Bombardier CRJ family AD status records review

When this review is needed

• A CRJ is changing hands and the buyer wants the AD status list verified against evidence before pricing.
• The tail is moving to a new operator's program and the AD position has to reconcile first.
• A recurring-inspection AD is due and its next-due basis has not been checked against current cycles.
• An operator change left the AD list built under one system and now read by another.

The problem

A CRJ accumulates cycles fast in regional service, which makes recurring-inspection directives the part of the AD list that drifts. A next-due date that was correct when the list was built quietly goes stale as the tail flies short sectors, and a directive closed by a service bulletin can look compliant while the accomplishment record that would prove it sits in a work package from a prior operator. Whoever reads the list at a transfer inherits both the applicability calls and the recurring calculations, and the evidence that settles them is rarely on the summary itself.

What gets reviewed

• Applicability of each directive reasoned against the CRJ serial and its configuration
• Accomplishment evidence checked line by line rather than at the status total
• Recurring-inspection next-due status recalculated against current cycles
• Directives closed by service bulletin traced to the embodiment record behind them
• Superseded directives reconciled so the superseding action is shown closed
• The open-versus-closed count reconciled against the individually evidenced lines

What gets validated

• Each closed directive traces to accomplishment evidence a receiving party would accept on its face
• Applicability calls hold for the specific serial and its embodied configuration
• Recurring-AD next-due values reconcile to the tail's current cycles, not the last list date
• A superseded directive shows the superseding action closed, with the original alone insufficient
• The status-list total agrees with the count of individually supported lines

Evidence normally required

• The current AD status list for the tail
• Accomplishment records and work cards behind the closed directives
• Service bulletin and modification records tied to AD closures
• Current time and cycle status for recurring-due calculations
• The applicable AD source lists for the receiving jurisdiction

Common discrepancies

• A recurring-inspection AD whose next-due date no longer matches the tail's cycles
• A directive closed against a service bulletin with no embodiment record in the file
• A superseded AD shown compliant on the original action but silent on the superseding one
• An applicability call that does not hold for the serial's embodied configuration

What is at stake

A recurring-AD next-due date that has drifted past the tail's accumulated cycles is not a clerical error; it can mean an inspection is already overdue on paper. A closure asserted without accomplishment evidence can force a re-inspection at the receiving operator's insistence, and on a high-cycle regional jet those exposures land in clusters, because the same short-sector utilization that drives one recurring directive stale drives several.

How the work runs

What the buyer receives

• An exception list keyed to the AD status list, flagging the lines that will not survive review
• A source map linking each closed directive to its accomplishment evidence
• A closure plan for the applicability, recurring-due, and evidence gaps

Who uses the output

• Asset managers pricing the AD position the evidence actually supports
• Continuing-airworthiness leads confirming no recurring directive is overdue on the tail
• Records teams assembling the accomplishment documents each open line requires

How the work fits into the transaction or program

The review runs before the AD position is relied on at a sale or a program transfer, so drifted recurring dates and unevidenced closures are found while the accomplishment records are still reachable. Its closure plan feeds the document chasing and recalculation that has to finish before the tail is accepted onto a new program or priced into a deal.

Aircraft-specific considerations

The CRJ's high-cycle regional utilization means recurring-inspection directives dominate the AD exposure, so next-due status is recalculated against accumulated cycles rather than trusted from the list date. Landing-gear and aging-structure directives are common on this family, and because the tail has often changed operators, the accomplishment evidence for a given directive may sit in a work package a prior operator generated, which is why closures are traced to source.

Jurisdiction-specific considerations

A CRJ moving between an FAA and an EASA register brings state-of-design and state-of-registry directives that overlap on the same tail, and a service bulletin one authority mandates another may treat as optional. The review reasons each line against the receiving authority rather than assuming the outgoing position transfers.

Regulatory limits

The review reconciles AD evidence so the receiving party or authority can make its own acceptance decision. It does not close a directive, perform the inspection behind one, or make an airworthiness determination on the tail.

What this review does not cover

• Performing or signing off the maintenance behind any open directive
• Determining airworthiness on the aircraft
• Negotiating which AD basis a receiving authority will accept

Specific to this review

• On a high-cycle CRJ, recurring-inspection directives are the AD lines most likely to have gone stale, because short-sector utilization outruns the list's last calculation.
• A directive closed by service bulletin can read compliant while its embodiment record sits in a prior operator's work package, so closures are traced to that record rather than the list.
• Superseded directives are the most common false-clean, because the original action was recorded and the superseding action was never carried forward on the list.

Sources

Frequently asked questions

Relevant glossary terms

Related pages

Where this fits