Content of the maintenance programme

1 General requirements 1.1 The maintenance programme should contain the following basic information. 1.1.1 The type/model and registration number of the aircraft, engines and, where applicable, auxiliary power units and propellers 1.1.2 The name and address of the owner, operator or M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation managing the aircraft airworthiness. 1.1." The reference, the date of issue and issue number of the appro!ed maintenance programme. 1.1.# A statement signed by the owner, operator or M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation managing the aircraft airworthiness to the effect that the specified aircraft will be maintained to the programme and that the programme will be re!iewed and updated as re$uired. 1.1.% &ontents/list of effecti!e pages and their re!ision status of the document. 1.1.' &hec( periods, which reflect the anticipated utilisation of the aircraft. Such utilisation should be stated and include a tolerance of not more than 2%). *here utilisation cannot be anticipated, calendar time limits should also be included. 1.1.+ ,rocedures for the escalation of established chec( periods, where applicable and acceptable to the competent authority of registry.

1.1.- ,ro!ision to record the date and reference of appro!ed amendments incorporated in the maintenance programme. 1.1.. /etails of pre0flight maintenance tas(s that are accomplished by maintenance staff. 1.1.11 The tas(s and the periods 2inter!als/fre$uencies3 at which each part of the aircraft, engines, A,45s, propellers, components, accessories, e$uipment, instruments, electrical and radio apparatus, together with the associated systems and installations should be inspected. This should include the type and degree of inspection re$uired. 1.1.11 The periods at which components should be chec(ed, cleaned, lubricated, replenished, ad6usted and tested. 1.1.12 7f applicable details of ageing aircraft system re$uirements together with any specified sampling programmes. 1.1.1" 7f applicable details of specific structural maintenance programmes where issued by the type certificate holder including but not limited to8 a. Maintenance of structural 7ntegrity by damage Tolerance and Supplemental Structural 7nspection ,rogrammes 2SS7/3. b. Structural maintenance programmes resulting from the S9 re!iew performed by the T& holder. c. &orrosion pre!ention and control. d. :epair Assessment. e. *idespread ;atigue /amage

1.1.1#. 7f applicable, details of &ritical /esign &onfiguration &ontrol <imitations together with appropriate procedures. Amd by Decision 2007/001/R 1.1.1% 7f applicable a statement of the limit of !alidity in terms of total flight cycles/calendar date/flight hours for the structural programme in 1.1.1". 1.1.1' The periods at which o!erhauls and/or replacements by new or o!erhauled components should be made. 1.1.1+ A cross0reference to other documents appro!ed by the Agency which contain the details of maintenance tas(s related to mandatory life limitations, &ertification Maintenance :e$uirements 2&M:5s3 and A/s. Note: To prevent inadvertent variations to such tasks or intervals these items should not be included in the main portion of the maintenance programme document, or any planning control system, without specific identification of their mandatory status. 1.1.1- /etails of, or cross0reference to, any re$uired reliability programme or statistical methods of continuous Sur!eillance. 1.1.1. A statement that practices and procedures to satisfy the programme should be to the standards specified in the T& holder5s Maintenance 7nstructions. 7n the case of appro!ed practices and procedures that differ, the statement should refer to them.

1.1.21 =ach maintenance tas( $uoted should be defined in a definition section of the programme. 2 ,rogramme basis 2.1 An owner or an M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation5s aircraft maintenance programme should normally be based upon the M:9 report, where applicable, and the T& holder5s maintenance planning document or &hapter % of the maintenance manual, 2i.e. the manufacturer5s recommended maintenance programme3. The structure and format of these maintenance recommendations may be re0written by the owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation to better suit the operation and control of the particular maintenance programme. 2.2 ;or a newly type0certificated aircraft where no pre!iously appro!ed maintenance programme exists, it will be necessary for the owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation to comprehensi!ely appraise the manufacturer5s recommendations 2and the M:9 report where applicable3, together with other airworthiness information, in order to produce a realistic programme for appro!al. 2." ;or existing aircraft types it is permissible for the operator to ma(e comparisons with maintenance programmes pre!iously appro!ed. 7t should not be assumed that a programme appro!ed for one owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation would automatically be appro!ed for another.

=!aluation should be made of the aircraft/fleet utilisation, landing rate, e$uipment fit and, in particular, the experience of the owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation when assessing an existing programme. *here the competent authority is not satisfied that the proposed maintenance programme can be used as is, the competent authority should re$uest appropriate changes such as additional maintenance tas(s or de0escalation of chec( fre$uencies as necessary. 2.# &ritical /esign &onfiguration &ontrol <imitations 2&/&&<3 7f &/&&< ha!e been identified for the aircraft type by the T&/ST& holder, maintenance instructions should be de!eloped. &/&&<5s are characterised by features in an aircraft installation or component that should be retained during modification, change, repair, or scheduled maintenance for the operational life of the aircraft or applicable component or part. Amd by Decision 2007/001/R " Amendments Amendments 2re!isions3 to the appro!ed maintenance programme should be made by the owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation, to reflect changes in the T& holder5s recommendations, modifications, ser!ice experience, or as re$uired by the competent authority. # ,ermitted !ariations to maintenance periods

The owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation may only !ary the periods prescribed by the programme with the appro!al of the competent authority or through a procedure de!eloped in the maintenance programme and appro!ed by the competent authority. % ,eriodic re!iew of maintenance programme contents %.1 The owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation5s appro!ed maintenance programmes should be sub6ect to periodic re!iew to ensure that they reflect current T& holder5s recommendations, re!isions to the M:9 report if applicable, mandatory re$uirements and the maintenance needs of the aircraft. %.2 The owner or the M.A Subpart appro!ed organisation should re!iew the detailed re$uirements at least annually for continued !alidity in the light of operating experience. '. :eliability ,rogrammes '.1 Applicability '.1.1 A reliability programme should be de!eloped in the following cases8 2a3 the aircraft maintenance programme is based upon MS 0" logic 2b3 the aircraft maintenance programme includes condition monitored components 2c3 the aircraft maintenance programme does not contain o!erhaul time periods for all significant system components 2d3 when specified by the Manufacturer5s maintenance planning document or M:9.

'.1.2 A reliability ,rogramme need not be de!eloped in the following cases8 2a3 the maintenance programme is based upon the MS 01 or 2 logic but only contains hard time or on condition items 2b3 the aircraft is not a large aircraft according to ,art0M 2c3 the aircraft maintenance programme pro!ides o!erhaul time periods for all significant system components. Note : for the purpose of this paragraph, a significant system is a system the failure of which could hazard the aircraft safety. '.1." >otwithstanding paragraphs '.1.1 and '.1.2 abo!e, an M.A.Subpart organisation may howe!er, de!elop its own reliability monitoring programme when it may be deemed beneficial from a maintenance planning point of !iew. '.2 Applicability for M.A.Subpart organisation/operator of small fleets of aircraft '.2.1 ;or the purpose of this paragraph, a small fleet of aircraft is a fleet of less than ' aircraft of the same type. '.2.2 The re$uirement for a reliability programme is irrespecti!e of the M.A.Subpart organisation5s fleet si?e. '.2." &omplex reliability programmes could be inappropriate for a small fleet. 7t is recommended that such M.A.Subpart organisations tailor their reliability programmes to suit the si?e and complexity of operation.

'.2.# @ne difficulty with a small fleet of aircraft consists in the amount of a!ailable data which can be processed8 when this amount is too low, the calculation of alert le!el is !ery coarse. Therefore Aalert le!elsB should be used carefully. '.2.% An M.A.Subpart organisation of a small fleet of aircraft, when establishing a reliability programme, should consider the following8 2a3 The programme should focus on areas where a sufficient amount of data is li(ely to be processed. 2b3 *hen the amount of a!ailable data is !ery limited, the M.A.Subpart organisation5s engineering 6udgement is then a !ital element. 7n the following examples, careful engineering analysis should be exercised before ta(ing decisions8 A A1B rate in the statistical calculation may possibly simply re!eal that enough statistical data is missing, 0rather that there is no potential problem. *hen alert le!els are used, a single e!ent may ha!e the figures reach the alert le!el. =ngineering 6udgement is necessary so as to discriminate an artefact from an actual 0need for a correcti!e action. 7n ma(ing his engineering 6udgement, an M.A.Subpart organisation is encouraged to establish contact and ma(e comparisons with other M.A.Subpart organisations of the same aircraft, where possible and rele!ant. Ma(ing comparison with data pro!ided by the manufacturer may 0also be possible.

'.2.' 7n order to obtain accurate reliability data, it should be recommended to pool data and analysis with one or more other M.A.Subpart organisation2s3. ,aragraph '.' of this paragraph specifies under which conditions it is acceptable that M.A.Subpart organisations share reliability data. '.2.+ >otwithstanding the abo!e there are cases where the M.A.Subpart organisation will be unable to pool data with other M.A.Subpart organisation, e.g. at the introduction to ser!ice of a new type. 7n that case the competent authority should impose additional restrictions on the M:9/M,/ tas(s inter!als 2e.g. no !ariations or only minor e!olution are possible, and with the competent authority appro!al3. '." =ngineering 6udgement '.".1 =ngineering 6udgement is itself inherent to reliability programmes as no interpretation of data is possible without 6udgement. 7n appro!ing the M.A.Subpart organisation5s maintenance and reliability programmes, the competent authority is expected to ensure that the organisation which runs the programme 2it may be the M.A.Subpart organisation, or an ,art01#% organisation under contract3 hires sufficiently $ualified personnel with appropriate engineering experience and understanding of reliability concept 2see AM& M.A.+1'3 '.".2 7t follows that failure to pro!ide appropriately $ualified personnel for the reliability programme may lead the competent authority to re6ect the appro!al of the

reliability programme and therefore the aircraft maintenance programme. '.# &ontracted maintenance '.#.1 *hereas M.A."12 specifies that, the aircraft maintenance programme 0which includes the associated reliability programme0, should be managed and presented by the M.A.Subpart organisation to the competent authority, it is understood that the M.A.Subpart organisation may delegate certain functions to the ,art0 1#% organisation under contract, pro!ided this organisation pro!es to ha!e the appropriate expertise. '.#.2 These functions are8 2a3 /e!eloping the aircraft maintenance and reliability programmes, 2b3 ,erforming the collection and analysis of the reliability data, 2c3 ,ro!iding reliability reports, and 2d3 ,roposing correcti!e actions to the M.A.Subpart organisation. '.#." >otwithstanding the abo!e decision to implement a correcti!e action 2or the decision to re$uest from the competent authority the appro!al to implement a correcti!e action3 remains the M.A.Subpart organisation5s prerogati!e and responsibility. 7n relation to paragraph '.#.22d3 abo!e, a decision not to implement a correcti!e action should be 6ustified and documented. '.#.# The arrangement between the M.A.Subpart organisation and the ,art01#% organisation should

be specified in the maintenance contract 2see appendix 113 and the rele!ant &AM=, and M@= procedures. '.% :eliability programme 7n preparing the programme details, account should be ta(en of this paragraph. All associated procedures should be clearly defined. '.%.1 @b6ecti!es '.%.1.1 A statement should be included summarising as precisely as possible the prime ob6ecti!es of the programme. To the minimum it should include the following8 2a3 to recognise the need for correcti!e action, 2b3 to establish what correcti!e action is needed and, 2c3 to determine the effecti!eness of that action '.%.1.2 The extent of the ob6ecti!es should be directly related to the scope of the programme. 7ts scope could !ary from a component defect monitoring system for a small M.A.Subpart organisation, to an integrated maintenance management programme for a big M.A.Subpart organisation. The manufacturer5s maintenance planning documents may gi!e guidance on the ob6ecti!es and should be consulted in e!ery case. '.%.1." 7n case of a MS 0" based maintenance programme, the reliability programme should pro!ide a monitor that all MS 0" related tas(s from the maintenance programme are effecti!e and their periodicity is ade$uate. '.%.2 7dentification of items.

The items controlled by the programme should be stated, e.g. by ATA &hapters. *here some items 2e.g. aircraft structure, engines, A,43 are controlled by separate programmes, the associated procedures 2e.g. indi!idual sampling or life de!elopment programmes, constructor5s structure sampling programmes3 should be cross referenced in the programme. '.%." Terms and definitions. The significant terms and definitions applicable to the ,rogramme should be clearly identified. Terms are already defined in MS 0", ,art01#% and ,art0M. '.%.# 7nformation sources and collection. '.%.#.1 Sources of information should be listed and procedures for the transmission of information from the sources, together with the procedure for collecting and recei!ing it, should be set out in detail in the &AM= or M@= as appropriate. '.%.#.2 The type of information to be collected should be related to the ob6ecti!es of the ,rogramme and should be such that it enables both an o!erall broad based assessment of the information to be made and also allow for assessments to be made as to whether any reaction, both to trends and to indi!idual e!ents, is necessary. The following are examples of the normal prime sources8 2a3 ,ilots :eports. 2b3 Technical <ogs. 2c3 Aircraft Maintenance Access Terminal / @n0board Maintenance System readouts.

2d3 Maintenance *or(sheets. 2e3 *or(shop :eports. 2f3 :eports on ;unctional &hec(s. 2g3 Stores 7ssues/:eports. 2h3 :eports on Special 7nspections (order of (g) (h) propably reversed in original document) 2i3 Air Safety :eports. 263 :eports on Technical /elays and 7ncidents. 2(3 @ther sources8 =T@,S, :CSM, &AT 77/777. '.%.#." 7n addition to the normal prime sources of information, due account should be ta(en of continuing airworthiness and safety information promulgated under ,art021 '.%.% /isplay of information. &ollected information may be displayed graphically or in a tabular format or a combination of both. The rules go!erning any separation or discarding of information prior to incorporation into these formats should be stated. The format should be such that the identification of trends, specific highlights and related e!ents would be readily apparent. '.%.%.1 The abo!e display of information should include pro!isions for Anil returnsB to aid the examination of the total information. '.%.%.2 *here AstandardsB or Aalert le!elsB are included in the programme, the display of information should be oriented accordingly.

'.%.' =xamination, analysis and interpretation of the information. The method employed for examining, analysing and interpreting the programme information should be explained. '.%.'.1 =xamination. Methods of examination of information may be !aried according to the content and $uantity of information of indi!idual programmes. These can range from examination of the initial indication of performance !ariations to formalised detailed procedures at specific periods, and the methods should be fully described in the programme documentation. '.%.'.2 Analysis and 7nterpretation. The procedures for analysis and interpretation of information should be such as to enable the performance of the items controlled by the programme to be measuredD they should also facilitate recognition, diagnosis and recording of significant problems. The whole process should be such as to enable a critical assessment to be made of the effecti!eness of the programme as a total acti!ity. Such a process may in!ol!e8 2a3 &omparisons of operational reliability with established or allocated standards 2in the initial period these could be obtained from in0ser!ice experience of similar e$uipment of aircraft types3. 2b3 Analysis and interpretation of trends. 2c3 The e!aluation of repetiti!e defects.

2d3 &onfidence testing of expected and achie!ed results. 2e3 Studies of life0bands and sur!i!al characteristics. 2f3 :eliability predictions. 2g3 @ther methods of assessment. '.%.'." The range and depth of engineering analysis and interpretation should be related to the particular programme and to the facilities a!ailable. The following, at least, should be ta(en into account8 2a3 ;light defects and reductions in operational reliability. 2b3 /efects occurring on0line and at main base. 2c3 /eterioration obser!ed during routine maintenance. 2d3 *or(shop and o!erhaul facility findings. 2e3 Modification e!aluations. 2f3 Sampling programmes. 2g3 The ade$uacy of maintenance e$uipment and publications. 2h3 The effecti!eness of maintenance procedures. 2i3 Staff training. 263 Ser!ice bulletins, technical instructions, etc. '.%.'.# *here the M.A.Subpart organisation relies upon contracted maintenance and/or o!erhaul facilities as an information input to the programme, the arrangements for a!ailability and continuity of such information should be established and details should be included. '.%.+ &orrecti!e Actions. '.%.+.1 The procedures and time scales both for implementing correcti!e actions and for monitoring the effects of correcti!e actions should be fully described.

&orrecti!e actions shall correct any reduction in reliability re!ealed by the programme and could ta(e the form of8 2a3 &hanges to maintenance, operational procedures or techni$ues. 2b3 Maintenance changes in!ol!ing inspection fre$uency and content, function chec(s, o!erhaul re$uirements and time limits, which will re$uire amendment of the scheduled maintenance periods or tas(s in the appro!ed maintenance programme. This may include escalation or de0escalation of tas(s, addition, modification or deletion of tas(s. 2c3 Amendments to appro!ed manuals 2e.g. maintenance manual, crew manual3. 2d3 7nitiation of modifications. 2e3 Special inspections of fleet campaigns. 2f3 Spares pro!isioning. 2g3 Staff training. 2h3 Manpower and e$uipment planning. Note: Some of the above corrective actions may need the competent authoritys approval before implementation. '.%.+.2 The procedures for effecting changes to the maintenance programme should be described, and the associated documentation should include a planned completion date for each correcti!e action, where applicable. '.%.- @rganisational :esponsibilities. The organisational structure and the department responsible for the administration of the

programme should be stated. The chains of responsibility for indi!iduals and departments 2=ngineering, ,roduction, Euality, @perations etc.3 in respect of the programme, together with the information and functions of any programme control committees 2reliability group3, should be defined. ,articipation of the competent authority should be stated. This information should be contained in the &AM= or M@= as appropriate. '.%.. ,resentation of information to the competent authority. The following information should be submitted to the competent authority for appro!al as part of the reliability programme8 2a3 The format and content of routine reports. 2b3 The time scales for the production of reports together with their distribution. 2c3 The format and content of reports supporting re$uest for increases in periods between maintenance 2escalation3 and for amendments to the appro!ed maintenance programme. These reports should contain sufficient detailed information to enable the competent authority to ma(e its own e!aluation where necessary. '.%.11 =!aluation and re!iew. =ach programme should describe the procedures and indi!idual responsibilities in respect of continuous monitoring of the effecti!eness of the programme as a whole. The time periods and the procedures for both routine and non0routine re!iews of maintenance control should be detailed 2progressi!e, monthly, $uarterly, or

annual re!iews, procedures following reliability AstandardsB or Aalert le!elsB being exceeded, etc.3. '.%.11.1 =ach ,rogramme should contain procedures for monitoring and, as necessary, re!ising the reliability AstandardsB or Aalert le!elsB. The organisational responsibilities for monitoring and re!ising the AstandardsB should be specified together with associated time scales. '.%.11.2 Although not exclusi!e, the following list gi!es guidance on the criteria to be ta(en into account during the re!iew. 2a3 4tilisation 2high/low/seasonal3. 2b3 ;leet commonality. 2c3 Alert <e!el ad6ustment criteria. 2d3 Ade$uacy of data. 2e3 :eliability procedure audit. 2f3 Staff training. 2g3 @perational and maintenance procedures. '.%.11 Appro!al of maintenance programme amendment The competent authority may authorise the M.A.Subpart organisation to implement in the maintenance programme changes arising from the reliability programme results prior to their formal appro!al by the authority when satisfied that D 2a3 the :eliability ,rogramme monitors the content of the Maintenance ,rogramme in a comprehensi!e manner, and 2b3 the procedures associated with the functioning of the A:eliability roupB pro!ide the assurance that appropriate

control is exercised by the @wner/operator o!er the internal !alidation of such changes. '.' ,ooling Arrangements. '.'.1 7n some cases, in order that sufficient data may be analysed it may be desirable to ApoolB data8 i.e. collate data from a number of M.A.Subpart organisations of the same type of aircraft. ;or the analysis to be !alid, the aircraft concerned, mode of operation, and maintenance procedures applied must be substantially the same8 !ariations in utilisation between two M.A.Subpart organisations may more than anything, fundamentally corrupt the analysis. Although not exhausti!e the following list gi!es guidance on the primary factors which need to be ta(en into account. 2a3 &ertification factors, such as8 aircraft T&/S compliance 2!ariant3 / modification status, including S9 compliance. 2b3 @perational ;actors, such as8 operational en!ironment / utilisation, e.g. low/high/seasonal etc / respecti!e fleet si?e operating rules applicable 2e.g. =T@,S/:CSM/All *eather etc.3 / operating procedures / M=< and M=< utilisation 2c3 Maintenance factors, such as8 aircraft age maintenance proceduresD maintenance standards applicableD lubrication procedures and programmeD M,/ re!ision or escalation applied or maintenance programme applicable. '.'.2 Although it may not be necessary for all of the foregoing to be completely common, it is necessary for a substantial amount of commonality to pre!ail. /ecision

should be ta(en by the competent authority on a case by case basis. '.'." 7n case of a short term lease agreement 2less than ' month3 more flexibility against the para '.'.1 criteria may be granted by the competent authority, so as to allow the owner/operator to operate the aircraft under the same programme during the lease agreement effecti!ity. '.'.# &hanges by any one of the M.A.Subpart organisation to the abo!e, re$uires assessment in order that the pooling benefits can be maintained. *here an M.A.Subpart organisation wishes to pool data in this way, the appro!al of the competent authority should be sought prior to any formal agreement being signed between M.A.Subpart organisations. '.'.% *hereas this paragraph '.' is intended to address the pooling of data directly between M.A.Subpart organisations, it is acceptable that the M.A.Subpart organisation participates in a reliability programme managed by the aircraft manufacturer, when the competent authority is satisfied that the manufacturer manages a reliability programme which complies with the intent of this paragraph.