AD compliance status
Airbus A220 family AD compliance status records review
This review tests whether the AD status list on an Airbus A220 family aircraft holds up line by line against the evidence behind it. It is run for lessors, airlines, operators, and management teams before a transaction, at induction, or when a compliance position has been taken on trust and never traced. The work checks applicability for the serial number, accomplishment records, and the recorded method of compliance against source documents rather than the summary alone. You get a supported exception list where the status and evidence disagree, a map from each AD line to its source, and a closure plan for the specific tail.
When this review is needed
- A buyer is pricing an A220 and needs the AD position backed by evidence, not a status line.
- The tail is inducting under a new certificate and each AD has to reconcile to accomplishment records the receiving side can retain.
- A recurring AD is coming due and no one has confirmed the last accomplishment closes the interval cleanly.
- The status list was inherited from a prior operator whose applicability calls were never rechecked for this serial number.
The problem
An AD status list is a summary, and a summary can assert compliance the file cannot prove. On a relatively young A220 the list often looks complete, so the applicability calls and the accomplishment evidence go unexamined until a buyer or an auditor asks for the record behind a specific line. That is when a directive marked complied-with turns out to rest on a work-order reference that never resolves to a signed accomplishment.
What gets reviewed
- Applicability of each AD determined against the effectivity for this serial number and configuration
- Accomplishment evidence matched to every AD the list marks complied-with
- Recorded method of compliance checked against what the directive permits
- Recurring ADs traced to their last accomplishment and next-due basis
- Terminating action confirmed where an AD was closed by modification or superseded
- Open and deferred items reconciled to the maintenance program and any alternative method in use
Scope this review
Tell us the asset, the event, and the evidence in scope, and we will outline a focused first engagement.
Send a representative, redacted record set and we will scope the review.
What gets validated
- Each AD marked complied-with resolves to a dated accomplishment record for this tail
- Applicability reflects the serial number and configuration rather than a fleet-wide assumption
- The recorded method of compliance is one the directive actually allows
- A recurring AD's next-due figure follows from the last accomplishment on file
- An AD closed by terminating action shows the modification or superseding directive that closed it
Evidence normally required
- The current AD status list for the serial number
- Accomplishment records, work orders, and sign-offs behind the status lines
- Configuration and modification records that drive applicability
- Any alternative method of compliance approvals in use on the tail
- The maintenance program sections governing recurring directive intervals
Common discrepancies
- An AD marked complied-with whose accomplishment record cannot be produced for this tail
- An applicability call carried from the fleet that does not fit this serial number's configuration
- A recurring AD whose next-due date was set without the prior accomplishment behind it
- A directive closed as terminated with no modification record to show the terminating action
What is at stake
An AD closed on the list but unsupported by evidence forces a conservative re-accomplishment or a stalled acceptance, both of which land on the current owner. On a recurring directive, a missing prior accomplishment can move the next-due calculation, and a wrong applicability call left standing can hide a directive that actually applies to the serial number.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Fix applicability
Determine which directives apply to this serial number using its configuration, not a fleet effectivity table.
Match evidence to status
Trace every complied-with line to a dated accomplishment record for the tail.
Check method and intervals
Confirm the recorded method is permitted and each recurring next-due follows from the last accomplishment.
List and sequence exceptions
Record the unsupported and mis-applied directives and lay out the closure work.
What the buyer receives
Who uses the output
- Records teams reconciling the AD position before a sale or an induction
- Continuing-airworthiness staff clearing recurring directives to a defensible next-due basis
- Asset managers pricing the compliance risk the status list actually carries
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The AD review anchors the compliance layer that a data room, an induction, or a lease return all build on. Its exception list feeds remediation while the owner still holds the accomplishment evidence, and its source map lets the next party verify the position instead of accepting the list on faith.
Aircraft-specific considerations
A220 fleets are young enough that their delivery baseline and service-bulletin embodiment history are still close at hand, which makes applicability calls easier to verify against configuration than on an older type. The engine and avionics configuration drives a meaningful share of the applicable directives, so the review ties AD applicability back to the recorded configuration rather than a generic effectivity table.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
An A220 may carry both FAA and EASA directives depending on register history, and a directive issued by one authority can have a mandatory counterpart from the other. The review notes where the status list tracks one authority's directives cleanly but leaves the parallel obligation from the other unaddressed.
Regulatory limits
The review reconciles the AD position to the evidence on file. It does not determine airworthiness, approve an alternative method of compliance, or accomplish any directive. Confirming that an accomplishment record exists is not the same as certifying the accomplishment.
What this review does not cover
- Accomplishing, re-accomplishing, or signing off any AD
- Approving an alternative method of compliance
- Any airworthiness determination on the aircraft
Specific to this review
- A young A220 status list tends to read complete, which is exactly why the accomplishment evidence goes unchecked until a buyer asks.
- Applicability, not accomplishment, is the more common defect on a recent type, because fleet-level calls get applied to serial numbers they do not fit.
- A recurring AD's next-due date is only as good as the prior accomplishment record it was calculated from.
- A terminating action recorded without its modification evidence leaves the directive effectively open.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). The legal basis for issuing and enforcing Airworthiness Directives on U.S.-registered products.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Records an owner or operator must keep, including total time in service, current status of life-limited parts, and AD compliance.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
Frequently asked questions
The AD list already shows everything as complied-with. What is left to check?
The list is a claim; the review tests it. Each complied-with line is traced to a dated accomplishment record, each applicability call is checked against this serial number's configuration, and recurring next-due figures are confirmed against the prior accomplishment. The status that survives that is evidence-backed rather than asserted.
Relevant glossary terms
Related pages
Where this fits
Talk to an engineer who has done this work
We will walk through your current state, the records or evidence involved, and a scoped first engagement.
Talk through the aircraft, records, evidence, deadline, and next useful step.