Originally Posted by paul salerno

Readers,
My company OmniSMS.aero has developed an integrated SMS/QMS web application that supports ASAP, in preparation for AC 120-66C. We are currently working with two clients to bring their ASAP 'in-house'. This means ASAP reports will be submitted into the company's SMS reporting portal, rather than WBAT. ERC members (both company and FAA) will work the ASAP reports within the company's system. FAA ERC members will be granted a restricted user role that allows them to see only specified ASAP reports.
A risk matrix appropriate to each specific report / event will be selected by ERC agreement, including matrices in dimensions of airworthiness, people, assets and reputation. Event Risk Classification (as developed by the ARMS working group) can also be used. The system is designed to facilitate efficient and accurate processing of ASAP reports, including identification of causal factors and development / implementation of risk controls and corrective actions. It will also solve the problem of redundant data (in the company's SMS and WBAT).
But IMHO, two fundamental problems remain with AC 120-66C:
1. As TheSchwartz made clear with excerpts from the proposed AC, "Reckless conduct" is defined as deviating from company policies or procedures. So in my simple mind, if an ASAP report is submitted and investigation reveals the crew failed to follow ANY related procedure, the report may be denied.
2. Risk assessments are notoriously subjective, and it could often be a real challenge to get any ERC to agree on the likelihood and severity of an unwanted outcome or consequence (in practice, risk assessments are often run for more than one unwanted outcome). Event Risk Classification methodology (by the ARMS Working Group) should greatly reduce this subjectivity, but there will be a learning curve.
Bottom line, it remains unclear whether FAA ERC members will vote to accept or deny an ASAP report where the employee has not followed a company procedure.