Archive quality
Task-card records in a scanned archive, checked against source
This review tests whether the closed task-card set in a digitized records archive stands on its scanned sources. A records specialist samples work packages, opens the underlying card images, and confirms each card is present, legible, and carries the sign-offs and data references the paper original held. It runs during a scanning project or after an archive migration, before the paper is retired or the digital index becomes the working reference. The records control lead receives an exception list keyed to package and card numbers so the index can be corrected against evidence.
When this review is needed
- A scanning vendor has handed back a batch of digitized work packages and acceptance has to mean something.
- Paper task cards are scheduled for destruction and the scans will become the only copy.
- A lease return or audit is approaching and the counterparty will pull card images, not summaries.
- The archive is migrating between document systems and card-to-package links may not survive the move.
The problem
A digital index over closed work packages looks orderly whether or not the images behind it are complete. Cards get skipped at the scanner, sign-off blocks land in shadow or off the page edge, and a multi-sheet card comes back as one sheet. Nobody discovers this while the paper still exists, because nobody needs the scan yet. The person who does need it is under transaction or audit pressure, years later, opening files one by one.
What gets reviewed
- Sampled closed work packages traced from the digital index down to individual card images
- Sign-off blocks, stamps, and certifying references checked for capture and legibility
- Card counts per package compared with the package close-out summary
- Multi-sheet cards and attached worksheets verified as complete in the scan
- OCR-derived index fields spot-checked against what the card image actually shows
- File naming and metadata checked for stable links between card, package, and aircraft
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 sampled card image opens, renders fully, and matches the card number the index assigns it
- Sign-offs and certifying stamps on sampled cards are readable rather than clipped or washed out
- The number of card images in a sampled package equals the count the close-out record states
- References to approved data cited on the card are legible enough to identify the document and revision
- Metadata exports agree with file names on package number, aircraft, and check event
Evidence normally required
- The digital index or metadata export covering the closed task-card set
- Access to the image files, organized by work package
- Package close-out summaries or check completion certificates for the sampled events
- The scanning project's batch logs, if a vendor produced the archive
- Any prior acceptance or quality-control records for the scan batches
Common discrepancies
- Packages indexed as complete where several card images are absent from the file set
- Sign-off blocks cut off at the scan margin so the certifying signature cannot be read
- Index fields populated by OCR that disagree with the card image on task number or date
- One card image filed under two packages because a batch separator sheet was missed
What is at stake
Once the paper is gone, an unreadable or missing card image is a permanent gap in the accomplishment evidence for that task. At redelivery or during an authority audit, a closed package that cannot show its signed cards gets treated as unsupported work, and the burden of reconstruction falls on whoever holds the aircraft at that moment.
Move from findings to resolution
Move from findings to a documented resolution path.
How the work runs
Frame the sample
Select work packages across check types, scan batches, and years so the sample represents how the archive was built.
Open the sources
Pull each sampled package's card images and read them against the close-out summary and the index entries.
Log exceptions
Record every missing, illegible, or misindexed card with the package and card number it belongs to.
Support correction
Hand the exception list to records control, then re-check corrected items so acceptance is documented.
What the buyer receives
- An exception list keyed to package and card numbers, with the defect stated per item
- A sampling record showing which packages and cards were opened and what was checked
- Correction instructions the records team can apply to the digital index and re-verify
Who uses the output
- Records control leads deciding whether a scan batch can be accepted
- Digital records managers correcting the index before the archive goes live
- Technical-records leadership deciding when paper task cards may be retired
How the work fits into the transaction or program
This check sits between scanning and reliance. Digitization projects measure throughput; this review measures whether the output can serve as maintenance evidence. Its exception list feeds the correction cycle with the scanning team, and its acceptance record supports the later decision to stand down the paper archive.
Jurisdiction-specific considerations
Under 14 CFR 43.9 and Part 91.417, the task card is often the record that shows who performed and approved the work, so the FAA expectation attaches to the signed card itself. EASA operators under Regulation 1321/2014 keep detailed maintenance records through their CAMO arrangements, and an airworthiness review will sample down to card level. Both regimes accept digital copies, provided the copy actually reproduces the signed original.
Regulatory limits
The review reports on whether scanned task-card evidence supports the closed set. It does not certify work as properly performed, issue any airworthiness determination, approve the archive system, or decide on behalf of the operator whether paper originals may be destroyed.
What this review does not cover
- Re-performing or judging the maintenance the cards record
- Scanning or rescanning documents; the review checks what the archive holds
- Legal advice on record-retention obligations in any jurisdiction
Specific to this review
- Card-level defects cluster by scan batch, so one bad day at the scanner can compromise every package digitized that day; sampling is stratified by batch for this reason.
- The close-out summary is the natural completeness reference for a package because it was written when the paper set was whole.
- Sign-off legibility fails more often from compression settings than from the original ink, which means the defect can be systemic across an entire archive.
- An index built by OCR inherits every misread task number silently, and the error only surfaces when someone searches for the card and finds the wrong one.
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
Can this review clear the archive for paper destruction?
It gives the operator the evidence basis for that decision: a documented sample, an exception list, and a record of corrections. The destruction decision itself stays with the operator and must satisfy its own retention obligations under FAA or EASA rules and any lease terms.
How large a sample is meaningful across thousands of task cards?
Coverage matters more than raw volume. A sample spread across scan batches, check events, and card types finds systemic defects, which are the ones that matter, far faster than a large sample drawn from one corner of the archive.
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.