Easy Access Rules for Continuing Airworthiness (Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014)

ED Decision 2020/002/R

1.Airworthiness review staff are only required if the CAMO wants to be granted M.A.711(b) airworthiness review and, if applicable, M.A.711(c) permit to fly privileges.

2.‘experience in continuing airworthiness’ means any appropriate combination of experience in tasks related to aircraft maintenance and/or continuing airworthiness management and/or surveillance of such tasks.

3.A person qualified to the AMC M.A.706 subparagraph 4.5 should be considered as holding the equivalent to an aeronautical degree.

4.An appropriate licence in compliance with Annex III (Part-66) is any one of the following:

a category B1 licence in the subcategory of the aircraft reviewed, or

a category B2 or C licence, or

in the case of piston-engine non-pressurised aeroplanes of 2 000 kg MTOM and below, a category B3 licence,

in the case of sailplanes, powered sailplanes, ELA1 aeroplanes, balloons and airships, a category L licence in the appropriate subcategory.

It is not necessary to satisfy the experience requirements of Annex III (Part-66) at the time of the review.

5.To hold a position with appropriate responsibilities means the airworthiness review staff should have a position in the organisation independent from the airworthiness management process or with overall authority on the airworthiness management process of complete aircraft.

Independence from the airworthiness management process may be achieved, among other ways, by:

Being authorised to perform airworthiness reviews only on aircraft for which the person has not participated in their management. For example, performing airworthiness reviews on a specific model line, while being involved in the airworthiness management of a different model line.

M.A. Subpart G organisations with Part-145/M.A. Subpart F/Part-CAO approval, may nominate maintenance personnel from their Part-145/M.A. Subpart F/Part-CAO organisation as airworthiness review staff, as long as they are not involved in the airworthiness management of the aircraft. These personnel should not have been involved in the release to service of that particular aircraft (other than maintenance tasks performed during the physical survey of the aircraft or performed as a result of findings discovered during such physical survey) to avoid possible conflict of interests.

Nominating as airworthiness review staff personnel from the quality department of the CAMO.

Overall authority on the airworthiness management process of complete aircraft may be achieved, among other ways, by:

Nominating as airworthiness review staff the accountable manager or the nominated postholder.

Being authorised to perform airworthiness reviews only on those particular aircraft for which the person is responsible for the complete continuing airworthiness management process.

In the case of one-man organisations, this person has always overall authority. This means that this person can be nominated as airworthiness review staff.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

For all aircraft used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 and for any other aircraft, other than balloons, above 2 730 kg MTOM, formal aeronautical maintenance training means training (internal or external) supported by evidence on the following subjects:

•Relevant parts of initial and continuing airworthiness regulations.

•Relevant parts of operational requirements and procedures, if applicable.

•The organisation’s continuing airworthiness management exposition.

•Knowledge of a relevant sample of the type(s) of aircraft gained through a formalised training course. These courses should be at least at a level equivalent to Part-66 Appendix III Level 1 General Familiarisation and could be imparted by a Part-147 organisation, by the manufacturer, or by any other organisation accepted by the competent authority.

‘Relevant sample’ means that these courses should cover typical systems embodied in those aircraft being within the scope of approval

•Maintenance methods.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

For all balloons and any other aircraft of 2 730 Kg MTOM and below, not used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008:

1.‘experience in continuing airworthiness’ can be full-time or part-time, either as professional or on a voluntary basis.

2.Appropriate aeronautical maintenance training means demonstrated knowledge of the following subjects:

Relevant parts of initial and continuing airworthiness regulations.

Relevant parts of operational requirements and procedures, if applicable.

The organisation’s continuing airworthiness management exposition.

Knowledge of a relevant sample of the type(s) of aircraft gained through training and/or work experience. Such knowledge should be at least at a level equivalent to Part-66 Appendix III Level 1 General Familiarisation and could be imparted by a Part-147 organisation, by the manufacturer, or by any other organisation accepted by the competent authority.

‘Relevant sample’ means that these courses should cover typical systems embodied in those aircraft being within the scope of approval.

Maintenance methods.

This knowledge may be demonstrated by documented evidence or by an assessment performed by the competent authority or by other airworthiness review staff already authorised within the organisation in accordance with approved procedures. This assessment should be recorded.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

The formal acceptance by the competent authority of the airworthiness review staff is granted through the corresponding EASA Form 4.

If the airworthiness review is performed under the supervision of existing airworthiness review staff, evidence should be provided to the competent authority together with EASA Form 4. If satisfied, the competent authority will issue the formal acceptance through EASA Form 4.

Once the airworthiness review staff has been accepted by the competent authority, the inclusion of their name in the exposition (refer to M.A.704(a)5) constitutes the formal authorisation by the organisation.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

In order to keep the validity of the airworthiness review staff authorisation, the airworthiness review staff should have either:

•been involved in continuing airworthiness management activities for at least six months in every two year period, or

•conducted at least one airworthiness review in the last twelve month period.

In order to restore the validity of the authorisation, the airworthiness review staff should conduct at a satisfactory level an airworthiness review under the supervision of the competent authority or, if accepted by the competent authority, under the supervision of another currently valid authorised airworthiness review staff of the concerned continuing airworthiness management organisation in accordance with an approved procedure.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

The minimum content of the airworthiness review staff record should be:

•Name,

•Date of Birth,

•Basic Education,

•Experience,

•Aeronautical Degree and/or Part-66 qualification and/or nationally-recognised maintenance personnel qualification,

•Initial Training received,

•Type of Training received,

•Continuation Training received,

•Experience in continuing airworthiness and within the organisation,

•Responsibilities of current role in the organisation,

•Copy of the authorisation.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)The organisation shall ensure that all continuing airworthiness management is carried out in accordance with Section A, Subpart C of this Annex (Part-M), and Section A, Subpart C of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable.

(b)For every aircraft managed, the approved continuing airworthiness management organisation shall:

1.ensure that an aircraft maintenance programme including any applicable reliability programme, as required by point M.A.302 of this Annex (Part-M) or ML.A.302 of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable, is developed and controlled,

2.for aircraft not used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, provide a copy of the aircraft maintenance programme to the owner or operator responsible in accordance with point M.A.201 of this Annex (Part-M) or ML.A.201 of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable,

3.manage the approval of modification and repairs,

4.ensure that all maintenance is carried out in accordance with the approved maintenance programme and released in accordance with Section A, Subpart H of this Annex (Part-M) or Section A, Subpart H of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable,

5.ensure that all applicable airworthiness directives and operational directives with a continuing airworthiness impact, are applied,

6.ensure that all defects discovered during scheduled maintenance or reported are corrected by an appropriately approved maintenance organisation,

7.ensure that the aircraft is taken to an appropriately approved maintenance organisation whenever necessary,

8.coordinate scheduled maintenance, the application of airworthiness directives, the replacement of service life limited parts, and component inspection to ensure the work is carried out properly,

9.manage and archive all continuing airworthiness records and/or operator's technical log.

10.ensure that the mass and balance statement reflects the current status of the aircraft.

(c)In the case of complex motor-powered aircraft or aircraft used for CAT, or aircraft used for commercial specialised operations or commercial ATO or commercial DTO operations, when the CAMO is not appropriately approved in accordance with Annex II (Part-145) or Subpart F of this Annex (Part-M) or Annex Vd (Part-CAO), the organisation shall, in consultation with the operator, establish a written maintenance contract with an organisation approved in accordance with Annex II (Part-145) or Subpart F of this Annex (Part-M) or Annex Vd (Part-CAO) or with another operator, detailing the functions specified under points M.A.301(b), M.A.301(c), M.A.301(f) and M.A.301(g) of this Annex (Part-M), or points ML.A.301(b) to (e) of Annex Vb (Part-ML), ensuring that all maintenance is ultimately carried out by a maintenance organisation approved in accordance with Annex II (Part-145) or Subpart F of this Annex (Part-M) or Annex Vd (Part-CAO) and defining the support of the quality functions referred to in point M.A.712(b) of this Annex (Part-M).

(d)Notwithstanding point (c), the contract may be in the form of individual work orders addressed to the maintenance organisation approved in accordance with Annex II (Part-145) or Subpart F of this Annex (Part-M) or Annex Vd (Part-CAO) in the case of:

1.an aircraft requiring unscheduled line maintenance;

2.component maintenance, including engine maintenance.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

The CAMO should have adequate knowledge of the design status (type specification, customer options, airworthiness directives (ADs), airworthiness limitations contained in the aircraft instructions for continuing airworthiness, modifications, major repairs, operational equipment) and of the required and performed maintenance. The status of aircraft design and maintenance should be adequately documented to support the performance of the quality system.

For CS-25 aeroplanes, adequate knowledge of the airworthiness limitations should cover those contained in CS-25 Book 1, Appendix H, paragraph H25.4 and fuel tank system airworthiness limitations including critical design configuration control limitations (CDCCL).

ED Decision 2015/029/R

When managing the approval of modifications or repairs the organisation should ensure that Critical Design Configuration Control Limitations are taken into account.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

This requirement means that the CAMO is responsible for determining what maintenance is required, when it has to be performed, by whom and to what standard in order to ensure the continued airworthiness of the aircraft.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

1.In case of complex motor-powered aircraft, aircraft used for CAT operations, aircraft used for commercial specialised operations and aircraft used by commercial ATO, the provisions of M.A.201 establish that a CAMO is required. This CAMO is in charge of the continuing airworthiness management and this includes the tasks specified in M.A.301 points (2), (3), (5) and (6). If the CAMO does not hold the appropriate maintenance organisation approval, then the CAMO should conclude a contract with the appropriate organisation(s).

2.The CAMO bears the responsibility for the airworthy condition of the aircraft for which it performs the continuing airworthiness management. Thus, it should be satisfied before the intended flight that all required maintenance has been properly carried out.

3.The CAMO should agree with the operator on the process to select a maintenance organisation before concluding any contract with a maintenance organisation.

4.The fact that the CAMO has contracted a maintenance organisation approved under Subpart F or Part-145 should not prevent it from checking at the maintenance facilities on any aspect of the contracted work to fulfil its responsibility for the airworthiness of the aircraft.

5.The contract between the CAMO and the maintenance organisation(s) should specify in detail the responsibilities and the work to be performed by each party.

6.Both the specification of work and the assignment of responsibilities should be clear, unambiguous and sufficiently detailed to ensure that no misunderstanding arises between the parties concerned that could result in a situation where work that has an effect on the airworthiness or serviceability of aircraft is not or will not be properly performed.

7.Special attention should be paid to procedures and responsibilities to ensure that all maintenance work is performed, service bulletins are analysed and decisions are taken on their accomplishment, airworthiness directives are accomplished on time and that all work, including non-mandatory modifications, is carried out to approved data and to the latest standards.

8.Appendix XI to this AMC gives further details on the subject.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

MAINTENANCE CONTRACT WITH ANOTHER CAMO/OPERATOR

1.The purpose of M.A.708(c) is to ensure that all maintenance is carried out by an appropriately approved maintenance organisation. It is possible to contract another operator/CAMO (secondary operator/CAMO) that does not hold a maintenance organisation approval when it proves that such a contract is in the interest of the CAMO by simplifying the management of its maintenance, and the CAMO keeps an appropriate control of it. In this case the continuing airworthiness management exposition should include appropriate procedures to ensure that all maintenance is ultimately carried out on time by approved maintenance organisations in accordance with the CAMO’s data. In particular, the quality system procedures should place great emphasis on monitoring compliance with the above. The list of approved maintenance organisations, or a reference to this list, should be included in the CAMO’s continuing airworthiness management exposition.

2.This contract should not preclude the CAMO from ensuring that all maintenance is performed by appropriately approved organisations which comply with the M.A.201 continuing airworthiness responsibility requirements. Typical examples of such arrangements are the following:

Component maintenance:

The CAMO may find it more appropriate to have a primary contractor (the secondary operator/CAMO) dispatching the components to appropriately approved organisations rather than sending themselves different types of components to various maintenance organisations approved under Part-145. The benefit for the CAMO is that the management of maintenance is simplified by having a single point of contact for component maintenance. The CAMO remains responsible for ensuring that all maintenance is performed by maintenance organisations approved under Part-145 and in accordance with the approved standards.

Aircraft, engine and component maintenance:

The CAMO may wish to have a maintenance contract with a secondary operator/CAMO not approved under Part-145 for the same type of aircraft. A typical case is that of a dry-leased aeroplane between operators where the parties, for consistency or continuity reasons (especially for short-term lease agreements), find it appropriate to keep the aeroplane under the current maintenance arrangement. Where this arrangement involves various Part-145 approved contractors, it might be more manageable for the lessee CAMO to have a single maintenance contract with the lessor operator/CAMO. Whatever type of acceptable maintenance contract is concluded, the CAMO is required to exercise the same level of control on contracted maintenance, particularly through the M.A.706(c) continuing airworthiness management group of persons and quality system as referred to in M.A.712.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

For line maintenance, the actual layout of the IATA Standard Ground Handling Agreement may be used as a basis, but this does not preclude the CAMO from ensuring that the content of the contract is acceptable and especially that the contract allows the CAMO to properly exercise its maintenance responsibility. Those parts of the contract that have no effect on the technical or operational aspects of airworthiness are outside the scope of this paragraph.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

The intent of this paragraph is that maintenance contracts are not necessary when the continuing airworthiness management exposition specifies that the relevant maintenance activity may be ordered through one-time work orders. This includes unscheduled line maintenance and may also include component maintenance up to engines, as long as the maintenance is manageable through work orders, both in terms of volume and complexity. It should be noted that this paragraph implies that even where base maintenance is ordered on a case-by-case basis, there should be a written maintenance contract.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)The approved continuing airworthiness management organisation shall hold and use applicable current maintenance data in accordance with point M.A.401 of this Annex (Part-M) or point ML.A.401 of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable, for the performance of continuing airworthiness tasks referred to in point M.A.708 of this Annex (Part-M). That data may be provided by the owner or the operator, subject to an appropriate contract being established with such an owner or operator. In such case, the continuing airworthiness management organisation only needs to keep such data for the duration of the contract, except when required by point M.A.714 of this Annex (Part-M).

(b)For aircraft not used by licenced air carriers in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, the approved continuing airworthiness management organisation may develop ‘baseline’ or ‘generic’ maintenance programmes, or both, in order to allow for the initial approval or the extension of the scope of an approval, without having the contracts referred to in Appendix I to this Annex (PartM) or Appendix I to Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable. Those ‘baseline’ and ‘generic’ maintenance programmes however do not preclude the need to establish an adequate Aircraft Maintenance Programme in compliance with point M.A.302 of this Annex (Part-M) or ML.A.302 of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable, in due time before exercising the privileges referred to in point M.A.711 of this Annex (Part-M).

ED Decision 2016/011/R

When using maintenance data provided by the customer, the CAMO is responsible for ensuring that this data is current. As a consequence, it should establish appropriate procedures or provisions in the contract with the customer.

The sentence ‘…, except when required by point M.A.714’, means, in particular, the need to keep a copy of the customer data which was used to perform continuing airworthiness activities during the contract period.

‘Baseline’ maintenance programme: it is a maintenance programme developed for a particular aircraft type following, where applicable, the maintenance review board (MRB) report, the type certificate holder’s maintenance planning document (MPD), the relevant chapters of the maintenance manual or any other maintenance data containing information on scheduling.

‘Generic’ maintenance programme: it is a maintenance programme developed to cover a group of similar types of aircraft. These programmes should be based on the same type of instructions as the baseline maintenance programme. Examples of ‘generic’ maintenance programmes could be Cessna 100 Series (covering Cessna 150, 172, 177, etc.).

‘Baseline’ and ‘generic’ maintenance programmes are not applicable to a particular aircraft registration mark, but to an aircraft type or group of types, and should be available to the competent authority prior to the initial approval and prior to the extension of the scope of an existing organisation approval. The intent is that the competent authority is aware of the scope and complexity of tasks that will be managed before granting an organisation approval or change of approval.

After this initial approval, when an owner/operator is contracted, the baseline or generic maintenance programme, as applicable, may be used to establish the M.A.302 aircraft maintenance programme, incorporating the additional maintenance tasks and indicating those which are not applicable to a particular aircraft registration mark. This may be achieved by adding an Annex to the baseline/generic maintenance programme for each aircraft registration, specifying which tasks are added and which are not applicable. This will result in an aircraft maintenance programme specific for each customer.

However, this does not mean that this adaptation must be performed for each contracted aircraft registration. The reason is that the customer may already have an approved aircraft maintenance programme, which in that case should be used by the continuing airworthiness management organisation to manage the continuing airworthiness of such aircraft.

Continuing airworthiness management organisations may seek authorisation for indirect approval in order to amend the aircraft maintenance programme mentioned above in accordance with M.A.302(c). The indirect approval procedure should include provisions to notify to the competent authority that an aircraft maintenance programme specific for a customer has been created. The reason is that, according to M.A.704(a)9, for aircraft not used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, the Continuing Airworthiness Management Exposition (CAME) only needs to include the reference to the baseline/generic maintenance programme.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

Paragraph M.A.709(a) refers to continuing airworthiness tasks referred to in M.A.708. As a consequence, this covers continuing airworthiness management tasks but not airworthiness reviews.

Airworthiness review requirements are established in M.A.710 and the requirements for the corresponding record retention are contained in M.A.714.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

When the organisation approved in accordance with point M.A.711(b) of this Annex (Part-M) performs airworthiness reviews, they shall be performed in accordance with point M.A.901 of this Annex (Part-M) or point ML.A.903 of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

Responsibilities of airworthiness review staff:

The following is a summary of the requirements contained in M.A.710 as well as the associated AMCs and Appendices, in relation to the responsibilities of the airworthiness review staff:

•Airworthiness review staff are responsible for performing both the documental and the physical survey.

•Procedures must be established by the CAMO in order to perform the airworthiness review, including the depth of samplings (refer to Appendix V to AMC1 M.A.704, paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3).

•Procedures must make very clear that the final word about the depth of the inspections (both documental and physical) belongs to the airworthiness review staff, who can go beyond the depth contained in the CAME if they find it necessary. At the end, it is the responsibility of the airworthiness review staff to be satisfied that the aircraft complies with Part-M or Part-ML, as applicable, and is airworthy, and the organisation must ensure that no pressure or restrictions are imposed on the airworthiness review staff when performing their duty.

•A compliance report must be produced by the airworthiness review staff, detailing all items checked and the outcome of the review.

•Airworthiness review staff are responsible for the items checked during the airworthiness review. However, they do not take over the responsibilities of the CAMO, Part-145, DOA, POA or any other organisations, not being responsible for problems not detected during the airworthiness review or for the possibility that the approved or declared maintenance programme may not include certain recommendations from the Design Approval Holder. Obviously, if the airworthiness review staff are not independent of the airworthiness management process and were nominated on the basis of the option of having overall authority on such a process, they will be responsible for the full continuing airworthiness of such aircraft. Nevertheless, this responsibility will be a consequence of their position related to M.A.706 and not of their position as airworthiness review staff (M.A.707).

•The issuance of the airworthiness review certificate (ARC) by the airworthiness review staff only certifies that the aircraft is considered airworthy in relation to the scope of the airworthiness review performed and the fact that the airworthiness review staff are not aware of instances of non-compliance which endanger flight safety. Furthermore, it only certifies that the aircraft is considered airworthy at the time of the review.

It is the responsibility of the owner or contracted CAMO to ensure that the aircraft is fully airworthy at any time.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)A continuing airworthiness management organisation approved in accordance with Section A, Subpart G of this Annex (Part-M) may:

1.manage the continuing airworthiness of aircraft, except those used by licenced air carriers in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, as listed on the approval certificate;

2.manage the continuing airworthiness of aircraft used by licenced air carriers in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, when listed both on its approval certificate and on its Air Operator Certificate (AOC);

3.arrange to carry out limited continuing airworthiness tasks with any contracted organisation, working under its quality system, as listed on the approval certificate;

4.extend, under the conditions set out in point M.A.901(f) of this Annex (Part-M) or ML.A.901(c) of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable, an airworthiness review certificate that has been issued by the competent authority or by another organisation or person, as applicable;

5.Approve the AMP, in accordance with point (b)(2) of point ML.A.302, for aircraft managed in accordance with Annex Vb (Part-ML).

(b)An approved continuing airworthiness management organisation registered in one of the Member States may, additionally, be approved to carry out airworthiness reviews referred to in point M.A.710 and:

1.issue the related airworthiness review certificate and extend it in due time under the conditions set out in points M.A.901(c)(2) or M.A.901(e)(2) of this Annex (Part-M) or point ML.A.901(c) of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable; and,

2.issue a recommendation for the airworthiness review to the competent authority of the Member State of registry.

(c)A continuing airworthiness management organisation whose approval includes the privileges referred to in point M.A.711(b) may additionally be approved to issue a permit to fly in accordance with point 21.A.711(d) of Annex I (Part-21) to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 for the particular aircraft for which the organisation is approved to issue the airworthiness review certificate, when the continuing airworthiness management organisation is attesting conformity with approved flight conditions, subject to an adequate approved procedure in the exposition referred to in point M.A.704.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

SUBCONTRACTING OF CONTINUING AIRWORTHINESS TASKS

1.The CAMO may subcontract certain continuing airworthiness management tasks to qualified persons or organisations. The subcontracted person or organisation performs the continuing airworthiness management tasks as an integral part of the CAMO’s continuing airworthiness management system, irrespective of any other approval held by the subcontracted person or organisation (including CAMO or Part-145 approval).

2.The CAMO remains accountable for the satisfactory completion of the continuing airworthiness management tasks irrespective of any contract that may be established.

3.In order to fulfil this responsibility, the CAMO should be satisfied that the actions taken by the subcontracted person or organisation meet the standards required by Subpart G. Therefore, the CAMO management of such activities should be accomplished:

(a)by active control through direct involvement, and/or

(b)by endorsing the recommendations made by the subcontracted person or organisation.

4.In order to retain ultimate responsibility, the CAMO should limit subcontracted tasks to the activities specified below:

(a)airworthiness directive analysis and planning;

(b)service bulletin analysis;

(c)planning of maintenance;

(d)reliability monitoring, engine health monitoring;

(e)maintenance programme development and amendments;

(f)any other activities, which do not limit the CAMO responsibilities, as agreed by the competent authority.

5.The CAMO’s controls associated with subcontracted continuing airworthiness management tasks should be reflected in the associated contract and be in accordance with the CAMO policy and procedures defined in the continuing airworthiness management exposition. When such tasks are subcontracted, the continuing airworthiness management system is considered to be extended to the subcontracted persons or organisations.

6.With the exception of engines and auxiliary power units, contracts would normally be limited to one organisation per aircraft type for any combination of the activities described in Appendix II. Where contracts are made with more than one organisation, the CAMO should demonstrate that adequate coordination controls are in place and that the individuals’ responsibilities are clearly defined in the related contracts.

7.Contracts should not authorise the subcontracted organisation to subcontract to other organisations elements of the continuing airworthiness management tasks.

8.The competent authority should exercise oversight of the subcontracted activities through the CAMO approval. The contracts should be acceptable to the competent authority. The CAMO should only subcontract to organisations which are specified by the competent authority on EASA Form 14.

9.The subcontracted organisation should agree to notify the CAMO of any changes affecting the contract as soon as practical. The CAMO should then inform its competent authority. Failure to do so may invalidate the competent authority’s acceptance of the contract.

10.Appendix II to AMC M.A.711(a)(3) provides information on the subcontracting of continuing airworthiness management tasks.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

An organisation may be approved for the privileges of M.A.711(a) only, without the privilege to carry out airworthiness reviews. This can be contracted to another appropriately approved organisation. In such a case, it is not mandatory that the contracted organisation is linked to an AOC holder, being possible to contract an appropriately approved independent continuing airworthiness management organisation which is approved for the same aircraft type.

In order to be approved for the privileges of M.A.711(b) for a particular aircraft type, it is necessary to be approved for the privileges of M.A.711(a) for that aircraft type. As a consequence, the normal situation in this case is that the organisation will be performing continuing airworthiness management tasks and performing airworthiness reviews on every aircraft type contained in the approval certificate.

Nevertheless, this does not necessarily mean that the organisation needs to be currently managing an aircraft type in order to be able to perform airworthiness reviews on that aircraft type. The organisation may be performing only airworthiness reviews on an aircraft type without having any customer under contract for that type.

Furthermore, this situation should not necessarily lead to the removal of the aircraft type from the organisation approval. As a matter of fact, since in most cases the airworthiness review staff are not involved in continuing airworthiness management activities, it cannot be argued that these airworthiness review staff are going to lose their skills just because the organisation is not managing a particular aircraft type. The important issue in relation to maintaining a particular aircraft type in the organisation approval is whether the organisation continuously fulfils all the Subpart G requirements (facilities, documentation, qualified personnel, quality system, etc.) required for initial approval.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

The sentence ‘for the particular aircraft for which the organisation is approved to issue the airworthiness review certificate’ contained in M.A.711(c) means that:

•For aircraft used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, and for aircraft above 2 730kg MTOM, the permit to fly can only be issued for aircraft which are in a controlled environment and are managed by that CAMO.

•The permit to fly can be issued for any other aircraft for which the organisation can exercise the privilege in M.A.711(b).

Regulation (EU) 2015/1536

(a)To ensure that the approved continuing airworthiness management organisation continues to meet the requirements of this Subpart, it shall establish a quality system and designate a quality manager to monitor compliance with, and the adequacy of, procedures required to ensure airworthy aircraft. Compliance monitoring shall include a feedback system to the accountable manager to ensure corrective action as necessary.

(b)The quality system shall monitor activities carried out under Section A, Subpart G of this Annex (Part-M). It shall at least include the following functions:

1.monitoring that all activities carried out under Section A, Subpart G of this Annex (Part-M) are being performed in accordance with the approved procedures, and;

2.monitoring that all contracted maintenance is carried out in accordance with the contract, and;

3.monitoring the continued compliance with the requirements of this Part.

(c)The records of these activities shall be stored for at least two years.

(d)Where the approved continuing airworthiness management organisation is approved in accordance with another Part, the quality system may be combined with that required by the other Part.

(e)For licenced air carriers in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 the M.A. Subpart G quality system shall be an integrated part of the operator's quality system.

(f)In the case of a small organisation not managing the continuing airworthiness of aircraft used by licenced air carriers in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, the quality system may be replaced by regular organisational reviews subject to the approval of the competent authority, except when the organisation issues airworthiness review certificates for aircraft above 2730 kg MTOM other than balloons. In the case where there is no quality system, the organisation shall not contract continuing airworthiness management tasks to other parties.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

1.Procedures should be held current such that they reflect best practice within the organisation. It is the responsibility of all employees to report any difficulties with the procedures via their organisation’s internal occurrence reporting mechanisms.

2.All procedures, and changes to the procedures, should be verified and validated before use where practicable.

3.The feedback part of the system should address who is required to rectify any non-compliance in each particular case and the procedure to be followed if rectification is not completed within appropriate timescales. The procedure should lead to the accountable manager specified in M.A.706.

4.The independent quality audit reports referenced in AMC M.A.712(b) should be sent to the relevant department for rectification action giving target rectification dates. Rectification dates should be discussed with such department before the quality department or nominated quality auditor confirms such dates in the report. The relevant department is required to rectify findings and inform the quality manager or the quality auditor of such rectification.

5.The accountable manager should hold regular meetings with staff to check progress on rectification except that in the large organisations such meetings may be delegated on a day to day basis to the quality manager subject to the accountable manager meeting at least twice per year with the senior staff involved to review the overall performance and receiving at least a half yearly summary report on findings of non-compliance.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

1.The primary objectives of the quality system are to enable the CAMO to ensure airworthy aircraft and to remain in compliance with the Part-M and, as applicable, Part-ML requirements.

2.An essential element of the quality system is the independent audit.

3.The independent audit is an objective process of routine sample checks of all aspects of the CAMO ability to carry out continuing airworthiness management to the required standards. It includes some product sampling as this is the end result of the process.

4.The independent audit represents an objective overview of the complete continuing airworthiness management related activities. It is intended to complement the M.A.902 or ML.A.902 requirement for an airworthiness review to be satisfied that all aircraft managed by the organisation remain airworthy.

5.The independent audit should ensure that all aspects of M.A. Subpart G compliance are checked annually, including all the sub-contracted activities, and may be carried out as a complete single exercise or subdivided over the annual period in accordance with a scheduled plan. The independent audit does not require each procedure to be checked against each product line when it can be shown that the particular procedure is common to more than one product line and the procedure has been checked every year without resultant findings. Where findings have been identified, the particular procedure should be rechecked against other product lines until the findings have been rectified after which the independent audit procedure may revert back to the annual interval for the particular procedure. Provided that there are no safety related findings, the audit time periods specified in this AMC may be increased by up to 100% subject to agreement by the competent authority.

6.Where the organisation has more than one location approved the quality system should describe how these are integrated into the system and include a plan to audit each location every year.

7.A report should be raised each time an audit is carried out describing what was checked and the resulting findings against applicable requirements, procedures and products.

8.The independence of the audit should be established by always ensuring that audits are carried out by personnel not responsible for the function, procedure or products being checked.

9.An organisation should establish a quality plan acceptable to the competent authority to show when and how often the activities as required by M.A. Subpart G will be audited.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

A small organisation is considered to be an organisation with up to 5 full-time staff (including all M.A.706 personnel) or equivalent proportional number when using part-time staff. The complexity of the organisation, combination of aircraft and aircraft types, the utilisation of the aircraft and the number of approved locations of the organisations should also be considered before replacing the quality system by an organisational review.

Appendix XIII to this AMC should be used to manage the organisational reviews.

The following activities should not be considered as subcontracting and, as a consequence, they may be performed without a quality system, although they need to be described in the continuing airworthiness management exposition and be approved by the competent authority:

•Subscription to a technical publisher that provides maintenance data (Aircraft Maintenance Manuals, Illustrated Parts Catalogues, Service Bulletins, etc.), which may be applicable to a wide range of aircraft. These data may include maintenance schedules recommended by different manufacturers that can be afterwards used by the continuing airworthiness management organisation in order to produce customised maintenance programmes.

•Contracting the use of a software tool for the management of continuing airworthiness data and records, under the following conditions (in addition to M.A.714(d) and (e)):

If the tool is used by several organisations, each organisation should have access to its own data only.

Introduction of data can only be performed by personnel of the continuing airworthiness management organisation.

The data can be retrieved at any time.

Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

In order to enable the competent authority to determine continued compliance with this Part, the approved continuing airworthiness management organisation shall notify it of any proposal to carry out any of the following changes, before such changes take place:

1.the name of the organisation.

2.the location of the organisation.

3.additional locations of the organisation.

4.the accountable manager.

5.any of the persons specified in M.A.706(c).

6.the facilities, procedures, work scope and staff that could affect the approval.

In the case of proposed changes in personnel not known to the management beforehand, these changes shall be notified at the earliest opportunity.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

This paragraph covers scheduled changes to the CAMO approval. The primary purpose of this paragraph is to enable the CAMO to remain approved if agreed by the competent authority during negotiations about any of the specified changes. Without this paragraph the approval would automatically be suspended in all cases.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)The continuing airworthiness management organisation shall record all details of work carried out. The records required under point M.A.305 of this Annex (Part-M) or ML.A.305 of Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable, and if applicable point M.A.306 of this Annex (Part-M), shall be retained.

(b)If the continuing airworthiness management organisation has the privilege referred to in point M.A.711(b), it shall retain a copy of each airworthiness review certificate and recommendation issued or, as applicable, extended, together with all supporting documents. In addition, the organisation shall retain a copy of any airworthiness review certificate that it has extended under the privilege referred to in point M.A.711(a)4.

(c)If the continuing airworthiness management organisation has the privilege referred to in point M.A.711(c), it shall retain a copy of each permit to fly issued in accordance with the provisions of point 21A.729 of Annex I (Part-21) to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012.

(d)The continuing airworthiness management organisation shall retain a copy of all records referred to in points (b) and (c) until two years after the aircraft has been permanently withdrawn from service.

(e)The records shall be stored in a manner that ensures protection from damage, alteration and theft.

(f)All computer hardware used to ensure backup shall be stored in a different location from that containing the working data in an environment that ensures they remain in good condition.

(g)Where continuing airworthiness management of an aircraft is transferred to another organisation or person, all retained records shall be transferred to the said organisation or person. The time periods prescribed for the retention of records shall continue to apply to the said organisation or person.

(h)Where a continuing airworthiness management organisation terminates its operation, all retained records shall be transferred to the owner of the aircraft.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

1.The CAMO should ensure that it always receives a complete CRS from the approved maintenance organisation, M.A.801(b)(1) certifying staff and/or from the Pilot-owner such that the required records can be retained. The system to keep the continuing airworthiness records should be described in the organisation continuing airworthiness management exposition.

2.When an organisation arranges for the relevant maintenance organisation to retain copies of the continuing airworthiness records on its behalf, it will nevertheless continue to be responsible for the records under M.A.714 relating to the preservation of records. If it ceases to be the organisation of the aircraft, it also remains responsible for transferring the records to any other person or organisation managing continuing airworthiness of the aircraft.

3.Keeping continuing airworthiness records in a form acceptable to the competent authority means in paper form or on a computer database or a combination of both methods. Records stored in microfilm or optical disc form are also acceptable. The record should remain legible throughout the required retention period.

4.Paper systems should use robust material which can withstand normal handling and filing.

5.Computer systems should have at least one backup system which should be updated within 24 hours of any new entry. Each terminal is required to contain programme safeguards against the ability of unauthorised personnel to alter the database.

Microfilming or optical storage of continuing airworthiness records may be carried out at any time. The records should be as legible as the original record and remain so for the required retention period.

Regulation (EU) 2021/700

(a)An approval shall remain valid until 24 March 2022, subject to:

1.the organisation remaining in compliance with this Part, in accordance with the provisions related to the handling of findings as specified under point M.B.705 and;

2.the competent authority being granted access to the organisation to determine continued compliance with this Part, and;

3.the approval not being surrendered or revoked.

(b)Upon surrender or revocation, the approval certificate shall be returned to the competent authority.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)A level 1 finding is any significant non-compliance with the requirements of this Annex (Part-M) or Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable, which lowers the safety standard and hazards seriously the flight safety;

(b)A level 2 finding is any non-compliance with the requirements of this Annex (Part-M) or Annex Vb (Part-ML), as applicable, which could lower the safety standard and possibly hazard the flight safety.

(c)After receipt of notification of findings according to point M.B.705, the holder of the continuing airworthiness management organisation approval shall define a corrective action plan and demonstrate corrective action to the satisfaction of the competent authority within a period agreed with this authority.

SUBPART H — CERTIFICATE OF RELEASE TO SERVICE — CRS

Regulation (EU) 2021/700

(a)Except for aircraft released to service by a maintenance organisation approved in accordance with Annex II (Part-145), the CRS shall be issued in accordance with this Subpart.

(b)No aircraft shall be released to service unless a CRS is issued when all maintenance tasks ordered have been properly carried out. The CRS shall be issued by an authorised certifying staff of the maintenance organisation approved in accordance with Subpart F of this Annex or with Annex Vd (Part-CAO), except for maintenance tasks other than complex maintenance tasks listed in Appendix VII to this Annex where the CRS is issued, alternatively by:

1.independent certifying staff acting in accordance with the requirements laid down in Article 5 of this Regulation;

2.the pilot-owner acting in accordance with point M.A.803 of this Annex.

(c)By derogation from point (b), in case of unforeseen situations, when an aircraft is grounded at a location where no maintenance organisation approved in accordance with this Annex, Annex II (Part-145) or Annex Vd (Part-CAO) and no independent certifying staff are available, the owner may authorise any person, with no less than 3 years of appropriate maintenance experience and holding either a valid ICAO Annex 1 compliant maintenance license for the aircraft type requiring certification or a certifying staff authorisation valid for the work requiring certification issued by an ICAO Annex 6 approved maintenance organisation to maintain the aircraft in accordance with the standards set out in Subpart D of this Annex and release it to service. In that case, the owner shall:

1.obtain and keep in the aircraft records specifying details of the maintenance carried out and of the qualifications of the person issuing the CRS;

2.ensure that any such maintenance is later on verified and a new CRS is issued by an appropriately authorised person referred to in point (b) or an organisation approved in accordance with Subpart F of this Annex, Annex II (Part-145) or Annex Vd (Part-CAO), at the earliest opportunity and in any case within 7 calendar days from the issuance of a CRS by the person authorised by the owner;

3.notify the organisation responsible for the continuing airworthiness management of the aircraft, when contracted, or the competent authority in the absence of such a contract, within 7 days from the issuance of such authorisation.

(d)In case of a release to service in accordance with point (b)(1), the certifying staff may be assisted in performing the maintenance tasks by one or more persons subject to his or her direct and continuous control.

(e)A CRS shall contain at least:

1.basic details of the maintenance carried out;

2.the date on which the maintenance was completed;

3.the identity of the organisation or person issuing the CRS, including, alternatively:

(i)the approval reference of the maintenance organisation and the certifying staff issuing the CRS;

(ii)in the case referred to in point (b)(2), the identity and, where applicable, the licence number of the certifying staff issuing the CRS;

4.the limitations to airworthiness or operations, if any.

(f)By derogation from point (b) and notwithstanding point (g), when the required maintenance cannot be completed, a CRS may be issued with the approved aircraft limitations. In that case, the certificate shall indicate that the maintenance could not be completed, as well as indicate any applicable airworthiness or operations limitations, as part of the information required by point (e)(4).

(g)A CRS shall not be issued in the case of any known non-compliance which endangers flight safety.

ED Decision 2023/013/R

1.Release to service and eligible persons

Only natural or legal persons entitled to release to service an aircraft after maintenance in accordance with Part-M, Part-145 or Part-CAO are considered as an eligible installer responsible for the embodiment of a SC/SR when in compliance with applicable requirements.

For aircraft where there is no Part-66 licence applicable, the release to service of an aircraft after embodiment of a SC/SR is only possible by holders of an appropriate certifying staff qualification valid in a Member State (national qualification), with the following conditions:

•If the holder signs the release to service on behalf of an Approved Maintenance Organisation (AMO), this is valid for aircraft registered in any Member State.

•If the holder signs the release to service as an independent certifying staff (not on behalf of an AMO), this is only valid for aircraft registered in the Member State responsible for such certifying staff qualification.

Depending on its nature, for certain SCs/SRs, the Certification Specification CS-STAN might restrict the eligibility for the issuance of the release to service to certain persons.

Since the design of the SC/SR does not require specific approval, the natural or legal person releasing the aircraft to service after the embodiment of the change or repair takes the responsibility that the applicable certification specifications within CS-STAN are fulfilled while being in compliance with Part-M, Part-145 and/or Part-CAO and not in conflict with data issued by the TC holder or the declarant of a declaration of design compliance. This includes responsibility in respect of an adequate design, the selection/manufacturing of suitable parts and their identification, documenting the change or repair, generation or amendment of aircraft manuals and instructions as needed, embodiment of the change/repair, releasing the aircraft to service and record-keeping.

2.Parts and appliances to be installed as part of a SC/SR

The design of the parts and appliances to be used in a SC/SR is considered a part of the change/repair, and, therefore, there is no need of a specific design approval. However, it is possible that for a particular SC, these Certification Specifications specifically require the use of parts and appliances that meet a technical standard. In this case, when the parts and appliances require to be authorised as an ETSO article, other articles recognised as equivalent by means of an international safety agreement or grandfathered in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 are equally acceptable.

Normally, a SC/SR shall not contain specifically designed parts that should be produced by a production organisation approved in accordance with Part-21 (POA). However, in the case that the change or repair would contain such a part, it should be produced by an approved Production Organisation (POA), and delivered with an EASA Form 1. An arrangement in accordance with 21.A.122(b) is not applicable.

Eligibility for installation of parts and appliances belonging to a SC/SR is subject to compliance with the related provisions of Part 21, Part 21 Light, Part-M, Part-145 and Part-CAO, and the situation varies depending on the aircraft in/on which the SC/SR is to be embodied, and who the installer is. The need for an EASA Form 1 is addressed in Part 21, Part 21 Light and Part-M. Furthermore, Part-M Subpart F, Part-145 and Part-CAO contain provisions (i.e. M.A.603(c), 145.A.42(c) and CAO.A.020(c)) allowing maintenance organisations to fabricate certain parts to be installed in/on the aircraft as part of their maintenance activities.

3.Parts and appliances identification

The parts modified or installed during the embodiment of the SC/SR need to be permanently marked in accordance with Subpart Q of Part 21 or Subpart Q of Part 21 Light.

4.Documenting the SC/SR and declaring compliance with the Certification Specifications

In accordance with Part-M, Part-CAO or Part-145 (e.g. AMC M.A.801 (e) and AMC 145.A.50(b)), the legal or natural person responsible for the embodiment of a change or a repair should compile details of the work accomplished. In the case of SCs/SRs, this includes, as necessary, based on its complexity, an engineering file containing drawings, a list of the parts and appliances used for the change or repair, supporting analysis and the results of tests performed or any other evidence suitable to show that the design fulfils the applicable Certification Specifications within CS-STAN together with a statement of compliance and amendments to aircraft manuals, to instructions for continuing airworthiness and to other documents such as aircraft parts list, wiring diagrams, etc., as deemed necessary. EASA Form 123 is prepared for the purpose of documenting the preparation and embodiment of the SC/SR. The aircraft logbook should contain an entry referring to EASA Form 123; both EASA Form 123 and the release to service required after the embodiment of the SC/SR should be signed by the same person.

Form 123 and all the records listed on it should follow elementary principles of controlled documentation, e.g. contain reference number of documents, issue dates, revision numbers, name of persons preparing/releasing the document, etc.

5.Record-keeping

The legal or natural person responsible (see paragraph 1. above) for the embodiment of the change/repair should keep the records generated with the SC/SR as required by Part-M or Part-145 and CS-STAN.

In addition, M.A.305 requires that the aircraft owner (or CAMO, if a contract i.a.w. M.A.201 exists) keeps the status of the changes/repairs embodied in/on the aircraft in order to control the aircraft configuration and manage its continuing airworthiness.

With regard to SCs/SRs, the information provided to the owner or CAMO may be listed in Form 123 and should include, as required, a copy of any modified aircraft manual and/or instructions for continuing airworthiness. All this information should normally be consulted when the aircraft undergoes an airworthiness review, and, therefore, a clear system to record the embodiment of SCs/SRs, which is also easily traceable, would be of help during subsequent aircraft inspections.

6.Instructions for continuing airworthiness

As stipulated in M.A.302, the aircraft owner or CAMO needs to assess if the changes in the instructions for continuing airworthiness of the aircraft require to amend the aircraft maintenance programme and to obtain its approval.

7.Embodiment of more than one SC

The embodiment of two or more related SCs described in Subpart B of CS-STAN is permitted as a single change (the use of one Form 123 only) as long as adequate references to and records of all SCs embodied are captured. Restrictions and limitations of the two (or more) SCs would apply. It is permitted to issue a single release to service containing adequate traceability of all the SCs embodied.

8.Acceptable form to be used to record the embodiment of SCs/SRs

EASA Form 123 — Standard Change/Standard Repair (SC/SR) embodiment record

Form 123 Issue 00

Notes:

Original remains with the legal or natural person responsible for the embodiment of the SC/SR.

The aircraft owner should retain a copy of this form.

The aircraft owner should be provided with copies of the documents referenced in boxes 5 and 7 and those in box 6 marked with an asterisk ‘*’.

The ‘relevant paragraphs’ in boxes 9a and 9b refer to the applicable paragraphs of ‘Subpart A – General’ of CS-STAN and those of the SC/SR quoted in box 2.

For box 12, when the aircraft owner has signed a contract i.a.w. M.A.201, it is possible that the Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation (CAMO) representative signs box 12 and provides all relevant information to the owner before next flight.

Completion instructions:

Use English or the official language of the State of registry to fill in the form.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

A certificate of release to service is necessary before flight, at the completion of any defect rectification, whilst the aircraft operates a flight between scheduled maintenance checks.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

AIRCRAFT GROUNDED AT OTHER LOCATIONS

1.‘3 years of appropriate maintenance experience’ means 3 years working in an aircraft maintenance environment on at least some of the aircraft type systems corresponding to the aircraft endorsed on the aircraft maintenance license or on the certifying staff authorisation that the person holds.

2.‘Holding the proper qualifications’ means holding either:

(a)a valid ICAO Annex 1 compliant maintenance license for the aircraft type requiring certification, or;

(b)a certifying staff authorisation valid for the work requiring certification, issued by an ICAO Annex 6 approved maintenance organisation.

3.A release in accordance with this paragraph does not affect the controlled environment, in accordance with point (b) of M.A.901, of the aircraft as long as the M.A.801(c)2 recheck and release has been carried out by an approved maintenance organisation.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

1.The aircraft certificate of release to service should contain the following statement:

(a)'Certifies that the work specified except as otherwise specified was carried out in accordance with Part-M and in respect to that work the aircraft is considered ready for release to service'.

(b)For a Pilot-owner a certificate of release to service should contain the following statement:

‘Certifies that the limited pilot-owner maintenance specified except as otherwise specified was carried out in accordance with Part-M and in respect to that work the aircraft is considered ready for release to service’.

2.The certificate of release to service should relate to the task specified in the manufacturer's or operator's instruction or the aircraft maintenance programme which itself may cross-refer to a manufacturer's/operator's instruction in a maintenance manual, service bulletin etc.

3.The date such maintenance was carried out should include when the maintenance took place relative to any life or overhaul limitation in terms of date/flying hours/cycles/ landings etc., as appropriate.

4.When extensive maintenance has been carried out, it is acceptable for the certificate of release to service to summarise the maintenance so long as there is a unique cross-reference to the work-pack containing full details of maintenance carried out. Dimensional information should be retained in the work-pack record.

5.The person issuing the certificate of release to service should use his normal signature except in the case where a computer release to service system is used. In this latter case the competent authority will need to be satisfied that only the particular person can electronically issue the release to service. One such method of compliance is the use of a magnetic or optical personal card in conjunction with a personal identity number (PIN) known only to the individual, which is keyed into the computer. A certification stamp is optional.

6.At the completion of all maintenance, owners, certifying staff, operators and maintenance organisations should ensure they have a clear, concise, legible record of the work performed.

7.In the case of an M.A.801(b)1 release to service, certifying staff should retain all records necessary to prove that all requirements have been met for the issuance of a certificate of release to service.

ED Decision 2023/013/R

INCOMPLETE MAINTENANCE

1.Being unable to establish full compliance with sub-paragraph M.A.801(b) means that the maintenance required by the aircraft owner, CAO or CAMO could not be completed due either to running out of available aircraft maintenance downtime or because the maintenance data requires a flight to be performed as part of the maintenance, as described in paragraph 4.

2.The aircraft owner, CAO or CAMO is responsible for ensuring that all required maintenance has been carried out before flight. Therefore, an aircraft owner, CAO or CAMO should be informed and agree to the deferment of full compliance with M.A.801(b). The certificate of release to service may then be issued subject to details of the deferment, including the aircraft owner, CAO or CAMO authorisation, being endorsed on the certificate.

3.If a CRS is issued with incomplete maintenance a record should be kept stating what action the mechanic, supervisor and certifying staff should take to bring the matter to the attention of the relevant aircraft owner, CAO or CAMO so that the issue may be discussed and resolved with the aircraft owner, CAO or CAMO.

4.Certain maintenance data issued by the design approval holder or the declarant of a declaration of design compliance (e.g. aircraft maintenance manual (AMM)) requires that a maintenance task be performed in flight as a necessary condition to complete the maintenance ordered. Within the aircraft limitations, the person authorised to certify the maintenance per M.A.801 should release the incomplete maintenance before this flight. GM M.A.301(i) describes the relations with the aircraft operator, which retains the responsibility for the MCF. After performing the flight and any additional maintenance necessary to complete the maintenance ordered, a certificate of release to service should be issued in accordance with M.A.801.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

'Endangers flight safety’ means any instance where safe operation could not be assured or which could lead to an unsafe condition. It typically includes, but is not limited to, significant cracking, deformation, corrosion or failure of primary structure, any evidence of burning, electrical arcing, significant hydraulic fluid or fuel leakage and any emergency system or total system failure. An AD overdue for compliance is also considered a hazard to flight safety.

Regulation (EU) 2021/700

(a)Except for components released to service by a maintenance organisation that is approved in accordance with Annex II (Part-145) and for the cases covered by point (e) of point M.A.502, a CRS shall be issued at the completion of any maintenance work carried out on an aircraft component in accordance with point M.A.502.

(b)The authorised release certificate identified as EASA Form 1 constitutes the component CRS, except when such maintenance on aircraft components has been performed in accordance with point (b) or (d) of point M.A.502 in which case the maintenance is subject to aircraft release procedures in accordance with point M.A.801.

ED Decision 2019/009/R

The purpose of the EASA Form 1 (see also Appendix II to Part-M) is to release components after manufacture and to release maintenance work carried out on such components under the approval of a competent authority, and to allow components that are removed from one aircraft/component to be fitted to another aircraft/component.

When an approved organisation maintains an aircraft component for use by the organisation, an EASA Form 1 may not be necessary depending upon the organisation’s internal release procedures; however all the information normally required for the EASA Form 1 should be adequately detailed in the certificate of release to service.

Regulation (EU) 2019/1383

(a)To qualify as a Pilot-owner, the person must:

1.hold a valid pilot licence (or equivalent) issued or validated by a Member State for the aircraft type or class rating; and

2.own the aircraft, either as sole or joint owner; that owner must be:

(i)one of the natural persons on the registration form; or

(ii)a member of a non-profit recreational legal entity, where the legal entity is specified on the registration document as owner or operator, and that member is directly involved in the decision making process of the legal entity and designated by that legal entity to carry out Pilot-owner maintenance.

(b)For any other than complex motor-powered aircraft of 2 730 kg MTOM and below, which are not used in CAT operations, in commercial specialised operations or in commercial operations by ATOs or DTOs, the pilot-owner may issue a CRS after having carried out limited pilot-owner maintenance as specified in Appendix VIII to this Annex.

(c)The scope of the limited Pilot-owner maintenance shall be specified in the aircraft maintenance programme referred to in point M.A.302.

(d)The CRS shall be entered in the aircraft continuing airworthiness record system and contain basic details of the maintenance carried out, the maintenance data used, the date on which that maintenance was completed, as well as the identity, the signature and pilot licence number of the pilot-owner issuing such a certificate.

ED Decision 2021/009/R

1.Privately operated means the aircraft is operated pursuant to M.A.201(i).

2.A Pilot-owner may only issue a CRS for maintenance he/she has performed.

3.In the case of a jointly-owned aircraft, the maintenance programme should list:

The names of all Pilot-owners competent and designated to perform Pilot-owner maintenance in accordance with the basic principles described in Appendix VIII of Part-M. An alternative would be the maintenance programme to contain a procedure to ensure how such a list of competent Pilot-owners should be managed separately and kept current.

The limited maintenance tasks they may perform.

4.An equivalent valid pilot licence may be any document attesting a pilot qualification recognised by the Member State. It does not have to be necessarily issued by the competent authority, but it should in any case be issued in accordance with the particular Member State’s system. In such a case, the equivalent certificate or qualification number should be used instead of the pilot's licence number for the purpose of the M.A.801(b)(2) (certificate of release to service).

5.Not holding a valid medical examination does not invalidate the pilot licence (or equivalent) required under M.A.803(a)1 for the purpose of the Pilot-owner authorisation.

SUBPART I — AIRWORTHINESS REVIEW CERTIFICATE

Regulation (EU) 2022/1360

To ensure the validity of the aircraft airworthiness certificate, an airworthiness review of the aircraft and its continuing airworthiness records shall be carried out periodically.

(a)An airworthiness review certificate is issued in accordance with Appendix III (EASA Form 15a or 15b) to this Annex upon completion of a satisfactory airworthiness review. The airworthiness review certificate shall be valid for 1 year;

(b)An aircraft in a controlled environment is an aircraft which, during the preceding 12 months:

1.has had its airworthiness continuously managed by a unique CAMO or CAO;

2.has been maintained by a maintenance organisation approved in accordance with Subpart F of this Annex, Annex II (Part-145) or Annex Vd (Part-CAO), including the cases when maintenance tasks referred to in point (b) of point M.A.803 are carried out and released to service in accordance with point (b)(1) or (b)(2) of point M.A.801 of this Annex.

(c)For all aircraft used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, and for aircraft above 2 730 kg MTOM that are in a controlled environment, the organisation referred to in point (b)(1) managing the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft may in accordance with CAMO.A.125(e) of Annex Vc or point M.A.711(b) of this Annex or point CAO.A.095(c)(1) of Annex Vd, as applicable, and subject to compliance with point (j):

1.issue an airworthiness review certificate in accordance with point M.A.901;

2.extend at most twice the validity of the airworthiness review certificate it has issued, for a period of 1 year each time, where the aircraft concerned has remained within a controlled environment.

(d)The airworthiness review certificate shall be issued by the competent authority upon a satisfactory assessment based on a recommendation made by a CAMO or CAO, sent together with the application from the owner or operator for all aircraft used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, and for aircraft above 2 730 kg MTOM that complies with the following alternative conditions:

1.they are not in a controlled environment;

2.their continuing airworthiness is managed by an organisation that does not hold the privilege to carry out airworthiness reviews.

The recommendation referred to in the first subparagraph shall be based on an airworthiness review carried out in accordance with point M.A.901.

(e)For aircraft of 2 730 kg MTOM and below not used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008, any CAMO or CAO chosen by the owner or operator may in accordance with CAMO.A.125(e) of Annex Vc or point M.A.711(b) of this Annex or CAO.A.095(c) of Annex Vd, as applicable, and subject to compliance with point (j):

1.issue the airworthiness review certificate in accordance with point M.A.901;

2.extend at most twice the validity of the airworthiness review certificate it has issued, for a period of 1 year each time, where the aircraft has remained within a controlled environment under its management.

(f)By derogation from points (c)(2) and (e)(2) of point M.A.901, for aircraft that are in a controlled environment, the organisation referred to in point (b)(1) managing the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft, may, subject to compliance with point (j), extend at most twice the validity of an airworthiness review certificate that the competent authority or another CAMO or CAO has issued, for a period of 1 year each time.

(g)Whenever circumstances reveal the existence of a potential risk to aviation safety, the competent authority shall carry out the airworthiness review and issue the airworthiness review certificate itself.

(h)Without prejudice to point (g), the competent authority may carry out the airworthiness review and issue the airworthiness review certificate itself in the following cases:

1.when the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft is managed by a CAMO or CAO which has its principal place of business located in a third country;

2.for any other aircraft of 2 730 kg MTOM and below, if the owner so requests.

(i)Where the competent authority issues the airworthiness review certificate itself in accordance with points (g) or (h) or after assessing the recommendation in accordance with point M.B.901, the owner or operator of the aircraft shall, where necessary for those purposes, provide the competent authority with:

1.any documentation required by the competent authority;

2.suitable accommodation at the appropriate location for its personnel;

3.the support of the certifying staff

(j)An airworthiness review certificate shall not be issued, nor extended if there is evidence or indications that the aircraft is not airworthy.

(k)The airworthiness review of the aircraft shall include a full documented review of the aircraft records establishing that the following requirements have been met:

1.airframe, engine and propeller flying hours and associated flight cycles have been properly recorded;

2.the flight manual is applicable to the aircraft configuration and reflects the latest revision status;

3.all the maintenance due on the aircraft pursuant to the approved AMP has been carried out;

4.all known defects have been corrected or, when applicable, carried forward in a controlled manner in accordance with M.A.403;

5.all applicable ADs have been applied and properly registered;

6.all modifications and repairs applied to the aircraft have been registered and are in compliance with point M.A.304;

7.all life-limited parts and time-controlled components installed on the aircraft are properly identified, registered and have not exceeded their limitation;

8.all maintenance has been carried out in accordance with this Annex;

9.the current mass and balance statement reflects the current configuration of the aircraft and is valid;

10.the aircraft complies with the latest revision of its type design approved by the Agency;

11.if required, the aircraft holds a noise certificate corresponding to the current configuration of the aircraft in compliance with Subpart I of Annex I (Part 21) or, as applicable, Subpart I of Section A of Annex Ib (Part 21 Light) to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012.

(l)The airworthiness review of the aircraft shall include a physical survey of the aircraft. For that survey, airworthiness review staff not appropriately qualified in accordance with Annex III (Part-66) shall be assisted by such qualified staff.

(m)Through the physical survey of the aircraft, the airworthiness review staff shall ensure that:

1.all required markings and placards are properly installed;

2.the aircraft complies with its approved flight manual;

3.the aircraft configuration complies with the approved documentation;

4.no evident defect can be found that has not been addressed in accordance with point M.A.403;

5.no inconsistencies can be found between the aircraft and the documented review of records referred to in point (k).

(n)By derogation from point (a), the airworthiness review may be anticipated by a maximum period of 90 days without loss of continuity of the airworthiness review pattern, so as to allow for the physical review to take place during a maintenance check.

(o)The airworthiness review certificate (EASA Form 15b) or the recommendation for the issue of the airworthiness review certificate (EASA Form 15a) referred to in Appendix III to this Annex can only be issued:

1.by authorised airworthiness review staff on behalf of the approved organisation;

2.if the airworthiness review has been completely carried out.

(p)A copy of any airworthiness review certificate issued or extended for an aircraft shall be sent to the Member State of registry of the aircraft concerned within 10 days.

(q)Airworthiness review tasks shall not be subcontracted.

(r)Should the outcome of the airworthiness review be inconclusive, the organisation having carried out the review shall inform the competent authority as soon as possible and in any case within 72 hours from the moment the organisation identifies the reason for which the airworthiness review is inconclusive.

(s)The airworthiness review certificate shall not be issued until all findings have been closed.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

In order to ensure the validity of the aircraft airworthiness certificate, M.A.901 requires performing periodically an airworthiness review of the aircraft and its continuing airworthiness records, which results in the issuance of an airworthiness review certificate valid for one year.

ED Decision 2023/013/R

Responsibilities of airworthiness review staff:

The following is a summary of the requirements contained in M.A.901 as well as the associated AMC and Appendices, in relation to the responsibilities of the airworthiness review staff:

•Airworthiness review staff are responsible for performing both the documental and the physical survey.

•Procedures must be established by the CAMO or CAO in order to perform the airworthiness review, including the depth of samplings.

•Procedures must make very clear that the final word about the depth of the inspections (both documental and physical) belongs to the airworthiness review staff, who can go beyond the depth established in the CAME or CAE if they find it necessary. At the end, it is the responsibility of the airworthiness review staff to be satisfied that the aircraft complies with Part-M and is airworthy, and the organisation must ensure that no pressure or restrictions are imposed on the airworthiness review staff when performing their duty.

•A compliance report must be produced by the airworthiness review staff, detailing all items checked and the outcome of the review.

•Airworthiness review staff are responsible for the items checked during the airworthiness review. However, they do not take over the responsibilities of the CAMO, maintenance organisation, DOA, POA or any other organisations, not being responsible for problems not detected during the airworthiness review or for the possibility that the approved or declared maintenance programme may not include certain recommendations from the design approval holder or the declarant of a declaration of design compliance. Obviously, if the airworthiness review staff are not independent of the airworthiness management process and were nominated on the basis of the option of having overall authority on such a process, they will be responsible for the full continuing airworthiness of such aircraft. Nevertheless, this responsibility will be a consequence of their position in the organisation and not of their function as airworthiness review staff.

•The issuance of the airworthiness review certificate (ARC) by the airworthiness review staff only certifies that the aircraft is considered airworthy in relation to the scope of the airworthiness review performed and the fact that the airworthiness review staff are not aware of instances of non-compliance which endanger flight safety. Furthermore, it only certifies that the aircraft is considered airworthy at the time of the review.

It is the responsibility of the owner or contracted CAMO or CAO to ensure that the aircraft is fully airworthy at any time.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

EASA Form 15a is issued by competent authorities while EASA Form 15b is issued by a CAMO or CAO organisation.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

1.If the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft is not managed according to an Appendix I Continuing airworthiness contract, the aircraft should be considered to be outside a controlled environment. Nevertheless, such contract is not necessary when the operator and the CAMO are the same organisation.

2.The fact that limited pilot-owner maintenance as defined in M.A.803(b) is not carried out and released by an approved maintenance organisation does not change the status of an aircraft in a controlled environment providing the CAMO under contract has been informed of any such maintenance carried out.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

When the aircraft has remained within a controlled environment, the extension of the validity of the airworthiness review certificate does not require an airworthiness review but only a verification of the continuous compliance with M.A.901(b).

It is acceptable to anticipate the extension of the airworthiness review certificate by a maximum of 30 days without a loss of continuity of the airworthiness review pattern, which means that the new expiration date is set up one year after the previous expiration date. This anticipation of up to 30 days also applies to the 12 month requirements shown in M.A.901(b), meaning that the aircraft is still considered as being in a controlled environment if it has been continuously managed by a single organisation and maintained by appropriately approved organisations, as stated in M.A.901(b), from the date when the last airworthiness review certificate was issued until the date when the extension is performed (this can be up to 30 days less than 12 months).

It is also acceptable to perform the extension of an airworthiness review certificate after its expiration date, as long as all the conditions for the extension are met. However, this means the following:

•The aircraft could not fly since the airworthiness review certificate expired until it is extended, and

•The new expiration date (after extension) is set one year after the previous expiration date (not one year after the extension is performed).

ED Decision 2023/013/R

The recommendation sent by a CAMO or CAO to the competent authority of the Member State of registry should be, at least, in English when the Member State of registry is different from the CAMO/CAO’s Member State. Otherwise, it can be completed in the official language(s) of the CAMO/CAO’s Member State.

The recommendation sent to the competent authority should contain at least the items described below:

(a)General information

CAMO information

owner/lessee information

date and place where the document review and the aircraft survey were carried out

period and place the aircraft can be seen if required by the competent authority

(b)Aircraft information

registration

type

manufacturer

serial number

flight manual reference

weight and centre of gravity data

maintenance programme reference

(c)Documents accompanying the recommendation

copy of registration papers

copy of the owners request for a new airworthiness review certificate

(d)Aircraft status

aircraft total time and cycles

list of persons or organisations having carried out continuing airworthiness activities including maintenance tasks on the aircraft and its components since the last airworthiness review certificate

(e)Aircraft survey

a precise list of the areas of the aircraft that were surveyed and their status

(f)Findings

a list of all the findings made during the airworthiness review with the corrective action carried out

(g)Statement

A statement signed by the airworthiness review staff recommending the issue of an airworthiness review certificate.

The statement should confirm that the aircraft in its current configuration complies with the following:

airworthiness directives up to the latest published issue, and;

type certificate datasheet or airworthiness data sheet (for aircraft subject to a declaration of design compliance);

maintenance programme;

limitation for life-limited parts and time-controlled components;

the valid weight and centre of gravity schedule reflecting the current configuration of the aircraft;

Part 21 or Part 21 Light, as applicable, for all modifications and repairs;

the current flight manual including supplements, and;

operational requirements.

The above items should clearly state the exact reference of the data used in establishing compliance; for instance, the number and issue of the type certificate data sheet or airworthiness data sheet (for aircraft subject to a declaration of design compliance) used should be stated.

The statement should also confirm that all the above is properly entered in the aircraft continuing airworthiness record system and/or in the operator’s technical log.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

Suitable accommodation should include:

(a)an office with normal office equipment such as desks, telephones, photocopying machines etc. whereby the continuing airworthiness records can be reviewed.

(b)a hangar when needed for the physical survey.

The support of personnel appropriately qualified in accordance with Part-66 is necessary when the competent authority’s airworthiness review staff is not appropriately qualified.

ED Decision 2023/013/R

FULL DOCUMENTED REVIEW

1.A full documented review is a check of at least the following categories of documents:

—registration papers;

—M.A.305 aircraft continuing airworthiness record system;

—M.A.306 aircraft technical log system;

—list of deferred defects, minimum equipment list and configuration deviation, list if applicable;

—aircraft flight manual including aircraft configuration;

—aircraft maintenance programme;

—maintenance data;

—relevant work packages;

—AD status;

—modification and SB status;

—modification and repair approval sheets;

—status of life-limited parts and time-controlled components;

—relevant EASA Form 1 or equivalent;

—mass and balance report and equipment list;

—aircraft, engine and propeller TC data sheets or airworthiness data sheet (for aircraft subject to a declaration of design compliance).

As a minimum, sample checks within each document category should be carried out.

2.The CAMO or CAO should develop procedures for the airworthiness review staff to produce a compliance report that confirms the above have been reviewed and found in compliance with Part-M.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

PHYSICAL SURVEY

1.The physical survey could require actions categorised as maintenance (e.g. operational tests, tests of emergency equipment, visual inspections requiring panel opening, etc.). In this case, after the airworthiness review, a release to service should be issued.

2.When the airworthiness review staff are not appropriately qualified as per Part-66 in order to release such maintenance, M.A.901(l) requires them to be assisted by such qualified personnel. However, the function of such Part-66 personnel is limited to performing and releasing the maintenance actions requested by the airworthiness review staff, it not being their function to perform the physical survey of the aircraft.

3.This means that the airworthiness review staff who is going to sign the airworthiness review certificate or the recommendation should be the one performing both the documented review and the physical survey of the aircraft. It is not the intent of the rule to delegate the survey to Part-66 personnel who are not airworthiness review staff. Furthermore, the provision of M.A.901(n) that allows a 90-day anticipation for the physical survey provides enough flexibility to ensure that the airworthiness review staff (ARS) are present.

4.The physical survey may include verifications to be carried out during flight.

5.The CAMO or CAO should develop procedures for the ARS to produce a compliance report that confirms that the physical survey has been carried out and found satisfactory.

6.To ensure compliance, the physical survey may include relevant sample checks of items.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

‘Without loss of continuity of the airworthiness review pattern’ means that the new expiration date is set up 1 year after the previous expiration date. As a consequence, when the airworthiness review is anticipated, the validity or the airworthiness review certificate is longer than 1 year (up to 90 days longer).

This anticipation of up to 90 days also applies to the 12-month requirements shown in , which means that the aircraft is still considered as being in a controlled environment if it has been continuously managed by a single organisation and maintained by appropriately approved organisations, as stated in , from the date when the last airworthiness review certificate was issued until the date when the new airworthiness review is performed (this can be up to 90 days less than 12 months).

ED Decision 2020/002/R

A copy of both the physical survey and document review compliance reports stated above should be sent to the competent authority together with any recommendation issued.

Regulation (EU) 2019/1383

(a)An airworthiness review certificate becomes invalid if:

1.suspended or revoked; or

2.the airworthiness certificate is suspended or revoked; or

3.the aircraft is not on the aircraft register of a Member State; or

4.the type certificate under which the airworthiness certificate was issued is suspended or revoked.

(b)An aircraft must not fly if the airworthiness certificate is invalid or if:

1.the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft or any component fitted to the aircraft does not meet the requirements of this Part; or

2.the aircraft does not remain in conformity with the type design approved by the Agency; or

3.the aircraft has been operated beyond the limitations of the approved flight manual or the airworthiness certificate, without appropriate action being taken; or

4.the aircraft has been involved in an accident or incident that affects the airworthiness of the aircraft, without subsequent appropriate action to restore airworthiness; or

5.a modification or repair is not in compliance with point M.A.304.

(c)Upon surrender or revocation, the airworthiness review certificate shall be returned to the competent authority

Regulation (EU) 2022/1360

(a)When transferring an aircraft registration within the Union, the applicant shall:

(1)inform the former Member State in which Member State the aircraft will be registered, then;

(2)apply to the new Member State for the issuance of a new airworthiness certificate in accordance with Annex I (Part 21) or, as applicable, Annex Ib (Part 21 Light) to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012.

(b)Notwithstanding point M.A.902(a)(3), the former airworthiness review certificate shall remain valid until its expiry date.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

The applicant should notify to the competent authority within the former Member State of registry so as to allow the proper transfer of information between the two competent authorities during the aircraft transfer process.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

In case of transfer of aircraft registration within EU, the aircraft owner/ operator should verify that the competent authority of the new Member State of registry has entered the new aircraft registration on the existing airworthiness review certificate and validated the change.

Regulation (EU) 2022/1360

(a)When importing an aircraft onto a Member State register from a third country or from a regulatory system where Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 does not apply, the applicant shall:

1.apply to the competent authority of the Member State of registry for the issuance of a new airworthiness certificate in accordance with Annex I (Part 21) or, as applicable, Annex Ib (Part 21 Light) to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012;

2.for aircraft other than new, have an airworthiness review carried out in accordance with point M.A.901;

3.have all maintenance carried out to comply with the AMP approved in accordance with point M.A.302.

(b)When satisfied that the aircraft is in compliance with the relevant requirements, the organisation performing the airworthiness review, shall send a documented recommendation for the issuance of an airworthiness review certificate to the competent authority of the Member State of registry.

(c)The owner of the aircraft shall allow access to the aircraft for inspection by the competent authority of the Member State of registry.

(d)The competent authority of the Member State of registry shall issue an airworthiness certificate when it is satisfied that the aircraft complies with the requirements of Annex I (Part 21) or, as applicable, Annex Ib (Part 21 Light) to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012.

(e)That competent authority of the Member State shall also issue the airworthiness review certificate. The certificate shall be valid for 1 year, unless the competent authority decides to reduce the period of validity for reasons of aviation safety.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

In order to allow for possible participation of authority personnel, the applicant should inform the competent authority at least 10 working days in advance of the time and location of the airworthiness review.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

WORK TO BE UNDERTAKEN TO ESTABLISH AIRWORTHINESS

1.When performing an airworthiness review of aircraft imported into the EU the aircraft and the relevant records should be reviewed to determine the work to be undertaken to establish the airworthiness of the aircraft.

2.In determining the work to be undertaken during the airworthiness review on the aircraft, the following should be taken into consideration:

(a)the information from third country authorities such as export certificates, primary authority information;

(b)the information on aircraft maintenance history such as continuing airworthiness records, aircraft, engine, propeller, rotor and life limited part log books or cards as appropriate, tech log/flight log/cabin log, list of deferred defects, total flight times and cycles, times and cycles since last maintenance, accident history, former maintenance schedule, former AD compliance status;

(c)the information on aircraft such as aircraft, engine and propeller type certificate datasheets, noise and emission certificate data sheets, flight manual and supplements;

(d)the aircraft continuing airworthiness status such as the aircraft and component AD status, the SB status, the maintenance status, the status of life-limited parts and time-controlled components, weight and centre of gravity schedule including equipment list;

(e)the modification and repair status of the aircraft detailing elements such as owner/operator designed modifications and repairs, STCs, and parts needing European parts approval (EPA);

(f)the aircraft cabin configuration such as emergency equipment fitted, cockpit configuration, placards, instrument limitations, cabin layout;

(g)the maintenance needed for import, such as embodiment of modifications needed to comply with the EASA type certificate, bridging check to comply with the new maintenance programme;

(h)the avionics such as, but not limited to, radio and navigation equipment, instrument flight rules (IFR) equipment, digital flight data recorder (DFDR)/cockpit voice recorder (CVR) test, emergency locator transmitter (ELT) 406 MHz code and identification;

(i)the compass compensation;

(j)special operating rules such as extended twin-engine operations (ETOPS)/long range operations (LROPS), reduced vertical separation minima (RVSM), minimum navigation performance specifications (MNPS), all weather operations (AWOPS), area navigation (RNAV);

(k)the aircraft survey including verification of conformity with the flight manual and the datasheet, presence of fire proof identification plates, conformity of markings including registration, presence and serviceability of emergency equipment, internal and external lighting systems, and

(l)maintenance check flight including check of control system/cockpit ground check/engine run up.

3.If there is no CAMO or maintenance organisation approved for the airworthiness review of the specific aircraft type available, the competent authority may carry out the airworthiness review in accordance with this paragraph and the provisions M.A.901(g) and M.B.902. In this case, the airworthiness review should be requested to the competent authority with a 30-day notice.

ED Decision 2023/013/R

CONTENT OF RECOMMENDATION

The recommendation sent to the competent authority should contain at least the items described below.

(a)All the information set forth by AMC M.A 901(d)

(b)Aircraft information

aircraft assigned registration;

state of manufacturer;

previous registration;

export certificate number;

TC and TC data sheet numbers;

noise and emissions TC and TC data sheet numbers;

comparison of prior maintenance programme with the proposed new maintenance programme.

(c)Documents accompanying the recommendation

copy of the application;

original export certificate;

copy of the approvals of the flight manual and its supplements;

list of ADs incorporated up to the latest published issue;

proposed new maintenance programme;

status of all life-limited parts and time-controlled components;

the valid weight and centre of gravity schedule reflecting the current configuration of the aircraft, and;

Reference to the Part 21 approval or Part 21 Light approval/declaration for all modifications and repairs.

(d)Maintenance

a copy of the work packages requested by the CAMO including details of any bridging check to ensure all the necessary maintenance has been carried out.

(e)Aircraft maintenance check flight

a copy of the maintenance check flight report.

Regulation (EU) 2019/1383

(a)A level 1 finding is any finding of significant non-compliance with the requirements of this Annex, which lowers the safety standard and seriously endangers flight safety.

(b)A level 2 finding is any finding of non-compliance with the requirements of this Annex, which may lower the safety standard and may endanger the flight safety.

(c)After receipt of notification of findings according to point M.B.903, the person or organisation accountable referred to in point M.A.201 shall define a corrective action plan and demonstrate corrective action to the satisfaction of the competent authority within a period agreed with this authority including appropriate corrective action to prevent reoccurrence of the finding and its root cause.

SECTION B — PROCEDURE FOR COMPETENT AUTHORITIES

SUBPART A — GENERAL

Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

This Section establishes the administrative requirements to be followed by the competent authorities in charge of the application and the enforcement of Section A of this Part.

Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014

(a)General

A Member State shall designate a competent authority with allocated responsibilities for the issuance, continuation, change, suspension or revocation of certificates and for the oversight of continuing airworthiness. This competent authority shall establish documented procedures and an organisational structure.

(b)Resources

The number of staff shall be appropriate to carry out the requirements as detailed in this Section.

(c)Qualification and training

All staff involved in activities dealt with in this Annex shall be appropriately qualified and have appropriate knowledge, experience, initial training and continuation training to perform their allocated tasks.

(d)Procedures

The competent authority shall establish procedures detailing how compliance with this Annex (Part-M) is accomplished.

The procedures shall be reviewed and amended to ensure continued compliance.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

1.In deciding upon the required airworthiness organisational structure, the competent authority should review the number of certificates to be issued, the number and size of potential operators, the number of approved maintenance organisations and CAMOs within that Member State, as well as the level of civil aviation activity, number and complexity of aircraft and the size of the Member State’s aviation industry.

2.The competent authority should retain effective control of important inspection functions and not delegate them in such a way that aircraft owners, operators, approved maintenance organisations and CAMOs, in effect, regulate themselves in airworthiness matters.

3.The set-up of the organisational structure should ensure that the various tasks and obligations of the competent authority are not relying on individuals. That means that a continuing and undisturbed fulfilment of these tasks and obligations of the competent authority should also be guaranteed in case of illness, accident or leave of individual employees.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

1.Competent authority inspectors should have:

1.1.practical experience and expertise in the application of aviation safety standards and safe operating practices;

1.2.comprehensive knowledge of:

(a)relevant parts of implementing rules, certification specifications and guidance material;

(b)the competent authority’s procedures;

(c)the rights and obligations of an inspector;

(d)quality systems;

(e)continuing airworthiness management;

(f)operational procedures when affecting the continuing airworthiness management of the aircraft or the maintenance.

1.3.training on auditing techniques.

1.4.five years relevant work experience to be allowed to work as an inspector independently. This may include experience gained during training to obtain the subparagraph 1.5 qualification.

1.5.a relevant engineering degree or an aircraft maintenance technician qualification with additional education. ‘Relevant engineering degree’ means an engineering degree from aeronautical, mechanical, electrical, electronic, avionic or other studies relevant to the maintenance and continuing airworthiness of aircraft/aircraft components.

1.6.knowledge of a relevant sample of the type(s) of aircraft gained through a formalised training course including Fuel Tank Safety (FTS) training as described in Appendix XII to AMC M.A.706(f) and AMC1 M.B.102(c). These courses should be at least at a level equivalent to Part-66 Appendix III Level 1 General Familiarisation.

‘Relevant sample’ means that these courses should cover typical systems embodied in those aircraft being within the scope of approval.

1.7.knowledge of maintenance standards.

2.In addition to technical competency, inspectors should have a high degree of integrity, be impartial in carrying out their tasks, be tactful, and have a good understanding of human nature.

3.A programme for continuation training should be developed which provides for the inspectors, at regular intervals, to visit appropriate manufacturers and attend technical symposia as well as training or refresher courses to gain first-hand knowledge of new developments. As a general policy, it is not desirable for the inspectors to obtain technical qualifications from those entities under their direct regulatory jurisdiction.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

AIRCRAFT CONTINUING AIRWORTHINESS MONITORING (ACAM) INSPECTORS

1.ACAM in-depth surveys should be performed by competent authority inspectors qualified in accordance with M.B.102(c).

2.ACAM ramp surveys may be performed by inspectors qualified for the technical tasks of ramp inspections in accordance with other Parts, or by inspectors qualified in accordance with M.B.102(c).

ED Decision 2015/029/R

The documented procedures should contain the following information:

(a)The Member State’s designation of the competent authority(ies).

(b)The title(s) and name(s) of the manager(s) of the competent authority and their duties and responsibilities.

(c)Organisation chart(s) showing associated chains of responsibility of the senior persons.

(d)A procedure defining the qualifications for staff together with a list of staff authorised to sign certificates.

(e)A general description of the facilities.

(f)Procedures specifying how the competent authority(ies) ensure(s) compliance with Part-M.

Regulation (EU) 2019/1383

If, during oversight or by any other means, evidence is found by the competent authority responsible for oversight in accordance with this Annex that shows a non-compliance with the applicable requirements of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 by a person holding a licence, certificate, rating or attestation issued in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1139, the competent authority that identified the non-compliance shall take any enforcement measures necessary to prevent the continuation of that non-compliance.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)The competent authorities shall establish a system of record-keeping that allows adequate traceability of the process to issue, continue, change, suspend or revoke each certificate.

(b)The records for the oversight of organisations approved in accordance with this Annex shall include as a minimum:

1.the application for an organisation approval;

2.the organisation approval certificate including any changes;

3.a copy of the audit programme listing the dates when audits are due and when audits were carried out;

4.the competent authority continued oversight records including all audit records;

5.copies of all relevant correspondence;

6.details of any exemption and enforcement actions;

7.any report from other competent authorities relating to the oversight of the organisation;

8.organisation exposition or manual and amendments;

9.copy of any other document directly approved by the competent authority.

(c)The retention period for the point (b) records shall be at least 5 years.

(d)The minimum records for the oversight of each aircraft shall include, at least, a copy of:

1.the aircraft certificate of airworthiness;

2.airworthiness review certificates;

3.airworthiness review recommendations issued by CAO or CAMO;

4.the reports from the airworthiness reviews carried out directly by the competent authority;

5.all relevant correspondence relating to the aircraft;

6.the details of any exemption and enforcement action(s);

7.any document approved by the competent authority pursuant to this Annex or Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 (Part-ARO).

(e)The records specified in point (d) shall be retained until 2 years after the aircraft has been permanently withdrawn from service.

(f)All records shall be made available upon request by another Member State or the Agency.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

1.The record-keeping system should ensure that all records are accessible whenever needed within a reasonable time. These records should be organized in a consistent way throughout the competent authority (chronological, alphabetical order, etc.).

2.All records containing sensitive data regarding applicants or organisations should be stored in a secure manner with controlled access to ensure confidentiality of this kind of data.

3.All computer hardware used to ensure data backup should be stored in a different location from that containing the working data in an environment that ensures they remain in good condition. When hardware- or software-changes take place special care should be taken that all necessary data continues to be accessible at least through the full period specified in M.B.104(c) and/or (e).

ED Decision 2015/029/R

The cases, when records shall be made available should be limited to:

•incidents or accidents,

•findings through the aircraft continuing monitoring program where organisations approved by another competent authority are involved, to determine the root cause,

•aircraft mainly operated in another Member State,

•an aircraft previously operated in another Member State,

•an organisation having approvals in several Member States.

When records are requested from another Member State, the reason for the request should be clearly stated. The records can be made available by sending a copy or by allowing their consultation.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)In order to contribute to the improvement of air safety, the competent authorities shall participate in a mutual exchange of all necessary information in accordance with Article 72 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139.

(b)Without prejudice to the competencies of the Member States, in the case of a potential safety threat involving several Member States, the concerned competent authorities shall assist each other in carrying out the necessary oversight action.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

One typical case where the mutual exchange of information is necessary is when an aircraft is transferred inside the EU according to M.A.903. When notified of such a transfer, a competent authority should inform the competent authority where the aircraft will be registered of any known problems with the aircraft being transferred. Furthermore, the competent authority where the aircraft will be registered should ensure that the former competent authority has been properly notified that the aircraft is leaving.

SUBPART B — ACCOUNTABILITY

Regulation (EU) 2019/1383

The competent authorities as specified in point M.1 are responsible for conducting audits, inspections and investigations in order to verify that the requirements of this Annex are complied with.

Regulation (EU) 2019/1383

(a)The competent authority shall without undue delay notify the Agency in case of any significant problems with the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139.

(b)The competent authority shall provide the Agency with safety-significant information stemming from the occurrence reports it has received pursuant to point M.A.202.

SUBPART C — CONTINUING AIRWORTHINESS

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

(a)The competent authority shall verify that the AMP is in compliance with point M.A.302.

(b)Unless stated otherwise in point (c) of point M.A.302, the AMP and its amendments shall be approved directly by the competent authority. The competent authority shall have access to all the data required by points (d), (e) and (f) of point M.A.302.

(c)In the case of indirect approval as provided for in point M.A.302(c), the competent authority shall approve the AMP approval procedure of the CAO or CAMO through that organisation’s exposition referred to in point CAO.A.025 of Annex Vd, point M.A.704 of this Annex, or point CAMO.A.300 of Annex Vc, as applicable.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

For the competent authority of registry to verify compliance with M.A.302, the auditing surveyor/inspector should have received training on maintenance programme development and control.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

1.When assessing aircraft maintenance programmes for approval, the competent authority should verify that the maintenance programme is acceptable for the continuing airworthiness of the specific aircraft listed and it is appropriate for the proposed operating environment and scheduled utilisation.

2.The competent authority should assess the contents taking into account the origins of the document, i.e. the manufacturer’s recommended maintenance programme, an MRB report, the CAMO or operator’s own experience or another approved programme.

3.A competent authority may elect to publish a proposed maintenance schedule for a piston engine aircraft type or a group of piston engine aircraft types below 2 730 kg maximum take-off mass (MTOM) or for a sailplane, powered sailplane or balloon type or for a group of sailplanes, powered sailplanes or balloon types. When owners/operators of the aircraft mentioned above elect to use a competent authority proposed maintenance schedule, all the out of phase manufacturer recommendations should be incorporated into the final maintenance programme in order for it to be approved.

4.A copy of the approved programme should be retained by the competent authority, unless the programme is approved by a CAMO.

5.The documentation issued by the competent authority to approve the aicraft maintenance programme may include details of who may issue certificates of release to service in a particular situation and may define which tasks are considered as complex maintenance tasks or limited pilot owner maintenance according to Appendix VIII to Part-M.

6.In the case of aircraft used by air carriers licensed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 or complex motor-powered aircraft, the development of the aircraft maintenance programme is dependent upon sufficient satisfactory in-service experience which has been properly processed. In general, the task being considered for escalation beyond the MRB limits should have been satisfactorily repeated at the existing frequency several times before being proposed for escalation. Appendix I to AMC M.A.302 and M.B.301(b) gives further information.

7.The competent authority may approve an incomplete maintenance programme at the start of operation of an aircraft or an operator, subject to limiting the approval of the maintenance programme to a period that does not exceed any required maintenance not yet approved.

8.If the competent authority is no longer satisfied that a safe operation can be maintained, the approval of a maintenance programme or part of it may be suspended or revoked. Events giving rise to such action include:

8.1.An operator changing the utilisation of an aircraft;

8.2.The owner or CAMO has failed to ensure that the programme reflects the maintenance needs of the aircraft such that safe operation can be assured.

ED Decision 2023/013/R

1.Approval of an aircraft maintenance programme through a procedure established by a CAO/ CAMO should require the organisation to demonstrate to the competent authority that it has competence, procedures and record-keeping provisions, which will enable the organisation to analyse aircraft reliability, the instructions issued by the TC holder or the declarant of a declaration of design compliance, and other related operating and maintenance criteria.

2.According to the complexity of the aircraft and the nature of the operation, the maintenance programme procedures should contain reliability centred maintenance and condition monitored maintenance programme procedures and have procedures relating to the programme control which contain the following provisions:

(a)task escalation or adjustment,

(b)maintenance programme review,

(c)SB or Service Information assessment,

(d)component and structures in service performance review,

(e)maintenance programme revision,

(f)maintenance procedure effectiveness review and amendment,

(g)maintenance review board report (MRBR) or manufacturer maintenance planning document (MPD) review and assessment, as appropriate,

(h)AD review and assessment,

(i)owner/maintenance/CAO or CAMO liaison,

(j)training.

3.When the competent authority requests it, the organisation should make provision for the attendance of a representative of the competent authority at meetings held to consider maintenance implications arising from reviews of the above provisions.

Regulation (EU) 2020/270

All exemptions granted in accordance with Article 71 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 shall be recorded and retained by the competent authority.

Regulation (EU) 2015/1536

(a)The competent authority shall develop a survey programme on a risk-based approach to monitor the airworthiness status of the fleet of aircraft on its register.

(b)The survey programme shall include sample product surveys of aircraft and shall cover all aspects of airworthiness key risk elements.

(c)The product survey shall sample the airworthiness standards achieved, on the basis of the applicable requirements, and identify any findings.

(d)Any findings identified shall be categorised against the requirements of this Part and confirmed in writing to the person or organisation accountable according to M.A.201. The competent authority shall have a process in place to analyse findings for their safety significance.

(e)The competent authority shall record all findings and closure actions.

(f)If during aircraft surveys evidence is found showing non-compliance with this Part or with any other Part, the finding shall be dealt with as prescribed by the relevant Part.

(g)If so required to ensure appropriate enforcement action, the competent authority shall exchange information on non-compliances identified in accordance with point (f) with other competent authorities.

ED Decision 2016/011/R

ACAM SURVEY PROGRAMME — SCOPE

1.The competent authority should establish a programme covering in-depth surveys and ramp surveys.

2.The competent authority’s survey programme should select aircraft and/or operators depending on the number and complexity of aircraft on the national register, the diversity of aircraft types, local knowledge of the maintenance environment and operating conditions, airworthiness standards and past surveillance experience.

3.The programme should prioritise the operator/fleet/aircraft/key risk elements which are causing the greatest concern.

4.The survey programme should also include a certain percentage of unannounced ramp surveys.

5.The survey programme and changes thereto should be documented.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

ACAM SURVEY PROGRAMME — CREDITING

1.Where the ACAM survey can be linked to the oversight of an approved organisation, then credit can be granted in the monitoring process of that approved organisation.

2.The competent authority may take credit of aircraft airworthiness inspections qualifying for the ACAM programme when these inspections are performed in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2018/1139 and its implementing and delegated acts.

ED Decision 2020/002/R

COMBINED SURVEYS

In the interest of efficient use of competent authority resources, aircraft inspection procedures may be established covering the combined scope of various aircraft survey tasks performed by a competent authority, such as but not limited to:

•ACAM in-depth survey;

•airworthiness review;

•permit to fly physical inspection;

•Export Certificate of Airworthiness inspection;

•product survey in accordance with M.B.704(c);

•product audit in accordance with Part-145, Part-CAO or Part-M Subpart F;

•review under supervision for airworthiness review staff authorisation, provided it covers the full scope of the physical survey in accordance with M.A.710(c); and

•ramp inspections performed in accordance with ARO.OPS³¹ or ARO.RAMP³².

Depending on which type of survey is required, any actual survey performed may cover a subset of the combined scope.

ED Decision 2015/029/R

SCOPE OF SURVEYS

1.The competent authority should undertake sample product surveys of aircraft on its register to verify that:

(a)the condition of an aircraft as sampled is to a standard acceptable for the Certificate of Airworthiness/Airworthiness Review Certificate to remain in force,

(b)the operator/owner’s management of the airworthiness of the aircraft is effective,

(c)the approvals and licenses granted to organisations and persons continue to be applied in a consistent manner to achieve the required standards.

A physical inspection of the aircraft is necessary during each ACAM survey (ramp or in-depth).

2.Sample product surveys of aircraft include:

(a)in-depth surveys carried out during extensive maintenance that fully encompass selected aspects of an aircraft’s airworthiness,

(b)ramp surveys carried out during aircraft operations to monitor the apparent condition of an aircraft’s airworthiness.

3.When performing a ramp survey, the inspector(s) should make all possible efforts to avoid an unreasonable delay of the aircraft inspected.

4.The further information on ‘KEY RISK ELEMENTS’ can be found in Appendix III to GM1 M.B.303(b).

ED Decision 2015/029/R

IN-DEPTH SURVEY

1.An ACAM in-depth survey is a sample inspection of the key risk elements (KREs) and should be performed during scheduled/extensive maintenance. Appendix III to GM1 M.B.303(b) provides guidance on KREs that can be used for planning and/or analysis of the inspections.

2.The survey should be a ‘deep cut’ through the elements or systems selected.

3.The record of an ACAM inspection should identify which KREs were inspected.