation and that the carrier must address these requirements when returning the aircraft to an Airworthy condition.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



6-1042 AIRCRAFT OPSPECS LISTING. Air carrier aircraft that are removed from service and preserved in accordance with the air carrier’s storage program should remain on the aircraft OpSpecs listing. If the aircraft is removed from OpSpecs, the air carrier loses the authority to perform maintenance on that aircraft as well as the authority to use its storage program. Air carrier aircraft removed from the aircraft listing come under the requirements of § 43.13(a) and (b), rather than the air carrier maintenance program. Furthermore, the air carrier’s principal maintenance inspector (PMI) loses the oversight responsibility/authority for those aircraft that are not on the air carrier’s aircraft listing. However, if the air carrier places an aircraft in a non-operational status, but doesn’t preserve it to an appropriate level in accordance with a storage program, then the PMI should remove that aircraft from the aircraft OpSpecs listing. The PMI can take this action under the provisions of 14 CFR part 119, § 119.51(a)(1), due to the safety concerns of creating an unknown airworthiness status by not preserving the aircraft. The public interest is served by not allowing the aircraft to be used in air transportation until the operator demonstrates the required airworthiness status to the FAA.

6-1043 STORED AIR CARRIER AIRCRAFT SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS.

A. OpSpec D072, Aircraft Maintenance—Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance Program (CAMP) Authorization, gives the air carrier the authorization to conduct operations under part 121 as long as the requirements set forth in the OpSpec are complied with. It is important to understand that these OpSpec authorization requirements are for operational aircraft. Aircraft placed in storage, with or without a storage program, are not intended for operation; therefore, they do not fall under the requirements of the OpSpec until the carrier intends to operate the aircraft.

B. Since air carrier aircraft that have been placed in a non-operational status and preserved are not being operated, they are not required to be maintained in accordance with the maintenance schedule listed on OpSpec D088, Maintenance Time Limitations Authorization, or OpSpec D089, Maintenance Time Limitations Section.

C. However, the storage program may include other scheduled maintenance requirements or other required actions that are particular to the storage environment and to the level of storage. For example, engine runs may be required on a weekly basis for engines that have not been preserved. Another example is servicing dehumidifying equipment/material on a scheduled basis. Still another example is moving the aircraft from one side of the ramp to the other and turning it 180 degrees every 3 months. In any case, in addition to the procedures implemented to preserve the aircraft and place it in storage, the storage program should contain a schedule for accomplishment of all tasks required to maintain the aircraft in the intended level of preservation.

6-1044 STORED AIR CARRIER AIRCRAFT AIRWORTHINESS CERTIFICATES. Depending on the level of preservation, intended length of storage, and the security of the aircraft, the air carrier should consider removing the Standard Airworthiness Certificate and the certificate of registration from each stored aircraft for safekeeping.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



A. Inspectors must consider a number of factors when evaluating an FAA Standard Airworthiness Certificate issued to a stored aircraft. One is the unlimited or indefinite expiration date. Two others are validity and effectiveness. Valid means that the Standard Airworthiness Certificate has been executed with the proper legal authority and formalities; it is legitimate. Effectiveness means that the certificate remains in force; it has legal meaning. Still another factor to consider is that the effectiveness of the Standard Airworthiness Certificate is derived from the terms and conditions listed in block 6 on the Standard Airworthiness Certificate itself and further described in 14 CFR part 21, § 21.181(a)(1).

B. The text in block 6 of the Standard Airworthiness Certificate states:

“Unless sooner surrendered, suspended, revoked, or a termination date is otherwise established by the Administrator, this airworthiness certificate is effective as long as the maintenance, preventive maintenance, and alterations are performed in accordance with parts 21, 43, and 91 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, as appropriate, and the aircraft is registered in the United States.”

C. It is implicit in the terms and conditions of block 6 that the subject aircraft is being or will be operated. However, when an aircraft is preserved and placed in storage, it is similarly implicit that the aircraft is not going to be operated. However, because there is no expiration date, the Standard Airworthiness Certificate of a preserved and stored aircraft is not to be considered revoked, suspended, or terminated as a result. The Standard Airworthiness Certificate remains valid and the block 6 terms and conditions still apply. The Standard Airworthiness Certificate becomes ineffective when the requirements for maintenance, preventive maintenance (PM), and alterations pursuant to parts 21, 43, and 14 CFR part 91 are not complied with.

D. In accordance with the terms and conditions in block 6, the Standard Airworthiness Certificate of a preserved and stored aircraft is restored to a state of being effective when all maintenance, PM and alterations required by the air carrier maintenance program are complied with. The air carrier storage program should have clear procedures for ensuring that all of the maintenance program requirements as well as the appropriate regulatory requirements are complied with before approving it for return to service.

6-1045 UTILIZATION OF PARTS FROM AIRCRAFT IN STORAGE. It is common practice for air carriers to remove parts from aircraft that are in storage (regardless if the aircraft is on OpSpec D085, Aircraft Listing, or not). Aviation safety inspectors (ASI) must remember that the FAA has no regulatory authority to dictate where carriers obtain their parts. The responsibility lies with the carrier/installer to determine that all parts used on type-certificated products are acceptable for installation. The major concern is maintenance requirements becoming “overdue” on parts that have been installed on aircraft while in storage. The air carriers receiving inspection process must detail the procedures to ensure this responsibility.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



6-1046 AIRCRAFT MOVEMENT WHILE IN STORAGE STATUS. Movement (operation) of a stored aircraft from one place to another by air with the intention of keeping it in storage should be an unusual event. However, before any operation of an air carrier aircraft that has been preserved and stored in accordance with the air carrier’s storage program can take place, the air carrier must complete procedures for de-preserving the aircraft and accomplish those maintenance actions necessary to return the aircraft to an Airworthy status. The storage program should clearly outline these procedures and maintenance actions.

A. If the aircraft is not being moved to accomplish maintenance, movement of a preserved and stored aircraft can become complex if Airworthiness Directive (AD) requirements and scheduled maintenance requirements are past due. PMIs should pay close attention to the special flight permit restrictions and requirements of any overdue AD, as well as the terms and conditions of the air carrier’s continuing authorization to issue special flight permits for maintenance, if appropriate.

B. The procedures and actions required for operating a preserved and stored aircraft from one storage place to another should not be significantly different from those for returning the aircraft to a full operational status.

C. Aircraft subject to Stage 2 noise restrictions must be flown subject to the additional requirements of part 91, § 91.858.

D. If the aircraft is on the air carrier’s OpSpecs, then the PMI of the air carrier will provide oversight of the movement of the aircraft. If the aircraft is not on an air carrier certificate, then the PMI in the geographical area the aircraft is located will provide oversight.

6-1047 RETURN TO SERVICE FOLLOWING STORAGE. Storage programs are meant to preserve an aircraft, not require the accomplishment of normal scheduled maintenance. At a minimum, certificate holders must ensure the aircraft conforms to applicable airworthiness requirements and limitations of their maintenance program and the regulations. It must be understood that all time, especially calendar time, accrued while in storage must be counted when determining what scheduled maintenance is due once the aircraft is returned to service.

6-1048 OPSPEC D106, AIRCRAFT IN LONG TERM MAINTENANCE OR STORAGE. The statutory and regulatory basis requiring liability insurance coverage is in Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.), § 41112 and its implementing regulation, and 14 CFR part 205, § 205.4(b). Section 205.4(b) states, in part, that “Aircraft shall not be listed in the carrier’s operations specifications with the FAA and shall not be operated unless liability insurance coverage is in force.” All air carrier certificate holders are required to have continuous, effective liability insurance coverage and in effect, to ensure that the public is protected in the event of an accident. Effective liability insurance coverage is a condition for an air carrier to hold Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST) economic authority.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



A. However, in some circumstances, maintaining liability insurance coverage on an aircraft not in operation can produce economic hardship for an air carrier certificate holder (e.g., when an air carrier certificate holder’s operation is seasonal, an aircraft is undergoing long term maintenance, or it is in long term storage). Therefore, to comply with the requirements of § 205.4(b) and accommodate the economic needs of the certificate holders, OpSpec A501, Liability Insurance Suspension for Seasonal Operations, and OpSpec D106, were developed.

B. OpSpec A501 is issued to an air carrier certificate holder who requests to completely cease all kinds of operations for all of its aircraft for a designated period of time. The issuance of OpSpec A501 voluntarily holds all of the air carrier certificate holder’s OpSpecs, with the exception of OpSpec A501, in a state of suspension for the established period of time, as listed in OpSpec A501.

C. OpSpec D106 is issued to those air carrier certificate holders who wish to suspend the aircraft liability insurance on specific aircraft that are in long term maintenance or storage and for which it is not necessary or practicable to meet the requirements of § 205.4(b). These aircraft cannot be used in any air carrier certificate holder’s operations during this time. The issuance of this OpSpec voluntarily holds Parts A, B, C, and H of the OpSpecs in suspense for only those aircraft listed in Table 1 of OpSpec D106. Part D maintenance paragraphs are not suspended, which allows the maintenance programs to remain active.

D. At no time will OpSpecs A501 and D106 be active at the same time. These OpSpecs were developed as separate provisions for specific needs.

E. This section applies only to air carriers that have implemented storage programs. Carriers who do not choose to implement storage programs do not need provisions to keep their Part D maintenance paragraphs active, as they will not be maintaining their aircraft in accordance with their maintenance program.

6-1049 COORDINATION REQUIREMENTS. This task requires coordination with Airworthiness and Operations aviation safety inspectors (ASI).



• Title 14 CFR parts 21, 119, 121, and 135, • Volume 3, Chapter 42, Evaluate Part 121/135 (10 or More) Contract Maintenance

Program, Contract Agreements, and Contracted Work, if applicable, and • Volume 3, Chapter 43, Evaluate Continuous Airworthiness Maintenance

Program/Revision.

B. Forms. None.

C. Job Aids. Job Task Analysis (JTA): 3.3.83.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



6-1051 PROCEDURES.

A. Review the Manual. The certificate holder’s manual or other document should define adequate procedures to preserve aircraft while in storage. The areas of preservation in the paragraphs below will prevent the deterioration of the airplane, engines, structure, finish, and/or system components. Certificate holders may have all of these, some of these, or even additional areas in their manual based on the complexity of their aircraft and the amount of time it will be in storage. Certificate holders must consider the location where the aircraft will be stored; i.e., inside and protected from the environment, or outside, in which case environmental conditions must be considered (high winds, humidity, unusual pollutants, etc.). The need for repetitive inspections to ensure preservation methods are adequate must also be considered. The areas of preservation may include the following:

1) Airframe. This may include:

• Installation of protective coverings and closing of all external openings (except drains),

• Parking/mooring procedures, • Installation of safety pins, • Washing of aircraft (due to environment, may be repetitive), • Landing gear strut servicing, lubricating and protection of the oleo, • Tire inflation and rotation, • Fuel system decontamination, • Gust locks, • Primary and secondary flight control cycling and lubrication, • Protection of windows, • Procedures for the removal of parts or components, • Inspection of seats and carpet for moisture/mildew (if stored in humid

environments), • Preserving lavatories and water systems, and • Opening of closets, cabinets, and interior doors to supply ventilation and to

prevent mildew.

2) Engine/Auxiliary Power Unit (APU). This may include:

• Procedures to operate the engine/APU on an established interval, • Complete preservation of the engine/APU (e.g., pickling), and • Procedures for the removal of parts or components.

3) Electrical. This may include:

• Opening/closing of circuit breakers, • Battery servicing/disconnection, • Removal of batteries from emergency devices, such as megaphone,

flashlights, power supplies for emergency lights, emergency beacons, etc., and • Procedures for the removal of parts or components.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



4) Operational Checks. This may include:

• Procedures to transition the aircraft from preservation to a state acceptable for engine operations and operational checks of systems, back to the preserved state, and

• Operational checks of hydraulics, electrical, engine, fuel systems and avionics, etc.

B. Review Contracts with Air Carrier Maintenance Providers. A maintenance provider may be used to store and preserve aircraft. These providers are required to perform all functions in accordance with the certificate holder’s manual and be monitored by the operator’s Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS) (Reference 8900.1, Volume 6, Chapter 2, Section 40). If contracts were negotiated, the PMI should review this document to ensure the certificate holder’s manual procedures will be followed (see Volume 3, Chapter 42).

C. Review Procedures for Movement of the Aircraft in a Storage Status. Occasionally, certificate holders may need to fly an aircraft that is in storage to another location to perform maintenance. The air carrier must have procedures in place to ensure an aircraft, which does not meet its type certificate (TC), is in safe condition for the intended flight. The manual must include procedures to:

1) Ensure that flights conducted under this provision are conducted in accordance with OpSpec D084, Special Flight Permit with Continuous Authorization to Conduct Ferry Flights, and/or OpSpec D095, Minimum Equipment List (MEL) Authorization.

NOTE: The subject aircraft must be listed on OpSpec D085 in order to be operated as authorized in OpSpecs D084 and D095. If the aircraft is not listed on OpSpec D085, then the requirements of § 21.197(a) apply.

2) De-preserve the aircraft based on any preservation methods used during storage (i.e., protective coverings/Standard Airworthiness Certificates, engine pickling, and fuel system additives).

3) Conduct inspections or operational checks necessary to ensure the aircraft is safe for the intended flight.

4) Ensure that the aircraft is evaluated for inoperative systems or removed components/accessories and their affect on the intended flight. This includes determining Weight and Balance (W&B) changes on the aircraft.

5) Obtain approval from personnel with authority and responsibility for authorizing the movement of aircraft in storage status.

6) Determine that ADs, which must be complied with before flight, are so complied with.

5/9/11 8900.1 CHG 0



D. Review Procedures for Returning the Aircraft to an Airworthy Condition. Regardless of what procedures a certificate holder has in its manual on preserving an aircraft in storage, the manual must have procedures on how to return an aircraft to Airworthy condition once taken out of storage. These procedures must include a records check and compliance audit of the maintenance program. All time limited (flight hours, cycles, or calendar) items that went overdue during the storage period must be brought back into compliance. Review the manual to determine if it includes procedures to:

1) Define lines of responsibility and authority for personnel involved in ensuring the aircraft is returned to service properly.

2) Audit the current status of the aircraft to the maintenance program and comply with required tasks, including ADs, life-limited components, Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR), avionics databases, etc.

3) De-preserve the aircraft based on any preservation methods used during storage (i.e., protective coverings/Standard Airworthiness Certificates, engine pickling, and fuel system additives).

4) Conduct other inspections and operational checks, as deemed necessary, based on the amount of time the aircraft was in storage and the environment to which it was exposed.

5) Conduct any operational check flights or test flights prior to return to service.


A. PTRS. Complete PTRS Record and/or ATOS DCT Safety Attribute Inspection (SAI): 1.1.1.

B. Complete the Task. Successful completion of this task will result in the acceptance of the storage program submitted as part of the CAMP. If requested by the air carrier, issue OpSpec D106.

C. Document the Task. File all supporting paperwork in the operator/applicant’s office file.

6-1053 FUTURE ACTIVITIES. Normal surveillance.


6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



VOLUME 11 FLIGHT STANDARDS PROGRAMS

CHAPTER 1 VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE REPORTING PROGRAM

Section 1 Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program for Air Carriers and Regulated Entities

11-1 PURPOSE.

A. Overview. This section specifies the procedures to be employed when a certificate holder, fractional ownership program, (as defined in paragraph 11-4E), or a Production Approval Holder (PAH) operating under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) voluntarily discloses to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) apparent violations of those FAA regulations listed in paragraph 11-2. These procedures can be applied to maintenance, flight operations, anti-drug and alcohol misuse prevention programs, and to the manufacturing functions of a PAH’s organization. These procedures cannot be applied for those persons who are required to report failures, malfunctions and defects under 14 CFR part 21 § 21.3 and also for those people who do not submit the reports in the time frame required by the regulation.

B. Internal Evaluation Programs (IEP). Certificate holders, fractional ownership programs, and PAHs are encouraged, but not required, to develop IEPs that continually monitor company policies and procedures and ensure that the highest level of safety and security compliance is maintained. They may voluntarily disclose apparent violations of 14 CFR covered by this program in accordance with the procedures in this section even though an IEP has not been established. Guidance for operators on IEPs is contained in the current edition of Advisory Circular (AC) 120-59, Air Carrier Internal Evaluation Programs. Guidance for operators on the Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP) is contained in the current edition of AC 00-58, Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program.

C. Guidance. Varying requirements for select groups of regulated entities require reference to guidance tailored to those groups. To locate appropriate guidance for a given regulated entity, reference must be made to the following paragraphs based on the type of regulated entity submitting the disclosure at, http://av-info.faa.gov/vdrp for a list of those regulated entities authorized to utilize the Web-based VDRP.

1) Air carriers certificated under 14 CFR part 119 and operating under 14 CFR parts 121 and 135, see paragraph 11-12, VDRP for Air Carriers.

2) Regulated entities authorized to utilize the Web-based VDRP system who are not air carriers, see paragraph 11-13, VDRP for Regulated Entities, Other than Air Carriers. Those other regulated entities will be listed on the VDRP Home Page at: http://av-info.faa.gov/vdrp (no login required).

3) Regulated entities not authorized to utilize the Web-based VDRP, see paragraph 11-14 and its associated subparagraphs.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



11-2 APPLICABILITY.

A. Regulations. The VDRP is applicable to the following regulations: 14 CFR parts 21, 39, 119, 121, 125, 133, 135, 137, 141, 142, 145, 147 and, for fractional ownership programs operating under part 91 subpart K (part 91K), those portions of part 91K pertaining directly to the duties and responsibilities of the program manager, as defined in part 91K or management specifications (MSpecs).

B. Exceptions. The VDRP has a history of accepting violations that should not have been handled, or should have been handled under special provisions. The following are instances where VDRP does not apply.

1) Individual Airmen. Except as provided in paragraph 11-8, Separate Actions Against Airmen or Other Individual Agents, VDRP does not apply to violations by individual airmen.

2) Hazardous Materials (hazmat). Voluntary disclosure of violations of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (49 CFR) part 175, hazmat should be accomplished in accordance with the current edition of AC 121-37, Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program-Hazardous Materials.

3) Drug and Alcohol. Voluntary disclosure of violations of anti-drug and alcohol misuse prevention program regulations must be reported to the Drug Abatement Division Manager, AAM-800, 800 Independence Avenue S.W., Washington, D.C. 20591 and will be processed in accordance with directions from that office.

11-3 BACKGROUND. Civil penalties under the FAA’s enforcement program have always been considered a means to promote compliance with the FAA’s regulations, not an end in themselves. In addition to the deterrence achieved by the appropriate use of civil penalties, the public interest is also served by positive incentives to promote and achieve compliance. The FAA believes that aviation safety is well served by incentives for certificate holders, fractional ownership programs, and PAHs to identify and correct their own instances of noncompliance and to invest more resources in efforts to preclude their recurrence. The FAA’s policy of forgoing civil penalty actions when one of these entities detects violations, promptly discloses the violations to the FAA, and takes prompt corrective action to ensure that the same or similar violations do not recur is designed to encourage compliance with FAA regulations, foster safe operating practices, and promote the development of IEPs.

11-4 KEY TERMS. The following key terms and phrases are defined to ensure a standard interpretation and understanding of the FAA voluntary disclosure policy.

A. Evidence. For the purpose of voluntary disclosure, evidence generally should be in the form of written documentation or reports that support a certificate holder’s, fractional ownership programs, or PAH’s analysis of the disclosed apparent violation and the resulting elements of the proposed comprehensive fix. Evidence generally comes from the following four elements:

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



• Documents or manuals reviewed; • Equipment examined; • Activities observed; and • Interview data.

B. Comprehensive Fix. A comprehensive fix is an action, or actions, proposed by the certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH and accepted by the principal inspector (PI) to preclude recurrence of the apparent violation that has been voluntarily disclosed under this program. A schedule of the dates and events encompassed by the comprehensive fix must be established and included in a letter of correction.

C. Satisfactory Fix. A satisfactory fix is a comprehensive fix, in which all corrective measures have been completed on schedule and are satisfactory to the FAA.

D. PI. Under the VDRP, PI refers to the appropriate maintenance, avionics, operations inspector, or other designated FAA official of the program office responsible for oversight of the area of noncompliance involved in the disclosure.

E. Fractional Ownership Programs. Fractional ownership programs are defined in part 91K, and associated MSpecs. Participation of fractional ownership programs is limited as follows:

1) Only program managers authorized in accordance with part 91K and MSpecs, may participate in the VDRP;

2) Voluntary disclosures of apparent violations by a fractional ownership program may only be submitted by the program manager, or an authorized representative; and

3) Voluntary disclosures by fractional ownership programs are limited to apparent violations pertaining directly to the duties and responsibilities of the program manager, as defined in part 91K and MSpecs.

F. Regulated Entity. A regulated entity is any certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH, authorized to submit voluntary disclosures under the VDRP.

11-5 VOLUNTARY DISCLOSURE POLICY. It is FAA policy that open sharing of apparent violations and the cooperative as well as an advisory approach to solving problems will enhance and promote aviation safety. Certificate holders, fractional ownership programs, and PAHs will receive a letter of correction in lieu of civil penalty action for covered instances of noncompliance that are voluntarily disclosed to the FAA in accordance with the procedures set forth in this section.

A. Evaluating an Apparent Violation. In evaluating whether an apparent violation is covered by this policy, the responsible inspector will ensure that the following five conditions are met:

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



1) The certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH has notified the FAA of the apparent violation immediately after detecting it and before the agency has learned of it by other means;

2) The apparent violation was inadvertent;

3) The apparent violation does not indicate a lack, or reasonable question, of qualification of the certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH;

4) Immediate action, satisfactory to the FAA, was taken upon discovery to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation; and

5) The certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH has developed or is developing a comprehensive fix and schedule of implementation satisfactory to the FAA. The comprehensive fix includes a followup self-audit to ensure that the action taken corrects the noncompliance. This self-audit is in addition to any audits conducted by the FAA.

B. Legal Enforcement Action. Except as specified in the subparagraphs below, the FAA ordinarily will not forgo legal enforcement action if the certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH informs the FAA of the apparent violation during, or in anticipation of, an FAA investigation/inspection or in association with an accident or incident.

1) Exceptions-Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) Report. If the FAA has learned of an apparent violation by a certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH from an ASAP report as described in the current edition of AC 120-66, Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP), a voluntary disclosure can still be accepted by the FAA, even though the FAA has already learned of the violation from the ASAP.

2) Exceptions-Joint Audit. Similarly, if a regulated entity voluntarily agrees to conduct a joint audit (inspection) with the FAA during which an apparent violation is discovered either by the company or FAA members of the audit (inspection) team, the FAA may accept a voluntary disclosure submitted by the company, even though the FAA has already learned of the apparent violation during the course of the joint audit (inspection).

11-6 REPEATED VIOLATIONS. If following FAA closure of an investigative package resulting from a voluntary disclosure, the same or similar violations are discovered to have occurred prior to submission of the associated voluntary disclosure, the FAA does not reopen the case unless it determines that the pertinent regulated entity failed to comply with all the elements of the comprehensive fix agreed upon by the FAA and the entity.

11-7 DISPUTE RESOLUTION. When disputes occur regarding the acceptance of a proposed comprehensive fix, or a modification to that before the fix is considered satisfactory, the PI and the pertinent regulated entity may request that the issue be resolved at the next level of management within the FAA. This procedure will provide for an independent assessment of the areas in disagreement.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



11-8 SEPARATE ACTIONS AGAINST AIRMEN OR OTHER INDIVIDUAL AGENTS.

A. Criteria for Meeting VDRP Policy. The voluntary disclosure policy applies to individual airmen or other agents of an employing certificate holder only when all of the following occur:

1) The apparent violation involves a deficiency of the employing entity’s practices or procedures that causes the employing certificate holder to be in violation of a covered violation of an FAA regulation, and;

2) The airman or other agent of the employing entity, while acting on behalf of the employing entity, inadvertently violates the FAA’s regulations as a direct result of a deficiency of the employing entity that causes the employing entity to be in violation of the regulations. (The voluntary disclosure policy does not apply to the airman or other agent when his or her apparent violation is the result of actions unrelated to the employing entity’s deficiency), and;

3) The airman or other agent immediately makes the report of his or her apparent violation to the employing entity, and;

4) The employing certificate holder immediately notifies the FAA of both the airman or other agent’s apparent violation and the apparent deficiency in its practice or procedures.

B. If All Criteria Conditions Are Met. When all the above conditions are met, a separate Enforcement Investigation Report (EIR) is opened for the individual and closed with no more than administrative action in accordance with the current edition of FAA Order 2150.3, Compliance and Enforcement Program.

C. If All Criteria Conditions Are Not Met. If all the above conditions are not met, the PI will review all facts associated with the case and determine what action is appropriate for individual airmen or other agents of the employing entity.

NOTE: This provision does not apply to matters concerning qualifications to hold an airman certificate.

D. ASAP Report. Special provisions exist for apparent violations by certificate holders when a voluntary disclosure is made based on information in an ASAP report. In such cases, the FAA may, at its sole discretion, accept the corrective action recommended by an ASAP event review committee (ERC) for an accepted ASAP report as the comprehensive fix for the voluntary disclosure. This is acceptable when the following conditions all apply, even when an apparent employee qualification or competency issue is involved.

1) The FAA determines that the violation is due entirely to the actions of the employee(s) and not to a systematic or procedural deficiency of the company; and

2) The employee completes the corrective action recommended by the ASAP ERC to the satisfaction of the FAA.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



11-9 APPLICABILITY OF THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) TO SELF-DISCLOSURE RECORDS. Records submitted to the FAA for review according to the VDRP, including information submitted using the Web-based VDRP system, are protected from release to the public in accordance with the provisions of FAA Order 8000.89, Designation of Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP) Information as Protected from Public Disclosure under 14 CFR Part 193. For that reason, VDRP identifying data, such as the regulated entity’s name, identifier, personnel names, etc. should not be entered into PTRS records or other public records at any time.

11-10 REPEATED VIOLATIONS. If a repeated violation occurs, notwithstanding the fact that a comprehensive fix was satisfactorily completed and followed, the procedures outlined in this section may apply to the disclosure of the repeated violation. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances surrounding the repeated violation, the FAA will determine on a case-by-case basis whether a repeated violation will be covered under this policy. Regulated entities and PIs are encouraged to evaluate the systemic issues and circumstances surrounding each apparent violation. This is particularly important when citing a common regulation. Depending upon the specific circumstances associated with the event, citations of a common regulation may not necessarily be indicative of a common systemic failure.

11-11 REGIONAL FLIGHT STANDARDS DIVISION (RFSD) RESPONSIBILITIES.

A. Web-Based Disclosure Reviews. RFSD managers must assure the conduct of regional division level reviews of the voluntary disclosures submitted through the VDRP system from air carriers under their jurisdiction. These Regional Office (RO) reviews must be accomplished on at least a quarterly basis in order to verify compliance with the voluntary disclosure policies specified in this chapter.

B. Legacy Paper-Based Disclosure Reviews. RFSD managers must assure the conduct of regional division level reviews of voluntary disclosures submitted via the legacy (paper-based) system in accordance with the applicable RO review process.

11-12 VDRP FOR AIR CARRIERS. Effective December 8, 2006, voluntary disclosures by air carriers must be processed utilizing the previously referenced Internet application, even if initial notification to the FAA is accomplished by other means. This Web-based application offers an automated interface for air carriers and FAA inspectors to accomplish the voluntary disclosure process virtually paper-free. In addition, the Web-based VDRP, accessed at http://avinfo.faa.gov/vdrp, provides enhanced capabilities for tracking and managing voluntary disclosures, while protecting all submissions in accordance with the provisions of part 193 and Order 8000.89.

NOTE: This revision incorporates guidance issued in Notice N 8900.39, Requiring Appropriate 14 CFR Part 119 Corporate Officer and FAA Office Manager Signatures for Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP), on May 1, 2008, requiring corporate official and FAA office manager signatures for all voluntary disclosures submitted by air carriers certificated under part 119 for operations under part 121 or part 135.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



A. Access to the Web-Based System. Access to the Web-based system requires assignment of login identification and a password, which are obtained via the following means.

1) Air Carrier Representatives. Users named by an air carrier to represent the company on voluntary disclosure issues, will be added to the VDRP Web-based system by a PI assigned certificate responsibilities for that air carrier. Each authorized representative will be issued a unique login identification and password for access to the system. Refer to VDRP User Guide at https://av-info.faa.gov/VDRP/UserGuide.pdf or, contact VDRP Help Desk at 866-285-4942 for additional information.

2) FAA Personnel Access. FAA personnel may obtain access to the system via one of the following means:

• PI’s are automatically added to the VDRP system when the automated Operations Safety System (OPSS) recognizes the individual as a PI assigned to that air carrier or;

• FAA personnel not assigned as a PI who require access to the system will be added to the system by a PI, utilizing the “Add User” functionality.

B. System User Guidance and Support. The VDRP system guidance and user guide for the Web-based system may be accessed or downloaded from https://avinfo.faa.gov/VDRP/UserGuide.pdf. Additional assistance may be obtained via telephone from the VDRP Help Desk:

• Hours of operation: 6:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. CST Monday through Friday. • Telephone numbers: Toll-free at 866-285-4942 or at 405-954-7272. • E-mail address: 9-AMC–AVS–[email protected].

C. General Web-Based System Information. The Web-based VDRP is accessible anywhere with an Internet connection, on a 24-hour, 7-day-a-week basis, subject to access privileges granted in accordance with subparagraph 11-12A.

1) Internal tracking and email alerts simplify management of voluntary self-disclosures.

2) Online data entry provides a streamlined and automated VDRP process.

• No software to download or install; and • It is secure, only authenticated users can access the Web-based VDRP system.

All transactions are encrypted using 128-bit Secure Socket Layer (SSL) technology.

D. User Responsibilities.

1) Air Carrier. An air carrier is responsible for submitting the voluntary disclosure, completing the written report, and implementing corrective actions satisfactory to the PI.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



2) FAA Inspectors. A PI, or his or her designee, is assigned to a voluntary disclosure. The assigned inspector is responsible for reviewing and accepting (or declining) submissions from the air carrier (i.e., initial notification, written report and any revisions to the written report/corrective actions). In addition, the PI will issue a letter of correction (or other administrative action, as appropriate), while confirming implementation of the corrective actions agreed upon with the air carrier. The PI will close the VDRP file upon satisfactory implementation of the corrective action(s), or open an enforcement investigation if the air carrier should fail to implement the corrective action as detailed in the letter of correction.

E. User Login.

1) FAA Inspector. Login information will be provided via internal channels.

2) Air Carrier. Contact your FAA certificate-holding district office (CHDO) to obtain access information.

F. User Support. The VDRP system provides context sensitive help for every web form of the application. Online help is available within the Web-based application. In addition, the VDRP Users Guide contains detailed explanation of the VDRP web application, descriptions of VDRP terms, functions and features of VDRP. This is available at the VDRP Web site.

G. The Six Stages of the VDRP for Air Carriers. The Web-based VDRP employs a six stage process. Responsibility for each stage is assigned to either the air carrier or the FAA, as described below.

1) Stage 1: Notification to FAA of an Apparent Violation. Except as specified below, the voluntary disclosure policy applies only when notification of an apparent violation is made to the FAA by the certificate holder, immediately after the apparent violation has been discovered by that air carrier, and before the FAA learns of the apparent violation by some other means.

a) Notification of a disclosure to FAA will normally be made via the Web-based system, unless extenuating circumstances prevent initial notification using that venue. The Web-based VDRP system contains provisions for indicating that the notification process was initiated utilizing another form of media. When acceptable to the PI, initial notice of a voluntary disclosure may be submitted orally, via a written hardcopy, or by electronic copy; provided, the air carrier enters the initial notification data via the Web-based VDRP system within 72 hours of the original notification. Compliance with the 10- (or 30-) day limit for submission of the written report will be based on the date of the original notification, regardless of the submission means or media.

b) When the certificate holder notifies FAA of an apparent violation, contact must be made with, or directed to, the appropriate PI. The notification requirement is automatically met when the disclosure is submitted via the Web-based VDRP system as all PIs for that certificate are notified when a disclosure is submitted. However, if the certificate holder submits the initial notification via alternative media, as authorized in subparagraph 11-12G1)a), the disclosure must be submitted to the appropriate PI. It is FAA’s policy that initial notification

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



should be accomplished on a timely basis, ordinarily within 24 hours of the discovery of the apparent violation. However, an inspector may accept disclosures that exceed the 24-hour policy when the inspector determines that a later submission is justified based on the specific circumstances, and in view of those circumstances, the submission is still considered timely. For example, a voluntary disclosure based on a company violation revealed in an ASAP report may require more that 24 hours from the submission of that ASAP report in order for the responsible company entity to become aware of the information in the report and to initiate a voluntary disclosure. The FAA retains sole discretion in determining whether a voluntary disclosure received later than 24 hours after discovery of the violation is timely. The certificate holder should therefore not delay notification for any reason, and should address, to the maximum extent possible, the following items with the PI:

1. A brief description of the apparent violation, including an estimate of the duration of time that it remained undetected, as well as how and when it was discovered.

2. Verification that noncompliance ceased after it was identified.

3. A brief description of the immediate action taken after the apparent violation was identified, the immediate action taken to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation, and the person responsible for taking the immediate action.

4. Verification that an evaluation is underway to determine:

• If there are any systemic problems; and, • The corrective steps necessary to prevent the apparent violation from

recurring.

5. Identification of the person responsible for preparing the comprehensive fix.

6. Acknowledgment that a detailed written report will be provided to the PI within 10 working-days. (Note: If a proposed comprehensive fix is not fully developed within 10 working-days, the air carrier should provide at least an overview of its comprehensive fix plans in a written report submitted within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. In any event, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be submitted within 30 calendar-days after initial notification.)

7. The initial notification of a voluntary disclosure must be submitted by one of the management officials specified in 14 CFR part 119, §§ 119.65 or 119.69, as appropriate. In addition, the initial notification can be submitted by an employee authorized by the airline to accomplish initial notification so long as that employee includes a letter signed by one of the management officials specified in §§ 119.65 or 119.69, as appropriate. That letter must stipulate that:

• The corporate official is aware of the disclosure; • The company took immediate action to cease the violation; and

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



• The company will develop a proposed comprehensive fix for FAA consideration to prevent future reoccurrences of the violation.

NOTE: The Web-based VDRP allows upload of documents (photos, text documents, letters, etc.) by the air carrier at Stage I and Stage III and upload by the FAA in Stages II, IV, V and VI, to enable the attachment of whatever documents may be required to support their submissions.

2) Stage II: FAA Response to Certificate Holder (Air Carrier). The PI will review the Web-based submission from the air carrier and respond in a timely manner. If the original submission from the air carrier was made via an alternative media (e.g., telephone, fax, etc.), the PI may respond via an alternative means, but must also respond to the subsequent Web-based submission by the air carrier.

a) The PI’s review of the disclosure will, to the extent possible, and based on available information confirm that the submission meets the following requirements:

1. The air carrier has notified the FAA of the apparent violation immediately after detecting it and before the Agency has learned of it by other means.

2. The apparent violation was inadvertent.

3. The apparent violation does not indicate a lack, or reasonable question, of qualification of the air carrier.

4. Immediate action, satisfactory to the FAA, was taken upon discovery to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation.

5. The air carrier certificate has developed, or is developing, a comprehensive fix and schedule of implementation satisfactory to the FAA. The comprehensive fix includes a followup self-audit to ensure that the action taken corrects the noncompliance. This self-audit is in addition to any audits conducted by the FAA.

6. The initial notification of a voluntary disclosure was submitted by one of the management officials specified in §§ 119.65 or 119.69, as appropriate. Or, the initial notification was submitted by an employee authorized by the airline to accomplish initial notification and includes a letter signed by one of the management officials specified in §§ 119.65 or 119.69, as appropriate. That letter must stipulate that:

• The corporate official is aware of the disclosure; • The company took immediate action to cease the violation; and • Acknowledgement that the company has developed or is developing a

proposed comprehensive fix for FAA consideration to prevent future reoccurrences of the violation.

NOTE: The determination to accept or reject the voluntary disclosure is to be made on the basis of the information required to be presented by the air carrier

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



(as noted in subparagraphs 11-12G1)b)1-7) and any other information known to the FAA at that time. Acceptance of the voluntary disclosure at this stage is not a final determination of acceptability under VDRP. Should subsequent investigation reveal the disclosure fails to meet the requirements set forth in subparagraphs G2)a)1-6 or, it is determined that a violation did not occur, the case may be rescinded and enforcement action taken if appropriate. If the CHDO has sufficient evidence, independent of the materials provided by the air carrier as part of its submission under VDRP, to proceed with enforcement action, enforcement action will be initiated in accordance with the procedures set forth in the current edition of Order 2150.3. Inspectors should be aware that rescinding the case in the Web-based system also closes the VDRP record in Enforcement Information System (EIS) with a “No Action” code. However, such closure of the VDRP record does not preclude the inspector from opening an enforcement investigation and proceeding with enforcement action.

b) Once the PI completes the review and makes a determination to accept or reject the voluntary disclosure, the PI will complete the required VDRP entries for Stage II and submit his or her input via the Web-based system. Upon submission by the PI, the VDRP system will alert the office manager via email, that the file is awaiting his or her review.

c) Office manager review of PI determination to accept or reject the voluntary disclosure.

1. If the office manager indicates concurrence with the PI’s determination and selects, “Submit”, Stage II is concluded and the record will advance into Stage III, which triggers automated notification to the air carrier of the acceptance and opening of the EIR, including automated assignment of an EIR number to the report.

2. If the office manager indicates nonconcurrence with the PI’s recommendation, the case will be referred back to the PI for reconsideration with whatever comments have been entered by the office manager. The case will not advance to Stage III nor will it be closed as an invalid submission until the office manager submits concurrence with the PI’s determination.

NOTE: If, at any time subsequent to acceptance of the disclosure, the FAA becomes aware that the disclosure did not meet the requirements set forth for acceptance under the VDRP, the acceptance may be withdrawn. In such cases, as well in those cases where it is subsequently determined that a violation did not occur, the Web-based system provides the option of “rescinding” a case, which closes it without action within the VDRP. If the CHDO has sufficient evidence, independent of the materials provided by the air carrier as part of its submission under VDRP, to proceed with enforcement action, enforcement action should be initiated in accordance with the procedures set forth in Order 2150.3.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



3) Stage III: Written Report of the Air Carrier’s Apparent Violation. The written report should be submitted by the air carrier, to the PI, via the Web-based VDRP system, within 10 working-days. This report must contain a detailed description of the proposed comprehensive fix, outlining the planned corrective steps, the responsibilities for implementing those corrective steps, and a time schedule for completion of the fix. If a proposed comprehensive fix is not fully developed within 10 working-days, the pertinent regulated entity should provide at least an overview of its comprehensive fix plans in a written report submitted within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. In any event, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be submitted within 30 calendar-days after initial notification.

a) The VDRP Web-based system requires the input of the following information:

1. A list of the specific FAA regulations that may have been violated.

2. A description of the apparent violation, including the duration of time it remained undetected, as well as how and when it was detected.

3. A description of the immediate action taken to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation, including when it was taken, and who was responsible for taking the action.

4. An explanation that shows the apparent violation was inadvertent.

5. Evidence that demonstrates the seriousness of the apparent violation and the air carrier’s analysis of that evidence.

6. Completion of a Risk Assessment Matrix to aid in evaluating the significance of the event.

7. A detailed description of the proposed comprehensive fix, outlining the planned corrective steps, the responsibilities for implementing those corrective steps, and a time schedule for completion of the comprehensive fix, including a self audit following implementation of the corrective action(s).

8. Identification of the company official(s) responsible for monitoring the implementation and completion of the comprehensive fix.

4) Stage IV: Written Report Review by the FAA. The FAA works with the certificate holder to ensure that the air carrier has identified any root causes and systemic issues which led to the apparent violation. In this stage, the PI is also tasked with completing a Risk Assessment Matrix to aid in evaluating the significance of the event and the proposed comprehensive fix. This collaboration helps to ensure that the corrective actions contained in the comprehensive fix are acceptable to the FAA.

NOTE: Should investigation of the apparent violation result in the determination that no violation has occurred, the EIR may be closed by rescinding the file and providing an explanation in the provided comment box. When submitted, the user is provided a warning that submitting this action (rescinding the file) will close

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



the case and terminate the investigation. If the inspector confirms the rescission, the case is closed in VDRP that date and will be closed in the EIS 10 days later, with the original date of closure recorded in EIS. The 10-day delay is provided to enable the FAA to re-open the file within that 10-day “window” if deemed necessary.

5) Stage V: Implementation of a Comprehensive Fix and FAA Surveillance.

a) During the implementation period, the FAA and the pertinent air carrier should continue to work together. The FAA may advise and assist the entity in correcting any identified systemic problems. Changes will be made to the proposed comprehensive fix when the need is identified. Upon determining that the initial implementation of the proposed comprehensive fix is satisfactory, the PI may issue a letter of correction in Stage V. Alternatively, the PI may elect instead to issue the letter of correction in Stage VI, if deemed appropriate. If the letter of correction is issued in Stage V, and subsequent changes are made to the comprehensive fix, the PI will issue and upload a revised letter of correction in Stage VI which reflects the letter of correction as implemented.

b) The FAA monitors the implementation of the corrective steps. Throughout the implementation period, the FAA assesses the pertinent air carrier’s corrective efforts and top management’s awareness of these efforts. If, during this period, the FAA determines that the steps taken by the air carrier are not those documented in the comprehensive fix and acceptable corrective action by the air carrier is not forthcoming, the letter of correction may be rescinded, and appropriate legal enforcement action initiated.

6) Stage VI: Inspector Sign-off. At the conclusion of the implementation period, the PI and the certificate-holding office manager will make a final assessment. Consultation with regional specialists, legal counsel, or other FAA personnel may be accomplished when deemed appropriate by the PI or the office manager.

a) If all elements of the comprehensive fix have been satisfactorily accomplished, including the followup self audit by the air carrier, the PI will enter the required data and submit the entries required for Stage VI completion.

b) Upon Stage VI submission by the PI, the VDRP system will alert the office manager via email, that the file is awaiting the manager’s review. The office manager will then log into the VDRP system, review the VDRP file and assess the adequacy of the comprehensive fix and its implementation. The office manager will make a determination as to whether the implementation of the comprehensive fix was satisfactorily accomplished.

1. If the office manager concurs with the PI’s determination, Stage VI is concluded upon the manager’s concurrence submission, and the VDRP system will automatically generate Form 2150-5, Self Disclosure Worksheet and close the associated EIR record in the EIS.

2. If the office manager does not concur with the PI’s recommendation, the case will be referred back to the PI for reconsideration with whatever comments have been

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



entered by the office manager. The case will not advance out of Stage VI until resubmitted by the PI and the office manager submits concurrence with the PI’s determination.

NOTE: If, following FAA closure of the investigative package resulting from a voluntary disclosure, the same or similar violations are discovered to have occurred prior to submission of the associated voluntary disclosure, the FAA does not reopen the case unless it determines that the pertinent air carrier failed to comply with all the elements of the comprehensive fix agreed upon by the FAA and the entity.

c) Once, the case is closed in VDRP, the case will close in EIS 10 days later, with the original date of closure recorded in EIS. The 10-day delay is provided to enable the FAA to re-open the file within that 10-day “window” if deemed necessary.

11-13 VDRP FOR REGULATED ENTITIES, OTHER THAN AIR CARRIERS. This section is directed to those regulated entities, other than air carriers, which are required to utilize the Web-based VDRP system. Currently, the VDRP system is in the process of being incrementally modified to enable its use by such additional regulated entities. In order to review a list of regulated entities, other than air carriers, currently required to utilize the Web-based VDRP system see https://av-info.faa.gov/vdrp; no login required to access this list.

A. Access to the Web-Based VDRP System by a Regulated Entity, Other Than Air Carrier Representatives. Access by regulated entity representatives to the Web-based system requires FAA assignment of login identification and a password, which are obtained by the following means.

1) Regulated Entity Representative Access. Users named by the regulated entity to represent the company on voluntary disclosure issues, will be added to the VDRP Web-based system by a PI assigned certificate responsibilities for that regulated entity. Each authorized representative will be issued a unique login identification and password for access to the system. Refer to VDRP User Guide at https://av-info.faa.gov/VDRP/UserGuide.pdf or, contact VDRP Help Desk at (866) 285-4942 for additional information.

2) FAA Personnel Access. FAA personal may obtain access to the system via one of the following means.

• PI’s are automatically added to the VDRP system when the OPSS recognizes the individual as a PI assigned to that regulated entity. or;

• FAA personnel not assigned as a PI who require access to the system will be added to the system by a PI, utilizing the “Add User” functionality.

B. System Guidance and Support. The VDRP system guidance and user guide for the Web-based system may be accessed or downloaded from https://avinfo.faa.gov/VDRP/UserGuide.pdf. Context sensitive help is available within the web-based application itself Additional assistance may be obtained via telephone from the VDRP Help Desk:

• Hours of operation: 6:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. CST Monday through Friday;

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



• Telephone numbers: Toll-free at -866-285–4942 or at 405-954-7272; and • E-mail address: [email protected].

C. General Web-based VDRP System Information. The Web-based VDRP is accessible anywhere with an Internet connection, on a 24-hour, 7-day-a-week basis, subject to access privileges granted in accordance with subparagraph 11-13A.

1) Internal tracking and email alerts simplify management of voluntary self-disclosures.

2) Online data entry provides a streamlined and automated VDRP process.

• No software to download or install; and • It is secure, only authenticated users can access the Web-based VDRP system.

All transactions are encrypted using 128 bit SSL technology.

D. User Responsibilities.

1) Regulated Entities. A regulated entity is responsible for submitting the voluntary disclosure, completing the written report, and implementing corrective actions satisfactory to the PI.

2) FAA Inspectors. A PI, or his or her designee, is assigned to a voluntary disclosure. The assigned inspector is responsible for reviewing and accepting (or declining) submissions from the regulated entity (i.e., initial notification, written report and any revisions to the written report/corrective actions). In addition, the PI will issue a letter of correction (or other administrative action, as appropriate), while confirming implementation of the corrective actions agreed upon with the regulated entity. The PI will close the VDRP file upon satisfactory implementation of the corrective action(s), or open an enforcement investigation if the regulated entity should fail to implement the corrective action as detailed in the letter of correction.

E. User Login.

1) FAA Inspector. Login information will be provided via internal channels.

2) Regulated Entity. Contact your FAA CHDO to obtain access information.

F. The Six Stages of the VDRP for Regulated Entities Other Than Air Carriers. The Web-based VDRP employs a six stage process. Responsibility for each such stage is assigned either to the regulated entity or the FAA, as described below.

1) Stage I: Notification to FAA of an Apparent Violation. Those regulated entities to which this section applies are required to utilize the Web-based VDRP system for submitting voluntary disclosures to the FAA. Except as specified below, the voluntary disclosure policy applies only when notification of an apparent violation is made to the FAA by the regulated

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



entity immediately after the apparent violation has been discovered by that regulated entity, and before the FAA learns of the apparent violation by some other means.

a) Notification of a disclosure to FAA will normally be made via the Web-based VDRP system unless extenuating circumstances prevent initial notification using that venue. The Web-based VDRP system contains provisions for indicating that the notification process was begun via another media. When acceptable to the PI, initial notice by an authorized user of the Web-based VDRP may be submitted orally, via a written hardcopy, or by electronic copy; provided, the regulated entity enters the initial notification data via the Web-based VDRP system within 72 hours of the original notification. However, compliance with the 10- (or 30-) day limit for submission of the written report will be based on the date of the original notification, regardless of the submission means or media.

b) When a regulated entity notifies FAA of an apparent violation, contact must be made with, or directed to, the appropriate PI. This requirement is automatically met by submission of the voluntary disclosure via the Web-based system. No further action is required when utilizing the Web-based system). However, if the certificate holder submits the initial notification by alternative means, as authorized in subparagraph 11-13F1)a), the disclosure must be submitted to the appropriate PI. It is FAA’s policy that initial notification should be accomplished on a timely basis, ordinarily within 24 hours of the discovery of the apparent violation. However, an inspector may accept disclosures that exceed the 24-hour policy when the inspector determines that a later submission is justified based on the specific circumstances, and in view of those circumstances, the submission is still considered timely. For example, a voluntary disclosure based on a company violation revealed in an ASAP report may require more that 24 hours from the submission of that ASAP report in order for the responsible company entity to become aware of the information in the report and to initiate a voluntary disclosure. The FAA retains sole discretion in determining whether a voluntary disclosure received later than 24 hours after discovery of the violation is timely. The regulated entity should therefore not delay notification for any reason, and should address, to the maximum extent possible, the following items with the PI:

1. A brief description of the apparent violation, including an estimate of the duration of time that it remained undetected, as well as how and when it was discovered.

2. Verification that noncompliance ceased after it was identified.

3. A brief description of the immediate action taken after the apparent violation was identified, the immediate action taken to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation, and the person responsible for taking the immediate action.

4. Verification that an evaluation is underway to determine:

• If there are any systemic problems; and, • The corrective steps necessary to prevent the apparent violation from

recurring.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



5. Identification of the person responsible for preparing the comprehensive fix.

6. Acknowledgment that a detailed written report will be provided to the PI within 10 working-days. (Note: If a proposed comprehensive fix is not fully developed within 10 working-days, the regulated entity should provide at least an overview of its comprehensive fix plans in a written report submitted within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. In any event, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be submitted within 30 calendar-days after initial notification.)

NOTE: The Web-based VDRP allows upload of documents (photos, text documents, etc.) by the regulated entity at Stage I and Stage III and by the FAA at Stages II, IV, V and VI.

2) Stage II: FAA Response to the Regulated Entity. The PI will review the Web-based submission from the regulated entity and respond in a timely manner. If the original submission from the regulated entity was made via an alternative media (e.g., telephone, fax, etc.), the PI may respond via an alternative means, but must also respond to the subsequent Web-based submission by the regulated entity.

a) The PI’s review of the disclosure will, to the extent possible, confirm the submission meets the following requirements:

1. The regulated entity has notified the FAA of the apparent violation immediately after detecting it and before the Agency has learned of it by other means.

2. The apparent violation was inadvertent.

3. The apparent violation does not indicate a lack, or reasonable question, of qualification of the regulated entity.

4. Immediate action, satisfactory to the FAA, was taken upon discovery to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation.

5. The regulated entity has developed, or is developing, a comprehensive fix and schedule of implementation satisfactory to the FAA. The comprehensive fix includes a followup self-audit to ensure that the action taken corrects the noncompliance. This self-audit is in addition to any audits conducted by the FAA.

b) Once the PI completes the review and makes a determination to accept or reject the voluntary disclosure, the PI will complete the required VDRP entries for Stage II and submit his or her input via the Web-based system.

c) If the disclosure is accepted by the PI, the VDRP system will automatically notify the regulated entity via email and assign an EIR number to the file. The PI is also provided with the option to return the notification to the regulated entity for additional editing or to reject the disclosure as being invalid. A voluntary disclosure is found to be invalid when the PI

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



determines the disclosure fails to meet the requirements set forth for acceptance under the VDRP. In all cases, the regulated entity receives email notice of the determination by the PI.

NOTE: The determination to accept or reject the voluntary disclosure is to be made on the basis of the information required to be presented by the air carrier (as noted in subparagraphs 11-13F1)b)1-6) and any other information known to the FAA at that time. Acceptance of the voluntary disclosure at this stage is not a final determination of acceptability under VDRP. Should subsequent investigation reveal the disclosure fails to meet the requirements set forth in subparagraphs 11-13F2)a)1-5 or, it is determined that a violation did not occur, the case may be rescinded and enforcement action taken if appropriate. If the CHDO has sufficient evidence, independent of the materials provided by the air carrier as part of its submission under VDRP, to proceed with enforcement action, enforcement action will be initiated in accordance with the procedures set forth in the current edition of Order 2150.3. Inspectors should be aware that rescinding the case in the web-based system also closes the VDRP record in EIS with a “No Action” code. However, such closure of the VDRP record does not preclude the inspector from opening an enforcement investigation and proceeding with Enforcement action.

3) Stage III: Written Report of the Regulated Entity’s Apparent Violation. The written report should be submitted by the regulated entity to the PI, via the Web-based VDRP system, within 10 working-days. This report must contain a detailed description of the proposed comprehensive fix, outlining the planned corrective steps, the responsibilities for implementing those corrective steps, a time schedule for completion of the fix, and including scheduling of the self-audit following completion of the comprehensive fix. If a proposed comprehensive fix is not fully developed within 10 working-days, the pertinent regulated entity should provide at least an overview of its comprehensive fix plans in a written report submitted within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. In any event, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be submitted within 30 calendar-days after initial notification.

a) The VDRP Web-based system requires the input of the following information:

1. A list of the specific FAA regulations that may have been violated.

2. A description of the apparent violation, including the duration of time it remained undetected, as well as how and when it was detected.

3. A description of the immediate action taken to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation, including when it was taken, and who was responsible for taking the action.

4. An explanation that shows the apparent violation was inadvertent.

5. Evidence that demonstrates the seriousness of the apparent violation and the regulated entity’s analysis of that evidence.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



6. Completion of a Risk Assessment Matrix to aid in evaluating the significance of the event.

7. A detailed description of the proposed comprehensive fix, outlining the planned corrective steps, the responsibilities for implementing those corrective steps, and a time schedule for completion of the fix to include a self audit following implementation.

8. Identification of the company official(s) responsible for monitoring the implementation and completion of the comprehensive fix and self-audit.

4) Stage IV: Written Report Review by the FAA. The FAA works with the regulated entity to ensure it has identified any root causes and systemic issues which led to the apparent violation. This collaboration helps to ensure that the corrective actions contained in the comprehensive fix are acceptable to the FAA. In this stage, the PI is also tasked with completing a Risk Assessment Matrix to aid in evaluating the significance of the event and the proposed comprehensive fix.

NOTE: Should investigation of the apparent violation result in the determination that no violation has occurred, the EIR may be closed by rescinding the file and providing an explanation in the provided comment box. When submitted, the user is provided a warning that submitting this action (rescinding the file) will close the case and terminate the investigation. If the inspector confirms the rescission, the case is closed in VDRP that date and will close in EIS 10 days later, with the original date of closure recorded in EIS. The 10-day delay is provided to enable the FAA to re-open the file within that 10-day “window” if deemed necessary.

5) Stage V: Implementation of a Comprehensive Fix and FAA Surveillance.

a) During the implementation period, the FAA and the pertinent regulated entity should continue to work together. The FAA may advise and assist the entity in correcting any identified systemic problems. Changes will be made to the proposed comprehensive fix when the need is identified. Upon determining that the initial implementation of the proposed comprehensive fix is satisfactory, the PI may issue a letter of correction in Stage V. The PI may elect to issue the letter of correction in Stage VI if deemed appropriate. If the letter of correction is issued in Stage V, and subsequent changes are made to the comprehensive fix, the PI will issue and upload a revised letter of correction in Stage VI which reflects the letter of correction as implemented.

b) The FAA monitors the implementation of the corrective steps. Throughout the implementation period, the FAA assesses the pertinent regulated entity’s corrective efforts and top management’s awareness of these efforts. If, during this period, the FAA determines that the steps taken by the entity are not those documented in the comprehensive fix and acceptable corrective action by the regulated entity is not forthcoming, the letter of correction may be rescinded, and appropriate legal enforcement action initiated.

6) Stage VI: Inspector Sign-Off. At the conclusion of the implementation period, the PI makes a final assessment. If all elements of the comprehensive fix, including satisfactory

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



completion of the self-audit, have been adequately accomplished, the PI finds the fix satisfactory and closes the case. The case remains subject to rescission and initiation of appropriate legal enforcement action in the event that the agreed-upon actions, outlined in the comprehensive fix, are not completed to the satisfaction of the FAA.

a) The PI has the authority to close the case. Consultation with regional specialists, legal counsel, or other FAA personnel may be accomplished when deemed appropriate by the PI.

NOTE: If, following FAA closure of the investigative package resulting from a voluntary disclosure, the same or similar violations are discovered to have occurred prior to submission of the associated voluntary disclosure, the FAA does not reopen the case unless it determines that the pertinent regulated entity failed to comply with all the elements of the comprehensive fix agreed upon by the FAA and the entity.

b) Once the case is closed in VDRP, the case will close in EIS 10 days later, with the original date of closure recorded in EIS. The 10 day delay is provided to enable the FAA to reopen the file within that 10-day “window” if deemed necessary.

11-14 VDRP FOR REGULATED ENTITIES NOT AUTHORIZED TO UTILIZE THE WEB-BASED VDRP SYSTEM.

A. Applicability. All regulated entities which are authorized to participate in the VDRP, but are not authorized to utilize the VDRP Web-based system will utilize the guidance contained in this section for submission of voluntary disclosures to the FAA. A list of those regulated entities which are authorized to use the Web-based system may be found at https://av-info.faa.gov/vdrp.

B. The Six Stages of the VDRP for Regulated Entities Not Authorized to Use the Web-Based VDRP System. Voluntary disclosure accomplished under this section employ a six stage process, as described below.

1) Stage 1: Notification to the FAA of an Apparent Violation. Except as specified below, the voluntary disclosure policy applies only when notification of an apparent violation is made to the FAA by a regulated entity, immediately after the apparent violation has been discovered by that regulated entity, and before the FAA learns of the apparent violation by some other means. When acceptable to the PI, initial notice of a voluntary disclosure may be submitted orally, via written hardcopy, or by electronic means. When the regulated entity notifies the FAA of an apparent violation, contact must be made with, or directed to, the appropriate PI. It is FAA policy that initial notification should be accomplished on a timely basis, ordinarily within 24 hours of the discovery of the apparent violation. However, an inspector may accept disclosures that exceed the 24-hour policy when the inspector determines that a later submission is justified based on the specific circumstances, and in view of those circumstances, the submission is still considered timely. For example, a voluntary disclosure based on a company violation revealed in an ASAP report may require more that 24 hours from the submission of that ASAP report in order for the responsible company entity to become aware of the information in

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



the report and to initiate a voluntary disclosure. The FAA retains sole discretion in determining whether a voluntary disclosure received later than 24 hours after discovery of the violation is timely. The certificate holder should therefore not delay notification for any reason, and should address, to the maximum extent possible, the following items with the PI:

a) A brief description of the apparent violation, including an estimate of the duration of time that it remained undetected, as well as how and when it was discovered.

b) Verification that noncompliance ceased after it was identified.

c) A brief description of the immediate action taken after the apparent violation was identified, the immediate action taken to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation, and the person responsible for taking the immediate action.

d) Verification that an evaluation is underway to determine:

• If there are any systemic problems; and • The corrective steps necessary to prevent the apparent violation from

recurring.

e) Identification of the person responsible for preparing the comprehensive fix.

f) Acknowledgment that a detailed written report will be provided to the PI within 10 working-days. If a proposed comprehensive fix is not fully developed within 10 working-days, the regulated entity should provide at least an overview of its comprehensive fix plans in a written report submitted within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. In any event, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be submitted within 30 calendar-days after initial notification.

NOTE: Exceptions. If the FAA has learned of an apparent violation by a certificate holder, fractional ownership program, or PAH from an ASAP report as described in AC 120-66, a voluntary disclosure can still be accepted by the FAA, even though the FAA has already learned of the violation from the ASAP. Similarly, if a regulated entity voluntarily agrees to conduct a joint audit (inspection) with the FAA during which an apparent violation is discovered either by the company or FAA members of the audit (inspection) team, the FAA may accept a voluntary disclosure submitted by the company, even though the FAA has already learned of the apparent violation during the course of the joint audit (inspection).

2) Stage II: FAA Response to a Certificate Holder. The PI responds with a written acknowledgment of the entity’s initial notification. This acknowledgment includes the request for a written report and is sent in lieu of a letter of investigation, provided the written report is completed in accordance with the voluntary disclosure reporting procedures set forth in this section. The PI will open an EIR that will be closed out with a letter of correction following satisfactory development and implementation of a comprehensive fix as provided by schedule of implementation agreed upon by the FAA and the entity.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



a) The PI’s review of the disclosure will, to the extent possible, confirm the submission meets the following requirements:

b) The air carrier has notified the FAA of the apparent violation immediately after detecting it and before the Agency has learned of it by other means.

c) The apparent violation was inadvertent.

d) The apparent violation does not indicate a lack, or reasonable question, of qualification of the air carrier.

e) Immediate action, satisfactory to the FAA, was taken upon discovery to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation.

f) The air carrier certificate has developed, or is developing, a comprehensive fix and schedule of implementation satisfactory to the FAA. The comprehensive fix includes a followup self-audit to ensure that the action taken corrects the noncompliance. This self-audit is in addition to any audits conducted by the FAA.

NOTE: The determination to accept or reject the voluntary disclosure is to be made on the basis of the information required to be presented by the air carrier (as noted in subparagraphs 11-14B1)a)–f)) and any other information known to the FAA at that time. Acceptance of the voluntary disclosure at this stage is not a final determination of acceptability under VDRP. Should subsequent investigation reveal the disclosure fails to meet the requirements set forth in subparagraphs 11-14B2)a)–f) or, it is determined that a violation did not occur, the case may be rescinded and enforcement action taken if appropriate. If the CHDO has sufficient evidence, independent of the materials provided by the air carrier as part of its submission under VDRP, to proceed with enforcement action, enforcement action will be initiated in accordance with the procedures set forth in the current edition of Order 2150.3. Inspectors should be aware that rescinding the case in the web-based system also closes the VDRP record in EIS with a “No Action” code. However, such closure of the VDRP record does not preclude the inspector from opening an enforcement investigation and proceeding with Enforcement action.

3) Stage III: Written Report of the Regulated Entity’s Apparent Violation. A written report should be provided by the regulated entity to the PI within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. This report must contain a detailed description of the proposed comprehensive fix, outlining the planned corrective steps, the responsibilities for implementing those corrective steps, and a time schedule for completion of the fix. If a proposed comprehensive fix is not fully developed within 10 working-days, the pertinent regulated entity should provide at least an overview of its comprehensive fix plans in a written report submitted within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. In any event, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be submitted within 30 calendar-days after initial notification. In summary, the written report should include the following information (a sample format for this report is provided in subparagraph 11-14B3)h)).

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



a) A list of the specific FAA regulations that may have been violated.

b) A description of the apparent violation, including the duration of time it remained undetected, as well as how and when it was detected.

c) A description of the immediate action taken to terminate the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation, including when it was taken, and who was responsible for taking the action.

d) An explanation that shows the apparent violation was inadvertent.

e) Evidence that demonstrates the seriousness of the apparent violation and the regulated entity’s analysis of that evidence.

f) A detailed description of the proposed comprehensive fix, outlining the planned corrective steps, the responsibilities for implementing those corrective steps, a time schedule for completion of the fix and a self-audit, following completion of the fix, to ensure the action taken corrects the non-compliance.. If a proposed comprehensive fix is not fully developed within 10 working-days, the pertinent regulated entity should provide at least an overview of its comprehensive fix plans in a written report submitted within 10 working-days after the initial notification was made. In any event, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be submitted within 30 calendar-days after initial notification.

g) Identification of the company official responsible for monitoring the implementation, completion of the comprehensive fix and followup self edit.

h) Sample Written Report Format. The following sample in Figure 11-1 is only a suggested format to be followed when preparing the written report that will be submitted to the FAA. While a regulated entity should include at least all the elements specified below, the structure of the written report can be modified by the regulated entity to fit its particular needs.

4) Stage IV: Written Report Review by the FAA. The FAA works with the certificate holder to ensure that the regulated entity has identified any root causes and systemic issues which led to the apparent violation. This collaboration helps to ensure that the corrective actions contained in the comprehensive fix are acceptable to the FAA.

5) Stage V: Implementation of Comprehensive Fix and FAA surveillance.

a) During the implementation period, the FAA and the pertinent regulated entity should continue to work together. The FAA may advise and assist the entity in correcting any identified systemic problems. Changes will be made to the proposed comprehensive fix when the need is identified. Upon determining that the initial implementation of the proposed comprehensive fix is satisfactory, the PI may issue a letter of correction in Stage V. If the letter of correction is issued in Stage V, and subsequent changes are made to the comprehensive fix, the PI will issue an amendment to the letter of correction which reflects the letter of correction as implemented.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



b) The FAA monitors the implementation of the corrective steps. Throughout the implementation period, the FAA assesses the pertinent regulated entity’s corrective efforts and top management’s awareness of these efforts. If, during this period, the FAA determines that the steps taken by the entity are not those documented in the comprehensive fix and acceptable corrective action by the regulated entity is not forthcoming, the letter of correction may be rescinded, and appropriate legal enforcement action initiated.

6) Stage VI: Inspector Sign-Off. At the conclusion of the implementation period, the PI makes a final assessment. If all elements of the comprehensive fix have been adequately accomplished, including a satisfactory self-audit by the regulated entity, the PI finds the fix satisfactory and closes the case. The case remains subject to reopening in the event that the agreed-upon actions, outlined in the comprehensive fix, are not completed to the satisfaction of the FAA. A statement of followup investigation, confirming that the comprehensive fix was satisfactorily implemented and completed, is prepared to complete the FAA’s investigative package.

a) The PI has the authority to close the case. Consultation with regional specialists, legal counsel, or other FAA personnel may be accomplished when deemed appropriate by the PI.

b) If, following FAA closure of the investigative package resulting from a voluntary disclosure, the same or similar violations are discovered to have occurred prior to submission of the associated voluntary disclosure, the FAA does not reopen the case unless it determines that the pertinent regulated entity failed to comply with all the elements of the comprehensive fix agreed upon by the FAA and the entity.

C. Repeated Violations. If, following FAA closure of the investigative package resulting from a voluntary disclosure, the same or similar violations are discovered to have occurred prior to submission of the associated voluntary disclosure, the FAA does not reopen the case unless it determines that the pertinent regulated entity failed to comply with all the elements of the comprehensive fix agreed upon by the FAA and the entity.

D. Dispute Resolution. When disputes occur regarding the acceptance of a proposed comprehensive fix, or a modification thereto before the fix is considered satisfactory, the PI and the pertinent regulated entity may request that the issue be resolved at the next level of management within the FAA. This procedure will provide for an independent assessment of the areas in disagreement.

E. Separate Actions Against Airmen or Other Individual Agents.

1) The voluntary disclosure policy applies to individual airmen or other agents of an employing certificate holder only when all of the following occur:

a) The apparent violation involves a deficiency of the employing entity’s practices or procedures that causes the employing certificate holder to be in violation of a covered violation of an FAA regulation, and;

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



b) The airman or other agent of the employing entity, while acting on behalf of the employing entity, inadvertently violates the FAA’s regulations as a direct result of a deficiency of the employing entity that causes the employing entity to be in violation of the regulations. (The voluntary disclosure policy does not apply to the airman or other agent when his or her apparent violation is the result of actions unrelated to the employing entity’s deficiency), and;

c) The airman or other agent immediately makes the report of his or her apparent violation to the employing entity, and;

d) The employing regulated entity immediately notifies the FAA of both the airman or other agent’s apparent violation and the apparent deficiency in its practice or procedures.

2) When all the above conditions are met, a separate EIR is opened for the individual and closed with no more than administrative action in accordance with Order 2150.3.

3) If all the above conditions are not met, the PI will review all facts associated with the case and determine what action is appropriate for individual airmen or other agents of the employing entity.

4) This provision does not apply to matters concerning qualifications to hold an airman certificate.

NOTE: Special provisions exist for apparent violations by regulated entities when a voluntary disclosure is made based on information in an ASAP report. In such cases, the FAA may, at its sole discretion, accept the corrective action recommended by an ASAP ERC for an accepted ASAP report as the comprehensive fix for the voluntary disclosure. This is acceptable when the following conditions all apply (even when an apparent employee qualification or competency issue is involved):

• The FAA determines that the violation is due entirely to the actions of the employee(s) and not to a systematic or procedural deficiency of the company; and

• The employee completes the corrective action recommended by the ASAP ERC to the satisfaction of the FAA.

Figure 11-1. Sample Written Report Format

A. General.

1) Date.

2) Certificate type or equivalent.

3) Pertinent regulated entity number or equivalent.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



4) Company name.

5) Company address.

6) Company official filing report.

• Name. • Position. • Telephone number. • E-mail address.

B. Description of Apparent Violation.

1) Applicable part of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations.

2) Date apparent violation was discovered.

3) Location of discovery.

4) Company official who discovered the apparent violation.

• Name. • Position. • Telephone number. • E-mail address. • Date and time of initial notification to the FAA. • Name of FAA official notified (principal inspector (PI)).

C. Company Official Responsible for Immediate Action.

1) Name.

2) Position.

3) Telephone number.

4) E-mail address.

D. Duration of Time Apparent Violation Remained Undetected-Hours, Cycles, or Days.

E. Summary of Apparent Violation. The summary should be a brief statement that describes the nature of the apparent violation and identifies the specific aircraft, engines, appliances, facilities, checkpoint, gate, cargo, and/or individuals associated with the apparent violation.

F. Immediate Action.

1) When immediate action was taken.

2) Description of immediate action. This description should outline the immediate steps that were taken to end the violation.

3) Company official responsible for immediate action.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



4) Name.

5) Position.


7) E-mail address.

G. Analysis.

1) Summary of evidence. This summary should describe the scope of the apparent violation and explain how it was detected. In addition, conclusions reached regarding possible or probable systemic deficiencies (i.e., who, what, when, why, and how the noncompliance occurred) should be described.

2) Reasons why the apparent violation was inadvertent.

3) Supporting documentation. The evidence associated with the apparent violation should be attached. This evidence should include a statement regarding how the regulated entity determined the extent of the apparent violation.

H. Comprehensive Fix Proposal. The proposed long-term corrective steps to be taken by the regulated entity to preclude recurrence of the apparent violation should be listed in this section. Each corrective step should identify the individual or department responsible for implementing and completing the corrective step as well as the time allotted for completion of each corrective step. Examples of types of questions or issues that a comprehensive fix proposal should address are as follows:

1) Whether the apparent violation involves equipment, facilities, or individuals beyond those addressed in the initial notification and for which immediate action was taken.

2) Whether procedural or organizational changes are necessary.

3) How it will be determined whether any procedural or organizational changes are effective.

4) What procedures will be developed to ensure that the affected area is periodically reviewed in the future so that concerns can be identified before a violation occurs.

5) Who will be responsible for performing periodic reviews.

6) To whom in the regulated entity’s organization the results of those periodic reviews will be reported, and how they will be documented?

I. Responsibility for Monitoring the Implementation of the Comprehensive Fix.

1) Name.

2) Position.


4) E-mail address.

J. FAA Acceptance (To be Completed by the FAA).

1) Name.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



2) Position (PI).

3) Date.

4) Office.

11-15 VDRP CODES, VDRP PACKAGE CHECKLIST, FAA FORM 2150–5 WORKSHEET, AND SAMPLE VDRP INITIAL NOTIFICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LETTER. This paragraph applicable only to those regulated entities submitting disclosures via the legacy, paper-based system. The information that follows is the requested way to enter information into EIS for voluntary disclosure cases:

A. Block 18 Regulations Believed Violated. If more than one regulation is cited, list them in order of importance. The primary 14 CFR violated should be listed first.

B. Codes Applicable to the Form 2150–5. Figures 11-1 through 11-7 may be utilized to determine the appropriate coding for the Form 2150-5.

NOTE: These codes are also contained in drop-down menus within in the Web-based VDRP, when utilizing the Web-based VDRP.

Figure 11-2. Voluntary Disclosure Type Codes

Code Operation Description 1 Air Carrier—121 3 Commercial Operator & Part 125 Operators 4 Scheduled Air Carrier—135 5 Air Carrier On Demand—135 11 Manufacturer 13 Certificated School 15 Repair Station

Figure 11-3. Voluntary Disclosure Sub-Type Codes (Based on Type of Operation)

Type Operation Sub-Type Code Sub-Type Operation Description Air Carrier—121 01 Scheduled Passenger

Air Carrier—121 02 Scheduled Cargo

Air Carrier—121 03 On-Demand—Passenger

Air Carrier—121 04 On-Demand—Cargo

Air Carrier—121 05 Helicopter

Air Carrier—121 98 None

Commercial Operator 03 On-Demand—Passenger

Commercial Operator 04 On-Demand—Cargo

Commercial Operator 05 Helicopter

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



Scheduled Air Carrier—135 01 Scheduled Passenger

Scheduled Air Carrier—135 02 Scheduled Cargo

Scheduled Air Carrier—135 03 On-Demand—Passenger

Scheduled Air Carrier—135 04 On-Demand—Cargo

Scheduled Air Carrier—135 05 Helicopter

Scheduled Air Carrier—135 98 None

On Demand Air Carrier—135 01 Scheduled Passenger

On Demand Air Carrier—135 02 Scheduled Cargo

On Demand Air Carrier—135 03 On-Demand—Passenger

On Demand Air Carrier—135 04 On-Demand—Cargo

On Demand Air Carrier—135 05 Helicopter

On Demand Air Carrier—135 98 None

Manufacturer 05 Helicopter

Manufacturer 23 Aircraft

Manufacturer 24 Engine

Manufacturer 25 Propeller

Manufacturer 26 Product Parts/Appliance

Certificated School 27 Pilot (Schools)

Certificated School 28 Mechanic (Schools)

Certificated School 29 Flight Engineer (Schools)

Repair Station 23 Aircraft

Repair Station 24 Engine

Repair Station 25 Propeller

Repair Station 26 Product Parts/Appliance Figure 11-4. Voluntary Disclosure Problem Category Codes

Category Code Problem Category Description

100 Personnel

200 Manuals

300 Records/Tapes

400 Training

500 Facilities

600 Conformance

700 Operations

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



800 Maintenance Figure 11-5. Voluntary Disclosure Accident Associated Codes

Code Condition

00 No Accident

01 Accident Occurred-Not Associate

02 Accident Occurred-Associated Figure 11-6. Voluntary Disclosure Problem Codes

Problem Code Problem Description

101 Knowledge

103 Ability/Proficiency

105 Qualifications/Currency

107 Staffing

109 Certificate/Ratings

199 Other/Remarks

201 Content/Information

2010 Drug/Types Of Testing

2020 Drug/Types Of Drugs

203 Currency

2030 Drug/Covered Functions

2040 Drug/Plan Submission

205 Revision/System

2050 Drug/Medical Review Officer

2060 Drug/Employee Assistance Program

207 Distribution

2070 Drug/Laboratory

2080 Drug/Specimen Collection

209 Availability

2090 Drug/Recordkeeping/Reporting

299 Other/Remarks

301 Disposition

303 Procedures

305 Personnel

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



307 Content/Information

309 Currency

311 Availability

313 Aircraft Discrepancy

315 Inspections

317 Major Repair/Alteration

319 Return To Service

399 Other/Remarks

401 Program

403 Curriculum

405 Aids/Devices

407 Testing

409 Records

411 Facility

413 Instructors

499 Other/Remarks

501 Adequacy

503 Environmental

505 Lighting

507 Snow/Ice Control

509 Runways

511 Taxiways

513 Sterile Area

515 Ramp/Gate Area

517 Vehicle/Other Equipment

519 Obstruction

521 Construction

523 Contamination/Foreign Object Damage (FOD)

525 Markings

527 Signs

529 Approach Aids

531 Navigation Aids

599 Other/Remarks

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



601 Crew Complement

603 Procedures

605 Checklist

607 Minimum Equipment List (MEL)/Configuration Deviation List (CDL)

609 Approved Program

611 Airworthiness (AW) Directives

613 Weight & Balance

615 Analysis & Surveillance

617 Regulations

619 Security

621 Operations Specifications

623 Sterile Cockpit

625 Aircraft Limitations

627 Carry-On Bags

629 Cabin Safety

631 631 Directives

633 ATC Clearances

635 Public Safety

637 Passenger Handling

639 Flight/Duty Times

641 Hazardous Material

643 Waivers/Authorizations

699 Other/Remarks

701 Air Traffic Control (ATC)/Clearance

703 Automated Terminal Information Service (ATIS)

705 Supplementary Aviation Weather Reporting Station (SAWRS)/Automated Weather Observing System (AWOS)

707 Standard Instrument Departures (SIDs)/Standard Terminal Automation Replacement System (STARS)

709 Standard Instrument Approach Procedure (SIAP)

711 Procedures

719 Other/Remarks

721 ATC/Clearance

723 Pre-Departure

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



725 Taxi/Takeoff

727 Climb Figure 11-7. Voluntary Disclosure Fix Codes

Fix Code Fix Description 101 Program/Procedures–Technical 102 Program/Procedures–Administrative 103 Program/Procedures–Training 104 Program/Procedures–Automation (software) 205 Equipment/Facilities–Automation (Hardware) 206 Equipment/Facilities–Test Equipment 207 Equipment/Facilities–Training 208 Equipment/Facilities–Aircraft 209 Equipment/Facilities–Ground Equipment 210 Equipment/Facilities–Housing 311 Personnel–Organization 312 Personnel–Action 313 Personnel–Training

Figure 11-8. Voluntary Disclosure Action Codes

01 Administrative Action 14 No Action

Figure 11-9. Self-Disclosure Inspector/Clerical Checklist

This paragraph is applicable only to those regulated entities submitting disclosures via the legacy, paper-based system.

This checklist should remain with the self-disclosure package until it is completed and should then be removed and discarded by the reporting inspector.

_____ 1. Upon receipt of a notification of self-disclosure, complete the “FAA Acknowledgment of Receipt of Certificate Holders Initial Notification of Self-Disclosure” form. Send original to the certificate holder and keep one (1) copy for file.

NOTE: An extension to the 10 calendar-day time limit referenced in the Acknowledgement of Receipt (Figure 11-10) may be granted if requested by the certificate holder. However, in accordance with the current edition of AC 00-58, a detailed description of the comprehensive fix should be provided in writing to the principal inspector within 30 calendar-days.

_____ 2. Determine, to the extent possible, that no FAA investigation of the reported violation is already underway.

_____ 3. Open appropriate administrative action PTRS entry in the computer.

NOTE: Entries in PTRS should not include reference to identifying data, such as name of the regulated entity, an FAA designator for the regulated entity, names of

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



personnel assigned to the operator, registration number of the aircraft, etc., as PTRS data is commonly released under FOIA, while VDRP data is protected from release under FOIA. Reference to the EIR number may be made, as identifying data is not recorded in EIS for cases handled under the VDRP.

_____ 4. If the proposed comprehensive fix and the initial implementation of that fix are deemed acceptable by the principal inspector (or his or her designee), a letter of correction will be sent to the certificate holder.

NOTE: In accordance with the current edition of FAA Order 2150.3 (Chapter 5, Par 3e), any case involving Corrective Action, cannot be closed until the Corrective Action has been completed by the regulated entity and found to be satisfactory by the FAA.

_____ 5. Complete FAA Form 2150-5 in the computer and print out a copy for the file.

_____ 6. Following issuance of the letter of correction and closure of the VDRP investigation, close the PTRS entry referenced in item 3 above.

Figure 11-10. FAA Form 2150-5, Self-Disclosure Worksheet

This paragraph is applicable only to those regulated entities submitting disclosures via the legacy, paper-based system.

REPORT NUMBER ___________ RELATED NUMBER ________________

SELF DISCLOSURE Y SD IDENTITY CODE > _________

6. CERTIFICATE TYPE > ________

EQUIPMENT TYPE > _______ 9. MODEL AIRCRAFT ________________

13. DATE OCCURRED// 14. TIME _______________

15. DATE KNOWN TO FAA//

18. REGULATIONS VIOLATED (primary first)

1. ________ , 2. _________ , 3 _______ , 4 ________

19. TYPE ____________ 20. SUB-TYPE ____________

21. CATEGORY ___________ 23. ACCIDENT ASSOCIATED ___________

DATE FAA ACCEPTED PLAN//(DATE OF LETTER OF CORRECTION)

PROBLEM CODE ________

FIX CODE 1. _______ , 2. ______ , 3. ______, 4. _____

(List primary first)

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



CORRECTIVE ACTION PLAN (1200 Characters maximum)

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________

25. TYPE ACTION > _____ 26. SANCTION > ______

27. DATE >// (Date 2150 is printed)

Figure 11-11. FAA Acknowledgment of Receipt of Certificate Holder’s Initial Notification of Self-Disclosure

This paragraph is applicable only to those regulated entities submitting disclosures via the legacy, paper-based system. Time and date of receipt are recorded by Web-based VDRP system upon submission by the certificate holder. Reply to certificate holder is automated in the Web-based VDRP system upon FAA acceptance in Stage II.

I, ________________________________ of the Kansas City Flight Standards District Office hereby acknowledge receipt of the verbal report stating that a violation of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations may have occurred involving:

___________________________________________________________________________________

The referenced finding was immediately disclosed to me on

(Date) __________________ at (Time local) ______________ by the

Following Company official:

NAME: _____________________________________________

POSITION: _________________________________________

PHONE: ____________________________________________

At that time, the above named company official advised me of the immediate steps taken to cease the conduct that resulted in the apparent violation and stated that an investigation is underway to determine what remedial actions may be necessary to prevent a recurrence of the finding.

In accordance with the current edition of AC 00-58, Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program, this acknowledgment will serve in lieu of a letter of investigation. However, should we discover prior to receipt of your written report, that the apparent violation was already under investigation by the FAA, we will notify you and proceed with that investigation and this self disclosure will be denied. We expect your complete written report of this incident including a detailed description of the proposed comprehensive fix outlining the planned corrective steps within 10 calendar-days (or 30 calendar-days if so approved) of this initial notification.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 57



I have assigned the following inspector to assist in verifying the facts associated with the finding and in preparing the appropriate investigative package:

Name: ______________________________________________

FAA Office: _________________________________________

Phone: _____________________________________________

Principal Inspector: ___________________________________

FAA Office: _________________________________________

Date: _______________________________________________

Signature: ___________________________________________


6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



VOLUME 11 FLIGHT STANDARDS PROGRAMS

CHAPTER 2 VOLUNTARY SAFETY PROGRAMS

Section 1 Aviation Safety Action Program

11-35 PURPOSE. Aviation Safety Action Programs (ASAP) prevent accidents and incidents by encouraging employees of certificate holders to voluntarily report safety issues and events. ASAPs provide for education of appropriate parties and the analysis and correction of safety concerns that are identified in the program. ASAPs are intended to create a nonthreatening environment to encourage the employee to voluntarily report safety issues even though they may involve violation of Title 49 of the United States Code (49 U.S.C.), Subtitle VII, or violation of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). ASAP is based on a safety partnership between the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the certificate holder and may include any third party such as an employee labor organization. These programs are intended to generate safety information that may not otherwise be obtainable.

A. Information obtained from these programs will permit ASAP participants to identify actual or potential risks throughout their operations. Once identified, the parties to an ASAP can implement corrective actions in order to reduce the potential for occurrence of accidents, incidents, and other safety-related events. In order to gain the greatest possible positive benefit from ASAP, it may be necessary for certificate holders to develop programs with compatible data collection, analysis, storage, and retrieval systems. The information and data, which are collected and analyzed, can be used as a measure of aviation system safety.

B. An ASAP provides a vehicle whereby employees of participating air carrier and domestic repair station certificate holders can identify and report safety issues to management and to the FAA for resolution, without fear that the FAA will use reports accepted under the program to take legal enforcement action against them, or that companies will use such information to take disciplinary action. These programs are designed to encourage participation from various employee groups, such as flightcrew members, mechanics, Flight Attendants (F/A), and dispatchers.

NOTE: The FAA may use ASAP reports for legal enforcement purposes where such reports disclose events that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification.

C. The elements of ASAP are set forth in a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the FAA, certificate holder management, and an appropriate third party, such as an employee labor organization or other employee representatives.

11-36 BACKGROUND. The FAA’s safety mission requires it to take action to reduce or eliminate the possibility or recurrence of accidents in air transportation. The FAA and the air transportation industry have sought innovative means for addressing safety problems and identifying potential safety hazards. The FAA, in cooperation with industry, established several demonstration ASAPs in an effort to increase the flow of safety information to both the air carrier and the FAA, and issued Advisory Circular (AC) 120-66, Aviation Safety Action

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Program (ASAP), January 1997. Among these programs were the USAir Altitude Awareness Program, the American Airlines Safety Action Partnership, and the Alaska Airlines Altitude Awareness Program. These programs included incentives to encourage employees of air carriers participating in the programs to disclose information, which may include possible violations of the 14 CFR without fear of punitive enforcement sanctions or company disciplinary action. Events reported under a program that involved an apparent violation of the regulations by the air carriers were handled under the Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP), provided that the elements of the policy were satisfied. In view of the positive safety results from those programs, the FAA issued a revised AC 120-66 in March 2000 (AC 120-66A), which established industry-wide guidelines for participation. The FAA revised AC 120-66 again in November 2002 (AC 120-66B), incorporating the lessons learned from over two dozen programs that have been established. This chapter contains revised guidance to facilitate achievement of ASAP’s safety goals, as well as to encourage wider participation in the program. ASAP includes incentives that encourage participating employees to disclose safety information, which may include possible violations of the 14 CFR.

11-37 KEY TERMS. The following key terms and phrases are defined for the purposes of ASAP to ensure a standard interpretation of the guidance.

A. Administrative Action. Under paragraph 205 of the current edition of FAA Order 2150.3, Compliance and Enforcement Program, administrative action is a means for disposing of violations or alleged violations that do not warrant the use of enforcement sanctions. The two types of administrative action are a warning notice and a letter of correction.

B. Air Carrier. A person who undertakes directly by lease, or other arrangement, to engage in air transportation.

C. ASAP Manager. The person serving as the focal point for program administration, including but not limited to: recording and acknowledging receipt of reports; maintaining the ASAP database; providing information about, and responding to, inquiries concerning the status of ASAP reports; and for the coordination and tracking of event review committee (ERC) corrective action recommendations. The ASAP manager may or may not be the voting representative from company management on the ERC.

D. Certificate Holder. Refers to a person authorized to operate under 14 CFR part 121, or who holds a certificate issued under 14 CFR part 145.

E. Certificate-Holding District Office (CHDO). The Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) or certificate management office (CMO) having overall responsibility for all FAA reporting requirements, technical administration requirements, and regulatory oversight of a certificate holder.

F. Consensus of the Event Review Committee (ERC). Under ASAP, consensus of the ERC means the voluntary agreement of all voting representatives of the ERC to each decision required by the MOU.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



G. Corrective Action. For the purposes of ASAP, corrective action refers to any safety-related action or recommendation determined necessary by the ERC based upon a review and analysis of the reports submitted under an ASAP. Corrective action may involve joint or individual action by the parties to the ASAP MOU.

H. Covered Under the Program/Qualified for Inclusion/Included in ASAP. For the purposes of ASAP, these terms all have the same meaning. They mean that the enforcement-related incentives and other provisions of the ASAP apply to the employee who submitted the report.

I. Enforcement Decision Tool (EDT). The EDT is utilized to determine the safety risk posed by an event as a function of the type of conduct involved. The EDT process uses systems safety risk management (RM) principles. (See FAA Order 2150.3, appendix F.) For non-sole source reports accepted by the ASAP ERC and determined by the ERC to be supported with sufficient evidence of a violation, the ERC may use the EDT along with associated guidance to determine the type of corrective action to take under ASAP (administrative or informal action).

J. Enforcement-Related Incentive. Refers to an assurance that lesser enforcement action will be used to address certain alleged violations of the regulations to encourage participation by the employees of a certificate holder.

K. ERC. A group comprised of a representative from each party to an ASAP MOU. The group reviews and analyzes reports submitted under an ASAP. The ERC may share and exchange information and identify actual or potential safety problems from the information contained in the reports. The ERC is usually comprised of a management representative from the certificate holder, a representative from the employee labor association (if applicable), and a specifically qualified FAA inspector from the CHDO. Where an employee group is not represented by a labor association, the ERC may include a voting representative chosen from the employee group, even though in that case the labor group is not a signatory to the ASAP MOU.

L. Informal Action. Oral or written counseling of individuals.

M. Intentional Falsification. For the purposes of ASAP, intentional falsification means a false statement in reference to a material fact made with knowledge of its falsity. It does not include mistakes or inadvertent omissions or errors.

N. Major Domestic Repair Station. Refers to a part 145 certificated repair station located in the United States that is certificated to perform airframe and/or engine maintenance for certificate holders.

O. Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). Refers to the written agreement between two or more parties setting forth the purposes for, and terms of, an ASAP.

P. Party/Parties. Refers to the certificate holder, the FAA, and any other person or entity (e.g., labor union or other industry or government entity) that is a signatory to the MOU.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Q. Person. A person refers to an individual, firm, partnership, corporation, company, association, joint stock association, or government entity. It includes a trustee, receiver, assignee, or similar representative of any of them.

R. Runway Incursion Information Evaluation Program (RIIEP). An FAA-sponsored initiative for gathering critical safety data not otherwise available concerning the root causes of runway incursions and surface incidents. The primary means of gathering the data is through in-depth interviews of pilots and maintenance technicians involved in these incidents, as well as completion of a RIIEP questionnaire. ASAP participants are encouraged to incorporate RIIEP as a voluntary part of their ASAP process by providing RIIEP awareness information to their pilot and maintenance technician groups. ERC members should provide the RIIEP questionnaire to a pilot or maintenance technician who submits an ASAP report involving a runway incursion or surface incident, and request voluntary completion of the questionnaire by that employee. In the case of a sole source report, the employee should be instructed not to enter the name identification information requested in section 1 of the RIIEP questionnaire.

S. Safety-Related Report. Refers to a written account of an event that involves an operational or maintenance issue related to aviation safety reported through an ASAP. The reporting venue is specified in the ASAP MOU.

T. Streamlined No Action and Administrative Action Process (SNAAP). The SNAAP provides an automated means for issuance of a warning notice, letter of correction, or FAA letter of no action. The automated process does not replace the more formal process for administrative action described in Order 2150.3. The SNAAP is not to be used for remedial training, voluntary disclosures, or cases where further corrective action must be taken. It should not be used when an inspector determines that inclusion in an administrative action letter of summary of facts text is appropriate, since SNAAP does not allow for entry of such text. It should not be used for ASAP administrative action letters when, based on the consensus of the ASAP ERC, inclusion of summary of facts information in the letter is determined to be appropriate. The SNAAP is highly recommended for letters of no action and should replace the manual preparation of such letters.

U. Sole Source Report. For the purposes of FAA action under ASAP, the ERC shall consider a report to be sole source when all evidence of the event available to the FAA outside of ASAP is discovered by or otherwise predicated on the ASAP report. It is possible to have more than one sole source report for the same event.

V. Sufficient Evidence. Sufficient evidence means evidence gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise predicated on, the individual’s safety-related report. There must be sufficient evidence to prove the violation, other than the individual’s safety-related report. In order to be considered sufficient evidence under ASAP, the ERC must determine through consensus that the evidence (other than the individual’s safety-related report) would likely have resulted in the processing of an FAA enforcement action had the individual’s safety-related report not been accepted under ASAP. Accepted ASAP reports for which there is sufficient evidence must be closed with FAA administrative action unless the ERC has elected through unanimous consensus to employ the EDT for an accepted non-sole source report and determines through the EDT process that informal action is appropriate, as follows: If sufficient

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



evidence supports a violation for an accepted non-sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3). This matrix may be used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non-sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action, if appropriate).

W. Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP). A policy under which regulated entities may voluntarily report apparent violations of the regulations and develop corrective action satisfactory to the FAA to preclude their recurrence. Certificate holders that satisfy the elements of the VDRP receive a letter of correction in lieu of civil penalty action. Voluntary disclosure reporting procedures are outlined in the current edition of AC 00-58, Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program.

11-38 APPLICABILITY. ASAPs are intended for air carriers that operate under part 121 and major domestic repair stations certificated under part 145. Other certificated entities may also apply, and will be evaluated for acceptance on a case-by-case basis to determine whether adequate resources are available to maintain program quality control (QC). ASAPs are entered into voluntarily by the FAA, a certificate holder, and if appropriate, other parties.

11-39 DEVELOPMENT. Certificate holders may develop programs and submit them to the FAA for review and acceptance in accordance with the guidance provided. Ordinarily, programs are developed for specific employee groups, such as flightcrew members, F/As, mechanics, or dispatchers. The FAA will determine whether a program is accepted. The FAA may suggest, but may not require, that a certificate holder develop an ASAP to resolve an identified safety problem.

A. Development and Implementation of an ASAP.

1) The certificate holder, employee group, and the FAA must first develop a relationship that will promote the ASAP concept. The reluctance of one or more parties to commit to the program is detrimental to the process.

2) The process for report review must be outlined in detail.

3) Safety data collection, analysis, and retention processes must be developed and agreed upon.

4) Event investigation tasks must be assigned.

5) Before implementing the ASAP, a comprehensive company employee and management education program must be undertaken.

6) The ASAP process may require cultural change for all parties involved.

7) Continuity of ERC representation personnel during the early stages of program implementation will promote the desired partnership relationship between program members.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



B. Demonstration Programs. Certificate holders initially must develop a demonstration program for each employee group sought to be covered by an ASAP. The objective of a demonstration program is to measure its effectiveness and ensure that it meets the safety objectives of the specific ASAP.

1) The initial demonstration program should have a duration of 18 months. However, the FAA may authorize the extension of a demonstration program, when the FAA determines that a longer period of time is needed to achieve the desired goals and benefits articulated in the program.

2) At the conclusion of the initial demonstration program, all parties will review the program. Demonstration programs that require modification may be extended for an additional time, ordinarily not to exceed 12 months, to effectively measure any change(s) made to the original program to address a deficiency identified by any of the parties to the MOU.

3) The ERC is responsible for preparing a final report on the demonstration program at its conclusion. If an application for a continuing program is anticipated, the ERC will prepare and submit a report with the certificate holder’s application to the FAA 60 days in advance of the termination date of the demonstration program. All demonstration programs will be subject to an FAA program review prior to transition from a demonstration to a continuing ASAP.

C. Continuing Programs. After a demonstration program is reviewed and determined to be successful by the parties to the agreement, it may be accepted as a continuing program, subject to review and renewal every 2 years by the FAA.

D. Withdrawal. Regardless of the duration of a program, any party to the ASAP MOU may withdraw from the program at any time for any reason.

11-40 RESOURCES. An ASAP can result in a significant commitment of both human and fiscal resources by the parties to the program. During the development of a program, it is important that each party is willing to commit the necessary personnel, time, and monetary resources to support the program. Programs for which adequate resources from all parties are not available, including the FAA in particular, should not be recommended by a CHDO for acceptance.

11-41 ASAP CONCEPTS. The specific provisions of an ASAP are described by an MOU, which is primarily developed by the certificate holder, FAA CHDO, and in some cases, a third party such as an employee labor union. A sample MOU is provided in the current edition of AC 120-66. An automated MOU template is also available through the FAA Web page at http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/asap/. The guidance material contained in this section and in AC 120-66 provides structure and guidance in preparing a program acceptable for FAA participation. Several workable concepts have emerged from the ASAP demonstration programs. These concepts should be addressed in the MOU, and are explained below:

A. ERC. The determination of whether reports qualify for inclusion in the ASAP will be made by a consensus (unanimous agreement) of the ERC.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



1) The ERC is composed of one designated representative and an alternate each from the FAA, the certificate holder, and a third party, if applicable (e.g., a representative from the employee’s union or a person chosen from the employee group to serve as an employee voting representative on the ERC).

2) The ERC will:

• Review and analyze reports submitted under the ASAP. • Determine whether such reports qualify for inclusion, including, if

appropriate, interviewing or requesting clarification from the reporter. The ERC may elect to interview an employee prior to an acceptance decision.

• Identify actual or potential problems from the information contained in the reports.

• Propose solutions for those problems. • Conduct an annual review of the ASAP database to determine whether

corrective actions have been effective in preventing or reducing the recurrence of targeted safety-related events.

3) For official meeting purposes, a quorum exists when all designated ERC representatives or their alternates are present. Some reported events may involve matters that are complex or sensitive, or that require the expertise of other FAA or industry persons. The ERC representatives are encouraged to consult with such persons as needed during the ASAP process.

B. FAA ERC Member Responsibilities.

1) Determine if the FAA has received independent evidence on a reported event (e.g., preliminary pilot deviation (PD) report, Administrator’s Daily Alert Bulletin, etc.).

2) Assist in determination of a possible 14 CFR regulatory violation.

3) Assure the ERC investigation ascertains all pertinent facts and circumstances prior to acceptance/exclusion, including, where appropriate, ERC interview of the employee(s) prior to acceptance of a report.

4) Assist in determining event resolution in the best interest of safety.

5) Recommend corrective action whenever it is appropriate.

6) Follow through on corrective action to ascertain satisfactory completion.

NOTE: Some reported events may involve matters that are complex or sensitive, or that require the expertise of other FAA or industry persons. FAA ERC representatives are encouraged to consult with such persons as may be needed during the ASAP process to better understand the nature of an event and its appropriate disposition. FAA management should be advised when potentially controversial events have been submitted for consideration under ASAP. Providing briefings and information to other FAA personnel concerning the

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



nature of the safety event and associated results of ERC/FAA investigation is appropriate, provided that the identity of the reporting employee is not disclosed outside of the ERC. It is appropriate for the FAA member of an ASAP ERC to share information on safety issues identified through ASAP with other FAA personnel.

C. Consensus of the ERC. The success of ASAP is built on the ability of the ERC to achieve consensus on each event that is reported. Consensus of the ERC means the voluntary agreement of all representatives of the ERC.

1) The ERC must reach a consensus when deciding whether a report is accepted into the program and when deciding on corrective action recommendations arising from the event, including whether FAA administrative action is appropriate. It does not require that all members believe that a particular decision or recommendation is the most desirable solution, but that the result falls within each member’s range of acceptable solutions for that event in the best interest of safety. In order for this concept to work effectively, the ERC representative must be empowered to make decisions within the context of the ERC discussions on a given report. Senior management and supervisors should ordinarily not preempt their respective ERC representative’s decisionmaking discretion for an event reported under the ASAP. If the parties to an ASAP MOU do not permit their respective ERC representative to exercise this discretion, the capacity of the ERC to achieve consensus will be undermined, and the program will ultimately fail.

2) Recognizing that the FAA holds statutory authority to enforce the necessary rules and regulations, it is understood that the FAA retains all legal rights and responsibilities contained in 49 U.S.C. and FAA Order 2150.3. In the event there is not a consensus of the ERC on decisions concerning a report involving an apparent violation(s), a qualification issue, or medical certification or qualification issue, the FAA ERC representative will decide how the report should be handled (e.g., acceptance or exclusion of the report, or corrective action for an event accepted under ASAP). The FAA will not use the content of an ASAP report in any subsequent enforcement action except as described in paragraph 11-43B1).

3) When the ERC becomes aware of an issue involving the medical qualification or medical certification of an airman, the ERC must immediately advise the appropriate Regional Flight Surgeon (RFS) about the issue. The ERC will work with the RFS and the certificate holder’s medical department or medical consultants to resolve any medical certification or medical qualification issues or concerns revealed in an ASAP report, or through the processing of that report. The FAA ERC member must follow the direction(s) of the RFS with respect to any medical certification or qualification issue(s) revealed in an ASAP report.

4) The program may be terminated at any time by any party for any reason.

5) Report De-identification. ASAP provides for confidentiality of reporter identity outside of the ERC, but not reporter anonymity within the ERC itself. The ASAP manager may elect to remove the employee’s name (but should not remove any other information, such as date of the event, tail number, etc.) for initial ERC report review. The purpose of removing the reporter’s name is simply to reduce the likelihood that personal knowledge of the individual may

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



bias the initial evaluation of the event. FAA ERC members need the specifics (other than employee identity) concerning the event (date, flight number, location, etc.) in order to efficiently accomplish their responsibility to determine whether the FAA has received independent information (i.e., information such as a preliminary PD report, outside of the ASAP) concerning the event.

6) Safety Data Collection, Analysis, and Retention Processes. Through the collection and aggregation of de-identified ASAP data, the parties to the MOU can identify and analyze trends and target resources to reduce risks. Data are gathered from the reports and used to identify trends. Corrective actions are devised to counter adverse trends. Data are again gathered to determine the effectiveness of any corrective actions undertaken. If needed, new or additional corrective actions are devised and implemented. Data are used to evaluate the effectiveness of these new actions. This process continues until the actions are deemed successful, and then data are used to monitor long-term success and ensure there is no recurrence.

7) ASAP Manager. The person, designated by the air carrier, serving as the focal point for information about, and inquiries concerning the status of, ASAP reports, and for the coordination and tracking of ERC recommendations. Duties include:

a) Receives, records, tracks, analyzes and responds to ASAP reports.

b) Maintaining the ASAP database and facilitating ERC member access, as needed.

c) Preparing meeting agenda.

d) Tracking corrective action(s).

e) Recording repeat instances of noncompliance with the 14 CFR.

f) Providing employee feedback.

8) ASAP Database. Individual program participants may develop data acquisition, event categorization, and risk analysis schemes that work best for them. However, FAA representatives should be cognizant of FAA-sponsored development and implementation of a voluntary national information sharing venue for ASAP, and should convey that information to their ERC counterparts, as well as to the ASAP manager. In order to enable voluntary sharing of ASAP information from multiple program participants, a common taxonomy (classification scheme) tailored to the type of events and corrective actions appropriate for a particular employee group must be created. Although not required to do so, operators interested in participating in safety information sharing at a national level may want to consider adopting part or all of the endorsed national classification scheme for a given employee group, in order to facilitate their participation in that initiative. In any case, regardless of a participant’s internal classification scheme for ASAP events, participants who wish to participate in national information sharing will need to map their events to the agreed upon national scheme for a given employee group in order to participate in that information sharing effort. Information concerning

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



the national information sharing initiative for ASAP is available from the manager, Voluntary Safety Programs Branch, AFS-230.

a) Suggested items for inclusion in a report tracking/categorization scheme include:

• Report number (certificate holder defined), • Event category (certificate holder defined), • Report type (sole or non-sole source), • Referred to another line of business (when, what department, followup), • Possible 14 CFR violation (yes/no), • Sufficient evidence (yes/no), • Risk category (certificate holder defined), • Air Transportation Oversight System (ATOS) element (if appropriate), • Corrective action recommendation (description), • FAA action, if any (letter of correction, warning notice, or letter of no

action), • Written counseling, or oral counseling action accomplished, if any, • Completion date, followup required (yes/no), • Corrective action effective (yes/no), • Time to completion, and • Person responsible for additional information (investigation/interview,

etc.).

b) Database information retention requirements: Safety-related information should be retained for a period of time sufficient for the ERC to determine whether its recommended corrective actions have been effective, but not less than for 2 years.

D. Sole Source Reporting. Often, the only information available concerning a safety event will be the individual’s ASAP report. Under ASAP this is referred to as a “sole source” report. Therefore, for the purposes of FAA action under ASAP, an individual’s ASAP report is considered sole source when all evidence of the individual reporter’s involvement in the event available to the FAA is discovered by or otherwise predicated on the report. The intent of the ASAP is to correct safety concerns that are identified by the program. Safety risks/threats identified in sole source reports must be addressed by the ASAP ERC. Corrective action for the individual and/or the air carrier should be recommended, if appropriate.

1) The ERC will close the sole source report and provide feedback to the reporting employee in a form and manner acceptable to the ERC.

2) It is possible to have more than one sole source report for the same event.

3) After the investigation is complete and the only evidence of the individual reporter’s involvement in the event available to the FAA is obtained from the reporting individual, or is caused by or predicated upon that individual’s accepted sole source report, no additional FAA enforcement action or correspondence outside of the ERC is required. Such

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



reports are closed with an ERC response to the submitter, and corrective action under ASAP, if the ERC determines that such corrective action is appropriate.

4) Accepted sole source reports shall not be closed with an FAA letter of no action, letter of correction, or a warning notice.

E. Sufficient Evidence. Sufficient evidence means evidence gathered by an investigation not caused by, or otherwise predicated on, the individual’s safety-related report. (See paragraph 11-37V for the complete definition.) Reports that are accepted into the program and supported by sufficient evidence are referred to as non-sole source reports.

1) For accepted non-sole source reports, the inspector should only open an Enforcement Investigative Report (EIR) at such time during the investigation that it is determined that sufficient evidence of an apparent violation exists, as defined in paragraph 11-37V.

a) For non-sole source reports that are accepted under an ASAP, neither administrative action nor informal action will be taken against an individual for an apparent violation unless there is sufficient evidence of the violation, other than the individual’s safety-related report.

NOTE: If sufficient evidence supports a violation for a non-sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3). This matrix may be used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non-sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action if appropriate).

b) For non-sole source reports that are accepted under an ASAP, an FAA warning notice, letter of correction, or informal action (see note above), in addition to an appropriate ERC reply to the reporter, would be used to close an ERC investigation when the evidence provided for the accepted non-sole source report is sufficient to prove a violation.

c) For non-sole source reports that are accepted under ASAP, an FAA letter of no action, in addition to an appropriate ERC reply to the reporter, would be used to close an ERC investigation when there is not sufficient evidence, as defined in paragraph 11-37V.

2) Under ASAP, except for reports that appear to involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification, the content of any individual’s ASAP report will not be used as evidence by FAA for any purpose in an FAA enforcement action.

3) Corrective action refers to any safety-related action determined necessary by the ERC based upon a review and analysis of the reports submitted under an ASAP. Corrective action may involve joint or individual action by the parties to the ASAP MOU.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



a) Corrective action for employees is any safety-related action determined necessary by the ERC based upon a review, investigation, and analysis of the event(s).

b) Corrective action for certificate holder systemic issues is any safety-related recommendation determined necessary by the ERC, based upon a review, investigation, and analysis of the event(s).

1. The ASAP manager should convey such ERC recommendations to the appropriate company department head for consideration.

2. The certificate holder may implement (as recommended), modify, or decline to implement.

3. The ASAP manager must record, track, and follow up company response and action.

4. Any recommended corrective action that is not implemented will be recorded along with the stated reason why it was not implemented.

5. Repeated occurrences of systemic issues should be brought to the attention of company and FAA management.

4) The FAA ERC representative:

a) Should recommend corrective action whenever it is appropriate given the nature of the event, regardless of whether it is sole source or non-sole source.

b) Is responsible for tracking and followup for ERC-recommended corrective action to assure that it has been accomplished to the satisfaction of the FAA.

c) May elect to observe accomplishment of corrective action to ascertain acceptability.

F. Enforcement-Related Incentive. An enforcement-related incentive is the minimum FAA enforcement action that is needed to achieve the desired goal(s) and results of the program when alleged infractions of the 14 CFR are involved.

NOTE: If sufficient evidence supports a violation for a non-sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3). This matrix is used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non-sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action if appropriate).

1) Apparent violations of the regulations by employees of a certificate holder disclosed through safety-related reports will be addressed with administrative action or informal action if (see note above):

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



a) Sufficient evidence exists; and

b) The apparent violation(s) is inadvertent and does not involve an intentional disregard for safety.

2) Violations that are not inadvertent or that involve an intentional disregard for safety are specifically excluded from the program and any enforcement-related incentive will not apply to these violations.

NOTE: ASAP ERC members are encouraged to consider the conduct definitions and associated attributes found in Order 2150.3 when determining whether a report should or should not be accepted under the ASAP.

3) Reports that appear to involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification are automatically excluded from the program and are turned over to the proper authorities for further investigation.

4) Conduct that raises a question of a lack of airman competence or qualification, medical certification, or other employee competence/qualification issues may be addressed by the ASAP; however, the employee must successfully complete all of the recommendations in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC to be covered by the program and the ERC must comply with paragraph 11-41C3).

5) Reports initially accepted under an ASAP will be excluded from the program if the employee fails to complete the recommended corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC. Failure of a certificate holder to follow through with corrective action acceptable to all members of the ERC to resolve any safety deficiencies will ordinarily result in termination of the program. In addition, failure of any individual to complete corrective action for an apparent violation, a competence or qualification issue, or a medical certification issue in a manner acceptable to all members of the ERC may result in the reopening of the case and referral of the matter for appropriate action.

11-42 GUIDELINES FOR ACCEPTANCE AND EXCLUSION OF REPORTS UNDER AN ASAP. Participation in the ASAP is limited to certificate holder employees and to events occurring while acting in that capacity. Each employee participating in the ASAP must individually submit a report in order to receive the enforcement-related incentives and benefits of the ASAP policy. However, in cases where an event may be reported by more than one person, each individual who seeks coverage under ASAP must either sign the same report or submit separate signed reports. The ERC should not complete its deliberations on acceptance/exclusion of a report, classification as sole source/non-sole source, etc., until the FAA member informs the ERC that he or she has completed the investigation of the event.

A. Criteria for Acceptance. The following criteria must be met in order for a report involving a possible violation to be covered under ASAP:

1) The employee must submit a report in a timely manner. In order to be considered timely, a report must be submitted in accordance with either of the following two criteria:

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



a) Within a time period following the event that is defined in the MOU, such as within 24 hours of the end of the duty day in which the event occurred. If the ERC reaches consensus that this criterion has been met, a report would not be rejected for timeliness, even if the FAA was already aware of the possible noncompliance with the regulations, and may have brought it to the attention of the employee;

b) Within 24 hours of having become aware of possible noncompliance with the 14 CFR in accordance with the following criteria:

1. If a report is submitted later than the time period after the occurrence of an event stated in the MOU, the ERC will review all available information to determine whether the employee knew or should have known about the possible noncompliance with the 14 CFR within that time period.

2. If the employee did not know or could not have known about the apparent noncompliance with the 14 CFR within that time period, then the report would be included in the ASAP, provided the report is submitted within 24 hours of having become aware of possible noncompliance with the 14 CFR, and provided all other ASAP acceptance criteria have been met.

3. If the employee knew or should have known about the apparent noncompliance with the 14 CFR, then the report will not be included in ASAP, unless the MOU states that a sole source report that meets all other ASAP acceptance criteria except timeliness will be accepted.

2) The alleged regulatory violation must be inadvertent and must not appear to involve an intentional disregard for safety. As stated in Order 2150.3, inadvertent apparent violations are generally the result of simple failure to exercise reasonable care.


3) The reported event must not appear to involve criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification.

4) Sole source reports that meet all of the MOU acceptance criteria except timely submission will be accepted under an ASAP, provided that the ASAP MOU includes a specific provision to that effect.

5) Reports involving the same or similar possible noncompliance with the 14 CFR that were previously addressed with administrative action under the ASAP will be accepted into the program, provided they otherwise satisfy the acceptance criteria under paragraph 11-42A. The ERC will consider on a case-by-case basis the corrective action that is appropriate for such reports.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



B. Nonreporting Employees. Nonreporting employees are employees of the certificate holder that have been identified in an ASAP report as possibly having been involved in an alleged violation and have neither signed that report nor submitted a separate report. For the purposes of the ASAP, there are two types of nonreporting employees—those employees of the group covered by an ASAP MOU and those employees that are not covered by an ASAP MOU.

1) If an ASAP report identifies another covered employee of the certificate holder in a possible violation, and that employee has neither signed that report nor submitted a separate report, the ERC will determine on a case-by-case basis whether that employee knew or reasonably should have known about the possible violation. If the ERC determines that the employee did not know or could not have known about the apparent violation(s), and the original report otherwise qualifies for inclusion under the ASAP, the ERC will offer the nonreporting employee the opportunity to submit his or her own ASAP report.

a) If the nonreporting employee submits his or her own report within 24 hours of notification from the ERC, that report will be afforded the same consideration under the ASAP as that accorded the report from the original reporting employee, provided all other ASAP acceptance criteria are met.

b) If the nonreporting employee fails to submit his or her own report within 24 hours of notification by the ERC, the possible violation by that employee will be referred to an appropriate office within the FAA for additional investigation and reexamination and/or enforcement action, as appropriate, and for referral to law enforcement authorities, if warranted.

2) If an ASAP report identifies another employee of the certificate holder who is not covered under an ASAP MOU, and the report indicates that employee may have been involved in a possible violation, the ERC will determine on a case-by-case basis whether it would be appropriate to offer that employee the opportunity to submit an ASAP report. If the ERC determines that it is appropriate, the ERC will provide that employee with information about ASAP and invite the employee to submit an ASAP report.

a) If the employee submits an ASAP report within 24 hours of notification by the ERC, that report will be covered under an ASAP.

b) If the employee fails to submit an ASAP report within 24 hours of notification by the ERC, the possible violation by that employee will be referred to an appropriate office within the FAA for additional investigation and reexamination and/or enforcement action, as appropriate, and for referral to law enforcement agencies, if warranted.

C. Excluding Reports from ASAP. The following types of reports are excluded under an ASAP:

1) Reports involving an apparent violation that is not inadvertent or that appears to involve an intentional disregard for safety. For example, a pilot misreading an item on a checklist would ordinarily be considered inadvertent. Failure to use the checklist, however, would not be considered inadvertent.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0




2) Reports that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification.

3) Untimely reports excluded under paragraph 11-42A1) or reports where a consensus on acceptance under paragraph 11-42 is not reached by the ERC.

4) Reports of events that occurred when not acting as an employee of the certificate holder.

5) Reports initially included in an ASAP will be excluded from the program if the employee fails to complete the recommended corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC. In those cases, failure of any individual to complete corrective action for an apparent violation, a competence or qualification issue, or medical certification or qualification issue in a manner acceptable to all members of the ERC may result in the reopening of the case and referral of the matter for appropriate action. Failure of a certificate holder to follow through with corrective action acceptable to all members of the ERC to resolve any safety deficiencies will ordinarily result in termination of the program.

11-43 ENFORCEMENT POLICY. The content of the ASAP report will not be used to initiate or support any company disciplinary action, or as evidence for any purpose in an FAA enforcement action, except as provided in paragraph 11-43B1). The following enforcement policy shall apply to reports submitted under ASAP:

A. Reports Accepted Under ASAP. An individual’s report that is accepted into ASAP will be addressed using the following enforcement policy:

1) Those non-sole source reports included in ASAP with sufficient evidence (see paragraph 11-37V for the definition of sufficient evidence) to support a violation of 14 CFR will be closed with administrative action or informal action (see note). Those non-sole source reports without sufficient evidence to support a violation of the 14 CFR will be closed with an FAA letter of no action.

NOTE: If sufficient evidence supports a violation for a non-sole source report, the ERC may employ the EDT—Individual matrix and associated guidance (see Order 2150.3). This matrix may be used to determine, through ERC consensus under the ASAP process, whether the accepted non-sole source ASAP report should be closed with administrative or informal action (and corrective action, if appropriate).

NOTE: Important: If the SNAAP is used, source code 44 must be entered on the SNAAP job aid. If it is not used, code 44 must be entered on the FAA Form 2150-5, Enforcement Investigation Report, for those non-sole source reports included in ASAP supported by sufficient evidence and closed with

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



administrative action. Code 44 signifies that the information is protected from release under 14 CFR part 193.

2) Those sole source reports that are included in ASAP will be closed with appropriate corrective action and an ERC response to the submitter (no FAA action).

3) Those reports included in ASAP that demonstrate a lack of qualification or competence, or that raise a question of a lack of qualification or competence, will be addressed with appropriate corrective action recommended by the ERC, provided the employee completes the corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC.

B. Reports Excluded from ASAP. Reported events that are excluded from ASAP will be referred to the FAA for possible enforcement action and/or reexamination under 49 U.S.C., Subtitle VII, and as prescribed in FAA Order 2150.3.

1) Reports of events that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification will be referred to an appropriate FAA office for further handling. The FAA may use such reports for any enforcement purposes, and will refer such reports to law enforcement agencies, if appropriate. If upon completion of subsequent investigation it is determined that the event did not involve any of the aforementioned activities, then the report will be referred back to the ERC for a determination of acceptability under ASAP. Such reports will be accepted under ASAP provided they otherwise meet the acceptance criteria contained in paragraph 11-42A.

2) Neither the written ASAP report nor the content of the written ASAP report will be used to initiate or support company discipline or as evidence for any purpose in an FAA enforcement action except as provided for in paragraph 11-43B1). The FAA may conduct an independent investigation of an event disclosed in a report.

C. Reopening Reports Based on New Evidence. All safety-related reports should be fully evaluated and, to the extent appropriate, investigated by the FAA. The ERC should not accept or close a report until all member investigations concerning the event are completed, including the determination of whether independent information on the event (i.e., information not obtained from, or predicated upon, the ASAP report) is known to the FAA. A closed ASAP case, including any related EIR, involving a violation addressed with administrative action, informal action, or for which no action has been taken, may be reopened and appropriate enforcement action taken if evidence is later discovered that establishes that the violation should have been excluded from the program.

D. Violations of Certificate Holders. Apparent violations of certificate holders disclosed through a safety-related report under an ASAP may be handled under the VDRP, provided the certificate holder voluntarily reports the apparent violations to the FAA and the other elements of that policy are met. (See AC 00-58 and FAA Order 2150.3.) The FAA shall use the knowledge of the event to conduct such independent investigation of the operator’s apparent violation(s) as is deemed appropriate, including opening an EIR and, where the FAA has accepted the voluntary disclosure of a violation by the regulated entity, the FAA shall close the event with an FAA letter of correction (administrative action).

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



1) Special provisions exist for apparent violations by certificate holders when a voluntary disclosure is made based on information in an ASAP report. If the FAA has learned of an apparent violation by a certificate holder from an ASAP report, a voluntary disclosure can still be accepted by the FAA, even though the FAA has already learned of the violation from the ASAP.

2) In such cases, the FAA may, at its sole discretion, accept the corrective action recommended by an ASAP ERC for an accepted ASAP report as the comprehensive fix for the voluntary disclosure. This is acceptable when the following conditions all apply (even when an apparent employee qualification or competency issue is involved):

a) The FAA determines that the violation is due entirely to the actions of the employee(s) and not to a systematic or procedural deficiency of the company; and

b) The employee completes the corrective action recommended by the ASAP ERC to the satisfaction of the FAA.

E. Enforcement Investigation Coordination. The CHDO is the focal point of all enforcement-related investigations resulting from events reported through the ASAP.

1) If an event occurs within the jurisdiction of a FSDO other than the CHDO of the certificate holder involved, the FSDO will contact the CHDO of the certificate holder to coordinate appropriate action. The FSDO should delay opening an EIR until establishing contact with the appropriate CHDO. The FSDO should determine whether the certificate holder has an ASAP for the applicable employee group by accessing the Flight Standards Service (AFS) ASAP Web page at http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/asap/media/asap_participants.pdf.

2) The CHDO, upon learning of an ASAP event that may involve a violation of the 14 CFR, will contact the investigating FSDO that has jurisdiction over the geographical area where the event occurred. If the alleged violator has submitted an ASAP report that has been accepted into the certificate holder’s ASAP, that FSDO shall transfer the investigation, including any open EIR, to the CHDO for further investigation and disposition. If the ASAP report was not accepted into the program, the investigation and EIR remain at the FSDO where the ASAP-reported event occurred unless the Regional headquarters (HQ) agrees to transfer the case in accordance with Order 2150.3, chapter 6, paragraph 8b.

NOTE: Other related reports, such as an incident report or preliminary PD report, must be completed in accordance with current guidance materials regarding such reports. These reports should normally be completed by the FAA office having jurisdiction over the event. However, the CHDO may request the transfer of an incident report, preliminary PD report, or other report associated with an event reported under ASAP. If the CHDO requests transfer of a report, the CHDO must ensure that AFS responsibilities with respect to that report are completed in a timely manner.

11-44 MOU. The elements of an ASAP are set forth in an MOU between the FAA, certificate holder management, and an appropriate third party, such as an employee labor organization or

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



their representatives. A program will be implemented in accordance with the provisions of its MOU. Each MOU will be based on the parties’ different needs and purposes for an ASAP. Required elements of an MOU are identified in the ASAP MOU Checklist job aid (see Figure 11-11, Aviation Safety Action Program Checklist).

A. Parties to the MOU. For the purpose, the term “party/parties” refers to the certificate holder, the FAA, and any other person or entity that is a signatory to the MOU and would be a major contributor to the success of the respective ASAP. This could include labor unions or other industry or government entities. It should be noted that the FAA only regulates certificate holders and other persons subject to the 14 CFR. However, all signatories are expected to conform to the provisions of the MOU.

B. Development Theme. The MOU should be written with the theme of open communication and trust between the parties to the agreement.

C. MOU Elements. Each MOU will be based on the parties’ different needs and purposes for an ASAP. The MOU shall set forth the elements of the ASAP.

1) An automated AFS ASAP MOU template is available to download at http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/asap/memo_generator/. While use of this template is not mandatory, it is recommended for use by certificate holders in developing their ASAP MOU. Benefits of using this template include expedited review and acceptance processes of the MOU.

2) Certificate holders may develop a proposed ASAP MOU that does not make use of the template referenced in the preceding paragraph. In these cases, the checklist provided (see Figure 11-11) shall be used by the FAA when the MOU is being reviewed. Certificate holders should use this checklist during development of their MOU to verify that all of the required content is present. This checklist provides the minimum elements necessary for an ASAP MOU to be accepted by the FAA. The checklist should be completed in its entirety and forwarded with the MOU for processing. The CHDO should verify accurate completion of the checklist by the certificate holder prior to forwarding the MOU for review at the respective regional FAA HQ and AFS-230.

D. MOU Signatories. The MOU must be signed by an authorized representative of each party. The MOU will be signed by the CHDO office manager on behalf of the FAA following receipt of a letter of authorization (LOA) from the Office of the Director, AFS-1.

11-45 ASAP PROGRAM ACCEPTANCE, EXTENSION, RENEWAL, AND AMENDMENT PROCEDURES. When a certificate holder submits an MOU, assigned inspectors should review the key terms and concepts in AC 120-66 and this section. The checklist job aid (Figure 11-11) should then be completed, if applicable, to ensure that the MOU complies with FAA policy.

A. Initial Review by the CHDO. The certificate holder should initially develop and present the program to the CHDO for review.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



1) The CHDO and the certificate holder will review it to ensure that it satisfies the guidance in AC 120-66 and this section. Prior to acceptance, the program should be reviewed to ensure that sufficient FAA and company resources are available to administer the program effectively. Program proposals that require agency resources exceeding available levels should not be recommended by the CHDO for acceptance.

2) When the CHDO is satisfied that the program is acceptable under the guidance of ASAP, the CHDO manager forwards an electronic copy of the proposed MOU, and the CHDO’s recommendation for acceptance, to the respective Flight Standards division Regional Office (RO) and to the ASAP program office, AFS-230. If the proposed MOU does not employ the ASAP MOU AFS automated template referenced in paragraph 11-45F, a completed ASAP checklist (Figure 11-11) shall accompany the proposed MOU for processing.

NOTE: For the purposes of review by the Flight Standards division RO and FAA HQ, AFS-230, a signed copy of the MOU is not required. The MOU may be signed by the respective parties following receipt by the FAA CHDO manager authorized by AFS-1 to sign the MOU on behalf of the FAA.

a) The ASAP program office shall review and, if required, forward a copy of the MOU to the Office of the Chief Counsel, Enforcement Division, AGC-300, for appropriate legal review. MOUs that utilize the template do not require AGC review.

b) All programs, except for renewals of continuing programs, shall receive authorization on final acceptance from AFS-1. AFS-1 will indicate authorization for acceptance of the MOU by FAA memorandum to the CHDO manager through the regional division manager. AFS-230 will be responsible for preparing the memorandum for AFS-1’s signature and submitting it with the ASAP package to AFS-1.

c) Following authorization by AFS-1, the CHDO manager shall sign the MOU on behalf of the FAA. The certificate holder should allow a minimum of 60 days for the FAA acceptance process to be completed once its ASAP program is received at FAA HQ for review.

B. Demonstration Program Extensions. If the company requests an extension of the initial demonstration program beyond 18 months, the local CHDO manager shall inform the AFS-230 manager of the request by electronic message. Upon receipt of authorization from AFS-230 by return electronic message, the CHDO manager shall grant the request by CHDO letter to the company. The CHDO manager must forward a signed copy of the extension letter to the ASAP program office, AFS-230, for program tracking purposes.

C. Continuing Program Initial Acceptance. Initial acceptance of a continuing program is processed in the same manner as described in paragraph 11-45A.

D. Renewal of a Continuing Program. The renewal of an existing continuing program is accomplished every 2 years after a review by the parties to the MOU to ensure that the particular ASAP program is meeting its objectives. The renewal may be accomplished at the local CHDO level by the CHDO manager signing the MOU on behalf of the FAA. The company should notify the CHDO of its request for renewal 60 days in advance of the expiration of an

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



existing continuing program ASAP MOU. The CHDO manager shall notify the ASAP program office, AFS-230, by e-mail 45 days in advance of renewing an existing continuing ASAP program.

E. Program Reviews and Reports.

1) Annual Review. The ERC conducts an annual review of the ASAP database with emphasis on determining whether corrective actions have been effective in preventing or reducing the recurrence of safety-related events of a similar nature. That review will include recommendations for corrective action for recurring events indicative of adverse safety trends.

2) End of Demonstration Program Report. The ERC is responsible for preparing a final report on the demonstration program at its conclusion. If an application for a continuing program is anticipated, the ERC will prepare and submit a report with the certificate holder’s application to the FAA 60 days in advance of the termination date of the demonstration program. This allows the effective measurement of any change(s) made to the original program that addresses a deficiency identified by any of the parties to the MOU.

3) FAA Program Review. The purpose of the program review is to collect information, data, and feedback from participants that will enable an assessment of whether the safety objectives of the program are being achieved, and whether those results are being effectively documented. To the maximum extent possible, the FAA program review is scheduled to coincide with the end of demonstration or first continuing program MOU expiration. The review is completed onsite during a regularly scheduled ERC meeting. The review incorporates a survey questionnaire combined with an observation of the ERC meeting followed by feedback concerning the conduct of the meeting, including a discussion of the program review questionnaire responses. In addition, the reviewer provides clarification of ASAP policy, guidance, and discussions of national program trends, and concludes with a short question and answer session.

F. FAA ASAP Policy Updates. As the FAA and industry gain experience with the ASAP, FAA ASAP policy will evolve to reflect lessons learned. AFS has established a Web page (http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/asap/) to provide the most current information on ASAP policy updates. If the FAA makes changes to ASAP policy, they will appear on the ASAP Web page prior to publication elsewhere. The Web page also contains an automated template to facilitate the generation of an ASAP MOU by airlines and major domestic repair stations interested in starting new programs. Although not required, use of the automated template is strongly encouraged, because MOUs that use the standard language from that program can be quickly accepted. The template will always reflect the most current FAA policy on ASAP. If the certificate holder and, where applicable, its associated labor association elect to revise an accepted MOU to incorporate updates to FAA ASAP policy, the following acceptance procedures will apply:

1) The AFS ASAP Web page will serve as the reference source for updates to FAA ASAP policy. Until revised, guidance to industry provided in AC 120-66 will continue to apply, except as noted on the ASAP Web page. The ASAP Web page will contain the exact language that describes policy updates to these documents.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



2) The CHDO manager will accept revisions to accepted ASAP MOUs that are revised to incorporate updates to FAA ASAP policy when such revisions employ the exact policy language that appears in the MOU template on the AFS ASAP Web page. The FAA does not require coordination and review of such revisions above the level of the CHDO manager. However, an information copy of the revised MOU shall be provided to the AFS-230 manager P.O. Box 20027, Washington, DC 20041, following acceptance.

3) Following CHDO review, revisions to accepted ASAP MOUs that do not incorporate the exact policy language that appears in the MOU template on the AFS ASAP Web page must be forwarded for further review through the FAA regional HQ to AFS-230. The CHDO must provide, by cover letter, its recommendations regarding acceptance of such revisions.

G. Revision Control. The certificate holder should employ standard revision control methodology with respect to revisions to the MOU. The original and subsequent revisions should include:

1) For each revision to an original MOU, a change control page, identifying the revision number, a brief synopsis of each change to the original document, and specifying which pages are to be removed and replaced;

2) A List of Effective Pages (LEP);

3) A table of contents;

4) On each page of the MOU, a calendar date for when that page was prepared or revised;

5) For all revisions to an original MOU, a revision number on each page that is revised; and

6) Sequential page numbers on all pages of the MOU (except the cover page, if applicable, which shall be understood to constitute page (i)).

H. Recordkeeping. The parties should maintain those records necessary for a program’s administration and evaluation. Records submitted to the FAA for review relating to an ASAP are protected to the extent allowed by law under applicable exemptions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). All records and documents relating to an ASAP must be kept in a manner that ensures compliance with the 14 CFR and all applicable laws, including the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA).

I. Aviation Safety Inspector (ASI) Training. ASIs should be adequately prepared to perform ASAP-related duties as outlined below:

1) ASIs who will review an ASAP MOU for recommended acceptance or who will participate in an ERC should attend training as prescribed by the Flight Standards Training Division (AFS-500).

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



2) ASIs who will serve as ERC representatives should meet the following minimum qualifications:

a) Three years of AFS experience (series 1825);

b) One year of part 121 certificate management experience;

c) ASAP initial/continuing training; and

d) Except for new ASAP programs, attendance at three ERC meetings. For a new ASAP program, inspector attendance, if feasible, at another certificate holder’s ERC is recommended for training purposes prior to the inspector’s participation in the new program.

11-46 PROGRAM TRACKING AND REPORTING SUBSYSTEM (PTRS) INPUT. For activity associated with participation in the ASAP review committee, Operations inspectors and cabin safety inspectors (CSI) should enter the PTRS code 1391 for each set of such reports reviewed, maintenance inspectors should use PTRS code 3395, and avionics inspectors should use 5395 for these reviews. Enter the designator code appropriate to the air carrier or major domestic repair station whose ASAP program was associated with the reports. Use the numeric-miscellaneous field to record the number of reports reviewed. Comments regarding the report content or conduct of the ASAP program may be entered as necessary. For sole source reports regarding actions of individual employees, the inspector should not enter the name of the employees.

A. If an enforcement investigation associated with an ASAP report is initiated, the inspector shall enter the code ASAP in the “National Use” block of the PTRS initiated in order to track aspects of ASAP. This entry is in addition to the PTRS code appropriate for the specific activity (e.g., 1735/33, 3731/33, 5731/33). It is also important to complete the “Designator” block with the appropriate air carrier or major domestic repair station designator code even when completing a PTRS activity involving an employee of the certificate holder.

B. General comments regarding the report content or conduct of the ASAP program may be entered as necessary. For sole source reports regarding actions of individual employees, the inspector should not enter the name of the employees.

11-47 QUARTERLY REPORTS ON SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS.

A. The fundamental purpose of ASAP is to enhance safety. It is therefore important to maintain an audit trail of the extent to which the program is achieving that objective. Office managers shall prepare a summary report of safety enhancements achieved each quarter by each certificate holder’s ASAP program(s) for which they have oversight responsibility. Quarterly reports shall be sent by electronic mail to the respective regional HQ AFS division office and to the AFS-230 manager, using the report format provided in the example, Figure 11-12, ASAP Safety Enhancement Report Format Example.

B. This information is maintained on an FAA internal SharePoint site, access to which is available to any AFS inspector upon request to AFS-230. Regional division ASAP coordinators

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



should use the SharePoint site to track compliance by individual FAA offices with the quarterly report submission requirement, as well as to review safety enhancements achieved in their region through ASAP. The information should be considered protected from public release under the current edition of FAA Order 8000.82, Designation of Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) Information as Protected from Public Disclosure under 14 CFR Part 193, and part 193. Direct access requests should be sent to the AFS-230 manager.

11-48 ASAP DATA AND INFORMATION CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE CRITERIA.

A. A significant impediment to the sharing of ASAP information with the FAA is the aviation industry’s concern over public disclosure of the information, and, if disclosed, the potential for it to be used for other than the safety enhancement purposes for which the ASAP was created. Under 49 U.S.C. § 40123, certain voluntarily provided safety and security information is protected from disclosure in order to encourage persons to provide the information to the FAA.

B. Order 8000.82 designates information received by the agency from an ASAP as protected from public disclosure in accordance with the provisions of part 193.

C. Part 193 protection—with the exception of ASAP MOUs, and de-identified summarized information as specified in Order 8000.82—other ASAP data and information is protected from disclosure under FOIA.

D. FAA Guidelines on Use of Information from ASAP.

1) Classification. “Protected from disclosure under 49 U.S.C., section 40123 and 14 CFR part 193” and therefore should be considered “For Official Use Only”—to be disclosed within the FAA on a “need to know” basis.

2) ASAP Reports. De-identified information on an event may be used within the FAA for mission pertinent purposes, such as surveillance planning, policy development, or rulemaking.

3) ERC Deliberations. The FAA ERC member may communicate within the FAA the facts disclosed by the investigation and disposition of any event reported under ASAP, including followup for corrective actions. However, it is not considered a “best practice” for office managers and supervisors to inquire as to specific content of discussion within the ERC.

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 11-11. Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) Checklist

If the certificate holder chooses not to use the Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) template (available on the Web at http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/asap/) when developing an MOU, it should use the following checklist to ensure that the MOU adequately addresses all necessary elements. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) personnel shall use this checklist when reviewing an MOU developed without the aid of the template. An MOU may contain additional information not included in the checklist that is necessary for the operation of the program. This checklist shall be submitted to the FAA certificate-holding district office (CHDO) along with the completed MOU at the time of submission for FAA acceptance. The CHDO shall review this checklist to ensure that all provisions of the ASAP have been met in accordance with the guidance material and that the certificate holder has accurately completed the checklist. The CHDO shall include the completed checklist along with other applicable items discussed in this section for regional and Headquarters (HQ) review. The “RESPONSE” column should be answered for each question. The response should be Yes, No, or NA (not applicable). All No or NA responses should include a brief explanation as to why that item was marked NO or NA. The “REFERENCE” column should also be completed by identifying the location of the particular item’s response in the certificate holder’s MOU (e.g., MOU, page 2, paragraph 3a).

ASAP MOU Checklist

NO. ITEM RESPONSE (Circle Yes, No, or NA)

MOU Paragraph REFERENCE

1 Does this program involve a part 121 air carrier or part 145 major domestic repair station?

Yes No NA

2 Is this ASAP: a Specific to an employee group(s)? Yes No NA b A demonstration program? Yes No NA c An extension of a demonstration program? Yes No NA d A continuing program? Yes No NA e A renewal of a continuing program? Yes No NA 3 Is the duration of the program limited to the

period of time needed to achieve the desired goals and benefits articulated in the program? Demonstration programs initially should have a duration of no longer than 18 months and should be reviewed prior to renewal. Demonstration programs that undergo changes after their initial review may be renewed for no longer than 12 months. Programs that are classified as continuing must be reviewed and renewed every 2 years.

Yes No NA

4 Have all parties to the ASAP entered into this agreement voluntarily? Yes No NA

5 Is there a description of the objective(s) of the program which includes:

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0





a The essential safety information that is reasonably expected to be obtained through the program?

Yes No NA

b Any specific safety issues that are of a concern to any of the parties? Yes No NA

c The benefits to be gained through the use of the program? Yes No NA

6 Is there a description of any enforcement-related incentive that is needed to achieve the desired goal and results of the program?

Yes No NA

7 Is there a statement that all safety-related reports shall be fully evaluated and, to the extent appropriate, investigated by the event review committee (ERC)?

Yes No NA

8 Is there a description of the manner in which ASAP records and reports shall be kept that ensures compliance with Federal aviation regulations or the Pilot Records Improvement Act of 1996 (PRIA), and any other applicable laws?

Yes No NA

9 Is there a description of the process for timely reporting to the ERC all events disclosed under the program?

Yes No NA

10 Is there a description of the procedures that provide for:

a The resolution of safety-related events? Yes No NA b Continuous tracking of those events? Yes No NA c The analysis of safety-related events? Yes No NA 11 Is there a description of the ERC ASAP report

acceptance and exclusion criteria? Yes No NA

12 Is there a description of the frequency of periodic reviews by the parties to determine whether the program is achieving the desired results? (These reviews are in addition to any other review conducted by the FAA or any other party individually.)

Yes No NA

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0





13 Is there a statement that the ERC shall be comprised of one representative from each party to the MOU, and a description of the duties of the ASAP manager? (The ASAP manager may either be the same individual assigned as the company management representative to the ERC, or it may be another individual from company management who will not serve as a voting member of the ERC.)

Yes No NA

14 Is there a description of the process for training and distributing information about the program to certificate holder management and employees and procedures for providing feedback to individuals who make safety-related reports under the program?

Yes No NA

15 Is there a statement that modifications to the MOU must be accepted by all parties? Yes No NA

16 Is there a statement that termination or modification of a program will not adversely affect anyone who acted in reliance on the terms of a program in effect at the time of that action (i.e., when a program is terminated, all reports and investigations that were in progress will be handled under the provisions of the program until they are completed).

Yes No NA

17 Is there a statement that the program can be terminated at any time, by any party? Yes No NA

18 Is there a statement that failure of any party to follow the terms of the agreement ordinarily will result in termination of the program?

Yes No NA

19 Is there a statement that failure of a certificate holder to follow through with corrective action acceptable to the FAA to resolve any safety deficiencies will ordinarily result in termination of the program?

Yes No NA

20 Is there a detailed description of the following concepts if they are included in the program and, if appropriate, how they will be used:

a ERC? Yes No NA b Consensus of the ERC? Yes No NA c Sole source reporting? Yes No NA d Sufficient evidence? Yes No NA e Enforcement-related incentive? Yes No NA

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0





21 Is there a statement that repeated instances involving the same or similar possible noncompliance with the 14 CFR that were previously addressed with administrative action under the ASAP will be accepted into the program, provided that they otherwise meet the acceptance criteria of ASAP? (The ERC will consider on a case-by-case basis the corrective action that is appropriate for such reports.)

Yes No NA

22 Does the ASAP include an MOU procedure to identify the date, time, location or fix, altitude, flight number, and air traffic control (ATC) frequency at the time the event occurred? (This applies to ASAP MOUs that contain provisions for ATC events.)

Yes No NA

23 Is there a statement that employees initially covered under an ASAP will be excluded from the program and not entitled to the enforcement-related incentive if they fail to complete the recommended corrective action in a manner satisfactory to all members of the ERC? (These cases may result in the reopening of the case and referral of the matter for appropriate action.)

Yes No NA

24 Is there a statement that any safety-related ASAP event that concerns an apparent violation(s) that is excluded from ASAP will be referred by the FAA ERC representative to an appropriate office within the FAA for any additional investigation and reexamination and/or enforcement action, as appropriate?

Yes No NA

25 Is there a statement that a closed ASAP case, including a related EIR, that involves a violation addressed with administrative action or for which no action has been taken may be reopened if evidence is later discovered that establishes the event should have been excluded from the program?

Yes No NA

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0





26 Is there a statement that when the ERC becomes aware of an issue involving the medical qualification or medical certification of an airman, the ERC must immediately advise the appropriate Regional Flight Surgeon (RFS) about the issue? (The ERC will work with the RFS and the certificate holder’s medical department or medical consultants to resolve any medical certification or qualification issues or concerns revealed in an ASAP report, or through the processing of that report. The FAA ERC member must follow the direction(s) of the RFS with respect to any medical certification or medical qualification issue(s) revealed in an ASAP report.)

Yes No NA

27 Is there a statement that reports that appear to involve possible criminal activity, substance abuse, controlled substances, alcohol, or intentional falsification will be referred to an appropriate FAA office for further handling? The FAA may use such reports for any enforcement purposes and will refer such reports to law enforcement agencies, as appropriate.

Yes No NA

28 Is there a statement that the ASAP manager will maintain an electronic database that tracks each event through and including closure of that event by the ERC and enables trend analysis?

Yes No NA

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



Figure 11-12. ASAP Safety Enhancement Report Format Example

CHDO: AEA-FSDO-99

REGION: EA

FISCAL YEAR: 2007

FISCAL YEAR (SEPT - OCT) QUARTER: 1ST

ASAP MOU HOLDER NAME: ABC Airlines

ASAP MOU HOLDER FAA DESIGNATOR: ABCA

ASAP MOU EMPLOYEE GROUP(S): Pilot, Mechanic

ASAP ERC CONTACT INFORMATION & PRESENT QUARTER STATISTICS

Pilot MOU

FAA Member: John Smith, [email protected] 718-456-7890 Company Member: Fred Jones, [email protected] 718-567-8901 Labor Member: Allan Doe, [email protected] 718-678-9012 ASAP Manager: Mary Moppett [email protected] 718-567 -9001

Number of ASAP reports submitted present quarter: 20 Number of ASAP reports accepted present quarter: 19 Number of accepted reports present quarter that were sole source to the FAA: 17 Number of accepted reports present quarter (both sole source and non-sole source) closed with corrective action under ASAP for the employee: 12 Number of reports present quarter which resulted in recommendations to the company for corrective action: 5

Mechanic MOU

FAA Member: James Goodrench, [email protected] 718-654-0987 Company Member: Miles Togo, [email protected] 718-765-1098 Labor Member: Will Walker, [email protected] 718-876-2109 ASAP Manager: Miles Togo [email protected]

Number of ASAP reports submitted present quarter: 15 Number of ASAP reports accepted present quarter: 15 Number of accepted reports present quarter that were sole source to the FAA: 10 Number of accepted reports (both sole source and non-sole source) closed with corrective action under ASAP for the employee: 14 Number of reports present quarter which resulted in recommendations to the company for corrective action: 2

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



DESCRIPTION OF SAFETY ENHANCEMENTS:

Pilot ASAP:

Safety Issue Identified: Ambiguous procedures for radio frequency change on landing: An ASAP report was submitted stating that after landing in San Francisco, CA (SFO), the flightcrew was never advised to change frequency to Ramp Control. The report stated that the crew was under the impression that they were not supposed to change frequency unless advised to do so, and they therefore had taxied to the gate without contacting Ramp Control.

Corrective Action Taken: A pilot bulletin was issued to change the Jeppesen page 10-7 instructions, replacing “expect to contact Ramp Control on 127.57” with “You are required to contact Ramp Control on 127.57.”

Safety Issue Identified: Repeated instances of flightcrew members failing to take immediate and decisive aircraft flightpath modification in response to Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) warnings.

Corrective Action Taken: Need for pilot immediate compliance to TCAS warnings highlighted in the quarterly safety newsletter. TCAS events added to Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) scenarios for all pilot recurrent training.

Mechanic ASAP:

Safety Issue Identified: Conflicting guidance between the General Procedures Manual (GPM) and the Aircraft Maintenance Manual (AMM). The GPM requires a leak check of the static lines after using a quick disconnect. The AMM does not require leak checks for quick disconnects.

Corrective Action Taken: A Quality Control Alert was issued to notify everyone that the GPM procedures take priority over the AMM and quick disconnects will be leak checked prior to returning the aircraft to service.

Safety Issue Identified: Repeated instances of failure to use the torque wrench required in the maintenance manual, resulting in bolts coming loose during flight

Corrective Action Taken: Purchased additional torque wrench equipment to increase availability at all maintenance locations. Highlighted need to use torque wrenches as prescribed by maintenance manual procedures in monthly mechanic newsletter. Emphasized the safety issue to all maintenance supervisors in a quarterly maintenance safety meeting.

John Doe CHDO/CMO Manager Copy to: AEA-230 AFS-230

6/7/11 8900.1 CHG 0



NOTE: This report should be prepared and forwarded electronically to the regional division office and to the AFS-230 manager as a Word document. In order to preclude submission of multiple files with the same file name and to facilitate archiving of reports over time, a specific file naming format should be used, as follows: ASAP-AIRLINE DESIGNATOR-FISCAL YEAR-FISCAL QUARTER-EMPLOYEE CATEGORY CODE(S).DOC. The following employee category codes should be employed: P for Pilot, D for Dispatch (or flight follower), M for Maintenance, L for Load Planners, F for F/A, R for ramp worker, and X for other. For reports containing safety enhancements for more than one employee group, multiple employee category codes should be strung together in the file name. Examples: ASAP-ABCA-2007-1-PM.doc; ASAP-ABCA-2007-1-PDM.doc.
