Your's and the FAA's/ NTSB's figures match-up precisely. Unfortunately you have possibly either deliberately or unintentionally mislead everyone here by the lack of inclusion of the disclaimer....
...."Not all instances of either accident or inccident will be shown here for reasons of successful outcome"..... - FROM THE NTSB's WEBSITE!!!!
The "New and improved" rules relating to accident reporting came into effect in August 2000 -
FAA - Accident Reporting
Loosley interpreted under the old FAA rules, an engine failure in a twin gets a mention in the FAA's/NTSB's database if the outcome is that the aircraft crashes or suffers major structural damage as a result. If the aircraft manages to land safely with either no structural damage or loss of life, then there is no accident/incident in their eyes as there was a safe resolution to the flight. They do have to report it, but there is no data compiled upon it nor is it included in their final accident figures.
As you are aware, here 'one only has to sneeze without a serviceable hanky and they call it pilot error', as a person who will remain nameless, but he went-on to head what was then the CAA, said once upon a time.
You've done well, but didn't have the full story of the figures you're quoting.
To paraphrase someone off pprune about 5 years ago "Statistics are like lamposts - meant for illumination, not support."
It's all about context and apples and oranges - Your ball tiger!
