Import acceptance
Repair and alteration records review for import acceptance
This review tests whether an aircraft's repair and alteration history will hold up when a receiving authority accepts the aircraft onto its register. A records specialist runs it for the importing party once the target register is known and before the acceptance package is handed over. It walks each structural repair and major alteration back to its damage disposition, its approved-data basis, and the return-to-service entry that closed it, then flags anything the incoming authority is likely to challenge. You receive a repair map keyed to the acceptance questions, a gap list, and a document request set aimed at the items that block acceptance.
When this review is needed
- An aircraft is being imported onto a new register and the receiving authority will scrutinize the repair history.
- Structural repairs were carried out under one authority's approved data and now have to satisfy another.
- A major alteration on the airframe lacks a clear approval basis the incoming authority will accept.
- The acceptance deadline is fixed and the repair evidence has to be assembled before the package closes.
The problem
Repairs and alterations that were entirely defensible on the departing register can stall an import because the receiving authority reads the approved-data basis differently. A repair signed off years ago may reference data the incoming authority does not recognize, or a damage disposition may have been recorded without the substantiation now demanded. The importing team inherits every one of those questions at the moment the aircraft crosses the border, usually against a delivery date already set.
What gets reviewed
- Every structural repair matched to its damage report and disposition
- The approved-data basis behind each repair and major alteration
- Return-to-service entries that close each repair traced to the responsible signatory
- Alterations checked against the configuration the receiving register will record
- Receiving-authority special conditions on repairs raised before handover
- A repair map indexed to the acceptance questions the incoming authority asks
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 structural repair references approved or acceptable data the receiving authority recognizes
- Damage dispositions carry the substantiation the repair claims to rest on
- Return-to-service entries name a signatory whose privilege covered the work at the time
- Major alterations reconcile to the configuration record the new register will hold
- Repairs flagged for receiving-authority questions are backed by retrievable source documents
Evidence normally required
- The airframe repair and alteration history with the repair map
- Damage reports, dispositions, and the approved data cited for each repair
- Return-to-service records closing each repair and alteration
- The receiving authority's import requirements and any special conditions
- The current configuration and modification status for the serial number
Common discrepancies
- A structural repair resting on data the receiving authority does not accept
- A major alteration with no traceable approval basis in the file
- A damage disposition recorded without the substantiation it references
- A return-to-service entry signed under a privilege that does not carry to the new register
What is at stake
A repair the receiving authority will not accept can hold the whole acceptance, and reconstructing an approval basis after the fact is slow and sometimes impossible. Left unresolved, the alteration may have to be removed, re-substantiated, or carried as a restriction the new operator lives with, and the cost of that lands on the importing party rather than the seller.
How the work runs
Fix the receiving standard
Pull the receiving authority's import requirements and any special conditions on repairs for this type.
Trace each repair
Walk every structural repair and major alteration back to its disposition and approved-data basis.
Test acceptability
Judge each repair against what the incoming authority will recognize and flag the exposures.
Build the request set
List the missing substantiation and route it to the party who can supply it before handover.
What the buyer receives
- A repair map keyed to the receiving authority's acceptance questions
- A gap list ranking repairs by acceptance risk and recoverability
- A document request set targeting the missing approval and substantiation evidence
Who uses the output
- Asset managers judging whether repair history threatens the acceptance date
- Continuing-airworthiness teams preparing answers to the receiving authority
- Records staff assembling the repair evidence the incoming register will require
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review runs after the target register is fixed and before the acceptance package is submitted, so the repair questions surface while the importing party still has time to chase evidence. Its gap list feeds the wider import-acceptance file alongside modification status and AD position, and the repair map becomes part of the record the new operator maintains.
Start with a single asset
Confirm the status list matches the underlying evidence.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
FAA, EASA, and TCCA treat the acceptability of repair data differently, so a repair approved on one register is not automatically recognized on another. The review notes where a repair's basis will need a bilateral acceptance path or fresh substantiation for the receiving authority, rather than assuming the departing approval transfers.
Regulatory limits
The review assembles and tests repair evidence so the receiving authority can evaluate it. It does not approve a repair, issue or validate approved data, or make any airworthiness determination on the airframe.
What this review does not cover
- Developing or approving new repair or alteration data
- Physical inspection of the repaired structure
- The receiving authority's own acceptance decision on the airframe
Specific to this review
- A repair fully valid on the departing register can be the single item that stalls an import, because acceptability of the data is judged by the receiving authority.
- Structural repair substantiation is among the hardest evidence to reconstruct after handover, so it is chased before the acceptance package closes.
- Return-to-service privilege does not travel with the aircraft: a signature valid under one authority may need a recognized basis on the new register.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Maintenance recordkeeping content and approval-for-return-to-service requirements, including 43.9, 43.11, and Appendix B.
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.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Export airworthiness approval requirements and special requirements of an importing authority.
European Union / EASA. EASA design and production certification, STCs, ETSO authorizations, and EASA Form 1 release.
Frequently asked questions
A repair was approved by the departing authority. Why review it again for import?
Acceptability of repair data is decided by the authority accepting the aircraft, not the one that released it. The review confirms the receiving authority will recognize the basis, or identifies where a bilateral path or fresh substantiation is needed before acceptance.
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.