CL: O-AWS010-2

May 2018

RELIABILITY PROGRAMME EVALUATION

INSPECTION RECORD

Name of Maintenance Organisation

Physical Address (Location)

Aircraft Type

Date of Inspection
Reliability Program Document No. Issue and date
Inspector(s) /

Assessment Code: YES = Satisfactory NO = Not Satisfactory N/C = Not Checked N/A = Not
Applicable

Item Assessment
YES NO N/C N/A
1. Has the applicant been informed of the following programme
requirements:
(a) Programme application?
(b) Organizational structure?
(c) Data collection system?
(d) Methods of data analysis and application to maintenance control?
(e) Procedures for establishing and revising performance standards?
(f) Definition of significant terms?
(g) Programme displays and status of corrective action programmes?
(h) Procedures for programme revision?
(i) Procedures for maintenance control changes?
EVALUATE THE PROGRAMME APPLICATION PROCEDURES.
2. When the applicant submits a formal programme, does the programme
document-
(a) Define the components, systems, or complete aircraft controlled by the
programme?
(b) Have a list of all components controlled by the programme included as
an Appendix to the programme document or included by reference
(e.g., time limits, manuals, or computer report)?
(c) Identify individual systems and/or components by Air Transport
Association (ATA) Specification 100?
CL:O-AWS010-1 May 2018 Page 1 of 6
 Item Assessment
YES NO N/C N/A
EVALUATE ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
3. Is the structure adequately described and does it address committee
membership, if appropriate, and meeting frequency?
4. Does the reliability programme include an organizational chart that shows
the following:
(a) The relationships among organizational elements responsible for
administering the programme?
(b) The two organizational elements responsible for approving changes to
maintenance controls and specifying the duties and responsibilities for
initiating maintenance programme revisions?
Note: One of the two organizations must have inspection or quality control
responsibility or have overall programme responsibility.
EVALUATE THE ORGANIZATIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES.
5. Does the reliability programme document address the following:
(a) The method of exchanging information among organizational elements?
(This may be displayed in a diagram)
(b) Activities and responsibilities of each organizational element and/or
reliability control committee for enforcing policy and ensuring corrective
action?
6. Is Authority delegated to each organizational element to enforce policy?
EVALUATE THE DATA COLLECTION SYSTEM.
7. Does the reliability document fully describe the data collection system for
the aircraft, component, and/or systems to be controlled?
8. Does it address the following:
(a) Flow of information?
(b) Identification of sources of information?
(c) Steps of data development from source to analysis?
(d) Organizational responsibilities for each step of data development?
9. Does the document include samples pf data to be collected, such as -
(a) Power plant disassembly and inspection reports?
(b) Component condition reports?
(c) Mechanical delay and cancellation reports?
(d) Flight record reports?
(e) Premature removal reports?
(f) In-flight shutdowns?
(g) Confirmed failure reports?
(h) Internal leakage reports?
(i) Engine shutdown reports?
10. Does the reliability document include a graphic portrayal of programme
operations with a closed loop showing source data, data collection, and
analysis?
EVALUATE THE METHODS OF DATA ANALYSIS AND APPLICATION TO
MAINTENANCE CONTROLS.
11. Does the data analysis system include the following:
(a) One or more of the types of action appropriate to the trend or level of
reliability experienced, including -
CL:O-AWS010-1 May 2018 Page 2 of 6
 Item Assessment
YES NO N/C N/A
(i) Actuarial or engineering studies employed to determine a need for
maintenance programme changes?
(ii) Maintenance programme changes involving inspection frequency
and content, functional checks, overhaul procedures, and time
limits?
(iii) Aircraft, aircraft system, or component modification or repair?
(iv) Changes in operating procedures and techniques?
(b) The effects on maintenance controls such as overhaul time, inspection
and check periods, and overhaul and/or inspection procedures?
(c) Procedures for evaluating critical failures as they occur?
(d) Documentation used to support and initiate changes to the
maintenance programme, including modifications, special inspections,
or fleet campaigns?
(e) Reference to the operator’s manual procedures for handling these
documents?
(f) A corrective action programme that shows the results of corrective
actions in a reasonable period of time? (Depending on the effect on
safety, a “reasonable” period of time can vary from immediate to an
overhaul cycle period.)?
(g) Samples of forms used to implement corrective actions?
(h) A description of statistical techniques used to determine operating
reliability levels?
EVALUATE THE PROCEDURES FOR ESTABLISHING AND REVISING
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
12. Does each programme include one of the following for each aircraft system
and/or component controlled by the programme:
(a) Initial performance standards defining the area of acceptable reliability?
(b) Methods, data, and a schedule to establish the performance standard?
13. Is the performance standard responsive and sensitive to the level of
reliability experienced and is stable without being fixed?(The standard
should not be so high that abnormal variations would not cause an alert or
so low that it is constantly exceeded in spite of the best known corrective
action measures)
14. Do the procedures specify the organizational elements responsible for
monitoring and revising the performance standard, as well as when and
how to revise the standard?
EVALUATE DEFINITIONS.
15. Does each programme clearly define all significant terms used in the
programme?
16. Do Definitions reflect their intended use in the programme? (They may vary
from programme to programme)
17. Are acronyms and abbreviations unique to the programme defined?

CL:O-AWS010-1 May 2018 Page 3 of 6

 YES NO N/C N/A
EVALUATE PROGRAMME DISPLAYS AND STATUS OF CORRECTIVE
ACTION PROGRAMMES AND REPORTING.
18. Does the programme describe reports, charts, and graphs used to
document operating experience?
19. Are responsibilities for these reports established and the reporting elements
clearly identified and described?
20. Are the programme displays containing the essential information for each
aircraft, aircraft system, and component controlled by the programme
addressed?
21. Is each system and component identified by the appropriate ATA
Specification 100 system code number?
22. Does the programme include displays showing:
(a) Performance trends?
(b) The current month’s performance?
(c) A minimum of 12 months’ experience?
(d) Reliability performance standards (“alert” values)?
23. Does the programme include the status of corrective action programmes?
24. Does this include all corrective action programmes implemented since the
last reporting period?
EVALUATE THE INTERVAL ADJUSTMENTS AND PROCESS AND/OR
TASK CHANGES SYSTEM.
25. Does a review of the change system confirm that -
(a) There are special procedures for escalating systems or components
whose current performance exceed control limits?
(b) The programme does not allow for the maintenance interval adjustment
of any Certification Maintenance Requirements (CMR) items? (CMRs
are part of the certification basis. No CMR item may be escalated
through the operator maintenance/reliability programme. CMRs are the
responsibility of State of Design engineering as far as approval and
escalation)?
Note: The operator shall not use his reliability programme as a basis for
adjusting the repeat interval for its corrosion prevention and control
programme; however, the operator may use the reliability programme for
recording data for later submission to the Authority to help substantiate repeat
interval changes.
(c) Provisions are included for notifying the Authority when changes are
made?
EVALUATE THE PROCEDURES FOR PROGRAMME REVISIONS.
26. Does the reliability document accomplish the following:
(a) Identify and isolate areas which require Authority approval for
programme revision, including the following:
(i) Reliability measurement?
(ii) Changes involving performance standards, including instructions
relating to the development of these standards?
(iii) Data collection system?
(iv) Data analysis methods and application to maintenance programme?

CL:O-AWS010-1 May 2018 Page 4 of 6

 Item Assessment
YES NO N/C N/A
(v) Any procedural or organizational change concerning programme
administration?
(b) If the operator proposes that the Authority approve all revisions, does
the document contain procedures for adequately administering and
implementing changes required by these actions? (It is not necessary to
isolate those areas requiring Authority approval)?
(c) Identify the organizational element responsible for approving
amendments to the programme?
(d) Provide a periodic review to determine that the established
performance standard is still realistic?
(e) Provide procedures for distributing approved revisions?
(f) Reference the operator’s manual and provide the overhaul and
inspection periods, work content, and other maintenance programme
activities controlled by the programme?
EVALUATE THE PROCEDURES FOR MAINTENANCE CONTROL
CHANGES.
27. Does the reliability programme document address the following:
(a) Procedures for maintenance control changes to the reliability
programme?
(b) The organizational elements responsible for preparing substantiation
reports to justify maintenance control changes? Note: At least two
separate organizational elements are required, one of which exercises
inspection or quality control responsibility for the operator;
(c) Processes used to specify maintenance control changes? (e.g.,
sampling, functional checks, bench checks, decision tree analysis, and
unscheduled removal)
(d) Procedures covering all maintenance programme activities controlled
by the programme?
(e) Procedures for amending OpSpecs, as required?
(f) Procedures to ensure maintenance interval adjustments are not
interfering with ongoing corrective actions?
(g) Critical failures and procedures for taking corrective action?
(h) Procedures for notifying the Authority, when increased time limit
adjustments or other programme adjustments are addressed?
Inspectors Remarks

CL:O-AWS010-1 May 2018 Page 5 of 6

Recommendations
The Reliability Programme has been evaluated in accordance with the Civil Aviation (Air Operators
Certification and Administration) Regulations currently in force and the checklist above. I DO / DO NOT /
RECOMMEND the Reliability Programme to be APROVED.

Name of Inspector______________ Signature___________________ Date_____________

Manager Airworthiness

Remarks:

I hereby Approve / do not Approve the Reliability Programme

Signature ……………………………Date……………….……………
Manager Airworthiness

CL:O-AWS010-1 May 2018 Page 6 of 6