Field approval, finding closure
Field-approval finding closure register support
This support confirms that the finding and action-item register behind a field approval reflects real closure rather than a status field set to closed. It checks that each finding has an owner, links to the evidence that resolves it, and reaches a closure state supported by that evidence. An engineer who works finding registers runs it before the package is submitted. You receive a gap assessment separating closed-in-status items from closed-in-evidence ones, an evidence map from each finding to its resolution, and a closure plan for the register.
When this review is needed
- A field-approval project accumulated findings and action items and the register now has to show they are closed.
- Items are marked closed but no one has confirmed the closure evidence actually exists.
- A review found the register and the underlying evidence tell different stories about what is open.
- The package is near submission and open findings have to be resolved or dispositioned first.
The problem
A finding register is easy to close on paper and hard to close in fact. Under schedule pressure, items get their status flipped to closed while the evidence that was supposed to resolve them never lands, and the register stops matching reality. A reviewer reads the register as a claim that every issue is resolved, so a status-only closure is a claim the evidence cannot back, and those are exactly the items that reopen in formal review.
What gets reviewed
- Ownership of each finding and action item on the register
- Links from each item to the evidence intended to resolve it
- Closure state checked against the evidence rather than the status field alone
- Findings that share a root cause and should close together
- Dispositions for items that cannot be closed and must be carried
- Consistency between the register and the compliance evidence it references
Scope this review
Tell us the asset, the event, and the evidence in scope, and we will outline a focused first engagement.
Identify what is missing against the means of compliance.
What gets validated
- Each finding on the register has a named owner and a defined closure basis
- Every item marked closed links to evidence that actually resolves it
- Items closed by disposition state the basis and the residual exposure plainly
- Findings sharing a root cause are resolved consistently rather than piecemeal
- The register agrees with the compliance evidence it points to
Evidence normally required
- The finding and action-item register in its current state
- The closure evidence referenced against each item
- The compliance evidence the findings relate to
- Ownership and disposition records for the open items
- The certification basis the findings were raised against
Common discrepancies
- An item marked closed with no closure evidence attached to it
- Several findings from one root cause closed inconsistently across the register
- An open issue whose status was flipped to closed under schedule pressure
- A disposition that closes an item without stating its residual exposure
What is at stake
A register that shows closures the evidence does not support invites the reviewer to reopen items the modifier thought were behind them, stalling the package late. Worse, a genuinely open issue hidden under a closed status can surface after approval, when reversing course is far more costly than clearing it before submission.
How the work runs
Read the register
List every finding and action item with its owner and its claimed closure state.
Test each closure
Check that items marked closed link to evidence that actually resolves them rather than a status field alone.
Group by root cause
Identify findings that share a cause and confirm they close consistently.
Plan the remaining closures
Sequence the items the register cannot yet support, including dispositions for those that must be carried.
What the buyer receives
- A gap assessment separating status-only closures from evidence-backed ones
- An evidence map from each finding to the resolution it relies on
- A closure plan for the items the register cannot yet support
Who uses the output
- Engineering leads deciding which findings still need real closure evidence
- Compliance managers submitting a register that matches the evidence behind it
- Maintenance leadership relying on findings that were resolved rather than merely marked
How the work fits into the transaction or program
The finding register is the running record of what the field-approval project still owes, so this review pulls together the loose ends the other reviews raised. It confirms the register reflects real closure before submission, so the reviewer reads a claim the evidence can back rather than one that reopens under scrutiny.
Start with a single asset
Reduce finding cycles by checking the package first.
Regulatory limits
The review confirms that findings are closed with supporting evidence and reports where they are not. It does not close findings on the FAA's behalf, accept a disposition, make a compliance finding, or determine airworthiness of the installation.
What this review does not cover
- Performing the corrective work behind an open finding
- Accepting or approving a disposition on the FAA's behalf
- Deciding the airworthiness of the installed change
Specific to this review
- A status field set to closed is not closure; the evidence behind the item is what a reviewer actually reads.
- Findings that share a root cause should resolve together, and closing them piecemeal is where inconsistency creeps in.
- A genuinely open issue hidden under a closed status is costliest when it surfaces after approval rather than before submission.
Sources
U.S. Government (eCFR). Type certificates, STCs (Subpart E), TSO authorizations (Subpart O), PMA (Subpart K), and export airworthiness approvals (Subpart L).
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 type certification process, certification basis establishment, and compliance findings.
European Union / EASA. EASA design and production certification, STCs, ETSO authorizations, and EASA Form 1 release.
Frequently asked questions
The register already shows everything closed. What is left to review?
Whether the closures are real. A register can show every item closed while the supporting evidence for several of them was never attached. The review tests each closure against its evidence, so what reaches the reviewer is closure in fact rather than closure in status.
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.