Narrative:

I was an upgrade lead on feb/mon/01 and I instructed a mechanic to finish installing a bushing on the trailing edge flap carriage. The mechanic informed me that the bushing would not stay in place due to the hole being out-of-round. I asked the mechanic to talk with the foreman as to which course of action was to be taken. I got back later with the mechanic, who told me that they shimmied the bushing. I asked him 'is that fix per the maintenance manual?' he said 'no, it is not.' then I asked him what he did. He said he put aluminum tape around the bushing and installed it back into the flap carriage and reassembled the flap carriage. He noted that the foreman told him to do it that way. I asked him if they got an engineering variation authority/authorized from the engineer. He said no, and that the foreman would sign off the write-up. I took the write-up and went into the foreman's office and asked him if they called the engineering department for an engineering variation authority/authorized. The foreman said they didn't need an engineering variation authority/authorized. I said 'what do you mean we don't need an engineering variation authority/authorized? You need one because this is unusual.' the foreman still insisted that we did not need an engineering variation authority/authorized. I told him 'we need an engineering variation authority/authorized to protect the mechanic working on the write-up, and to protect you.' he said we can't be calling the engineer for every little thing that comes up. I asked the foreman 'is he going to sign the work off?' and he stated yes. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter stated the airplane was not dispatched with the improper repair, but repaired prior to departure. The reporter stated the sequence carriage was so far out of limits it had to be removed, welded and machined to maintenance manual limits to return the airplane to service. The reporter said the loose sequence carriage was discovered at XA00 at night and plenty of time was available to properly replace or repair prior to scheduled departure. The reporter stated because no sequence carriage was in stock a shop repair was required and delayed the trip 2 hours. An investigation revealed the improper and unauthorized repair and resulted in the supervisor being fired.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B747-400 WAS DELAYED DUE TO AN ATTEMPT BY A MAINT SUPVR TO DISPATCH AN IMPROPERLY REPAIRED L WING TRAILING EDGE FLAP SEQUENCE CARRIAGE. THE CARRIAGE WAS REPAIRED PRIOR TO DEP.

Narrative: I WAS AN UPGRADE LEAD ON FEB/MON/01 AND I INSTRUCTED A MECH TO FINISH INSTALLING A BUSHING ON THE TRAILING EDGE FLAP CARRIAGE. THE MECH INFORMED ME THAT THE BUSHING WOULD NOT STAY IN PLACE DUE TO THE HOLE BEING OUT-OF-ROUND. I ASKED THE MECH TO TALK WITH THE FOREMAN AS TO WHICH COURSE OF ACTION WAS TO BE TAKEN. I GOT BACK LATER WITH THE MECH, WHO TOLD ME THAT THEY SHIMMIED THE BUSHING. I ASKED HIM 'IS THAT FIX PER THE MAINT MANUAL?' HE SAID 'NO, IT IS NOT.' THEN I ASKED HIM WHAT HE DID. HE SAID HE PUT ALUMINUM TAPE AROUND THE BUSHING AND INSTALLED IT BACK INTO THE FLAP CARRIAGE AND REASSEMBLED THE FLAP CARRIAGE. HE NOTED THAT THE FOREMAN TOLD HIM TO DO IT THAT WAY. I ASKED HIM IF THEY GOT AN ENGINEERING VARIATION AUTH FROM THE ENGINEER. HE SAID NO, AND THAT THE FOREMAN WOULD SIGN OFF THE WRITE-UP. I TOOK THE WRITE-UP AND WENT INTO THE FOREMAN'S OFFICE AND ASKED HIM IF THEY CALLED THE ENGINEERING DEPT FOR AN ENGINEERING VARIATION AUTH. THE FOREMAN SAID THEY DIDN'T NEED AN ENGINEERING VARIATION AUTH. I SAID 'WHAT DO YOU MEAN WE DON'T NEED AN ENGINEERING VARIATION AUTH? YOU NEED ONE BECAUSE THIS IS UNUSUAL.' THE FOREMAN STILL INSISTED THAT WE DID NOT NEED AN ENGINEERING VARIATION AUTH. I TOLD HIM 'WE NEED AN ENGINEERING VARIATION AUTH TO PROTECT THE MECH WORKING ON THE WRITE-UP, AND TO PROTECT YOU.' HE SAID WE CAN'T BE CALLING THE ENGINEER FOR EVERY LITTLE THING THAT COMES UP. I ASKED THE FOREMAN 'IS HE GOING TO SIGN THE WORK OFF?' AND HE STATED YES. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE AIRPLANE WAS NOT DISPATCHED WITH THE IMPROPER REPAIR, BUT REPAIRED PRIOR TO DEP. THE RPTR STATED THE SEQUENCE CARRIAGE WAS SO FAR OUT OF LIMITS IT HAD TO BE REMOVED, WELDED AND MACHINED TO MAINT MANUAL LIMITS TO RETURN THE AIRPLANE TO SVC. THE RPTR SAID THE LOOSE SEQUENCE CARRIAGE WAS DISCOVERED AT XA00 AT NIGHT AND PLENTY OF TIME WAS AVAILABLE TO PROPERLY REPLACE OR REPAIR PRIOR TO SCHEDULED DEP. THE RPTR STATED BECAUSE NO SEQUENCE CARRIAGE WAS IN STOCK A SHOP REPAIR WAS REQUIRED AND DELAYED THE TRIP 2 HRS. AN INVESTIGATION REVEALED THE IMPROPER AND UNAUTH REPAIR AND RESULTED IN THE SUPVR BEING FIRED.

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.