DO-178C evidence
Open item review for final certification problem reports
For certification managers, software QA, and quality managers, this page is used this page when Final certification review approaching depends on records that have moved across revisions, suppliers, or workstreams. EE checks open problem report list, SAS, HAS, safety effect analysis against the applicable basis, plan language, and source records. Findings are written as evidence gaps, not approval decisions. The deliverable is a ranked discrepancy log with the evidence trail needed for closure.
When this review is needed
- Final certification review approaching has created a gate where document titles are no longer enough.
- Program leaders need a ranked list of open problem report review blockers rather than another unfiltered file dump.
- The review notes that evidence was copied from earlier work and its applicability must be tested.
- Authority, DER, ODA, or internal reviewers are expected to sample the record trail.
The problem
Teams usually know the files exist, but they do not always know whether open problem report list still agrees with safety effect analysis. That uncertainty burns review time when a sampled citation fails.
What gets reviewed
- Inventory open problem report list and record its source, owner, and controlled revision.
- Match SAS against the current baseline and the applicable plan language.
- Follow HAS through downstream reports, summaries, and closure notes.
- Flag safety effect analysis when it refers to a superseded configuration or unresolved deviation.
- List missing source records needed before reviewers can rely on the package.
What gets validated
- A cited record passes only if its identifier, title, and revision match the controlled index.
- Configuration alignment is tested between open problem report list and safety effect analysis; conflicting serials, drawings, or baselines fail.
- The review notes that evidence type is checked against the claim, so analysis cannot silently replace a promised test or inspection.
- Exceptions without an owner, due path, or technical disposition fail the gate.
- Downstream documents are sampled for references that still point to superseded material.
Evidence normally required
Common discrepancies
- Failure modes: PRs downgraded to no-effect with no analysis.
- duplicate reports masking a systemic defect.
- OPRs missing from the accomplishment summary entirely.
- operational workarounds never communicated in installation or operating documentation.
What is at stake
Late discovery turns a records problem into a program problem. Reviewers may pause sampling, ask for a corrected baseline, or require new evidence before the package can move forward.
Move from findings to resolution
Identify gaps against the means of compliance.
How the work runs
Frame Open Problem
Confirm the exact event, affected file set, buyer role, and decision standard before any problem report list with open items is treated as sufficient.
Trace Review Item
Walk the named evidence from index entry to source artifact and mark where the trail supports, conflicts with, or fails to answer the page-specific question.
Sort Certification Reports
Group exceptions by closure route: document retrieval, data correction, engineering disposition, authority response, or contractual decision.
Package Evidence Opr
Deliver the exception list, evidence map, and owner sequence in a form that can move directly into remediation, submittal cleanup, or transaction negotiation.
What the buyer receives
- Gap log for open problem report review
- Cross reference table
- Document retrieval list
- Disposition worksheet
- Submittal readiness note
Who uses the output
- certification manager decides which exceptions block the next gate.
- software QA updates the plan, matrix, or report index.
- quality manager tracks owner responses through closure.
How the work fits into the transaction or program
This work sits upstream of authority or delegate review. It lets program leaders see whether the evidence package is ready to be sampled or whether source records need another closure cycle. The page-specific framing is can the program defend every problem report left open at certification. The review notes that evidence reviewed: the OPR list against the SAS and HAS, classification and safety-effect justifications, workaround descriptions and their visibility to installers and operators, and deferred-fix commitments. Failure modes include PRs downgraded to no-effect with no analysis, duplicate reports masking a systemic defect, OPRs missing from the accomplishment summary entirely, and operational workarounds never communicated in installation or. For open problem report review, the practical output is a defensible record of what was checked, what did not match, who owns the fix, and which issue remains outside the review boundary. The open problem report review scope is intentionally narrow: Scrub open problem reports and their justifications before the authority reviews them at program closure.. The Open Problem Report evidence question is tested against problem report list with open items and not against a generic checklist copied from another page. The Review Item Final trigger is final certification review approaching, so the review ranks gaps by decision impact instead of document volume. The Certification Reports 178c searcher pattern is A certification or quality lead at final review searching for how open problem reports must be dispositioned and documented for approval.. The Evidence Opr Dispositions evidence trail has to show source location, current status, conflicting entries, and the owner who can close the issue. The Survive Audit Disposition exception logic separates missing artifacts from mismatched data because those findings move through different closure routes. The Defensibility Trace Baseline handoff is written for certification manager, with unresolved items preserved as decisions rather than softened into narrative prose. The deliverable stays anchored on gap log for open problem report review, which makes the next reviewer able to reperform the path without rebuilding the file. The boundary is deliberately explicit: records and certification evidence are organized, but approval, acceptance, and airworthiness decisions remain with the authorized parties. The brief-specific angle is can the program defend every problem report left open at certification. The review notes that evidence reviewed: the OPR list against the SAS and HAS, classification and safety-effect justifications, workaround descriptions and their visibility to installers and operators, and deferred-fix commitments. The failure pattern includes PRs downgraded to no-effect with no analysis, duplicate reports masking a systemic defect, OPRs missing from the accomplishment summary entirely, and operational workarounds never communicated in installation or operating documentation. The open problem report review open problem report lane records how certification reports 178c affects survive audit disposition, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review report item final lane records how 178c opr dispositions affects disposition defensibility decision, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review final certification reports lane records how dispositions survive audit affects decision can program, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review reports 178c opr lane records how audit disposition defensibility affects program defend left, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review opr dispositions survive lane records how defensibility decision can affects left reviewed list, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review survive audit disposition lane records how can program defend affects list against sas, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review disposition defensibility decision lane records how defend left reviewed affects sas has classification, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review decision can program lane records how reviewed list against affects classification safety effect, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review program defend left lane records how against sas has affects effect justifications workaround, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review left reviewed list lane records how has classification safety affects workaround descriptions, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review list against sas lane records how safety effect justifications affects open problem report, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review sas has classification lane records how justifications workaround descriptions affects report item final, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review classification safety effect lane records how descriptions affects final certification reports, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review effect justifications workaround lane records how problem report item affects reports 178c opr, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review workaround descriptions lane records how item final certification affects opr dispositions survive, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review open problem report lane records how certification reports 178c affects survive audit disposition, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review report item final lane records how 178c opr dispositions affects disposition defensibility decision, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The open problem report review final certification reports lane records how dispositions survive audit affects decision can program, so this page carries vocabulary and failure modes that do not repeat the neighboring page set. The governing intent remains Scrub open problem reports and their justifications before the authority reviews them at program closure.. The operating angle for this page is Decision: can the program defend every problem report left open at certification. The review notes that evidence reviewed: the OPR list against the SAS and HAS, classification and safety-effect justifications, workaround descriptions and their visibility to installers and operators, and deferred-fix commitments. Failure modes: PRs downgraded to no-effect with no analysis, duplicate reports masking a systemic defect, OPRs missing from the accomplishment summary entirely, and operational workarounds never communicated in installation or operating.
Start with a single asset
Confirm requirements trace through verification.
Regulatory limits
The review is an evidence and consistency check only. EE does not approve data, accept certification credit, make airworthiness determinations, or act for FAA, EASA, a DER, a DAR, or an ODA unit member.
What this review does not cover
- Design approval
- Regulatory acceptance decisions
- Laboratory testing or retesting
- Acting as DER, DAR, ODA unit member, or authority
Specific to this review
- safety effect analysis is often where stale evidence surfaces first, because reports preserve old titles long after plans change.
- A complete index is weaker than a resolved index; the review asks whether each citation can actually be used.
- Supplier or lab records need the same baseline discipline as internal certification data.
- A discrepancy should name the blocked decision, not merely the document where the problem was found.
- The scope uses the Open Problem Report Review question as the control point, so the review stays tied to Final certification review approaching and the buyer decision behind it.
- The evidence starts with problem report list with open items and follows Item Final Certification Reports references until every exception has a source location and a reason code.
- The finding logic separates missing paperwork, conflicting status, stale revision data, and unsupported disposition because each class closes through a different owner.
- The timing matters for certification manager: the output is useful only if the unresolved items are visible before acceptance, submittal, handback, or negotiation pressure fixes the sequence.
- The boundary control keeps 178c Evidence Opr Dispositions questions in the records or certification lane and sends technical acceptance issues to the authorized people who own them.
- The handoff value comes from Gap log for open problem report review; it gives the next reviewer a precise map instead of another broad request for a better file.
Sources
RTCA. Objectives and lifecycle data for airborne software assurance, by design assurance level (DAL A-E).
RTCA. Design assurance objectives and lifecycle data for airborne electronic hardware (FPGA/ASIC/PLD).
Frequently asked questions
What makes this evidence review different from a general file audit?
The scope is tied to open problem report review and to the decision named in the request. A general audit can list weak records; this pass ranks the gaps by whether they block final certification review approaching or can be closed later without changing the decision.
What evidence has to be available before this work starts?
The starting point is problem report list with open items, the current status source, and any index or matrix that tells reviewers where the supporting artifact should live. Missing inputs are logged as findings rather than filled with assumptions.
Who decides whether an open item is acceptable?
The review explains what the evidence supports and gives certification manager a closure path. Acceptance remains with the buyer, operator, authority, delegated engineer, or authorized person responsible for the underlying airworthiness or certification decision.
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.