FAA acceptance of Non-conforming parts (discrepancies)

[Topher_]

I am looking for guidance on how to request FAA acceptance of a non-conforming part that receives a 8110-3? And what documentation is required to provide engineering data to certify the part is still good for airworthiness?

I'm trying to be a little vague so I don't bias anyone with my thoughts on this. But basically I have a part that has a dimension that is out of tolerance, but the dimension is not critical to the design. This part is one part of a system that goes on an aircraft with a STC. My QC department flagged it during MRB and the part was dispositioned by engineering as 'use as is'.

 

[mfgenggear]

OP
contact an FAA liason engineer.
Your company must have design and MRB approval from the FAA. I take it this an after market aircraft part.. design owned by the government.

 

[SWComposites]

OP do you not have a DER to sign off such things?
Can’t be the first time you have had a discrepancy that needed approval.

 

[mfgenggear]

op
this is the process
Design Approvals | Federal Aviation Administration https://www.faa.gov/aircraft/air_cert/design_approvals

 

[rb1957]

What's happening here ? Why do you need FAA approval for the part ?

I assume you're doing some maintenance on a plane, and that you have FAA approval for such.
Part of that approval should include a process for non-conformances.
I'd've thought that that process could be as simple as ...
Inspection find a Non-conformance,
report this to Engineering, who disposition it.
That disposition should solve the non-conformance, so when done and inspected as done, then the thing is "done". Why need additional approval ?
Possibly Engineering provide a solution ... "scrap", which also solves the non-conformance (and no need to FAA approval for this either).

no?

of course the other way to disposition would be to forward to the people who have the data, and wait for a reply.
But if you're sure it is acceptable as is then why the problem ??

 

[3DDave]

AFAIK this is supposed to be part of the company processes that the FAA approves before any work is done/before the company is allowed to work on aircraft.

The worst case is having to note in the aircraft maintenance logs that a part was used that may be a problem in terms of fitting with other parts or needing special handling. For example, on some aircraft if a locking pin hole is damaged, the fix is to ream to a larger size and then note that a larger pin must be used on that aircraft.

Whatever dimension that is discrepant may be OK, but if anyone comes along later to make a mod they need to know that this one aircraft is different than all the others in a way that is not represented on the manufacturer's drawings.

 

[rb1957]

that's what I thought. The FAA gives a manufacturing approval based on a Quality Manual (similar for delegates ... delegation is based on an Engineering Manual).
This manual should describe how non-conformances are to be addressed. Maybe their manual says "get an 8110" ?

 

[MintJulep]

I'm trying to be a little vague

Congratulations, you succeeded.

Perhaps this part is related to a major repair, or modification? Perhaps the repair or modification design approval involved form 8110-3?

Perhaps now the physical part is non conforming to the approved design?

Perhaps your amend the 8110-3 with the MRB's supporting findings and get the DER to sign.