Narrative:

2 co-workers and I were assigned to install the #2 leading edge slat on aircraft X. In doing so, I believe we installed a part against policy which could allow for an unairworthy part to be installed. We received our work assignment and were advised the part was here at the maintenance facility. The slat is a loaner part from boeing and came with FAA form 8130-3. We were concerned by the lack of an I&right tag which is the mechanic's proof of a receiving inspection and overall airworthiness of the received part. In checking the illustrated parts catalog, the part number was not effective for the ship. We advised our lead of the problem and he produced boeing's redars compatibility matrix. The matrix showed the part and dash number to be compatible with our plane with no modification required. The question of a need for receiving inspection still remained. We found the procedure for a loner part in the ysop which clearly states the loner part will have an I&right tag attached after receiving inspection and prior to delivery to the dock. We questioned our team coordinator and were advised that the policy was being changed. He stated the X SOP overrides the Y SOP and that it was ok to continue. We requested that he show us the procedure in the X SOP as we were unable to find it. He denied our request and ordered us to install the part. Believing that the part did not get a receiving inspection, we performed a visual inspection of the part and noted no defects. Feeling the part was otherwise acceptable (referencing FAA form 8130-3 and redars matrix) at the order of our team coordinator we installed the slat referencing the maintenance manual and job card.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757-200 L WING SLAT REPLACEMENT DID NOT RECEIVE THE REQUIRED PRE INSTALLATION INSPECTION AND PART TAG PER THE COMPANY REGS.

Narrative: 2 CO-WORKERS AND I WERE ASSIGNED TO INSTALL THE #2 LEADING EDGE SLAT ON ACFT X. IN DOING SO, I BELIEVE WE INSTALLED A PART AGAINST POLICY WHICH COULD ALLOW FOR AN UNAIRWORTHY PART TO BE INSTALLED. WE RECEIVED OUR WORK ASSIGNMENT AND WERE ADVISED THE PART WAS HERE AT THE MAINT FACILITY. THE SLAT IS A LOANER PART FROM BOEING AND CAME WITH FAA FORM 8130-3. WE WERE CONCERNED BY THE LACK OF AN I&R TAG WHICH IS THE MECH'S PROOF OF A RECEIVING INSPECTION AND OVERALL AIRWORTHINESS OF THE RECEIVED PART. IN CHKING THE ILLUSTRATED PARTS CATALOG, THE PART NUMBER WAS NOT EFFECTIVE FOR THE SHIP. WE ADVISED OUR LEAD OF THE PROB AND HE PRODUCED BOEING'S REDARS COMPATIBILITY MATRIX. THE MATRIX SHOWED THE PART AND DASH NUMBER TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH OUR PLANE WITH NO MODIFICATION REQUIRED. THE QUESTION OF A NEED FOR RECEIVING INSPECTION STILL REMAINED. WE FOUND THE PROC FOR A LONER PART IN THE YSOP WHICH CLRLY STATES THE LONER PART WILL HAVE AN I&R TAG ATTACHED AFTER RECEIVING INSPECTION AND PRIOR TO DELIVERY TO THE DOCK. WE QUESTIONED OUR TEAM COORDINATOR AND WERE ADVISED THAT THE POLICY WAS BEING CHANGED. HE STATED THE X SOP OVERRIDES THE Y SOP AND THAT IT WAS OK TO CONTINUE. WE REQUESTED THAT HE SHOW US THE PROC IN THE X SOP AS WE WERE UNABLE TO FIND IT. HE DENIED OUR REQUEST AND ORDERED US TO INSTALL THE PART. BELIEVING THAT THE PART DID NOT GET A RECEIVING INSPECTION, WE PERFORMED A VISUAL INSPECTION OF THE PART AND NOTED NO DEFECTS. FEELING THE PART WAS OTHERWISE ACCEPTABLE (REFING FAA FORM 8130-3 AND REDARS MATRIX) AT THE ORDER OF OUR TEAM COORDINATOR WE INSTALLED THE SLAT REFING THE MAINT MANUAL AND JOB CARD.

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.