Narrative:

Performed maintenance on 2 panels, part number 205-030-280-127 and panels nme-205-030-173-38 127 in jul/fri/99 and jul/thu/99. Aircraft was returned to service and flying, east coast. Have had no complaints from customer. Have been using same return to service procedures for last 3 years. FSDO had complete knowledge aircraft was leased to a 135 operator in his area in december 1999. Under inspection of aircraft by asi squawks included 2 panels mentioned above. Procedural dispute began, customer opted to change panels because of time constraint of contract. FAA inspector issued loi. No action as of this date of letter. On apr/tue/01 received letter of retesting of my airman's competency. I have requested ia testing and some type of remedial classes to fulfill current questions of asi about competency. Corrective actions: requested repair station status. Asi has approved inspection manual but then promoted to washington D.C. Sent 2 follow-up letters with no answers in past several months from FSDO. I had hoped for clarification of problems and to come to an agreement acceptable to both parties on forms and procedures to follow as outlined in ipm. Received ia, apr/fri/01. Will continue to request help from FSDO, continue classes and education, cooperate.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A&P MECH INVESTIGATED BY FAA FOR ALLEGEDLY INSTALLING 2 PANELS INCORRECTLY IN A BELL HELI AT HIS MAINT FAC.

Narrative: PERFORMED MAINT ON 2 PANELS, PART NUMBER 205-030-280-127 AND PANELS NME-205-030-173-38 127 IN JUL/FRI/99 AND JUL/THU/99. ACFT WAS RETURNED TO SERVICE AND FLYING, EAST COAST. HAVE HAD NO COMPLAINTS FROM CUSTOMER. HAVE BEEN USING SAME RETURN TO SVC PROCS FOR LAST 3 YEARS. FSDO HAD COMPLETE KNOWLEDGE ACFT WAS LEASED TO A 135 OPERATOR IN HIS AREA IN DECEMBER 1999. UNDER INSPECTION OF ACFT BY ASI SQUAWKS INCLUDED 2 PANELS MENTIONED ABOVE. PROCEDURAL DISPUTE BEGAN, CUSTOMER OPTED TO CHANGE PANELS BECAUSE OF TIME CONSTRAINT OF CONTRACT. FAA INSPECTOR ISSUED LOI. NO ACTION AS OF THIS DATE OF LETTER. ON APR/TUE/01 RECEIVED LETTER OF RETESTING OF MY AIRMAN'S COMPETENCY. I HAVE REQUESTED IA TESTING AND SOME TYPE OF REMEDIAL CLASSES TO FULFILL CURRENT QUESTIONS OF ASI ABOUT COMPETENCY. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: REQUESTED REPAIR STATION STATUS. ASI HAS APPROVED INSPECTION MANUAL BUT THEN PROMOTED TO WASHINGTON D.C. SENT 2 FOLLOW-UP LETTERS WITH NO ANSWERS IN PAST SEVERAL MONTHS FROM FSDO. I HAD HOPED FOR CLARIFICATION OF PROBS AND TO COME TO AN AGREEMENT ACCEPTABLE TO BOTH PARTIES ON FORMS AND PROCS TO FOLLOW AS OUTLINED IN IPM. RECEIVED IA, APR/FRI/01. WILL CONTINUE TO REQUEST HELP FROM FSDO, CONTINUE CLASSES AND EDUCATION, COOPERATE.

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.