Aircraft departed airport with MEL requirement deficiency.

Attributes
ACN	205755
Time
Date	199203
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : roc
State Reference	NY
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Medium Large Transport, Low Wing, 2 Turbojet Eng
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : flight engineer pilot : atp pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 110 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 3000
ASRS Report	205755
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : cfi pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time total : 10110 flight time type : 2000
ASRS Report	204880
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe non adherence : far other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted
Consequence	faa : investigated
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation other

Narrative:

FAA inspector advised during his cabin inspection that breakaway tension on seatback 2C was insufficient, and referred me to our MEL, which said the seat must be blocked and considered inoperative. I spoke with our maintenance control in pit, and they read me a letter which said 1 seatback tension could be shot if the 1 across the aisle was ok. He gave me a logbook signoff, and I advised the inspector that our maintenance department had advised me that current policy superseded the MEL, and that I was going to fly to pit with no further maintenance action. He advised me that I may be in violation, and he would not go on the airplane. I said fire, he got off, and we left. After arriving in pit, I spoke with maintenance again, and they told me that they had goofed and the MEL was correct after all, and that the letter they had read to me had been superseded by a new revision to the equipment maintenance manual. So I did violate myself, apparently, although I followed instructions thought to be valid from our maintenance controllers.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACFT DEPARTED ARPT WITH MEL REQUIREMENT DEFICIENCY.

Narrative: FAA INSPECTOR ADVISED DURING HIS CABIN INSPECTION THAT BREAKAWAY TENSION ON SEATBACK 2C WAS INSUFFICIENT, AND REFERRED ME TO OUR MEL, WHICH SAID THE SEAT MUST BE BLOCKED AND CONSIDERED INOP. I SPOKE WITH OUR MAINT CTL IN PIT, AND THEY READ ME A LETTER WHICH SAID 1 SEATBACK TENSION COULD BE SHOT IF THE 1 ACROSS THE AISLE WAS OK. HE GAVE ME A LOGBOOK SIGNOFF, AND I ADVISED THE INSPECTOR THAT OUR MAINT DEPT HAD ADVISED ME THAT CURRENT POLICY SUPERSEDED THE MEL, AND THAT I WAS GOING TO FLY TO PIT WITH NO FURTHER MAINT ACTION. HE ADVISED ME THAT I MAY BE IN VIOLATION, AND HE WOULD NOT GO ON THE AIRPLANE. I SAID FIRE, HE GOT OFF, AND WE LEFT. AFTER ARRIVING IN PIT, I SPOKE WITH MAINT AGAIN, AND THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY HAD GOOFED AND THE MEL WAS CORRECT AFTER ALL, AND THAT THE LETTER THEY HAD READ TO ME HAD BEEN SUPERSEDED BY A NEW REVISION TO THE EQUIP MAINT MANUAL. SO I DID VIOLATE MYSELF, APPARENTLY, ALTHOUGH I FOLLOWED INSTRUCTIONS THOUGHT TO BE VALID FROM OUR MAINT CTLRS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.