The right ecs pack pressure supply indication was inoperative and deferred on a canadair crj-200. Ca...

Attributes
ACN	796506
Time
Date	200805
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : zzz.airport
State Reference	US
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zzz.artcc tracon : zzz.tracon
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Regional Jet 200 ER&LR
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	cruise : level
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
ASRS Report	796506
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe maintenance problem : improper documentation
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Company Maintenance Human Performance Aircraft Chart Or Publication
Primary Problem	Chart Or Publication

Narrative:

The right ecs pack pressure supply indication was inoperative; so we deferred it with maintenance control per MEL. On review of MEL requirements; I noticed that the (O) procedure calls for the pilot to first perform the QRH procedure in the event of a pack high pressure fault indication. Additional procedures are specified in the event that the problem persists. This (O) procedure is completely illogical; in that step 4 of the QRH procedure; 'ecs duct pressure...confirm less than 60 psi' requires one to reference the same inoperative indication just deferred via the MEL. The QRH procedure being unusable; an alternate (O) procedure in the MEL; would appear to be in order. Also; MEL allows relief for both pack supply indications. However; having both inoperative would appear to make seeing 60 psi indication for a xbleed start impossible and; therefore; require the APU to be operative. MEL should prohibit deferral of both pack supply pressure indications if the APU is inoperative; and APU deferrals in MEL should require at least 1 pressure indication be operative.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: THE R ECS PACK PRESSURE SUPPLY INDICATION WAS INOP AND DEFERRED ON A CANADAIR CRJ-200. CAPTAIN BELIEVES THE (O) PROCEDURE IS ILLOGICAL AND AN ALTERNATE (O) PROCEDURE IN THE MEL WOULD APPEAR TO BE IN ORDER.

Narrative: THE R ECS PACK PRESSURE SUPPLY INDICATION WAS INOP; SO WE DEFERRED IT WITH MAINT CTL PER MEL. ON REVIEW OF MEL REQUIREMENTS; I NOTICED THAT THE (O) PROC CALLS FOR THE PLT TO FIRST PERFORM THE QRH PROC IN THE EVENT OF A PACK HIGH PRESSURE FAULT INDICATION. ADDITIONAL PROCS ARE SPECIFIED IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROB PERSISTS. THIS (O) PROC IS COMPLETELY ILLOGICAL; IN THAT STEP 4 OF THE QRH PROC; 'ECS DUCT PRESSURE...CONFIRM LESS THAN 60 PSI' REQUIRES ONE TO REF THE SAME INOP INDICATION JUST DEFERRED VIA THE MEL. THE QRH PROC BEING UNUSABLE; AN ALTERNATE (O) PROC IN THE MEL; WOULD APPEAR TO BE IN ORDER. ALSO; MEL ALLOWS RELIEF FOR BOTH PACK SUPPLY INDICATIONS. HOWEVER; HAVING BOTH INOP WOULD APPEAR TO MAKE SEEING 60 PSI INDICATION FOR A XBLEED START IMPOSSIBLE AND; THEREFORE; REQUIRE THE APU TO BE OPERATIVE. MEL SHOULD PROHIBIT DEFERRAL OF BOTH PACK SUPPLY PRESSURE INDICATIONS IF THE APU IS INOP; AND APU DEFERRALS IN MEL SHOULD REQUIRE AT LEAST 1 PRESSURE INDICATION BE OPERATIVE.

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.

The right ecs pack pressure supply indication was inoperative and deferred on a canadair crj-200. Captain believes the (O) procedure is illogical and an alternate (O) procedure in the MEL would appear to be in order.