Non-routine findings
Bombardier Global 7500 non-routine records review
A Global 7500 non-routine records review confirms that findings raised during checks were dispositioned and closed with evidence, not left dangling. It is run for an operator, lessor, or management provider checking that a tail's defect history resolves cleanly. It reads the non-routine register, the defect cards behind it, the engineering dispositions, the corrective-action entries, and the final sign-offs, then confirms each finding reaches a documented close. You receive a supported exception list, a source map from defect to closure, and a closure plan for the aircraft under review.
When this review is needed
- A Global 7500 came out of a heavy check and the non-routine findings it raised have to be confirmed closed.
- A buyer wants the defect history reconciled to be sure nothing was deferred without a home.
- An engineering disposition on a structural finding needs its approval basis verified.
- A management handover happened mid-check and some non-routines closed under a different provider.
The problem
Non-routines are where a check's real story lives, because they capture what inspection actually found. Each one needs a disposition, a corrective action, and a close, and any of those links can be thin: a disposition with no approval basis, a corrective action recorded without the sign-off that closes it, or a finding deferred into a category that quietly holds it open. On a large check the register runs long, and a single unclosed non-routine can sit unnoticed among hundreds that closed cleanly.
What gets reviewed
- The non-routine register reconciled against the defect cards it is built from
- Engineering dispositions checked for a documented basis appropriate to the finding
- Corrective-action entries matched to the disposition they were meant to satisfy
- Final sign-offs confirmed to close the full scope of each non-routine
- Deferred findings traced to where they were carried and whether they later closed
- Structural and systems findings screened for whether they required approved data
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 finding on the register has a disposition, a corrective action, and a closing sign-off
- Dispositions that alter structure or configuration carry an approval basis
- Corrective actions recorded match the disposition and the defect they address
- Deferred non-routines are traceable to a register that still tracks them
- No finding is shown closed without the evidence that a reviewer would accept
Evidence normally required
- The non-routine register from the check
- The defect cards and inspection findings behind the register
- Engineering dispositions and their approval references
- Corrective-action entries and final sign-offs
- Any deferral register carrying findings forward
Common discrepancies
- A non-routine dispositioned but missing the sign-off that closes it
- A structural disposition with no approved-data reference behind it
- A finding deferred at the check with no register still tracking it
- A corrective action that does not fully address the defect it was raised against
What is at stake
An open non-routine that the status treats as closed is a latent gap, and it is the kind of thing a diligence reviewer looks for precisely because it is easy to miss. A structural disposition without an approval basis can force re-substantiation, and a deferral with no tracking can surface as an overdue item at the worst time. Closing these after the check, once the engineering that dispositioned them has dispersed, is slow and sometimes leaves a conservative fallback as the only option.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Reconcile the register
Match every non-routine on the register to the defect card that raised it.
Test the dispositions
Confirm each disposition carries a basis appropriate to the finding it addresses.
Confirm the closes
Verify corrective actions and sign-offs close the full scope of each finding.
Trace the deferrals
Follow carried-forward findings to a tracking register and list what remains open.
What the buyer receives
- A supported exception list of non-routines that do not reach a documented close
- A source map from each finding to its disposition, corrective action, and closure
- A closure plan naming the sign-off, basis, or tracking each open item needs
Who uses the output
- Records teams confirming a check's findings all resolved before the status is trusted
- Asset managers reading defect-history integrity into the value of the tail
- Engineering settling how to treat a disposition raised without a basis
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The non-routine review completes the picture the task-card review starts, because the cards show the routine work and the non-routines show what inspection uncovered along the way. Its exception list drives remediation while the check engineering is still reachable, and a clean non-routine history is part of the check evidence a redelivery or sale rests on.
Aircraft-specific considerations
As the Global 7500 fleet reaches its earlier heavy checks, the non-routine findings from those checks are the first substantial defect history many of these tails carry, so they weigh heavily in a records picture. Composite structure and an integrated cabin mean some findings need approved-data dispositions that a routine defect does not, and the review screens for that. Where a management provider changed during a check, the review pays attention to non-routines that opened under one provider and closed under another.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
A Global 7500 whose non-routines were dispositioned under one authority and whose next operator sits under another may hold closures in a form the receiving system evaluates differently. The review notes where a disposition will need supplementing for the receiving register, without asserting either authority accepts it.
Regulatory limits
The review confirms non-routine findings reach a documented close with an appropriate basis. It does not approve a disposition, perform or sign off a corrective action, or make an airworthiness determination on the aircraft.
What this review does not cover
- Performing or signing off any corrective action
- Developing or approving disposition data
- Any airworthiness determination on the aircraft
Specific to this review
- A non-routine register is where deferred findings hide, because a defect carried forward without a tracking register drops out of the status silently.
- A disposition that touches structure needs an approval basis that an ordinary defect close does not, and that basis is the item most often missing.
- The earliest heavy checks on a young fleet generate the defect history that later transactions read most closely, so their non-routines carry outsized weight.
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 do you catch a non-routine that was deferred and then lost?
By reconciling the register against a live deferral or carry-forward tracking source, not just the check paperwork. A finding marked deferred should appear on a register that still tracks it. Where it does not, the review flags it as an open item that the status is treating as closed.
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.