Narrative:

While aircraft X was in maintenance layover in ZZZ, it had a scheduled time controlled operation(required by ad 2001-14-19 'inspection of the slat track housings for fuel leaks'). During the inspection I was contacted by ZZZ lead mechanic, who informed me that they had found a fuel stain on the #5 slat track. He stated that he wiped the area but the stain reappeared after 15 mins. I checked the detailed instructions of the operation, which stated 'reference boeing maintenance manual 28-11-00 for fuel leak limits.' we then checked the limits and believed that the stain was within the maintenance manual limits. I asked that he forward the item to deferred maintenance item as per maintenance manual 28-11-00-6 fuel stain and as per flag note -2 'it is not necessary to repair the fuel leak immediately examine the fuel leak frequency to make sure that it does not get larger. Repair must be made at the earliest practical maintenance opportunity without delay.' I informed lead that I would route and stop the aircraft for inspection and repair. After the conversation I continued to review the job card and the maintenance manual. As I did I noticed a contradiction between steps a and B. Step B implied that the leak needed to be reworked/repaired as per maintenance manual 28-11-00. I spoke with several other coordinators as to their interpretation of the job card. After a discussion we decided that the best course of action would be to repair the leak in ZZZ. I called the ZZZ foreman and the lead mechanic and informed them that the item needed to be corrected before further flight. I asked that they evaluate the repair and send an estimated ready time. I initiated a sheet stating the required repair. I also called equipment control and informed them that ZZZ would soon send ready time which would more than likely knock aircraft X out for the day. Unfortunately, when I called ZZZ, lead mechanic was no longer on duty. I was unable to get this information to him personally. I also spoke with the maintenance desk and was informed that they were dragging the aircraft to the hanger and diverting manpower toward the evaluation and repair of the stain. It appeared that everything was in place for a complete corrective action for the leak. When my relief arrived he had a differing opinion of the job card. He took the same stance as I had earlier in the night. I explained in detail the counter argument and we sought out the advise of the wide body manager. I voiced my opinion that the item needed to be repaired and the discussion was still under way when I went home. I called the office at approximately XA00 12/tue/01 to check on the aircraft status. I was informed that no ready time had been sent and that the flight was still shown as active. The 767ER coordinator and the special route coordinator were on the phone when I called. When I awoke at XN00 12/tue/01, I called the office again and was informed that the aircraft had left ZZZ that morning. I informed the desk of my misgivings about the job card. When I returned to work on 12/fri/01, I checked the log pages and saw that the lead's signoff was used to release the item, which was entirely wrong. At this point I contacted the lead and informed him of all that transpired. I felt responsible in that I had advised the lead to defer maintenance item. But, when I revealed my decision he was no longer there and the people that I contacted did not correct his signoff. I had made it abundantly clear to the foreman and the lead that I had mistakenly advised the lead to defer maintenance item. I also made it clear in no uncertain terms that the fuel leak needed to be repaired before further flts. This is evident in my sheet turnover log. When I printed off a copy of the job card 50158AD when I arrived back to work on 12/fri/01, the job card had been revised that day to delete step 1, which was the source of the problem.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B767-300ER WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH AN AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE NOT ACCOMPLISHED ON A FLAP TRACK FAIRING FUEL LEAK DUE TO JOB CARD CONFLICT.

Narrative: WHILE ACFT X WAS IN MAINT LAYOVER IN ZZZ, IT HAD A SCHEDULED TIME CONTROLLED OP(REQUIRED BY AD 2001-14-19 'INSPECTION OF THE SLAT TRACK HOUSINGS FOR FUEL LEAKS'). DURING THE INSPECTION I WAS CONTACTED BY ZZZ LEAD MECHANIC, WHO INFORMED ME THAT THEY HAD FOUND A FUEL STAIN ON THE #5 SLAT TRACK. HE STATED THAT HE WIPED THE AREA BUT THE STAIN REAPPEARED AFTER 15 MINS. I CHKED THE DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS OF THE OP, WHICH STATED 'REFERENCE BOEING MAINT MANUAL 28-11-00 FOR FUEL LEAK LIMITS.' WE THEN CHKED THE LIMITS AND BELIEVED THAT THE STAIN WAS WITHIN THE MAINT MANUAL LIMITS. I ASKED THAT HE FORWARD THE ITEM TO DEFERRED MAINT ITEM AS PER MAINT MANUAL 28-11-00-6 FUEL STAIN AND AS PER FLAG NOTE -2 'IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO REPAIR THE FUEL LEAK IMMEDIATELY EXAMINE THE FUEL LEAK FREQ TO MAKE SURE THAT IT DOES NOT GET LARGER. REPAIR MUST BE MADE AT THE EARLIEST PRACTICAL MAINT OPPORTUNITY WITHOUT DELAY.' I INFORMED LEAD THAT I WOULD RTE AND STOP THE ACFT FOR INSPECTION AND REPAIR. AFTER THE CONVERSATION I CONTINUED TO REVIEW THE JOB CARD AND THE MAINT MANUAL. AS I DID I NOTICED A CONTRADICTION BETWEEN STEPS A AND B. STEP B IMPLIED THAT THE LEAK NEEDED TO BE REWORKED/REPAIRED AS PER MAINT MANUAL 28-11-00. I SPOKE WITH SEVERAL OTHER COORDINATORS AS TO THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE JOB CARD. AFTER A DISCUSSION WE DECIDED THAT THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE TO REPAIR THE LEAK IN ZZZ. I CALLED THE ZZZ FOREMAN AND THE LEAD MECH AND INFORMED THEM THAT THE ITEM NEEDED TO BE CORRECTED BEFORE FURTHER FLT. I ASKED THAT THEY EVALUATE THE REPAIR AND SEND AN ESTIMATED READY TIME. I INITIATED A SHEET STATING THE REQUIRED REPAIR. I ALSO CALLED EQUIPMENT CTL AND INFORMED THEM THAT ZZZ WOULD SOON SEND READY TIME WHICH WOULD MORE THAN LIKELY KNOCK ACFT X OUT FOR THE DAY. UNFORTUNATELY, WHEN I CALLED ZZZ, LEAD MECH WAS NO LONGER ON DUTY. I WAS UNABLE TO GET THIS INFO TO HIM PERSONALLY. I ALSO SPOKE WITH THE MAINT DESK AND WAS INFORMED THAT THEY WERE DRAGGING THE ACFT TO THE HANGER AND DIVERTING MANPOWER TOWARD THE EVALUATION AND REPAIR OF THE STAIN. IT APPEARED THAT EVERYTHING WAS IN PLACE FOR A COMPLETE CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR THE LEAK. WHEN MY RELIEF ARRIVED HE HAD A DIFFERING OPINION OF THE JOB CARD. HE TOOK THE SAME STANCE AS I HAD EARLIER IN THE NIGHT. I EXPLAINED IN DETAIL THE COUNTER ARGUMENT AND WE SOUGHT OUT THE ADVISE OF THE WIDE BODY MANAGER. I VOICED MY OPINION THAT THE ITEM NEEDED TO BE REPAIRED AND THE DISCUSSION WAS STILL UNDER WAY WHEN I WENT HOME. I CALLED THE OFFICE AT APPROX XA00 12/TUE/01 TO CHK ON THE ACFT STATUS. I WAS INFORMED THAT NO READY TIME HAD BEEN SENT AND THAT THE FLT WAS STILL SHOWN AS ACTIVE. THE 767ER COORDINATOR AND THE SPECIAL RTE COORDINATOR WERE ON THE PHONE WHEN I CALLED. WHEN I AWOKE AT XN00 12/TUE/01, I CALLED THE OFFICE AGAIN AND WAS INFORMED THAT THE ACFT HAD LEFT ZZZ THAT MORNING. I INFORMED THE DESK OF MY MISGIVINGS ABOUT THE JOB CARD. WHEN I RETURNED TO WORK ON 12/FRI/01, I CHKED THE LOG PAGES AND SAW THAT THE LEAD'S SIGNOFF WAS USED TO RELEASE THE ITEM, WHICH WAS ENTIRELY WRONG. AT THIS POINT I CONTACTED THE LEAD AND INFORMED HIM OF ALL THAT TRANSPIRED. I FELT RESPONSIBLE IN THAT I HAD ADVISED THE LEAD TO DEFER MAINT ITEM. BUT, WHEN I REVEALED MY DECISION HE WAS NO LONGER THERE AND THE PEOPLE THAT I CONTACTED DID NOT CORRECT HIS SIGNOFF. I HAD MADE IT ABUNDANTLY CLR TO THE FOREMAN AND THE LEAD THAT I HAD MISTAKENLY ADVISED THE LEAD TO DEFER MAINT ITEM. I ALSO MADE IT CLEAR IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT THE FUEL LEAK NEEDED TO BE REPAIRED BEFORE FURTHER FLTS. THIS IS EVIDENT IN MY SHEET TURNOVER LOG. WHEN I PRINTED OFF A COPY OF THE JOB CARD 50158AD WHEN I ARRIVED BACK TO WORK ON 12/FRI/01, THE JOB CARD HAD BEEN REVISED THAT DAY TO DELETE STEP 1, WHICH WAS THE SOURCE OF THE PROB.

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.