Narrative:

I was made aware that aircraft X had overflown a few repetitive inspections. It was determined that the re-inspect items were facted out [in the program] rather than deferred; continue inspection. [The] desk advised myself and another [technician] that the mod should stop the aircraft due to the overfly condition. I had just came on shift when this occurred. I coordinated with the workload supervisor to have the fact removed and made into an information item; so that the tii's could be assigned to ZZZ for the overnight bow. The items were again facted out by ZZZ and again changed to an information [item] and the aircraft continued on the next day.I suspect that when the mechanic facted out the item; his only option were to either defer; which he wouldn't do since he did the inspection; or accomplish; wherein he take accountability for his inspection. Sometimes safe provided the mechanic with accomplished-re-inspect; and those are put into safe as an information.ensure that the mechanic is given a drop down menu option of accomplished-re-inspect; rather than just accomplished; so that he and his station may take credit for the work assigned to the bow. In addition; the afmm 20.11.33 states; if not repaired within the 120-day limit; maintenance control can extend the tii or mon (monitor) for an additional 120-day period. Maintenance control can extend this terminating action limit as many times as required until downtime; parts and manpower are available to address the deferral. This extension and continuing re-inspect will create opportunities for instances such as this to occur. My recommendation is that the 120 day permanent repair be held firm; with no extension.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Technician reported that aircraft overflew required reinspections due to improper computer entries.

Narrative: I was made aware that Aircraft X had overflown a few repetitive inspections. It was determined that the re-inspect items were FACTED out [in the program] rather than deferred; continue inspection. [The] desk advised myself and another [technician] that the MOD should stop the aircraft due to the overfly condition. I had just came on shift when this occurred. I coordinated with the Workload Supervisor to have the FACT removed and made into an INFO item; so that the TII's could be assigned to ZZZ for the Overnight BOW. The items were again FACTED out by ZZZ and again changed to an INFO [item] and the aircraft continued on the next day.I suspect that when the mechanic FACTED out the item; his only option were to either DEFER; which he wouldn't do since he did the inspection; or ACCOMPLISH; wherein he take accountability for his inspection. Sometimes SAFE provided the mechanic with ACCOMPLISHED-RE-INSPECT; and those are put into SAFE as an INFO.Ensure that the mechanic is given a drop down menu option of ACCOMPLISHED-RE-INSPECT; rather than just ACCOMPLISHED; so that he and his station may take credit for the work assigned to the BOW. In addition; the AFMM 20.11.33 states; if not repaired within the 120-day limit; Maintenance Control can extend the TII or MON (Monitor) for an additional 120-day period. Maintenance Control can extend this terminating action limit as many times as required until downtime; parts and manpower are available to address the deferral. This extension and continuing re-inspect will create opportunities for instances such as this to occur. My recommendation is that the 120 day permanent repair be held firm; with no extension.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.