An airbus 319 was dispatched in non compliance with the incorrect CAT 3 autoland check accomplished.

Attributes
ACN	517247
Time
Date	200107
Day	Mon
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : zzz.airport
State Reference	US
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : c90.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A319
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : maintenance
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	maintenance : technician
Qualification	technician : powerplant technician : airframe
ASRS Report	517247
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : improper maintenance maintenance problem : improper documentation non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far
Independent Detector	other other : person 1
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	other
Factors
Maintenance	performance deficiency : testing performance deficiency : logbook entry
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft Maintenance Human Performance
Primary Problem	Maintenance Human Performance

Narrative:

Aircraft XXX came in to gate with an 'elac 2 pitch fault' which occurred in-flight, but then went away. I performed 'caats' check for this fault and could not duplicate. Operations checks as outlined or called for in 'caats' task 27-93-00-810-880 section 3.1., were performed satisfactory, with no faults noted. One previous event occurred in-flight momentarily on jul/xa/01, with also no faults noted. I signed off this item as operations test ok, per the 'caats' tasks, then made an additional item stating a CAT functional check was required for elac 2 fault. This item was signed off by avionics personnel as 'no open items in CAT system' aircraft certified CAT 3A/B.' after aircraft left, I read the air carrier maintenance policy and procedures manual concerning CAT events and repairs. Per chapter 320-23, section 4-H, I discovered that a repeat item that cannot be verified (cannot duplicate fault) must have a satisfactory functional check will be required. This is the step I missed on my signoff and tests. I stated only an operations test was accomplished.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN AIRBUS 319 WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE INCORRECT CAT 3 AUTOLAND CHK ACCOMPLISHED.

Narrative: ACFT XXX CAME IN TO GATE WITH AN 'ELAC 2 PITCH FAULT' WHICH OCCURRED INFLT, BUT THEN WENT AWAY. I PERFORMED 'CAATS' CHK FOR THIS FAULT AND COULD NOT DUPLICATE. OPS CHKS AS OUTLINED OR CALLED FOR IN 'CAATS' TASK 27-93-00-810-880 SECTION 3.1., WERE PERFORMED SATISFACTORY, WITH NO FAULTS NOTED. ONE PREVIOUS EVENT OCCURRED INFLT MOMENTARILY ON JUL/XA/01, WITH ALSO NO FAULTS NOTED. I SIGNED OFF THIS ITEM AS OPS TEST OK, PER THE 'CAATS' TASKS, THEN MADE AN ADDITIONAL ITEM STATING A CAT FUNCTIONAL CHK WAS REQUIRED FOR ELAC 2 FAULT. THIS ITEM WAS SIGNED OFF BY AVIONICS PERSONNEL AS 'NO OPEN ITEMS IN CAT SYS' ACFT CERTIFIED CAT 3A/B.' AFTER ACFT LEFT, I READ THE ACR MAINT POLICY AND PROCS MANUAL CONCERNING CAT EVENTS AND REPAIRS. PER CHAPTER 320-23, SECTION 4-H, I DISCOVERED THAT A REPEAT ITEM THAT CANNOT BE VERIFIED (CANNOT DUPLICATE FAULT) MUST HAVE A SATISFACTORY FUNCTIONAL CHK WILL BE REQUIRED. THIS IS THE STEP I MISSED ON MY SIGNOFF AND TESTS. I STATED ONLY AN OPS TEST WAS ACCOMPLISHED.

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.