ACMI approval package
Records package review before wet-lease or ACMI approval
airlines, operators, brokers use this review when Wet-lease / ACMI placement approval makes wet-lease records readiness records a decision item. The work checks certificate currency, registration, insurance, AD status, maintenance status summaries, AOC and ops-spec scope, and maintenance support arrangements against source evidence and the current status file. A discrepancy exists when the approval package is current in one record set but inconsistent or incomplete for the authority or lessee review. The buyer receives an approval package index, status exception register, and expiring-document action list for acceptance, pricing, audit, or remediation decisions.
When this review is needed
- A wet-lease or ACMI placement needs authority or lessee approval.
- Certificate dates fall inside the proposed operating period.
- Status reports were generated from a system with unresolved audit findings.
- Two regulatory document conventions must be presented in one package.
The problem
Wet-lease readiness is certificate heavy and time sensitive. The aircraft may remain on the supplying operator certificate, but the receiving side still needs a coherent package that explains current status, operating authority, and maintenance support.
What gets reviewed
- Check certificate, registration, insurance, and airworthiness review dates against the placement period.
- Reconcile AD and maintenance status summaries to the latest controlled records.
- Confirm operating scope records cover the aircraft and intended placement arrangement.
- Review maintenance support arrangements for the operating period.
- Package records using labels the receiving reviewer can follow across systems.
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
- Pass when certificates are current through the relevant approval window or renewal actions are diarized.
- Fail when status summaries conflict with the latest audit finding list.
- Check that maintenance support responsibilities are documented for the wet-lease period.
- Reject packages that mix document versions without a controlled index.
Evidence normally required
- CofA or ARC record set
- Registration and insurance certificates
- AD and maintenance status exports
- AOC or operations scope records
- Maintenance support agreement records
Common discrepancies
- ARC expiry falls inside the proposed placement period.
- AD status summary conflicts with a recent internal audit exception.
- Insurance certificate version in the package is superseded.
- Maintenance support arrangement absent for a location in the planned operation.
What is at stake
A missing or inconsistent certificate can delay approval past the placement window. Expiring ARC, insurance, or status documents can also create avoidable renegotiation when capacity is already committed.
How the work runs
Frame Wet Lease
Confirm the exact event, affected file set, buyer role, and decision standard before any certificate and registration set is treated as sufficient.
Trace Readiness Audit
Walk the named evidence from index entry to source artifact and mark where the trail supports, conflicts with, or fails to answer the page-specific question.
Sort Review Acmi
Group exceptions by closure route: document retrieval, data correction, engineering disposition, authority response, or contractual decision.
Package Placement Approved
Deliver the exception list, evidence map, and owner sequence in a form that can move directly into remediation, submittal cleanup, or transaction negotiation.
What the buyer receives
- For this review, wet-lease records package index
- Certificate expiry action list
- Status summary exception register
- Authority and lessee request pack
Who uses the output
- ACMI program manager uses the output to set acceptance conditions.
- Quality manager uses the output to request missing evidence.
- Fleet manager uses the output to price or schedule remediation.
How the work fits into the transaction or program
A wet-lease approval hinges on a records package the lessee's authority must accept while the aircraft stays on the lessor operator's AOC: the decision is whether certificates, status, and program evidence are current, consistent, and presentable within the approval timeline, which is usually weeks. The evidence set centers on certificate set currency (CofA, ARC or equivalent, registration, insurance certificates), AD status snapshot and maintenance status summary in the format the receiving authority expects, AOC and. The likely weak points are an ARC expiring mid-placement that nobody diarized, status summaries generated from tracking that contradict the last audit's findings, and approval delays because the package mixed document conventions from two regulatory systems. Handoff: ACMI program manager, wet-lease / ACMI placement approval, Records package review before wet-lease or ACMI approval.
Start with a single asset
Prove the review on a single tail, then scale across the fleet.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
The package is organized so FAA and EASA and ICAO records references are visible without claiming automatic acceptance across authorities. Where a receiving reviewer needs a different format, the same source record is mapped to that review question.
Regulatory limits
This wet-lease records readiness review is a records completeness and traceability assessment. It does not issue approvals, make airworthiness determinations, approve maintenance, or guarantee acceptance by FAA and EASA and ICAO; those decisions remain with the operator, authorized persons, and the relevant authority.
What this review does not cover
- Physical inspection of the aircraft, engine, component, or part condition.
- Regulatory applications, authority submissions, or approval issuance.
- Legal interpretation of lease, loan, purchase, insurance, or support agreement remedies.
Specific to this review
- For this review, wet-lease records packages fail on currency and presentation as often as on missing technical records.
- The same aircraft status may need to be explained in the supplying operator format and the receiving reviewer format.
- Expiring documents inside the operating period should be treated as approval risks before submission.
- The scope uses the Wet Lease Records Readiness question as the control point, so the review stays tied to Wet-lease / ACMI placement approval and the buyer decision behind it.
- The evidence starts with Certificate and registration set and follows Audit Package Review Acmi references until every exception has a source location and a reason code.
- The finding logic separates missing paperwork, conflicting status, stale revision data, and unsupported disposition because each class closes through a different owner.
- The timing matters for ACMI program manager: the output is useful only if the unresolved items are visible before acceptance, submittal, handback, or negotiation pressure fixes the sequence.
- The boundary control keeps Approval Placement Approved Speed questions in the records or certification lane and sends technical acceptance issues to the authorized people who own them.
- The handoff value comes from For this review, wet-lease records package index; it gives the next reviewer a precise map instead of another broad request for a better file.
- The source discipline is stricter on this page than on a general audit because the claim being tested is Assemble and verify the records package that supports a wet-lease or ACMI approval before the placement window closes..
Sources
International Civil Aviation Organization. International standards for aircraft operation, including maintenance program and recordkeeping expectations.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
U.S. Government (eCFR). Air carrier maintenance recordkeeping and retention requirements under Part 121.
Frequently asked questions
What makes this workflows review different from a general file audit?
The scope is tied to wet lease records readiness and to the decision named in the request. A general audit can list weak records; this pass ranks the gaps by whether they block wet-lease / acmi placement approval or can be closed later without changing the decision.
What evidence has to be available before this work starts?
The starting point is certificate and registration set, the current status source, and any index or matrix that tells reviewers where the supporting artifact should live. Missing inputs are logged as findings rather than filled with assumptions.
Who decides whether an open item is acceptable?
The review explains what the evidence supports and gives acmi program manager a closure path. Acceptance remains with the buyer, operator, authority, delegated engineer, or authorized person responsible for the underlying airworthiness or certification decision.
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.