Conformity records
Conformity records support for a major change
This review confirms that the articles and installations used to generate evidence for a major change were conforming when the evidence was produced. A certification engineer runs it before conformity records are relied on in the data package. It checks that each test article's identity and configuration are established, that the conformity inspection covered what the test claims, and that no result rests on an article whose configuration cannot be tied back to the approved design. You receive a gap assessment, an evidence map linking each conformity record to the result it supports, and a closure plan for the articles whose conformity cannot yet be shown.
When this review is needed
- Tests were run and now the conformity records behind each article have to be confirmed before the results are credited.
- A test article was reworked between conformity and test and the records do not show the article stayed conforming.
- An installation was inspected but the configuration it was inspected in is not clearly tied to the approved design.
- A reviewer will ask whether the article that produced a result was actually conforming at the time of test.
The problem
Conformity is a moment in time, and test programs rarely respect it. An article is inspected conforming, then a fixture is adjusted, a wire is rerouted, or a software load is bumped before the test actually runs, and the conformity record no longer describes the thing that produced the data. On a busy test campaign the paperwork lags the hardware, and the link between an approved configuration, a conformity inspection, and a specific result is exactly where the chain breaks.
What gets reviewed
- Test article identity and configuration established against the approved design
- Conformity inspection coverage matched to what each credited test claims
- Configuration continuity from conformity through the test that produced the result
- Installation conformity tied to the approved change and its effectivity
- Results traced to the conforming article they were generated on
- Conformity status mapped against the certification basis for the change
Scope this review
Tell us the asset, the event, and the evidence in scope, and we will outline a focused first engagement.
Identify what is missing against the means of compliance.
What gets validated
- Each credited test article has a conformity record covering the configuration it was tested in
- The conformity inspection scope matches the requirement the test is credited against
- Rework between conformity and test is captured and the article shown to have stayed conforming
- Installation conformity ties to the approved configuration and the correct effectivity
- Every credited result names the conforming article it was produced on
Evidence normally required
- Conformity inspection records for the test articles and installations
- Test article configuration and build records
- Test reports with the article configuration each result was run on
- The approved design data and effectivity for the change
- The certification plan showing which tests are credited
Common discrepancies
- A test article reworked after conformity with no record showing it stayed conforming
- A conformity inspection whose scope is narrower than the test crediting it
- An installation inspected in a configuration that does not match the approved change
- A credited result that cannot be tied to a specific conforming article
What is at stake
A result generated on an article whose conformity cannot be shown is not creditable, however good the data looks. If the break is found after submission, the program either reconstructs the article's configuration history under scrutiny or repeats the test on a conforming article, both of which are expensive late in a change. Left unaddressed, the whole compliance argument built on that test is exposed.
How the work runs
Establish article identity
Confirm each test article's configuration is tied to the approved design before its results are read.
Match conformity to test
Check the conformity inspection scope covers what each credited test claims.
Trace continuity to result
Confirm the article stayed conforming from inspection through the test that produced the data.
Plan the closure
Sequence the fixes for articles whose conformity cannot yet be shown.
What the buyer receives
- A gap assessment listing each result whose article conformity is not established
- An evidence map linking each conformity record to the result it supports
- A closure plan for the articles and installations whose conformity must be reconciled
Who uses the output
- Certification engineers confirming credited results rest on conforming articles
- Test and conformity leads reconciling inspection records with what was tested
- Compliance managers tracking which conformity gaps still block a credited result
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review runs after testing and before the results are relied on in the finding, confirming the chain from approved design to conformity inspection to credited result holds without a break. Its evidence map supports the accomplishment summary and the compliance matrix, and its closure plan clears the conformity issues that would otherwise disqualify a test late in the change.
Start with a single asset
Reduce finding cycles by checking the package first.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
The FAA and EASA both require credited testing on conforming articles, but the way conformity is witnessed and documented and who is authorized to attest it differ between the two systems. The review notes where a conformity record acceptable to one authority needs additional attestation or scope for the other.
Regulatory limits
The review confirms the conformity records support the results credited against them. It does not perform conformity inspections, attest conformity on the authority's behalf, or make any airworthiness determination.
What this review does not cover
- Performing or witnessing the conformity inspection itself
- Attesting conformity or issuing conformity documentation for an authority
- Repeating any test on a conforming article
Specific to this review
- Conformity is a point in time, so an article reworked after inspection is no longer covered even if the rework was minor, unless the record captures it.
- A conformity inspection scoped narrower than the test crediting it leaves part of the result unsupported, which is easy to miss when the two documents are read separately.
- Installation conformity has to match effectivity as well as configuration, because an installation correct for one serial number may not conform for the one the result is credited against.
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
Why check conformity if the test data itself looks clean?
Clean data on a non-conforming article proves nothing about the approved design, because it was produced by something else. The result is only creditable when the article that generated it is shown to have conformed at the time of test, which is what the conformity record has to establish.
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.