Narrative:

During preflight preparations, I noted a logbook write-up indicating a scratch near the cargo door. I went to the area and observed a scratch about 6 inches long. The center of the scratch was yellow. (When our mechanics observe any scratches or dents on the skin of the aircraft, it is marked with yellow paint -- I have just learned the color of kelvar is also yellow.) several months ago, to keep track of escalating ramp damage, my company put out an e-mail specifying the procedure to follow in the event scratches or other damage is found on the aircraft. I believed at that time if a scratch was found that did not penetrate the skin of the aircraft it must be noted for tracking purposes but that no maintenance action was required. I realize that if a discrepancy is noted in our aircraft log that affects a component or involves structural damage, a maintenance 'sign-off' is required. However, I perceived the write-up of the scratch as a simple notation to record the item. We subsequently boarded our passenger, obtained our dispatch release and departed. After takeoff, ATC informed us that company wanted us to return to the field. Upon arrival at the gate we were informed that the scratch was a maintenance item that had not been cleared. We were never advised maintenance was working on the aircraft or that we would be delayed and we received our dispatch release. Certainly had I interpreted the write-up differently, I would not have accepted the aircraft and departed. I was confused somewhat by the guidance in the e-mail and did not have a copy or any other information to reference. Clearly, I should have contacted maintenance or dispatch for clarification. For some reason the 'light,' so to speak, did not go off. Contributing factors included not being notified of the delay by dispatch or maintenance and in fact actually being issued a dispatch release even though the corrective action would take hours to fix. Additionally, our company frequency issues e-mails and company memos that may change our operating procedures. But the procedures often take a very long time to be incorporated in our operations manual making it very difficult to keep up with revisions to policy and operating procedures.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: EMB145 FLC TOOK OFF WITH AN OPEN ITEM IN THE ACFT LOGBOOK AND WAS INSTRUCTED BY THE COMPANY TO RETURN AND LAND.

Narrative: DURING PREFLT PREPARATIONS, I NOTED A LOGBOOK WRITE-UP INDICATING A SCRATCH NEAR THE CARGO DOOR. I WENT TO THE AREA AND OBSERVED A SCRATCH ABOUT 6 INCHES LONG. THE CTR OF THE SCRATCH WAS YELLOW. (WHEN OUR MECHS OBSERVE ANY SCRATCHES OR DENTS ON THE SKIN OF THE ACFT, IT IS MARKED WITH YELLOW PAINT -- I HAVE JUST LEARNED THE COLOR OF KELVAR IS ALSO YELLOW.) SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, TO KEEP TRACK OF ESCALATING RAMP DAMAGE, MY COMPANY PUT OUT AN E-MAIL SPECIFYING THE PROC TO FOLLOW IN THE EVENT SCRATCHES OR OTHER DAMAGE IS FOUND ON THE ACFT. I BELIEVED AT THAT TIME IF A SCRATCH WAS FOUND THAT DID NOT PENETRATE THE SKIN OF THE ACFT IT MUST BE NOTED FOR TRACKING PURPOSES BUT THAT NO MAINT ACTION WAS REQUIRED. I REALIZE THAT IF A DISCREPANCY IS NOTED IN OUR ACFT LOG THAT AFFECTS A COMPONENT OR INVOLVES STRUCTURAL DAMAGE, A MAINT 'SIGN-OFF' IS REQUIRED. HOWEVER, I PERCEIVED THE WRITE-UP OF THE SCRATCH AS A SIMPLE NOTATION TO RECORD THE ITEM. WE SUBSEQUENTLY BOARDED OUR PAX, OBTAINED OUR DISPATCH RELEASE AND DEPARTED. AFTER TKOF, ATC INFORMED US THAT COMPANY WANTED US TO RETURN TO THE FIELD. UPON ARR AT THE GATE WE WERE INFORMED THAT THE SCRATCH WAS A MAINT ITEM THAT HAD NOT BEEN CLRED. WE WERE NEVER ADVISED MAINT WAS WORKING ON THE ACFT OR THAT WE WOULD BE DELAYED AND WE RECEIVED OUR DISPATCH RELEASE. CERTAINLY HAD I INTERPED THE WRITE-UP DIFFERENTLY, I WOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED THE ACFT AND DEPARTED. I WAS CONFUSED SOMEWHAT BY THE GUIDANCE IN THE E-MAIL AND DID NOT HAVE A COPY OR ANY OTHER INFO TO REF. CLRLY, I SHOULD HAVE CONTACTED MAINT OR DISPATCH FOR CLARIFICATION. FOR SOME REASON THE 'LIGHT,' SO TO SPEAK, DID NOT GO OFF. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS INCLUDED NOT BEING NOTIFIED OF THE DELAY BY DISPATCH OR MAINT AND IN FACT ACTUALLY BEING ISSUED A DISPATCH RELEASE EVEN THOUGH THE CORRECTIVE ACTION WOULD TAKE HRS TO FIX. ADDITIONALLY, OUR COMPANY FREQ ISSUES E-MAILS AND COMPANY MEMOS THAT MAY CHANGE OUR OPERATING PROCS. BUT THE PROCS OFTEN TAKE A VERY LONG TIME TO BE INCORPORATED IN OUR OPS MANUAL MAKING IT VERY DIFFICULT TO KEEP UP WITH REVISIONS TO POLICY AND OPERATING PROCS.

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.