M.B.301 Aircraft maintenance programme
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.
AMC M.B.301(a) Maintenance programme
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.
AMC M.B.301(b) Maintenance programme
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.
AMC M.B.301(c) Maintenance Programme
ED Decision 2020/002/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, TC holder’s instructions, 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.
M.B.303 Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring
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.
AMC1 M.B.303(a) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring (ACAM)
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.
AMC2 M.B.303(a) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring (ACAM)
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.
GM M.B.303(a) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring (ACAM)
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.OPS30 Subpart OPS of Part-ARO ‘Authority requirements for air operations’ to Commission Regulation (EU) No 965/2012. or ARO.RAMP31 Subpart RAMP of Part-ARO ‘Authority requirements for air operations’ to Commission Regulation (EU) No 965/2012..
Depending on which type of survey is required, any actual survey performed may cover a subset of the combined scope.
AMC1 M.B.303(b) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring
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).
AMC2 M.B.303(b) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring
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.
AMC3 M.B.303(b) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring
ED Decision 2015/029/R
KEY RISK ELEMENTS
1. The following KREs should be used for aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring:
(a) Type design and changes to type design
(b) Airworthiness limitations
(c) Airworthiness Directives
(d) Aircraft documents
(e) Flight Manual
(f) Mass & Balance
(g) Markings & placards
(h) Operational requirements
(i) Defect management
(j) Aircraft Maintenance Programme
(k) Component control
(l) Repairs
(m) Records
2. These KREs and their detailed components should be adapted to the complexity of the aircraft type being surveyed by retaining only those items that are applicable and relevant for the particular aircraft type.
3. The further information regarding ‘KEY RISK ELEMENTS’ can be found in Appendix III to GM1 M.B.303(b).
GM1 M.B.303(b) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring (ACAM)
ED Decision 2020/002/R
KEY RISK ELEMENTS
The KREs define the scope of continuing airworthiness. The list of KREs is intended to provide the basis for planning and control of the ACAM survey programme. It will ensure that the programme covers all aspects of continuing airworthiness. While it is not required to cover all KREs during a given inspection, the ACAM survey programme needs to ensure that there is no omission, i.e. certain KRE are never inspected.
The further information on ‘KEY RISK ELEMENTS’ can be found in Appendix III to GM1 M.B.303(b).
AMC M.B.303(d) Aircraft continuing airworthiness monitoring (ACAM)
ED Decision 2016/011/R
FINDINGS ANALYSIS
1. The process should analyse the findings, or combination thereof, in order to identify:
(a) the root causes and their recurrence;
(b) the potential impact on flight safety of the individual aircraft or aircraft fleet on the national register, including hazard identification and risk mitigation; and
(c) further necessary actions at the level of the organisation(s) or individual(s) interacting with the continuing airworthiness of the aircraft or aircraft fleet.
2. The outcome of the analysis should be used for the further adjustment of the ACAM programme as well as for the purpose of M.B.303(e), (f) and (g).
3. The purpose of this process is not to analyse individual findings, but to address systemic issues or issues that become apparent at individual, corporate or aggregate level.
M.B.304 Revocation and suspension
Regulation (EU) 2015/1536
The competent authority shall:
(a) suspend an airworthiness review certificate on reasonable grounds in the case of potential safety threat, or;
(b) suspend or revoke an airworthiness review certificate pursuant to M.B.903(1).
M.B.305 Aircraft technical log system
Regulation (EU) 2020/270
(a) The competent authority shall approve the initial aircraft technical log system required by point M.A.306.
(b) To enable the organisation to implement changes to the aircraft technical log system without prior competent authority approval, the competent authority shall approve the relevant procedure referred to in point CAMO.A.300(c) of Annex Vc, or point M.A.704(c) of this Annex or point CAO.A.025(c) of Annex Vd.