An MD80 prior to departure crew noted an incorrect MEL reference number. Discovered after several ph...

Attributes
ACN	709257
Time
Date	200604
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : zzz.airport
State Reference	US
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 150 flight time type : 5500
ASRS Report	709257
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : non compliance with mel maintenance problem : improper documentation non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other flight crewa other flight crewb
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	other other
Factors
Maintenance	contributing factor : schedule pressure performance deficiency : logbook entry performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Maintenance Human Performance Aircraft Chart Or Publication Environmental Factor
Primary Problem	Maintenance Human Performance

Narrative:

Crew change. Inbound flight had maintenance issue with a seat I believe 1C due to a sharp point on the trim of the seat. All preflight complete waiting on book to be signed off by contract maintenance. When we received the logbook it had an MEL number. There is nothing in our MEL book that addressed this number so we had contract maintenance call maintenance (or so we thought) for clarification. Contract maintenance called in maintenance from whom he received this MEL number and said the crew had a question about the MEL. Maintenance told him there is no such airplane in location. The captain started to talk on the phone with maintenance and found out it was maintenance and I believe; looking back; the contract maintenance; twice called maintenance control and got the improper sign off and MEL; etc. Well he thought we were air carrier Y. He then contacted air carrier Y. Maintenance for company correctly crossed off the improper signoff and corrected the mistake and then properly signed off the logbook. This is really unacceptable and unprofessional from contract maintenance in location. Why he called maintenance Y and thought we were air carrier Y is a mystery. We had way too many distrs; and this one almost got us but we caught it in time. I do believe the final signoff was completed properly; but I have doubts to the contract maintenance in location and they made this 'mistake' paperwork to maintenance. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated the logbook they received from the contract maintenance technician was correct in every respect except the MEL reference number which wasn't in their book. It appears the technician called another carrier's maintenance controller in error and was given the deferral. Several phone calls were required to get the logbook problem corrected. This problem was reported to the company.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN MD80 PRIOR TO DEP CREW NOTED AN INCORRECT MEL REF NUMBER. DISCOVERED AFTER SEVERAL PHONE CALLS THAT CONTRACT MAINT USED ANOTHER CARRIER'S MEL FOR DEFERRAL. LOGBOOK CORRECTED.

Narrative: CREW CHANGE. INBOUND FLT HAD MAINT ISSUE WITH A SEAT I BELIEVE 1C DUE TO A SHARP POINT ON THE TRIM OF THE SEAT. ALL PREFLT COMPLETE WAITING ON BOOK TO BE SIGNED OFF BY CONTRACT MAINT. WHEN WE RECEIVED THE LOGBOOK IT HAD AN MEL NUMBER. THERE IS NOTHING IN OUR MEL BOOK THAT ADDRESSED THIS NUMBER SO WE HAD CONTRACT MAINT CALL MAINT (OR SO WE THOUGHT) FOR CLARIFICATION. CONTRACT MAINT CALLED IN MAINT FROM WHOM HE RECEIVED THIS MEL NUMBER AND SAID THE CREW HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE MEL. MAINT TOLD HIM THERE IS NO SUCH AIRPLANE IN LOCATION. THE CAPT STARTED TO TALK ON THE PHONE WITH MAINT AND FOUND OUT IT WAS MAINT AND I BELIEVE; LOOKING BACK; THE CONTRACT MAINT; TWICE CALLED MAINT CTL AND GOT THE IMPROPER SIGN OFF AND MEL; ETC. WELL HE THOUGHT WE WERE ACR Y. HE THEN CONTACTED ACR Y. MAINT FOR COMPANY CORRECTLY CROSSED OFF THE IMPROPER SIGNOFF AND CORRECTED THE MISTAKE AND THEN PROPERLY SIGNED OFF THE LOGBOOK. THIS IS REALLY UNACCEPTABLE AND UNPROFESSIONAL FROM CONTRACT MAINT IN LOCATION. WHY HE CALLED MAINT Y AND THOUGHT WE WERE ACR Y IS A MYSTERY. WE HAD WAY TOO MANY DISTRS; AND THIS ONE ALMOST GOT US BUT WE CAUGHT IT IN TIME. I DO BELIEVE THE FINAL SIGNOFF WAS COMPLETED PROPERLY; BUT I HAVE DOUBTS TO THE CONTRACT MAINT IN LOCATION AND THEY MADE THIS 'MISTAKE' PAPERWORK TO MAINT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE LOGBOOK THEY RECEIVED FROM THE CONTRACT MAINT TECHNICIAN WAS CORRECT IN EVERY RESPECT EXCEPT THE MEL REF NUMBER WHICH WASN'T IN THEIR BOOK. IT APPEARS THE TECHNICIAN CALLED ANOTHER CARRIER'S MAINT CTLR IN ERROR AND WAS GIVEN THE DEFERRAL. SEVERAL PHONE CALLS WERE REQUIRED TO GET THE LOGBOOK PROB CORRECTED. THIS PROB WAS RPTED TO THE COMPANY.

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.

An MD80 prior to departure crew noted an incorrect MEL reference number. Discovered after several phone calls that contract maintenance used another carrier's MEL for deferral. Logbook corrected.