Narrative:

On nov/xa-xb/98, I verified work accomplished by several a&P licensed maintenance technicians on aircraft xyz. The aircraft is an ETOPS B767. The work accomplished was: tech #1 -- bite checked APU M206 box -- no faults found. Tech #2 -- changed rinse line water filters -- leak checked ok. Techs made logbook entries stating work was done (log pages ZZZY and zzxx). Due to misunderstanding between air carrier maintenance policies and procedures and inspection management, I signed also on the corrective action block on the log pages, verifying the work. Even though I am ETOPS qualified, I now believe they should not have signed any corrective action.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B767-200 IN ETOPS CONFIGN WAS REPAIRED AND RETURNED TO SVC BY NON ETOPS QUALIFIED TECHNICIANS.

Narrative: ON NOV/XA-XB/98, I VERIFIED WORK ACCOMPLISHED BY SEVERAL A&P LICENSED MAINT TECHNICIANS ON ACFT XYZ. THE ACFT IS AN ETOPS B767. THE WORK ACCOMPLISHED WAS: TECH #1 -- BITE CHKED APU M206 BOX -- NO FAULTS FOUND. TECH #2 -- CHANGED RINSE LINE WATER FILTERS -- LEAK CHKED OK. TECHS MADE LOGBOOK ENTRIES STATING WORK WAS DONE (LOG PAGES ZZZY AND ZZXX). DUE TO MISUNDERSTANDING BTWN ACR MAINT POLICIES AND PROCS AND INSPECTION MGMNT, I SIGNED ALSO ON THE CORRECTIVE ACTION BLOCK ON THE LOG PAGES, VERIFYING THE WORK. EVEN THOUGH I AM ETOPS QUALIFIED, I NOW BELIEVE THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE SIGNED ANY CORRECTIVE ACTION.

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.