Narrative:

On the night in question, I was working an engine anti-ice light problem. At XA30 another mechanic suggested to change the P5-5 standby power module. The suggesting mechanic got the new module without checking the parts effectivity and compatibility display and it was installed on the aircraft. I signed off the paperwork for fixing the problem due to the fact that it was my assigned aircraft, but I did not install the part. We were trying to not have the aircraft take a delay. I would recommend that the parts in stores at the line be labeled better but also take the time to check.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737-300 WITH AN ENG ANTI-ICE LIGHT PROB HAD THE STANDBY PWR MODULE REPLACED. DISPATCHED WITH THE INCORRECT STANDBY PWR MODULE INSTALLED.

Narrative: ON THE NIGHT IN QUESTION, I WAS WORKING AN ENG ANTI-ICE LIGHT PROB. AT XA30 ANOTHER MECH SUGGESTED TO CHANGE THE P5-5 STANDBY PWR MODULE. THE SUGGESTING MECH GOT THE NEW MODULE WITHOUT CHKING THE PARTS EFFECTIVITY AND COMPATIBILITY DISPLAY AND IT WAS INSTALLED ON THE ACFT. I SIGNED OFF THE PAPERWORK FOR FIXING THE PROB DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT WAS MY ASSIGNED ACFT, BUT I DID NOT INSTALL THE PART. WE WERE TRYING TO NOT HAVE THE ACFT TAKE A DELAY. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE PARTS IN STORES AT THE LINE BE LABELED BETTER BUT ALSO TAKE THE TIME TO CHK.

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.