Narrative:

Shortly after departure from ZZZ; aircraft experienced APU intake door actuator inoperative. This mechanical problem requires continuous APU operation in flight but dispatch was not contacted. I contacted the flight to confirm problem with APU and confer concerning fuel due to the fact that I overheard aircraft maintenance control conversation on local radio. Flight continued to ZZZ1 without problem. Upon landing in ZZZ1 I had conversation with the captain concerning the upcoming deferral and gave him fuel numbers in advance. At this point I informed him that I would contact him when the MEL was placed in the system for an amendment. His response was that he may not immediately answer because I might catch him 'on climb out.' as soon as the MEL became available in the computer system I contacted the flight via SELCAL and was told by the captain that he would 'call me back above 10' (10000 ft). A short time later I was contacted and gave the captain a the release amendment. This amendment was 17 mins after pushback and accomplished in flight just above 10000 ft. My concern with this situation is that MEL procedures exist for good reason; and flight crews should not disregard the procedures in favor of expediency; convenience; or on time performance. The dispatcher must wait until the information is disseminated from maintenance control and the captain needs to wait until the release is amended.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CRJ700 WITH AN AUXILIARY POWER UNIT INTAKE DOOR FAILED OPEN AND DEFERRED PER THE MEL BUT REQUIRING A FUEL PENALTY WAS DISPATCHED WITHOUT THE AMENDED RELEASE.

Narrative: SHORTLY AFTER DEP FROM ZZZ; ACFT EXPERIENCED APU INTAKE DOOR ACTUATOR INOP. THIS MECHANICAL PROB REQUIRES CONTINUOUS APU OPERATION IN FLT BUT DISPATCH WAS NOT CONTACTED. I CONTACTED THE FLT TO CONFIRM PROB WITH APU AND CONFER CONCERNING FUEL DUE TO THE FACT THAT I OVERHEARD ACFT MAINT CTL CONVERSATION ON LOCAL RADIO. FLT CONTINUED TO ZZZ1 WITHOUT PROBLEM. UPON LANDING IN ZZZ1 I HAD CONVERSATION WITH THE CAPT CONCERNING THE UPCOMING DEFERRAL AND GAVE HIM FUEL NUMBERS IN ADVANCE. AT THIS POINT I INFORMED HIM THAT I WOULD CONTACT HIM WHEN THE MEL WAS PLACED IN THE SYS FOR AN AMENDMENT. HIS RESPONSE WAS THAT HE MAY NOT IMMEDIATELY ANSWER BECAUSE I MIGHT CATCH HIM 'ON CLB OUT.' AS SOON AS THE MEL BECAME AVAILABLE IN THE COMPUTER SYS I CONTACTED THE FLT VIA SELCAL AND WAS TOLD BY THE CAPT THAT HE WOULD 'CALL ME BACK ABOVE 10' (10000 FT). A SHORT TIME LATER I WAS CONTACTED AND GAVE THE CAPT A THE RELEASE AMENDMENT. THIS AMENDMENT WAS 17 MINS AFTER PUSHBACK AND ACCOMPLISHED IN FLT JUST ABOVE 10000 FT. MY CONCERN WITH THIS SITUATION IS THAT MEL PROCS EXIST FOR GOOD REASON; AND FLT CREWS SHOULD NOT DISREGARD THE PROCS IN FAVOR OF EXPEDIENCY; CONVENIENCE; OR ON TIME PERFORMANCE. THE DISPATCHER MUST WAIT UNTIL THE INFO IS DISSEMINATED FROM MAINT CTL AND THE CAPT NEEDS TO WAIT UNTIL THE RELEASE IS AMENDED.

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.