Narrative:

Upon arring and closing out the afml for the night; I noticed that the aircraft was due a service check that night. I called maintenance control and advised them of this. The maintenance person I reached told me; 'that's easy; I can take care of that;' and told me to change the service due date to the next day. He did this based upon the aspect that the prior due date for a service check was 9/wed/06; which would have made the date due on 9/sat/06. However; the actual sign off for this aircraft's prior service check happened to be 9/thurs/06; which would imply that the current service check was indeed due on 9/sun/06. I am not a maintenance person and do not know all of the regulations for maintenance requirements. Still; I question this practice as it would seem that if it was done this way consistently; the air carrier would actually be able to gain days and perform fewer maintenance service checks every year. The phone conversation with this maintenance person should be clearly recorded. I was the captain of record for the departing flight in this aircraft the next day and felt uncomfortable with this discrepancy and altered date for a required maintenance service check; as authorized by maintenance control; at xa:30 on 9/sat/06; on the ground after the last flight of the day.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the captain believes changing these check times is putting the flight crew licenses at risk. The service check times are every three days and working the check on one day and signing for the check accomplishment on the next day gives one more day over the limit. The reporter stated it's a game maintenance is playing to extend service check times and feels having the flight crews changing the check due date in a non maintenance station is unethical and most likely illegal.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CRJ200 TERMINATED AT NIGHT IN A NON MAINT STATION WITH A SVC CHK DUE. MAINT ADVISED CAPT TO CHANGE THE DATE TO THE NEXT DAY.

Narrative: UPON ARRING AND CLOSING OUT THE AFML FOR THE NIGHT; I NOTICED THAT THE ACFT WAS DUE A SVC CHECK THAT NIGHT. I CALLED MAINT CTL AND ADVISED THEM OF THIS. THE MAINT PERSON I REACHED TOLD ME; 'THAT'S EASY; I CAN TAKE CARE OF THAT;' AND TOLD ME TO CHANGE THE SVC DUE DATE TO THE NEXT DAY. HE DID THIS BASED UPON THE ASPECT THAT THE PRIOR DUE DATE FOR A SVC CHK WAS 9/WED/06; WHICH WOULD HAVE MADE THE DATE DUE ON 9/SAT/06. HOWEVER; THE ACTUAL SIGN OFF FOR THIS ACFT'S PRIOR SVC CHK HAPPENED TO BE 9/THURS/06; WHICH WOULD IMPLY THAT THE CURRENT SVC CHK WAS INDEED DUE ON 9/SUN/06. I AM NOT A MAINT PERSON AND DO NOT KNOW ALL OF THE REGULATIONS FOR MAINT REQUIREMENTS. STILL; I QUESTION THIS PRACTICE AS IT WOULD SEEM THAT IF IT WAS DONE THIS WAY CONSISTENTLY; THE ACR WOULD ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO GAIN DAYS AND PERFORM FEWER MAINT SVC CHKS EVERY YEAR. THE PHONE CONVERSATION WITH THIS MAINT PERSON SHOULD BE CLEARLY RECORDED. I WAS THE CAPT OF RECORD FOR THE DEPARTING FLT IN THIS ACFT THE NEXT DAY AND FELT UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THIS DISCREPANCY AND ALTERED DATE FOR A REQUIRED MAINT SVC CHK; AS AUTHORIZED BY MAINT CTL; AT XA:30 ON 9/SAT/06; ON THE GND AFTER THE LAST FLT OF THE DAY.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE CAPT BELIEVES CHANGING THESE CHK TIMES IS PUTTING THE FLT CREW LICENSES AT RISK. THE SVC CHK TIMES ARE EVERY THREE DAYS AND WORKING THE CHK ON ONE DAY AND SIGNING FOR THE CHK ACCOMPLISHMENT ON THE NEXT DAY GIVES ONE MORE DAY OVER THE LIMIT. THE RPTR STATED IT'S A GAME MAINT IS PLAYING TO EXTEND SVC CHK TIMES AND FEELS HAVING THE FLT CREWS CHANGING THE CHK DUE DATE IN A NON MAINT STATION IS UNETHICAL AND MOST LIKELY ILLEGAL.

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.