Narrative:

During the walk-around captain discovered several missing and loose rivets from the tail cone section of engine number 1. The maintenance office was close by; so the captain verbally reported the defect to the mechanic on duty in the office. The mechanic instantly retorted that he would defer it. Captain showed area of concern to the mechanic and the mechanic said he would investigate. The captain was told the area would be deferred under an [airbus] maintenance tip (mt). Captain said if legal to do so; fine. Item entered into ACARS by flight crew. The maintenance release was received and the deferral verbiage caused some concern for the crew. The action item for our logbook [write-up] simply said continued deferred - no time. As it was being deferred under the maintenance tip; I thought it necessary to mention it in the maintenance release as well as the maintenance tip requirements of maximum flight hours on the deferral. We asked for this amendment over the radio to ZZZ maintenance as the door was closed. Maintenance seemed to have a hard time understanding our concerns and they did re-issue the maintenance release; but only added a line stating 15 rivets loose or missing...still no mention of the maintenance tip I was told was being used as the deferral authority for the flight. Maintenance asked if this was good enough and would we go with that. Said 'no'. Brought dispatch and maintenance control into the mix over ACARS and explained our concerns. Maintenance control was on the phone with ZZZ maintenance and it was determined the maintenance tip was not valid and we were not legal to go. After a great deal of time; we were told the flight could depart with an engineering authority for the missing/loose rivets. This took quite some time to generate and when it was reported as done we conferenced with dispatch and maintenance control since the engineering authority is barely referenced in the fom. We decided we could safely proceed. A maintenance release was generated with the required references (after 2 more requests) and the flight was then legal to depart. During our delay; ZZZ had a heavy hail event and we did need to de-ice. The operations personnel continuously fed the [flight] crew false information as to time requirements for de-ice and the door was slammed a full 25 minutes before de-ice showed up. This was on top of our almost two hour maintenance delay. To conclude; I believe the myopic focus on deferring every item has the mechanics distracted and sometime missing obvious items that can't be deferred. The [flight] crew should not have the job title of maintenance quality control thrust upon them as well as all the other normal duties we have. The ZZZ station folks all; at some time during our delay; only half jokingly asked the crew what we broke. As I am carrying out my duties as a professional airline pilot; the detraction of non-certificated personnel opinions as to an aircraft's fly-ability are not required or welcome.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Captain and a Mechanic report about discrepancies in the deferral process of an A320 aircraft. The Captain had found numerous rivets missing and 'working' on the # 1 engine Common Nozzle Assembly. Captain believes his Carrier's focus on deferring every item has the Mechanics distracted and sometimes missing obvious items that can't be deferred.

Narrative: During the walk-around Captain discovered several missing and loose rivets from the tail cone section of engine number 1. The Maintenance office was close by; so the Captain verbally reported the defect to the Mechanic on duty in the office. The Mechanic instantly retorted that he would defer it. Captain showed area of concern to the Mechanic and the Mechanic said he would investigate. The Captain was told the area would be deferred under an [Airbus] Maintenance Tip (MT). Captain said if legal to do so; fine. Item entered into ACARS by Flight Crew. The Maintenance Release was received and the deferral verbiage caused some concern for the Crew. The action item for our logbook [write-up] simply said continued deferred - no time. As it was being deferred under the Maintenance Tip; I thought it necessary to mention it in the Maintenance Release as well as the Maintenance Tip requirements of maximum flight hours on the deferral. We asked for this amendment over the radio to ZZZ Maintenance as the door was closed. Maintenance seemed to have a hard time understanding our concerns and they did re-issue the Maintenance Release; but only added a line stating 15 rivets loose or missing...still no mention of the Maintenance Tip I was told was being used as the Deferral authority for the flight. Maintenance asked if this was good enough and would we go with that. Said 'no'. Brought Dispatch and Maintenance Control into the mix over ACARS and explained our concerns. Maintenance Control was on the phone with ZZZ Maintenance and it was determined the Maintenance Tip was not valid and we were not legal to go. After a great deal of time; we were told the flight could depart with an Engineering Authority for the missing/loose rivets. This took quite some time to generate and when it was reported as done we conferenced with Dispatch and Maintenance Control since the Engineering Authority is barely referenced in the FOM. We decided we could safely proceed. A Maintenance Release was generated with the required references (after 2 more requests) and the flight was then legal to depart. During our delay; ZZZ had a heavy hail event and we did need to de-ice. The Operations personnel continuously fed the [Flight] Crew false information as to time requirements for de-ice and the door was slammed a full 25 minutes before de-ice showed up. This was on top of our almost two hour maintenance delay. To conclude; I believe the myopic focus on deferring every item has the Mechanics distracted and sometime missing obvious items that can't be deferred. The [Flight] Crew should not have the job title of Maintenance Quality Control thrust upon them as well as all the other normal duties we have. The ZZZ Station folks all; at some time during our delay; only half jokingly asked the Crew what we broke. As I am carrying out my duties as a professional airline pilot; the detraction of non-certificated personnel opinions as to an aircraft's fly-ability are not required or welcome.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.