Hazard Statuses
Every hazard in the register moves through a defined lifecycle from initial identification to closure.| Status | API Value | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Draft | draft | Entry created but not yet reviewed. The hazard has been identified but has not been formally evaluated through the SRM process. |
| Active | active | Identified and under active monitoring. Risk controls may be in development or already in place. The hazard is part of the organization’s ongoing risk portfolio. |
| Mitigated | mitigated | Controls have been implemented and residual risk has been reassessed. The hazard remains in the register for continued monitoring under Safety Assurance (14 CFR 5.71). |
| Accepted | accepted | Formally accepted at the appropriate management level with documented rationale. The residual risk is within the organization’s acceptable risk criteria. |
| Closed | closed | The hazard no longer exists or has been fully mitigated. The record is retained for historical reference and regulatory compliance but no longer requires active monitoring. |
Status Lifecycle
A hazard may move from Mitigated back to Active if Safety Assurance monitoring reveals
that controls are no longer effective, per 14 CFR 5.75.
Hazard Fields
| Field | Type | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
code | String | Auto | Auto-generated tracking code (e.g., HAZ-2026-0042). |
title | String | Yes | Brief description of the hazard condition. |
description | Text | Yes | Detailed narrative explaining the hazard — what it is, where it exists, and what systems or processes it affects. |
category | Enum | Yes | Classification of the hazard domain. See the categories table below. |
source | Enum | Yes | How the hazard was identified: report, investigation, audit, industry_data, or operational_experience. |
owner | User reference | Yes | The person responsible for managing this hazard and its controls. |
status | Enum | Auto | Current lifecycle status. |
initial_risk | Object | Yes | Severity (1—5) and likelihood (A—E) rating before controls. Produces a risk index and zone. |
controls | Array | No | List of risk controls applied to this hazard. See the controls table below. |
residual_risk | Object | No | Severity and likelihood rating after controls are in place. |
next_review_date | Date | Yes | When this hazard is next due for review. |
review_frequency | Enum | Yes | How often the hazard must be reviewed: monthly, quarterly, semi_annual, or annual. |
linked_reports | Array | No | Safety reports that identified or relate to this hazard. |
linked_investigations | Array | No | Investigations that uncovered or analyzed this hazard. |
linked_cpas | Array | No | Corrective and Preventive Actions addressing this hazard. |
linked_moc | Array | No | Management of Change records associated with this hazard. |
created_at | Timestamp | Auto | Record creation timestamp (UTC). |
updated_at | Timestamp | Auto | Last modification timestamp (UTC). |
Hazard Categories
Hazard Category Classification
Hazard Category Classification
| Category | API Value | Description | Examples |
|----------|---------------|-------------|----------| | Flight Operations |
flight_ops | Hazards
related to flight conduct, procedures, and airborne operations. | Unstable approaches, runway
excursions, CFIT risk areas, altitude deviations. | | Maintenance | maintenance | Hazards
related to aircraft maintenance, inspections, and airworthiness. | Overdue inspections, tooling
deficiencies, parts quality, MEL management. | | Ground Handling | ground | Hazards related to
ramp operations, fueling, and ground movement. | Ramp incursions, fueling errors, pushback
incidents, FOD on movement areas. | | Cabin Safety | cabin | Hazards related to cabin operations
and passenger safety. | Turbulence injuries, evacuation readiness, galley equipment failures. | |
Airspace / ATC | airspace | Hazards related to airspace, navigation, and air traffic control
interactions. | Communication breakdowns, TCAS events, airspace violations. | | Weather |
weather | Hazards related to meteorological conditions affecting operations. | Icing, wind
shear, low visibility, convective weather, volcanic ash. | | Human Factors | human_factors |
Hazards related to human performance, cognition, and behavior. | Fatigue, CRM breakdowns,
complacency, distraction, inadequate training. | | Organizational | organizational | Hazards
related to management systems, policies, and organizational structure. | Staffing gaps, training
deficiencies, procedural drift, resource constraints. |Risk Controls
Each hazard can have one or more risk controls. Controls follow the hierarchy of effectiveness defined by the control type.| Field | Type | Description |
|---|---|---|
description | Text | What the control does and how it reduces the hazard’s risk. |
type | Enum | Control hierarchy classification — see the table below. |
status | Enum | planned, implemented, or verified. |
effectiveness | Enum | effective, partially_effective, ineffective, or not_yet_assessed. |
linked_cpas | Array | CPA records that implement or verify this control. |
Control Type Hierarchy
Control Type Hierarchy
Controls are classified using the standard hierarchy of effectiveness. Higher-tier controls are preferred because they reduce risk more reliably.
| Tier | Type | Description | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Elimination | Remove the hazard entirely. | Discontinue operations at an airport with unresolvable terrain hazards. |
| 2 | Substitution | Replace the hazard with something less hazardous. | Switch to a runway with ILS capability instead of a non-precision approach. |
| 3 | Engineering | Isolate people from the hazard through physical or system design. | Install TAWS/EGPWS, automated fuel quantity sensors, wing-mounted cameras. |
| 4 | Administrative | Change procedures, training, or policies. | Revised SOP, additional recurrent training, briefing requirement, checklist update. |
| 5 | PPE | Personal protective equipment as a last line of defense. | Hearing protection for ramp workers, high-visibility vests, safety harnesses. |
Administrative controls (SOPs, training, checklists) are the most common in aviation operations but are also the most dependent on human compliance. Pairing administrative controls with engineering controls provides defense in depth.
Review Schedule
Hazards require periodic review to verify that risk controls remain effective and that the risk profile has not changed. The review frequency is configurable per hazard.| Frequency | API Value | Typical Use |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly | monthly | New or high-risk hazards requiring close monitoring during initial control implementation. |
| Quarterly | quarterly | Active hazards with established controls that need regular effectiveness checks. |
| Semi-Annual | semi_annual | Mitigated hazards with stable, verified controls. |
| Annual | annual | Accepted hazards with a long track record of effective controls. |
Review Process
The review process consists of five stages:| Stage | Description |
|---|---|
| Reminder | The system sends a notification to the hazard owner when the next review date approaches (configurable lead time: 7, 14, or 30 days). |
| Initiation | The owner opens the review dialog from the hazard detail page. |
| Evaluation | The owner assesses whether the hazard still exists, whether controls remain effective, whether the operating environment has changed, and whether new data (reports, incidents, industry bulletins) affects the risk profile. |
| Updates | The owner may reassess residual risk (severity and likelihood), add/modify/remove controls, change the hazard status, or adjust the review frequency. |
| Completion | The owner submits the review. The system records the review date, reviewer, and any changes made, then calculates the next review date. |
Overdue hazard reviews are flagged on the safety compliance dashboard and affect Safety Assurance
metrics. Overdue reviews may also be noted during FAA surveillance activities.
Linked Records
The hazard register does not exist in isolation. Each hazard connects to other SMS records through explicit links that establish regulatory traceability.| Linked Record | Relationship | Regulatory Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Safety reports | Reports that identified or relate to the hazard. | 14 CFR 5.53 — hazard identification from safety reporting. |
| Investigations | Investigations that uncovered or analyzed the hazard. | 14 CFR 5.73 — safety performance assessment. |
| CPAs | Corrective and Preventive Actions addressing the hazard’s risk controls. | 14 CFR 5.55 — risk control development. |
| MOC records | Management of Change items that affect the hazard or its controls. | 14 CFR 5.51 — SRM for changes to existing systems. |
| Risk assessments | Formal risk evaluations performed for the hazard. | 14 CFR 5.55 — safety risk assessment. |
Regulatory Alignment
| Part 5 Section | Requirement | Hazard Register Component |
|---|---|---|
| 5.53 | System analysis and hazard identification | Hazard fields, categories, source tracking, description. |
| 5.55(a) | Process to analyze safety risk | Initial risk assessment (severity x likelihood). |
| 5.55(b) | Acceptable level of safety risk | Status lifecycle — Accepted status with documented rationale. |
| 5.55(c) | Risk controls when risk is unacceptable | Controls list with type hierarchy and effectiveness tracking. |
| 5.57 | Notification of hazards to interfacing parties | Linked records and owner assignment for cross-functional awareness. |
| 5.71 | Safety performance monitoring and measurement | Periodic review schedule, effectiveness monitoring, status updates. |
| 5.73 | Safety performance assessment | Review process validating control effectiveness over time. |
| 5.97 | SMS records | Hazard records retained as long as the control remains relevant. |
Related
Risk Assessment Matrix
Severity and likelihood definitions used to rate hazards.
Conduct a Risk Assessment
Perform a risk assessment.
Investigation Workflow
How investigations identify hazards for the register.
CPA Lifecycle
How CPAs implement and verify hazard risk controls.