Narrative:

I was the maintenance control coordinator on shift when we took the call from the [flight] crew that the [forward] left main passenger door (L1) slide was accidently; partially deployed. We then had our on-call contract maintenance (ocm) come out and inspect and determined [whether] the slide [release] strings started to come apart. I informed him [the contract mechanic] that we would have to send a road trip [maintenance crew] from ZZZ1 to replace the slide assembly. I then made a call to shift supervisor X and informed him what the incident was and that we needed him and another mechanic to go replace the slide assembly.I then pulled up the aircraft illustrated parts catalog (aipc) and looked at the part numbers (P/ns) to see if they had any in stock. I then pulled the P/north off the aipc; P/north XXX-5; and looked up the location in our contract provider's software parts inventory program. I then called supervisor X back and had him verify stock. He then checked the aipc as well and determined they had the slide in stock. He then called me back and said he and another mechanic were going to replace the slide. At that time we had several other aircraft out of service [that] we were working and [we were] short staffed; so I wasn't able to fully indulge myself into the situation. I expected supervisor X to run with it and take care of the situation as far as parts and manual references go. I heard nothing back from them until they had the old slide removed when supervisor X called back and said the old slide they removed had a different P/north that stated '190' on the slide assembly and the one they had [from stock] stated '170.' that's when I pulled the aipc back up and we reviewed the aipc together. We both agreed that the aipc showed the P/north above as being valid on this erj-190; but before moving further we wanted additional review. That's when I called and spoke to our base maintenance lead inspector about the issue. I asked him to pull up the aipc and explained to him our situation. I reviewed the aipc and he agreed with us with the part being valid for installation. I then called the supervisor back and told him that after talking to the lead inspector; we are good to install the part. He agreed and they moved forward. After installing the slide; the supervisor called back and said he still didn't feel comfortable with it but agreed that the aipc showed it was good. The next day; he called up and talked to me again about it and I told him that if he was still worried; I would move another slide with the '190' showing on it and they can go back and replace the slide assembly again. After getting back to the office; the supervisor contacted the aircraft manufacturer asking for further guidance on the issue. They responded later with the fact that they agreed the aipc was wrong/misleading and would remove this P/north from the aipc during their next [aipc] revision. We then put the erj-190 out of service and sent a road trip to ZZZ to replace the slide assembly. While I agree the wrong part was installed; I believe the incorrect/misleading aipc led to this situation happening. The aipc was incorrectly labeled and misleading; causing us to install an in-effective [not-effective] part on the aircraft. Workload saturation. Reference material incorrect.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Maintenance Control Coordinator and another Controller report about a Forward Entry Door escape slide that was replaced on an ERJ-190 aircraft using the Manufacturer's Aircraft Illustrated Parts Catalog (AIPC). Escape slide installed was 'Not Effective' for the aircraft due to AIPC was found to have incorrect and misleading Part Number (P/N) information.

Narrative: I was the Maintenance Control Coordinator on shift when we took the call from the [flight] crew that the [Forward] Left Main Passenger Door (L1) slide was accidently; partially deployed. We then had our On-call Contract Maintenance (OCM) come out and inspect and determined [whether] the slide [release] strings started to come apart. I informed him [the Contract Mechanic] that we would have to send a road trip [Maintenance crew] from ZZZ1 to replace the slide assembly. I then made a call to Shift Supervisor X and informed him what the incident was and that we needed him and another mechanic to go replace the slide assembly.I then pulled up the Aircraft Illustrated Parts Catalog (AIPC) and looked at the Part Numbers (P/Ns) to see if they had any in stock. I then pulled the P/N off the AIPC; P/N XXX-5; and looked up the location in our Contract Provider's software Parts Inventory program. I then called Supervisor X back and had him verify stock. He then checked the AIPC as well and determined they had the slide in stock. He then called me back and said he and another Mechanic were going to replace the slide. At that time we had several other aircraft out of service [that] we were working and [we were] short staffed; so I wasn't able to fully indulge myself into the situation. I expected Supervisor X to run with it and take care of the situation as far as parts and manual references go. I heard nothing back from them until they had the old slide removed when Supervisor X called back and said the old slide they removed had a different P/N that stated '190' on the slide assembly and the one they had [from stock] stated '170.' That's when I pulled the AIPC back up and we reviewed the AIPC together. We both agreed that the AIPC showed the P/N above as being valid on this ERJ-190; but before moving further we wanted additional review. That's when I called and spoke to our Base Maintenance Lead Inspector about the issue. I asked him to pull up the AIPC and explained to him our situation. I reviewed the AIPC and he agreed with us with the part being valid for installation. I then called the Supervisor back and told him that after talking to the Lead Inspector; we are good to install the part. He agreed and they moved forward. After installing the slide; the Supervisor called back and said he still didn't feel comfortable with it but agreed that the AIPC showed it was good. The next day; he called up and talked to me again about it and I told him that if he was still worried; I would move another slide with the '190' showing on it and they can go back and replace the slide assembly again. After getting back to the office; the Supervisor contacted the Aircraft Manufacturer asking for further guidance on the issue. They responded later with the fact that they agreed the AIPC was wrong/misleading and would remove this P/N from the AIPC during their next [AIPC] revision. We then put the ERJ-190 out of service and sent a road trip to ZZZ to replace the slide assembly. While I agree the wrong part was installed; I believe the incorrect/misleading AIPC led to this situation happening. The AIPC was incorrectly labeled and misleading; causing us to install an in-effective [Not-Effective] part on the aircraft. Workload saturation. Reference material incorrect.

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.