![](media/image1.wmf)

**LOG OF REVISIONS**

+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
| **REV   | **R    | ## DESCRIPTION OF REVISION             | ## Date |
| ISION** | EVISED |                                        |         |
|         | P      |                                        |         |
|         | AGES** |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
| IR      | \-     | 1^st^ Edition                          | 7/      |
|         |        |                                        | 21/2000 |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
| 1       | 7-10,  | Clarify Process guidance; add          | 3       |
|         | 12,    | statements to ACS; clarify completion  | /1/2002 |
|         | 14-19, | of ACS; update contact information;    |         |
|         | 20,    | change classification of landing gear  |         |
|         | 36-38, | failures for risk assessment.          |         |
|         | 59, 70 |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+
|         |        |                                        |         |
+---------+--------+----------------------------------------+---------+

FORWARD

The Small Airplane Directorate Airworthiness Directives Manual
Supplement (Airworthiness Concern Process Guide) is intended to provide
the aviation community a standardized approach to resolve airworthiness
issues. It is considered supplemental to the existing practices outlined
in the Airworthiness Directive Manual (FAA-AIR-M-8040.1).

Aviation Safety Engineers are expected, whenever possible, to utilize
the methods in the supplement guide to develop, prioritize, and
administer solutions to airworthiness concerns on Small Airplane
Directorate products. These methods facilitate early coordination
between the FAA Aviation Safety Engineer, the affected manufacturers,
and aviation interest groups (such as type clubs, industry associations,
etc.) in the exchange of technical, operational, and economic data.
Aviation Safety Engineers should utilize this additional information
during the risk assessment process. It is anticipated that this process
will result in more responsive, more effective decisions pertaining to
airworthiness issues.

Although this guide is the culmination of an extensive development
effort between the FAA and the flying organizations, there is always
room for improvement. Please direct any pertinent comments to:

> Continued Operational Safety Program Manager
>
> Federal Aviation Administration
>
> Small Airplane Directorate
>
> 901 Locust Street, Room 301
>
> Kansas City, MO 64106

![](media/image3.png){width="3.6in" height="1.0944444444444446in"}

***Small Airplane Directorate***

***Airworthiness Directives Manual Supplement***

###### *[Table of Contents]{.underline}*

**Purpose**

**Airworthiness Concern Process**

-   **Notification of Airworthiness Concern**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Communication and Data Gathering**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Perform Risk Assessment**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Take Appropriate Action(s)**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Monitor Airworthiness Concern**

**APPENDIX I Airworthiness Concern Process (Flow Chart)**

**APPENDIX II Airworthiness Concern Sheet (ACS)**

**APPENDIX III Associations and Type Club Listing**

**APPENDIX IV Airworthiness Contacts**

**APPENDIX V Risk Assessment for Reciprocating Engine Airworthiness
Directives**

**APPENDIX VI Risk Assessment for Airworthiness Concerns on Small
Airplane Directorate Products**

**APPENDIX VII Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) Guide**

**APPENDIX VIII AC 43-16A, GA Alerts Guide**

######## Purpose 

The purpose of this Airworthiness (A/W) Concern Process Guide is to
provide the aviation community (FAA Aviation Safety Engineers (ASEs),
manufacturers, Type Clubs) a standardized approach to resolve
airworthiness concerns. This guide describes the methods in which
airworthiness concerns about Small Airplane Directorate (SAD) products
should be identified, prioritized, and administered. ASEs are expected
to use the procedures in this guide, although it is understood that it
may be necessary, after consultation with the Directorate AD coordinator
(Reference Appendix IV), to make exceptions.

This guide supplements the process located in the Airworthiness
Directive Manual (FAA-AIR-M-8040.1). This guide focuses on the data
gathering permitted to obtain factual (**technical and economic**)
information before proposing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rule Making
(ANPRM), Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM), Supplemental NPRM,
Immediately Adopted Rule, or Emergency AD. It is envisioned this early
coordination with manufacturers, associations, Type Clubs, owners,
operators, and mechanics will promote safety and streamline the AD
process for both those airplanes with manufacturing support and for
\"orphaned\" airplanes with no manufacturing support.

# Airworthiness Concern Process {#airworthiness-concern-process .unnumbered}

Airworthiness concerns come to the attention of the Aircraft
Certification Office (ACO) in a variety of ways. The usual methods are
shown below, but the list is not inclusive:

-   NTSB Safety Recommendations

-   FAA Safety Recommendations

-   Mandatory Continued Airworthiness Instructions (MCAI) from foreign
    authorities

-   Service Difficulty Reports (SDR)

-   Manufacturers' FAR Part 21.3 Reports

-   Notification from a Type Club

    The ASE, as part of their continued operational safety duties,
    evaluates these concerns for possible corrective action. This guide
    provides a five step procedure to address any airworthiness concern.

1.  Notification of Airworthiness Concern

2.  Communication and Data Gathering

3.  Perform Risk Assessment

4.  Take the appropriate action

5.  Monitor the area of concern

This process is depicted with the flow chart shown in Appendix I. The
five steps are further described below.

#### 1. Notification of Airworthiness Concern {#notification-of-airworthiness-concern .unnumbered}

When an ASE is notified of an airworthiness concern they should gather
as much additional information as possible. The engineer uses the
Airworthiness Concern Sheet (ACS) to obtain information from the field
via aircraft associations and aircraft Type Clubs. The engineer will
complete and disseminate the ACS. Appendix II includes the ACS form and
helpful information about suggested and required content. The ACS should
specify any detailed information that is requested from the field such
as technical data and accurate cost of compliance data.

The ASE should perform an initial risk assessment as described in step
3. This helps determine what possible action is needed to address the
concern. The ACS should also specify the requested response time (10, 30
or 90 days) according to the results of the initial assessment.

The information received from an ACS is used to help determine what
corrective action, if any, the FAA should take regarding any particular
concern. Usually, the ASE should complete the ACS process before
beginning an AD proposal worksheet. The ACS is not to be confused with
any rulemaking activity; its purpose is to solicit technical and
economic impact comments. The ACS should always explain this. The ACS
form in Appendix II contains the appropriate statement.

For a new routine AD action (NPRM), do not submit the AD proposal
worksheet to the SAD AD coordinator until the ACS process is complete.
The ASE needs to take time to evaluate any comments or information
received and adjust the AD proposal worksheet accordingly.

It is important to note that if the safety concern indicates an urgent
safety of flight condition, the ASE, in coordination with the SAD AD
coordinator, should initiate Emergency AD or Adopted Rule AD action
concurrently with the ACS process. (These ADs are issued without waiting
for public comment.) In these instances, the ACS should request a 10 day
response time. If, however, the service difficulty report or single
reported incident is the first event of its type, additional information
from user/operators may provide valuable insight. Often \"emergency
events\" have root causes that do not directly affect the fleet. User
operational and maintenance knowledge, if available, could change the
scope of inspection and mandated inspection intervals.

Thus, for urgent safety concerns, ASEs should complete and disseminate
an \"Emergency (10 day response) ACS\" at the same time they initiate
the AD worksheet. The AD action will be prepared as the ACS is processed
by the user groups. This enhances the decision making process by helping
gather all available service information prior to issuing the Emergency
AD or Adopted Rule AD. The AD will not be issued until the comments are
received and evaluated. Later, if new information becomes available, the
ASE working with the SAD AD group may initiate further rulemaking to
adjust the regulatory impact as appropriate (increase or decrease the AD
requirements, for instance).

Since Emergency ADs and Adopted Rule ADs are exceptions to the normal
procedure, they will be issued only when justified.

**[2. Communication and Data Gathering (Technical and
Economic)]{.underline}**

The ASE sends the ACS to the Type Certificate holder, appropriate
associations and Type Clubs. Appendix III, \"Associations and Type Clubs
Listing,\" contains a list of associations and Type Clubs. The ASE
should also send a copy to the SAD COSM group. (This keeps the
Directorate informed of possible concerns existing in the field. It also
provides a means of cross referencing similar concerns from different
offices.)

The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA) has agreed to forward
the ACS to the appropriate Type Clubs or organizations. Therefore the
ASE will send AOPA the completed ACS. Appendix III includes a sample
cover letter that can accompany the ACS. These documents should be sent
electronically. This is the most efficient means for AOPA to forward the
ACS and expedites the data gathering. The type clubs will respond to
AOPA with technical and economic information pertinent to the
airworthiness concern and AOP will consolidate the feedback into one
response.

Although AOPA is the primary conduit to the Type Clubs, this should not
preclude directly sending the ACS to Type Clubs, if warranted. For
instance, if the communication lines between the FAA and a Type Club are
strong, notifying the Type Club directly, in addition to AOPA, can
expedite the feedback time.

The ASE should also search other sources for additional data. The
primary tool used to find related data is the Aircraft Certification
Service's Aviation Safety Accident Prevention (ASAP) computer utility.
ASAP is available to all ASEs. ASAP searches the NTSB and FAA
accident/incident data system (A/IDS) and the FAA's Service Difficulty
Reports (SDR) database for information as requested by the user.
Appendix IV provides information about these sources.

For urgent safety of flight concerns, it is important that the user
groups respond within 10 days. In order to assure that they give the ASC
proper attention, it is recommended that the ASE communicate with them
as needed.

Note: Appendix III is intended to be a \"living document\" maintained
and provided to the FAA by the AOPA for FAA ACS use. The AOPA list is
not exhaustive. It includes those associations and type clubs considered
capable of disseminating ACS safety concerns to its members, compiling
feedback, and submitting technical and economic cost impact data back to
the ASE in a timely manner. The FAA welcomes all interested parties to
be included in the listing.

**[3. Perform Risk Assessment]{.underline}**

The ASE initially performs the risk assessment with readily available
data and then as additional data are obtained from the field response to
the ACS. Normally, if initial data indicate an urgent safety of flight
condition, AD action should not be delayed. In all cases, data from the
field should be monitored and evaluated throughout the AD process.

This guide provides two risk assessment methods. The ASE should use
"Risk Assessment for Reciprocating Engine Airworthiness Directives" for
engine related concerns. Appendix V describes this method. The ASE
should use "14 CFR Part 23 (AD) Risk Assessment" for all airworthiness
concerns regarding SAD products. Appendix VI describes this method and
provides examples of how it is used.

**[4. Take Appropriate Action(s)]{.underline}**

Except for urgent safety of flight conditions, the course of action
should not be determined until ACS feedback is received and the risk
assessment is complete. The ASE should consider all available data,
including ACS feedback from the field, to evaluate the potential
action(s).

The risk assessment is a tool used to help objectively determine the
best course of action. The assessment results should always be tempered
with good engineering judgement. Because of the nature of the method, it
is possible that the final risk factor does not accurately characterize
the severity of the concern. The ASE should always perform a "sanity
check." If the ASE is unsure of the risk assessment's accuracy, he or
she should seek input from colleagues or SAD staff.

Sometimes, the individual risk factors of Section 3.0 of Appendix VI may
not represent a concern's risk to a particular design or use. In those
cases, the ASE should justify any deviation from the Appendix V or VI
method. This justification should become part of the risk assessment
documentation. When the ASE decides the appropriate action, he or she
should document any pertinent information that helped with that
decision.

When the ASE is satisfied that sufficient data has been reviewed and the
risk assessment produces a realistic course of action, the ASE may
recommend one or more actions to the SAD AD group. The flow chart in
Appendix I presents the steps to take for each action.

The possible recommended actions are:

####### 

-   [Airworthiness Directive]{.underline} (Reference Airworthiness
    Directives Manual FAA-AIR-M-8040.1)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Urgent Safety of Flight Situation (Emergency AD)

-   Urgent Safety of Flight Situation (Adopted Rule With Comments)

-   Final Rule after Notice

-   Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) Followed by a Final Rule

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   [Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB)]{.underline}
    (Reference Appendix VII)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Informs appropriate field personnel (owners, operators, and/or
    mechanics) of safety concern and recommended actions.

-   May reference manufacturers Service Letters or Service Bulletins

-   "**ADVISORY ONLY/NOT MANDATORY**"

####### 

####### General Aviation Alerts Advisory Circular (AC) 43-16A (Reference Appendix VIII)

-   [Manufacturer's Service Letters]{.underline} (Coordinate development
    with manufacturer.)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   [No Action Required]{.underline} (Continue to Monitor A/W Concern)

    **[5. Monitor Airworthiness Concern]{.underline}**

    The ASE will communicate actions taken with the participating
    manufacturers, associations and Type Clubs. Appendix III includes a
    sample letter to explain the action taken.

    Monitoring an airworthiness concern an important aspect of this
    process. It is a joint effort with the FAA, the manufacturer, and
    the field (associations, Type Clubs, and owner/operators, etc.).
    However, it is the FAA's responsibility to stay well informed,
    compile the information, and reevaluate the concern as new data
    (SDRs, A/IDS, manufacturer and type club comments, etc.) become
    available. This last step is essential to verify that the action
    adequately addressed the airworthiness concern.

**APPENDIX II**

> Airworthiness ![](media/image4.png){width="1.6041666666666667in"
> height="1.6875in"}
>
> Concern Sheet

Airworthiness Concern Sheet

Completion Instructions

(Initiated by FAA Office)

**Block 1: Date**

Insert into Block 1 the Date the ACS is completed

**Block 2: Originator information**

Complete block 2 with pertinent information about the originator.
Include title, FAA office and routing symbol, telephone and email
address.

**Block 3: Make, Model Series, Serial Number**

Complete block 3 with as much make, model, series, and serial number
information as possible. A complete description is often needed to
determine the scope of the concern. If available, manufacturers' Service
Bulletins usually contain this information. If the series or serial
number range is unclear or unknown then this should be explained and
requested as part of the information the users may be able to supply.
(This information is required on AD worksheets, so it will be needed in
the event the concern evolves into a proposed AD action.) Two examples
are shown.

**Block 4: Reason for Airworthiness Concern**

Complete block 4 with a short synopsis of the concern. Two examples are
shown.

**Block 5: FAA Description of Airworthiness Concern**

Describe in Block 5 the airworthiness concern. Describe the concern as
completely as possible. Attach the Risk Assessment and other appropriate
data. Use additional sheets if necessary. Two examples are shown.

If certain key information is incomplete or unknown, request that the
association or user group provide any data. One example is shown.

The box at the bottom of Block 5 explains that the ACS process is not
rulemaking, but rather a solicitation for technical information. **This
box is to be included on each ACS**.

**Block 6: Attachments, Notification, and Response Time**

**Attachments:** Check all boxes in Block 6 that apply. (The acronyms
are listed in block 7.) Always include results of the Risk Analysis
(RA). **Do not include proprietary data.**

The initial risk assessment procedures are described in Appendices V and
VI.

**Note:**

FAA Safety Recommendations are for FAA internal use only; however
selected information may be shared with the public. NTSB Safety
Recommendations are a matter of public record and may be shared with the
public in entirety.

**Notification:** Check all boxes that apply. **Always notify FAA Small
Airplane Directorate COSM group, Type Certificate holder, and AOPA.**
AOPA is responsible for disseminating the information to the appropriate
user groups. Email is the preferred method of notification. FAX is the
second preference. Appendix III contains the addresses of many
interested associations and type clubs.

**Response Date Requested:** Insert the date the response needs to be
returned. (Calendar days from the Block 1 ACS date.) Based on the
initial risk assessment, the following choices are:

"Emergency (10 days)" indicates that an "Emergency AD" is under
consideration. The concern involves potential catastrophic failure/loss
of life. Expect minimal owner/operator responses by request date.

"Alert (30 days)" indicates a high level of concern. AD worksheet/NPRM
may be in process. Encourage associations and Type Clubs to utilize
electronic and facsimile media. Expect fewer owner/operator responses by
request date.

"Information (90 days)\" indicates a "non-emergency" concern. This
choice allows associations and Type Clubs time to utilize print media,
mass mailings, etc., maximizing number and quality of owner/operator
comments.

**Block 7: List of Acronyms**

![](media/image5.png){width="0.36180555555555555in"
height="0.3701388888888889in"} ***SAMPLE ACS TRANSMITTAL LETTER***

U. S. Department \_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Directorate

of Transportation \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Aircraft Certification Office

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**Federal Aviation \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**, \_\_ \_\_\_\_\_

**Administration**

*([Date]{.underline})*

*([Mr./Ms.]{.underline} ) ([Title]{.underline})*

*([Type Club Name]{.underline})*

*([Type Club Address]{.underline})*

Dear ([*Mr./Ms*.]{.underline} ):

Per our telecon of \_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_, \_\_\_\_, enclosed is the
Airworthiness Concern Sheet (ACS*). This ACS has been coordinated with
the current Type Certificate (TC) holder (delete if no current TC
holder)*. The ACS is intended for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Aircraft Certification Office Aviation Safety Engineers to convey known
airworthiness (A/W) concerns to aircraft owner/operators through
associations and type clubs. The FAA endorses the dissemination of this
information. We request that you distribute this A/W concern to your
membership for **technical** and **economic impact** comments.

*[Service Difficulty Report/s (SDR/s]{.underline})*, **and/or** *[a FAA
Safety Recommendation]{.underline}* **and/or** *[a National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Safety Recommendation]{.underline}*
**and/or** *[Accident/s/Incident/s]{.underline}* **and/or** [*reports
from the field, etc*.]{.underline}, brought this concern to our
attention, see enclosed.

We developed an (*[Engine & Propeller Directorate/Small Airplane
Directorate]{.underline}*) (*[EPD/SAD]{.underline}*) Risk Assessment
(RA) based on all currently available data concerning this ACS. Please
review the enclosed RA and provide comments concerning our initial
determination. (Reference SAD A/W Concern Process Guide, Appendix V &
VI.)

At this time, the FAA has not made a determination on what type of
corrective action (if any) should be taken. The resolution of this
airworthiness concern could involve an AD action or an SAIB, or the FAA
could determine that no action is needed at this time. The initial Risk
Assessment for this concern indicated

that [\*]{.underline} or [\*]{.underline} might be considered. The FAA's
final determination will depend in part on the information received in
response to this Airworthiness Concern Sheet.

*(\* Fill in the blanks with what your risk assessment has determined
the appropriate action to be (e.g., NPRM, Adopted Rule AD, etc.))*

As described in the ACS, we consider this A/W Concern as
*([\"Information/Alert/Emergency\"]{.underline})*. Please provide your
association/type club comments to this office within
*([90/30/10]{.underline})* days, *([respectively]{.underline}).* If you
have any questions, please contact \_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ at
(\_\_\_) \_\_\_-\_\_\_\_, *([e-mail address, ex:
john**.**doe@faa**.**gov]{.underline}).*

Sincerely,

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_ \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

([ASE or Branch Manager Signature]{.underline})

([Branch]{.underline})

\# Enclosures

cc: Type Certificate Holder *(if available)*,

Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA),

Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA)

bcc: ACE-110 (Barry Ballenger), A\_\_-\_\_\_\_:R/F,

A\_\_-\_\_\_\_:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_:(xxx)
xxx-xxxx:­\_\_:xx/xx/xx:\*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.\_\_\_\*

*([internal office file code]{.underline}) ([TC Holder
Name/Make]{.underline}); ([ACS Descriptive Title]{.underline})*

WM: N/A

![](media/image5.png){width="0.36180555555555555in"
height="0.3701388888888889in"} Sample ACS Interim/Final Response Letter

U. S. Department \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Directorate

of Transportation \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Aircraft Certification Office

**\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

**Federal Aviation \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**, \_\_. \_\_\_\_\_

**Administration**

(Date)

(Mr./Ms.)

[Association/Type Club Name and Address)]{.underline}

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Dear (Mr./Ms.) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_:

This is a (*[interim/final]{.underline}*) response to your letter of
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, 200\_, addressing our FAA Airworthiness Concern Sheet
(ACS), dated \_\_\_\_ \_\_, 200\_, concerning
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. We have reviewed your
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ and we [(*agree/disagree*)]{.underline} that you\'re
proposed inspection method of inspecting for
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, by
([*removing/accessing/etc*.)]{.underline} \_\_\_\_\_ ([*has/seems to
have merit/concerns us* *for the following
reason/s*:]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_).

We have accomplished the following actions:

1.  We determined that an Airworthiness Directive (AD) (*[is/is
    not]{.underline}*) required at this time. We based our decision on
    [*(#) of reported occurrences/service difficulty report/*s)
    (SDR/s)]{.underline} in the SDR data base (*[compared to events
    versus population/time between events/operational use]{.underline}*)
    and [(# of/*no*)]{.underline} accidents/incident reports and that
    the (*[condition]{.underline}*) is accessible and inspectable
    *during [(annual inspection intervals/routine scheduled
    maintenance/preflight/etc]{.underline}*[)]{.underline}.

2.  We published an article in the \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 200\_ Alert No.
    \_\_\_ issue of AC No. 43-16A Aviation Maintenance Alerts (see
    enclosed copy). The article highlighted the potential for (*[name
    the A/W concern]{.underline}*) the
    [(*above/proposed/etc*.)]{.underline} inspection method of
    \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_, and the need for [(*a
    thorough annual inspection/inspecting
    for*)]{.underline}\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_,
    etc.

3.  On \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_, 200\_, SAIB No.
    \_\_-0\_\_-\_\_was posted on the FAA\'s web site at
    http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/safety/alerts/SAIB/. The SAIB [(*was
    sent/will be*)]{.underline} sent to [(*\#*)]{.underline} registered
    \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ owners
    (*[on/by]{.underline}*) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_,
    200\_ (see enclosed copy). The SAIB highlights the potential for
    \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ and the need for (*[thorough annual
    inspections/inspecting for/etc.]{.underline}*)

We appreciate [(*type club\'s name*)]{.underline}
\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
interest and response to our ACS request for information. If you have
any questions or need additional information, please call me at (\_\_)
\_\_\_-\_\_\_\_/fax: - \_\_\_\_, e-mail: [(first).(last
name)@faa.gov](mailto:____.___________@faa.gov).

Sincerely,

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Aerospace Engineer

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Branch

Enclosures (2)

cc: ACE-110 (Barry Ballenger), A\_\_-\_\_\_\_:R/F,

A\_\_-11\_:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_(
)\_\_\_-\_\_\_\_:\_\_\_:\_\_/\_\_/0\_:\*\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_.DOC\*

8110: [(Acft. Make/Model/A/W Concern Condition)]{.underline} WM: 7

**APPENDIX III \-- Associations and Type Club Listing**

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

1-26 Association, A division of the Soaring Society of America

Bob Hurni

Secretary-Treasurer

516 East Meadow Lane

Phoenix, AZ 85022

\(602\) 993-8840

<bhurni@aol.com>

<http://www.crosswinds.net/~sgs126>

1-26 Association, a division of the Soaring Society of America

Clayton W. (Bill) Vickland

Eastern Vice President

629 N. Monroe Street

Arlington, VA 22201

\(703\) 527-5302

\(703\) 527-1529

<c.vickland@aol.com>

1-26 Association, A division of the Soaring Society of America

Del Blomquist

President

1706 Gotham St.

Chula Vista, CA 91913

\(619\) 482-7527

Aerostar Owners Association

Paul Neuda

Publisher

PO Box 460

Valdosta, GA 31603

\(912\) 244-7827

\(912\) 224-2604

<info@aerostar-owners.com>

[http://aerostar-owners.com](http://aerostar-owners.com/)

Air Line Pilots Association

John O\'Brien

Director of Engineering and Air Safety

535 Herndon Parkway

PO Box 1169

Herndon, VA 20172-9805

\(703\) 689-2270

\(703\) 689-4370

<obrienj@alpa.org>

[http://www.alpa.org](http://www.alpa.org/)

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Air Transport Association of America

David Fuscus

Vice President of Communications

1301 Pennsylvania Ave., NW

Suite 1100

Washington, DC 20004-1707

\(202\) 626-4000

\(202\) 626-4149

[http://www.air-transport.org](http://www.air-transport.org/)

Aircraft Electronics Association

Paula Derks

President

4217 South Hocker Drive

Independence, MO 64055

\(816\) 373-6565

\(816\) 478-3100

<paulad@aea.net>

[http://www.aea.net](http://www.aea.net/)

American Bonanza Society

Nancy Johnson

Executive Director

Mid-Continent Airport

PO Box 12888

Wichita, KS 67277-2888

\(316\) 945-1700

\(316\) 945-1710

<bonanza1@bonanza.org>

[http://www.bonanza.org](http://www.bonanza.org/)

American Bonanza Society

Neil L. Pobanz

Technical Consultant

PO Box 32

Lacon, IL 61540

\(309\) 246-2002

\(309\) 246-2002

<laconaero@aol.com>

American Bonanza Society

Michael Hoeffler

43 Old Sugar Road

Bolten, MA 01740

\(508\) 351-9080

<N48mh@mediaone.net>

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

American Navion Society

Jerry Feather

President

PO Box 148

Grand Junction, CO 81502

\(970\) 245-7459

\(970\) 243-8503

American Tiger Club and National Bucker Club (Aerobatic)

Celesta Price

President

300 Estelle Rice Drive

Moody, TX 76557

\(254\) 853-9067

American Yankee Association

Ronald B. Levy

Safety Director

1510 Aviemore Place

BelAir, MD 21015-5713

\(410\) 937-2819

<rblevy@mindspring.com>

[http://www.aya.org](http://www.aya.org/)

American Yankee Association

Guy Warner

President

2707 Sedgefield Ct. E.

Clearwater, FL 33761

\(727\) 462-6022

<guyaya@attglobal.net>

[http://www.aya.org](http://www.aya.org/)

American Yankee Association

Stewart Wilson

Secretary-Treasurer

PO Box 1531

Cameron Park, CA 95682-1531

530-676-4AYA

\(530\) 676-3949

[http://www.aya.org](http://www.aya.org/)

American Yankee Association

Jay D. Stout

40 Briar Rose Trail

Elizabethtown, PA 17022

\(717\) 653-8181

<stout@redrose.net>

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Antique Airplane Association, Inc.

Brent Taylor

Executive Director

22001 Bluegrass Road

Ottumwa, IA 52501-8569

\(641\) 938-2773

\(641\) 938-2084

<aaaapmhq@pcsia.net>

[http://aaa-apm.org](http://aaa-apm.org/)

AOPA

Andrew Werking

421 Aviation Way

Frederick, MD 21701

\(301\) 695-2167

\(301\) 695-2214

<andy.werking@aopa.org>

[http://www.aopa.org](http://www.aopa.org/)

Balloon Federation of America

Charles Sundquist

Presient

PO Box 400

Indianola, IA 50125

\(515\) 961-3537

\(515\) 961-3537

<bfaoffice@aol.com>

[http://www.bfa.net](http://www.bfa.net/)

Bellanca-Champion Club

Bob Szego

President

PO Box 100

Coxsackie, NY 12051-0100

\(518\) 731-6800

\(518\) 731-8190

<szegor@bellanca-championclub.com>

[http://bellanca-championclub.com](http://bellanca-championclub.com/)

California Pilots Association

Jay C. White

President

PO Box 6868

San Carlos, CA 94070

\(800\) 244-1949

\(415\) 366-1915

<jay-white00@aol.com>

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Cessna 150-152 Club

Royson Parsons

Executive Director

PO Box 1917

Atascadero, CA 93423-1917

\(805\) 461-1958

Cessna 170 Association

President

PO Box 1667

Lebanon, MO 65536

\(417\) 532-4847

\(417\) 532-4847

<c170hq@llion.org>

[http://www.cessna170.org](http://www.cessna170.org/)

Cessna 172-182 Club

Debbie K. Jones

Vice President

PO Box 22631

Oklahoma City, OK 73123

\(405\) 495-8666

\(405\) 495-8666

<cessna172182@aol.com>

[http://www.cessna172-182club.com](http://www.cessna172-182club.com/)

Cessna Owner Organization

Trevor Janz

North 7450 Aanstad Rd.

Iola, WI 54945

\(715\) 445-5000

\(715\) 445-4053

<sales@cessnaowner.org>

[http://www.cessnaowner.org](http://www.cessnaowner.org/)

or [www.piperowner.org](http://www.piperowner.org/)

Cessna Pilots Association

John Frank

President

Technical and Educational Facility

PO Box 5817

Santa Maria, CA 93456

\(805\) 922-2580

\(805\) 922-7249

<Jfrank@cessna.org>

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Citabria Owners Group

Carl Peterson

President

636 Iona Lane

Roseville, MN 55113

[http://www.citabria.com](http://www.citabria.com/)

Commander Owners Organization

Sven Faret

30-a Main Parkway

Plainview, NY 11803

Confederate Airforce, Inc.

Keith Lawrence

Director of Administration

PO Box 62000

Midland, TX 79711-2000

\(915\) 563-1000

\(915\) 563-8046

<diradmin@cafhq.org>

[http://www.confederateairforce.org](http://www.confederateairforce.org/)

Culver Aircraft Association

Dan Nicholson

723 Baker Drive

Tomball, TX 77375

\(281\) 351-0114

\(713\) 850-3579

<dann@gie.com>

Culver Club

Larry Low

President

60 Skywood Way

Woodside, CA 94062-4811

\(650\) 851-0204

deHavilland Moth Club

Michael Maniatis

Chairman

48 West 22nd. Street

New York, NY 10010

\(212\) 620-0398

\(212\) 620-0398

<moth@sprintmail.com>

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Ercoupe Owners Club

Skip Carden

Executive Director

PO Box 15388

Durham, NC 27704

\(919\) 471-9492

\(919\) 477-2194

<coupeclub@aol.com>

Experimental Aircraft Association

Earl Lawrence

EAA Aviation Center

PO Box 3086

Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086

\(920\) 426-6522

\(920\) 426-4828

<elawrence@eaa.org>

[http://www.eaa.org](http://www.eaa.org/)

Helicopter Association International

Roy Resavage

President

1635 Prince Street

Alexandria, VA 22314-2818

\(703\) 683-4646

\(703\) 683-4745

[http://www.rotor.com](http://www.rotor.com/)

Howard Aircraft Foundation

David Schober

PO Box 252

Volga, WV 26238

\(304\) 457-5026

<HowardClub@aol.com>

International 195 Club

Dwight M. Ewing

President

PO Box 737

Merced, CA 95340

\(209\) 722-6283

\(209\) 722-5124

<ewing@elite.net>

[http://www.cessna195.org](http://www.cessna195.org/)

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

International Bird Dog Association

Mitch Leland

President

406 North AV.R

Clifton, TX 76634-1252

<L-19Birddog@worldnet.att.net>

[http://www.L-19BowWow.com](http://www.L-19BowWow.com/)

International Cessna 120/140 Association

Bill Rhoades

Editor

6425 Hazelwood Ave.

Northfield, MN 55057

\(612\) 652-2221

\(507\) 663-0098

<pilot140@aol.com>

International Cessna 120/140 Association

David Lowe

Maintenance Advisor

1231 Coffman Road

Sacramento, Kentucky 42372

\(270\) 736-5392

\(270\) 736-9051

<Loweaviate@aol.com>

International Cessna 170 Association

Miles Bowen

President

PO Box 1667

Lebanon, Missouri 65536

\(417\) 532-4847

<C170HQ@mail.llion.org>

[http://www.cessna170.org](http://www.cessna170.org/)

International Cessna 180/185 Club

Scott White

President

PO Box 639

Castlewood, VA 24224

\(540\) 738-8450

International Comanche Society, Inc.

Bruce Berman

Editor

Wiley Post Airport, Hangar 3

Bethany, OK 73008

\(405\) 491-0321

\(405\) 491-0325

<comancheflyer@compuserv.com>

[http://www.ics.pxl.net](http://www.ics.pxl.net/)

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

International Comanche Society, Inc.

Roy Roberts

President

902 Old ReFugio Rd.

Victoria, TX 77905

<rgrob@Techisp.com>

[http://www.ics.pxl.net](http://www.ics.pxl.net/)

International Stinson Club

Dennis Dow

President

3005 6th Street

Sacramento, CA 95818

\(916\) 446-3729

<stinson@aeromar.com>

<http://www.aeromar.com/swsc.html>

International Stinson Club

Ray Herrick

5860 34th Street

Vero Beach, Florida 32966

\(561\) 770-1932

<Ray9502k@aol.com>

Luscombe Association

John Bergeson

6438 West Millbrook

Remun, MI 79340-9625

\(517\) 561-2393

\(517\) 561-5101

Malibu/Mirage Owners and Pilots Association

Russ Caauwe

Executive Director

PO Box 1288

Green Valley, AZ 85614

\(520\) 399-1121

\(520\) 648-3823

<mmopa@uswest.net>

[http://www.MMOPA.com](http://www.MMOPA.com/)

Maule Aircraft Association

Dave Neumeister

Publisher

5630 South Washington Road

Lansing, MI 48911-4999

\(800\) 594-4634

\(800\) 596-8341

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Meyers Aircraft Owners Association

William E. Gaffney

Secretary

PO Box 158

Cragsmoor, NY 12420

\(845\) 565-8005

\(845\) 565-8039

<wgaffne@banet.net>

Mooney Aircraft Pilots Association

Bob KromerTom Canavera

100 Sandau, Suite 200

San Antonio, TX 78216

\(210\) 525-8008

\(210\) 525-8085

<Lela@Txdirect.net>

Musketeer Mail Group

Bob Steward

9220 A-1 Parkway East #240

Birmingham, AL 35206

\(205\) 833-5200

<n76lima@mindspring.com>

National Agricultural Aviaton Association

James Callan

Executive Director

1005 E Street, SE

Washington, DC 20003

\(202\) 546-5722

\(202\) 546-5726

<information@agaviation.org>

[http://www.agaviation.org](http://www.agaviation.org/)

National Business Aviation Association

Eli Cotti

Senior Manager of Technical Operations

1200 18th Street, NW

Suite 400

Washington, DC 20036

\(202\) 783-9000

\(202\) 331-8364

<ecotti@nbaa.org>

[http://www,nbaa.org]()

National Stinson Club

George Almond

1229 Rising Hill Road

Placerville, CA 95667

\(530\) 622-4004

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

National Stinson Club (108 Section)

Robert L. Taylor

Editor

PO BOX 127

Blakesburg, IA 52536

\(641\) 938-2773

\(641\) 938-2084

<aaaapmhq@pcsia.net>

[http://www.aaa-apm.org](http://www.aaa-apm.org/)

North American Trainer Association (T-6,T-28, B-25,F-51)

Stoney and Kathy Stonich

25801 N.E. Hinness Road

Brush Prairie, WA 98606

\(360\) 256-0066

\(360\) 896-5398

<natrainer@aol.com>

[http://www.natrainer.org](http://www.natrainer.org/)

Popular Rotorcraft Association

Pam Bundy

Office Manager

PO Box 68

Mentone, IN 46539

\(219\) 353-7227

\(219\) 353-7227

[http://www.pra.org](http://www.pra.org/)

Short Wing Piper Club

Tom Anderson

5401 Crooked Tree Drive

Mason, Ohio 45040

\(513\) 398-2656

<Tanderson@sprintmail.com>

Short Wing Piper Club

Michael Crowe

2568 Old Snapping Shoals Rd.

McDonough, GA 30252

\(770\) 957-4225

<tripacer@bellsouth.net>

Soaring Society of America

Jim Short

15232 Vaysee Ct.

Lockport, IL 60441

\(708\) 301-3198

<short@megsinet.net>

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Soaring Society of America, Inc.

Larry Sanderson

President

PO Box 2100

Hobbs, NM 88241

\(505\) 392-1177

\(505\) 392-8154

<larry@ssa.org>

[http://www.ssa.org](http://www.ssa.org/)

Swift Association, International

Charlie Nelson

PO Box 644

Athens, TN 37371

\(423\) 745-9547

<swiftlychs@aol.com>

T-34 Association

George Braly

2800 Airport Road

Hangar A

Ada, OK 74820

\(580\) 436-4833

<gwbraly@gami.com>

T-34 Association

Charles Nogle

President

PO Box 925

Champagne, IL 61824

217-56-3063

Twin Beech 18 Society

Mattie Schultz

Executive Director

C/O Staggerwing Museum Foundation, Inc.

PO Box 550

Tullahoma, TN 37388

\(931\) 455-1974

\(931\) 455-2577

<http://tullahoma.com/staggerwing/swm.html>

Twin Bonanza Assocation

Richard I. Ward

Director

19684 Lakeshore Drive

Three Rivers, MI 49093

\(616\) 279-2540

\(616\) 279-2540

<forward@net-link.net>

[http://www.twinbonanza.com](http://www.twinbonanza.com/)

**Associations and Type Club Listing** (continued)

(Contact AOPA/EAA for Current Information)

Twin Cessna Flyer

Anthony Saxton

Technical Director

Box 860

Definance OH 43512

\(419\) 658-4444

\(419\) 658-2988

<tony@tas-aviation.com>

Twin Cessna Flyer

Larry Ball

President

512 Broadway, Ste. 102

New Haven, IN 46774

\(219\) 749-2520

\(219\) 749-6140

<larry@twincessna.org>

[http://www.twincessna.org](http://www.twincessna.org/)

World Beechcraft Society

Bill Robinson

President

500 SE Everett Mall Way

Suite A7

Everett, WA 98208-8111

\(425\) 267-9235

\(425\) 355-6173

<bill@worldbeechcraft.com>

[http://www.worldbeechcraft.com](http://www.worldbeechcraft.com/)

**Appendix IV \-- Airworthiness Contacts**

+--------------------------------------------------------+-------------+
| **[Public contact number for SDRs/AIDs]{.underline}:** | **(405)     |
|                                                        | 954-4173**  |
| **[To Request SDR Data Reports]{.underline}:**         |             |
| [9-AMC-AFS620-REQUEST@mmacmail.jcc                     |             |
| bi.gov](mailto:9-AMC-AFS620-REQUEST@MMACMAILJCCBI.GOV) |             |
+--------------------------------------------------------+-------------+

**[Aviation Safety Inspectors (ASIs)/Aviation Safety Engineers (ASEs)
call]{.underline}:**

+----------------------+-------------------------------+--------------+
| ## *[Aviation Data   |                               | **(405)      |
|  Systems Branch (AFS |                               | 954-4391,**  |
| -620)]{.underline}:* |                               |              |
|                      |                               | **Fax:       |
|                      |                               | -4748**      |
+----------------------+-------------------------------+--------------+
| ## David W. F        |                               | **(405)      |
| ox, Branch Manager ( |                               | 954-6502**   |
| david.w.fox@faa.gov) |                               |              |
+----------------------+-------------------------------+--------------+
| ## Misty Granth      |                               | **(405)      |
| am, Branch Secretary |                               | 954-6429**   |
+----------------------+-------------------------------+--------------+
| ## Thom              | ## *(SDR Program Manager)*    | ## (4        |
| as (Tom) M. Marcotte |                               | 05) 954-6500 |
|                      | <9-AMC-S                      |              |
| *(thomas.            | DR-PrgMgr@mmacmail.jccbi.gov> |              |
| m.marcotte@faa.gov)* |                               |              |
+----------------------+-------------------------------+--------------+
| ## Rober             | ## *(Transport, Ro            | ## (4        |
| t M. (Mickey) Kedigh | torcraft, and Amateur Built)* | 05) 954-6509 |
|                      |                               |              |
| ## *(rober           |                               |              |
| t.m.kedigh@faa.gov)* |                               |              |
+----------------------+-------------------------------+--------------+
| ## Isaac A. Williams | ## *(Small Airplanes)*        | ## (4        |
|                      |                               | 05) 954-6488 |
| *(isaac.             |                               |              |
| a.williams@faa.gov)* |                               |              |
+----------------------+-------------------------------+--------------+

**[National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Accident
Reports]{.underline}:**

***[Analysis and Data Section]{.underline}***:

  ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------
  **Latricia Carter (carterl@ntsb.gov)**                  **(202)
                                                          314-6554**

                                                          

  **Carol Floyd (floydc@ntsb.gov)**                       **(202)
                                                          314-6553**
  ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------

**[Aircraft Certification Website:]{.underline}**
http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert

> [Electronic version of this Small Airplane Directorate Airworthiness
> Concern Process Guide]{.underline}

[http://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals/small_airplanes/cos/continued_airworthiness/media/aceACSGuide.doc](http://www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/ACPGUIDE.DOC)

> This cite also includes an explanation of the AD process, general
> certification information. etc. Select Aircraft Certification, then
> select "Airworthiness Directives" to launch "Regulatory and Guidance
> Library," which contains all ADs, aircraft certification related ACs,
> and aircraft certification regulatory action.

**[Flight Standards Web Sites/E-Mail Addresses]{.underline}:**

> [FAA Flight Standards Service Aviation Information Web
> Site]{.underline}: [http://av-info.faa.gov](http://av-info.faa.gov/)

SDR and M or D Electronic Form , SDR Query/Search Tool, ADs, NPRMs, Air
Operator, Air Agency, Pilot Schools, Mechanic Schools, Repair Stations,
SAIBs, NTSB Accidents, FAA Incidents, AFS Directory, etc.

> [FAA National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center
> (NASDAC)]{.underline}:
> [http://intraweb.nasdac.faa.gov](http://intraweb.nasdac.faa.gov/)
>
> NTSB and FAA Accident/Incident Data (A/IDS), FAA SDR Data Base Search
> Engine, etc.
>
> [AFS-600 HomePage Internet Address]{.underline}:
> http://www.faa.gov/about/office/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs600/
>
> Use Search Button for: ACs, ADs, Alerts, Joint Aircraft
> System/Component Code Table & Definitions (Modified Air Transport
> Association (ATA) Codes)
>
> [FAA Advisory Circular (AC) 43-16A, General Aviation (GA)
> Alerts]{.underline}:

+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **Phil Lomax**                                        | **(405)      |
|                                                       | 954-6487**   |
| Editors                                               |              |
|                                                       | **Fax:       |
| FAA                                                   | -4570**      |
|                                                       |              |
| ATTN: **AFS-640** **ALERTS**                          |              |
|                                                       |              |
| P.O. Box 25082                                        |              |
|                                                       |              |
| Oklahoma City, OK 73125-5029                          |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| *E-Mail:* <phil_w_lomax@mmacmail.jccbi.gov>           | cc           |
|                                                       | :Mail:Lomax, |
|                                                       | Phil W.      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+

> [Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins (SAIBs)]{.underline}:

+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **Mary Ellen Anderson**                               | **(405)      |
|                                                       | 954-         |
| *Information Program Manager*                         | 7071/-4103** |
|                                                       |              |
| FAA                                                   | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -4104**      |
| Airworthiness Programs Branch, AIR-140                |              |
|                                                       |              |
| P.O. Box 26460                                        |              |
|                                                       |              |
| Oklahoma City, OK 73125-0460                          |              |
|                                                       |              |
| *Email:* <mary.ellen.anderson@faa.gov>                |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| SAIBs on the Web:                                     |              |
| [http://av-info.faa.gov](http://av-info.faa.gov/)     |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+

**[Regional AD Coordinators]{.underline}:**

+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **[Engine and Propeller Directorate,                  |              |
| ANE-103]{.underline}:**                               |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| #### Mary Culver, *AD Coordinator*                    | **(781)      |
|                                                       | 238-7125**   |
|                                                       |              |
|                                                       | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -7199**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **[Rotorcraft Directorate, ASW-111]{.underline}**:    |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| > **Patrick Long,** *AD Coordinator*                  | **(817)      |
|                                                       | 222-5115**   |
|                                                       |              |
|                                                       | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -5961**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **[Small Airplane Directorate,                        |              |
| ACE-103]{.underline}**:                               |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| #### Larry Werth, *AD Coordinator*                    | **(816)      |
|                                                       | 329-4147**   |
|                                                       |              |
|                                                       | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -4149**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **[Transport Airplane Directorate]{.underline},       |              |
| ANM-114**                                             |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| > **Rose Opland,** *AD Coordinator*                   | **(425)      |
|                                                       | 227-2154**   |
|                                                       |              |
|                                                       | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -1232**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **[Airworthiness Programs Branch,                     |              |
| AIR-140]{.underline}:**                               |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| > **Mary Ellen Anderson**, *Information Program       | **(405)      |
| > Manager*                                            | 954-         |
| >                                                     | 7071/-4103** |
| > **(AD Distribution)**                               |              |
|                                                       | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -4104**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+

**[Small Airplane Directorate Continued Operational Safety Program,
ACE-110]{.underline}**

> For clarification about ACS process, suggestions for improvements or
> changes, contact:

+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| ######### Marv Nuss                                   | **(816)      |
|                                                       | 329-4117**   |
| Email: <marvin.nuss@faa.gov>                          |              |
|                                                       | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -4090**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| ######### Barry Ballenger                             | **(816)      |
|                                                       | 329-4152**   |
| Email:                                                |              |
| [barry.ballenger@faa.gov](mailto:marvin.nuss@faa.gov) | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -4090**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+

**[Aviation Safety Accident Prevention (ASAP)]{.underline}:**

> For questions about SDR searches using ASAP, contact:

+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| ######### M                                           | **(316)      |
| elinda Alexander, *SAD Service Difficulty Specialist* | 946-4114**   |
|                                                       |              |
| Email:                                                | **Fax:       |
| [m                                                    | -4407**      |
| elinda.alexander@faa.gov](mailto:marvin.nuss@faa.gov) |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| ######### C                                           | **(316)      |
| ora Byrd, *Wichita ACO Service Difficulty Specialist* | 946-4126**   |
|                                                       |              |
| Email: <cora.byrd@faa.gov>                            | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -4407**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| ######### Ka                                          | **(770)      |
| ye Henson, *Atlanta ACO Technical Support Specialist* | 703-6047**   |
|                                                       |              |
| Email: <kaye.henson@faa.gov>                          | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -6097**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| ######### Deborah                                     | **(847)      |
| Knight *Chicago ACO Aircraft Certification Assistant* | 294-7053**   |
|                                                       |              |
| Email:                                                | ########     |
| [deborah.knight@faa.gov](mailto:marvin.nuss@faa.gov)  | # Fax: -7834 |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+

> For desktop access to the SDR data base/AIDS/ADs/etc., contact:

+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| **Ben Beets**,                                        | **(817)      |
|                                                       | 222-5169**   |
| *Software Engineer/Continued Operational Safety,      |              |
| ASW-110*                                              | **Fax:       |
|                                                       | -5961**      |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+
| *Note: Windows based program allows ASEs/ASIs direct  |              |
| access to the SDR database. Internet access software, |              |
| IDs, LAN system passwords, and modem software         |              |
| available upon request. ASEs/ASIs: Contact Ben to add |              |
| selected aviation manufactures to the ASAP system.    |              |
| (for Mfgrs. data base searches.)*                     |              |
+-------------------------------------------------------+--------------+

**[Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA)]{.underline}:**

+----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+
| **Andrew Werking**,                                | **(301)         |
|                                                    | 695-2167**      |
| *Government Specialist of Regulatory &             |                 |
| Certification* Policy                              |                 |
|                                                    |                 |
| Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association             |                 |
|                                                    |                 |
| 421 Aviation Way                                   |                 |
|                                                    |                 |
| Frederick, Maryland 21701-4798                     |                 |
+----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+
| E-Mail:                                            | andrew.w        |
|                                                    | erking@aopa.org |
| AOPA\'s Web Site:                                  |                 |
| [http://www.aopa.org](http://www.aopa.org/)        |                 |
+----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+

**[Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA)]{.underline}:**

+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| **Earl Lawrence**                                   | **(920)        |
|                                                     | 426-6522**     |
| *VP Government Relations*                           |                |
|                                                     |                |
| *Experimental Aircraft Association*                 |                |
|                                                     |                |
| *P.O. Box 3086*                                     |                |
|                                                     |                |
| *Oshkosh, WI 54903-3086*                            |                |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| E-Mail:                                             | Ela            |
|                                                     | wrence@eaa.org |
| EAA\'s "Aviation Safety Data Exchange" Web Site:    |                |
|                                                     |                |
| [htt                                                |                |
| p://www.safetydata.com](http://www.safetydata.com/) |                |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+

![](media/image6.png){width="6.904166666666667in"
height="9.447222222222223in"}

**APPENDIX V -- Engine Risk Assessment**

**1. INTRODUCTION**

This memo provides guidance for Aircraft Certification Offices (ACOs) to
use when evaluating reciprocating engine service problems for
determination of appropriate FAA action. Airworthiness Directives (AD's)
are required for unsafe conditions, but the determination of which types
of engine service problems should be considered unsafe conditions is
dependent upon the type of airplane in which the engine is installed.
Reciprocating engines are typically installed in small airplanes
intended for personal use, and the regulations governing the design and
operation of these airplanes incorporate \"mitigating features\" to
lessen the criticality of the engine. These mitigating features include
low stall speeds, handling and stability criteria, emergency landing
procedures, crashworthiness, and pilot training. These mitigating
factors don't guarantee safety when an engine service problem occurs,
but instead provide a level of assurance that a pilot can reasonably fly
the airplane to a safe landing. Using loss of engine power as measure of
an airplane's ability to accommodate engine failures, actual service
data indicates that total aircraft power losses on turbine powered
transport aircraft are ten times more likely to result in fatalities
than on small piston powered GA aircraft. Therefore, it can be
substantiated that General Aviation (GA) aircraft equipped with
reciprocating engines differ from turbine powered transports relative to
the criticality of the engine.

This uniqueness of the GA fleet has resulted in inconsistent bases for
issuance of ADs related to reciprocating engine service problems. In
some cases, ADs have been issued where other, less burdensome forms of
FAA action would have been more appropriate. And, conversely, in some
cases where no FAA action was taken, an AD was warranted based on the
potential safety risk. The FAA and the turbine engine industry have
addressed similar continued airworthiness inconsistencies by instituting
formalized, quantitatively-based risk assessment methodologies for
evaluation of service problems. Risk assessment methodologies can also
be applied to the GA reciprocating engine fleet, but must be modified to
accommodate the less sophisticated technical resources and the
incompleteness and inaccuracies of service data that is typical of the
GA industry. The risk assessment methodology presented below should be
considered a general guideline, rather than a specific procedure, to use
for the evaluation of GA reciprocating engine service problems. It must
be emphasized that, because each service problem presents its own unique
set of circumstances, the risk assessment methodology will need to be
customized to accommodate each analysis.

 

**2. RISK ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY**

A risk analysis utilizes data and information on a service problem to
quantify the expected number of future events over a specified time
period. The risk analysis should consider the consequences of the
service problem relative to safety of flight, the probability of that
service problem occurring, and the exposure of the current GA fleet to
the problem. The following procedure is provided to assist in
development of a risk

analysis for a GA engine service problem. Because the particular details
of any given service problem vary, this procedure can only be considered
a starting point; evaluation methods will likely require customization
to fit the specific data. It should also be noted that in many cases,
all of the necessary data may not be available, and estimates must be
used in place of the actual data. If necessary, engineers or flight test
pilots can be consulted regarding the characteristics of airplane
response to a given engine problem.

*An example based on an actual service problem will be provided to
parallel each step of the following risk assessment process. Each
subparagraph will contain its respective step from the example at the
end of the descriptive text. The example will be based on the service
problem evaluated for issuance of recent AD, which addressed failures of
engine crankshafts.*

**a. Consequences of the Engine Service Problem**

The first step in the process involves evaluation of the engine service
problem to determine the potential effect on flight safety. For the
purpose of this Guidance Memo, engine service problems that are being
considered for AD action can typically be grouped in one of the three
following hazard levels:

1.  [*Hazardous*:]{.underline} Engine service problems that cause fire,
    uncontainment or other problems that could result in immediate
    collateral damage to the aircraft. These require minimal evaluation
    as they represent a direct safety hazard to the aircraft and they
    should be considered an unsafe condition that warrants an AD.
    However, a risk analysis should still be performed to help determine
    compliance times for the AD.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  *[Major:]{.underline}* Engine Service Problems that cause a
    significant power loss. These events pose an indirect hazard to the
    aircraft and do not necessarily require an AD. As discussed above,
    the design of GA airplanes incorporate mitigating features that
    contribute to lessening the severity of an engine service problem.
    Other factors, such as probability of the event occurring and fleet
    exposure, need to be considered for these service problems before
    initiating an AD.

2.  *[Minor:]{.underline}* Other types of service problems that do not
    result in a significant power loss, such as a partial power loss,
    rough running, pre-ignition, backfire, single magneto failures.
    These are potential AD candidates only if the probability of the
    event is very high.

Information on the consequences of the service problem should be
obtained from the production approval holder (PAH), which includes the
engine manufacturer, STC holder, or PMA holder.

 

*[EXAMPLE:]{.underline} Manufacturing defects in a certain population of
engine crankshafts had experienced numerous failures resulting in 13
accidents over a six year time period. Failure of the crankshaft
resulted in immediate engine shutdown, but did not result in uncontained
engine destruction, failure of the engine mounting system, fire, or
other*

*collateral damage. Therefore, the failure mode posed an indirect hazard
to the airplane and was classified as \"major\".*

 

b.  **Identification of Suspect Population**

The suspect population consists of all engines on which the service
problem might occur. This could include the entire fleet of a particular
engine model, or a subset of that fleet. For example, a quality escape
might only impact a range of engine serial numbers

shipped over a certain time period. Identification of the suspect lot
requires input from the PAH. The suspect population can be defined in
the following terms:

-   Direct Population: this represents the engines that are confirmed to
    have the suspect part or condition and on which the service problem
    might occur. The direct population can be defined only if records
    exist that specifically define engine serial numbers, or a range of
    engine serial numbers, on which the risk of the service problem
    exists. However, the number of engines in the direct population can
    be determined based on the number of parts shipped. The conversion
    of the number of suspect spare parts to an equivalent number of
    engines must take a conservative approach, and assume that a minimum
    number of the suspect parts were installed in each engine.

-   Indirect Population: this represents the engines that require
    further inspection or maintenance action to determine if they have
    the suspect part or condition. This

> would apply if, for example, a suspect lot of spare parts were shipped
> to various third party repair facilities, and records are not
> available to identify which engine serial numbers the parts were
> installed in. Or, if the failure condition results from an improper
> repair or maintenance procedure, and it is not known which engines
> underwent the repair or action, then all engines of the particular
> model must be considered suspect.

Determination of the total number of engines of a particular model that
are currently in service can be obtained from the engine manufacturer,
or from the FAA aircraft registry in Oklahoma City.

 

*[EXAMPLE:]{.underline} Data from the engine manufacturer and from the
FAA indicates that the suspect crankshafts are installed on
approximately 10,100 engines.*

-   *Because the FAA/APO GA Survey presents operating hours for
    airplanes, not engines, the number of equivalent airplanes needs to
    be calculated:*

-   *assume 13% aircraft are twin engine (FAA/APO GA Survey)*

-   *10,100 engines = 87% N + 2 x (13% N), where N = total no. of
    airplanes*

-   ***N = 8938 airplanes**, (1162 twins + 7775 singles)*

-   *this is the direct population because this is an estimate of the
    number of engines equipped with the suspect crankshafts*

**c. Event Rate**

The event rate is expressed as the number of service problem events per
operating hour. The rate can be based on actual service experience, test
data, or analysis. The rate may change with time; for example, for a
fatigue-related problem, the rate may increase as a part or engine
accumulates more total time.

In many cases, only data on the number of accidents is available, not
the number of total events. The event rate will then need to be
estimated from the available data. To accomplish this, the following
relationship between shutdowns, accidents and fatal accidents was
derived from an analysis of FAA SDR data and NTSB accident data:

-   Shutdowns/power losses: \>1 every 10,000 hours

-   Accidents: 1 every 100,000 hours

-   Fatal Accidents: 1 every 1,000,000 hour

For the purpose of the risk assessment, the event rate is assumed to be
equivalent to the shutdown/power loss rate. The following formulas can
then be used to estimate the number of events from available accident
data:

-   No. of events = (No. of accidents) X 10, or

-   No. of events = (No. of fatal accidents) X 100

 

*[EXAMPLE:]{.underline}*

-   *NTSB accident data indicated 13 accidents due to failures of engine
    crankshafts over the period from 1986 to 1992*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   *The event rate needs to estimated from the accident rate*

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   *It is assumed that the event rate will not change in the future.*

-   *estimate applicable airplane flight hours over relevant time
    period*

-   *piston fleet est'd at 198,335 aircraft (FAA/APO GA Survey)*

-   *applicable airplanes estimated as 8938 (step b above)*

-   *applicable airplanes as % of piston fleet = 8938/198335 = 4.5% of
    fleet*

-   *189,947,000 hours for total fleet over '86-'92 time period*

-   *4.5% of total fleet hrs for applicable population = **8,559,036
    aircraft hours***

-   *calculate event rate*

-   *13 accidents/incidents over '86-'92 time period*

-   *13 accidents/ 8,559,036 hrs = 1.52 x 10^-6^ accident rate*

-   *10 x (accident rate) = **15.2 x 10^-6^ event rate***

** **

d.  **Exposure to Failure Condition**

The exposure to the service problem is a function of the suspect
population, and the number of hours those engines can be expected to
operate over a specified time period.

-   Determination of the appropriate time period to use for the analysis
    depends on the characteristics of the service problem. In some
    cases, for high utilization aircraft, it may be appropriate to use
    the overhaul period and assume that maintenance is not performed
    between overhauls. A one year specified time period may be used if
    no other basis exists for the estimate.

-   The number of hours per engine must be estimated. Manufacturer's
    data can be used, or the General Aviation and Air Taxi Activity
    Survey, published by the FAA Office

> of Aviation Policy and Plans, provides GA fleet utilization hours to
> estimate the number of hours the suspect population of engines are
> operated.

-   The total hours of exposure of the suspect population can then be
    found by multiplying the direct population by the number of hours
    per engine per year, multiplied by the specified time period.

 

*[EXAMPLE:]{.underline} A one-year time period was chosen for this
analysis and the utilization rate was estimated as 130
hour/airplane/year (based on FAA/APO GA Survey).*

-   *Exposure = (130 hrs/airplane/yr) x (8938 airplanes) **= 1.16x10^6^
    hours***

c.  **Expected Events**

The expected number of events can then be found by multiplying the event
rate by the number of hours of exposure over the specified time period.
The expected number of events can then be compared to historical data or
FAA safety objectives for the respective event criticality level
(hazardous, major or minor) to determine the appropriate form of FAA
action, if any. However, for small populations of at-risk engines, the
risk exposure may be unacceptable even if the analysis forecasts a low
number of expected events. In those cases, further analysis may be
required.

The following table illustrates possible alternative courses of FAA
action based on the risk assessment results. It is provided as a
recommended guideline, and as previously stated, each service problem
will have unique aspects that may require modifications to this process.

 

**Recommended FAA Action^1^**

+-------------+----------------+-------------+------------------------+
| **Expected  | **Minor        | **Major     | **Hazardous Failure    |
| Number of   | Failure        | Failure     | Consequences**         |
| Events^2^** | Consequences** | Con         |                        |
|             |                | sequences** |                        |
+-------------+----------------+-------------+------------------------+
| Low         | None           | GA Alert    | Airworthiness          |
|             |                |             | Directive              |
|             | ANPRM          | AC 43-16    |                        |
|             |                |             | (AD)                   |
|             |                | Or          |                        |
|             |                |             |                        |
|             |                | SAIB        |                        |
+-------------+----------------+-------------+------------------------+
| Medium      | GA Alert       | Ai          | Airworthiness          |
|             |                | rworthiness | Directive              |
|             | AC 43-16       | Directive   |                        |
|             |                | (AD)        | (AD)                   |
|             | Or             |             |                        |
|             |                | (EXAMPLE)   |                        |
|             | SAIB^3^        |             |                        |
+-------------+----------------+-------------+------------------------+
| High        | Airworthiness  | Ai          | Airworthiness          |
|             | Directive (AD) | rworthiness | Directive              |
|             |                | Directive   |                        |
|             |                | (AD)        | (AD)                   |
+-------------+----------------+-------------+------------------------+

 

1.  This assumes that company actions such as Service Letters, Service
    Bulletins, and Type Club or other association publications will be
    taken. If not, then FAA action may be required to compensate for the
    lack of company action.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  More precise objectives or levels for hazardous, major and minor
    events will be defined as reciprocating engine risk assessment
    experience is accumulated.

2.  Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin

 

*[EXAMPLE:]{.underline}*

-   *Expected events = (event rate) x (exposure)*

> *= (15.2 x 10^-6^ events/hour) x (1.16x10^6^ hours) **= 18 expected
> events ***

-   *For the purposes of the table shown below, 18 expected events are
    assumed to represent a \"medium\" value, and for a major failure
    condition, an AD is recommended.*

   

**f. Other Considerations**

The following additional factors should be considered when evaluating
the need to issue an AD:

-   If the suspect parts are installed on an identifiable group of
    engines (i.e., by engine serial number), or if only a small fleet of
    the suspect engine model exists, then the per flight risk, or risk
    exposure of any individual aircraft, to the service problem is
    higher for a given event probability. In these cases, an AD would be
    more likely to be required.

-   Service problem occurrence rates that change over time must be
    considered in the analysis. These service problems are typically
    fatigue-related and are more likely

> to occur as the part or engine accumulates more operating hours.
> Additional data is often required to properly assess these conditions.

-   In some instances, where the indirect population greatly exceeds the
    direct population (those engines with the suspect part), the number
    of expected events will be low relative to the size of the fleet. If
    an AD is required, the AD compliance section should structured to
    limit the burden on the indirect population of engines.

-   Other sources of data that can be used to support the risk analysis
    include FAA Service Difficulty Report (SDR) and Accident/Incident
    data, and data from GA organizations such as Airplane Owners and
    Operators Association (AOPA) or Aeronautical Repair Station
    Association (ARSA). These organizations can conduct surveys of their
    members to obtain specific information.

 

![](media/image7.png){width="2.375in" height="1.3333333333333333in"}

 

**Appendix VI \-- Risk Assessment for Airworthiness Concerns on**

**Small Airplane Directorate Products**

**1. Introduction and Overview/ General Discussion**

This process is for Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) personnel to use
when performing a service problem risk assessment on Small Airplane
Directorate products for determination of appropriate FAA Airworthiness
(A/W) corrective actions.

Airworthiness Directives (AD's) are required to address unsafe
conditions, but the determination of which types of service problems
should be considered as unsafe conditions is generally dependent upon
the type and use of the aircraft. Small Airplane Directorate 14 CFR Part
23 product line ranges considerably from manned free balloons, airships,
gliders, small single engine personal use airplanes, to business jets
and multi-engine commuter turboprops used in 14 CFR Part 135 and 121
service

Operational Performance Risk (OPR) Groups: For Risk Assessment (RA)
purposes, three groups within the SAD product line will be generally
considered herein: Lower (OPR) group (1); Medium OPR group (2); and
Higher OPR group (3):

[Lower OPR Group (1)]{.underline}:

Includes manned free airships, gliders, sailplanes, primary category
airplanes and restricted category airplanes and some (small)
non-pressurized single engine airplanes. These aircraft are typically
used in day only or day and night visual flight rules (VFR) operations.
Limited instrument flight rules (IFR) operational capability.
Predominately private use (14 CFR Part 91 Operations) Non-pressurized.
The regulations governing the design and operation of these aircraft
typically incorporate design features that make them somewhat more
tolerant of failures (short of major structural failures). Features
include low stall speeds, excellent low speed handling and stability,
and typically operated under day-only VFR conditions. These factors
don't guarantee safety in the event of a failure or service problem, but
instead provide a level of assurance that a pilot can reasonably fly the
airplane to a landing. Includes 14 CFR Part 91/135 (private use, flight
instruction, private rental, and some air taxi operations).

[Medium OPR Group (2)]{.underline}:

Generally includes medium performance single and multi-reciprocating
engine airplanes approved for IFR operation. Includes pressurized
airplanes used in known icing conditions. Considered less tolerant of
failures due to typically higher gross weight and higher landing speeds.
Multi-engined airplanes with more redundant features normally are prone
to asymmetric thrust issues in the event of an engine failure. Typical
single pilot operations. Service experience indicates an acceptable
level of safety even for emergency landings. Includes 14 CFR Part 91 and
135 (non-scheduled airline) operations.

[Higher OPR Group (3)]{.underline}:

Generally includes airplanes with complex systems, pressurized, two or
more turbine engines, used in known icing conditions, and/or high
speed/high altitude operations and with high stall speeds. Includes 14
CFR Part 91 (business jets), and 14 CFR Part 121 & 135 (scheduled and
non-scheduled airline) operations.

This wide variety of Small Airplane Directorate products may result in
an inconsistent basis for issuance of AD\'s. In some cases, AD\'s have
been issued where other, less burdensome forms of FAA action would have
been more appropriate. Conversely, in some cases where no FAA action was
taken, an AD may have been warranted based on the potential safety risk.

Risk assessment methodologies can be applied to these products, but must
be modified to consider the wide variation in technical resources, the
service data completeness, and accuracy of service data. The risk
assessment methodology that follows should be considered a general
guideline to aid in evaluating a service problem, rather than a specific
procedure that must be followed without exception. It must be emphasized
that, because each service problem presents its own unique set of
circumstances, the risk assessment methodology will need to be
customized to accommodate each analysis.

**1.1 Assumptions**

This risk assessment is applicable to certificated small airplane
directorate products that include (reference Section 3.1.b.):

OPR Group (1):

> Manned Free Balloons
>
> Airships
>
> Gliders and Sailplanes
>
> Primary Category Airplanes
>
> Restricted Category Airplanes

OPR Group (1/2):

> Single Reciprocating Engined Airplanes
>
> Multi Reciprocating Engined Airplanes

OPR Group (2):

> Single Turbine Engined Airplanes

OPR Group (2/3):

> Multi Turbine Engine Airplanes

OPR Group (3):

> Commuter Category Airplanes

These aircraft can be operated under 14 CFR part 91 "General Operating
and Flight Rules" (for personal use and for hire). Some can be operated
under 14 CFR part 135 and part 121 (for hire).

This diversity of aircraft classes and uses may make it difficult to
determine appropriate airworthiness action. This process has been
developed to help determine the airworthiness impact on aircraft based
on service difficulty reports, accident data, and safety analysis.

The objective is to use this measurable and structured analytical
process to determine appropriate airworthiness corrective actions. It is
intended as a diagnostic tool for the FAA aviation safety engineer (ASE)
as a supplement to the AD Handbook, in coordination with the respective
Small Airplane Directorate AD technical writers and coordinators. It is
recognized that many variables

and circumstances beyond the scope of this process can influence the
outcome. Since airworthiness actions differ, the SAD AD coordination
group and FAA legal counsel can influence final AD actions.

14 CFR part 25 (Transport category) airplanes may require a different
level of review. Other processes and procedures may also be valid in
determining the probability or risk of occurrence, (e.g. FAA Advisory
Circular (AC) 39.XX, ACE-110, ANE-110 and ANM-110 guidance/policies
documents, etc.). This procedure compliments those efforts.

**1.2 Consideration of Cost:**

When an immediate safety of flight concern has been presented, cost
should not be a primary consideration. The primary focus should be what
corrective action must be taken to mitigate the A/W problem and the most
effective means to notify the public.

When a safety of flight concern has been identified that does not
require immediate action (e.g. NPRM), the consideration of cost (burden)
can be effectively applied. It is important to remember that the great
majority of airplanes in our country are privately owned and operated.
AD actions require expenditure of limited resources. We should always
minimize the burden on the public. Often, the public believes the FAA
does not consider cost when identifying A/W corrective actions. To
responsibly perform our duties, we should always strive to find the most
effective means at the lowest cost to correct or mitigate potential
safety of flight concerns. Seek type club economic impact input.

Note: Both Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) recommended method of
compliance and any alternate method of compliance should be considered
and incorporated if it maintains the appropriate level of safety while
reducing the operator\'s economic compliance burden.

# 1.3 Immediate Safety Problems: 

> Address *immediate safety problems* with Emergency AD mandatory
> inspection, or other appropriate means. Develop a short-term solution
> to *mitigate the immediate A/W safety problem* and then *use the
> expertise of the industry and users groups* to [create a
> cost-effective long-term corrective action]{.underline}. Usually the
> longer term solution need not be immediately adopted as the mandatory
> inspection requirement would still be in place until public comments
> could be received, dispositioned, and then incorporated in the final
> AD action (e.g. NPRM process).

**2. Definition of Terms**

1.  **Safety Effect**

The *Safety Effect* is the actual service report or potential outcome of
the known failure condition. The more adverse the consequences, the
higher the risk weighting. Information on the consequences of the
service problem should be coordinated with the production approval
holder

(PAH) and/or Industry Group. The weighting for each safety effect are
shown in parentheses in the summary below:

> **Catastrophic effect (4)**- High potential for loss of aircraft,
> multiple fatalities.
>
> **Hazardous effect (3)-** Large reduction in functional capabilities
> or safety margins that can cause serious or fatal injuries.
>
> **Major effect (2)**- Significant reduction in functional capabilities
> or safety margins that will cause physical discomfort or a significant
> increase in workload, possible injuries or fatalities.
>
> **Minor effect (1)** - Slight reduction in functional capabilities or
> safety margins that will cause an increase in workload or require use
> of emergency procedures.

**2.1.1**

**Safety Risk Factor is the potential risk based on potential safety
effect listing (+ plus) aircraft type, operational use, etc. (see
Section 3.1). The higher the number, the greater impact on overall risk
on continued airworthiness.**

2.  **Operational Use:**

*Operational use* may play a role in appropriate A/W corrective action
by impacting the priority in which the corrective action is
accomplished. Because of this, an airworthiness safety condition in a
single engine airplane operated under 14 CFR Part 91 may be treated
differently from a 14 CFR Part 121 or 135 airplane in airline service.
Note: A/W problems that result in an immediate safety of flight
condition must be handled in the same manner regardless of operational
type. **In no particular order:**

**Passenger Service**, (14 CFR Part 121 scheduled, part 135
unscheduled) - Scheduled passenger service requires the highest level of
airworthiness oversight, prompt attention, and actions are needed when
safety problems are reported.

**Trainers** - Rigorous operational use demanded. Numerous takeoffs,
landings and power changes tend to stress airframe and powerplant/s.
Accumulates hours (time-in service) quickly and are usually maintained
under a structured maintenance program. Historically 100 hour or
equivalent inspections per 14 CFR Part 43, were developed to mitigate
higher number of hours per month operating rates and maintain a
reasonable level of safety.

**Agricultural Airplanes/Aircraft** - Typically used in sparsely
populated areas, single place (pilot) and Day VFR flight conditions.
Several certification standards define agricultural aircraft including
Civil Air Manual (CAM) 8, Civil Air Regulations (CAR) 3, 14 CFR Part
21.25 and Part 23, etc.

**Acrobatics** - Usually a special designed airplane with additional
structural capability and wider range of performance. 14 CFR Part 23
acknowledges the higher structural loading and defines specific
certification requirements.

**Personal Use** - Usually owned by individuals or small groups and
operated under 14 CFR Part 91. Day VFR to night IFR operations.
Generally, low fleet average operating hours per month. Annual
inspection intervals. Low use can contribute to different airworthiness
concerns than higher use aircraft.

**Special Use -** Banner towing, parachute jumping, aerial photography,
medical transport, etc., may generate special concerns from this wide
variety of operation.

3.  **Number of Occurrences of the Event:**

The event is defined as the action that causes the ASE to begin an
investigation to determine if an A/W corrective action is necessary. The
event can be an aircraft accident, incident, NTSB Safety Recommendation,
FAA Safety recommendation, SDR Study, congressional inquiry, or public
inquiry, etc.

The number of occurrences is the total number of recorded events of that
failure condition on that make and model aircraft.

4.  **Events versus Population:**

The number of occurrences divided by the total number of registered
aircraft of that make and model and configuration. Alternately, where a
component is used on multiple makes and/or models, the number of
occurrences divided by the total number of registered aircraft that
incorporate the component. This is to be used as a "rough order of
magnitude" number. Exact number is service is not necessary but would be
helpful.

5.  **Time between Events:**

Using all the occurrences counted in paragraph 2.3 above, determine the
average of the times between events. For single events, use \"average
fleet age\" as \"time between events\".

Default: If \'time\' is unknown the following average flight hours per
year (ball park estimate) may be used:

  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------
  [Primary Operational                [Hours per Year/Hours per
  Use]{.underline}:                   Month]{.underline}:

  Private Use:                        75 hrs./year/6.25 hrs./month)

  Business Use:                       300 hours per year (25 hrs./month)

  Air Taxi Use:                       1200 hours per year (100
                                      hrs./month)

  Scheduled Airline Use:              2400 hours per year (200
                                      hrs./month)
  ----------------------------------- -----------------------------------

6.  **Aircraft Type:**

**Airships, Manned Free Balloons etc. --** Better safety record than
powered airplanes, gliders and sailplanes. Low safety impact due to
failures. Treat separately on a case by case basis.

**Gliders and Sailplanes -** Unique operational use and safety impact.
Lower safety effect (impact) than powered airplanes. Treat similar to
single reciprocating engine airplanes.

**Single Engine (reciprocating)** - Single engine airplane design
features tend to mitigate the hazardous effects of an engine failure.
Low stall speed (61 knots or less), stable handling characteristics,
good glide ratio, 14 CFR Part 23 structural requirements all indicate
acceptable level of safety. Pilots typically make successful landings
without power.

Studies indicate fatal accidents occur less than 1% of the time as a
result of engine failures. Reasons include low stall speeds,
conservative flight and stall handling characteristics, and 14 CFR Part
91 pilot training requirements, etc. Generally as airplane weight and
performance increases, the impact of continued flight to a landing due
to engine failure, increases. Service experience indicates private
pilots typically land safely (on/off-airport) after engine failures.
Refer to the Engine and Propeller Directorate for additional guidance in
this area.

**Multi Engine (reciprocating)** - Shares design commonality with many
twin engine turboprop airplanes; e.g. two engines, system backups, etc.
to help mitigate failures that could impact continued safe flight to
landing. Many twin-engine (reciprocating) airplanes have a stall speed
of 61 knots or less (Reference 14 CFR Part 23). These airplanes
typically provide for single pilot operations and service experience
indicates an acceptable level of safety even for off-airport landings.
It is noted that certain twin-engined (reciprocating) airplanes cannot
maintain single engine level flight under all operating conditions. The
glide may be extended with the remaining engine to allow the pilot to
locate optional landing sites.

**Single Engine Turbojet or Turboprop** - Similar design certification
requirements as a single reciprocating engine airplane, (e.g. low stall
speed, etc.) with additional requirements to account for higher
performance and mission capability. Some airplanes may have stall speeds
above 61 knots. In these cases, other technologies are typically
incorporated to mitigate the increased energy and other factors in an
emergency situation (e.g. off-airport landing).

**Twin Engine Turbojet or Turboprop** **Class** - Considered high
performance airplanes with relatively high stall speeds. Typically
requires improved landing fields and fairly long runways for successful
operations. Off-airport landings are significant in that damage to the
airplane can involve occupant injuries. Airplane systems have built in
redundancies to mitigate the potential for failures resulting in
off-airport landings. There are usually two or more engines, airplane
systems backups, usually a minimum crew of two, with extensive pilot
training and recurrency requirements. These are a few examples used for
continued safe flight to landing after a failure occurs that compromises
safety.

**Commuter Class** - Considered same as Part 25, highest level of safety
desired and needed.

**3.0 Risk Assessment Methodology**

Determine the **Safety Effect** and the **Safety Risk Factor** and plot
the results of the assessment on the Initial Risk Assessment Evaluation
Chart (shown in Figure 1 and 3) using the methodology that follows. From
the chart, determine the most likely AD action or other method of
alerting the public to the service difficulty such as SAIB, GA Alert,
Manufacturer\'s Service Bulletin, etc. The chart provides a global
perspective to assist the evaluator to determine potential corrective
action means.

**3.1 Initial Risk Assessment Evaluation Chart**

The chart is not intended to mandate A/W corrective actions, but is
intended to supplement the decision-making process. The chart values
were determined from prior experience and may be revised further as
dictated by future experience. In certain cases, experience and
judgement may drive the user to a different conclusion. In those cases,
please consult with the Small Airplane Directorate AD coordinator.

The **ordinate (y-axis)** denotes the **Safety Effect** and it's effect
on continued airworthiness. The four categories are Minor, Major,
Hazardous, and Catastrophic (see section 3.1). The categories are
intended to weigh the relative effects of an airworthiness problem and
it's effect on *continued flight to a landing*. The user can interpolate
and assess a safety effect score between the values stated below,
although it is not recommended to refine the **Safety Effect** number
below a 0.5 (1/2) range.

The higher the Safety Effect, the more negative the airworthiness
effect. The airworthiness impact determination is very important and
must be carefully analyzed to minimize the burden on the public while
maximizing the mandatory corrective action (if necessary) to mitigate
the airworthiness problem.

The **abscissa (x-axis)** denotes the **Safety Risk Factor.** The safety
risk factor increases from left to right and is calculated using the
following:

**Safety Risk Factor =** [Safety Effect (**a**)]{.underline} x
[Operational Use (**b**)]{.underline} x [Percentage used by population
(**c**)]{.underline} + [Number of Occurrences (**d**)]{.underline} +
[Events versus Population (**e**)]{.underline} + [Time between Events
(**f**)]{.underline} + [Aircraft Type (**g**)]{.underline}

**Where:**

> **a. Safety Effect (reference Section 2.1):**

  --------------------------------------------------- --------- ----------
  Catastrophic                                        **(4)**   

  Hazardous                                           **(3)**   

  Major                                               **(2)**   

  Minor                                               **(1)**   
  --------------------------------------------------- --------- ----------

> **b. Operational Use (reference Sections 1.1 and** **2.2):**

  ------------------------------------------------ ----------------------
  14 CFR Part 135/121                              **(3)**

  14 CFR Part 91 (for hire)                        **(2)**

  14 CFR Part 91 (personal)                        **(1)**
  ------------------------------------------------ ----------------------

> **c. Percentage Use by Population (\*):**

  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------
  \>75% 14 CFR Part 135/121                             **(4)**

  \>50% 14 CFR Part 135/121                             **(3)**

  \>25% 14 CFR Part 135/121                             **(2)**

  \<25% 14 CFR Part 135/121                             **(1)**
  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------

> **d. Number of Occurrences (reference Section 2.3):**

  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------
  5 +                                                   **(3)**

  3 to 5                                                **(2)**

  1 to 3                                                **(1)**
  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------

**e. Events versus Population (reference Section 2.4)\*:**

  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------
  10% +                                                 **(2)**

  1% +                                                  **(1)**

  0.1%                                                  **(0)**

  Less than .1%                                         **(-1)**
  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------

**f. Time between Events (reference Section 2.5):**

  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------
  Over 3 years                                          **(-1)**

  Over 2 years                                          **(0)**

  1 to 2 years                                          **(1)**

  Less than 1 year                                      **(2)**
  ----------------------------------------------------- -----------------

> **g. Aircraft Type (reference Section 2.6):**

+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| Commuter/Twin Turbojet                              | **(3)**        |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| ## Turboprop                                        | **(2)**        |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| ## Twin Engine Reciprocating                        | **(1)**        |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| ## Single Engine Reciprocating                      | **(0)**        |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| ## Single Engine Jet\*\*                            | **(0)**        |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| ## Glider/Sailplane                                 | **(-1)**       |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| AG Airplane                                         | **(-2)**       |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+
| ## Airship/Balloon                                  | **(-3)**       |
+-----------------------------------------------------+----------------+

\* Exact numbers are not necessary. The important issue is to determine
applicable values based on sound engineering judgement. Industry and
association databases or other expertise including airline trend
analysis personnel may be utilized to determine best numerical values.

\*\*Assumes similar operational performance (stall/landing speed) to
high performance single engine reciprocating aircraft.

**4.0 Safety Effect Determination**

The Safety Effect determination has a significant impact on the response
to an airworthiness concern or service problem.

4.1 Accident/Incidents:

SDR reports, NTSB safety recommendations, FAA safety recommendations, or
an airplane accident/incident are the most common triggers of
airworthiness investigations. An actual aircraft accident or incident
event is very significant and should influence the ASE's decision on
what action to take. Understanding the actual aircraft accident/incident
event versus a SDR report provides important insight on the actual
safety effect versus a potential safety effect.

Example: An airplane experiences a partial hydraulic failure in a
critical flight control system. The flight crew is able to control the
airplane to a landing but runs off the end of the runway damaging the
airplane. In the Safety Effect Listing (reference Section 5.0), a
partial hydraulic failure is identified as a potentially a **hazardous**
safety effect. The actual accident/incident outcome may have contributed
to a **major** safety effect impact on the continued safe fight to a
landing.

Note: Some airplane designs may provide additional capabilities enabling
the crew to cope with a partial hydraulic failure lowering the safety
effect from **hazardous** to **major to even minor**. Other designs may
not be as robust. This is where additional data gathering and expert
engineering consultation would help. Reviewing the FAA's SDR Aviation
Safety Accident Prevention (ASAP) database may provide more reports of
similar service difficulties for that particular type design. Other
examples of similar failure conditions may result in a **catastrophic**
outcome. In that case, your investigation may lead you to conclude that
a partial hydraulic failure has a bigger safety impact than the Safety
Effect Listing indicates (**catastrophic** vs. **hazardous**).

In conclusion, real world outcomes often provide valuable insight when
making safety effect determinations.

4.2 Service Difficulty Reports:

The *trend or pattern* from service difficulty reports (SDRs) should be
an integral part of the evaluation. In general, the greater *number of
SDRs per fleet size*, the more concern or attention needs to be paid
depending on the airworthiness *impact concerning continued flight to a
landing*. The *time frame* in which the reports are cited is also
important. Often an initial SDR is followed or preceded by additional
reports of the same or similar condition over a relatively short period
of time (2 years or less.). At the same time SDRs with *minor or minimal
(No) effect upon airworthiness* may occur several times over a
relatively short period. These may need less attention/action, as the
overall negative effect on continued flight to a landing is low.

The chart and process can be used by considering Safety Effect impact
using two definitions and averaging. For example, a particular type of
failure report may potentially be both hazardous and catastrophic. In
those cases, engineering judgment is required, however a reasonable

approach is to add the two Safety Effect numbers and average the sum.
This may provide additional insight on the appropriate AD action.

**5.0 Safety Effect Listing**

The following list of safety of flight examples is broken-down by
potential airworthiness *impact*. This is a guide, not hard and fast
rules, or an exhaustive list. The listing is provided to assist the
evaluator. Some of the examples shown in each category listing may
result in a higher probability for that identified outcome than another
in the same category. Examples were grouped together by service
experience, FAA AC documents, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
Aerospace Recommended Practices (ARP) publications, and engineering
judgement. An obvious example is failure of the primary structure versus
failure of a powered flight control system. [Primary structural failure
*results* in a catastrophic event]{.underline} while [failure of a
powered flight control system *may have high potential* for a
catastrophic event]{.underline}. This difference needs to be evaluated
during the AD review process. Engineering judgement is needed and the
intent of these listings is to provide a basis for the evaluator. Other
sources of information and expertise that can be helpful include senior
engineering experts, industry groups, industry guidelines, AD
coordination group, Directorate specialists, etc.

**[5.1 Examples of Conditions that have a potentially CATASTROPHIC
effect (4)]{.underline}**

Failure of the primary aircraft structure

> Failure of powered flight control system
>
> Failure of a propeller blade (at the shank)
>
> Failure of a propeller hub
>
> Failure of a propeller control system
>
> Total loss of flight instruments
>
> Engine fire that causes an accident
>
> Cabin fire
>
> Significant electrical system fire
>
> (Engine) failure of the rotating system (Not reciprocating engines)
>
> Engine turbine wheel burst
>
> Engine compressor wheel failure
>
> Engine shaft disconnect/failure
>
> Complete hydraulic system failure
>
> Runaway trim system
>
> Autopilot hardovers
>
> Failure or malfunction of the engine Full Authority Digital Electronic
> Control (FADEC) Powerplant Control) overspeed protection system
>
> Malfunction of an airplane stick pusher
>
> Malfunctioning thrust reverser in flight
>
> Structural, engine and or propeller repairs not performed properly and
> a failure occurs

**[5.2 Examples of Conditions that have a potentially HAZARDOUS effect
(3)]{.underline}**

> Crack in Primary Structure (Repairs Needed)
>
> Engine fires
>
> Carbon monoxide in cabin
>
> Failure or malfunction of engine control system (FADEC) causing loss
> of powerplant control
>
> Powerplant performance enhancement trim system
>
> Stick pusher if warning is given
>
> Powered flight controls if one loss on one axis only
>
> Total loss of navigation and communication
>
> Loss of or misleading airspeed information for high performance
> airplanes
>
> Loss of altitude information
>
> Total power loss
>
> Partial hydraulic failure (flight critical systems)
>
> Partial propeller blade failure (mid-span or outboard)
>
> Partial electrical system failure
>
> Failure of the pilot's seat
>
> Failure of Vacuum pump
>
> Engine system accessories
>
> Failure of propeller governor
>
> Failure of trim tabs

**[5.3 Examples of Conditions that potentially have a MAJOR effect
(2)]{.underline}**

> Crack in Primary Structure (Inspections Needed)
>
> Total loss of or misleading airspeed information
>
> Total loss of directional heading information
>
> Total loss of navigation information
>
> Failure of landing gear
>
> Loss of Landing gear control (up/down)
>
> Loss of airplane steering
>
> Airplane tire failure
>
> Total loss of braking (airplanes greater than 6,000 lbs.)
>
> Total loss of powerplant fire warning system
>
> Loss of one engine (multi-engined aircraft) (results in A/C damage)
>
> Partial loss of hydraulic system (multi-circuit systems)
>
> Failure of primary engine overspeed governor
>
> Failure of auxiliary fuel pump
>
> Failure of the primary engine fuel pump (results in A/C damage)
>
> Failure of the engine coolant system
>
> Improper structural, engine, or propeller repairs

**[5.4 Examples of Conditions that potentially have a MINOR effect
(1)]{.underline}**

Cracks found in secondary aircraft structures

> Unusual wear found in rotating aircraft assemblies (landing gear
> components, mechanical flight control systems, bearing, etc.)
>
> Loss of one engine (multi-engined aircraft)
>
> Loss of primary engine fuel pump (does not cause engine failure -- may
> cause performance degradation)
>
> Failure of air temperature gauge
>
> Failure of the aircraft overspeed warning
>
> Electrical power indicating gauge/system
>
> Loss of powerplant torque indicating system
>
> Failure of thrust reverser to deploy on ground
>
> Failure of powerplant fuel flow indicating system
>
> Failure of fuel pressure indicating system
>
> Loss of powerplant air inlet temperature system
>
> Loss of engine EGT/CHT indicating system
>
> Loss of engine manifold pressure indicating system
>
> Failure of oil pressure indicating system
>
> Failure of oil temperature indicating system
>
> Loss of engine tachometer/indicating system
>
> Failure of engine coolant indicator
>
> Failure of landing gear position indicating system
>
> Total loss of braking (airplanes under 6,000 lbs.)
>
> Loss of trim indicating system
>
> Loss of trim control
>
> Failure of the stall warning system
>
> Failure of the vertical speed indicator
>
> Loss of communication
>
> Loss of time indicating system

**6.0 Other Considerations**

The following additional factors should also be considered during the
risk assessment process:

-   Sometimes, suspect parts are installed on an identifiable group of
    airplanes (i.e., by serial number), or only a small fleet of the
    suspect engine model exists. In these cases the risk exposure to the
    service problem of any individual aircraft in that group is higher
    than if the service problem were distributed randomly. If an AD is
    required, the AD compliance section should be structured to limit
    the burden on the unaffected airplanes.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Service problem occurrence rates that change over time must be
    considered in the analysis. These service problems are typically
    fatigue-related and are more likely to occur as the aircraft or
    component accumulates more operating hours. Additional data is often
    required to properly assess these conditions.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   In general, an airworthiness report involving an Urgent Safety of
    Flight Situation falls within two AD rulemaking procedures (e.g.
    Emergency AD or (Immediate) Adopted Final Rule (With Request for
    Comments). Use the most expeditious means to correct an A/W issue.
    A/W corrective actions impose a burden on the public. It is
    important that the ASE properly assesses this public impact. Use
    this procedure for a "first cut" of appropriate A/W corrective
    actions. Include the Directorate AD coordination group early in your
    A/W corrective action decision making process for additional insight
    in addressing the safety of flight condition.

**7.0 Sample Calculations (reference Section 3.1 and Fig\'s. 2 & 3)**

**Safety Risk Factor =** [Safety Effect (**a**)]{.underline} x
[Operational Use (**b**)]{.underline} x [Percentage used by population
(**c**)]{.underline} + [Number of Occurrences (**d**)]{.underline} +
[Events versus Population (**e**)]{.underline} + [Time between Events
(**f**)]{.underline} + [Aircraft Type (**g**)]{.underline}

**Example 1: 14 CFR Part 91 Airplane Fatal Accident (Failure of
propeller hub)**

**Safety Effect = Hazardous (a = 4)**

**Safety Risk** **Factor** = (a = 4) x (b = 2) x (c = 3) + (d = 1) + (e
= 0) + (f = 1) + (g = 2) = **28**

> A/W Action = Potential Emergency AD
>
> **Example 2: 14 CFR Part 91 Airplane Accident (No Fatalities),
> substantial damage, some injuries (Loss of One Engine)**

**Safety Effect = Major (a = 2)**

**Safety Risk** **Factor** = (a = 2) x (b = 2) x (c = 2) + (d = 1) + (e
= 0) + (f = 1) + (g = 1) = **11**

> A/W Action = Potential NPRM
>
> Example 3: 14 CFR Part 121/135 Airplane Accident (No Fatalities)
> (Total Loss of Navigation Information.)

**Safety Effect = Major (a = 2)**

**Safety Risk** **Factor** = (a = 2) x (b = 3) x (c = 4) +(d = 1) + (e
= 1) + (f = 1) + (g = 3) = **30**

> A/W Action = Potential NPRM
>
> **Example 4: 14 CFR Part 121/135 Engine or Propeller Failure (No
> Fatalities) (Engine or propeller had uncontained failure)**

**Safety Effect = Hazardous to Catastrophic (a = 3.5)**

**Safety Risk** **Factor** = (a = 3.5) x (b = 3) x (c = 4) + (d = 1) +
(e = 1) + (f = 1) + (g = 2) = **47**

> A/W Action = Potential Emergency AD
>
> **Example 5:** **14 CFR** **Part 91 Airplane Accident (Fatalities)
> (Total Loss of Flight Instruments)**

**Safety Effect = Catastrophic (a = 4)**

**Safety Risk** **Factor** = (a = 4) x (b = 1) x (c = 1) + (d = 1) + (e
= 0) + (f = 1) + (g = 1) = **7**

> A/W Action = Potential NPRM/Emergency AD (Judgement Call)

**Example 6: 14 CFR Part 91 Service Difficulty Reports (Part failure)
(No accident)**

**Safety Effect = Major (a = 2)**

**Safety Risk** **Factor** = (a = 2) x (b = 1) x (c = 1) + (d = 3) + (e
= 0) + (f = 0) + (g = 0) = **5**

> A/W Action = Potential SAIB, GA Alerts article and/or manufacturer\'s
> service bulletin.

  ------------------ -------------------- ------- ----------------- ------- -------------------- ------- ----------------- ------- ---------------- ------- ------------- ------- ---------------- ------- -------------
                     **a.**                       **b.**                    **c.**                       **d.**                    **e.**                   **f.**                **g.**                   

                                                                            **Percentage Use**                                                                                                             **Safety**

  **Accident/**      **Safety**                   **Operational**           **by Population**            **Number**                **Events**               **Time**              **Aircraft**             **Risk**

  **Incident**       **Effect**           **X**   **Use**           **X**   **Part 135/121**     **+**   **of**            **+**   **Vs.**          **+**   **Between**   **+**   **Type**         **=**   **Factor**

  **Examples**                                                              **[(Vs. Part                 **Occurrences**           **Population**           **Events**                                     **from**
                                                                            91)]{.underline}**                                                                                                             

  **(ref. 7.0)**     **(ref. 3.1.a.)**            **(ref. 3.1.b.)**         **(ref. 3.1.c.)**            **(ref. 3.1.d.)**         **(ref.                  **(ref.               **(ref.                  **(ref.
                                                                                                                                   3.1.e.)**                3.1.f.)**             3.1.g.)**                2.1.1, 3.1)**

  **[Example         **4**                        **2**                     **3**                        **1**                     **0**                    **1**                 **2**                    **28**
  1]{.underline}**                                                                                                                                                                                         

  *Fatality,*        *Catastrophic*               *Part 91*                 *Part 135/121*               *(1 to 3)*                *0.10%*                  *(1 to 2              *Turboprop*              *Potential*
                                                                                                                                                            years)*                                        

  *Prop Hub*                                      *(for hire)*              *(50% +)*                                                                                                                      *Emergency
                                                                                                                                                                                                           AD*

  *Failure*                                                                                                                                                                                                

                                                                                                                                                                                                           

  **[Example         **2**                        **2**                     **2**                        **1**                     **0**                    **1**                 **1**                    **11**
  2]{.underline}**                                                                                                                                                                                         

  *Part 91,*         *Major*                      *Part 91*                 *Part 135/121*               *(1 to 3)*                *0.10%*                  *(1 to 2              *Twin*                   *Potential*
                                                                                                                                                            yrs.)*                                         

  *Injuries,*                                     *(for hire)*              *(25%+)*                                                                                              *Engine*                 *NPRM*

  *Substantial*                                                                                                                                                                   *Recip.*                 

  *Damage*                                                                                                                                                                                                 

                                                                                                                                                                                                           

  **[Example         **2**                        **3**                     **4**                        **1**                     **1**                    **1**                 **3**                    **30**
  3]{.underline}**                                                                                                                                                                                         

  *Part 135/121*     *Major*                      *Part 135/*               *Part 135/121*               *(1 to 3)*                *1% +*                   *(1 to 2              *Commuter /*             *Potential*
                                                                                                                                                            yrs.)*                                         

  *Accident*                                      *121*                     *(75%+)*                                                                                              *Twin*                   *NPRM*

  *No Fatalities*                                                                                                                                                                 *Turbojet*               

                                                                                                                                                                                                           

  **[Example         **3.5\***                    **3**                     **4**                        **1**                     **1**                    **1**                 **2**                    **47**
  4]{.underline}**                                                                                                                                                                                         

  *Part 135/121*     *Hazardous*                  *Part 135/*               *Part 135/121*               *(1 to 3)*                *1% +*                   *(1 to 2              *Turboprop*              *Potential*
                                                                                                                                                            yrs.)*                                         

  *Engine or*        *to*                         *121*                     *(75%+)*                                                                                                                       *Emergency
                                                                                                                                                                                                           AD*

  *Prop Failure*     *Catastrophic*                                                                                                                                                                        

  *No Fatalities*    \* Note: Engineering                                                                                                                                                                  
                     judgment may dictate                                                                                                                                                                  
                     adding/subtracting                                                                                                                                                                    
                     half points for                                                                                                                                                                       
                     failures bordering                                                                                                                                                                    
                     between safety                                                                                                                                                                        
                     effect criteria.                                                                                                                                                                      

  *(Uncontained)*                                                                                                                                                                                          

                                                                                                                                                                                                           

  **[Example         **4**                        **1**                     **1**                        **1**                     **0**                    **1**                 **1**                    **7**
  5]{.underline}**                                                                                                                                                                                         

  *Fatal*            Catastrophic                 *Part 91*                 *Part 135/121*               *(1 to 3)*                *0.10%*                  *(1 to 2              *Twin*                   *Potential*
                                                                                                                                                            yrs.)*                                         

  Airplane                                        (Personal Use)            *(Less than 25%)*                                                                                     *Engine*                 *Emergency
                                                                                                                                                                                                           AD*

  Accident                                                                                                                                                                        *Recip.*                 *or NPRM*

                                                                                                                                                                                                           **5**

  **[Example         **2**                        **1**                     **1**                        **3**                     **0**                    **0**                 **0**                    *Potential*
  6]{.underline}**                                                                                                                                                                                         

  *Part 91 SDRs*     Major                        *Part 91*                 *Part 135/121*               *(5+)*                    *0.1%*                   *(Over 2              *Single Engine/*         *SAIB,*
                                                                                                                                                            yrs.)*                                         

                                                  (Personal Use)            (Less than 25%)                                                                                       *Jet\*/Recip.*           *GA Alerts,*

                                                                                                                                                                                                           *Mfg.\'s SB*
  ------------------ -------------------- ------- ----------------- ------- -------------------- ------- ----------------- ------- ---------------- ------- ------------- ------- ---------------- ------- -------------

**APPENDIX VII**

###### Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) Guide

**I. [When an SAIB is appropriate]{.underline}**:

-   **[Type Certificated (TC'd) Aircraft]{.underline}:**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   A risk analysis determines the safety condition does not warrant
    Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) Airworthiness Directive (AD)
    action, but warrants owner/operator notification.

-   The safety condition warrants enhanced operational or maintenance
    awareness, but not at the mandatory rule making level.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The safety condition warrants an General Aviation Maintenance Alerts
    article

> (see Appendix VIII).

-   If not sure, coordinate with your Directorate AD coordinator, to
    determine if an SAIB is warranted (see Appendix IV).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Experimental aircraft:]{.underline}**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   ADs are not applicable to non-TC'd amateur built aircraft (unless
    addressing a safety condition involving a TC'd engine or propeller).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   SAIBs are the most serious action the FAA may take for amateur built
    aircraft.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Appropriate for a serious safety condition (catastrophic effect),
    that if not corrected, could result in a future accident.

**II. [How to fill out an SAIB:]{.underline}**

> Note: check the Web at
> [http://av-info.faa.gov](http://av-info.faa.gov/) to review sample
> SAIBs.

-   **[Introduction]{.underline}**:

-   The purpose is to inform registered owners of a potential safety
    problem in general terms. "The SAIB is advisory in nature and is not
    mandated by regulation."

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Background]{.underline}**:

-   "This SAIB is prompted by reports of ..." (describe the safety
    condition that warrants owner/operator notification of the potential
    safety condition).

-   Describe the conditions under which the safety condition can occur.

-   Who, What, When, Where, How, Why ?

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Recommendation]{.underline}**:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   "The FAA is recommending, but not mandating the following:"

-   "The FAA highly recommends registered owners of (make/model),
    etc..."

-   The description should succinctly explain what is recommended and
    the expected benefits (and potential risk) expected if the
    recommended action is or is not taken.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[For Further Information Contact]{.underline}**:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   List your office address.

-   **[Attention]{.underline}**:

-   Provide your name, phone and facsimile numbers, cc:Mail address,
    etc.

-   The manufacturer's name, phone and facsimile numbers, and Email
    address.

-   Web site address where service information, letters, bulletins, etc.
    may be reviewed and downloaded.

**III. [Coordinate the SAIB draft with your Directorate's AD Coordinator
(see Appendix IV)]{.underline}:**

-   The SAIB is coordinated within the ACO, then forwarded to the
    applicable Directorate AD Coordinator (Reference Appendix IV).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The Directorate AD Coordinator forwards the draft SAIB to AFS-600.

**IV. [Contact the SAIB Information Program Manager at AFS-600 (see
Appendix IV)]{.underline}:**

-   Determine mailing list:

-   Owners

-   Repair Stations

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Foreign CAAs

-   Inspection Authorized (AI) Repairmen (authorized to sign off annual
    inspections)

-   Associations

-   Type Clubs

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Note: AFS-600 may make mail list recommendations.

APPENDIX VIII \-- AC 43-16A, GA Alerts Guide

**I. [How to determine if an Alerts article is
appropriate]{.underline}**:

-   A risk analysis determines the safety condition does not warrant
    Airworthiness Directive (AD) action:

-   The safety condition warrants enhanced operational or maintenance
    awareness, but not at the mandatory rule making level.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The safety condition warrants or does not warrant an SAIB (see
    Appendix VI). If the safety condition can be addressed by
    maintenance, default with an Alerts article.

**II. [Alerts article examples]{.underline}**:

-   Review published Aviation Maintenance Alerts articles by checking
    the AFS-620 web site at:

> [http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/offices/afs/afs600/afs620/](http://afs600.faa.gov/)
>
> then select **Maintenance Alerts**

**III. [Filling Out the Alerts article]{.underline}**:

-   The **article** line includes the following:

-   Make; Model; Popular Name; Defective Part Name/Operational
    Condition, etc.; ATA Code (Check JASC Code Table (formerly ATA) at
    the AFS-600 web site, above.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The **body** of the article includes the following:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Describe the who, what, where, when, how of the safety condition
    followed with recommended action as appropriate.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **Part total time** (if known). If not known or not applicable, so
    state.

**[Coordination with AFS-640]{.underline}:**

-   Contact the AFS-640 Alerts editor (see Appendix IV).

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   The editor will review the draft and have final say on its contents.

-   Ask to review the finished version.

-   Provide technical input. The editor will retain final article
    composition responsibility.