Aircraft Certification

Aircraft Certification’s approximately 950 engineers and inspectors in 38  field offices issue approvals to the designers and manufacturers of aircraft  and aircraft engines, propellers, parts, and equipment, including the  avionics and other equipment required for the Next Generation Air  Transportation System (NextGen)—a federal effort to transform the U.S.  national airspace system from a ground-based system of air traffic control  to a satellite-based system of air traffic management. Flight Standards

Flight Standards’ nearly 4,000 inspectors issue certificates allowing  individuals and entities to operate in the national airspace system. Extent of Variation in Interpretation Is Unknown but Potentially Stems from Factors Related to Performance-Based Regulations and FAA’s Processes

		Extent of Variation in FAA’s Interpretation of Standards for Certification and Approval Decisions Is Unknown, but Stakeholders and Experts Indicate That Serious Problems Occur Infrequently

Studies we reviewed and aviation stakeholders and experts we spoke with  indicated that variation in FAA’s interpretation of standards for  certification and approval decisions is a long-standing issue that affects  both Aircraft Certification and Flight Standards, but the extent of the  problem has not been quantified in the industry as a whole. Specifically, 10 of the 13 industry  group and individual company representatives we interviewed said that  they or members of their organization experienced variation in FAA’s  certification and approval decisions on similar submissions; the remaining  3 industry representatives did not raise variation in interpretations and  decisions as an issue. Industry Stakeholders Noted That Variation in Decisions Occurs as a Consequence of Performance-Based Regulations and FAA’s Exercise of Professional Judgment

Variation in FAA’s interpretation of standards and certification and  approval decisions occurs as a result of factors related to performance- based regulations and the use of professional judgment by FAA inspectors  and engineers, according to industry stakeholders. Key Stakeholders and Experts Said the Certification and Approval Processes Generally Work Well, but When They Do Not, It Can Be Costly for Industry

		Stakeholders and Experts Said the Certification and Approval Processes Contribute to System Safety and Work Well Most of the Time

Many industry stakeholders and experts stated that FAA’s certification and  approval processes contribute positively to the safety of the national  airspace system. Industry stakeholders have also raised concerns about the effects of  inefficiencies in the certification and approval processes on the  implementation of NextGen. According to our October 2009 testimony  on NextGen, airlines and manufacturers said that FAA’s certification  processes take too long and impose costs on industry that discourage  them from investing in NextGen equipment. The stakeholders said that these  inefficiencies have resulted in costly delays for them. One of the goals for QMS is to reduce inconsistencies  and increase standardization. Conclusions

FAA has taken actions to address variation in decisions and inefficiency in  its certification and approval processes, although the agency does not  have outcome-based performance measures and a continuous evaluative  process to determine if these actions are having their intended effects. Recommendations for Executive Action

To ensure that FAA actions contribute to more consistent decisions and  more efficient certification and approval processes, we recommend that  the Secretary of Transportation direct the Administrator of FAA to take  the following two actions:
Determine the effectiveness of actions to improve the certification and  approval processes by developing a continuous evaluative process and use  it to create measurable performance goals for the actions, track  performance toward those goals, and determine appropriate process  changes. DOT provided  technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. It describes the processes and discusses  (1) the extent of variation in FAA’s interpretation of standards with regard  to the agency’s certification and approval decisions and (2) key  stakeholder and expert views on how well the certification and approval  processes work. To address these objectives, we reviewed relevant  studies, reports, and FAA documents and processes; convened a panel of  aviation industry and other experts; and interviewed aviation industry  members, an expert, and FAA officials. What is the most significant problem with the certification and approval  processes?
Why GAO Did This Study

Among its responsibilities for aviation safety, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) issues thousands of certificates and approvals annually. These certificates and approvals, which FAA bases on its interpretation of federal standards, indicate that such things as new aircraft, the design and production of aircraft parts and equipment, and new air operators are safe for use in the national airspace system. Past studies and industry spokespersons assert that FAA's interpretations produce variation in its decisions and inefficiencies that adversely affect the industry. GAO was asked to examine the (1) extent of variation in FAA's interpretation of standards for certification and approval decisions and (2) views of key stakeholders and experts on how well these processes work. To perform the study, GAO reviewed industry studies and reports and FAA documents and processes; convened a panel of aviation experts; and interviewed officials from various industry sectors, senior FAA officials, and unions representing FAA staff.

What GAO Found

Studies, stakeholders, and experts indicated 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. 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). According to industry stakeholders, variation in FAA's interpretation of standards for certification and approval decisions 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. Industry stakeholders have also raised concerns 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, 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.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that FAA develop a continuous evaluative process with measurable performance goals to determine the effectiveness of the agency's actions to improve its certification and approval processes. DOT did not comment on the recommendations but provided technical comments, which were included as appropriate.