What Makes a Good Hazard Report in Aviation?

A good hazard report in aviation clearly describes a safety concern in a way that allows an organization to understand the risk, evaluate its potential impact, and take appropriate action. Within a Safety Management System in business aviation, hazard reports are not incident narratives or complaint forms. They are structured safety inputs that help identify conditions, behaviors, or system weaknesses that could lead to an accident or serious incident if left unaddressed.

In practical terms, a good hazard report answers three basic questions: what happened or could happen, where and under what conditions it occurred, and why it matters to safety. It does not need to identify root causes or propose corrective actions. Its purpose is to capture useful safety information early, before risk escalates. When hazard reports are consistently well written, they become one of the most reliable sources of proactive safety data available to an operator.

This article explains what makes a hazard report effective, why quality matters in business aviation, and how hazard reporting supports regulatory compliance and meaningful risk management across different types of operations.

What Is a Hazard Report in an Aviation SMS?

In the context of a Safety Management System in business aviation, a hazard report is a formal method for employees and contractors to document unsafe conditions, latent system issues, or operational concerns. Hazards may be physical, procedural, organizational, or environmental. They may exist for long periods without producing an incident, which makes early identification critical.

Under FAA 14 CFR Part 5, hazard identification is a core component of Safety Risk Management. ICAO Annex 19 also emphasizes hazard identification as a foundational SMS function. While regulations do not prescribe a specific format, they expect operators to have a documented process for collecting, assessing, and tracking hazards.

A hazard report is not the same as an incident or accident report. An incident report documents something that has already occurred. A hazard report focuses on conditions that increase risk, regardless of whether an event has happened yet.

Why Hazard Report Quality Matters in Business Aviation

Business aviation operations often involve small teams, high variability, and limited redundancy. Pilots, technicians, dispatchers, and managers may all perform multiple roles. Because of this, many hazards are identified informally through conversations rather than formally reported. When hazard reports are vague or inconsistent, important safety signals are lost.

High quality hazard reports support several critical outcomes:

• They enable objective risk assessment rather than subjective judgment.

• They create traceable safety data that can be reviewed during audits.

• They help identify trends that may not be visible from single events.

• They support management decision making related to resources and controls.

For operators preparing for SMS maturity or regulatory oversight, hazard reporting quality is often scrutinized during audits. Auditors typically look for evidence that hazards are clearly described, assessed, and addressed. This is discussed in more detail in guidance related to what auditors look for in an SMS program.

What Information Should a Good Hazard Report Include?

A good hazard report is specific, factual, and operationally grounded. It focuses on observable conditions rather than opinions or conclusions.

At a minimum, an effective hazard report should include:

Description of the hazard A clear explanation of the unsafe condition or concern. This should be written in plain language and describe what was observed, not what might be assumed.

Location and context Where the hazard exists and under what operational circumstances it appears. This could include phase of flight, maintenance activity, weather conditions, time of day, or staffing levels.

Operational relevance An explanation of how the hazard could affect safety if it remains unaddressed. This does not require technical risk scoring but should explain why the condition matters.

Supporting details Optional information such as photographs, documents, or examples can be helpful but should not be required for submission.

Importantly, a good hazard report does not assign blame, speculate on intent, or propose solutions unless explicitly requested by the organization.

What Makes a Hazard Report Actionable?

An actionable hazard report allows safety personnel to move directly into assessment without seeking clarification. Ambiguous language often delays evaluation and discourages follow up.

Actionable reports typically share these characteristics:

• They describe a single hazard rather than multiple unrelated issues.

• They avoid vague phrases such as “unsafe situation” without explanation.

• They distinguish between the hazard itself and potential consequences.

• They provide enough context for someone not present to understand the concern.

For example, reporting “runway lighting is inadequate at night” is less actionable than reporting “runway edge lights at Taxiway B were inoperative during night operations, making centerline alignment difficult during landing rollout.”

How Hazard Reporting Differs Across Part 91, 135, and 145 Operations

While the principles of good hazard reporting remain consistent, how hazards are identified and documented can vary by operational context.

Part 91 operations Part 91 operators often rely on voluntary SMS programs. Hazard reports may come from a smaller group of pilots or maintenance providers. Because formal reporting culture may be less established, clarity and simplicity are especially important to encourage participation.

Part 135 operations Part 135 operators are required to implement SMS under FAA timelines. Hazard reporting systems must demonstrate consistency and traceability. Reports are often reviewed by designated safety personnel and may be linked to formal risk assessments and corrective actions.

Part 145 repair stations Maintenance hazards often involve tooling, documentation, human factors, or parts availability. Good hazard reports in maintenance environments clearly describe the task being performed, the deviation observed, and the potential impact on airworthiness.

These differences are explored further in discussions on how SMS applies differently to Part 91, Part 135, and Part 145 operators.

Common Mistakes in Hazard Reporting

Many hazard reporting programs struggle not because employees are unwilling to report, but because expectations are unclear.

Common issues include:

Overly vague submissions Reports that lack detail or context require follow up and may never be fully assessed.

Event focused reporting Some reporters only submit hazards after something goes wrong, missing opportunities for proactive risk management.

Blame oriented language Statements that assign fault can discourage future reporting and undermine safety culture.

Duplicate reporting without consolidation Repeated reports of the same issue without structured review can create noise rather than insight.

Addressing these issues often requires training and clear guidance on what constitutes a useful report.

What “Good” Looks Like When Hazard Reporting Works Well

When hazard reporting is implemented effectively, several indicators are typically present.

• Reports increase over time without a corresponding increase in incidents.

• Hazards are assessed within defined timeframes.

• Reporters receive acknowledgment or feedback.

• Trends are reviewed during safety meetings.

• Corrective actions are documented and tracked.

Good hazard reporting also supports the broader SMS framework, including Safety Assurance and Safety Promotion. It becomes a routine operational activity rather than a compliance exercise.

This level of integration is often discussed in foundational explanations of what a Safety Management System in business aviation actually is and how the four pillars of SMS work together.

The Role of Technology in Supporting Quality Hazard Reporting

Technology does not replace good reporting practices, but it can support consistency and accessibility. Modern SMS platforms often provide structured fields, guided prompts, and mobile access that reduce reporting friction.

Effective systems help ensure:

• Standardized data collection across departments.

• Timely routing and review of reports.

• Linkage between hazards, risk assessments, and mitigations.

• Long term trend analysis.

Importantly, technology should support reporting without overcomplicating it. Excessive required fields or complex workflows can reduce participation and degrade report quality.

How Hazard Reporting Supports Systemic Risk Identification

Individual hazard reports provide value on their own, but their greatest benefit comes from aggregation. When reviewed collectively, hazard data can reveal patterns related to procedures, training, equipment, or organizational factors.

For example, repeated reports involving similar weather decision making challenges may indicate a need for procedural review or additional training. This connection between hazard reporting and systemic risk is a key objective of SMS and is explored further in discussions about how SMS helps identify systemic risk patterns.

Summary

A good hazard report in aviation is clear, factual, and focused on safety relevance. It enables timely risk assessment, supports regulatory expectations, and strengthens an organization’s ability to manage risk proactively. Within a Safety Management System in business aviation, hazard reporting is one of the most practical ways employees contribute to safety outcomes.

When expectations are clear and reporting is supported by appropriate processes and tools, hazard reports become reliable safety inputs rather than administrative tasks. Over time, consistent high quality reporting builds a foundation for informed decision making, continuous improvement, and operational resilience.