Maintenance-accomplishment evidence review

When this review is needed

• Records show maintenance as accomplished and the evidence behind those entries needs confirming before reliance.
• A heavy check or shop visit is recorded as closed and the work-package evidence has not been verified.
• Findings raised as non-routine during a check need their disposition and closure traced.
• An accomplishment shown in a status has to be tied back to the signed work that produced it.

The problem

A closed status is the easy part to read and the hardest to trust. Behind it should sit a signed task card, an identified approved-data reference the work was carried out against, a disposition for every non-routine card the check raised, and a release for each component handled. Any of these can be absent while the status still shows green. Non-routine work is where the chain breaks most often, because a finding gets opened in the heat of a check and the record of how it was closed never makes it back into the package.

What gets reviewed

• Task cards and work packages for sign-off, date, and the authorization that closed them
• The approved data each task was accomplished against, such as the manual reference or instruction
• Non-routine cards raised during a check and the disposition that closed each one
• Release evidence tying installed or replaced components to the recorded work
• Accomplishment entries that appear in a status with no supporting work record
• Deferred items carried out of a check and whether their closure was later recorded

What gets validated

• Each accomplished task carries a sign-off, a date, and a valid authorization
• The approved-data reference the work was carried out against is identified and appropriate
• Findings raised as non-routine in a check have a recorded disposition and closure
• Release evidence reconciles with the components named in the work package
• Deferred items from the check have a later record showing they were closed
• Accomplishments shown in a status are matched to the signed work record behind them

Evidence normally required

• Task cards and the work package for the check or shop visit
• The non-routine cards raised and their disposition records
• Authorized release certificates for components handled in the work
• The approved-data references or instructions the tasks cite
• The deferral log for items carried out of the check

Common discrepancies

• A task recorded as accomplished with no sign-off or authorization on the card
• Work carried out against an approved-data reference that is missing or not identified
• A non-routine finding raised in a check with no recorded disposition
• An accomplishment shown in a status with no work record behind it
• A deferred item carried out of a check with no later record of closure

What is at stake

An accomplishment that cannot be evidenced may have to be treated as not done, repeated, or re-substantiated. An undispositioned non-routine card leaves an open condition recorded against the aircraft, and a component installed without a traceable release can put the work that depended on it back in question, all of which are cheaper to find before a return or sale than after.

How the work runs

What the buyer receives

• A per-task evidence trace showing the sign-off, data, and release behind each
• A list of tasks recorded without the supporting evidence
• A recommended path to source or close each unsupported accomplishment

Who uses the output

• Quality-assurance teams confirming the work package holds up
• Continuing-airworthiness staff closing open non-routine and deferred items
• Acquisition and asset teams relying on the maintenance history

How the work fits into the transaction or program

The review tests the work behind a closed check before that history is relied on, so missing sign-offs and undispositioned non-routines surface while the performing organization can still close them. Its trace feeds the discrepancy register and supports the status-to-source reconciliation for the wider transaction.

Jurisdiction-specific considerations

Recordkeeping content and the basis for return to service differ between the FAA and EASA systems, so an accomplishment is read against the rule the work was performed under. A release valid in one system is checked for acceptability where the records will next be relied on rather than assumed to carry across.

Regulatory limits

This review confirms that recorded accomplishments are evidenced, consistent, and traceable to signed work and approved data. It does not return any aircraft or component to service, does not re-perform maintenance, and makes no airworthiness determination.

What this review does not cover

• Performing or re-performing any maintenance task
• Returning an aircraft or component to service
• Approving the data the maintenance was carried out against

Specific to this review

• An accomplishment is only as good as its sign-off, its approved-data reference, and its release evidence, so each is checked rather than inferred from a closed status.
• Non-routine cards raised during a check are where the chain most often breaks, because a finding can be opened and never shown as dispositioned.
• Deferred items carried out of a check are tracked to a later closure record, since deferral moves the obligation forward rather than discharging it.

Sources

Frequently asked questions

Relevant glossary terms

Related pages

Where this fits