Narrative:

As the supervision of shop/line support, I received a call from maintenance control to bring back from the line. FAA inspectors found previous lightening strikes that he felt had holes in the area of the strikes. We were requesting to evaluate the area and fix if necessary. My mechanics removed the paint and evaluated each strike and found no discrepancy. Reinstalled the paint and the lead signed the logbook off as if we were signing off an area that needed a touch of paint. Then the inspection supervisor called and said not to release the airplane. About 20 mins later, FAA inspectors arrived and inspected the plane. They determined that they want every previous strike written-up again and signed off accordingly. We asked the inspection supervisor, who had the structural repair manual reference, if an inspection buy-back was required with us. Knowing he had the structured repair manual, we took his word when he said it was not required. We could sign off all structural repair cards that were written by myself and my lead mechanic as a fact. The lead and mechanics signed off 20 non-routine cards in the frame of mind that no inspection was required, and the area was only removal and replacement of paint. Also, the fact that the area was signed off previously at another station as having an inspection complied with, in all, we felt we signed off the non-routine cards as if removing and replacing paint, which actually can be factored out. Along with the information, we received from the inspection supervisor that they did not have to inspect the area. Later we find out that the non-routine cards should not have been factored out, but should have been on a time limited deferral. Since the eddy current inspection was previously done in ZZZ1, and our inspection department did not evaluate the lightening strikes area, we felt like we signed off the write-ups correctly. In the future, the FAA inspections, air carrier X inspection and maintenance need to communication better.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-200 WAS RELEASED FOR SVC IN NON COMPLIANCE AFTER A LIGHTENING STRIKE INSPECTION WAS NOT ACCOMPLISHED PER THE STRUCTURAL REPAIR MANUAL.

Narrative: AS THE SUPERVISION OF SHOP/LINE SUPPORT, I RECEIVED A CALL FROM MAINT CTL TO BRING BACK FROM THE LINE. FAA INSPECTORS FOUND PREVIOUS LIGHTENING STRIKES THAT HE FELT HAD HOLES IN THE AREA OF THE STRIKES. WE WERE REQUESTING TO EVALUATE THE AREA AND FIX IF NECESSARY. MY MECHS REMOVED THE PAINT AND EVALUATED EACH STRIKE AND FOUND NO DISCREPANCY. REINSTALLED THE PAINT AND THE LEAD SIGNED THE LOGBOOK OFF AS IF WE WERE SIGNING OFF AN AREA THAT NEEDED A TOUCH OF PAINT. THEN THE INSPECTION SUPVR CALLED AND SAID NOT TO RELEASE THE AIRPLANE. ABOUT 20 MINS LATER, FAA INSPECTORS ARRIVED AND INSPECTED THE PLANE. THEY DETERMINED THAT THEY WANT EVERY PREVIOUS STRIKE WRITTEN-UP AGAIN AND SIGNED OFF ACCORDINGLY. WE ASKED THE INSPECTION SUPVR, WHO HAD THE STRUCTURAL REPAIR MANUAL REF, IF AN INSPECTION BUY-BACK WAS REQUIRED WITH US. KNOWING HE HAD THE STRUCTURED REPAIR MANUAL, WE TOOK HIS WORD WHEN HE SAID IT WAS NOT REQUIRED. WE COULD SIGN OFF ALL STRUCTURAL REPAIR CARDS THAT WERE WRITTEN BY MYSELF AND MY LEAD MECH AS A FACT. THE LEAD AND MECHS SIGNED OFF 20 NON-ROUTINE CARDS IN THE FRAME OF MIND THAT NO INSPECTION WAS REQUIRED, AND THE AREA WAS ONLY REMOVAL AND REPLACEMENT OF PAINT. ALSO, THE FACT THAT THE AREA WAS SIGNED OFF PREVIOUSLY AT ANOTHER STATION AS HAVING AN INSPECTION COMPLIED WITH, IN ALL, WE FELT WE SIGNED OFF THE NON-ROUTINE CARDS AS IF REMOVING AND REPLACING PAINT, WHICH ACTUALLY CAN BE FACTORED OUT. ALONG WITH THE INFO, WE RECEIVED FROM THE INSPECTION SUPVR THAT THEY DID NOT HAVE TO INSPECT THE AREA. LATER WE FIND OUT THAT THE NON-ROUTINE CARDS SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN FACTORED OUT, BUT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON A TIME LIMITED DEFERRAL. SINCE THE EDDY CURRENT INSPECTION WAS PREVIOUSLY DONE IN ZZZ1, AND OUR INSPECTION DEPT DID NOT EVALUATE THE LIGHTENING STRIKES AREA, WE FELT LIKE WE SIGNED OFF THE WRITE-UPS CORRECTLY. IN THE FUTURE, THE FAA INSPECTIONS, ACR X INSPECTION AND MAINT NEED TO COM BETTER.

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.