Which of the following is not a factor considered during the screening of avionic equipment?

In the context of screening avionic equipment for corrosion control, the focus is primarily on factors that directly impact the functionality, safety, and integrity of the equipment. While aspects like the extent of damage, drying methods, and local repair capabilities are crucial for assessing the current state and future maintenance of the equipment, the manufacturer's history is generally not a direct factor considered during this screening phase.

The extent of damage assesses how much corrosion or physical wear has occurred, directly influencing decisions on repair or replacement. Drying methods pertain to how effectively moisture can be removed, thus preventing further corrosion-related issues. Local repair capability evaluates whether there are resources and expertise available nearby to conduct necessary maintenance, playing a vital role in long-term care.

The manufacturer's history, while useful for general awareness about reliability and past performance of similar equipment, does not typically weigh into immediate operational assessments or corrosion control strategies. Each piece of equipment is treated based on its current condition and immediate context, rather than past performances attributed to its maker. Hence, this aspect is not factored into immediate screening considerations.