Import acceptance
Maintenance program records review for import acceptance
This review checks whether an aircraft's maintenance program history will support the receiving operator's entry status at import. A records specialist runs it for the importing party once the receiving program is chosen, before the acceptance package is finalized. It examines the approved program revisions the aircraft was maintained to, any task escalations or variations applied, the source-document references behind them, and how the prior task history bridges to the incoming program. You receive a maintenance program status keyed to the acceptance questions, a bridging gap list, and a document request set for the program evidence the receiving side needs.
When this review is needed
- An aircraft maintained under one operator's program is importing onto a register served by a different program.
- Task escalations or variations were applied that the receiving program does not carry.
- The prior task history has to be bridged to the receiving intervals before entry status is set.
- The receiving authority requires the program basis demonstrated as part of import acceptance.
The problem
Two operators rarely run the same maintenance program, so the aircraft's task history has to be translated to the receiving intervals rather than copied across. Escalations and variations that were approved under the departing program may not exist in the receiving one, which leaves a task that looks current sitting on an interval the new program will not honor. The source documents that justify each escalation are often the first records to go missing, and they are exactly what the receiving side asks for.
What gets reviewed
- The approved program revisions the aircraft was maintained to, with their effectivity
- Task escalations and variations applied, traced to the source documents behind them
- Prior task accomplishment mapped onto the receiving program's intervals
- Bridging analysis identifying tasks with no clean equivalent in the receiving program
- Program evidence the receiving authority requires for import acceptance
- A maintenance program status indexed to the acceptance questions
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 program revision the aircraft was maintained to is identified with its applicable effectivity
- Every task escalation traces to the approved source document that authorized it
- Prior task accomplishment maps to a receiving-program interval without an unexplained gap
- Variations that have no equivalent in the receiving program are flagged with their consequence
- The program evidence the receiving authority will ask for is present and retrievable
Evidence normally required
- The maintenance program documents the aircraft was maintained under, with revision history
- Task escalation and variation approvals and their source documents
- The receiving operator's program for interval mapping
- Current task accomplishment status and last-done records
- The receiving authority's import requirements for program evidence
Common discrepancies
- A task escalation with no source document to substantiate the extended interval
- A program variation that has no equivalent task in the receiving program
- A last-done record that does not map cleanly to a receiving-program interval
- A program revision the aircraft was maintained to that cannot be located in the file
What is at stake
An aircraft inducted on an unbridged program history carries hidden task and interval gaps that surface at the first check under the new program, usually as unplanned work. Where an escalation cannot be substantiated, the receiving operator has to reset the task to a conservative interval, pulling forward maintenance the import economics did not assume.
How the work runs
Identify the program basis
Establish which approved program revisions and escalations the aircraft was maintained to.
Substantiate the escalations
Trace each escalation and variation to the source document that authorized it.
Bridge to the receiving intervals
Map prior accomplishment onto the receiving program and flag tasks with no clean equivalent.
List the gaps
Record the bridging exposures and request the missing program evidence before handover.
What the buyer receives
- A maintenance program status keyed to the receiving operator's program
- A bridging gap list flagging tasks and escalations that will not carry across
- A document request set for the missing program revisions and escalation approvals
Who uses the output
- Continuing-airworthiness teams building the receiving program's entry status
- Maintenance planners forecasting the work a bridged history pulls forward
- Asset managers pricing the program rework into the import economics
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review runs before entry status is fixed, so bridging gaps are known while the importing party can still request the program evidence. Its bridging gap list drives the induction planning the receiving operator does, and it pairs with the modification and AD checks that complete the import-acceptance file.
Start with a single asset
Confirm the status list matches the underlying evidence.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
Program approval structures differ across FAA, EASA, and TCCA, and an interval approved under one continuing-airworthiness system may not be recognized under another. The review notes where an escalation rests on an approval the receiving authority does not carry, so the receiving operator can decide whether to seek its own approval or reset the interval.
Regulatory limits
The review bridges and reconciles program records so the receiving operator can build entry status. It does not approve the maintenance program, grant an escalation, or make an airworthiness determination on any task.
What this review does not cover
- Authoring or approving the receiving operator's maintenance program
- Granting or extending any task interval or escalation
- Physical accomplishment of any task at induction
Specific to this review
- A task that reads as current under the departing program can sit on an interval the receiving program will not honor, so bridging is done task by task rather than in bulk.
- Escalation source documents are among the first records to go missing, and without them the receiving operator has to reset the interval conservatively.
- The economic value of a bridged program often turns on a handful of high-cost escalations, so those are substantiated first.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Air carrier maintenance recordkeeping and retention requirements under Part 121.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Maintenance recordkeeping and retention requirements for Part 135 operators.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
International Civil Aviation Organization. International standards for aircraft operation, including maintenance program and recordkeeping expectations.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Export airworthiness approval requirements and special requirements of an importing authority.
Frequently asked questions
Can the aircraft keep its current maintenance intervals after import?
Only where the receiving program carries an equivalent task and the escalation basis is recognized. The review identifies which intervals bridge cleanly and which will reset under the receiving program, so the induction plan reflects the real work that follows.
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.