M.A. SUBPART G APPROVAL RECOMMENDATION REPORT EASA FORM 13 
PART 3: Compliance with M.A. Subpart G continuing airworthiness management exposition (CAME) 
2.6 Quality audit personnel. Part 3 Contracted Maintenance 3.1 Maintenance contractor selection procedure. 3.2 Detailed list of maintenance contractors 3.3 Quality audit of aircraft. Part 4 Airworthiness review procedures 4.1 Airworthiness review staff. 4.2 Review of aircraft records. 4.3 Physical survey. 4.4 Additional procedures for recommendations to competent authorities for the import of aircraft. 4.5 Recommendations to competent authorities for the issue of airworthiness review certificates 4.6 Issuance of airworthiness review certificates 4.7 Airworthiness review records, responsibilities, retention and access. Part 4B Permit to fly procedures 4B.1 Conformity with approved flight conditions 4B.2 Issue of permit to fly under the CAMO privilege 4B.3 Permit to fly authorised signatories 4B.4 Interface with the local authority for the flight 4B.5 Permit to fly records, responsibilities, retention and access. Part 5 Appendices 5.1 Sample Documents. 5.2 List of airworthiness review staff 5.3 List of subcontractors as per M.A.711 (a) 3 and AMC M.A.201 (h)1. 5.4 List of approved maintenance organisations contracted. 5.5 Copy of contracts for sub-contracted work (appendix 2 to AMC M.A.201 (h)1. 5.6 Copy of contracts with approved maintenance organisations. 
CAME Reference: CAME Amendment: Competent authority audit staff: Signature(s): Competent authority office: Date of Form 13 part 3 completion: 

ED 2010/002/R

M.A. SUBPART G APPROVAL RECOMMENDATION REPORT EASA FORM 13 
Part 4: Findings regarding M.A. Subpart G compliance status Each level 1 and 2 finding should be recorded whether it has been rectified or not and should be identi-fied by a simple cross reference to the Part 2 requirement. All non-rectified findings should be copied in writing to the organisation for the necessary corrective action. 
Part 2 or 3 ref.  Audit reference(s): Findings  L e v e l  Corrective action 
Date Due  Date Closed 
Reference 

M.A. SUBPART G APPROVAL RECOMMENDATION REPORT EASA FORM 13 
Part 5: M.A. Subpart G approval or continued approval or change recommendation 
Name of organisation: Approval reference: Audit reference(s): The following M.A. Subpart G scope of approval is recommended for this organisation: Or, it is recommended that the M.A. Subpart G scope of approval specified in EASA Form 14 referenced ...................................................... be continued. Name of recommending competent authority surveyor: Signature of recommending competent authority surveyor: Competent authority office: Date of recommendation: Form 13 review (quality check): Date: 

ED 2008/013/R
Appendix VIII to AMC M.A.616

This is only applicable to organisations with less than 10 maintenance staff mem-bers. For larger organisations, the principles and practices of an independent quality system should be used.
Depending on the complexity of the small organisation (number and type of aircraft, number of different fleets, subcontracting of specialised services, etc.), the organisational review system may vary from a system using the principles and practices of a quality sys-tem (except for the requirement of independence) to a simplified system adapted to the low complexity of the organisation and the aircraft managed.
As a core minimum, the organisational review system should have the following fea-tures, which should be described in the Maintenance Organisation Manual (MOM):
a.  Identification of the person responsible for the organisational review programme. 
By default, this person should be the accountable manager, unless he delegates this responsibility to (one of) the M.A.606(b) person(s). 
b.  Identification and qualification criteria for the person(s) responsible for performing the organisational reviews. 
　
中國航空網 www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：CONTINUING AIRWORTHINESS REQUIREMENTS – PART M 2(67)