787 non-routine cards
Boeing 787 family non-routine card closure records review
This review follows the non-routine cards raised on a specific Boeing 787 family aircraft from the defect that opened each one through to a signed corrective action. A records specialist runs it for the party closing out a check or verifying a work event, usually at check exit or in diligence. It reads the non-routine register, the defect cards, the engineering dispositions that decided the fix, and the corrective-action entries and final sign-offs. You receive an exception list of cards that never closed cleanly, a source map from defect to disposition to sign-off, and a closure plan for the open loops.
When this review is needed
- A check produced a stack of non-routine cards and each defect has to trace to a closed corrective action.
- An engineering disposition called for a repair whose approval data is not attached to the card.
- The non-routine register lists cards whose final sign-off cannot be found.
- A buyer is sampling the non-routine set to gauge what the check actually uncovered.
The problem
Non-routine cards are where the real condition of a 787 shows up, because they capture what inspectors found once panels were open. Each card should run a clean loop from defect to engineering disposition to corrective action to sign-off, but under check pressure a card can be dispositioned and left open, closed without the approved data the disposition called for, or logged in the register with no final sign-off. Those open loops are the findings a buyer's team looks for first, precisely because they reveal what the routine cards do not.
What gets reviewed
- The non-routine register reconciled against the cards actually raised during the event
- Each defect card traced to the engineering disposition that decided the fix
- Corrective-action entries supported by the approved data the disposition required
- Final sign-offs present on each card that the disposition called complete
- Cards deferred under the MEL or carried forward accounted for in the exit status
- Cross-references from non-routine cards to any repair map or program follow-up they created
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
- Every card in the register traces to a defect and a decided disposition
- Corrective actions cite the approved or acceptable data the disposition required
- Each closed card carries the final sign-off that its disposition called for
- Deferred cards reference a valid MEL or deferral basis and a rectification interval
- Cards that produced a repair or a follow-up inspection link to the record that carries it forward
Evidence normally required
- The non-routine register for the event under review
- The defect cards and the engineering dispositions attached to them
- Approved-data references cited by the corrective actions
- Final sign-off and return-to-service records for the closed cards
- The MEL or deferral records for any carried-forward items
Common discrepancies
- A non-routine card dispositioned but left open with no corrective-action entry
- A corrective action closed without the approved data the disposition specified
- A card in the register with no final sign-off recorded
- A deferred defect carried past its rectification interval without a fresh basis
What is at stake
A non-routine card left open means a defect the aircraft carries with no record that it was resolved, which undercuts the return-to-service basis for the check. A disposition closed without its approved data leaves the corrective action unsupported, and an unclosed loop discovered in diligence invites a deeper sample and a harder negotiation over the state of the asset.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Reconcile the register
Match the non-routine register to the cards actually raised during the event.
Trace each loop
Follow every card from defect to engineering disposition to corrective action.
Check data and sign-off
Confirm the corrective action cites the required approved data and carries a final sign-off.
List the open loops
Record cards that did not close cleanly and sequence the evidence to recover.
What the buyer receives
- An exception list of non-routine cards that did not close cleanly
- A source map running from each defect through disposition to final sign-off
- A closure plan for the corrective actions to evidence and the sign-offs to obtain
Who uses the output
- Records teams closing out the non-routine set before return to service
- Continuing-airworthiness leads confirming every defect was resolved with evidence
- Buyer and lessor teams reading the non-routine cards to judge the asset's real condition
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The non-routine set is the counterpart to the closed task cards: the routines show the planned work, the non-routines show what inspection uncovered. This review closes the loop on the findings side, feeding any repair it exposes into the repair-approval review and any follow-up inspection into the program status.
Aircraft-specific considerations
Because so much 787 primary structure is composite, a non-routine finding often calls for a damage-tolerance disposition rather than a standard metallic repair, so the approved data behind the corrective action is more specialized and more likely to be missing. Systems findings tie into the aircraft's electrical and software configuration, which means a non-routine card can create a configuration change that has to be tracked elsewhere. The review is scoped to the actual events this serial number has been through.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
The acceptability of a disposition's data basis can differ between FAA and EASA acceptance, so the review notes where a corrective action approved under one system needs validation for the register the tail will serve.
Regulatory limits
The review confirms non-routine defects were dispositioned and closed with evidence. It does not perform or approve any repair, disposition any defect, or make an airworthiness determination on the aircraft.
What this review does not cover
- Dispositioning any defect or performing any corrective action
- Developing or approving repair or disposition data
- Any airworthiness determination on the aircraft
Specific to this review
- Non-routine cards reveal the condition the routine cards cannot, so buyers sample them first to see what a check actually turned up.
- A disposition without its cited approved data leaves the fix unsupported even when the card shows a sign-off, so the data reference is checked as closely as the closure.
- A composite finding usually needs a damage-tolerance disposition, so the specialized data behind it is a frequent gap in the non-routine trail.
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
Why do reviewers sample non-routine cards before the routine ones?
Routine cards show the planned work, but non-routine cards show what inspection actually found once the aircraft was opened up. That is where the true condition and the unresolved defects live, so an open or unsupported non-routine card tells a buyer more about the asset than a full set of clean routines.
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.