Narrative:

I was called out to aircraft X that had an XA25 departure at approximately XA20. This late call reported damage in forward pit. The pit was loaded and ramp was standing by for push. The damage was a crack in the fiberglas curved panel on the l-hand side of the pit approximately 2 ft forward of the bulkhead. In this area there was a crack in a previous fiberglas repair on the curved area of the panel of approximately 2 1/2 inches in length. I hastily made a decision to apply fire resistant cargo pit tape to what I perceived was another insignificant crack reported by ramp employees to avoid their delays. This is a common occurrence. The aircraft flew a round trip and returned to ZZZ. In retrospect; I realized that this decision violated my normal procedure to research and follow all documentation and may not comply with the maintenance manual. I researched amm to confirm my suspicion. I was fortunate to meet the aircraft at my gate on its return to ZZZ and immediately took steps to rectify my decision by inoperative'ing the pit for permanent repair per the amm. I shouldn't let the haste of the operation or 'delay blame' games affect my decision to consult maintenance manual or procedures. In the future; I will always consult the maintenance manual and MEL when confronted with pit anomalies.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MECHANIC DISPATCHES A B737-500 AFTER APPLYING FIRE RESISTANT TAPE OVER A CRACK IN THE FORWARD PIT CURVED SIDEWALL TO AVOID A DELAY. REALIZES LATER; THIS WAS AN ILLEGAL DISPATCH AS NOTED IN THE AMM.

Narrative: I WAS CALLED OUT TO ACFT X THAT HAD AN XA25 DEP AT APPROX XA20. THIS LATE CALL RPTED DAMAGE IN FORWARD PIT. THE PIT WAS LOADED AND RAMP WAS STANDING BY FOR PUSH. THE DAMAGE WAS A CRACK IN THE FIBERGLAS CURVED PANEL ON THE L-HAND SIDE OF THE PIT APPROX 2 FT FORWARD OF THE BULKHEAD. IN THIS AREA THERE WAS A CRACK IN A PREVIOUS FIBERGLAS REPAIR ON THE CURVED AREA OF THE PANEL OF APPROX 2 1/2 INCHES IN LENGTH. I HASTILY MADE A DECISION TO APPLY FIRE RESISTANT CARGO PIT TAPE TO WHAT I PERCEIVED WAS ANOTHER INSIGNIFICANT CRACK RPTED BY RAMP EMPLOYEES TO AVOID THEIR DELAYS. THIS IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE. THE ACFT FLEW A ROUND TRIP AND RETURNED TO ZZZ. IN RETROSPECT; I REALIZED THAT THIS DECISION VIOLATED MY NORMAL PROC TO RESEARCH AND FOLLOW ALL DOCUMENTATION AND MAY NOT COMPLY WITH THE MAINT MANUAL. I RESEARCHED AMM TO CONFIRM MY SUSPICION. I WAS FORTUNATE TO MEET THE ACFT AT MY GATE ON ITS RETURN TO ZZZ AND IMMEDIATELY TOOK STEPS TO RECTIFY MY DECISION BY INOP'ING THE PIT FOR PERMANENT REPAIR PER THE AMM. I SHOULDN'T LET THE HASTE OF THE OP OR 'DELAY BLAME' GAMES AFFECT MY DECISION TO CONSULT MAINT MANUAL OR PROCS. IN THE FUTURE; I WILL ALWAYS CONSULT THE MAINT MANUAL AND MEL WHEN CONFRONTED WITH PIT ANOMALIES.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.