01 / REVIEW
Record the document identity
Capture issuer, title, date, identifier and version. Keep the original file separately from notes or marked-up copies. A filename alone is a weak reference when people rename attachments.
02 / REVIEW
Map the claim
State the specific information supported: a transaction, stated species, quantity or origin statement. Do not let a document’s official appearance expand its meaning to unrelated claims.
03 / REVIEW
Record the link
Identify the lot, shipment or transaction referenced. If that connection is missing, mark it unresolved. A valid document can still be irrelevant to the physical material under review.
Read documents by the claim they support
Start with one physical lot and ask what you need to know about it. Then list the documents that actually address those questions. An invoice may connect a buyer, seller and quantity. A packing list may identify bundles. A supplier statement may describe origin. Those are different relationships, even when the documents arrive in the same email.
Keep the original document intact. Record its issuer, date, identifier and revision in the inventory, together with the lot or shipment it names. If the material link is absent, the document can remain in the folder while its relevance remains unresolved. An official-looking logo does not fill that gap.
Work a fictional document set
| Available item | What the reviewer can record | What remains open |
|---|---|---|
| Invoice INV-24 | Transaction and stated quantity | Harvest location not stated |
| Packing list PL-24 | Bundles A and B associated with shipment | Whether the received labels match |
| Label photograph | Observed identifier on received material | Whether source documents cover that identifier |
| Supplier origin statement | Claim as written, issuer and scope | Any missing link to the specific lot |
In this example, the invoice and packing list agree on the shipment, but the origin statement names a different lot. Keep the disagreement visible and request a lot-specific clarification. Do not edit the statement or copy its claim into the received lot merely because the species description matches.
The finished inventory should let another reviewer move from a claim to its document and from that document to the physical material. It is an evidence map, not a certificate. Carry unanswered relationships into the missing-records review.
A lot-record scenario
Fictional example: an invoice supports a sale and quantity but contains no harvest statement. The origin field remains unknown instead of inheriting the seller’s address.
Use the result
Keep the completed review with the relevant project record. Assign unresolved items before relying on a conclusion. If the material, condition or document changes, revisit the affected questions.
Evidence workspaceTechnical references
General background for the subject. Project worksheets and fictional situations are original review aids, not official agency forms.
APHIS: Lacey declaration guidance