While Report Finds No "Problems In The Industry As A Whole," NATA Disagrees

A report released late last week from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that variation in FAA’s interpretation of standards for certification and approval decisions is a long-standing issue, but GAO found no evidence that quantified the extent of the problem in the industry as a whole.

The report, titled "Certification and Approval Processes are Generally Viewed as Working Well, but Better Evaluative Information Needed to Improve Efficiency.", found that "ten of the 13 industry group and company officials GAO interviewed said that they or members of their organization had experienced variation in FAA certification and approval decisions on similar submissions. In addition, experts on GAO’s panel, who discussed and then ranked problems with FAA’s certification and approval processes, ranked inconsistent interpretation of regulations, which can lead to variation in decisions, as the first and second most significant problem, respectively, with these processes for FAA’s Flight Standards Service (which issues certificates and approvals for individuals and entities to operate in the national airspace system) and Aircraft Certification Service (which issues approvals to the designers and manufacturers of aircraft and aircraft parts and equipment)."

The report found that the variability is a result of factors related to performance-based regulations, which allow for multiple avenues of compliance, and the use of professional judgment by FAA staff and can result in delays and higher costs. Industry stakeholders and experts generally agreed that FAA’s certification and approval processes contribute to aviation safety and work well most of the time, but negative experiences have led to costly delays for the industry.

 Concerns were also raised about the effects of process inefficiencies on the implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen)—the transformation of the U.S. national airspace system from a ground-based system of air traffic control to a satellite-based system of air traffic management. They said that the processes take too long and impose costs that discourage aircraft operators from investing in NextGen equipment. FAA has taken actions to improve the certification and approval processes, including hiring additional inspectors and engineers and increasing the use of designees and delegated organizations—private persons and entities authorized to carry out many certification activities.

Additionally, GAO said, the "FAA is working to ensure that its processes are being followed and improved through a quality management system, which provides a mechanism for stakeholders to appeal FAA decisions. However, FAA does not know whether its actions under the quality management system are achieving the intended goals of reducing inconsistencies and increasing consistency and fairness in the agency’s application of regulations and policies because FAA does not have outcome- based performance measures and a continuous evaluative process that would allow it to determine progress toward these goals. Without ongoing information on results, FAA managers do not know if their actions are having the intended effects."

The report was requested by Representatives John Mica (R-FL) and Pete Sessions (R-TX), is in response to NATA's request to the Congressmen that they initiate a review into the lack of standardization of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulatory interpretations at the regional and locals levels. 

In a response to the report's release, NATA says that misses the mark in that it fails to provide meaningful information on the root cause and scope of the FAA regulatory interpretation inconsistencies and lacks an insightful analysis on how aviation businesses are impacted every day. Consequently, it serves only to highlight, again, that there is a problem. The following key failures in the report prevent it from being a useful tool in identifying a path to a long-term solution:

• The GAO report does not provide any empirical data on the scope of inconsistent regulatory interpretation.
• The report falls short in its attempt to categorize the types of circumstances in which inconsistent regulatory interpretations occur.
• The report does not explore or evaluate the impact on certificate holders of a local inspector's preference or opinion on how to meet regulatory requirements when previously the certificate holders' current process was approved by another inspector.
• The analysis omits the key causes of problems in certification and approval processes in flight standards. Those were identified by an expert panel as FAA culture, lack of accountability, rulemaking and guidance development process.
• Implementation of the top two recommended solutions to the issues involved with the certification and approval process - a change in FAA culture (increased accountability) and universal acceptance -was not explored.
• The GAO's recommended actions are so vague and non-specific as to be only marginally effective in addressing the core problem.

NATA says the report does highlight, as has been known, that industry believes there are problems in the FAA's processes related to certification and approvals. Before these problems can be addressed, a comprehensive evaluation to determine the full extent of this problem, including sufficient data to categorize variations by identifiable events within the certification and approval process, is necessary.

"When the association conducted its review on the impact the lack of FAA standardization is having on the aviation industry, it was clear that respondents were spending an inordinate amount of time and resources complying with varying regional and local regulatory interpretations," NATA President James K. Coyne said in a news release. "The GAO report does not address these issues as we hoped it would."

Coyne said the lack of standardization on regulatory interpretations is a continuing and mounting challenge for the aviation industry. "While this report does not address this ongoing concern, NATA will continue to make this issue one of the association's top priorities in 2011 and beyond to ensure that standardization becomes a reality for our industry."

FMI: www.gao.gov, www.nata.aero