Narrative:

Upon checking aml and release it was determined our aircraft required a CAT 2 confidence check. It was also noticed that the aircraft was CAT 2 MEL. As captain I advised the first officer that we would; given the opportunity; perform our visual arrival into ZZZ as if it were a CAT 2 approach. We performed all the required procedures for the CAT 2. All went as planned and our aircraft passed all required pre-testing. The appropriate procedure was then followed to report completion of the required confidence check. It was then that I was advised that our confidence check was not authorized as the aircraft was still under a CAT 2 MEL. I was also advised that the CAT 2 MEL should not have been in place; but had not properly had that MEL removed.as a result of no associated MEL which would require a CAT 2 MEL; it was believed that it was directly related to a required confidence check. Lots of our aircraft have needed confidence checks to regain currency due to time in storage. I made this assumption incorrectlypracticing advanced approaches in conditions not requiring them only helps to build proficiency and confidence. The fact that the plane was not CAT 2 authorized had no effect on our approach as we didn't need to; nor did we; deviate from anything that would have occurred making any other ILS on runway xl. In reality; the aircraft tested appropriately and if it hadn't that would have been noted and reported.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier Captain reported executing a CAT II confidence check approach which was not authorized.

Narrative: Upon checking AML and release it was determined our aircraft required a CAT 2 confidence check. It was also noticed that the aircraft was CAT 2 MEL. As Captain I advised the FO that we would; given the opportunity; perform our visual arrival into ZZZ as if it were a CAT 2 approach. We performed all the required procedures for the CAT 2. All went as planned and our aircraft passed all required pre-testing. The appropriate procedure was then followed to report completion of the required confidence check. It was then that I was advised that our confidence check was not authorized as the aircraft was still under a CAT 2 MEL. I was also advised that the CAT 2 MEL should not have been in place; but had not properly had that MEL removed.As a result of no associated MEL which would require a CAT 2 MEL; it was believed that it was directly related to a required confidence check. Lots of our aircraft have needed confidence checks to regain currency due to time in storage. I made this assumption incorrectlyPracticing advanced approaches in conditions not requiring them only helps to build proficiency and confidence. The fact that the plane was not CAT 2 authorized had no effect on our approach as we didn't need to; nor did we; deviate from anything that would have occurred making any other ILS on Runway XL. In reality; the aircraft tested appropriately and if it hadn't that would have been noted and reported.

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.