October 31, 2002

The Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA) recently represented a technician in an FAA Enforcement Investigation that resulted in a Letter of Investigation (LOI) being issued, because the technician followed instructions from Maintenance Control that were in error. It is imperative that technicians, be concerned about future certificate action, by gaining a complete understanding of their working relationship with Maintenance Control.

The results of the AMFA National Safety Survey this past summer has indicated that technicians are split as to their interpretation of whether Maintenance Control is a resource or authority. The word authority when used in reference to the Federal Air Regulations simply clarifies the means and documentation required to release a maintenance item back into service. (Some examples of "by what authority", may include the Administrator, Manufacturers Maintenance Manuals, Federal Air Regulations, Engineering Orders, and so forth)

In my opinion, Maintenance Control has never been or will ever be an authority under this definition.

A brief explanation of our responsibilities as technicians –

Both the air carrier and the technician have a responsibility to conform to the Federal Air Regulations.

FAR 43.7 Persons authorized to approve aircraft, airframes, aircraft engines, propellers, appliances, or component parts for return to service after maintenance, preventive maintenance, rebuilding, or alteration.

(b) The holder of a mechanic certificate or an inspection authorization may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 65 of this chapter.

(e) The holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate issued under Part 121 or 135, may approve an aircraft, airframe, aircraft engine, propeller, appliance, or component part for return to service as provided in Part 121 or 135 of this chapter, as applicable.

The difference is, that under Part 121, an air carrier must develop an aircraft maintenance procedural manual to be approved for an operating certification by the Federal Aviation Agency as indicated below.

FAR 121.367 Maintenance, preventative maintenance and alteration program. Each certificate holder shall have an inspection program and a program covering other maintenance, preventative maintenance, and alterations that ensures that - -

(a) Maintenance, preventative maintenance, and alterations performed by it, or by other persons are performed in accordance with the certificate holders manual.

In one certificate holder’s General Engineering and Maintenance Manual (GEMM) reference 01-03-02 par.1 Airmen Certificate Requirements C(1)(b) states that individuals who hold the Airframe and Power plant license are responsible for understanding and remaining in compliance with all applicable Federal Aviation Regulations.

FAR 121.367 cover Manual Requirements for your information

A brief explanation of one air carriers certificate holders manual reference to Maintenance control:

GEMM 02-05-14 par.1(A)(2) Maintenance Road Trips states that within the bounds of existing labor contracts, Maintenance Operations will have primary authority in all matters related to the maintenance road trip. This means, in my opinion, that MC will be in charge of the road trip.

This does not authorize MC to coerce the technician to release maintenance that in his opinion does not meet airworthiness requirements. The technician should always demand written documentation when in dispute with Maintenance Control.

Another area of interest is GEMM 02-06-08 Maintenance Control Orders/Mandatory Maintenance Control Orders. 1(B)(1) states that The Maintenance Control Order (MCO) is used by Maintenance Control to communicate Line Maintenance tasks to be accomplished. The program requires acknowledgement back to Maintenance Control that the message was received and every effort will be made to perform the specific task(s) outlined.

1(B)(2) states that the Mandatory Maintenance Control Order (MMCO) is used by Maintenance Control to communicate maintenance requirements that must be accomplished prior to further flight.

Neither GEMM reference or any other reference states that a technician is required to release maintenance that in his/her opinion does not meet airworthiness requirements nor without proper documentation.

GEMM reference 01-03-02 C(1)c states that within the bounds of the above mentioned FAR’s, the aircraft maintenance program, existing labor contracts, and the directives of management, Airframe and Power plant mechanics have the authority to approve aircraft and their components for return to service.

Of interest is GEMM 01-03-02 par.1 Airmen Certificate Requirements (B)(2)(b). The “Lead” Inspector and/or “Lead” Mechanic and/or properly certified manager is available for consultation and decision on matters requiring instruction or decision from higher authority than that of the person performing the work. Each “Lead” Inspector and/or “Lead” mechanic and/or properly certified manager holds the appropriate FAA Airman Certificate.

This means, in my opinion, that the “Lead” and the manager have the authority to sign the work off but have no authority to coerce the one that accomplished the work.

Contract Maintenance is another area that technicians must be especially vigilant when communicating with Maintenance Control from other carriers. The results from our recent national safety survey, in which over 16 airlines responded, has indicated that over half of the respondents has seen the carrier involved compromise safety in order to expedite the aircraft to a maintenance base for repairs.

Remember, as certified technicians, we are required to maintain a comprehensive knowledge of the Federal Air Regulations and are held to a very high standard by the very nature of our profession.

Sincerely,

Frank Boksanske, AMFA National Safety and Standards Director