For an NCC or SPO operator, Annex III (Part-ORO) applies.The requirements per ORO.GEN.205 therefore also apply here as the operator contracts "manual preparation" activities, here for parts of the OM-C, to an external organization ("specialist company", such as Lufthansa Systems, Jeppesen, etc.), see GM1 ORO.GEN.205 (a) (5). This means the operator must ensure that the contracted or purchased services or products comply with the applicable
requirements (e.g. AOMs) and any aviation safety hazards associated with contracted or purchased services or products (such as an error in these AOMs) are considered by the operator's management system.
AMC1 ORO.MLR.100 provides further details for this particular activity:
(h) For the route and aerodrome part of the OM, material produced by the operator may be supplemented with or substituted by applicable route guide material produced by a specialist company.

(i) If the operator chooses to use material from another source in the OM, either the applicable
material should be copied and included directly in the relevant part of the OM, or the OM should
contain a reference to the appropriate section of that applicable material.

(j) If the operator chooses to make use of material from another source (e.g. a route manual producer, an aircraft manufacturer or a training organisation), this does not absolve the operator from the responsibility of verifying the applicability and suitability of this material. Any material received from an external source should be given its status by a statement in the OM.

HI Alex,When we operate NCC/SPO.SPEC.MCF profiles we stipulate much higher operating minima in our OMA/MCFOM than published by the chart providers.This is driven by a HIRA based on the flight checking system funcutions

With regards to AOM in particular:
The operator having to establish its own aerodrome operating minima, like Eoin is describing, is a hard requirement for CAT, NCC and SOP operators (CAT.OP.MPA.110, NCC.OP.110 and SPO.OP.110 respectively).
GM7 CAT.OP.MPA.110 clarifies again:

USE OF COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION
When an operator uses commercially available information to establish aerodrome operating minima, the operator remains responsible for ensuring that the material used is accurate and suitable for its operation, and that aerodrome operating minima are calculated in accordance with the method specified in Part C of its operations manual and approved by the competent authority.
The procedures in ORO.GEN.205 ‘Contracted activities’ apply in this case.

Jeppesen provides some good guidance for this topic here:
https://ww2.jeppesen.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/ATC-Pages-831-846-9…

Hi Eoin and Robert,

thanks for clarification! I guess Eoin makes the point with his statement:

AMC1 NCC.OP.110 Aerodrome operating minima – general

COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION
An acceptable method of specifying aerodrome operating minima is through the use of commercially available information...

After a 'risk analyses' this should be accepted as ascertained.

Hi Axel,
I would agree, as long as the operator still accounts for all operator-specific elements per NCC.OP.110 (b), such as conditions or limitations stated in the AFM of the particular aircraft being operated, the composition of the flight crew, their competence and experience.
So here the operator has to check against the AFM and evaluate crew competence/experience himself, as a commercially available product will normally not be able to do so, and then the operator has to add an appropriate increment to the AOMs.
The analysis may very well show that no increase from the commercially provided AOMs is necessary.