The tables below map the ARGUS Audit Standard (AAS) requirements to each program area, showing what auditors evaluate as evidence of compliance.
This is a subset of ARGUS Gold requirements focused on areas directly addressed by the proposed program.
The audit standard has been substantially revised in response to the Part 5 mandate.
D = Documentation required. I = Evidence of implementation required. D/I = Both required.
AAS 1.2 — Safety Policy and Objectives
| AAS # | Standard | Part 5 Ref | What Auditors Evaluate |
|---|
| 1.2.1.b | Policy includes commitment to safety and just culture, including a non-retribution policy on reporting and description of unacceptable actions not covered by non-retribution | §5.21(a)(5), §5.71(a)(7) | D: AE's signed statement must explicitly address just culture, non-retribution policy for reporters, and the types of actions that are not protected |
| 1.2.1.c | Policy includes management commitment to provide resources to implement the safety policy | §5.21(a)(3) | D/I: AE statement must commit to all necessary resources. Evidence includes dedicated Safety Manager, SMS platform, training resources, and management participation in the SMS |
| 1.2.1.e | Policy includes a safety reporting policy defining the requirement for employees to report safety hazards | §5.21(a)(4) | D: Signed policy must clearly state the requirement for employees to report hazards |
| 1.2.1.f | Policy includes a Code of Ethics for all employees and management clarifying that safety is the operator's highest priority | §5.21(a)(7) | D: Signed policy must include a Code of Ethics covering safety responsibilities for all employees, managers, and officers with a statement that safety is the organization's highest priority |
| 1.2.1.g | Safety policy reviewed annually, signed and dated by the Accountable Executive | §5.21(b), §5.21(d) | D/I: Policy must include a statement that it will be periodically reviewed. Evidence: dated signatures on successive policy versions or records of annual AE safety review |
| 1.2.1.h | Safety policy posted prominently throughout the organization and at all operating locations | §5.21(c) | I: Physical posting at all locations and/or prominent electronic posting. Policy should not just be "available" — it must be visible during daily activities |
AAS 1.3–1.4 — Safety Accountability, Responsibilities, and Key Personnel
| AAS # | Standard | Part 5 Ref | What Auditors Evaluate |
|---|
| 1.3.1 | Operator identifies the Accountable Executive with ultimate responsibility and accountability for safety performance | §5.23(a)(1) | D/I: AE documented by name or title in a controlled manual. Evidence: org charts and statements of responsibility and accountability |
| 1.3.2 | Management safety accountabilities defined throughout the organization. Senior managers have direct accountability for safety. | §5.23(a)(2) | D/I: Safety accountabilities documented for all employees. Evidence: participation in Safety Meetings and Safety Risk Profile reviews |
| 1.3.5 | Operator specifies management levels with authority to make decisions regarding safety risk tolerability | §5.23(b) | D/I: Risk tolerability authority documented in risk matrix. Evidence: records showing appropriate managers reviewing and accepting risk in SRP, hazard reports, IEP findings, and FRAT scores |
| 1.4.1 | Operator identifies a Safety Manager as the responsible individual and focal point for SMS implementation and maintenance | §5.25(c) | D/I: Safety Manager position documented in a controlled manual. Evidence: interview with Safety Manager to assess understanding of SMS responsibilities |
| 1.4.1.a | Safety Manager has direct access or reporting to the Accountable Executive concerning the SMS | §5.25(c)(5) | D/I: Reporting relationship documented. Evidence: org chart showing the relationship and access path to AE |
AAS 1.6 — Safety Risk Management
| AAS # | Standard | Part 5 Ref | What Auditors Evaluate |
|---|
| 1.6.1 | Operator documents a Safety Risk Profile (SRP) including significant loss exposures, pre- and post-mitigation risks, likelihood and severity evaluations, and description of mitigations used | §5.53(c) | D/I: SRP must cover Flight Operations, Maintenance Operations, Human Factors, and Facilities. Evidence: completed SRP periodically reviewed and updated with management-level risk acceptance documented |
| 1.6.2 | Formal process ensures operational hazards are identified, documented, and retained in a hazard log / risk register | §5.21(a)(4), §5.53(c), §5.55(a) | D/I: Evidence: dated hazard log or risk register with all identified hazards retained |
| 1.6.3 | Hazard identification process includes investigation of incident and accident reports as a source | §5.71(a)(5) | D/I: Evidence: notations in risk register identifying hazards derived from accident and incident investigation |
| 1.6.4 | Hazard identification process includes review of hazards from appropriate external sources (OEMs, CAA, professional organizations, third-party services) | §5.57, §5.71(a)(8) | D/I: Evidence: notations in risk register identifying hazards derived from external sources such as NBAA, NATA, OpsGroup, and OEM service bulletins |
| 1.6.6 | Hazard identification includes a reporting system for voluntary and mandatory hazards, accessible to all personnel with feedback to reporters | §5.21(a)(4) | D/I: Voluntary vs. mandatory report types identified. Evidence: submitted reports categorized accordingly and feedback mechanism to reporters demonstrated |
| 1.6.7 | SMS includes formal event processing: root cause analysis, risk assessment, remedial action with manager accountability, and assurance check to verify mitigation effectiveness | §5.55(a–d) | D/I: Formal sequence documented. Evidence: all required steps demonstrated in the analysis of each reported hazard. Risk reassessment at appropriate time after mitigation verified. |
AAS 1.7 — Safety Assurance (IEP, SPIs, Management of Change)
| AAS # | Standard | Part 5 Ref | What Auditors Evaluate |
|---|
| 1.7.1 | Operator develops SPIs and Safety Performance Targets that reflect safety objectives and identify areas of significant risk | §5.71(a)(1) | D/I: SPIs must track progress against safety objectives and measure exposure to risks in the SRP. Evidence: current SPIs reviewed with evidence of active monitoring |
| 1.7.2 | Operator has a Management of Change process that identifies and assesses safety risks from significant changes before implementation | §5.51, §5.73(a)(4), §5.71(a)(2) | D/I: MOC process documented. Evidence: operator demonstrably used formal MOC before implementing significant changes |
| 1.7.3 | SMS includes a safety auditing program (IEP) designed to ensure effectiveness and continual improvement of the SMS | §5.71(a)(3) | D/I: IEP structure and function documented in a controlled document. Evidence: completed IEP checklists showing audits have been conducted |
| 1.7.4 | IEP includes regularly scheduled audits of operational processes | §5.71(a)(4) | D/I: Audit schedule documented. Evidence: IEP audits completed against planned schedule with records retained |
| 1.7.6 | IEP process includes root cause analysis of discrepancies, corrective actions, and follow-up to verify corrective actions were effective | §5.75 | D/I: Formal finding process documented. Evidence: records of root cause analysis and verified corrective action closure for each IEP finding |
AAS 1.8 — Safety Promotion
| AAS # | Standard | Part 5 Ref | What Auditors Evaluate |
|---|
| 1.8.1 | SMS outlines initial and annual recurrent training requirements for: Safety Manager, Management Personnel, and all employees | §5.91 | D/I: Specific initial and annual training requirements documented for all three groups. Evidence: training records demonstrating training was targeted to each individual's involvement in the SMS |
| 1.8.2 | SMS requires documentation of safety training accomplishments of all employees | §5.93(a) | D/I: Requirement and methodology for recording SMS training documented. Evidence: training records or tracking system for all employee SMS training |
| 1.8.4.a | Operator maintains a formal means for safety communication that disseminates safety-critical information | §5.93(a)(b) | D/I: Formal communication means documented. Evidence: safety bulletins, NOTACs, newsletters, or other communications demonstrating safety-critical information has been disseminated |
| 1.8.4.b | Safety communications include information explaining why a particular safety action is taken | §5.93(c)(d) | D/I: Requirement documented. Evidence: communications that describe the reasons safety actions were taken, not just what changed |
AAS 2.1–2.2 — Emergency Response Program
| AAS # | Standard | Part 5 Ref | What Auditors Evaluate |
|---|
| 2.1.1 | Operator has an ERP documented in a controlled manual, coordinated with external organizations it must interface with during emergencies. ERP noted in the Safety Policy. | §5.27(c), §5.21(a) | D/I: ERP in a controlled manual with revision sequence. Evidence: currency and completeness including method to maintain current contact information for external organizations |
| 2.1.2 | ERP covers: missing aircraft, substantial aircraft/property damage, bomb threats and terrorist acts, hijacking, facility accidents with serious injuries, and environmental events | §5.27 | D/I: ERP must address all listed event types with specific guidance for each. Evidence: drills conducted on events other than aircraft accidents, or review process showing all event types considered when selecting drill scenarios |
| 2.1.3.b | ERP includes procedures for notifying the FAA, NTSB, and the CAA in the location where an accident occurred | 49 CFR Part 830 | D: Procedures must include current contact information for NTSB and FAA notification. Contact list currency evaluated at time of audit. |
| 2.2.1 | ERP designates an Emergency Response Team with documented duties and responsibilities for key personnel, and ensures materials and supplies are available | §5.27(a)(b) | D/I: ERT members, duties, and lead position clearly documented. Evidence: inspection of ERT location and materials, interviews with ERT members to validate understanding of their roles |
| 2.2.2 | ERP includes current contact details for ERT members, other company personnel, government agencies, and service providers | §5.27 | D/I: Contact information currency maintenance method documented. Evidence: review of update records and verification of contact information currency at time of audit |
AAS 6.1–6.2 — Fatigue Management Program
| AAS # | Standard | Part 5 Ref | What Auditors Evaluate |
|---|
| 6.1.1.c | Flight and duty time limitations documented for all aircraft crew including cabin crew performing safety-related roles. Augmented crew limitations included where applicable. | 14 CFR §135.261–273 | D/I: All crew flight and duty limitations documented including augmented crew. Evidence: flight and duty time records reviewed for compliance |
| 6.2.1.a | If deviations from flight and duty limits are permitted, the FRMP includes a process to evaluate related risks and apply appropriate mitigations | §5.51–5.55 | D/I: Deviation risk assessment method documented. Evidence: records of risk assessment and mitigation for any approved deviations |
| 6.2.1.b | FRMP identifies management personnel authorized to approve deviations from flight and duty limits | §5.23(b) | D/I: Authorized managers documented by position. Evidence: records of approved deviations showing appropriate management authorization |