Narrative:

On mar/xx/94 the following flts were dispatched with the #1 fuel boost pump deferred. I referred to our company MEL book for reference and read to believe that the restr would require 5.3 pounds of additional fuel in the affected tank. The above flts were dispatched under this premise. The following day, the aircraft was to operate and the captain phoned prior to departure to question the restrs on the MEL. I again referred to the MEL book and further reviewed the MEL restr by referring to the maintenance and operations section pages which then led me to believe that the pump restr would be an additional 12.9 pounds of fuel required versus the previous 5.3 pounds. The flight plan was recalculated with the additional fuel and the original flight plan verbally amended. I have reviewed the MEL and the company procedures with my manager and idented that the page layout (format) of the MEL and brought to his attention that there was no notation to refer me to the 'operational section' of the MEL book as other restrictive MEL items do -- were misleading to me. My manager was in concurrence and will be submitting a revised version to replace the present. Supplemental information from acn 267595: even though the flight operated normally and safely, if it had become necessary to hold and go to an alternate there could have been a problem. This issue was discussed with our chief pilot as soon as the error was found and he explained to me they had already had a new revision to the MEL at the FAA office (to make the issue more clear) awaiting approval.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DUE TO ALLEGED PUB DEFICIENCY AN ACR B-727S OPERATED SEVERAL LEGS WITH AN MEL DEV AND SHORTED 7600 LBS OF FUEL IN #1 TANK.

Narrative: ON MAR/XX/94 THE FOLLOWING FLTS WERE DISPATCHED WITH THE #1 FUEL BOOST PUMP DEFERRED. I REFERRED TO OUR COMPANY MEL BOOK FOR REF AND READ TO BELIEVE THAT THE RESTR WOULD REQUIRE 5.3 LBS OF ADDITIONAL FUEL IN THE AFFECTED TANK. THE ABOVE FLTS WERE DISPATCHED UNDER THIS PREMISE. THE FOLLOWING DAY, THE ACFT WAS TO OPERATE AND THE CAPT PHONED PRIOR TO DEP TO QUESTION THE RESTRS ON THE MEL. I AGAIN REFERRED TO THE MEL BOOK AND FURTHER REVIEWED THE MEL RESTR BY REFERRING TO THE MAINT AND OPS SECTION PAGES WHICH THEN LED ME TO BELIEVE THAT THE PUMP RESTR WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 12.9 LBS OF FUEL REQUIRED VERSUS THE PREVIOUS 5.3 LBS. THE FLT PLAN WAS RECALCULATED WITH THE ADDITIONAL FUEL AND THE ORIGINAL FLT PLAN VERBALLY AMENDED. I HAVE REVIEWED THE MEL AND THE COMPANY PROCS WITH MY MGR AND IDENTED THAT THE PAGE LAYOUT (FORMAT) OF THE MEL AND BROUGHT TO HIS ATTN THAT THERE WAS NO NOTATION TO REFER ME TO THE 'OPERATIONAL SECTION' OF THE MEL BOOK AS OTHER RESTRICTIVE MEL ITEMS DO -- WERE MISLEADING TO ME. MY MGR WAS IN CONCURRENCE AND WILL BE SUBMITTING A REVISED VERSION TO REPLACE THE PRESENT. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 267595: EVEN THOUGH THE FLT OPERATED NORMALLY AND SAFELY, IF IT HAD BECOME NECESSARY TO HOLD AND GO TO AN ALTERNATE THERE COULD HAVE BEEN A PROB. THIS ISSUE WAS DISCUSSED WITH OUR CHIEF PLT AS SOON AS THE ERROR WAS FOUND AND HE EXPLAINED TO ME THEY HAD ALREADY HAD A NEW REVISION TO THE MEL AT THE FAA OFFICE (TO MAKE THE ISSUE MORE CLR) AWAITING APPROVAL.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.