Narrative:

Wrote up a malfunctioning bleed valve. Maintenance deferred the wrong valve. In part because I mistakenly wrote a vague discrepancy. In my case after the problem was fixed, I got the logbook. The deferral, although incorrect, was the corrective action for my write-up. In our log, any deferrals that will remain in effect for some time, are xferred to the back of the log onto a card stock page or 'hard card.' the log came back to me with no mention of the original corrective action being incorrect. The mechanic told me, and I asked 3 times, that because he xferred it to the 'hard card,' he needed to write a work order to clear the deferral and all details including the proper corrective action would be documented there. I asked him 2 questions: is the aircraft airworthy, and is the paperwork/signoffs appropriate and complete? With the first officer, as my witness, he replied 'yes' to both questions and once more assured me no other log entries were required. He said it was due in part to the original write-up not specifying which valve was the problem. The aircraft was fixed and I was satisfied the paperwork was complete. However, even with the mechanic taking responsibility, I worry about this coming back on me.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DO328 CAPT QUESTIONED THE LEGALITY OF A MAINT DEFERRAL OF THE ACFT BLEED AIR VALVES SINCE HE FAILED TO SPECIFY WHICH VALVE WAS DEFECTIVE.

Narrative: WROTE UP A MALFUNCTIONING BLEED VALVE. MAINT DEFERRED THE WRONG VALVE. IN PART BECAUSE I MISTAKENLY WROTE A VAGUE DISCREPANCY. IN MY CASE AFTER THE PROB WAS FIXED, I GOT THE LOGBOOK. THE DEFERRAL, ALTHOUGH INCORRECT, WAS THE CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR MY WRITE-UP. IN OUR LOG, ANY DEFERRALS THAT WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT FOR SOME TIME, ARE XFERRED TO THE BACK OF THE LOG ONTO A CARD STOCK PAGE OR 'HARD CARD.' THE LOG CAME BACK TO ME WITH NO MENTION OF THE ORIGINAL CORRECTIVE ACTION BEING INCORRECT. THE MECH TOLD ME, AND I ASKED 3 TIMES, THAT BECAUSE HE XFERRED IT TO THE 'HARD CARD,' HE NEEDED TO WRITE A WORK ORDER TO CLR THE DEFERRAL AND ALL DETAILS INCLUDING THE PROPER CORRECTIVE ACTION WOULD BE DOCUMENTED THERE. I ASKED HIM 2 QUESTIONS: IS THE ACFT AIRWORTHY, AND IS THE PAPERWORK/SIGNOFFS APPROPRIATE AND COMPLETE? WITH THE FO, AS MY WITNESS, HE REPLIED 'YES' TO BOTH QUESTIONS AND ONCE MORE ASSURED ME NO OTHER LOG ENTRIES WERE REQUIRED. HE SAID IT WAS DUE IN PART TO THE ORIGINAL WRITE-UP NOT SPECIFYING WHICH VALVE WAS THE PROB. THE ACFT WAS FIXED AND I WAS SATISFIED THE PAPERWORK WAS COMPLETE. HOWEVER, EVEN WITH THE MECH TAKING RESPONSIBILITY, I WORRY ABOUT THIS COMING BACK ON ME.

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.