Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014
Where maintenance facilities are located in more than one Member State the investigation and continued oversight of the approval shall be carried out in conjunction with the competent authorities designated by the Member States in whose territory the other maintenance facilities are located.
Regulation (EU) 2019/1383
(a) Provided the requirements of points M.A.606(a) and (b) are complied with, the competent authority shall formally indicate its acceptance of the M.A.606(a) and (b) personnel to the applicant in writing.
(b) The competent authority shall establish that the procedures specified in the maintenance organisation manual comply with Subpart F of this Annex, and shall ensure that the accountable manager signs the commitment statement.
(c) The competent authority shall verify that the organisation is in compliance with the requirements laid down in Subpart F of this Annex.
(d) A meeting with the accountable manager shall be convened at least once during the investigation for approval to ensure that he/she fully understands the significance of the approval and the reason for signing the commitment of the organisation to compliance with the procedures specified in the manual.
(e) All findings shall be confirmed in writing to the applicant organisation.
(f) The competent authority shall record all findings, closure actions (actions required to close a finding) and recommendations.
(g) For initial approval all findings shall be corrected by the organisation and closed by the competent authority before the approval can be issued.
AMC M.B.602(a) Initial approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
1. ‘Formally indicate in writing’ means that an EASA Form 4 (Appendix X to AMC M.B.602(a) and AMC M.B.702(a)) should be used for this activity. With the exception of the accountable manager, an EASA Form 4 should be completed for each person nominated to hold a position required by M.A.606(b).
2. In the case of the accountable manager approval of the maintenance organisation manual containing the accountable manager’s signed commitment statement constitutes formal acceptance.
AMC M.B.602(b) Initial approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
The competent authority should indicate approval of the maintenance organisation manual in writing.
AMC M.B.602(c) Initial approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
1. The competent authority should determine by whom, and how the audit shall be conducted. For example, it will be necessary to determine whether one large team audit or a short series of small team audits or a long series of single man audits are most appropriate for the particular situation.
2. The audit may be carried out on a product line type basis. For example, in the case of an organisation with Socata TB20 and Piper PA28 ratings, the audit is concentrated on one type only for a full compliance check. Dependent upon the result, the second type may only require a sample check that should at least cover the activities identified as weak for the first type.
3. The competent authority auditing surveyor should always ensure that he/she is accompanied throughout the audit by a senior technical member of the organisation. The reason for being accompanied is to ensure the organisation is fully aware of any findings during the audit.
4. The auditing surveyor should inform the senior technical member of the organisation at the end of the audit visit on all findings made during the audit.
AMC M.B.602(e) Initial approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
1. Findings should be recorded on an audit report form with a provisional categorisation as a level 1 or 2. Subsequent to the audit visit that identified the particular findings, the competent authority should review the provisional finding levels, adjusting them if necessary and change the categorisation from ‘provisional’ to ‘confirmed’.
2. All findings should be confirmed in writing to the applicant organisation within 2 weeks of the audit visit.
3. There may be occasions when the competent authority finds situations in the applicant's organisation on which it is unsure about compliance. In this case, the organisation should be informed about possible non-compliance at the time and the fact that the situation will be reviewed within the competent authority before a decision is made. If the review concludes that there is no finding then a verbal confirmation to the organisation will suffice.
AMC M.B.602(f) Initial approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
1. The audit report should be made on an EASA Form 6F (see appendix VI).
2. A quality review of the EASA Form 6F audit report should be carried out by a competent independent person nominated by the competent authority. The review should take into account the relevant paragraphs of M.A. Subpart F, the categorisation of finding levels and the closure action taken. Satisfactory review of the audit form should be indicated by a signature on the EASA Form 6F.
AMC M.B.602(g) Initial approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
The audit reports should include the date each finding was cleared together with reference to the competent authority report or letter that confirmed the clearance.
Regulation (EU) 2019/1383
(a) The competent authority shall issue to the applicant an EASA Form 3 approval certificate (Appendix V to this Annex), which includes the extent of the approval, when the maintenance organisation is in compliance with the applicable points of this Annex.
(b) The competent authority shall indicate the conditions attached to the approval on the EASA Form 3 approval certificate.
(c) The reference number shall be included on the EASA Form 3 approval certificate in a manner specified by the Agency.
AMC M.B.603(a) Issue of approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
1. For approvals involving more than one competent authority, the approval should be granted in conjunction with the competent authorities of the Member States in whose territories the other maintenance organisation facilities are located. For practical reasons the initial approval should be granted on the basis of a joint audit visit by the approving competent authority and competent authorities of the Member States in whose territories the other maintenance organisation facilities are located. Audits related to the continuation of the approval should be delegated to the competent authorities of the Member States in whose territories the other maintenance organisation facilities are located. The resulting audit form and recommendation should then be submitted to the approving competent authority.
2. The approval should be based upon the organisational capability relative to M.A. Subpart F compliance and not limited by reference to individual EASA certificated products.
For example, if the organisation is capable of maintaining within the limitation of M.A. Subpart F the Cessna 100 series aircraft the approval schedule should state A2 Cessna 100 series and not Cessna 172RG which is a particular designator for one of many Cessna 100 series.
3. Special case for ELA1 aircraft:
In order to promote standardisation, for this category of aircraft the following approach is recommended:
Possible ratings to be endorsed in EASA Form 3:
ELA1 sailplanes;
ELA1 powered sailplanes and ELA1 aeroplanes;
ELA1 balloons;
ELA1 airships.
Before endorsing any of those ratings (for example, ELA1 sailplanes) in EASA Form 3, the competent authority should audit that the organisation is capable of maintaining at least one aircraft type (for example, one type of sailplanes within the ELA1 category), including the availability of the necessary facilities, equipment, tooling, material, maintenance data, and certifying staff.
It is acceptable that the detailed scope of work in the Maintenance Organisation Manual (MOM) contains the same ratings endorsed in EASA Form 3 (for example, ELA1 sailplanes), without a need to further limit them. However, the maintenance organisation will only be able to maintain a certain aircraft type when all the necessary facilities, equipment, tooling, material, maintenance data, and certifying staff are available.
AMC M.B.603(c) Issue of approval
ED Decision 2015/029/R
The numeric sequence of the approval reference should be unique to the particular approved maintenance organisation.
Regulation (EU) 2019/1383
(a) The competent authority shall keep and update a programme listing, for each maintenance organisation approved in accordance with Subpart F of Section B of this Annex under its supervision, the dates when audit visits are due and when such visits were carried out.
(b) Each organisation shall be completely audited at periods not exceeding 24 months.
(c) All findings shall be confirmed in writing to the applicant organisation.
(d) The competent authority shall record all findings, closure actions (actions required to close a finding) and recommendations.
(e) A meeting with the accountable manager shall be convened at least once every 24 months to ensure he/she remains informed of significant issues arising during audits.
AMC M.B.604(b) Continuing oversight
ED Decision 2020/002/R
1. Where the competent authority has decided that a series of audit visits are necessary to arrive at a complete audit of an approved maintenance organisation, the program should indicate which aspects of the approval will be covered on each visit.
2. It is recommended that part of an audit concentrates on the organisations internal self monitoring reports produced by the organisational review to determine if the organisation is identifying and correcting its problems.
3. At the successful conclusion of the audit(s) including verification of the manual, an audit report form should be completed by the auditing surveyor including all recorded findings, closure actions and recommendation. An EASA Form 6F should be used for this activity.
4. Credit may be claimed by the competent authority surveyor(s) for specific item audits completed during the preceding 23-month period subject to four conditions:
(a) the specific item audit should be the same as that required by M.A. Subpart F latest amendment, and
(b) there should be satisfactory evidence on record that such specific item audits were carried out and that all corrective actions have been taken, and
(c) the competent authority surveyor(s) should be satisfied that there is no reason to believe standards have deteriorated in respect of those specific item audits being granted a back credit;
(d) the specific item audit being granted a back credit should be audited not later than 24 months after the last audit of the item.
5. When performing the oversight of an organisation that holds more than one approval pursuant to this Regulation, the competent authority should arrange the audits to cover both approvals avoiding a duplicated visit of a particular area.
Regulation (EU) 2019/1383
(a) When during audits or by other means evidence is found showing non-compliance with a requirement laid down in this Annex or Annex Vb (Part-ML), the competent authority shall take the following actions:
1. For level 1 findings, immediate action shall be taken by the competent authority to revoke, limit or suspend in whole or in part, depending upon the extent of the level 1 finding, the maintenance organisation approval, until successful corrective action has been taken by the organisation.
2. For level 2 findings, the competent authority shall grant a corrective action period appropriate to the nature of the finding that shall not be more than three months. In certain circumstances, at the end of this first period and subject to the nature of the finding, the competent authority can extend the three month period subject to a satisfactory corrective action plan.
(b) Action shall be taken by the competent authority to suspend in whole or part the approval in case of failure to comply within the timescale granted by the competent authority.
ED Decision 2015/029/R
For a level 1 finding it may be necessary for the competent authority to ensure that further maintenance and re-certification of all affected products is accomplished, dependent upon the nature of the finding.
Regulation (EU) 2019/1383
(a) The competent authority shall comply with the applicable elements of the initial approval for any change to the organisation notified in accordance with point M.A.617.
(b) The competent authority may prescribe the conditions under which the approved maintenance organisation may operate during such changes, unless it determines that the approval should be suspended due to the nature or the extent of the changes.
(c) For any change to the maintenance organisation manual:
1. in the case of direct approval of changes in accordance with point (b) of point M.A.604, the competent authority shall verify that the procedures specified in the manual are in compliance with this Annex before formally notifying the approved organisation of the approval;
2. in the case of an indirect approval of changes in accordance with point (c) of point M.A.604, the competent authority shall ensure that:
(i) the changes remain minor;
(ii) it has adequate control over the approval of the changes to ensure they remain in compliance with the requirements of this Annex.
ED Decision 2015/029/R
1. Changes in nominated persons.
The competent authority should have adequate control over any changes to personnel specified in M.A.606(a) and (b). Such changes will require an amendment to the manual.
2. It is recommended that a simple manual status sheet is maintained which contains information on when an amendment was received by the competent authority and when it was approved.
3. The competent authority should define the minor amendments to the manual which may be incorporated through indirect approval. In this case a procedure should be stated in the amendment section of the maintenance organisation manual.
Changes notified in accordance with M.A.617 are not considered minor.
For all cases other than minor, the applicable part(s) of the EASA Form 6F should be used for the change.
4. The approved maintenance organisation should submit each manual amendment to the competent authority whether it be an amendment for competent authority approval or an indirectly approved amendment. Where the amendment requires competent authority approval, the competent authority when satisfied, should indicate its approval in writing. Where the amendment has been submitted under the indirect approval procedure the competent authority should acknowledge receipt in writing.
M.B.607 Revocation, suspension and limitation of an approval
Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014
The competent authority shall:
(a) suspend an approval on reasonable grounds in the case of potential safety threat, or;
(b) suspend, revoke or limit an approval pursuant to point M.B.605.