Closing out the check
Airworthiness Directive status review for operators at heavy-check exit
This review closes the loop between the ADs worked during a heavy check and the operator's AD status records before the aircraft leaves the facility. It confirms that each directive in the check workscope has accomplishment evidence in the check package, that methods of compliance are recorded, and that the status list has been updated to match what was actually done. Records specialists run it during visit closeout, in the days before release. Maintenance leadership receives an AD closeout matrix, an open findings list keyed to task cards, and corrected status entries ready for the operator's system.
When this review is needed
- A heavy check is days from release and the AD items in the workscope have not been reconciled to the status list.
- ADs were accomplished through SBs during the visit and the linkage between card, bulletin, and directive is untested.
- Deviations or deferrals were raised against AD task cards mid-check and their final state is unclear.
- New directives became effective while the aircraft sat in the hangar.
The problem
During a heavy check, AD work is executed as task cards inside a package of thousands, and the operator's status list is updated separately, often by a different team on a different timetable. The mapping between directive, task card, and sign-off is where errors live: a card closed with a deviation, an AD accomplished through an SB whose own sign-off sits on another card, a step deferred mid-check and never picked back up. Release pressure at the end of the visit compresses exactly the verification this mapping needs.
What gets reviewed
- Every AD in the check workscope, mapped to its task cards and sign-offs
- Methods of compliance recorded per directive, including SB embodiment routes
- Deviations, deferrals, and partial accomplishments raised against AD task cards during the visit
- Status-list updates compared against what the check package evidences
- Recurring directives reset by the visit, with next-due values recomputed
- New ADs issued during the check window and their treatment
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 workscoped AD's task cards are closed with sign-offs and no unresolved deviation
- SB-route accomplishments have the bulletin's completion sign-off, and the AD entry cites it
- Deferred or partially accomplished steps appear as open in the status, never as complete
- Next-due values for reset recurring directives use the actual accomplishment date and utilization
- No directive that became effective during the visit is missing from the closeout
Evidence normally required
Common discrepancies
- A directive statused complete whose final inspection step sits on a deferred card
- SB embodiment signed off without the corresponding AD status entry being updated
- Next-due dates computed from planned rather than actual accomplishment dates
- An AD effective mid-check that neither the workscope nor the status caught
What is at stake
An AD recorded as done without matching evidence in the check package is a latent compliance finding that surfaces at the worst moments: an authority audit, the next transaction, or an incident review. Fixing it after the aircraft has left the facility means reopening a closed check package remotely, and in the hardest cases repeating inspection work in service that was already paid for in the hangar.
How the work runs
Map the workscope
Build the directive-to-card map from the check plan and the package index.
Reconcile the status
Compare updated status entries against the evidence and correct mismatches.
Clear for release
Hand the matrix and findings list to maintenance leadership before the aircraft leaves.
What the buyer receives
- An AD closeout matrix linking each directive to its cards, sign-offs, and evidence
- An open findings list keyed to specific task cards for resolution before release
- Corrected status entries prepared for load into the operator's system
Who uses the output
- The director of maintenance signing the aircraft out of the visit
- Continuing-airworthiness staff maintaining the status list
- Quality assurance closing the check in the operator's oversight system
How the work fits into the transaction or program
AD closeout is the compliance-critical slice of the wider check closeout, so it runs first, while the facility's crews and records staff are still on site and cards can still be reopened. The verified matrix then supports the release to service and becomes part of the operator's permanent record of the visit.
Start with a single asset
Reconcile maintenance tracking against the underlying records.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
For US-registered aircraft, 14 CFR Part 39 makes each directive a regulatory obligation and 91.417 governs the records that prove compliance; EASA-registered aircraft carry equivalent duties through Regulation 1321/2014 and the operator's CAMO. Where the check was performed abroad, the review also confirms sign-off authority was appropriate for the aircraft's registry.
Regulatory limits
The review verifies the mapping between directives, evidence, and status. It does not perform or certify AD work, approve deviations, authorize the release to service, or rule on applicability questions reserved to the authority.
What this review does not cover
- Physical verification of accomplished work on the aircraft
- Negotiating check invoices or workscope growth with the facility
- Engineering disposition of findings raised during the visit
Specific to this review
- The status list and the check package are maintained by different teams, and their reconciliation is nobody's default job, which is why it is made an explicit closeout step.
- Directives become effective on their own schedule; a six-week check is long enough for new ADs to land inside it unnoticed.
- Partial accomplishment is the hardest state to record honestly, and it is where statused-complete errors concentrate.
- Reopening a card costs minutes while the aircraft is in the hangar and weeks once it has flown.
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.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
Frequently asked questions
The MRO certifies its own work. Why does the operator need this pass?
The facility certifies task performance; the operator owns AD compliance status on its certificate. The gap between a signed card and a correct status entry belongs to the operator alone, and that gap is what this closeout verifies.
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.