767 non-routines
Boeing 767 family non-routine card closure records review
This review confirms that the non-routine findings raised during a Boeing 767's checks were dispositioned, corrected, and closed with evidence. It is run for a lessor, airline, or asset manager working a specific 767 tail through diligence or a check-package review. The work traces each defect card from the finding to its engineering disposition, corrective-action entry, and final sign-off, then flags any non-routine left open or closed without support. You receive a non-routine register reconciled to closure, an exception list of unresolved or unsupported findings, and a closure plan for the gaps.
When this review is needed
- A 767 heavy check raised many non-routines and the buyer wants each one traced to closure.
- A defect card carries a disposition but no corrective-action entry to prove the fix.
- A structural finding was deferred and the deferral basis has to be confirmed before redelivery.
- A check package from a prior operator lists open non-routines that were never reconciled.
The problem
Non-routines are where a check reveals what the routine cards did not expect, and each one has to run its own path from finding to fix to sign-off. On a 767 heavy check the count can reach into the hundreds, and a defect card that stops at its disposition, with no corrective-action entry behind it, leaves the finding recorded but its resolution unproven. Structural non-routines in particular carry weight, and an open or half-closed one is exactly what surfaces at redelivery.
What gets reviewed
- The non-routine findings raised during the checks under review
- The engineering disposition recorded against each defect card
- The corrective-action entry proving the disposition was carried out
- The final sign-off closing each non-routine
- Any deferral, its basis, and its standing against the current status
- Non-routines left open or closed without support logged as open items
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 non-routine has an engineering disposition appropriate to the finding
- Every disposition is backed by a corrective-action entry that carried it out
- A final sign-off closes each finding that the register marks resolved
- Deferred findings carry a basis and a standing consistent with the current status
- The register accounts for every non-routine the check package raised
Evidence normally required
- The non-routine register or defect-card set for the checks under review
- Engineering dispositions recorded against the findings
- Corrective-action entries and their supporting records
- Deferral records and their approval basis
- The check package that raised the non-routines
Common discrepancies
- A defect card with a disposition but no corrective-action entry behind it
- A structural non-routine deferred without a traceable deferral basis
- A finding marked closed on the register with no final sign-off
- A non-routine raised in the check package that never reached the register
What is at stake
An open non-routine that reaches a transaction becomes a condition the buyer attaches a price or a holdback to, and a finding closed without a corrective-action entry cannot be proven resolved if it is later questioned. A deferred structural finding with no traceable deferral basis can block acceptance until the basis is produced or the work is completed.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Build the register
Assemble the non-routine findings the checks raised and confirm the package accounts for them.
Trace each disposition
Follow each defect card from its finding to the engineering disposition recorded against it.
Confirm the correction
Tie each disposition to a corrective-action entry and a final sign-off, or a documented deferral.
Flag what remains
List open, deferred, and unsupported findings with the evidence needed to close each.
What the buyer receives
- A non-routine register reconciled from finding to closure
- An exception list of open, deferred, or unsupported findings
- A closure plan for the non-routines that can still be reconciled
Who uses the output
- Asset managers pricing open findings or holdbacks into a transaction
- Records teams reconciling a check package received from another operator
- Continuing-airworthiness staff clearing non-routines before redelivery
How the work fits into the transaction or program
Non-routine closure sits alongside the task-card review, because the cards raise the findings and the register proves they were resolved. Open or unsupported findings route into remediation, and any deferral is carried into the current status so a buyer or receiving CAMO sees exactly what remains before the tail changes hands.
Aircraft-specific considerations
A 767 heavy check raises many non-routines, and on aging tails structural findings are more common, so the register is weighted toward corrosion and repair items whose closure evidence matters most. Freighter-converted tails can carry conversion-related non-routines that have to close to the same standard as the routine check findings.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
Deferral and disposition practice differs between an FAA operator and an EASA CAMO, so a 767 that has closed non-routines under both carries mixed conventions. The review notes where a deferral or disposition follows a practice the receiving authority will want reconciled before acceptance.
Regulatory limits
The review traces non-routine findings to their recorded closure and flags what remains open. It does not disposition a finding, perform the corrective action, or make an airworthiness determination on the aircraft.
What this review does not cover
- Dispositioning or engineering any non-routine finding
- Performing the corrective action behind any defect card
- Any airworthiness determination on the aircraft
Specific to this review
- A disposition without a corrective-action entry records what should have been done, not proof it was done, so the finding stays unresolved in evidence.
- Structural non-routines carry the most weight on an aging 767 and are the ones a buyer scrutinizes at redelivery.
- A deferred finding needs a traceable basis, or it can block acceptance until the deferral is justified or the work is completed.
- A non-routine raised in the check package but never entered on the register is a finding the file cannot account for.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Maintenance recordkeeping content and approval-for-return-to-service requirements, including 43.9, 43.11, and Appendix B.
Federal Aviation Administration. FAA guidance on making and keeping maintenance records and acceptable recordkeeping practices.
European Union / EASA. Continuing airworthiness, maintenance records, CAMO responsibilities, and the airworthiness review process in the EASA system.
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.
Frequently asked questions
How is a deferred non-routine treated in the review?
A deferral is acceptable only with a traceable basis and a clear standing against the current status. The review confirms the deferral basis exists and carries the finding into the status so a buyer or receiving CAMO sees it as an open item rather than a closed one, which keeps the redelivery position honest.
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.