Narrative:

We met aircraft to begin our 6-LEG pairing. The aircraft came in from 1 leg and it had 3 write-ups from the prior evening's remain overnight at ont. Maintenance met the aircraft also and fixed a radio MEL, but carried over for flight 2 other MEL's. One of those MEL's was MEL 332, cabin interior illumination -- in this case it had been written up that there were 'ceiling lights inoperative' by name #, on jul/xa with his terminating flight in ont. Our understanding from maintenance was that this lighting problem was ok to fly, so we continued on our 6-LEG daylight flts. After our aircraft swap to the evening crew in las, maintenance and new crew reviewed the MEL and determined that due to the 'confign with photoluminescent emergency escape path marking system,' that the MEL 33-2 actually should not be deferrable, due to opposite fluorescent tubes being inoperative. Maintenance replaced the fluorescent lights, but caused a minor delay to the continuation of flight. It appears that we inadvertently flew our 6-LEG day with an inappropriate MEL deferral.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-300 HAS A CABIN LIGHTING SYS IMPROPERLY MEL'ED AT DEP ARPT. AT THE TERMINATION ARPT 6 LEGS LATER, IT IS DISCOVERED THAT THE EMER FLOOR LIGHTING WAS INVOLVED WITHIN THE ORIGINAL LIGHTING LOGBOOK ENTRY.

Narrative: WE MET ACFT TO BEGIN OUR 6-LEG PAIRING. THE ACFT CAME IN FROM 1 LEG AND IT HAD 3 WRITE-UPS FROM THE PRIOR EVENING'S REMAIN OVERNIGHT AT ONT. MAINT MET THE ACFT ALSO AND FIXED A RADIO MEL, BUT CARRIED OVER FOR FLT 2 OTHER MEL'S. ONE OF THOSE MEL'S WAS MEL 332, CABIN INTERIOR ILLUMINATION -- IN THIS CASE IT HAD BEEN WRITTEN UP THAT THERE WERE 'CEILING LIGHTS INOP' BY NAME #, ON JUL/XA WITH HIS TERMINATING FLT IN ONT. OUR UNDERSTANDING FROM MAINT WAS THAT THIS LIGHTING PROB WAS OK TO FLY, SO WE CONTINUED ON OUR 6-LEG DAYLIGHT FLTS. AFTER OUR ACFT SWAP TO THE EVENING CREW IN LAS, MAINT AND NEW CREW REVIEWED THE MEL AND DETERMINED THAT DUE TO THE 'CONFIGN WITH PHOTOLUMINESCENT EMER ESCAPE PATH MARKING SYS,' THAT THE MEL 33-2 ACTUALLY SHOULD NOT BE DEFERRABLE, DUE TO OPPOSITE FLUORESCENT TUBES BEING INOP. MAINT REPLACED THE FLUORESCENT LIGHTS, BUT CAUSED A MINOR DELAY TO THE CONTINUATION OF FLT. IT APPEARS THAT WE INADVERTENTLY FLEW OUR 6-LEG DAY WITH AN INAPPROPRIATE MEL DEFERRAL.

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.