Narrative:

I was PIC of airlines flight from dtw to mqt to cmx to msp with return as flight from msp to cmx to mqt. The maintenance preflight on the aircraft was due to expire at XX07 local time (at mqt). The last leg of our schedule (cmx to mqt) was not due to leave until XX35 local time. I informed dispatch that the aircraft was in need of a maintenance preflight. I was then instructed to talk to director of maintenance. He informed me that he felt that the 'circumstances beyond the control of the company' clause in the maintenance operations specifications allowed him to delay the preflight rather than delay the flight. I told him that if he gave me instructions to that effect in writing, I would fly the airplane. He refused to do so. I then went to director of operations for instructions. He intimated that if I did not fly the aircraft, someone else would. I then asked him for written instructions. He refused, but assured me that verbal instructions were sufficient. I feel that clarification of these rules is in order, and that pilots should receive written instructions in cases where rules are in dispute. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: operations specifications of the air carrier requires a maintenance inspection of the aircraft every 72 hours. When inspection is accomplished maintenance enters in the logbook the time and then it is the responsibility of the flight crew to add 72 hours to this time to indicate when the next inspection is due. Mqt is a maintenance facility but in this case the aircraft was allowed to continue to the next station where the inspection was accomplished. Time to do the inspection was about 30 mins. Feels very strongly a clarification of these rules is in order.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: REQUIRED MAINTENANCE INSPECTION WAIVED SO ACFT COULD CONTINUE WITHOUT DELAY.

Narrative: I WAS PIC OF AIRLINES FLT FROM DTW TO MQT TO CMX TO MSP WITH RETURN AS FLT FROM MSP TO CMX TO MQT. THE MAINT PREFLT ON THE ACFT WAS DUE TO EXPIRE AT XX07 LCL TIME (AT MQT). THE LAST LEG OF OUR SCHEDULE (CMX TO MQT) WAS NOT DUE TO LEAVE UNTIL XX35 LCL TIME. I INFORMED DISPATCH THAT THE ACFT WAS IN NEED OF A MAINT PREFLT. I WAS THEN INSTRUCTED TO TALK TO DIRECTOR OF MAINT. HE INFORMED ME THAT HE FELT THAT THE 'CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THE COMPANY' CLAUSE IN THE MAINT OPS SPECS ALLOWED HIM TO DELAY THE PREFLT RATHER THAN DELAY THE FLT. I TOLD HIM THAT IF HE GAVE ME INSTRUCTIONS TO THAT EFFECT IN WRITING, I WOULD FLY THE AIRPLANE. HE REFUSED TO DO SO. I THEN WENT TO DIRECTOR OF OPS FOR INSTRUCTIONS. HE INTIMATED THAT IF I DID NOT FLY THE ACFT, SOMEONE ELSE WOULD. I THEN ASKED HIM FOR WRITTEN INSTRUCTIONS. HE REFUSED, BUT ASSURED ME THAT VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS WERE SUFFICIENT. I FEEL THAT CLARIFICATION OF THESE RULES IS IN ORDER, AND THAT PLTS SHOULD RECEIVE WRITTEN INSTRUCTIONS IN CASES WHERE RULES ARE IN DISPUTE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: OPS SPECS OF THE ACR REQUIRES A MAINT INSPECTION OF THE ACFT EVERY 72 HRS. WHEN INSPECTION IS ACCOMPLISHED MAINT ENTERS IN THE LOGBOOK THE TIME AND THEN IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE FLT CREW TO ADD 72 HRS TO THIS TIME TO INDICATE WHEN THE NEXT INSPECTION IS DUE. MQT IS A MAINT FAC BUT IN THIS CASE THE ACFT WAS ALLOWED TO CONTINUE TO THE NEXT STATION WHERE THE INSPECTION WAS ACCOMPLISHED. TIME TO DO THE INSPECTION WAS ABOUT 30 MINS. FEELS VERY STRONGLY A CLARIFICATION OF THESE RULES IS IN ORDER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.