X hits on this document





25 / 220


an "on-call" basis. Air carriers commonly refer to these arrangements as contract maintenance, on-call maintenance, or subcontract mechanics.  The certificate holder who makes arrangements with these persons must ensure the work is performed in accordance with their manual.

(2) ) Air Carrier Contracts for an All-Encompassing Maintenance Program. These situations allow for an air carrier to contact with another equivalent air carrier for the purposes of the performance of maintenance (including required inspections).  In this category, all maintenance is performed IAW the contractor's programs, methods, procedures, and standards. The air carrier's aircraft is considered part of the contractor's fleet for purposes of maintenance program content and maintenance intervals, including reliability control. However, this does not alleviate the air carrier of its ultimate responsibility for the maintenance performed on its aircraft. The issuance of OpSpecs will authorize this type of contractual arrangement (see Vol. 2, Ch. 84, Part 121/125/135 OpSpecs).

(3) Air Carrier Contracts Specific Functions Using the Contractor's Approved Maintenance Program. This example is similar to that in paragraph 5C(2) except that the contract covers specific functions rather than an all-encompassing program. For example, the contract may cover heavy maintenance on engines under the contractor's approved maintenance program. The issuance of OpSpecs will authorize this type of contractual arrangement (see vol. 2, ch. 84).

(4) Air Carrier Participates in a Parts Leasing or Exchanging Pool.  Because the air carrier is responsible for the airworthiness of its aircraft and the performance of its maintenance, arrangements with persons or organizations that supply parts and/or components, other than new, on a lease or exchange basis are also considered outsource maintenance providers. Leases or exchanges that do not allow the air carrier to be in control of the maintenance of the leased/exchanged part/component while it is in a maintenance status are contrary to the regulations as they circumvent the responsibility for the performance of


D.  Oversight Responsibilities of the Air Carrier.

(1) Per §§ 121.373 and 135.431, the air carrier must maintain a system for the continuing analysis and surveillance of the performance and effectiveness of its outsourced maintenance and provide  corrective actions for any discrepancies found.  As part of its continuous analysis system and surveillance system, (CASS) the air carrier should establish a schedule for accomplishing continuing audits or inspections, which are designed to determine the maintenance provider's level of compliance with the specific work instruction and the procedures in the air carrier manual.  The frequency of these audits or inspections will be dictated by a number of variables, such as the air carrier's level of confidence in the maintenance provider, the complexity and quantity of the work, the quality of the work produced, and the quality of the records and certifications produced. Because of these variables, air carriers will have audit schedules that differ from one another. Each air carrier should have an audit schedule based on its own unique set of circumstances and needs.  

F.  Continuous Analysis System and Surveillance System.  

(1)  C.A.S.E., in a sense, functions as a contract auditor for its air carrier members.  The C.A.S.E. audit, which is performed to the C.A.S.E. 1-A Standard, is intended to satisfy the air carrier’s regulatory requirement for surveillance of the performance of their programs that are required by §§ 121.367 and 135.425.  It is important to understand the possible limitations of the C.A.S.E. audit.  Because some air carriers place specific needs unique to them on outsource providers, the C.A.S.E. 1-A Standard may not account for these requirements.  The differences in the programs may be in the way the air carrier trains mechanics, the performance and recordation of maintenance, etc.  If the C.A.S.E. 1-A Standard does not take these unique air carrier requirements into account, the air carrier must account for the differences.  On the other hand an air carrier may not place any unique requirements on a outsource provider (i.e., the air carriers program instructs the outsource provider to perform all maintenance in accordance with the providers and the manufactures manuals) then the C.A.S.E 1-A Standard is sufficient for the surveillance of that provider.  For example:  A

Vol. 2

Document info
Document views389
Page views389
Page last viewedThu Oct 27 07:16:49 UTC 2016