Narrative:

We met aircraft at bna for a crew change for our leg to san. The captain, who brought the aircraft in, wrote up the #2 engine valve closed light remaining 'bright' after engine shutdown. We discussed the write-up, and he went into the crew rest as the bna maintenance men came to troubleshoot/fix the problem. Bna maintenance said that they needed to run the #2 engine to check the light (first officer in the right seat). Maintenance stated that if the light remained bright after shutdown, they would pull a circuit breaker and MEL the write-up. They ran the #2 engine and shut it down. The light worked normally. They signed off the write-up, and we flew to san. After engine shutdown in san, the #2 engine closed light was bright (identical to the bna write-up). We were parked with no jetway or phone available, so I took the logbook and my cell phone to a ramp break area to call dispatch and maintenance control to advise them of the repeat write-up. The aircraft was a terminator. I discussed the repeat write-up with both dispatch and maintenance control. Maintenance control advised me to pull a circuit breaker as called for per MEL 73-10. The information given to me by maintenance control matched exactly what bna maintenance had said previously. I completed the logbook, MEL paperwork as well as pulling the circuit breaker with the collar added. I called maintenance control 1 more time from the cockpit to confirm the circuit breaker location was correct as well as the correct verbiage for the MEL. Maintenance control and I were right on track with the problem. The fix was exactly what I contemplated after the bna sign-off and what maintenance control had stated the night before. We departed san to abq, and in cruise, I pulled the opc to review MEL 73-10 and determined that all the steps had not been accomplished. We landed, and I immediately called maintenance control to discuss the MEL on the other aircraft. I told them what I had done and not done per the MEL. Maintenance control said the aircraft was inbound and that maintenance would re-examine the problem. The fix at bna and the discussion with maintenance control after landing at san led me to believe that all was done in order and properly. I was working the problem and the fix with maintenance control, ie, the circuit breaker, but did not use the actual MEL as my primary resource, which would have served as back-up for the MEL write-up. In the future, I will confirm and use as a constant reference the MEL especially in communication between all parties.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CREW WORKING IN COORD WITH MAINT CTL TO DEFER A B737-700 ENG VALVE INDICATOR LIGHT DID NOT COMPLETE ALL THE REQUIRED ITEMS FOR A PROPER DEFERRAL. THE ACFT WAS DISPATCHED IN THIS CONDITION.

Narrative: WE MET ACFT AT BNA FOR A CREW CHANGE FOR OUR LEG TO SAN. THE CAPT, WHO BROUGHT THE ACFT IN, WROTE UP THE #2 ENG VALVE CLOSED LIGHT REMAINING 'BRIGHT' AFTER ENG SHUTDOWN. WE DISCUSSED THE WRITE-UP, AND HE WENT INTO THE CREW REST AS THE BNA MAINT MEN CAME TO TROUBLESHOOT/FIX THE PROB. BNA MAINT SAID THAT THEY NEEDED TO RUN THE #2 ENG TO CHK THE LIGHT (FO IN THE R SEAT). MAINT STATED THAT IF THE LIGHT REMAINED BRIGHT AFTER SHUTDOWN, THEY WOULD PULL A CIRCUIT BREAKER AND MEL THE WRITE-UP. THEY RAN THE #2 ENG AND SHUT IT DOWN. THE LIGHT WORKED NORMALLY. THEY SIGNED OFF THE WRITE-UP, AND WE FLEW TO SAN. AFTER ENG SHUTDOWN IN SAN, THE #2 ENG CLOSED LIGHT WAS BRIGHT (IDENTICAL TO THE BNA WRITE-UP). WE WERE PARKED WITH NO JETWAY OR PHONE AVAILABLE, SO I TOOK THE LOGBOOK AND MY CELL PHONE TO A RAMP BREAK AREA TO CALL DISPATCH AND MAINT CTL TO ADVISE THEM OF THE REPEAT WRITE-UP. THE ACFT WAS A TERMINATOR. I DISCUSSED THE REPEAT WRITE-UP WITH BOTH DISPATCH AND MAINT CTL. MAINT CTL ADVISED ME TO PULL A CIRCUIT BREAKER AS CALLED FOR PER MEL 73-10. THE INFO GIVEN TO ME BY MAINT CTL MATCHED EXACTLY WHAT BNA MAINT HAD SAID PREVIOUSLY. I COMPLETED THE LOGBOOK, MEL PAPERWORK AS WELL AS PULLING THE CIRCUIT BREAKER WITH THE COLLAR ADDED. I CALLED MAINT CTL 1 MORE TIME FROM THE COCKPIT TO CONFIRM THE CB LOCATION WAS CORRECT AS WELL AS THE CORRECT VERBIAGE FOR THE MEL. MAINT CTL AND I WERE RIGHT ON TRACK WITH THE PROB. THE FIX WAS EXACTLY WHAT I CONTEMPLATED AFTER THE BNA SIGN-OFF AND WHAT MAINT CTL HAD STATED THE NIGHT BEFORE. WE DEPARTED SAN TO ABQ, AND IN CRUISE, I PULLED THE OPC TO REVIEW MEL 73-10 AND DETERMINED THAT ALL THE STEPS HAD NOT BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. WE LANDED, AND I IMMEDIATELY CALLED MAINT CTL TO DISCUSS THE MEL ON THE OTHER ACFT. I TOLD THEM WHAT I HAD DONE AND NOT DONE PER THE MEL. MAINT CTL SAID THE ACFT WAS INBOUND AND THAT MAINT WOULD RE-EXAMINE THE PROB. THE FIX AT BNA AND THE DISCUSSION WITH MAINT CTL AFTER LNDG AT SAN LED ME TO BELIEVE THAT ALL WAS DONE IN ORDER AND PROPERLY. I WAS WORKING THE PROB AND THE FIX WITH MAINT CTL, IE, THE CIRCUIT BREAKER, BUT DID NOT USE THE ACTUAL MEL AS MY PRIMARY RESOURCE, WHICH WOULD HAVE SERVED AS BACK-UP FOR THE MEL WRITE-UP. IN THE FUTURE, I WILL CONFIRM AND USE AS A CONSTANT REF THE MEL ESPECIALLY IN COM BTWN ALL PARTIES.

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.