Narrative:

On feb/tue/02 during an FAA maintenance inspection prior to a routine far part 135.299 line check, FAA discovered that the aircraft (CL600) had overflown a schedule aircraft reweight inspection. The reweight inspection was accomplished the following day prior to any further flts. This incident precipitated myself, an additional crew member, and the director of maintenance to conduct an in-house maintenance audit/review of the aircraft records the following day. This review found the aircraft additionally to be in non compliance of checking of the aircraft stall protection system (an airworthiness inspection item). As the aircraft captain and aviation department head, the following morning I contacted the certificate holder under which the aircraft is operated, and made a full disclosure of the second maintenance issue found. The action of overflying the inspection of the aircraft stall protection system damaged my trust and confidence of the aircraft maintenance tracking. I now requested the certificate holder to conduct a full audit of our maintenance records, maintenance department. And tracking procedures. The stall protection system inspection is an inspection based on accumulated airframe flight time. In looking back through the aircraft flight records, it appears the aircraft overflew the inspection of the stall protection system on jan/wed/02. This is peculiar because the charter company on jan/wed/02 conducted a scheduled audit of maintenance records at our facility. The outcome of that inspection was a letter we received dated jan/wed/02 stating that all maintenance records were neatly organized and in order, 'keep up the good work.' this letter reassured me that all maintenance was being tracked correctly and professionally. On feb/fri/02, I met with representative in hartford, ct, and requested that they perform a manufacturer's maintenance audit of the aircraft (before further flight) and provide an airworthiness release for flight assuming all is in order. This audit by bombardier is scheduled for feb/mon/02. The lead mechanic on the aircraft was relieved from his duties on feb/fri/02. The certificate holder is scheduled to return for an additional maintenance audit and crew training on feb/thu/02 and feb/fri/02. We have been informed by the certificate holder that the outcome of this audit will direct further action on their part.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CL601 WAS FOUND TO NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIRED ACFT REWEIGH INSPECTION OR CHKING THE STALL PROTECTION SYS.

Narrative: ON FEB/TUE/02 DURING AN FAA MAINT INSPECTION PRIOR TO A ROUTINE FAR PART 135.299 LINE CHK, FAA DISCOVERED THAT THE ACFT (CL600) HAD OVERFLOWN A SCHEDULE ACFT REWEIGHT INSPECTION. THE REWEIGHT INSPECTION WAS ACCOMPLISHED THE FOLLOWING DAY PRIOR TO ANY FURTHER FLTS. THIS INCIDENT PRECIPITATED MYSELF, AN ADDITIONAL CREW MEMBER, AND THE DIRECTOR OF MAINT TO CONDUCT AN IN-HOUSE MAINT AUDIT/REVIEW OF THE ACFT RECORDS THE FOLLOWING DAY. THIS REVIEW FOUND THE ACFT ADDITIONALLY TO BE IN NON COMPLIANCE OF CHKING OF THE ACFT STALL PROTECTION SYS (AN AIRWORTHINESS INSPECTION ITEM). AS THE ACFT CAPT AND AVIATION DEPT HEAD, THE FOLLOWING MORNING I CONTACTED THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER UNDER WHICH THE ACFT IS OPERATED, AND MADE A FULL DISCLOSURE OF THE SECOND MAINT ISSUE FOUND. THE ACTION OF OVERFLYING THE INSPECTION OF THE ACFT STALL PROTECTION SYS DAMAGED MY TRUST AND CONFIDENCE OF THE ACFT MAINT TRACKING. I NOW REQUESTED THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER TO CONDUCT A FULL AUDIT OF OUR MAINT RECORDS, MAINT DEPT. AND TRACKING PROCS. THE STALL PROTECTION SYS INSPECTION IS AN INSPECTION BASED ON ACCUMULATED AIRFRAME FLT TIME. IN LOOKING BACK THROUGH THE ACFT FLT RECORDS, IT APPEARS THE ACFT OVERFLEW THE INSPECTION OF THE STALL PROTECTION SYS ON JAN/WED/02. THIS IS PECULIAR BECAUSE THE CHARTER COMPANY ON JAN/WED/02 CONDUCTED A SCHEDULED AUDIT OF MAINT RECORDS AT OUR FACILITY. THE OUTCOME OF THAT INSPECTION WAS A LETTER WE RECEIVED DATED JAN/WED/02 STATING THAT ALL MAINT RECORDS WERE NEATLY ORGANIZED AND IN ORDER, 'KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.' THIS LETTER REASSURED ME THAT ALL MAINT WAS BEING TRACKED CORRECTLY AND PROFESSIONALLY. ON FEB/FRI/02, I MET WITH REPRESENTATIVE IN HARTFORD, CT, AND REQUESTED THAT THEY PERFORM A MANUFACTURER'S MAINT AUDIT OF THE ACFT (BEFORE FURTHER FLT) AND PROVIDE AN AIRWORTHINESS RELEASE FOR FLT ASSUMING ALL IS IN ORDER. THIS AUDIT BY BOMBARDIER IS SCHEDULED FOR FEB/MON/02. THE LEAD MECH ON THE ACFT WAS RELIEVED FROM HIS DUTIES ON FEB/FRI/02. THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER IS SCHEDULED TO RETURN FOR AN ADDITIONAL MAINT AUDIT AND CREW TRAINING ON FEB/THU/02 AND FEB/FRI/02. WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED BY THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER THAT THE OUTCOME OF THIS AUDIT WILL DIRECT FURTHER ACTION ON THEIR PART.

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.