Narrative:

On oct/sat/04 it is alleged that I completed a flap ball screw backlash inspection of aircraft X #3 l-hand flap ball screw and was negligent in not filling out a deferred maintenance time for a discrepant ball screw. In completing the work card; I completed the inspection part and came to the reporting part 'action required' #5 and #6 on the work cards. I was able to complete the flap ball screw backlash 'spreadsheet' and read the work card further for instruction on reporting. I saw the exception to using a deferred maintenance time stated in both work cards under item #5. '(Only if it is not possible to use the flap ball screw chart spreadsheet; table 1 of this work card will be used to determine the appropriate required action. If deferrals were issued as a result of using table 1; an additional 70 hour deferred maintenance time will be issued with the following statement: 'table 1 of work card was used to determine actuator deferred maintenance times. Results require evaluation.')' since the notes that followed this statement indicating that a deferred maintenance time needed to be made for ball screws under 3000 cycles did not have any numbers or letters separating them from the former statement excluding table 1 deferred maintenance times; I did not consider them separate from the exception of using a deferred maintenance time. Since we were using a spreadsheet now; I fully expected someone to be monitoring the ball screw backlash degradation by way of the spreadsheet. I thought 'why have the spreadsheets unless someone would monitor them otherwise they seem useless to me.' since I was able to complete the spreadsheet and did not know that no one was monitoring the spreadsheets; I thought my job had been completed since in interpreted the exception as meaning there were no deferred maintenance times needed if I use the spreadsheet. Since I fully expected someone to be monitoring the spreadsheets; I didn't expect to have a problem with tracking. It is only now; since the matter has come up; that I realize that the work card could have been interpreted that the notes were separate from the exception and no one was monitoring the spreadsheets. From now on; I will understand it to mean that there are deferred maintenance times needed for all ball screws under 3000 cycles. As I recall; I tried to consult other inspectors for input into the status of deferred maintenance times using these work cards and the spreadsheet to record ball screw backlash. I don't think anyone else I worked with; at the time; knew what it meant either. Since this caused unintended problems with tracking ball screw degradation; I view this as a misunderstanding or a misinterp of the intent of 2 of the paragraphs in these work cards #5 and #6. My suggestion for clarification of the work card is to number the notes that are placed between #5 and #6 instead of using them as 'notes.' since I interpreted the note's placement as part of the exception from the paragraph above; someone else may do this also.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DHC-8-300 HAD THE INSPECTION OF THE #3 FLAP BALL SCREW ACCOMPLISHED. DUE TO CONFUSING AND CONFLICTING JOB CARD PROC; THE AMOUNT OF BACKLASH WAS NOT PROPERLY RPTED.

Narrative: ON OCT/SAT/04 IT IS ALLEGED THAT I COMPLETED A FLAP BALL SCREW BACKLASH INSPECTION OF ACFT X #3 L-HAND FLAP BALL SCREW AND WAS NEGLIGENT IN NOT FILLING OUT A DEFERRED MAINT TIME FOR A DISCREPANT BALL SCREW. IN COMPLETING THE WORK CARD; I COMPLETED THE INSPECTION PART AND CAME TO THE RPTING PART 'ACTION REQUIRED' #5 AND #6 ON THE WORK CARDS. I WAS ABLE TO COMPLETE THE FLAP BALL SCREW BACKLASH 'SPREADSHEET' AND READ THE WORK CARD FURTHER FOR INSTRUCTION ON RPTING. I SAW THE EXCEPTION TO USING A DEFERRED MAINT TIME STATED IN BOTH WORK CARDS UNDER ITEM #5. '(ONLY IF IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO USE THE FLAP BALL SCREW CHART SPREADSHEET; TABLE 1 OF THIS WORK CARD WILL BE USED TO DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE REQUIRED ACTION. IF DEFERRALS WERE ISSUED AS A RESULT OF USING TABLE 1; AN ADDITIONAL 70 HR DEFERRED MAINT TIME WILL BE ISSUED WITH THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT: 'TABLE 1 OF WORK CARD WAS USED TO DETERMINE ACTUATOR DEFERRED MAINT TIMES. RESULTS REQUIRE EVALUATION.')' SINCE THE NOTES THAT FOLLOWED THIS STATEMENT INDICATING THAT A DEFERRED MAINT TIME NEEDED TO BE MADE FOR BALL SCREWS UNDER 3000 CYCLES DID NOT HAVE ANY NUMBERS OR LETTERS SEPARATING THEM FROM THE FORMER STATEMENT EXCLUDING TABLE 1 DEFERRED MAINT TIMES; I DID NOT CONSIDER THEM SEPARATE FROM THE EXCEPTION OF USING A DEFERRED MAINT TIME. SINCE WE WERE USING A SPREADSHEET NOW; I FULLY EXPECTED SOMEONE TO BE MONITORING THE BALL SCREW BACKLASH DEGRADATION BY WAY OF THE SPREADSHEET. I THOUGHT 'WHY HAVE THE SPREADSHEETS UNLESS SOMEONE WOULD MONITOR THEM OTHERWISE THEY SEEM USELESS TO ME.' SINCE I WAS ABLE TO COMPLETE THE SPREADSHEET AND DID NOT KNOW THAT NO ONE WAS MONITORING THE SPREADSHEETS; I THOUGHT MY JOB HAD BEEN COMPLETED SINCE IN INTERPED THE EXCEPTION AS MEANING THERE WERE NO DEFERRED MAINT TIMES NEEDED IF I USE THE SPREADSHEET. SINCE I FULLY EXPECTED SOMEONE TO BE MONITORING THE SPREADSHEETS; I DIDN'T EXPECT TO HAVE A PROB WITH TRACKING. IT IS ONLY NOW; SINCE THE MATTER HAS COME UP; THAT I REALIZE THAT THE WORK CARD COULD HAVE BEEN INTERPED THAT THE NOTES WERE SEPARATE FROM THE EXCEPTION AND NO ONE WAS MONITORING THE SPREADSHEETS. FROM NOW ON; I WILL UNDERSTAND IT TO MEAN THAT THERE ARE DEFERRED MAINT TIMES NEEDED FOR ALL BALL SCREWS UNDER 3000 CYCLES. AS I RECALL; I TRIED TO CONSULT OTHER INSPECTORS FOR INPUT INTO THE STATUS OF DEFERRED MAINT TIMES USING THESE WORK CARDS AND THE SPREADSHEET TO RECORD BALL SCREW BACKLASH. I DON'T THINK ANYONE ELSE I WORKED WITH; AT THE TIME; KNEW WHAT IT MEANT EITHER. SINCE THIS CAUSED UNINTENDED PROBS WITH TRACKING BALL SCREW DEGRADATION; I VIEW THIS AS A MISUNDERSTANDING OR A MISINTERP OF THE INTENT OF 2 OF THE PARAGRAPHS IN THESE WORK CARDS #5 AND #6. MY SUGGESTION FOR CLARIFICATION OF THE WORK CARD IS TO NUMBER THE NOTES THAT ARE PLACED BTWN #5 AND #6 INSTEAD OF USING THEM AS 'NOTES.' SINCE I INTERPED THE NOTE'S PLACEMENT AS PART OF THE EXCEPTION FROM THE PARAGRAPH ABOVE; SOMEONE ELSE MAY DO THIS ALSO.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.