(c)
Amendments to approved manuals (e.g. maintenance manual, crew manual).

(d)
Initiation of modifications.

(e)
Special inspections of fleet campaigns.

(f)
Spares provisioning.

(g)
Staff training.

(h)
Manpower and equipment planning.

Note: Some of the above corrective actions may need CAD approval before implementation.
The procedures for effecting changes to the maintenance programme should be described, and the associated documentation should include a planned completion date for each corrective action, where applicable.
Organisational Responsibilities.
The organisational structure and the department responsible for the administration of the programme should be stated. The chains of responsibility for individuals and departments (Engineering, Production, Quality, Operations etc.) in respect of the programme, together with the information and functions of any programme control committees (reliability group), should be defined. Participation of CAD should be stated. This information should be contained in the CAME or MOE as appropriate.
Presentation of information to CAD.
The following information should be submitted to CAD for approval as part of the reliability programme:
(a)
The format and content of routine reports.

(b)
The time scales for the production of reports together with their distribution.

(c)
The format and content of reports supporting request for increases in periods between maintenance (escalation) and for amendments to the approved maintenance programme.  These  reports should contain sufficient  detailed information  to enable CAD to make  its own evaluation where necessary.

Evaluation and review.
Each programme should describe the procedures and individual responsibilities in respect of continuous monitoring of the effectiveness of the programme as a whole. The time periods and the procedures for both routine and non-routine reviews of maintenance control should be detailed (progressive, monthly, quarterly, or annual reviews, procedures following reliability “standards” or “alert levels” being exceeded, etc.).
Each Programme should contain procedures for monitoring and, as necessary, revising the reliability “standards” or “alert levels”. The organisational responsibilities for  monitoring and revising the “standards” should be specified together with associated time scales.
Although not exclusive, the following list gives guidance on the criteria to be taken into account during the review.
(a)  Utilisation (high/low/seasonal). 
(b)  Fleet commonality. 
(c)  Alert Level adjustment criteria. 
(d)  Adequacy of data. 
(e)  Reliability procedure audit. 
(f)  Staff training. 
(g)  Operational and maintenance procedures. 

Approval of maintenance programme amendment
CAD may authorise the MCAR-M Subpart G organisation to implement in the maintenance programme changes arising from the reliability programme results prior to their formal approval by the authority when satisfied that ;
(a)
the Reliability Programme monitors the  content of the Maintenance Programme in a comprehensive manner, and

(b)
the procedures associated with the functioning of the “Reliability Group” provide the assurance that appropriate control is exercised by the Owner/operator over the internal validation of such changes.

Pooling Arrangements.
In some cases, in order that sufficient data may be analysed it may be desirable to “pool” data: i.e. collate data from a number of MCAR-M Subpart G organisations of the same type of aircraft. For the analysis to be valid, the aircraft concerned, mode of operation,  and  maintenance  procedures applied must be substantially the same: variations in utilisation between two MCAR-M Subpart G organisations may more than anything, fundamentally corrupt the analysis. Although not exhaustive the following list gives guidance on the primary factors which need to be taken into account.
　
中國(guó)航空網(wǎng) m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：馬爾代夫民航法規(guī) MCAR-M Continuing Airworthiness(96)