Narrative:

Aircraft had deferral on aft main tank fuel pump. Air carrier aircraft, mco to jfk was released by the previous shift dispatcher. On taking the next shift, I noticed that the penalty had only been partially applied, but the minimum release fuel of 24000 pounds had not. The flight plan had calculated during previous shift to a total of 23458 pounds. A new release was issued 5 mins prior to departure time with more fuel. Normally, when reviewing oversights in application of MEL stipulations, the company had invariably emphasized the necessity for constant vigilance. This is always good advice, and it cannot be denied that the dispatcher must do the work correctly and without fault. However, when the mistake is made by a dispatcher of the integrity of this dispatcher, it calls to question the adequacy of dispatch staffing by company X management. The example again illustrates the high workload placed on dispatch staff, which is becoming a more pertinent issue with the addition of workload associated with the staff downsizing resulting from the events of 9/tue/01. In other words, if someone as outstanding as this dispatcher cannot do the dispatch function properly, one should question whether anyone is capable of these duties as the certificate holder has established them.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR DISPATCH SUPVR DETECTED AN INCORRECTLY APPLIED FUEL ADDITION TO COMPLY WITH MEL RESTRICTIONS.

Narrative: ACFT HAD DEFERRAL ON AFT MAIN TANK FUEL PUMP. ACR ACFT, MCO TO JFK WAS RELEASED BY THE PREVIOUS SHIFT DISPATCHER. ON TAKING THE NEXT SHIFT, I NOTICED THAT THE PENALTY HAD ONLY BEEN PARTIALLY APPLIED, BUT THE MINIMUM RELEASE FUEL OF 24000 LBS HAD NOT. THE FLT PLAN HAD CALCULATED DURING PREVIOUS SHIFT TO A TOTAL OF 23458 LBS. A NEW RELEASE WAS ISSUED 5 MINS PRIOR TO DEP TIME WITH MORE FUEL. NORMALLY, WHEN REVIEWING OVERSIGHTS IN APPLICATION OF MEL STIPULATIONS, THE COMPANY HAD INVARIABLY EMPHASIZED THE NECESSITY FOR CONSTANT VIGILANCE. THIS IS ALWAYS GOOD ADVICE, AND IT CANNOT BE DENIED THAT THE DISPATCHER MUST DO THE WORK CORRECTLY AND WITHOUT FAULT. HOWEVER, WHEN THE MISTAKE IS MADE BY A DISPATCHER OF THE INTEGRITY OF THIS DISPATCHER, IT CALLS TO QUESTION THE ADEQUACY OF DISPATCH STAFFING BY COMPANY X MANAGEMENT. THE EXAMPLE AGAIN ILLUSTRATES THE HIGH WORKLOAD PLACED ON DISPATCH STAFF, WHICH IS BECOMING A MORE PERTINENT ISSUE WITH THE ADDITION OF WORKLOAD ASSOCIATED WITH THE STAFF DOWNSIZING RESULTING FROM THE EVENTS OF 9/TUE/01. IN OTHER WORDS, IF SOMEONE AS OUTSTANDING AS THIS DISPATCHER CANNOT DO THE DISPATCH FUNCTION PROPERLY, ONE SHOULD QUESTION WHETHER ANYONE IS CAPABLE OF THESE DUTIES AS THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER HAS ESTABLISHED THEM.

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.