Delegation of Federal Aviation Administration Certification Authorities to Aviation Manufacturers
link to page 1 
March 25, 2019
Delegation of Federal Aviation Administration
Certification Authorities to Aviation Manufacturers
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certifies pilots,
Airlines flight 302 in Ethiopia have raised concerns about
aircraft, and aircraft components, as well as airlines and
the airplane’s flight handling characteristics and its design
charter flight operators. It requires that aircraft and
and certification.
component design specifications meet safety standards and
comply with regulatory requirements. Once an aircraft
Specific concerns have been raised about the 737 MAX 8’s
design is type certified, a manufacturer must demonstrate
angle of attack (AOA) sensors that measure aircraft pitch
that it can reliably reproduce that aircraft type to receive
angle and its Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation
production certification to build deliverable aircraft. Every
System (MCAS), an automated flight control feature that is
aircraft manufactured must undergo examinations,
new to the Boeing 737 MAX. As a protection against
inspections, and tests to determine that it conforms to the
aerodynamic stall, the MCAS will point the aircraft nose
certified type design and meets airworthiness standards
down when a high AOA is detected. Concerns have been
before it receives airworthiness certification and can begin
raised that erroneous or faulty AOA indications might result
routine operations for an airline or other operator (see
in repeated nose down commands that may be difficult to
Figure 1).
counteract if appropriate procedures are not closely
followed.
Figure 1. Aircraft Certifications
Interest in the design approval of the MCAS system and the
overall certification process for the 737 MAX have centered
on the extent to which FAA was directly involved in the
certification process, the certification activities that were
delegated to Boeing, and the extent to which development
and certification schedules and deadlines influenced
certification evaluations, tests, and inspections.
Additionally, questions have been raised about the results
of systems safety analyses of flight control systems and risk
assessments of AOA and MCAS system failures. On March
19, 2019, Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao
requested that the Department of Transportation Office of
Inspector General (DOT OIG) conduct an audit of the
certification process for the Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft.
Source: CRS.
FAA Delegation Authority
Since its beginnings in the 1950s, FAA has allowed aircraft
49 U.S.C. §44702(d) authorizes FAA to delegate certain
and aircraft component manufacturers to conduct certain
certification functions to private entities, including aircraft
certification functions on its behalf, including some type
and aircraft component manufacturers and aircraft repair
certification and production certification activities as well
facilities. Since 1956, this authority has been used to allow
as most airworthiness certification activities. Recently,
private companies to carry out various examinations, tests,
FAA began certifying private entities that design and build
and inspections needed to issue initial airworthiness
production aircraft and aircraft parts under a formal
certificates for production aircraft and aircraft engines upon
framework allowing qualified companies to conduct
manufacture. FAA has generally taken a more active role
certification work on behalf of FAA with limited
with respect to initial certification of newly designed
aircraft types, new variants of those aircraft types, and new
supervision and direct oversight by FAA.
aircraft components. However, some elements of
737 MAX Crashes Raise Certification Concerns
examination, testing, and inspection have historically been
While FAA’s multistep certification process has historically
delegated to design and manufacturing organizations under
been held in high regard worldwide, the relationship
FAA supervision and oversight.
between FAA and regulated entities engaged in aircraft and
Organization Designation Authorization (ODA)
aircraft component manufacturing has been brought into
question following two crashes involving Boeing 737 MAX
In 2003, P.L. 108-176 directed FAA to develop a process
for issuing “design organization certificates
8 aircraft within two years of the model’s initial entry into
.” The resulting
operational service in May 2017. Initial findings regarding
Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) process,
the October 29, 2018, crash of Lion Air flight 610 in
which FAA created in 2005, provides the framework under
Indonesia, and the March 10, 2019, crash of Ethiopian
which approved organizations are delegated certain
certification responsibilities on behalf of FAA. ODA
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Delegation of Federal Aviation Administration Certification Authorities to Aviation Manufacturers
responsibilities may include authority to issue airworthiness
FAA. Boeing, for example, has authority to do both type
certifications, production certifications, and type
certification and production certification work, in addition
certifications, which are granted separately to specific ODA
to airworthiness certification on behalf of FAA. A 2015
certificate holders. Specifically, 49 U.S.C. §44704 allows
DOT OIG audit found that FAA lacked a comprehensive
FAA to rely on ODA holders to certify compliance for type
process for determining aircraft certification service staffing
certification of aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, aircraft
needs for effective ODA oversight and other certification
instruments and equipment, and certifications to mass-
activities, and language in P.L. 115-254 requires FAA to
produce and issue airworthiness certificates for production
assess its ODA oversight staffing needs.
aircraft and aircraft components.
Modern aircraft are significantly more complex than
The statute, however, specifies that FAA is to include in an
aircraft manufactured decades ago. Importantly, flight
ODA holder’s certification specific terms that it requires of
control systems are now highly automated and rely on
the organization in the interest of public safety. Those terms
complex electronic components and software. In the course
are specified through the ODA certification process detailed
of certification, FAA or its designees must evaluate whether
in FAA Order 8100.15B, Organization Designation
these systems will work safely and reliably, and also
Authorization Procedures. In addition to stating the
determine what training pilots will need to safely operate
required qualifications for ODA certification, the order
these aircraft and interact with these automated systems.
outlines processes and expectations regarding FAA
Both aircraft systems and structural tests rely heavily on
oversight and inspections of the ODA certificate holder.
computer modeling and simulation, and, like the aircraft
Congress has generally supported FAA’s ODA framework,
themselves, manufacturing facilities have incorporated
and the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254)
greater automation, which must be evaluated before
included language intended to reduce certification delays
granting production certification. This all requires FAA
and reduce restrictions on ODA holders, in part, by
certification staff to have highly specialized skills and
establishing a central ODA policy office, assessing ODA
training.
staffing needs, and developing additional tools to help
target ODA oversight activities.
Additionally, globalization of the supply chain for aircraft
components creates geographic and geopolitical challenges
FAA’s Integrated Oversight Philosophy
for FAA oversight. In 2015, the DOT OIG found that much
The ODA framework, which has evolved since its
of the certification work conducted at aircraft supplier
inception, is predicated on the broader FAA Integrated
facilities, about a quarter of which were located overseas,
Oversight Philosophy, an approach to safety oversight
was carried out by ODA holder employees with little or no
activities that relies heavily on risk-based strategies for
FAA oversight. FAA has stepped up oversight of priority
allocating FAA oversight resources. This approach relies on
international suppliers, but given the size of the industry, it
regulated entities, including manufacturers and airlines,
continues to rely heavily on ODA holders and foreign
adopting comprehensive safety management systems that
regulators.
continuously collect and analyze safety data and provide
mechanisms for voluntary reporting of safety concerns.
Another factor potentially affecting FAA involvement is the
FAA, in turn, uses these data and safety reports to target its
continuing uncertainty of federal budgets, which has
oversight based on its own risk assessments.
resulting in temporary shutdowns. While delegated entities
can continue certification work during a government
Challenges to FAA Design and
shutdown, certification activities that depend on FAA
Manufacturing Oversight
action may be delayed during a shutdown, which could
FAA faces a number of challenges that may limit its ability
cause delays in product development timelines and
to adequately oversee aircraft design and manufacturing
certification schedules. In 2007, FAA requested authority to
processes and delegated functions carried out by ODA
charge fees for certification activities similar to fee
holders. These challenges include limited staffing
structures that exist for other government approval and
resources, subject-matter complexity, globalization of the
inspection functions such as drug testing, medical device
aircraft manufacturing supply chain, and the impact of
certification, and food and agricultural product inspections.
budget uncertainties on federal oversight operations.
FAA certification fees have not been authorized by
Congress.
FAA’s annual budget for aircraft certification services
totals about $240 million, which covers a staff of about
Instead, FAA has historically relied on its delegation
1,350 employed at 13 aircraft certification offices, 19
authority and the ODA program. While Congress has
manufacturing inspection district offices, four
generally supported this approach, safety concerns are
manufacturing inspection satellite offices, a certificate
prompting debate on whether FAA has become too reliant
management office, a certification program management
on manufacturers in the certification process. However,
section at FAA headquarters, and two international offices.
efforts to reduce this reliance may be difficult to reconcile
FAA’s largest aircraft certification office, located in Seattle,
with initiatives to streamline the certification process.
WA, and primarily dedicated to overseeing Boeing, has a
staff of about 40 employees. Overall, FAA’s aircraft
Bart Elias, Specialist in Aviation Policy
certification service oversees about 1,600 manufacturers, of
which slightly more than 80, including Boeing, are ODA
IF11145
holders. Eighteen of those ODA holders have authority to
perform production certification activities, and 11 have
authority to conduct type certification work on behalf of
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Delegation of Federal Aviation Administration Certification Authorities to Aviation Manufacturers
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11145 · VERSION 1 · NEW
March 25, 2019
Delegation of Federal Aviation Administration
Certification Authorities to Aviation Manufacturers
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) certifies pilots,
Airlines flight 302 in Ethiopia have raised concerns about
aircraft, and aircraft components, as well as airlines and
the airplane’s flight handling characteristics and its design
charter flight operators. It requires that aircraft and
and certification.
component design specifications meet safety standards and
comply with regulatory requirements. Once an aircraft
Specific concerns have been raised about the 737 MAX 8’s
design is type certified, a manufacturer must demonstrate
angle of attack (AOA) sensors that measure aircraft pitch
that it can reliably reproduce that aircraft type to receive
angle and its Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation
production certification to build deliverable aircraft. Every
System (MCAS), an automated flight control feature that is
aircraft manufactured must undergo examinations,
new to the Boeing 737 MAX. As a protection against
inspections, and tests to determine that it conforms to the
aerodynamic stall, the MCAS will point the aircraft nose
certified type design and meets airworthiness standards
down when a high AOA is detected. Concerns have been
before it receives airworthiness certification and can begin
raised that erroneous or faulty AOA indications might result
routine operations for an airline or other operator (see
in repeated nose down commands that may be difficult to
Figure 1).
counteract if appropriate procedures are not closely
followed.
Figure 1. Aircraft Certifications
Interest in the design approval of the MCAS system and the
overall certification process for the 737 MAX have centered
on the extent to which FAA was directly involved in the
certification process, the certification activities that were
delegated to Boeing, and the extent to which development
and certification schedules and deadlines influenced
certification evaluations, tests, and inspections.
Additionally, questions have been raised about the results
of systems safety analyses of flight control systems and risk
assessments of AOA and MCAS system failures. On March
19, 2019, Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao
requested that the Department of Transportation Office of
Inspector General (DOT OIG) conduct an audit of the
certification process for the Boeing 737 MAX 8 aircraft.
Source: CRS.
FAA Delegation Authority
Since its beginnings in the 1950s, FAA has allowed aircraft
49 U.S.C. §44702(d) authorizes FAA to delegate certain
and aircraft component manufacturers to conduct certain
certification functions to private entities, including aircraft
certification functions on its behalf, including some type
and aircraft component manufacturers and aircraft repair
certification and production certification activities as well
facilities. Since 1956, this authority has been used to allow
as most airworthiness certification activities. Recently,
private companies to carry out various examinations, tests,
FAA began certifying private entities that design and build
and inspections needed to issue initial airworthiness
production aircraft and aircraft parts under a formal
certificates for production aircraft and aircraft engines upon
framework allowing qualified companies to conduct
manufacture. FAA has generally taken a more active role
certification work on behalf of FAA with limited
with respect to initial certification of newly designed
aircraft types, new variants of those aircraft types, and new
supervision and direct oversight by FAA.
aircraft components. However, some elements of
737 MAX Crashes Raise Certification Concerns
examination, testing, and inspection have historically been
While FAA’s multistep certification process has historically
delegated to design and manufacturing organizations under
been held in high regard worldwide, the relationship
FAA supervision and oversight.
between FAA and regulated entities engaged in aircraft and
Organization Designation Authorization (ODA)
aircraft component manufacturing has been brought into
question following two crashes involving Boeing 737 MAX
In 2003, P.L. 108-176 directed FAA to develop a process
for issuing “design organization certificates
8 aircraft within two years of the model’s initial entry into
.” The resulting
operational service in May 2017. Initial findings regarding
Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) process,
the October 29, 2018, crash of Lion Air flight 610 in
which FAA created in 2005, provides the framework under
Indonesia, and the March 10, 2019, crash of Ethiopian
which approved organizations are delegated certain
certification responsibilities on behalf of FAA. ODA
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Delegation of Federal Aviation Administration Certification Authorities to Aviation Manufacturers
responsibilities may include authority to issue airworthiness
FAA. Boeing, for example, has authority to do both type
certifications, production certifications, and type
certification and production certification work, in addition
certifications, which are granted separately to specific ODA
to airworthiness certification on behalf of FAA. A 2015
certificate holders. Specifically, 49 U.S.C. §44704 allows
DOT OIG audit found that FAA lacked a comprehensive
FAA to rely on ODA holders to certify compliance for type
process for determining aircraft certification service staffing
certification of aircraft, aircraft engines, propellers, aircraft
needs for effective ODA oversight and other certification
instruments and equipment, and certifications to mass-
activities, and language in P.L. 115-254 requires FAA to
produce and issue airworthiness certificates for production
assess its ODA oversight staffing needs.
aircraft and aircraft components.
Modern aircraft are significantly more complex than
The statute, however, specifies that FAA is to include in an
aircraft manufactured decades ago. Importantly, flight
ODA holder’s certification specific terms that it requires of
control systems are now highly automated and rely on
the organization in the interest of public safety. Those terms
complex electronic components and software. In the course
are specified through the ODA certification process detailed
of certification, FAA or its designees must evaluate whether
in FAA Order 8100.15B, Organization Designation
these systems will work safely and reliably, and also
Authorization Procedures. In addition to stating the
determine what training pilots will need to safely operate
required qualifications for ODA certification, the order
these aircraft and interact with these automated systems.
outlines processes and expectations regarding FAA
Both aircraft systems and structural tests rely heavily on
oversight and inspections of the ODA certificate holder.
computer modeling and simulation, and, like the aircraft
Congress has generally supported FAA’s ODA framework,
themselves, manufacturing facilities have incorporated
and the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-254)
greater automation, which must be evaluated before
included language intended to reduce certification delays
granting production certification. This all requires FAA
and reduce restrictions on ODA holders, in part, by
certification staff to have highly specialized skills and
establishing a central ODA policy office, assessing ODA
training.
staffing needs, and developing additional tools to help
target ODA oversight activities.
Additionally, globalization of the supply chain for aircraft
components creates geographic and geopolitical challenges
FAA’s Integrated Oversight Philosophy
for FAA oversight. In 2015, the DOT OIG found that much
The ODA framework, which has evolved since its
of the certification work conducted at aircraft supplier
inception, is predicated on the broader FAA Integrated
facilities, about a quarter of which were located overseas,
Oversight Philosophy, an approach to safety oversight
was carried out by ODA holder employees with little or no
activities that relies heavily on risk-based strategies for
FAA oversight. FAA has stepped up oversight of priority
allocating FAA oversight resources. This approach relies on
international suppliers, but given the size of the industry, it
regulated entities, including manufacturers and airlines,
continues to rely heavily on ODA holders and foreign
adopting comprehensive safety management systems that
regulators.
continuously collect and analyze safety data and provide
mechanisms for voluntary reporting of safety concerns.
Another factor potentially affecting FAA involvement is the
FAA, in turn, uses these data and safety reports to target its
continuing uncertainty of federal budgets, which has
oversight based on its own risk assessments.
resulting in temporary shutdowns. While delegated entities
can continue certification work during a government
Challenges to FAA Design and
shutdown, certification activities that depend on FAA
Manufacturing Oversight
action may be delayed during a shutdown, which could
FAA faces a number of challenges that may limit its ability
cause delays in product development timelines and
to adequately oversee aircraft design and manufacturing
certification schedules. In 2007, FAA requested authority to
processes and delegated functions carried out by ODA
charge fees for certification activities similar to fee
holders. These challenges include limited staffing
structures that exist for other government approval and
resources, subject-matter complexity, globalization of the
inspection functions such as drug testing, medical device
aircraft manufacturing supply chain, and the impact of
certification, and food and agricultural product inspections.
budget uncertainties on federal oversight operations.
FAA certification fees have not been authorized by
Congress.
FAA’s annual budget for aircraft certification services
totals about $240 million, which covers a staff of about
Instead, FAA has historically relied on its delegation
1,350 employed at 13 aircraft certification offices, 19
authority and the ODA program. While Congress has
manufacturing inspection district offices, four
generally supported this approach, safety concerns are
manufacturing inspection satellite offices, a certificate
prompting debate on whether FAA has become too reliant
management office, a certification program management
on manufacturers in the certification process. However,
section at FAA headquarters, and two international offices.
efforts to reduce this reliance may be difficult to reconcile
FAA’s largest aircraft certification office, located in Seattle,
with initiatives to streamline the certification process.
WA, and primarily dedicated to overseeing Boeing, has a
staff of about 40 employees. Overall, FAA’s aircraft
Bart Elias, Specialist in Aviation Policy
certification service oversees about 1,600 manufacturers, of
which slightly more than 80, including Boeing, are ODA
IF11145
holders. Eighteen of those ODA holders have authority to
perform production certification activities, and 11 have
authority to conduct type certification work on behalf of
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Delegation of Federal Aviation Administration Certification Authorities to Aviation Manufacturers
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF11145 · VERSION 1 · NEW