Narrative:

A flight planned for edaf-kbgr was preplanned by a dispatcher that I had relieved earlier in the evening. He had planned the route over the north atlantic to be operated 180 ETOPS (3 hours). He had not seen a MEL item which restr the aircraft to 120 ETOPS (2 hours). After a quick briefing I accepted the turnover without hesitation expecting all items had been reviewed carefully. Approximately 30 mins prior to departure the 'reclear airport' alternate fell below alternate airport minimums and a revision was needed. I revised the flight plan without revising the MEL items. Again, I had believed the flight had been properly planned earlier. The revision was sent to edaf. The captain accepted the conditions on the release (flight plan) and departed for kbgr. Later that morning I was planning for the flight which operated out of kbgr on the same aircraft. When I began to review the MEL I realized that an item (engine fire detection loop) had been deferred and the aircraft was not qualified for 180 ETOPS. By this time the edaf-kbgr flight was already across the north atlantic. The captain was notified once he had arrived in kbgr. As far as corrective action, when I am accepting a relief turnover I will be more cautious of the terms and conditions on the release (flight plan) and when revising a release I will carefully review the entire flight plan and preflight planning information prior to sending the information to the crew.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR DISPATCHER SENDS A B757-200 A 180 ETOPS RELEASE WHILE AN UNRPTED MEL REQUIREMENT ALTERS THE ACFT'S STATUS TO A 120 ETOPS.

Narrative: A FLT PLANNED FOR EDAF-KBGR WAS PREPLANNED BY A DISPATCHER THAT I HAD RELIEVED EARLIER IN THE EVENING. HE HAD PLANNED THE RTE OVER THE NORTH ATLANTIC TO BE OPERATED 180 ETOPS (3 HRS). HE HAD NOT SEEN A MEL ITEM WHICH RESTR THE ACFT TO 120 ETOPS (2 HRS). AFTER A QUICK BRIEFING I ACCEPTED THE TURNOVER WITHOUT HESITATION EXPECTING ALL ITEMS HAD BEEN REVIEWED CAREFULLY. APPROX 30 MINS PRIOR TO DEP THE 'RECLEAR ARPT' ALTERNATE FELL BELOW ALTERNATE ARPT MINIMUMS AND A REVISION WAS NEEDED. I REVISED THE FLT PLAN WITHOUT REVISING THE MEL ITEMS. AGAIN, I HAD BELIEVED THE FLT HAD BEEN PROPERLY PLANNED EARLIER. THE REVISION WAS SENT TO EDAF. THE CAPT ACCEPTED THE CONDITIONS ON THE RELEASE (FLT PLAN) AND DEPARTED FOR KBGR. LATER THAT MORNING I WAS PLANNING FOR THE FLT WHICH OPERATED OUT OF KBGR ON THE SAME ACFT. WHEN I BEGAN TO REVIEW THE MEL I REALIZED THAT AN ITEM (ENG FIRE DETECTION LOOP) HAD BEEN DEFERRED AND THE ACFT WAS NOT QUALIFIED FOR 180 ETOPS. BY THIS TIME THE EDAF-KBGR FLT WAS ALREADY ACROSS THE NORTH ATLANTIC. THE CAPT WAS NOTIFIED ONCE HE HAD ARRIVED IN KBGR. AS FAR AS CORRECTIVE ACTION, WHEN I AM ACCEPTING A RELIEF TURNOVER I WILL BE MORE CAUTIOUS OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON THE RELEASE (FLT PLAN) AND WHEN REVISING A RELEASE I WILL CAREFULLY REVIEW THE ENTIRE FLT PLAN AND PREFLT PLANNING INFO PRIOR TO SENDING THE INFO TO THE CREW.

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.