VOLUME 14 COMPLIaNCe AND ENFORCEMENT
CHAPTER 1 FLIGHT STANDARDS SERVICE COMPLIANCE POLICY
Section 2 Flight Standards Service Compliance Action Decision Procedure
14-1-2-1 GENERAL. The Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA)
central mission is to promote safety in civil aeronautics. The agency establishes
regulatory standards and requirements in Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR) parts
the statutory authority in Title 49 of the United
States Code (49 U.S.C.), Subtitle VII. Under 49 U.S.C. § 40113, the FAA Administrator
has broad authority to take action that the Administrator considers necessary
to carry out his or her statutory responsibilities and powers relating to safety
in air commerce, including conducting investigations; prescribing regulations,
standards, and procedures; and issuing orders.
A. Purpose. This section provides the structure to guide personnel through
Flight Standards Service (the Service) Compliance Policy implementation. It
outlines the Compliance Action Decision Process (CADP), a Root Cause Analysis
(RCA) process to determine what happened and effectively address deviations
from rules, standards, or procedures, resolve them, and return the individual
or entity to full compliance. This decisionmaking structure requires an open
and transparent exchange of safety information1 to
correct noncompliance and ensure that the
risk of recurrence is acceptably mitigated. The exchange of information should
occur during interviews, in written statements, and in reviewing and providing
supporting documentation, etc.
B. Scope. The use of Compliance Action (CA) is the initial means
of addressing all alleged, suspected, or identified instances of noncompliance. (See subparagraphs
14-1-2-7A7) and 14-1-2-9A for specific Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP)
and Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP) requirements). CAs will be
used to correct all noncompliance and deviations until a determination is made
that CA is not appropriate. This includes apparent violations of regulations
and/or statutes, as well as deviations from other established standards or procedures.
Flight Standards personnel must keep the following in mind during all interactions
with airmen and entities:
1) Except as described herein, where older Service policy conflicts with
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Sections 1 and 2,
this newer policy must be followed until it is superseded.
2) When in doubt as to the appropriate course of action or policy to follow, aviation
safety inspectors (ASI) and technicians2 (AST) should work through their Front Line
Managers (FLM) and office managers with the appropriate policy owners for clarification.
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 1 provides
important background and reference
information on the FAA Compliance Philosophy (CP) and the evolution of Flight
Standards Service Compliance Policy and CA. Pilot’s Bill of Rights (PBR) notification
must be provided as described in
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 1,
subparagraph 14-1-1-11G, Due Process Considerations, and
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 3.
14-1-2-3 TASK PREREQUISITES AND SIGNIFICANT INTERFACES.
This task requires use of critical thinking, working interdependently, and completion
of formal and on-the-job training (OJT) for Compliance and Enforcement (or later
A. Significant Interfaces:
• Airmen/organizations/others involved with the apparent noncompliance
• FLMs and office managers;
• Principal inspectors (PI) and other certificate management personnel; and
• Policy owners.
B. References (current editions):
1) FAA Order 8900.1:
• Volume 1, Chapter 2, The Federal Aviation Administration and Flight
Standards History, Organization, and Regulatory Responsibilities.
• Volume 1, Chapter 3, Inspector Responsibilities, Administration,
Ethics and Conduct.
• Volume 3, Chapter 19, Section 14,
Safety Assurance System: Remedial Training and TrackingPart
• Volume 3, Chapter 60, Procedures for Aviation Safety Inspector
• Volume 5, Chapter 7, Reexamination of an Airman.
• Volume 7, Chapter 2, Instructions for Investigating a Vehicle/Pedestrian
Deviation (V/PD) by a Mechanic Taxiing an Aircraft on an Airport’s Movement Area,
Section 1, General.
• Volume 10, Safety Assurance System Policy and Procedures.
• Volume 11, Chapter 1, Section 1,
Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program for Air Carriers and Regulated Entities.
• Volume 11, Chapter 2, Section 1,
Safety Assurance System: Aviation Safety Action Program.
• Volume 14, Compliance and Enforcement:
• Chapter 1, Flight Standards Service Compliance Policy.
• Appendix 14-1,
Compliance Philosophy and Pilot’s Bill of Rights Brochure.
• Appendix 14-2, Privacy Act Notice.
• Appendix 14-3,
Compliance Action Communication/Correspondence Guidelines.
• Appendix 14-4, Compliance
Action Documentation Review Job Aid.
• Appendix 14-5,
Guidance for Review of Enforcement Cases Under the FAA’s Compliance Philosophy.
• Chapter 2, Investigation
and Enforcement-Related Tasks.
• Chapter 3, Special Considerations.
• Volume 15, Chapter 6, Section 1,
FAASTeam Program Manager/Regional FAASTeam Point of Contact Duties and Roles to Facilitate Remedial Training.
• Any task that identifies an apparent noncompliance or deviation.
2) Other Documents:
• FAA Program Tracking and Reporting Subsystem (PTRS) Procedures
Manual (PPM) (which includes information on releasability under the Freedom
of Information Act (FOIA)):
• FOIA Exemptions Summary Sheet:
• Pertinent Federal aviation statutes and regulations.
C. Additional Policy Guidance (current editions):
• FAA Order
FAA Compliance and Enforcement Program.
• FAA Order
8000.88, PRIA Guidance for FAA Inspectors.
• FAA Order
Federal Aviation Administration Compliance Philosophy.
D. Definitions. The terms below as used in this volume are defined regarding
safety, CP, and enforcement. Be aware that terms may apply to both regulatory
(enforceable or required) and nonregulatory (unenforceable) actions that may
be taken by the FAA, which have different documentation requirements as described
in this section. Some terms also have common meaning (e.g., counseling) or may
be used differently in other volumes (e.g., Volume 10 Safety Assurance System
(SAS) Module 4 Corrected on the Spot vs. Volume 14 On-the-Spot Correction PTRS
1) Actions for Organizations. This includes improvements to systems,
procedures, operating practices, or training programs. This also includes restricting
or removing authority through operations specifications (OpSpecs) to manage
operational risk in the public interest, and communicating risk to the certificate holder.
2) Additional Training. Any training for individuals remediated
through their organization’s approved training program, through another required
training program for their job function or work environment (such as carrier
or repair station employees receiving Security Identification Display Area (SIDA)
or ramp driver training from the airport), or the FAA Safety Team (FAASTeam)
remedial training (RT) process. See subparagraph 9) below for the definition
of RT and
Volume 14, Chapter 3, Section 2 for
3) Compliance Action (CA). Action taken by Flight Standards personnel
(not the certificate holder) to (1) correct an airman/organization/noncertificated
person’s deviation from regulatory standards when the deviation was not a result of intentional, reckless,
or criminal behavior, or a pattern of negative behaviors or performance; or
(2) communicate safety hazards, risks, concerns, or recommendations. See subparagraph
14‑1‑2‑7D1) for exclusions.
NOTE: Distinct CA PTRS records are only created to document regulatory
deviations for airmen and other regulated entities not managed in SAS. When
a nonregulatory or nonstatutory deviation or safety recommendation/concern CA
is documented, it must be distinguished from regulatory/statutory deviations
per subparagraph 14-1-2-9B. The recommendation/concern comment may be made in
the PTRS or SAS record for the underlying activity which led to the discovery,
or added to a related regulatory CA activity record.
4) Corrective Action. Action taken by airmen/organizations/noncertificated
persons (not Flight Standards personnel) to correct a noncompliance with a rule
or deviations from standards or procedures and to mitigate hazards/risks.
5) Counseling. Oral or written counseling of airmen, organization
personnel, or noncertificated National Airspace System (NAS) participants, such
as passengers. The common practice of counseling may be used at any appropriate time to clarify a person’s
understanding and convey regulatory information, best practices, or safety concerns/issues, including the
recommendation of additional training or education where no regulatory deviation occurred.
6) Education. Providing or making referrals to safety, training,
or other aviation educational resources, such as those found at
other publicly available sources, to share best practices or recommend additional
study in areas of identified risk. Education is recommended when knowledge,
skill, or system/process improvements would be beneficial.
It can be used in conjunction with a regulatory CA or Enforcement Action, or
recommended when no regulatory/statutory deviation has occurred.
7) Enforcement Action. Formal administrative actions and legal Enforcement
Actions taken in accordance with Volume 14, Chapter 2 and Order
Enforcement Actions are not CAs as described in this order.
8) On-the-Spot Correction. A quick fix of a simple mistake or
other apparent deviation, which does not require additional followup. The fix
must be observed or verified by the ASI. Examples include adding missing information
or a signature to an incomplete form; retrieving a certificate from home or
receiving temporary authority from the Airmen Certification Branch (AFS-760)
before exercising certificate privileges; stowing luggage or equipment blocking
an emergency exit; correcting an incorrect instrument setting; or installing missing fasteners.
9) Remedial Training (RT). A form of CA which uses education
and training to allow airmen who have committed an inadvertent apparent deviation
to enhance their knowledge and skills. RT is a program authorized as described in
Volume 14, Chapter 3, Section 2 and
administered by the FAASTeam per
Volume 15, Chapter 6, Section 1 that
ASIs recommend for certificated airmen
when training is the appropriate action to take for a deviation from statutory
or regulatory standards. Use of RT requires coordination between the referring
ASI and the FAASTeam through office management. RT as defined above generally
excludes airmen who were using their certificates subject to an approved training
program at the time of the apparent deviation. Those airmen should be remediated
through their organization’s approved training
program. See documentation instructions in subparagraph 14-1-2-9F4)h) and
Volume 14, Chapter 3, Section 2 for
additional information and exceptions.
14-1-2-5 PROCESS FLOW MAP.
Figure 14-1-2A. Compliance Action Decision Process (CADP)
14-1-2-7 CADP PROCEDURES.
A. Notification. Communication at initial notification should
match the specific facts and circumstances. For example, the immediate verbal
notification provided during a ramp check that results in an on-the-spot correction
may be all that is necessary. However, significant safety hazards and ongoing
operational risks discovered during surveillance of an organization would likely
require immediate contact via telephone or other means, and be followed up in
writing (through the PI, when appropriate).
1) Address Immediate Safety Concerns. ASIs should take immediate
action to mitigate significant safety hazards and ongoing operational risks.
Therefore, when an ASI becomes aware of an immediate safety concern, he or she
must take timely steps to notify the airman or responsible person who can take
the appropriate action to prevent it from continuing.
2) Non-Immediate Issues. ASIs have more time to fully understand
actual or apparent deviations that have terminated (e.g., pilot deviations)
where no immediate threat to the NAS exists. In these cases, the ASI may exercise
judgment on whether or not it is prudent to immediately contact the airman or
3) PBR. For transparency, a CP and PBR Brochure (see
Compliance Philosophy and Pilot’s Bill of Rights Brochure) has been developed
and must be used when conducting CA investigations. Formal notification with
a Letter of Investigation (LOI) (including PBR text for airmen) is only required
for Enforcement Action (see
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 1,
subparagraph 14-1-1-11G and
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 3 for
due process and the CP/PBR Brochure).
4) Coordination. If the event involves an organization, the ASI
must notify the appropriate oversight office concerning the noncompliance and
any action that was taken to address an immediate safety concern. The oversight
office may take over and continue the appropriate process. In all cases, ASIs
should work interdependently, keep their FLM informed appropriately, and coordinate
any follow-up communication with the PI/certificate-holding district office (CHDO).
5) Checking Compliance History. ASIs must check surveillance,
CA, and enforcement histories of certificated and noncertificated persons/entities
prior to making or communicating final CA decisions. This does not preclude
an ASI from making an on-the-spot correction or providing immediate counseling.
In all cases, the ASI must inform the person/entity that further action may
be required after history is checked.
6) Timely Processing. In all cases, the goal is to restore compliance
now and for the future. Regardless of whether the event requires immediate notification
to the regulated entity, the remaining procedures in this section should be
completed in a timely manner. When addressing regulatory and/or statutory noncompliance,
it is important to determine eligibility for CA as early as possible and to
determine the appropriate type of correspondence needed with the airman/entity.
For airmen, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 6-month-stale complaint
if certificate action is to be taken. The ASI should keep his or her
FLM informed of his or her activities and, when applicable, coordinate certificate
holder communication with the PI/CHDO.
7) ASAP Considerations. The investigating ASI must determine
whether the entity has an ASAP covering an involved employee group by accessing
the Service’s ASAP web page at
Volume 11, Chapter 2, Section 1 for
more CHDO coordination information.
8) Initial Documentation Considerations. Safety and compliance issues should
be documented as soon as possible and within this order4 and
B. Investigate, Analyze, and Assess the Problem. The procedures
in this subparagraph are designed to aid in the RCA of the apparent deviation.
FAA safety personnel must identify who did what, where, when, and why. Determining
why the event happened and identifying the underlying root cause(s) is the purpose
of the investigation. Compliance will only be ensured if the cause(s) of the
event are clearly established, understood, and corrected. When a regulatory
deviation is identified and associated with an entity, the ASI must consult
with the PI/CHDO to make this assessment, or provide information for the PI/CHDO
to make the assessment.
NOTE: ASIs must continue to gather information and remain engaged with
the responsible parties in order to conduct a thorough and unbiased investigation.
1) Gather the Facts. Consider taking the following suggested
actions, based on the ASI’s determination of the information needed in each
specific situation. This list is neither mandatory nor all‑inclusive:
a) Reviewing records, including air traffic control (ATC) forms and data
from the Knowledge Services Network (KSN).
b) Reviewing technical documents (e.g., manufacturer’s maintenance manuals,
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), or Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM)).
c) Interviewing the party or parties involved (acquiring witness statements,
d) Acquiring technical information from other agencies (e.g., the National
Weather Service (NWS) and ATC).
e) Inspecting and taking photographs of items associated with the event, including
physical evidence, such as skid marks or damaged parts.
2) Ask the Questions. Consider the following suggested lines
of inquiry, based on the ASI’s determination of the information needed in each
specific situation. This list is neither mandatory nor all‑inclusive. Rather, it provides relevant information needed
for decision making and to effectively document the issue or event:
a) When did the safety issue or deviation occur?
b) Objective description of the event: what happened?
c) What possible outcome(s) could have resulted?
d) Who were the people involved?
e) Why did the people involved select that course of action?
f) What was the operation being done or attempted?
g) What was the expected process/procedure?
h) What information was available to the individual(s) involved about the task/operation?
i) What were the conditions?
• Task complexity;
• Personal and organization interfaces;
• Physical working environment;
• Competency of individual(s) involved (i.e., knowledge, training,
and experience related to the task/operation);
• Availability, quality, and clarity of technical and procedural information;
• Availability of supervision or consultation with others;
• Adequacy of resources (e.g., tools, facilities, personnel, and supplies);
• Constraints (equipment; time; environmental conditions; other
rules, e.g., environmental and occupational); and
• External pressures (e.g., time pressure, production, service demands,
and organizational policies).
j) What controls were in place?
• Controls that could have prevented the error/failure; and
• Remaining controls that prevented the error/failure from having
a more severe outcome.
k) Why were the controls that failed ineffective (in the opinion of the interviewee
or the evaluator conducting the analysis)?
3) Analyze the Event.
a) Critical thinking involving careful, objective analysis is the key to
understanding the event. Analysis of each event should focus on determining
the nature of the problem, the conditions under which it occurred, the controls
that failed (and may fail again in
the future), and the most effective proposed corrective action(s). Recommendations
for improvement should be part of the analysis.
b) Before deciding on CA as the mitigation, determine if the airman/organization
is proactive, cooperative, and capable of participating in effective corrective
or preventive action. An inability to comply requires a more formal process
NOTE: An entity’s refusal to speak with the FAA, or the obtaining of
legal counsel, does not automatically rule out CA. Airmen and organizations
are free to exercise their rights without repercussions. An entity that complies
with FAA requirements to regain and maintain compliance is considered cooperative.
However, if the ASI cannot adequately determine the facts of the case, or cannot
identify appropriate remediation(s) that are consented to and successfully accomplished
by the involved parties, the ASI must still use due diligence on behalf of the
public’s safety interest. Such due diligence may include reexamination, re-inspection,
or suspension pending compliance to determine that the certificated entity is
qualified, competent, and proficient.
c) The determination must be based reasonably on observable behaviors and
the facts and circumstances in each case.
• Does the airman/organization consistently perform in a positive
manner toward regulatory requirements?
• Does the airman/organization understand or recognize his or her/its
role in the deviation?
• Does the airman/organization cooperate with FAA personnel to achieve compliance?
• Does the airman/organization take the necessary actions to come
into and maintain compliance?
• Are there repeated failures to take corrective actions or repeated deviations?
• Is the airman/organization noncompliant in more than one area?
Does it involve multiple personnel?
NOTE: The fact that multiple areas or personnel are involved may indicate
a management or system failure (unsatisfactory supervision/procedures, misplaced
priorities, goal conflicts, etc.).
d) ASIs should assess all available facts and circumstances associated with
current and previous deviations. ASIs should evaluate the event for possible
systemic issues; this is particularly important for a frequently cited regulation.
e) Depending upon the specific circumstances associated with each event,
repeated deviations from the same regulation may not indicate a common systemic
failure. Often on the surface it appears that the same regulation is being repeatedly
violated due to the broadly defined wording of most regulations. However, every
situation has a unique set of facts. A review of the specific circumstances
may find that the deviations are due to entirely different causes.
f) Effective corrective action begins by clearly defining the real problem.
Additional CA can be taken in cases where the actual root cause was not previously
identified and addressed. Recurring findings often happen because an organization:
1. Solved the wrong problem;
2. Fixed the outcome only;
3. Fixed the symptoms only; or
4. Corrected only one problem, when two or more problems exist.
C. Is There Compliance? Once the problem is completely understood,
review the regulations applicable to the event. The following question can now
be answered: Is there regulatory and statutory compliance?
1) If Yes (A Regulatory/Statutory Deviation Did Not Occur).
The CP and policy should be applied to address safety concerns in the NAS where
no clear regulatory requirement exists.6 Flight
Standards personnel can communicate
or transfer risks and make recommendations to regulated and nonregulated entities
and document those Flight Standards actions as described in this section. Document
these nonregulatory concerns, potential risks, or
recommendations per subparagraph 14-1-2-9B within the PTRS activity record or
SAS Data Collection Tool (DCT) that led to the discovery. Include all ASI and/or
certificate holder actions to communicate or transfer the concerns/potential
risks and to correct the identified problem(s). Coordinate communication to
the certificate holder with the PI/CHDO and notify the PI, CHDO, and/or the
FLM of any concerns or risks. In communications with the certificate holder,
clearly identify that FAA concerns/recommendations are to make improvements
or use best practices, but they are not regulatory requirements.
2) If No (A Regulatory/Statutory Deviation Did Occur).
Determine the most efficient and effective course of action to reestablish compliance.
CA should be used if the individual or entity sufficiently meets the criteria
of subparagraph 14-1-2-7B3) above, and the noncompliance does not entail intentional, reckless, or criminal behavior (see
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 1,
subparagraph 14-1-1-7E, Use of Enforcement and Other Tools/Resources When Needed).
3) Additional Considerations for Regulatory/Statutory Noncompliance.
a) For events that have ceased, the question, “Was There Regulatory/Statutory
Compliance,” is still appropriate to ask in this step. The noncompliance does
not have to be occurring at the present time in order for a CA to be documented.
b) There may be instances where an ASI discovers or becomes aware of a deviation
after the airman or responsible person has already taken steps to address the
noncompliance and prevent its recurrence. The procedures in this section must
still be completed (in coordination with the PI/CHDO, when applicable) to decide
if the appropriate fix to the problem has been applied, to determine if any
validation or followup surveillance is needed, and to document the issue.
1. If sufficient corrective action has been taken or implemented by
the airman or responsible person, the ASI can document his or her action(s)
using the *752 “Other” PTRS activity code, or if within SAS, per Order 8900.1,
Volume 10, Chapter 5, Section 2.
2. Determine whether additional validation or followup surveillance
is needed and plan/document accordingly. This should be done in coordination
with the PI/CHDO when applicable.
3. If the corrective action taken by the airman or responsible person
is not adequate to address the underlying root cause(s) of the noncompliance,
the ASI may take additional action as described in this section.
D. Is CA Appropriate?
1) Potential Exclusions. CA may not be appropriate based on the
specific facts of the event under review, or because of other policies or commitments
that require a different agency response, as described in
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 1 and
this section. The Service must follow
policy and process commitments made to Congress, the Inspector General (IG),
and other external parties. Examples include, but are not limited to, Airworthiness
Safety Reporting Program
operations quality assurance (FOQA),10 all
noncompliance by military pilots, persons exercising a foreign pilot
subparagraphs 14-1-2-7A7) and 14-1-2-9A for additional ASAP and VDRP requirements, and
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 1,
subparagraph 14-1-1-7E on Enforcement Action.
2) If Yes (CA Is Appropriate). Take appropriate CA, such as:
a) On-the-spot correction, counseling, or education;
b) Additional training (requires interface with PI/CHDO when applicable)
or RT for airmen;
c) Improvements to systems, procedures, operational practices, or training
programs for regulated entities (requires interface with the certificate holder via the PI/CHDO);
d) Documenting corrective action that may have already been initiated or
implemented by the airman or entity; and
e) Any other action that would correct the noncompliance and address the
underlying safety concern.
NOTE: See subparagraph 14-1-2-3D for CA definitions, and detailed documentation requirements
in paragraph 14-1-2-9.
3) If No (CA Is Not Appropriate).
Take appropriate action. Refer to Volume 14, Chapter 2, and Order
initiate Enforcement Action.
E. Is the Problem Fixed?
1) Plan Followup Surveillance Activities. The ASI will validate
CA, or Enforcement Action, effectiveness when necessary.
a) Followup is normally not needed for simple mistakes, lack of understanding,
or diminished skills which have been corrected with on-the-spot corrections,
oral/written counseling, or (for General Aviation (GA) airmen) RT completed
per Volume 15, Chapter 6.
b) Company program, manual, or procedure changes normally require followup
to validate that the change is put in place and that it has the intended result
(coordinate with the PI/CHDO). If followup activities have been created and
linked to the original CA or Enforcement Action record in PTRS comments or through SAS automation as applicable,
and there is no other reason to keep the original record open, the original
record may be closed.
c) The ASI must consult on proper followup and documentation with his or
her FLM when complex or long-term followup is needed, and with the appropriate
PI/CHDO when an air agency/carrier/operator or letter of authorization (LOA)
holder is involved.
2) If Yes (The Problem Is Fixed). Close or complete the CA record with documentation,
as described in paragraph 14-1-2-9.
3) If No (The Problem Is Not Fixed). Is further CA appropriate and warranted?
a) If yes, document within PTRS or SAS, as appropriate, the additional CAs necessary
to ensure the effectiveness of root cause fixes. Continue followup.
b) If no, then an unsuccessful CA has occurred (e.g., the airman chooses
not to participate, is unable to take effective corrective action, or new information/behavior
makes CA inappropriate). Terminate the CA and initiate Enforcement Action in
accordance with Volume 14, Chapter 2, and Order
Regardless of the Enforcement Action outcome, continue communicating with the
certificate holder to mitigate the safety issues involved to an acceptable level
(i.e., return the certificate holder to compliance and prevent recurrence).
1. SAS PIs will choose “Initiate 2150.3” as a related sub-action.
2. PTRS users will trigger the enforcement PTRS record from the CA PTRS
record. (See additional documentation requirements in paragraph 14-1-2-9.)
NOTE: Unless opened in error (see subparagraph 14-1-2-9K), a terminated
CA requires Enforcement Action. (See
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 1,
subparagraph 14-1-1-11G and
Chapter 1, Section 3 for
the CP/PBR Brochure and due process considerations and subparagraph 14-1-2-9I
for additional policy on CAs with unsuccessful corrective action completion.)
F. External Communication/Correspondence. The steps discussed
in the CADP are meant as an aid for addressing noncompliance. Based on the particulars
of each case, Flight Standards personnel are expected to use the most efficient
and effective means to find and fix the safety issue(s). Flight Standards personnel
must use critical thinking and interdependence to determine the appropriate
level of external communication/correspondence necessary for each situation
and the specific facts involved. Refer to the communication/correspondence guidelines in
Compliance Action Communication/Correspondence Guidelines.
1) The following information must be conveyed during verbal communications
and/or written correspondence concerning a CA (except when there is repeated
communication/correspondence with the same entity and the information below
has already been conveyed):
a) Initial communication and/or correspondence:
1. A statement that the event appears eligible (or may be eligible) for CA.
2. A statement that Enforcement Action is not being pursued based on known information.
b) Completion of a CA. A statement that the event has been closed as a CA and describing
the type of action taken.
2) Corrective actions that take time or are complex in nature
should be documented in writing (email or letter as appropriate to the facts
and circumstances), including FAA expectations and clear suspense dates for responses.
3) Communication/Correspondence to an organizational entity that
extend beyond addressing the immediate safety concerns must be coordinated with
the appropriate PI/CHDO.
4) If an email or letter is sent to an individual (not an organizational
entity) requesting information, the CP/PBR Brochure (see
Appendix 14-1) and
the Privacy Act Notice (see
Privacy Act Notice) should be included.
5) Follow existing Service and office policies for correspondence
and record retention.
NOTE: Under the current expunction policy and retention schedule, there is no
authority to expunge or destroy records related to CAs at this time.
14-1-2-9 PTRS/SAS CA RECORD DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS.
A. ASAP and VDRP Data Protected from Disclosure. An impediment
to further development of voluntary information sharing programs is the reluctance
of some persons to share information that may later be released through a FOIA
request or other means. For that reason, the legal protections cited below were
put in place.
1) All records submitted to the FAA for review regarding ASAP,
including information predicated upon the ASAP report, are protected from release
to the public in accordance with the provisions of
FAA Order 8000.82,
Designation of Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) Information as Protected from Public Disclosure under 14 CFR Part
2) All records submitted to the FAA for review regarding VDRP,
including information submitted via the web-based VDRP system, are protected
from release to the public in accordance with the provisions of FAA Order
Designation of Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP) Information
as Protected from Public Disclosure Under 14 CFR Part
3) For the reasons cited above, no CA PTRS records will be completed for an accepted
ASAP or VDRP event. ASAP and VDRP corrective actions documentation and PTRS
requirements for accepted and excluded reports are detailed in Volume 11 and
Volume 14, Chapter 3, Section 12.
Additional information on ASAP and VDRP documentation
may be found in the current notice titled, Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP),
Voluntary Disclosure Reporting Program (VDRP), and Compliance Philosophy.
B. Documentation for Nonregulatory/Nonstatutory Issues or Events.
As noted in Figure 14-1-2A, Compliance Action Decision Process (CADP), there
is the potential for an ASI to have concerns or recommendations, following a
surveillance or other encounter with an airman or other entity, that do not
involve regulatory or statutory noncompliance.
1) PTRS Users. If there are no other regulatory/statutory findings, do not
create a CA PTRS record. These concerns/recommendations are documented in the primary activity
record for investigating the event, or that led to discovery of the issue. Clearly
identify and document these nonregulatory concerns/recommendations in a separate
comment with the appropriate primary area code, a keyword list of “911,” and an opinion code
of “I”. If CA is taken for other regulatory or statutory findings, additional
concerns/recommendations may be documented in the same CA PTRS record in a separate
comment coded as described above. Documenting these concerns will help the FAA
identify potentially systemic issues during future activities.
2) SAS Users. Nonregulatory safety concerns and/or recommendations with
no apparent regulatory or statutory deviation are documented in the SAS record
for the underlying activity that led to identification of the concern (the DCT or Action Item Tracking
Tool (AITT)) in accordance with Volume 10 policy
(Chapter 5, Section 2, and
Chapter 6, Section 2).
NOTE: See additional documentation requirements in subparagraph 14-1-2-9F below.
C. General Requirements for Documenting Regulatory/Statutory CAs. When the
FAA discovers a regulatory or statutory deviation and documents the investigation,
analysis, assessment, and resulting FAA actions (other than enforcement) in
either SAS or PTRS, a CA record has been created. Regulatory CAs are documented
in either SAS or PTRS (not both) for each person (individual or organization)
involved, appropriate to the person or certificate being addressed.
1) PTRS Users. A distinct PTRS record using the activity numbers
in subparagraph 14-1-2-9E and as outlined in the PPM will be created for each
person (noncertificated individual, airman, and organization) involved that
is not managed through SAS. Multiple specific CAs for the same person for a
particular event/issue are documented with separate comments in the same PTRS
record. If follow-up is required for any of the CAs documented in the same record,
choose a PTRS activity number that allows for follow-up. For example, if you
made an On-the-Spot Correction with an airman and also plan to make a RT offer,
use the *749 “Additional Training Activity” for the record and document the
On-the-Spot Correction in a separate comment.
2) SAS Users. DCTs with unfavorable responses to either 1) specific
regulatory requirements (SRR) or 2) questions asking if regulatory requirements
were met constitute a distinct regulatory CA record.
3) PTRS and SAS Users. When a CA record is completed, the comments
must provide a description of the problem, the overall planned corrective action,
and show how the deviation was permanently fixed, which may require linking
the record to future followup activities. Link records to the extent possible within SAS, or between SAS and
PTRS, using the automation and references in comments.
a) ASIs must make quality entries and FLMs must verify that all records of CA used
to correct regulatory deviations answer the questions of “Who, What, When, Where,
and Why,”14 including
each root cause that led to the deviation. Once the cause(s) are clearly identified and
documented, the comments must document the immediate, as well as long-term
corrective actions (see subparagraphs 14-1-2-7E1) and 14-1-2-9H for discussion
of followup). Documentation must be clear and stand alone in later history searches,
showing the noncompliance stopped and that any fixes put in place to prevent
recurrence were effective. The answers to these questions and requirements should
be readily identifiable. A complete and comprehensive report demonstrates that
a quality work activity was performed.
b) There may be instances where it is appropriate to use a CA to address regulatory
noncompliance for an organization, and additionally, use CA for personnel working
for that organization. Separate CA entries are created for each entity or person
that receives a CA in either SAS or PTRS as appropriate. If possible, trigger
the CA PTRS records from the same parent record (e.g., trigger pilot and co-pilot
CA records from the accident investigation record) as described in the paragraph below.
D. PTRS Multiple Records Requirement. PTRS records used to document
the regulatory CA are not a replacement for the record used to document the
primary activity (such as surveillance or accident investigation) during which
the deviation was found.
1) If an ASI finds a deviation during, for example, a routine non-SAS facility inspection
(other than a joint audit per Volume 11) and determines that CA is appropriate
to address the deviation, then the ASI would complete a PTRS record for both
the facility inspection and the CA.
a) The PTRS generated for the CA should be triggered from the PTRS record
for the primary activity. The parent transmittal record ID number will appear
automatically in the “Related Record” field of the triggered CA record.
b) The ASI must manually enter tracking of triggered record(s) in the parent
record. The activity number(s)/record ID(s) of the triggered record(s) should
be entered in the comment section using the appropriate primary area, keyword
“907,” and opinion code “I,” per the PPM, Chapter 4, Recording PTRS Activities.
Refer also to the PPM, Appendix B, How to Tie Records to Their Followups, for
triggering and linking records.
2) If no Enforcement Action is taken, the primary parent surveillance PTRS record,
which led to the discovery, is closed with a results code of “F” for followup
when any CA(s) (either regulatory or nonregulatory) is/are taken. The parent
record may be closed before the triggered regulatory CA is completed.
3) If any Enforcement Action is taken as an initial result of
the parent activity (without first using CA), the parent PTRS surveillance record
is closed with a results code of “E” for enforcement, regardless of any other
triggered CA records. Multiple actions for one event, such as separate Enforcement
Actions for a company and captain and a regulatory CA for a first
officer, are triggered (if possible) from the same parent PTRS record.
E. Appropriate PTRS Activity Code. Choose the appropriate PTRS
INVESTG/COMPLIANCE ACTION to document responses to the regulatory or statutory
deviations. (See subparagraph 14-1-2-9B for documenting nonregulatory responses.)
See definitions in subparagraph 14-1-2-3D for additional information. Activity
numbers are as follows, with the asterisks representing a 1, 3, or 5 (Operations
1000-series, Maintenance 3000-series, and Avionics 5000-series):
NOTE: CA PTRS records will not be created for accepted ASAP or VDRP reports.
1) *749 Additional Training. All additional training processes
documented by non-FAASTeam ASIs per this order. See
Volume 14, Chapter 3, Section 2 for
additional information and see RT documentation instructions in subparagraph 14-1-2-9F4)h).
2) *750 Counseling. Applies to any person participating in the
NAS. Used to document oral or written counseling of individuals for deviations
from regulatory or statutory standards.
3) *751 On-the-Spot Correction. Used to document correction of
regulatory or statutory deviations that meet the definition in subparagraph 14-1-2-3D.
4) *752 Other. For regulatory CAs that do not fit in another
specific category. May also be used when appropriate to document corrective
action(s) initiated or completed by airmen/organizations prior to the FAA’s
discovery of the deviation.
5) *753 Convene SAT. This activity number is no longer used. ASIs only use
SAS automation when documenting System Analysis Team (SAT) activity.
F. PTRS Required Fields. Complete all required fields in the
PTRS record and include the following information in accordance with the PPM
NOTE: Unless discovered and documented in SAS as described in subparagraph 14-1-2-9G,
nonregulatory safety concerns and/or recommendations with no apparent
regulatory or statutory deviation are documented in the PTRS record for the
activity that led to the discovery using the same criteria below for regulatory
noncompliance, except where noted below.
1) Section I: “Who” was involved; the four-letter designator
for an entity or the certificate number and name for an individual airman.
2) Section II: Include additional relevant personnel information
(such as an instructor or additional crewmember involved) as described in the
PPM at page 4-17, subparagraph B, including any certificate number(s) in the
“Remarks” field (additional “Who” involved).
3) Section III: Include any relevant information.
4) Section IV: Include comments which document the following:
a) “What” happened: Describe the noncompliance event, the SRR (including
the rule or statute citation), and how the requirement was not met. Include
additional “When” and “Where” details not captured in Section I, and explain
the role of all personnel involved or listed in Section II. For nonregulatory
safety issues, concerns, or recommendations, the SRR is not required; describe
what happened to raise the issue.
b) All identified hazards or ineffective risk controls, including behaviors,
that led to the issue.
c) (Regulatory findings only.) “Why” it happened: A brief summary of the
analysis and a listing of the underlying root cause(s) that resulted in noncompliance.
The ASI should critically review and validate any analysis or root cause(s)
provided by a certificate holder.
d) The mitigating or corrective action(s) taken by the person/entity to
correct the problem, if any, and when those action(s) were taken.
e) (Regulatory findings only.) Whether the person/entity completed all corrective
action(s) to the FAA’s satisfaction.
f) Whether any other FAA action was taken or is still required (additional
followup, reexamination/re-inspection, enforcement, etc.), including the ASI’s
recommendations on the controls, monitoring, and feedback required to mitigate
risks and ensure compliance.
g) If applicable, document use of SAS risk management process (RMP) or SAT.
See the definition in subparagraph 14-1-2-9G2) specific to the “Convene SAT” PTRS activity.
h) If used, RT under Volume 15 must be noted in the *749 “Additional Training”
CA PTRS record comment section, including details of the referring ASI’s offer
of RT and acceptance by the airman and the FAASTeam Program Manager (FPM)/Regional
FAASTeam Point of Contact’s (RFPOC) *950 PTRS activity’s full record ID number.
The referring ASI’s record must remain open until the RT process outcome is
known from the FPM/RFPOC and documented by the ASI in the “Additional Training”
Volume 14, Chapter 3, Section 2 and
Volume 15, Chapter 6, Section 1 for
i) If applicable, related PTRS records must be linked with coded comments
per subparagraph 14-1-2-9D1) above (keyword “907-I”).
j) When completed, ASIs should review the record(s) and subparagraphs
14-1-2-9C and 14‑1‑2‑9J to verify they have completed a quality compliance history
record for future review as to what the problem was and how it was fixed.
G. SAS Instructions. SAS users must use and document CA in accordance with
Volume 10, Chapters 5 and 6, and Volume 14. When it is beneficial to reference
or link to CA records within the SAS for persons not managed within SAS (such
as airmen working for a carrier), CA PTRS records recorded in SAS comment fields
will include “CAPTRS” (without quotes or spaces) and the full record transmittal
ID number as shown in this example: CAPTRSEA61201512345.
Compliance Action PTRS
Unique record identifier
NOTE: Use the comment blocks, information uploading capabilities, and radio buttons
in each DCT question, the Analysis, Assessment, and Action (AAA) process, and/or
the AITT to comply with CA documentation requirements in this section per Volume
10 policy. Use the terms and definitions in this section as appropriate when
documenting CAs in the SAS automation.
1) SAS Module 4: All SAS ASIs directly conducting surveillance
(including principal and non‑principal personnel) should take appropriate CAs
(such as on-the-spot corrections) for deviations when and where issues are identified. In all instances,
the important thing is to fix the immediate safety issue and document it in
SAS (for SAS-managed certificates) per
Volume 14, Chapter 1, Section 2 and
Volume 10, Chapter 5 guidance. Notify the PI per
Volume 10, Chapter 5, Section 1.
2) SAS Module 5: During Analysis, Assessment, and Action (AAA), the PI identifies
issues requiring action/followup and tracks them with the AITT, which may include
CA taken and entered in Module 4 by the PI or another ASI or new issues identified by AAA.
a) Person/airman regulatory CA followup for personnel documented in PTRS
is not required to be referenced in SAS per subparagraph 14-1-2-9G unless necessary
to show an effective response to a related SAS certificate issue.
b) When a PI identifies a regulatory deviation in AAA on a SAS-managed certificate,
the PI documents the issue in the AITT per Volume 10, Chapter 6 and Volume 14.
When the PI assesses a regulatory deviation has occurred and selects either a “3 Regulatory
Issues” or “4 Regulatory/Systemic Issues” (for either an issue partially or
fully addressed in Module 4, or a new issue identified by the PI), then the
“Regulatory Compliance Action” action choice must be selected. Regulatory CAs
which were adequately addressed in Module 4 and require no followup must be
documented as such in the AITT. See
Volume 10, Chapter 6, Sections 1 and
H. Followup Surveillance Activities. When additional followup
is required and is able to be completed soon by the discovering ASI, the initial CA PTRS record or Module
4 DCT can remain open to document any short- or mid-term followup validation
required. See step E in Figure 14-1-2A and subparagraph 14-1-2-7E. SAS DCTs
held open to complete followup must be coordinated with the PI and should be
closed before the due date.
1) PTRS Users: For complex or long-term followup, coordinate
with the PI/CHDO, if applicable. Trigger (if possible) any additional followup
surveillance activities needed to validate CA effectiveness from the parent
CA PTRS record, then close the CA record as completed with a comment linking
it to the planned follow‑up activity per subparagraph 14-1-2-9D1). If followup
confirms compliance, close the PTRS.
2) SAS Users: For complex or long-term followup, coordinate with
the PI/CHDO. PIs will track regulatory CA followup for SAS-managed certificates
on the AITT. Document CA in SAS records as described above and in accordance
with Volume 10 policy.
3) All ASIs: If followup fails to confirm full compliance has been restored,
reevaluate if CA or Enforcement Action is appropriate. (See step E in Figure
14-1-2A and subparagraphs 14-1-2-7D and 14-1-2-7E above.)
I. PTRS Regulatory CAs with Unsuccessful Corrective Action Completion.
1) If agreed-upon corrective action(s) were implemented but failed
to achieve their intended purpose, revised or additional corrective actions
should be developed and implemented. This is a normal and expected process that
should be documented in either the original CA PTRS record comments or in the
comments of triggered followup surveillance PTRS.
2) When the airman/entity fails to complete agreed-upon corrective
actions to the FAA’s satisfaction, the ASI documents the situation as follows:
a) Provide the details in the CA PTRS as described in subparagraph 14-1-2-9F4).
b) Terminate the CA PTRS record with a “T” in the results code.
c) Trigger any resulting Enforcement Action PTRS record from the parent CA PTRS record.
d) Link the records per subparagraph 14-1-2-9D.
e) Document related FAA and certificate holder mitigation actions in the
enforcement PTRS record.
J. Data Quality Guidelines, Review, and Job Aid.
1) ASIs must make timely entries that meet the criteria in subparagraph
14-1-2-9F and answer the questions of “Who, What, When, Where, and Why” as described in
the PPM and Volume 10 Data Quality Guidelines. A complete and comprehensive
report demonstrates that a quality work activity was performed.
2) FLMs must ensure documented data accurately reflects and supports ASI and PI
observations, decisions, and actions for regulatory CA. FLMs, or other delegated
personnel, must review all regulatory/statutory CA records to assure policy
is followed and that records are clear and complete enough to stand alone as
useful information when accessed in the future. The answers to the questions
and requirements in subparagraphs 14-1-2-9C and F should be readily
identifiable to others without firsthand experience with the facts. FLMs must
provide necessary leadership to resolve differences of opinion between reporting
ASIs and Data Quality Reviewers (DQR).
3) Appendix 14-4,
Compliance Action Documentation Review Job Aid, contains a job
aid and additional references to assist the ASI in creating quality entries,
help others perform efficient reviews, and provide a standardized mechanism
for providing feedback concerning documentation requirements.
K. CA Records Opened in Error. If a PTRS record is opened in
error, terminate the CA. This may be done when the identified noncompliance is later proven incorrect,
when an ASAP or VDRP report has been accepted for the event/issue and those
processes will address later corrective action(s), when a requirement to take
Enforcement Action is later discovered, or for other reasons requiring the activity
to be terminated.
1) Close the PTRS record with a “T” in the results code.
2) Provide opinion code “I” explanatory comments including applicable parts of
subparagraphs 14‑1‑2‑9F4)f), i), and j) discovered by the investigating ASI.
The rest of subparagraph 14‑1‑2‑9F4) no longer applies.
14-1-2-11 TASK OUTCOMES. The completion of this task results in:
• ASIs using critical thinking and working interdependently to find
and fix safety problems in the NAS as efficiently and effectively as possible;
• Conserving FAA resources by using the most effective means to
return an individual or entity that holds an FAA certificate, approval, authorization,
or license to full compliance and to prevent recurrence;
• Increased cooperation from airmen and entities when interacting
with ASIs; and
• Increased voluntary compliance with FAA regulations.
14-1-2-13 FUTURE ACTIVITIES.
A. Analysis and Interdependence. The PI or certification project manager
(CPM) must analyze regulatory noncompliance as soon as they are aware of it,
make assessment determinations on noncompliance and safety concerns, provide
action justification, maintain an open line of communication with the certificate
holder, and work together to resolve
should continually analyze data available
on their assigned [certificates for] trends, findings or problem areas that
may point to issues regarding compliance and that may require corrective actions.
ASIs should also make recommendations to management for changes in [surveillance
plans and policies] if adverse patterns, trends, or problem areas are discovered.
ASIs should coordinate their findings with the supervisor and office manager
[and the PI/CHDO, when applicable] when potential adverse safety data is detected
and make adjustments to their work program as necessary.”16
B. Enforcement Cases Reconsideration. There may be instances where initiated
enforcement cases are later determined to be eligible for CA. Some or all aspects
of an enforcement case may be downgraded to CA after discussion and agreement
between all parties at an informal conference, or a CA such as RT may be written into a legal settlement. See
Guidance for Review of Enforcement Cases Under the FAA’s Compliance Philosophy, for additional guidance.
C. Other Activities:
• Continue followup when appropriate to validate that airman/organization
corrective actions were effective;
• Search the National PTRS (NPTRS) data for prior CA records and
other record keyword 907/911 comments when responding to new suspected or actual
airman/organization noncompliance or deviations;
• Review SAS Module 4 and 5 reports and the Short Term Solutions
(STS) Reports, especially the SAS Compliance and Enforcement Action Comprehensive
Report. Periodic review of these reports can help identify SAS documented CA data (see
Volume 10, Chapter 6, Section 1); and
• Initiate Enforcement Action when CA is not appropriate or effective.
14-1-2-15 through 14-1-2-29 RESERVED.