A CL65 is dispatched illegally with an anti-skid MEL discrepancy.

Attributes
ACN	601933
Time
Date	200312
Day	Tue
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	airport : dfw.airport
State Reference	TX
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Regional Jet CL65, Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : parked
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 90 flight time total : 5000 flight time type : 1500
ASRS Report	601933
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : less severe maintenance problem : improper maintenance maintenance problem : non compliance with mel maintenance problem : improper documentation non adherence : far
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : landed as precaution
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft Maintenance Human Performance
Primary Problem	Aircraft

Narrative:

We had a caution message display during our anti-skid test on the before start flow. That is not a normal indication during this test. We called maintenance out after writing the item up in our log. After some testing they decided to defer one of our anti-skid channels (2 installed, 1 required per MEL). I questioned a supervisor about this because they did not specify which channel was deferred. Not satisfied with his answer, I called another supervisor out to the plane to see if he could explain it better. I was told the same thing. The poh does not go into the system with the depth that a maintenance manual does. Not having as much information as they do I had to take their word for it. We decided to take the airplane with the deferral. Once airborne, we were called by our dispatcher. He said maintenance control suspected it was an illegal deferral and asked us to return to the airport. I was told there is no way to determine which channel is not working.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A CL65 IS DISPATCHED ILLEGALLY WITH AN ANTI-SKID MEL DISCREPANCY.

Narrative: WE HAD A CAUTION MESSAGE DISPLAY DURING OUR ANTI-SKID TEST ON THE BEFORE START FLOW. THAT IS NOT A NORMAL INDICATION DURING THIS TEST. WE CALLED MAINT OUT AFTER WRITING THE ITEM UP IN OUR LOG. AFTER SOME TESTING THEY DECIDED TO DEFER ONE OF OUR ANTI-SKID CHANNELS (2 INSTALLED, 1 REQUIRED PER MEL). I QUESTIONED A SUPVR ABOUT THIS BECAUSE THEY DID NOT SPECIFY WHICH CHANNEL WAS DEFERRED. NOT SATISFIED WITH HIS ANSWER, I CALLED ANOTHER SUPVR OUT TO THE PLANE TO SEE IF HE COULD EXPLAIN IT BETTER. I WAS TOLD THE SAME THING. THE POH DOES NOT GO INTO THE SYS WITH THE DEPTH THAT A MAINT MANUAL DOES. NOT HAVING AS MUCH INFO AS THEY DO I HAD TO TAKE THEIR WORD FOR IT. WE DECIDED TO TAKE THE AIRPLANE WITH THE DEFERRAL. ONCE AIRBORNE, WE WERE CALLED BY OUR DISPATCHER. HE SAID MAINT CTL SUSPECTED IT WAS AN ILLEGAL DEFERRAL AND ASKED US TO RETURN TO THE ARPT. I WAS TOLD THERE IS NO WAY TO DETERMINE WHICH CHANNEL IS NOT WORKING.

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.