Conformity records
Conformity records evidence review for avionics suppliers
This review confirms that the articles an avionics supplier tested were the right articles, built to a controlled configuration and eligible for the tests run against them. A certification specialist checks article identity, ties each test article to its configuration, and confirms conformity was established before the test rather than assumed after. It runs before submittal, during a finding response, or when a configuration change casts doubt on which article a result belongs to. You receive a gap list, an evidence map linking each test result to a conformed article, and a closure sequence.
When this review is needed
- Test results are entering a data package and the articles behind them have not been tied back to a conformed configuration.
- A test was run and the team is unsure whether conformity was formally established before it started.
- A finding asks the supplier to show that the tested article matched the configuration the result is claimed for.
- A configuration change after testing raises the question of which article a given result actually represents.
The problem
Conformity is a timing discipline, and timing is what gets lost. A test article is built, a change slips in, the test runs, and the conformity that should have been established beforehand gets reconstructed afterward from memory and a build sheet. The result reads valid, but the article's identity at the moment of test, its configuration and its eligibility, is exactly the thing the record does not pin down, and no amount of good data recovers a conformity that was never captured in sequence.
What gets reviewed
- Article identity established so each test result names a specific, identifiable unit
- Each test article tied to a controlled configuration at the revision it was built to
- Conformity confirmed established before the test rather than reconstructed afterward
- Test eligibility checked so the article's configuration matched the test's applicability
- Post-test changes traced so results are attributed to the correct article configuration
- Installation conformity checked where the test was run on an installed rather than a bench article
What gets validated
- Each test result names a specific article, not a generic part or type
- The tested article ties to a controlled configuration at a defined revision
- Conformity was established before the test, evidenced in sequence rather than reconstructed
- The article's configuration made it eligible for the test that was run
- Post-test configuration changes are traced so no result is attributed to the wrong build
Evidence normally required
- Conformity inspection records and the associated article build documentation
- Configuration records tying each test article to a revision
- Test plans and the eligibility or applicability criteria for each test
- Test results with their references to the article tested
- Change records for any article modified before or after its test
Common discrepancies
- A test result referencing a part number and type but no specific, conformed unit
- Conformity reconstructed after the test from a build sheet rather than established before it
- A test run on an article whose configuration did not meet the test's eligibility criteria
- A post-test change that leaves two results attributed to what was really one evolving article
What is at stake
A test result whose article cannot be tied to a conformed configuration is worth very little, because an authority cannot accept a result without knowing what was tested. If conformity was established after the fact, the result may have to be repeated on a properly conformed article, which is the most expensive way to discover a records problem: the engineering was done, and it has to be done again.
Move from findings to resolution
Identify gaps against the means of compliance.
How the work runs
Pin the article identity
For each result, establish the specific unit tested and the revision it was built to, going beyond its part number alone.
Check conformity timing
Confirm conformity was established before the test in sequence, and flag any result where it was reconstructed afterward.
Confirm test eligibility
Verify the article's configuration met the test's applicability criteria so the result actually applies.
Flag likely repeats
Sequence closures so results that will need a repeat on a conformed article are identified first, given their lead time.
What the buyer receives
- A gap list naming each result whose article identity, conformity, or eligibility is unproven
- An evidence map linking every test result to a specific conformed article at a defined revision
- A closure sequence that flags results likely to need a repeat on a conformed article
Who uses the output
- Certification leadership deciding whether the test results rest on conformed articles
- Conformity and quality staff who need the specific records to locate or reconstruct where possible
- The team answering a finding about what article a given result belongs to
How the work fits into the transaction or program
Conformity records are what let a test result mean something, because they fix the identity of what was tested. This review sits between the test campaign and the submittal, confirming each result traces to a conformed article, so a result built on an unconformed or ineligible article is caught before it is offered as compliance evidence.
Start with a single asset
Confirm requirements trace through verification.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
FAA and EASA both require that certification test articles conform to the approved configuration, and both can ask the supplier to demonstrate conformity for a specific result. The review reads the records against whichever conformity process and forms the program uses, so the supplier can tie any result to a conformed article rather than defending an after-the-fact reconstruction under questioning.
Regulatory limits
This review reports whether the supplier's conformity records support the test results offered. It does not perform conformity inspections, does not accept the results, and does not make an airworthiness determination. Establishing and witnessing conformity remains with the supplier and, where required, the authority or its delegate.
What this review does not cover
- Performing or witnessing conformity inspections
- Re-running tests on conformed articles to replace unsupported results
- Accepting the test results or issuing a compliance finding
Specific to this review
- Conformity is unique among certification records in that a gap cannot be closed by finding a document later; if conformity was not established before the test, the sequence itself is the missing evidence.
- The most expensive conformity finding is a valid engineering result that has to be repeated, because the test was sound but the article it ran on was never pinned to a controlled configuration.
- Article identity is more than a part number; a result must name the specific unit, since two units of the same part can be at different revisions.
- Testing on an installed article adds an installation conformity question a bench test never has, and it is easy to conform the box while overlooking the installation around it.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Type certificates, STCs (Subpart E), TSO authorizations (Subpart O), PMA (Subpart K), and export airworthiness approvals (Subpart L).
Federal Aviation Administration. FAA type certification process, certification basis establishment, and compliance findings.
European Union / EASA. EASA design and production certification, STCs, ETSO authorizations, and EASA Form 1 release.
Frequently asked questions
We have the build records but conformity was signed off after the test. Is that a problem?
It usually is, because conformity is meant to establish the article's identity before the test proves anything about it. Reconstructing it afterward leaves a gap between what the record asserts and what was demonstrated in sequence. The review identifies each such result and tells you which ones an authority is likely to require repeated on a properly conformed article.
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.