MEL requirement -- air carrier flight crew discovers that the MEL in the aircraft is out of date whe...

Attributes
ACN	319170
Time
Date	199510
Day	Fri
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : bos
State Reference	MA
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 0
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : mem
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	MD-88
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Navigation In Use	Other Other
Flight Phase	ground : preflight
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 180 flight time total : 3200 flight time type : 1100
ASRS Report	319170
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 160 flight time total : 9000 flight time type : 2200
ASRS Report	319175
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : overcame equipment problem other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation other

Narrative:

At the gate while doing my exterior walkaround, I noticed the left wing position lights inoperative (2 of them). I notified the captain and called maintenance. The captain and I thought the item should be placed under 33-00-9A yet the maintenance guy wanted to put it under 33-00-9C. The inoperative lights were the green lights, and not the trailing edge white lights which we thought were implied by 33-00-9C. So the captain and mechanic called the atl maintenance coordinator in the jetway. He said put it under 33-00-9C because he had some type of electronic revision which deleted reference to the white. Since we didn't have this revision in the aircraft, the captain expressed his reservations about our copy of 33-00-9C, but made the decision to go with the atl maintenance coordinator's explanation and allow it to go under 33-00- 9C. He returned to the cockpit and said everything was taken care of. Later in flight after discussing our actions, I discovered the captain forgot to get the 'dispatch approval required,' as stated in which I thought he did since he stated everything was taken care of. I expressed my concerns to the captain, but he was in the jetway out of my sight. He could have come back to the cockpit to further discuss what the atl maintenance coordinator told him before he made his decision or we might have even reviewed the 33-00-9C item again. Possibly, don't use or confuse statements like 'everything is taken care of' as all steps were completed and review the steps by myself. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter was flying an MD88 when he discovered that both left wing navigation lights (red) were out. Maintenance decided to put the lights on the MEL. The MEL in the aircraft conflicted with the MEL that the maintenance coordinator was using and he assured the flight crew that he knew of an update that was not yet available to the crew. Based on these assurances the flight crew departed for tpa.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MEL REQUIREMENT -- ACR FLC DISCOVERS THAT THE MEL IN THE ACFT IS OUT OF DATE WHEN THEY DISCUSS A PROVISION WITH MAINT. MAINT EXPLAINED THAT THE MEL CODE NUMBERS FOR THE NAV LIGHTS IN THEIR, MORE RECENT MEL, WERE CORRECT.

Narrative: AT THE GATE WHILE DOING MY EXTERIOR WALKAROUND, I NOTICED THE L WING POS LIGHTS INOP (2 OF THEM). I NOTIFIED THE CAPT AND CALLED MAINT. THE CAPT AND I THOUGHT THE ITEM SHOULD BE PLACED UNDER 33-00-9A YET THE MAINT GUY WANTED TO PUT IT UNDER 33-00-9C. THE INOP LIGHTS WERE THE GREEN LIGHTS, AND NOT THE TRAILING EDGE WHITE LIGHTS WHICH WE THOUGHT WERE IMPLIED BY 33-00-9C. SO THE CAPT AND MECH CALLED THE ATL MAINT COORDINATOR IN THE JETWAY. HE SAID PUT IT UNDER 33-00-9C BECAUSE HE HAD SOME TYPE OF ELECTRONIC REVISION WHICH DELETED REF TO THE WHITE. SINCE WE DIDN'T HAVE THIS REVISION IN THE ACFT, THE CAPT EXPRESSED HIS RESERVATIONS ABOUT OUR COPY OF 33-00-9C, BUT MADE THE DECISION TO GO WITH THE ATL MAINT COORDINATOR'S EXPLANATION AND ALLOW IT TO GO UNDER 33-00- 9C. HE RETURNED TO THE COCKPIT AND SAID EVERYTHING WAS TAKEN CARE OF. LATER IN FLT AFTER DISCUSSING OUR ACTIONS, I DISCOVERED THE CAPT FORGOT TO GET THE 'DISPATCH APPROVAL REQUIRED,' AS STATED IN WHICH I THOUGHT HE DID SINCE HE STATED EVERYTHING WAS TAKEN CARE OF. I EXPRESSED MY CONCERNS TO THE CAPT, BUT HE WAS IN THE JETWAY OUT OF MY SIGHT. HE COULD HAVE COME BACK TO THE COCKPIT TO FURTHER DISCUSS WHAT THE ATL MAINT COORDINATOR TOLD HIM BEFORE HE MADE HIS DECISION OR WE MIGHT HAVE EVEN REVIEWED THE 33-00-9C ITEM AGAIN. POSSIBLY, DON'T USE OR CONFUSE STATEMENTS LIKE 'EVERYTHING IS TAKEN CARE OF' AS ALL STEPS WERE COMPLETED AND REVIEW THE STEPS BY MYSELF. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR WAS FLYING AN MD88 WHEN HE DISCOVERED THAT BOTH L WING NAV LIGHTS (RED) WERE OUT. MAINT DECIDED TO PUT THE LIGHTS ON THE MEL. THE MEL IN THE ACFT CONFLICTED WITH THE MEL THAT THE MAINT COORDINATOR WAS USING AND HE ASSURED THE FLC THAT HE KNEW OF AN UPDATE THAT WAS NOT YET AVAILABLE TO THE CREW. BASED ON THESE ASSURANCES THE FLC DEPARTED FOR TPA.

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.

MEL requirement -- air carrier flight crew discovers that the MEL in the aircraft is out of date when they discuss a provision with maintenance. Maintenance explained that the MEL code numbers for the navigation lights in their, more recent MEL, were correct.