## 6.6 SRM Document Approval 

## Approval of a Safety Risk Management (SRM) document with hazards requires and represents that: 

• The SRM document was developed properly, 

• Hazards were systematically identified, 

• Risk was appropriately assessed, 

• If identified, safety requirements were deemed valid, 

• Safety performance targets or other methods to verify predicted residual risk were approved by the responsible Service Unit, and 

• A monitoring plan was prepared. 

## Approval of an SRM document without hazards requires and represents that: 

• The SRM document was developed properly, 

• No hazards were introduced by the National Airspace System (NAS) change, 

• The analysis did not address an existing safety issue, 

• The NAS change will not affect risk, and 

• Sufficient justification exists to support the finding of no hazards. 

In approving SRM documentation, the approval authority affirms that the aforementioned items have been performed and agrees that the underlying assumptions are reasonable and the findings are complete and accurate. SRM documentation approval does not constitute approval for implementation or acceptance of any risk associated with the NAS change or existing safety issue. 

## 6.6.1 Service Unit SRM Documentation Approval or Concurrence 

Affected or stakeholder Service Units must assign an appropriate management official to provide approval or concurrence of the safety analysis. The person selected must be available to provide input to the management official(s) who will accept the risk associated with the NAS change or existing safety issue. 

If SRM documentation must be sent outside of the Service Unit for approval (to another Service Unit, another Line of Business (LOB), Safety and Technical Training (AJI), or Air Traffic Safety Oversight Service (AOV)), the documentation must have an approval or concurrence signature before it leaves the Service Unit. All identified means to reduce safety risk requiring approval and acceptance by AOV must first be sent through AJI. 

If SRM documentation requires the approval or concurrence of more than one Service Unit, discrepancies in the approval standards or processes may exist between the organizations. In these cases, the change proponent should request that AJI adjudicate the discrepancies. 

If an AJI safety case lead managed the development of a safety analysis / SRM document (see Section 5.2.2.3), no other Service Unit concurrence is required; however, the risk acceptor must still review and sign the SRM document before the NAS change can be implemented. If an AJI safety case lead develops the SRM document, the relevant/affected operational Service Unit(s) 

