Air carrier aircraft maintenance discrepancy found through logbook review by mechanic. Company groun...

Narrative:

On jul/sat/93, I was instructed by maintenance supervisor that aircraft was at ord hangar and it needed an airworthiness release because of a preflight inspection that was accomplished by first shift. I was reviewing the aircraft maintenance log and noticed that, on jun/xx/93, there were 3 discrepancies that required engine rigging. The engine rigging was signed off but was not r-two'ed. I called the terminal and maintenance supervisor answered on the speaker phone. I told him we had a problem on aircraft that had to do with r-two items not r-two'ed on jun/xx/93. Base maintenance manager was also present on the speaker phone and commented 'why the hell is he going back to the XXXX.' I replied that I always review further back and that still doesn't mean it's ok. Maintenance supervisor then told me that, if I was so concerned then it looks like I got some r-two'ing to do. I then asked him to send me a runup qualified mechanic. And then base maintenance manager said that would not be necessary because this was a previous airworthiness prior to the one that I was responsible for. Then I told him that I was looking out for the mechanics and inspector and I really think this aircraft should be held OTS until the personnel involved could be notified and the proper entries made. He, base maintenance manager, told me not to worry about it and let the aircraft fly and to give him 2 photocopies of the aml page and he would take care of it. Maintenance supervisor then told me that, if I am still concerned about it, to look at the safeties and make sure everything is saftied. I opened up the left engine FCU panel on aircraft and everything appeared to be safetied. I notified maintenance supervisor when I got back to the terminal that everything appeared to be safetied and gave 2 photocopies of the aml page to base maintenance manager. He then reassured me that he would give the chief inspector a copy as soon as he saw him and I was not liable because this happened on an airworthiness release that was prior to the one that I was responsible for.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR ACFT MAINT DISCREPANCY FOUND THROUGH LOGBOOK REVIEW BY MECH. CGP SUPVR, MGR AND INSPECTOR SEEM UNCONCERNED AND DIRECT RPTR TO OFFER THEM PAGES FOR REVIEW AND CORRECTIONS.

Narrative: ON JUL/SAT/93, I WAS INSTRUCTED BY MAINT SUPVR THAT ACFT WAS AT ORD HANGAR AND IT NEEDED AN AIRWORTHINESS RELEASE BECAUSE OF A PREFLT INSPECTION THAT WAS ACCOMPLISHED BY FIRST SHIFT. I WAS REVIEWING THE ACFT MAINT LOG AND NOTICED THAT, ON JUN/XX/93, THERE WERE 3 DISCREPANCIES THAT REQUIRED ENG RIGGING. THE ENG RIGGING WAS SIGNED OFF BUT WAS NOT R-TWO'ED. I CALLED THE TERMINAL AND MAINT SUPVR ANSWERED ON THE SPEAKER PHONE. I TOLD HIM WE HAD A PROB ON ACFT THAT HAD TO DO WITH R-TWO ITEMS NOT R-TWO'ED ON JUN/XX/93. BASE MAINT MGR WAS ALSO PRESENT ON THE SPEAKER PHONE AND COMMENTED 'WHY THE HELL IS HE GOING BACK TO THE XXXX.' I REPLIED THAT I ALWAYS REVIEW FURTHER BACK AND THAT STILL DOESN'T MEAN IT'S OK. MAINT SUPVR THEN TOLD ME THAT, IF I WAS SO CONCERNED THEN IT LOOKS LIKE I GOT SOME R-TWO'ING TO DO. I THEN ASKED HIM TO SEND ME A RUNUP QUALIFIED MECH. AND THEN BASE MAINT MGR SAID THAT WOULD NOT BE NECESSARY BECAUSE THIS WAS A PREVIOUS AIRWORTHINESS PRIOR TO THE ONE THAT I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR. THEN I TOLD HIM THAT I WAS LOOKING OUT FOR THE MECHS AND INSPECTOR AND I REALLY THINK THIS ACFT SHOULD BE HELD OTS UNTIL THE PERSONNEL INVOLVED COULD BE NOTIFIED AND THE PROPER ENTRIES MADE. HE, BASE MAINT MGR, TOLD ME NOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT AND LET THE ACFT FLY AND TO GIVE HIM 2 PHOTOCOPIES OF THE AML PAGE AND HE WOULD TAKE CARE OF IT. MAINT SUPVR THEN TOLD ME THAT, IF I AM STILL CONCERNED ABOUT IT, TO LOOK AT THE SAFETIES AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS SAFTIED. I OPENED UP THE L ENG FCU PANEL ON ACFT AND EVERYTHING APPEARED TO BE SAFETIED. I NOTIFIED MAINT SUPVR WHEN I GOT BACK TO THE TERMINAL THAT EVERYTHING APPEARED TO BE SAFETIED AND GAVE 2 PHOTOCOPIES OF THE AML PAGE TO BASE MAINT MGR. HE THEN REASSURED ME THAT HE WOULD GIVE THE CHIEF INSPECTOR A COPY AS SOON AS HE SAW HIM AND I WAS NOT LIABLE BECAUSE THIS HAPPENED ON AN AIRWORTHINESS RELEASE THAT WAS PRIOR TO THE ONE THAT I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR.

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.

Attributes
ACN	245921
Time
Date	199307
Day	Sat
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : ord
State Reference	IL
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 Transport, High Wing, 2 Turboprop Eng
Flight Phase	other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	other personnel other
Qualification	other other : other
ASRS Report	245921
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	other personnel other oversight : supervisor
Qualification	other other : other
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other other : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : unable
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Aircraft
Air Traffic Incident	other

Air carrier aircraft maintenance discrepancy found through logbook review by mechanic. Company ground personnel supervisor, manager and inspector seem unconcerned and direct reporter to offer them pages for review and corrections.