Narrative:

We had a flight attendant change during this enroute turn for the flight crew. An FAA inspector boarded the aircraft to perform an inspection on our next leg. During his preflight; he found the aft cabin bulkhead exhaust louver window was pushed in; and the louver guard in the cargo compartment was damaged. Maintenance was contacted for repairs. The ground crew had loaded only a few bags for our destination; so the inspector believed that the aircraft had flown with the damaged louver case and guard. Since the damage was found after our inbound flight attendant had left the aircraft; I didn't have a chance to show and discuss the damage with him. The flight attendant manual indicates that flight attendants should preflight the louvers by checking that they are all closed. While the louvers were closed in this scenario; the aircraft wasn't airworthy because the louver case was not flush against the aft cabin bulkhead wall; an issue the flight attendant manual doesn't discuss; and flight attendants may not know to look for this. This was an airworthiness issue because the damaged louver guard and the resultant leaky cargo compartment due to the louver case not being flush against the bulkhead could have put the safety of the aircraft in question had we had a cargo fire enroute. It appears the flight attendant manual should be updated so the preflight inspection includes checking for closed louvers and checking that the louver case is flush against the aft bulkhead.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An FAA Inspector; boarding the CRJ-200 for an enroute check; discovered the aft cabin bulkhead louvers and the louver guard adjoining the cargo compartment were damaged rendering the jet unfit for service until properly repaired or replaced. The inability to seal off the cargo compartment would have compromised the safety of flight in the event of a cargo compartment fire.

Narrative: We had a flight attendant change during this enroute turn for the flight crew. An FAA Inspector boarded the aircraft to perform an inspection on our next leg. During his preflight; he found the AFT CABIN BULKHEAD EXHAUST LOUVER WINDOW was pushed in; and the LOUVER GUARD in the cargo compartment was damaged. Maintenance was contacted for repairs. The ground crew had loaded only a few bags for our destination; so the inspector believed that the aircraft had flown with the damaged louver case and guard. Since the damage was found after our inbound flight attendant had left the aircraft; I didn't have a chance to show and discuss the damage with him. The flight attendant manual indicates that flight attendants should preflight the louvers by checking that they are all closed. While the louvers were closed in this scenario; the aircraft wasn't airworthy because the louver case was not flush against the aft cabin bulkhead wall; an issue the flight attendant manual doesn't discuss; and flight attendants may not know to look for this. This was an airworthiness issue because the damaged louver guard and the resultant leaky cargo compartment due to the louver case not being flush against the bulkhead could have put the safety of the aircraft in question had we had a cargo fire enroute. It appears the flight attendant manual should be updated so the preflight inspection includes checking for closed louvers and checking that the louver case is flush against the aft bulkhead.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.