diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
index 49b5ac59..72e9a5b7 100644
--- a/README.md
+++ b/README.md
@@ -53,3 +53,4 @@ This repository contains RFCs and DACIs. Lost?
  access tokens specifically for this environment
 - [0092-replay-issue-creation](text/0092-replay-issue-creation.md): Replay Issue Creation
 - [0095-escalating-forecasts-merged-issues](text/0095-escalating-forecasts-merged-issues.md): Issue States and Escalating Forecasts for Merged issues
+- [0109-simple-severity-detection-using-issue-metadata-type](text/0109-simple-severity-detection-using-issue-metadata-type.md): Simple Severity Detection using Issue Metadata Type
diff --git a/text/0109-simple-severity-detection-using-issue-metadata-type.md b/text/0109-simple-severity-detection-using-issue-metadata-type.md
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..c6e7acd3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/text/0109-simple-severity-detection-using-issue-metadata-type.md
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+- Start Date: 2023-07-25
+- RFC Type: feature
+- RFC PR: https://github.com/getsentry/rfcs/pull/109
+- RFC Status: draft
+
+# Summary
+
+One paragraph explanation of the feature or document purpose.
+
+# Motivation
+
+Why are we doing this? What use cases does it support? What is the expected outcome?
+
+# Background
+
+The reason this decision or document is required. This section might not always exist.
+
+# Supporting Data
+
+[Metrics to help support your decision (if applicable).]
+
+# Options Considered
+
+If an RFC does not know yet what the options are, it can propose multiple options. The
+preferred model is to propose one option and to provide alternatives.
+
+# Drawbacks
+
+Why should we not do this? What are the drawbacks of this RFC or a particular option if
+multiple options are presented.
+
+# Unresolved questions
+
+- What parts of the design do you expect to resolve through this RFC?
+- What issues are out of scope for this RFC but are known?