Narrative:

I picked up airplane for a flight back to ZZZ after 3 nights of 2 legs red eyes.there were 2 mels on both the dispatch release and the logbooks. I talked with the inbound captain about MEL 27-93-xxy (elac pitch fault) and he indicated that the fault was not displayed on the ewd. I checked that both the release and the logbook had the same mels numbers; which they did and proceeded to check logbook and checked log page where mels was applied. I then checked the actual MEL 27-93-xxy in MEL book for further guidance.the placards were installed properly; and logbook indicated the M procedure was done and signed off by maintenance. I do not recall if it was done at an outstation or by actual F9 maintenance.I had no means to know what and how maintenance actually performed in order to satisfy that M procedure in the MEL.I then read the O procedure and it indicates that if the fault is not displayed on the ewd; then the O procedure does not apply. Both the first officer and I confirmed that the fault was not displayed on the ewd and that therefore we did not have to perform the O procedure. We did check that items (a) to (I) of the MEL were satisfied.I was made aware on [a previous date] by the captain who picked up the airplane from us in ZZZ1 that maintenance was wondering why some cbs were pushed in and not collared. I replied that I was not aware of any cbs needed to be collared for the elac pitch fault or it would be stipulated in the MEL. I have not been contacted by anyone at F9 at this time regarding that topic MEL is not clear as it does not indicates in the M procedure that cbs are to be pulled and collared.MEL is not clear if there is a difference on the M action between F/ctl elac 1 fault and F/control elac pitch fault procedure.it looks to me that maintenance did not differentiate between those two different faults addressed in the same melconsecutives nights of 2 legs red eyes do not help the awareness of the flight crew. Even if not fatigued as dined in far 117; the level of tiredness is high

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MEL 27-93-XXY (ELAC pitch fault) was on the dispatch release and on the logbook. It was not indicated on the Engine/Warning Display (EWD). Placards were installed properly and the logbook indicated that the maintenance procedure was done and signed off; but; no circuit breakers were pulled or collard.

Narrative: I picked up airplane for a flight back to ZZZ after 3 nights of 2 legs red eyes.There were 2 MELs on both the dispatch release and the logbooks. I talked with the inbound captain about MEL 27-93-XXY (ELAC pitch fault) and he indicated that the fault was not displayed on the EWD. I checked that both the release and the logbook had the same MELs numbers; which they did and proceeded to check logbook and checked log page where MELs was applied. I then checked the actual MEL 27-93-XXY in MEL book for further guidance.The placards were installed properly; and logbook indicated the M procedure was done and signed off by Maintenance. I do not recall if it was done at an outstation or by actual F9 Maintenance.I had no means to know what and how Maintenance actually performed in order to satisfy that M procedure in the MEL.I then read the O procedure and it indicates that if the fault is not displayed on the EWD; then the O procedure does not apply. Both the First Officer and I confirmed that the fault was not displayed on the EWD and that therefore we did not have to perform the O procedure. we did check that items (a) to (I) of the MEL were satisfied.I was made aware on [a previous date] by the Captain who picked up the airplane from us in ZZZ1 that Maintenance was wondering why some CBs were pushed in and not collared. I replied that I was not aware of any CBs needed to be collared for the ELAC pitch fault or it would be stipulated in the MEL. I have not been contacted by anyone at F9 at this time regarding that topic MEL is not clear as it does not indicates in the M procedure that CBs are to be pulled and collared.MEL is not clear if there is a difference on the M action between F/ctl ELAC 1 fault and F/CTL ELAC PITCH fault procedure.It looks to me that Maintenance did not differentiate between those two different faults addressed in the same MELconsecutives nights of 2 legs red eyes do not help the awareness of the flight crew. Even if not fatigued as dined in FAR 117; the level of tiredness is high

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.