Narrative:

Upon arrival to van nuys airport, crew wrote up right nose taxi light and MEL'ed it. Subsequent conversation led to the discovery that maintenance control in ZZZ1 did not have on record two of the MEL'ed items posted in our status book. Subsequent review of those items led to the discovery that one of our items was past the extension date posted by maintenance on dec/sat/03. The aircraft was scheduled for maintenance on dec/wed/03. No indication on the aircraft status sheet faxed for the 2 flts prior to leaving the aircraft in maintenance on dec/tue/03, indicated the expiration of the MEL'ed item. The crew is trained to review the status book and status sheet when accepting the aircraft on a crew swap. I originally found all documentation in order on that date (dec/sun/03). I failed to notice and query the 'B' item in question. When speaking with the lead mechanic on dec/wed/03, we expected return to service (rts) about XA00Z on jan/thu/03. Upon reviewing MEL forms during rts (15) I missed the maintenance facility's failure to extend or review the now expired 'B' item with me or maintenance control in ZZZ1. In my estimation, ZZZ1 had knowledge of and had extended with concurrence of the lead. I was told 'we were unable to fix item and left it MEL'ed. When I reviewed the open item on MEL status, I failed to see the original dec/wed/03. I had read they swapped gauges only and taken for granted (that was at phx after consult with lead mechanic). My opinion is that crews depend on ZZZ1 control as much as they depend on us. This started before I took over the aircraft. (MEL not in system)? Failure of maintenance at 3 facilities to correct squawk and scheduling pressure for 'rts' and drastic time shifts in crew duty.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: H25B CREW FLEW THE ACFT WITH OUT OF DATE MEL ITEMS.

Narrative: UPON ARR TO VAN NUYS ARPT, CREW WROTE UP R NOSE TAXI LIGHT AND MEL'ED IT. SUBSEQUENT CONVERSATION LED TO THE DISCOVERY THAT MAINT CTL IN ZZZ1 DID NOT HAVE ON RECORD TWO OF THE MEL'ED ITEMS POSTED IN OUR STATUS BOOK. SUBSEQUENT REVIEW OF THOSE ITEMS LED TO THE DISCOVERY THAT ONE OF OUR ITEMS WAS PAST THE EXTENSION DATE POSTED BY MAINT ON DEC/SAT/03. THE ACFT WAS SCHEDULED FOR MAINT ON DEC/WED/03. NO INDICATION ON THE ACFT STATUS SHEET FAXED FOR THE 2 FLTS PRIOR TO LEAVING THE ACFT IN MAINT ON DEC/TUE/03, INDICATED THE EXPIRATION OF THE MEL'ED ITEM. THE CREW IS TRAINED TO REVIEW THE STATUS BOOK AND STATUS SHEET WHEN ACCEPTING THE ACFT ON A CREW SWAP. I ORIGINALLY FOUND ALL DOCUMENTATION IN ORDER ON THAT DATE (DEC/SUN/03). I FAILED TO NOTICE AND QUERY THE 'B' ITEM IN QUESTION. WHEN SPEAKING WITH THE LEAD MECH ON DEC/WED/03, WE EXPECTED RETURN TO SVC (RTS) ABOUT XA00Z ON JAN/THU/03. UPON REVIEWING MEL FORMS DURING RTS (15) I MISSED THE MAINT FACILITY'S FAILURE TO EXTEND OR REVIEW THE NOW EXPIRED 'B' ITEM WITH ME OR MAINT CTL IN ZZZ1. IN MY ESTIMATION, ZZZ1 HAD KNOWLEDGE OF AND HAD EXTENDED WITH CONCURRENCE OF THE LEAD. I WAS TOLD 'WE WERE UNABLE TO FIX ITEM AND LEFT IT MEL'ED. WHEN I REVIEWED THE OPEN ITEM ON MEL STATUS, I FAILED TO SEE THE ORIGINAL DEC/WED/03. I HAD READ THEY SWAPPED GAUGES ONLY AND TAKEN FOR GRANTED (THAT WAS AT PHX AFTER CONSULT WITH LEAD MECH). MY OPINION IS THAT CREWS DEPEND ON ZZZ1 CTL AS MUCH AS THEY DEPEND ON US. THIS STARTED BEFORE I TOOK OVER THE ACFT. (MEL NOT IN SYS)? FAILURE OF MAINT AT 3 FACILITIES TO CORRECT SQUAWK AND SCHEDULING PRESSURE FOR 'RTS' AND DRASTIC TIME SHIFTS IN CREW DUTY.

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.