U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular Subject: Maintenance Review Boards, Maintenance Type Boards, and OEM/TCH Recommended Maintenance Procedures Date: 8/27/12 Initiated by: AFS-300 AC No: 121-22C Change:
This advisory circular (AC) provides guidelines that industry may use to develop and revise the minimum scheduled tasking/interval requirements for derivative or newly type-certificated (TC) aircraft and powerplants for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval. This AC refers to these minimum scheduled tasking/interval requirements as the Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR), the Maintenance Type Board Report (MTBR), or the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)/type-certificate holder’s (TCH) Recommended Maintenance Procedures.
After FAA approval, the requirements become a basis upon which operators develop their own individual maintenance programs. The report will become a dynamic report for each TCH.
Use this AC to standardize the development, implementation, and update of FAA-approved minimum scheduled maintenance/inspection requirements.
ORIGINAL SIGNED by /s/ Raymond Towles, for John M. Allen Director, Flight Standards Service
CONTENTS Paragraph Page CHAPTER 1. CREATING AND USING MAINTENANCE/INSPECTION
REQUIREMENTS1
1-1. Purpose1
1-2. Cancellation1
1-3. Related CFR Parts1
1-4. Audience1
1-5. Scope1
1-6. Related Reading Material2
CHAPTER 2. MAINTENANCE PROGRAM OVERVIEW5
2-1. Timeline of Maintenance Steering Group (MSG) Actions5
2-2. MRB Applicability7
2-3. MRBR7
2-4. MRBR Proposal Delive ry Schedule Guidelines8
2-5. Validation of Associated Maintenance Procedures9
2-6. CMRs9
CHAPTER 3. INDUSTRY PARTICIPATION11
3-1. Industry Steering Committee (ISC)11
3-2. ISC Functions11
3-3. MSG WGs12
3-4. OEM/TCH Functions12
CHAPTER 4. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION (FAA) PARTICIPATION15
4-1. U.S. Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)/Type-Certificate Holder (TCH)15
4-2. Foreign OEM/TCH17
4-3. MRB18
4-4. Representatives of Other Na tional Aviation Authorities (NAA)21
CHAPTER 5. MAINTENANCE REVIEW BOARD REPORT (MRBR) APPROVAL23
5-1. Initial MRBR Approval Process23
5-2. National Aviation Authority (NAA) Approval of the MRBR23
5-3. Proposed Initial MRBR Disapproval Process23
5-4. MRBR Implementation23
CONTENTS (continued) Paragraph Page CHAPTER 6. MAINTENANCE REVIEW BOARD REPORT (MRBR) REVISIONS,
FORMAT, AND CONTENT27
6-1. MRBR Annual Review27
6-2. Temporary Revisions......................................................................................................2 7
6-3. Recommendations for Completing the Report27
CHAPTER 7. MAINTENANCE REVIEW BOARD POLICY BOARDS (MRBPB)33
7-1. Federal Aviation Admi nistration (FAA) MRBPB33
7-2. IMRBPB33
CHAPTER 8. MAINTENANCE TYPE BOARDS (MTB) PROCESS35
8-1. General35
8-2. MTB Process Applicability35
8-3. MTB Audit Process35
8-4. MTBR36
8-5. Policy and Procedures Handbook (PPH)37
8-6. OEM/TCH Representatives38
8-7. Regulatory Authoritie s’ Responsibilities38
CHAPTER 9. ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER (OEM)/TYPE-CERTIFICATE
HOLDER (TCH) RECOMMENDED MAINTENANCE PROCESS41
9-1. General41
9-2. Recommended Maintenan ce Process Applicability41
9-3. Recommended Maintenance Process Audits41
9-4. Scheduled Maintenance Instruction41
CHAPTER 10. MAINTENANCE REVIEW BOARD REPORT (MRBR)/MAINTENANCE
TYPE BOARD REPORT (MTBR) LOW-UTILIZATION MAINTENANCE
REQUIREMENTS43
10-1. General43
10-2. Applicability43
10-3. Requirements43
CHAPTER 11. FLIGHTCREWS ACCOMPLISHING MAINTENANCE45
11-1. General45
11-2. Applicability45
Page v (and vi) CONTENTS (continued) Paragraph Page
CHAPTER 12. IMPLEMENTATION AND OPTIMIZATION OF TASKING INTERVALS ...47
12-1. Introduction47
12-2. Purpose47
12-3. Policy Description47
12-4. Responsibilities49
12-5. Data Quality50
12-6. Data Integrity51
12-7. Data Review52
12-8. Data Correlation53
APPENDIX 1. ACRONYM/ABBREVIATION LISTING FOR THE MAINTENANCE
REVIEW BOARD REPORT (MRBR) (4 Pages)1
APPENDIX 2. EVOLUTION/OPTIMIZATION DEFINITIONS (2 Pages)1
APPENDIX 3. POLICY AND PROCEDURES HANDBOOK (PPH) FORMAT (10 Pages) 1
APPENDIX 4. RELEVANT FLOWCHARTS AND LETTERS (6 Pages)1
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1. Maintenance Review Board Process Flowchart8
Figure 4-1. Memo to AFS-300 to Establish a Maintenance Review Board16
Figure 5-1. Maintenance Review Board Report Letter of Approval24
Figure 5-2. Maintenance Review Board Report Approval Page25
Figure 8-1. Maintenance Type Board Flowchart37
Par 1-1 Page 1 CHAPTER 1. CREATING AND USING MAINTENANCE/INSPECTION
REQUIREMENTS
1-1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular (AC) provides guidelines that industry may use to develop and revise the minimum scheduled tasking/interval requirements for derivative or newly type-certificated (TC) aircraft and powerplants for Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approval. This AC refers to these minimum scheduled tasking/interval requirements as the Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR), the Maintenance Type Board Report (MTBR) or the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)/type-certificate holder’s (TCH) Recommended Maintenance Procedures. After FAA approval, the requirements become a basis upon which operators develop their own individual maintenance programs. The report will become a dynamic report for each TCH; that is, a document subject to periodic revision based on new or changed analysis or requirements.
1-2. CANCELLATION. This AC cancels AC 121-22B, Maintenance Review Board Report, Maintenance Type Board, and OEM/TCH Inspection Program Procedures, dated October 29, 2010.
1-3. RELATED CFR PARTS. Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 33, 35, 43, 91, 119, 121, 129, and 135 apply.
1-4. AUDIENCE. Guidance in this AC pertains to FAA personnel, air operators, air carriers, and OEM/TCHs and their vendors involved in the development of maintenance tasking requirements.
1-5. SCOPE. This AC is not mandatory and is not the only means to comply with the regulations. The FAA issues this AC for guidance and to outline a method of compliance. A person may elect to follow an alternative method, provided that the FAA finds it to be an acceptable means of complying with the applicable requirements of 14 CFR. The material in this AC is primarily designed to provide guidance for the standardized development, implementation, and update of FAA-approved minimum scheduled tasking/interval requirements, and it describes an acceptable means, but not the only means, of showing compliance with the applicable regulations. An MRBR, MTBR or OEM/TCH requirements document will be used by operators as a basis for developing and designing a maintenance program and will be submitted to the local regulatory authority for acceptance or approval. That acceptance or approval process becomes far more complex and potentially impossible if the MRBR or MTBR does not conform to a known standard. Therefore, to generate an MRBR, MTBR or OEM/TCH requirements document using the methods described in this AC, the methods described must be followed in all respects, without deviation. The FAA derived these guidelines from regulatory authorities and aviation industry experience. This AC is primarily designed to provide advice and recommendations for the standardized development, implementation, and update of FAA-approved minimum scheduled maintenance/inspection requirements, unless exceptions that meet the intent of the AC are documented and then approved/accepted in an OEM/TCH Policy and Procedures Handbook (PPH).
NOTE: This AC uses the term “must” only in the sense of ensuring the applicability of these particular methods of compliance when operators use
Page 2 Par 1-5 the acceptable means of compliance described herein. This AC does not change regulatory requirements and does not authorize changes in, or deviations from, regulatory requirements.
1-6. RELATED READING MATERIAL.
a. FAA Orders (current editions).
• Order 1100.5, FAA Organization—Field.
• Order 8100.5, Aircraft Certification Service Mission, Responsibilities, Relationships, and Programs.
• Order 8110.4, Type Certification.
• Order 8110.54, Instructions for Continued Airworthiness Responsibilities, Requirements, and Contents.
• Order 8300.12, Corrosion Prevention and Control Programs.
• Order 8430.21, Flight Standards Division, Aircraft Certification Division, and Aircraft Evaluation Group Responsibilities.
• Order 8900.1, Volume 8, Chapter 2, Section 7, Maintenance Review Boards.
b. FAA ACs (current editions).
• AC 20-107, Composite Aircraft Structure.
• AC 20-136, Aircraft Electrical and Electronic System Lightning Protection.
• AC 20-158, The Certification of Aircraft Electrical and Electronic Systems for Operation in the High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) Environment.
• AC 23-1309-1, System Safety Analysis and Assessment for Part 23 Airplanes.
• AC 25-19, Certification Maintenance Requirements.
• AC 25-27, Development of Transport Category Airplane Electrical Wiring Interconnection Systems Instructions for Continued Airworthiness Using and Enhanced Zonal Analysis Procedure.
• AC 27-1, Certification of Normal Category Rotorcraft.
• AC 29-2, Certification of Transport Category Rotorcraft.
• AC 33.4-3, Instructions for Continued Airworthiness, Aircraft Engine High Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) and Lightning Protection Features.
• AC 120-42, Extended Operations (ETOPS and Polar Operations).
c. Other Technical Documents.
• CMH-17, Composites Materials Handbook. (Available from http://www.cmh17.org.)
• European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Document # WI.MRB.00002-001, Maintenance Review Board Team.
Par 1-6 Page 3 (and 4)
• Transport Canada Transport Publication (TP) 13850, Scheduled Maintenance Instruction Development Process Manual.
• ATA MSG-3, Operator/Manufacturer Scheduled Maintenance Development, current edition available from:
Airlines for America (A4A) 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004–1707 202-626-4000 http://www.airlines.org
Par 2-1 Page 5 CHAPTER 2. MAINTENANCE PROGRAM OVERVIEW
2-1. TIMELINE OF MAINTENANCE STEERING GROUP (MSG) ACTIONS.
a. History. The development of maintenance programs dates to Aeronautical Bulletin 7E of May 15, 1930. The process of developing maintenance programs for new aircraft and aircraft engines has evolved. In the past, each air carrier proposed its own unique program. Today, the process is a collaborative effort in which the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), associated foreign regulatory authorities, and industry work together to develop the minimum scheduled maintenance/inspection requirements for new and derivative aircraft, aircraft engines, and propellers. Early experience in the development of initial scheduled maintenance/inspection requirements revealed that, through the use of logical analysis and decision processes, it was possible to develop a program of applicable and effective maintenance tasks. In 1968, the Maintenance Steering Group - 1st Task Force (MSG-1) developed maintenance requirements decision and analysis logic.
b. Role of the MSG. In 2006, the Air Transport Association of America (ATA) MSG was named the Maintenance Programs Industry Group (MPIG), while the latest version of MSG still retained the same original title. The ATA coordinates, and industry chairs, the MPIG, which has assumed the same duties as the original MSG task force. The MPIG meets periodically to review issues submitted by industry and the regulatory authorities affecting the latest version of MSG and to institute improvements or any necessary evolutionary changes due to revised regulatory requirements or advances in industry technology.
c. History of the Maintenance Steering Group Document by Revision.
(1) Handbook—Maintenance Evaluation and Program Development, MSG-1 (July 10, 1968). The FAA and industry used MSG-1 procedures to develop the initial minimum scheduled maintenance/inspection recommendations for the B-747-100 aircraft and its engines.
(2) Specification Maintenance Program Development, Maintenance Steering Group - 2nd Task Force (MSG-2) (January 8, 1970). A task force used the experience gained on the B-747-100 project to update the MSG-1 procedures so that a universal document could be made applicable for future newly type-certificated (TC) aircraft and/or engines. This document was called the MSG-2 document. In the 1970s, the FAA and industry used the MSG-2 procedures to develop the initial minimum scheduled maintenance/inspection recommendations for aircraft and engines.
(3) Airline/Manufacturer Maintenance Program Development Document Maintenance Steering Group - 3rd Task Force (MSG-3), Original Revision (September 30, 1980). In 1980, the combined efforts of the FAA, ATA tasking/interval requirements, U.S. and European aircraft and engine manufacturers, and U.S. and foreign airlines generated new decision logic and analysis procedures contained in a new document called MSG-3.
(4) Airline/Manufacturer Maintenance Program Development Document MSG-3, Revision 1 (March 31, 1988). In 1987, after applying MSG-3 analysis procedures on a number of new aircraft and engines in the first half of the 1980s, the airline industry decided that the
Page 6 Par 2-1 benefits of the experience gained during those years should be used to improve the document for future applications. Thus, Revision 1 to MSG-3 was developed. The FAA and industry began applying MSG-3 Revision 1 in 1988 for the ongoing development of new aircraft and aircraft engine Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR) documents.
(5) Airline/Manufacturer Maintenance Program Development Document MSG-3, Revision 2 (September 12, 1993). Further refinements made to the MSG-3 Revision 1 analysis resulted in Revision 2 to MSG-3. In 1993, the FAA and industry began applying MSG-3 Revision 2 for development of new and derivative aircraft and engine MRBR documents.
(6) ATA MSG-3 Operator/Manufacturer Scheduled Maintenance Program Development, Revision 2001 (March 2000). This version was reformatted into an electronic document to adapt to the use of computer technology.
(7) ATA MSG-3 Operator/Maintenance Program Development, Revision 2001.1 (February 2001). To include the large corporate aircraft and aging large transport legacy aircraft segment in the MSG-3 process, the FAA and industry began using MSG-3 Revision 2001.1 in 2001. This revision introduced significant changes, including inspection definitions, corrected terminology, and expanded wording on safety/emergency equipment. Also, with the advent in the manufacturer development of more technologically advanced fly-by-wire aircraft, and to improve the safety of legacy transport aircraft, it became necessary to introduce sections on enhanced zonal analysis procedures (EZAP) and Lightning/High Intensity Radiated Field (L/HIRF) protection.
(8) ATA MSG-3 Operator/Manufacturer Scheduled Maintenance Development, Revision 2002.1 (March 2002). Significant changes in this revision included the recording of all assumptions, the consideration of all vendor recommendations, procedures for fault-tolerant systems, Master Minimum Equipment List (MMEL) considerations, and the inclusion of analysis of nonmetallic structures.
(9) ATA MSG-3 Operator/Manufacturer Scheduled Maintenance Development, Revision 2003.1 (March 2003). The most significant changes included adding three-letter task abbreviations/acronyms, further revised fault-tolerant systems procedures, definition changes for fault-tolerant systems, and further clarification of the definition of safety/emergency systems or equipment.
(10) ATA MSG-3 Operator/Manufacturer Scheduled Maintenance Development Revision 2005.1 (March 2005). Changes introduced in this version included adding the need to identify design features that affect fuel tank safety (FTS), defining differentiation of Structural Significant Items (SSI) and Principal Structural Elements (PSE), correcting the relation of fatigue damage (FD) to nonmetallic materials, revising EZAPs to reflect recommendations from the FAA’s Aging Transport Systems Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ATSRAC) on aging wiring, and adding a definition for electrical wiring interconnection systems (EWIS).
(11) ATA MSG-3 Operator/Manufacturer Scheduled Maintenance Development Revision 2007.1 (April 2007). Changes introduced in this version expanded the text to better define and consider structural wear damage. This change expanded the text and added a