Maintenance documentation
Non-routine card records review
A non-routine card review is for lessors, airlines, and acquisition teams who need to know what a check actually found and whether each finding was closed correctly. It runs after a heavy visit or before relying on a maintenance event in a transaction. It reviews each non-routine card for its raised finding, the disposition chosen, the repair or approval data behind it, and the sign-off that closed it. You receive a per-card disposition view, a register of unsupported or open closures, and the data needed to resolve each one.
When this review is needed
- A check has closed and the volume of non-routines raised needs an independent read before the event is relied on.
- A finding was repaired during the visit and the approval basis for that repair has to be confirmed.
- A buyer wants the corrosion, structural, or systems findings from a recent check mapped and verified.
- A non-routine references a repair scheme whose approval data is not attached to the card.
The problem
Non-routines are where the real condition of an aircraft shows up, and they are also where documentation thins out under check pressure. A card may state a finding and a fix while the approved data, the substantiation, or the closing inspection sign-off is missing. The headline says the defect is cleared, but the evidence that it was cleared correctly is not there, and that gap is hard to close once the visit has ended.
What gets reviewed
- Each non-routine card raised during the event and the finding it records
- The disposition chosen, including repair, replace, defer, or no-defect-found
- Approved or acceptable repair data referenced for any repair disposition
- Substantiation for structural and corrosion repairs, including damage limits used
- The closing inspection sign-off and any required duplicate inspection
- Links from the card back to the parent work order and check task list
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 non-routine card records a clear disposition rather than an open or ambiguous state
- Each repair disposition references approved or acceptable data appropriate to the repair
- Structural and corrosion findings cite damage limits and substantiation consistent with the manual or approval
- Closing sign-offs are present and made by personnel authorized for that inspection
- Deferred findings are carried to an MEL or open-item list with a defined rectification interval
- Each card ties back to its parent work order and the task that generated it
Evidence normally required
- The non-routine cards raised during the check
- Repair data references or repair packages cited on the cards
- Structural repair substantiation and damage-tolerance data where used
- Inspection and duplicate-inspection sign-off records
- The parent work order and check task list
- Any deferral or open-item carry-forward records
Common discrepancies
- A non-routine left in an open or unclear disposition state after the check closed
- A repair disposition citing no approved data, or data that does not cover the repair
- Structural findings closed without damage limits or substantiation recorded
- A closing inspection sign-off missing where the repair clearly required one
- Deferred findings with no rectification interval or carry-forward to a tracked list
- Cards that cannot be linked to the work order or task that raised them
What is at stake
A non-routine closed without its approval or substantiation data can put a repair's standing in question. The repair may need re-substantiation or re-inspection, an open structural finding can constrain the asset, and unresolved cards reduce confidence in the entire check package.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Collect the cards
Gather every non-routine raised during the event with the repair data and sign-offs cited on each.
Read each disposition
Confirm the finding, the chosen disposition, and the approval or substantiation that supports it.
Rank the gaps
Register unsupported or open closures and weight them by structural and operational significance.
Plan closure
Recommend re-substantiation, re-inspection, or formal closure for each open or unsupported card.
What the buyer receives
- A per-card disposition view showing the finding, the fix, and the supporting data
- A register of unsupported, ambiguous, or open closures ranked by structural and operational weight
- A recommended path to re-substantiate, re-inspect, or formally close each open item
Who uses the output
- Quality teams confirming repairs were dispositioned and closed correctly
- Engineering deciding whether a repair stands or needs re-substantiation
- Acquisition teams reading the true condition revealed by a check
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The review reads the non-routines as the record of what a check found, so structural and repair gaps surface before they are inherited. It complements a work-order closeout review and feeds the discrepancy register and the asset condition view used in diligence.
Aircraft-specific considerations
What a non-routine needs to show depends on where the finding sits. A structural repair carries damage-tolerance substantiation and damage limits, while a systems defect leans on the task and the parts paperwork, so each card is judged against the kind of finding it records rather than a single template.
Regulatory limits
The review confirms that non-routine findings were dispositioned, documented, and closed in a traceable way. It does not approve repair data, re-inspect the repair, or determine the airworthiness of the affected structure or system.
What this review does not cover
- Engineering approval or generation of repair data
- Physical inspection or measurement of a completed repair
- Any airworthiness determination on the repaired item
Specific to this review
- Non-routines, not routine cards, are where an aircraft's real condition is recorded, which is why their closure quality drives the value of a check package.
- A structural non-routine is incomplete without the damage limits and substantiation behind the repair, even when the card shows a sign-off.
- A no-defect-found disposition is still a disposition; an entirely open card after a closed check is a distinct and higher-priority finding.
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.
International Civil Aviation Organization. International standards for the airworthiness of aircraft and the framework states use for type and continuing airworthiness.
Frequently asked questions
Why review non-routines separately from the work order?
The work order shows the planned scope; the non-routines show what the aircraft actually presented. Reading them on their own surfaces structural and repair gaps that a header-level closeout can miss.
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.
Walk through your situation with an engineer who has done this work.