AWC and Condition Inspection

[wirejock]

I'm probably the only one, but maybe this will help others.

The first Condition Inspection is due one year from the AWC. Because of various non aviation related life events, I find myself due for Condition before my test phase is completed.

So my advise is make sure you are ready before your airplane.
In my case, I foolishly believed I could refresh my biennial in a few flights. No sir. With me and rentals and the CFII, it took several flights and ground hours. Then life. Then transition training. Then weather and whatever. Just saying, get your ducks lined up, if possible, because life has a way of throwing curves.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

The first Annual Inspection is due one year from the AWC.

Minor clarification... the pertinent operating limitation states "within the previous 12 calendar months", not one year (which by the FAA's definition would mean exactly 365 days).

So, if the initial condition inspection at the time of certification is dated June 2, 2025, the next condition inspection is due July 1, 2026.

 

[wirejock]

Minor clarification... the pertinent operating limitation states "within the previous 12 calendar months"

So, if the initial condition inspection at the time of certification is dated June 2, 2025, the next condition inspection is due July 1, 2026.

So mine is dated May 30, 2025. I can go to June 29, 2026? Or start on that date and sign off July 1 (ish). Trying to push it into Winter one Condition Inspection at a time.

 

[lr172]

So mine is dated May 30, 2025. I can go to June 29, 2026? Or start on that date and sign off July 1 (ish). Trying to push it into Winter one annual at a time.

I believe "calendar months means the multiples are months, not days. May to May is 12 months. Therefore something signed off on ANY day in May is good through the end of May the following year. Unclear to me if this means May 31 or June 1, but assume the former. An interpretation for the layers to resolve.

 

[Biggiesauls]

I was counseled into signing off each year 1 day into the next month as a way to move my condition inspections from August (bad heat) to October/November time frame. This gave me the Winter months to do “upgrades” found or put off during condition inspection.

 

[mburch]

The first Annual Inspection is due one year from the AWC.

Others have already pointed out that it's 12 calendar months, not one year. But I'll piggyback on that to add that your annual condition inspection is due at the end of the 12th calendar month after the last condition inspection, not from the issuance of your airworthiness certificate. Sometimes these are separated by a considerable amount of time, if something happens with your DAR's schedule.

So mine is dated May 30, 2025. I can go to June 29, 2026? Or start on that date and sign off July 1 (ish).

You can perform and sign for your condition inspection any time, you just can't fly the airplane if its last condition inspection was not done within the preceding 12 calendar months. It works just like other things the FAA wants us to do on a calendar-month basis: flight reviews, medicals, and so forth. If you allow your condition inspection, medical, etc to lapse, you can reset the clock at any point in the future by jumping through the appropriate hoops, you just can't exercise any privilege that requires a thing while it's "timed out".

In your case, your previous annual will expire after May 31st 2026. Let's say you started your inspection today and discovered that you need a part that's on backorder, and what with one thing and another you don't get around to finishing and signing off your inspection until July 4th. That would reset the clock until July 31st 2027... the end of the 12th calendar month after July 2026.

 

[wirejock]

Thanks. If I understand correctly, I can perform the CI May 30 and into June. If I sign off say June 1 (easy math), my next is due June 30? Or is Scott correct, I can perform it June 30 (ish) and sign off July 1? I'm really getting confused. Thanks for all the reaponses.

The original post was intended to save other builders from the same occurrence. Since I had no Condition Inspection, the first is due 12 months from my AWC. I think. Since it was May 30, my Condition Inspection is due before May 31, 2026. It is conceivable a builder could have issues and actually be due for Condition Inspection before even flying the first flight! So get the biennial, medical & training done before the AWC. I suppose such a builder could log something to avoid dismantling. I don't know.

 

[drill_and_buck]

Why wait to "push" your annual from summer to winter one month at time? If you prefer to conduct your CI during the winter, why not just pick a winter month, when the weather is usually crappy, and complete your CI?

So what if it's been only 5 or 6 months since the last CI? I've moved my CI around multiple times for convenience factors. Well worth it to me. YMMV

 

[mburch]

If I understand correctly, I can perform the AI May 30 and into June. If I sign off say June 1 (easy math), my next is due June 30?

Yes, that's correct. If you complete your condition inspection on any day in month X, it is good through the end of month X the following year.

Or is Scott correct, I can perform it June 30 (ish) and sign off July 1? I'm really getting confused.

I think Scott just arbitrarily used June in his example, not specifically applicable to your situation.

Since I had no annual, the first is due 12 months from my AWC. I think.

Actually your DAR should have verified that you already had a logbook entry with the "in a condition for safe flight" verbiage... that's what starts the clock on your annual condition inspection, not the date on your airworthiness certificate.

 

[BobTurner]

Another minor correction: “biennial” means every 24 months. “Biannual” means every 6 months.

 

[N8DAV8R]

So mine is dated May 30, 2025. I can go to June 29, 2026? Or start on that date and sign off July 1 (ish). Trying to push it into Winter one annual at a time.

Why would you do a series of ACI's in month's that you don't prefer in order to get to winter? Do the ACI that you need now, then do another in whatever winter month you do prefer. There's nothing wrong with taking a look early to get on the schedule you want.

 

[wirejock]

Why would you do a series of ACI's in month's that you don't prefer to avoid in order to get to winter? Do the ACI that you need now, then do another in whatever winter month you do prefer. There's nothing wrong with taking a look early to get on the schedule you want.

I get it. Sorry, I'm slow.
Basically I plan the CI end of May. Sign off June 1 (ish). Next year I will start end if June and sign off July 1. Then each year push the CI into the next month till I am deep into December. We are always so busy with other obligations, it's the perfect month for AI.

I suppose I could do the CI early next season instead of waiting for June. That would be two six months apart. It's an idea. Thx

Another minor correction: “biennial” means every 24 months. “Biannual” means every 6 months.

I edited it. Sadly, I have a Bachelor of Journalism. To be fair Photojournalism. Thanks

 

[N8DAV8R]

I suppose I could do the AI early next season instead of waiting for June. That would be two six months apart. It's an idea. Thx

As you fly, maintain, and possibly even upgrade something on the airplane...keep an eye out for things that get you part of the way to an ACI. Especially if they are things you can plan around a little bit.

I have had things like paint, squaks, or SBs present a good opportunity to jump start the ACI schedule and avoid duplicating disassembly work.

 

[RV7A Flyer]

(Not to nitpick, but I think most people on this site abbreviate it as "CI" for "Condition Inspection". and N.B. not "Conditional Inspection" , just to head off that never-ending rant/debate LOL ).

 

[rvbuilder2002]

I just used June 2 as an example since you hadn’t stated a specific date.

With the limitation being 12 months, the due date is the start of the month after the one it was originally signed off, 1 year later.
Since it is good through the entire month, that means until the clock strikes midnight. So I always state it as being due at 12:01 am on the first day of the next month.
BTW, I have my certification clients sign off the initial condition inspection just before or on the day of their certification inspection.

 

[rmarshall234]

I read the original post and all the replies and now I’m going crazy …

An “Annual Inspection” is performed on a Certificated aircraft

A “Condition Inspection” is performed on a EAB aircraft

They each have specific regulatory meaning and interpretation.

 

[rockyfatcat]

I’m going to point out the obvious. The annual inspection, (or CI) can become a 13 month inspection, depending upon the date it was signed off. Nothing prohibits performing and singing off the inspection before the due date. It will reset the date to the end of the sign-off to the end of month the following year.

I changed the insurance on my daily driver to not in motion last July for engine work. The annual inspection on this certified aircraft was due in December. Because the repairs were still in process it didn’t happen. I am now reassembling the aircraft after having it inspected, and that annual will get signed off on April 1st. (The aircraft is still apart following inspection). That annual expires the last day of April 2027. The same applies to Conditional Inspections unless stated otherwise in your operating limitations.

 

[wirejock]

For the record...Condition Inspection. I incorrectly posted "Annual". Edited as many as Alexa could find, but cannot edit anyone else's.

 

[Desert Rat]

Larry, I understood your original post to be a reflection that phase 1 is taking a long time and holy heck, now it's taken so long that I've got put the plane down for an inspection and it's going to take even longer because thats time it can't be flying off cards.

If I've got that right, then I'll just say don't sweat it. If you're flying somebody else's plane, it doesn't matter whether it's a rental for fun that you have to get back for the next guy or a gig thats putting food on the table. Either way, you're driving to somebody else's schedule.

One of the greatest things about owning your own plane is that you get to do you, and phase 1 takes however long it takes.

 

[N8DAV8R]

For the record...Condition Inspection. I incorrectly posted "Annual". Edited as many as Alexa could find, but cannot edit anyone else's.

Whatever, it’s fine.

Most of the people I’m around that are t trying to impress someone or be dorks just call it an annual. Because it’s annual. Duh.

Good luck with your annual next month.

 

[wirejock]

Larry, I understood your original post to be a reflection that phase 1 is taking a long time and holy heck, now it's taken so long that I've got put the plane down for an inspection and it's going to take even longer because thats time it can't be flying off cards.

If I've got that right, then I'll just say don't sweat it. If you're flying somebody else's plane, it doesn't matter whether it's a rental for fun that you have to get back for the next guy or a gig thats putting food on the table. Either way, you're driving to somebody else's schedule.

One of the greatest things about owning your own plane is that you get to do you, and phase 1 takes however long it takes.

I didn't mean to imply disappointment. I built and am flying my own plane. How many get to do that right?. I'm ok with it. I was just trying to make others aware of how the time line works out and that it could be avoided with some planning.
Of course I also got schooled as usual. I need a VAF Editor.

 

[Ironflight]

I think that the reason many owners think of making the inspection go thirteen months (minus a few minutes) is that a lot of us came from certified airplane ownership where we had to pay for the inspection - so we wanted to get every penny out of it. Since our E-AB Condition Inspections are “free”, do them whenever you want within that thirteen month window to get them in the month you want. We did that with our “fleet” so that we didn’t have multiple inspections due in the same month, and we cycled them all to their respective months within a year.

 

[wirejock]

I think that the reason many owners think of making the inspection go thirteen months (minus a few minutes) is that a lot of us came from certified airplane ownership where we had to pay for the inspection - so we wanted to get every penny out of it. Since our E-AB Condition Inspections are “free”, do them whenever you want within that thirteen month window to get them in the month you want. We did that with our “fleet” so that we didn’t have multiple inspections due in the same month, and we cycled them all to their respective months within a year.

Here I go again. Honest. The wheels do turn. Albeit very slowly.
I could have performed a CI before first flight. Duh!
Ok, next. Spin my wheels dangnabbit!

 

[rvbuilder2002]

Here I go again. Honest. The wheels do turn. Albeit very slowly.
I could have performed a CI before first flight. Duh!
Ok, next. Spin my wheels dangnabbit!

As someone else posted previously, if the person that issued your airworthiness certificate had followed the FAA order correctly, they would have required you to have signed off a condition inspection as a prerequisite of issuing the certificate
Are you saying that you didn’t do that?

 

[wirejock]

As someone else posted previously, if the person that issued your airworthiness certificate had followed the FAA order correctly, they would have required you to have signed off a condition inspection as a prerequisite of issuing the certificate
Are you saying that you didn’t do that?

Yes. I did. He checked. What does that have to do with the time line between the AWC CI and the first 12 month CI? Am I missing something?
From what I'm hearing, nothing precludes performing the first AI before 12 calendar months. I could have done a CI before first flight and reset the 12 month clock. It's moot now as my 12 months is May 30.

 

[tareed]

Yes. I did. He checked. What does that have to do with the time line between the AWC CI and the first 12 month CI? Am I missing something?
From what I'm hearing, nothing precludes performing the first AI before 12 calendar months. I could have done a CI before first flight and reset the 12 month clock. It's moot now as my 12 months is May 30.

The condition inspection is due 12 calendar months from the date you did the first inspection, not the AWC date. In my case in means that I had to do my inspection 11 months from my AWC date (month).

 

[wirejock]

The condition inspection is due 12 calendar months from the date you did the first inspection, not the AWC date. In my case in means that I had to do my inspection 11 months from my AWC date (month).

Ok. Now I see where I went off reservation. Like I said. Wheels turn slow. 5/21/2025. So I still have to get busy. Either way, it's due 5/31.

Sorry Scott. Now I get it.

 

[lr172]

. Since I had no Condition Inspection, the first is due 12 months from my AWC.

Might want to check on that. It has been a while, but distinctly remember the fsdo guy requiring a completed CI before issuing the awc. I had to have it in the log book and available for his review before he would complete the process. He said it was critical, as I, the builder, was certifying airworthiness, NOT the FAA. He said you are fully responsible for airworthiness and must attest to it; we just do paperwork.

Can’t have an airworthiness certificate untill someone certifies that the plane is airworthy; for eab, that is the builder.

Never used a dar, but can’t really see them signing off a ci either.

 

[Ironflight]

Might want to check on that. It has been a while, but distinctly remember the fsdo guy requiring a completed CI before issuing the awc. I had to have it in the log book and available for his review before he would complete the process. He said it was critical, as I, the builder, was certifying airworthiness, NOT the FAA. He said you are fully responsible for airworthiness and must attest to it; we just do paperwork.

Can’t have an airworthiness certificate untill someone certifies that the plane is airworthy; for eab, that is the builder.

Never used a dar, but can’t really see them signing off a ci either.

Larry, Larry, Larry….. terminology is important! No one EVER certifies that an Experimental is Airworthy - they certify that it is in a “Condition for Safe Operation”. “Airworthy” means an airplane meets its Type Certificate, and Experimentals (well Amateur Builts…) don’t have one.

Everything else you wrote is correct.

 

[lr172]

Larry, Larry, Larry….. terminology is important! No one EVER certifies that an Experimental is Airworthy - they certify that it is in a “Condition for Safe Operation”. “Airworthy” means an airplane meets its Type Certificate, and Experimentals (well Amateur Builts…) don’t have one.

Everything else you wrote is correct.

Can’t argue with that. Typing too quickly and I consider condition for safe operation and airworthiness to be synonymous, as does the faa, i believe; just different words to provide distinction between eab and certified categories / regs. After all, they don’t issue a condition for safe operation certificate, they issue an airworthiness certificate for eabs eventhough it was only attested to a condition for safe operation. Can’t see them doing that if they didn’t also believe they were synonymous. But I completely understand your making sure the ocorrect words are used. My bad for not using them.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

Ok. Now I see where I went off reservation. Like I said. Wheels turn slow. 5/21/2025. So I still have to get busy. Either way, it's due 5/31.

Sorry Scott. Now I get it.

Symantec’s maybe, but you are still legal to fly until the end of the day (midnight) on 5/31, so from my perspective, it technically isn’t due until 6/01 (at 12:01 am).

 

[rvbuilder2002]

I consider condition for safe operation and airworthiness to be synonymous, as does the faa,

This actually is incorrect.
The FAA has very specific definitions to numerous terms used in the aviation world they are tasked with regulating (as Paul already alluded too).

The term Airworthy is one of them.
That is why the experimental operating limitation that is associated with the condition lists a specific example of how to make the entry, to include “ in a condition for safe operation “
FAA personnel in my part of the country never want to see “airworthy” written in the maintenance records of any experimental aircraft.

 

[lr172]

This actually is incorrect.
The FAA has very specific definitions to numerous terms used in the aviation world they are tasked with regulating (as Paul already alluded too).

The term Airworthy is one of them.
That is why the experimental operating limitation that is associated with the condition lists a specific example of how to make the entry, to include “ in a condition for safe operation “
FAA personnel in my part of the country never want to see “airworthy” written in the maintenance records of any experimental aircraft.

I get all that; never use airworthiness in eab. So why does the FAA issue us an airworthiness certificate if we are not really airworthy? Why aren’t we issued a condition for safe operation certificate? Clearly they must see them as similar, as they didn’t bother to create a different certificate.

 

[rvbuilder2002]

I get all that; never use airworthiness in eab. So why does the FAA issue us an airworthiness certificate?

I was waiting for that one to come up
I don’t know for sure, but I think it is because that document is in contrast to the registration certificate so has a different meaning in that context.

So one document, the registration, deals with who is identified as the owner of the aircraft, and the other deals with whether the Aircraft has met the requirements to be approved to actually fly, but the term has no connection to whether the airplane is safe to fly just because the piece of paper is a board.

 

[rmarshall234]

you are still legal to fly until the end of the day (midnight) on 5/31, so isn’t due until 6/01 (at 12:01 am).

Thank You!! I was starting to go again.

 

[Ironflight]

“Airwothiness” (as in “Certificate”) and “Airworthy” (as in a certified aircraft meeting its type certificate) are two different words, albeit with a common etymological root. But they are used in different contexts by the FAA. This incite came from a late-night session in OKC with some FAA folks and maybe one or two beers where-in we were trying to understand the mysteries of the universe and the CFR’s…..

 

[DrillBit]

“Airwothiness” (as in “Certificate”) and “Airworthy” (as in a certified aircraft meeting its type certificate) are two different words, albeit with a common etymological root. But they are used in different contexts by the FAA. This incite came from a late-night session in OKC with some FAA folks and maybe one or two beers where-in we were trying to understand the mysteries of the universe and the CFR’s…..

My money is on the unification of gravitation and quantum field theory LONG before the CFRs ever make coherent sense to mortal men.

 

[Dugaru]

He said it was critical, as I, the builder, was certifying airworthiness, NOT the FAA.

That’s what he thinks. Apparently he forgot to read 8130.2L (or whatever applied at the time, I think they’ve always had the same relevant language). He was required to inspect it for safety, and he could only issue an AWC if he found it to be airworthy.

He was correct that you were ALSO certifying airworthiness.

 

[Dugaru]

My money is on the unification of gravitation and quantum field theory LONG before the CFRs ever make coherent sense to mortal men.

Agreed. And I’m STILL trying to understand the physics of “surrendering” a document by email.

 

[Desert Rat]

I think that the reason many owners think of making the inspection go thirteen months (minus a few minutes) is that a lot of us came from certified airplane ownership where we had to pay for the inspection - so we wanted to get every penny out of it. Since our E-AB Condition Inspections are “free”, do them whenever you want within that thirteen month window to get them in the month you want. We did that with our “fleet” so that we didn’t have multiple inspections due in the same month, and we cycled them all to their respective months within a year.

I mow my own yard as well, but if I wanted to change the day by 1/2 a week, I'd likely creep up on it, not do it before I needed to...

 

[lr172]

That’s what he thinks. Apparently he forgot to read 8130.2L (or whatever applied at the time, I think they’ve always had the same relevant language). He was required to inspect it for safety, and he could only issue an AWC if he found it to be airworthy.

He was correct that you were ALSO certifying airworthiness.

Thats interesting. I don't really know the regs in this area. On my first inspection, the guy maybe spent 5 minutes looking over the plane. Amusing actually; He had me run the elev trim up and down, then told me it was done wrong. Had to remind him that the tab moves opposite the elev. I give him kudos for looking, as apparently that is pretty commonly done wrong. Second plane, the guy spent about 10 minutes looking at the plane. Though this guy did quiz me about a few things, but think that was more about the repairmamn cert. Both spent as much or more time explaining why I needed a traditional compass in addition to my EFIS.

I do have to wonder what the regs really say in this area, as that second guy was adamaent that it was ALL on me; He said it was the CI entry that was the driving factor in issuing the AWC. remember him saying that is why we have you notarize the document; can't remember which doc it was though.

 

[Ironflight]

That’s what he thinks. Apparently he forgot to read 8130.2L (or whatever applied at the time, I think they’ve always had the same relevant language). He was required to inspect it for safety, and he could only issue an AWC if he found it to be airworthy.

He was correct that you were ALSO certifying airworthiness.

Actualy, if you’re goign to refer to the Order, you should quote it accurately - there is no mention of the word “Airworthy” in the relevent paragraph {15-4. C (4)} which reads:

(4) Condition for Safe Operation. Inspect the aircraft to verify it is in a condition for safe operation. The sample checklist for a condition inspection in appendix A to FAA AC 90-89, Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook, may be used for determining if
the aircraft is in a condition for safe operation.

Now to really fry everyone's noodle, everyone that does a condition inspection signs the logbook stating that the airplane is “in a condition for safe operation”….so would the witness please define the word “safe”? Doug, you have signed your name to that statement, I’m sure…so you must be able to define it…right?!

Another topic of pointless debate in OKC bull sessions…..

 

[Dugaru]

Actualy, if you’re goign to refer to the Order, you should quote it accurately - there is no mention of the word “Airworthy” in the relevent paragraph {15-4. C (4)} which reads:

(4) Condition for Safe Operation. Inspect the aircraft to verify it is in a condition for safe operation. The sample checklist for a condition inspection in appendix A to FAA AC 90-89, Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook, may be used for determining if
the aircraft is in a condition for safe operation.

Now to really fry everyone's noodle, everyone that does a condition inspection signs the logbook stating that the airplane is “in a condition for safe operation”….so would the witness please define the word “safe”? Doug, you have signed your name to that statement, I’m sure…so you must be able to define it…right?!

Another topic of pointless debate in OKC bull sessions…..

“Actually, if you’re going to refer to the Order” you should also read 4-2 which incorporates 2-3.h. There’s that word….

I’m grateful there are DARs willing to undertake this responsibility. I wouldn’t be. Although to be fair I have no idea what their insurance/liability/indemnity situation would be if an EAB they’ve found to be airworthy turns out not to be. Perhaps there’s an FAA letter out there purporting to take them off the hook, although I also have no idea how effective that would be.

I was really surprised to see the language in 2-3.h. Seems out of place for an EAB, but there it is.

 

[lr172]

Thats interesting. I don't really know the regs in this area. On my first inspection, the guy maybe spent 5 minutes looking over the plane. Amusing actually; He had me run the elev trim up and down, then told me it was done wrong. Had to remind him that the tab moves opposite the elev. I give him kudos for looking, as apparently that is pretty commonly done wrong. Second plane, the guy spent about 10 minutes looking at the plane. Though this guy did quiz me about a few things, but think that was more about the repairmamn cert. Both spent as much or more time explaining why I needed a traditional compass in addition to my EFIS.

I do have to wonder what the regs really say in this area, as that second guy was adamaent that it was ALL on me; He said it was the CI entry that was the driving factor in issuing the AWC. remember him saying that is why we have you notarize the document; can't remember which doc it was though.

so, question to Paul, scott,and Mel: is what the fsdo guy told me accurate or does the inspector have some obligation to verify that the eab is in a condition for safe operation when issuing an AWC? I don't know a lot about these regs, but know enough to not accept the FSDO guys interpretations of them at face value.

 

[rmarshall234]

“Actually, if you’re going to refer to the Order”

At one point I considered trying to become a DAR (since I seemed to meet the requirements) and so I asked the FSDO inspector who was doing the airworthiness inspection on my EAB about that possibility. He actually suggested I become a DME instead (designated mechanic examiner) and referred me to a couple of FAA Orders to review. I downloaded those (seemingly million pages) and spent a little time reviewing them and when I woke up, I realized what my world was going to then look like and that I lacked one (seemingly) important qualification.

 

[BobTurner]

I think that the reason many owners think of making the inspection go thirteen months (minus a few minutes) is that a lot of us came from certified airplane ownership where we had to pay for the inspection - so we wanted to get every penny out of it. Since our E-AB Condition Inspections are “free”, do them whenever you want within that thirteen month window to get them in the month you want. We did that with our “fleet” so that we didn’t have multiple inspections due in the same month, and we cycled them all to their respective months within a year.

Paul, just curious. Obviously your post refers to EAB owners who hold a repairman certificate. Any idea of how many owners do not (e.g., they are not the builder)? Yes, I know mosaic will change this, but as of right now, I wonder if <50% can inspect their plane.

 

[Ironflight]

Paul, just curious. Obviously your post refers to EAB owners who hold a repairman certificate. Any idea of how many owners do not (e.g., they are not the builder)? Yes, I know mosaic will change this, but as of right now, I wonder if <50% can inspect their plane.

I don't have a clue, but would love to know the answer as well Bob! The EAA Safety Committee knows that non-builder owner numbers are always increasing, and are working to serve that population!