AD status & compliance
Airworthiness Directive compliance status review
An Airworthiness Directive compliance status review confirms that the applicable AD list is correct for the aircraft configuration and that each AD is closed by the method, dose, and recurring interval the directive requires. It is used by lessors, airlines, and acquisition teams before a return, a transaction, or a fleet integration. It reviews the AD status report, the accomplishment records, embodied modifications, and the effectivity that drives applicability. You receive an AD-by-AD status matrix, a list of unsupported or misstated closures, and the evidence needed to clear each one.
When this review is needed
- An AD status report is being relied on for a return, a sale, or a lender package and has not been checked against accomplishment records.
- An aircraft is moving onto a new operator's maintenance program and the applicable AD list has to be rebuilt for the actual configuration.
- A recurring AD interval is approaching and the last accomplishment date and method need confirming.
- An AD references a service bulletin or modification as a terminating action and the embodiment evidence is unclear.
The problem
AD status is typically delivered as a one-line-per-directive report exported from a tracking system. The report states open, closed, or not applicable, but the applicability logic and the accomplishment evidence behind each line sit elsewhere. An AD marked not applicable on the wrong serial-number range, or closed by an interim method when a terminating action was required, will not surface until someone reads the directive against the actual records.
What gets reviewed
- The applicable AD list reconciled to the aircraft, engine, and appliance configuration and effectivity
- Method of compliance recorded against what each directive actually requires
- Recurring AD intervals with last-done dates, cycles, and next-due tracking
- Terminating actions tied to the modification or service bulletin that closes the AD
- Superseded directives traced to the superseding AD and its current status
- Alternative methods of compliance and their approval reference where used
- AD status report reconciled against the underlying accomplishment records
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 applicable AD is identified from the actual configuration rather than a generic type list
- Every closed AD shows the method of compliance the directive requires, not a substituted method
- Recurring ADs carry a last-accomplished reference and a correctly calculated next-due
- A terminating action is supported by evidence that the modification was embodied
- Any alternative method of compliance cites the approval that authorizes it
- Not-applicable entries are justified by serial range, part number, or effectivity
- The status report figures reconcile with the accomplishment records they summarize
Evidence normally required
- Current AD status report for airframe, engines, and appliances
- Accomplishment records, task cards, and work orders for each closed AD
- Modification and service bulletin embodiment evidence for terminating actions
- Aircraft configuration and effectivity data including serial and part numbers
- Approval references for any alternative methods of compliance in use
Common discrepancies
- An AD marked not applicable against an effectivity that does include the serial number
- A directive closed by an interim inspection where a terminating modification was required
- A recurring AD with a next-due calculated from the wrong baseline date or interval
- A terminating action claimed without evidence the modification was embodied
- An alternative method of compliance used without the approval reference recorded
- A superseded AD left open in the report while the superseding directive is unaddressed
What is at stake
An overstated AD status carries forward into the asset value and the operator's compliance posture. A directive closed against the wrong method or an unembodied terminating action can force an unplanned removal, a repeat inspection, or a grounding once it is caught, and the cost lands on whoever relied on the report.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Rebuild applicability
Establish the applicable AD list from the actual airframe, engine, and appliance configuration and effectivity rather than a generic type list.
Test each closure
Compare the recorded method of compliance and accomplishment evidence against what each directive requires, including terminating actions and intervals.
Calculate recurring due
Confirm last-done references and recompute next-due for recurring directives, flagging any that are overdue or wrongly based.
Report and route
Deliver the status matrix, list the unsupported or misstated lines, and identify the evidence needed to close each one.
What the buyer receives
- An AD-by-AD status matrix with method, interval, and evidence trace for each line
- A list of unsupported, misstated, or unsubstantiated closures
- A next-due schedule for recurring directives with the calculation shown
- A closure path for each open or disputed item with the supporting evidence identified
Who uses the output
- Continuing-airworthiness teams confirming the compliance posture before accepting an aircraft
- Acquisition and asset teams pricing AD exposure into a transaction
- Records teams rebuilding the applicable AD list for a new operator program
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review turns a tracking-system export into an evidence-backed status before it feeds a return binder, a data room, or a fleet-integration plan. It pairs with a service-bulletin status validation where directives close on an embodied modification.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
The same airworthiness concern is often covered by an FAA AD and an EASA AD with different numbers, methods, and intervals. On an aircraft changing registry, applicability is rebuilt against the receiving authority's directive set, and an item closed under one authority is checked for whether the other recognizes the same method.
Regulatory limits
The review confirms that the AD status is complete, consistent, and supported. It does not issue an alternative method of compliance, grant relief from a directive, make an airworthiness determination, or guarantee that an authority will accept the recorded status.
What this review does not cover
- Performing the inspections or modifications an open AD requires
- Issuing or approving an alternative method of compliance
- Any airworthiness determination or regulatory sign-off
Specific to this review
- AD applicability turns on the actual configuration and effectivity, so the same type can carry a different applicable list aircraft to aircraft based on serial range and embodied modifications.
- A recurring AD next-due is only as good as its baseline; a wrong last-done date or interval silently produces a status that looks compliant but is overdue.
- A terminating action only closes a recurring AD if the modification is actually embodied, which is checked against embodiment evidence rather than the directive citation alone.
- The same safety concern may be addressed by separately numbered FAA and EASA directives whose methods and intervals do not match.
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.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Maintenance recordkeeping content and approval-for-return-to-service requirements, including 43.9, 43.11, and Appendix B.
Federal Aviation Administration. FAA guidance on making and keeping maintenance records and acceptable recordkeeping practices.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
Frequently asked questions
Why check the AD list itself rather than only the open items?
An AD wrongly marked not applicable never shows up as open. Reconstructing applicability from the actual configuration catches directives that were dropped from the list, which is where the largest surprises usually sit.
Can you clear an open AD for us?
No. The review identifies what each open or disputed AD requires and the evidence needed, but performing the inspection or modification and any regulatory approval remain with the operator and the authority.
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.
Walk through your situation with an engineer who has done this work.