Skip to content

FAA to EASA transition

FAA to EASA aircraft records transition

An FAA to EASA records transition prepares an aircraft's records for placement on an EASA member-state register after a history under 14 CFR. It is run by or for the lessor, airline, or acquisition team ahead of the move. It reconciles AD status onto the EASA mandatory set, checks that FAA Form 8130-3 releases are acceptable for the components staying installed, and assembles the continuing-airworthiness evidence a CAMO needs to support an airworthiness review. You receive a bridged AD view, a release-acceptance map, and the gap list a Part-CAMO will need to take the aircraft on.

When this review is needed

  • An N-registered aircraft is being placed on an EASA member-state register and a CAMO has to accept the continuing-airworthiness records.
  • A lease is moving the asset from a U.S. operator into the EASA system and the airworthiness review process is in scope.
  • FAA Form 8130-3 releases are installed and their acceptability under the EASA maintenance program needs confirming.
  • An AD status report was built against the FAA directive set and has to be restated for the EASA mandatory continuing-airworthiness information.

The problem

The records were assembled to satisfy 14 CFR, and the EASA system reads them differently. A CAMO has to build a continuing-airworthiness file and support an airworthiness review, but the AD status was tracked against the FAA list, and release paperwork follows FAA Form 8130-3 conventions. Where the FAA program relied on the operator's inspection program, the EASA side expects a maintenance program traceable to the type-certificate holder's data. These differences surface when the CAMO starts the review, and by then the aircraft is committed to a placement date.

What gets reviewed

  • AD status restated from the FAA directive set onto EASA mandatory continuing-airworthiness information
  • FAA Form 8130-3 release acceptance for components remaining installed under the EASA program
  • Configuration and STC status against EASA-acceptable approval bases
  • Maintenance-program reconciliation toward a CAMO-managed program
  • Continuing-airworthiness evidence assembled for the airworthiness review
  • Time and cycle continuity carried across the change of system

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 FAA AD is mapped to its EASA mandatory equivalent or shown to have no EASA applicability
  • FAA Form 8130-3 dual-release statements are present where EASA acceptance depends on them
  • Installed STCs carry an approval basis the EASA member-state authority accepts or a validation path is identified
  • The maintenance program reconciles to type-certificate-holder data the CAMO can adopt
  • Time-in-service and cycles are continuous across logbooks, status lists, and the airworthiness review inputs
  • Life-limited part releases support the status the CAMO will carry into the review

Evidence normally required

  • FAA AD status report from the outgoing register
  • Component release certificates, including FAA Form 8130-3 with any dual-release statements
  • STC and modification status with FAA approval references
  • The maintenance program the aircraft was operated under
  • Airframe, engine, and APU records showing time and cycle history
  • Any prior airworthiness review or export documentation if available

Common discrepancies

  • FAA ADs with no clean mapping to an EASA mandatory item, leaving applicability unresolved
  • FAA Form 8130-3 releases without a dual-release statement the CAMO needs for EASA acceptance
  • STCs approved by the FAA with no EASA validation or acceptable equivalent
  • An operator inspection program that does not reconcile to type-certificate-holder maintenance data
  • Time and cycle figures that disagree between the FAA status report and the underlying logbooks
  • Repairs substantiated under FAA approved data without an EASA-acceptable basis recorded

What is at stake

An aircraft that cannot clear the airworthiness review on schedule stays off the EASA register and off lease. Mandatory continuing-airworthiness information that was not mapped from the FAA AD set can drive unplanned maintenance, and a release the CAMO will not accept can force a component to be re-released or replaced before the review can close.

How the work runs

01

Bridge the AD set

Map each FAA Airworthiness Directive to its EASA mandatory continuing-airworthiness equivalent and resolve items with no clean match.

02

Test release acceptance

Check installed component releases for the dual-release statements the CAMO needs and flag those that fall short.

03

Reconcile the program

Compare the operating maintenance program to type-certificate-holder data the CAMO can adopt for the receiving register.

04

Package for the review

Assemble the continuing-airworthiness gap list and evidence the CAMO needs to start the airworthiness review.

What the buyer receives

  • A bridged AD view tying each FAA directive to its EASA disposition
  • A release-acceptance map flagging components whose 8130-3 release needs a dual-release statement
  • A continuing-airworthiness gap list keyed to what a CAMO needs for the airworthiness review

Who uses the output

  • The CAMO building the continuing-airworthiness file for the receiving register
  • Lessors and acquisition teams timing the placement against the review
  • Records teams closing the gaps the CAMO will not accept open

How the work fits into the transaction or program

The transition review runs before the airworthiness review is started so AD bridging and release acceptance are resolved while the outgoing operator can still produce evidence. It feeds the CAMO file and the placement schedule for the EASA member-state register.

Start with a single asset

Start with a single tail and expand once the workflow is proven.

Aircraft-specific considerations

STC density drives the work. An aircraft carrying FAA STCs that were never validated by EASA needs each modification's approval basis examined against what the receiving authority accepts, so the review concentrates on the modification record rather than the routine maintenance entries.

Jurisdiction-specific considerations

An FAA Form 8130-3 is not automatically acceptable in the EASA system. Acceptance for components typically depends on a dual-release statement issued under the bilateral arrangement, and an FAA STC has no standing on an EASA register until it is validated or an acceptable equivalent is shown.

Regulatory limits

The review reports records readiness for the EASA system. It does not perform the airworthiness review, act as the CAMO, issue an EASA certificate of airworthiness, or determine AD applicability for the receiving authority. Those acts stay with the CAMO and the member-state authority.

What this review does not cover

Specific to this review

  • EASA acceptance of an FAA Form 8130-3 for installed components generally rests on a dual-release statement under the FAA-EASA bilateral, not on the FAA release alone.
  • An FAA STC has no EASA standing until validated, so modification-heavy airframes carry the most transition risk into the airworthiness review.
  • The EASA system expects a maintenance program traceable to type-certificate-holder data, where an FAA Part 91 history may have run on an operator-built inspection program.

Sources

Frequently asked questions

Will the CAMO accept FAA Form 8130-3 releases as they are?

Not always. Acceptance for installed components usually depends on a dual-release statement issued under the FAA-EASA bilateral. The review identifies which releases carry it and which need follow-up before the airworthiness review.

What happens to FAA STCs on transition?

An FAA STC has no automatic standing on an EASA register. Each modification's approval basis is examined and a validation or acceptable-equivalent path is identified where one is required.

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.