Narrative:

On may/fri/04, I was informed, via e-mail, dated may/fri/04, that an inappropriate MEL was issued by me to an unknown airplane. The date of the issue was may/sat/04. The MEL was for an aed that had a red flashing 'X.' the e-mail went on to say that as of apr/mon/04, aed's cannot be MEL'ed if unserviceable. My research showed the airplane in question was a B737. The MEL 25-17, emergency medical equipment was issued may/sat/04, at XA21 in MEL 25-17 was cleared on may/sun/04. ZZZ1 was the first maintenance base visited after leaving on may/sat/04. Maintenance called asking if the aed could be MEL'ed under 25-17 due to the fact that the wording of the MEL 25-17 is confusing. After reading MEL 25-17 4 times and being confused by the wording, I consulted my fellow controllers' opinion. The controllers' responses were that 3 maintenance controllers minimum, had e-mailed engineering in the past 2 months asking under exactly what circumstances aed's and eemk's can be MEL'ed per 25-17. To date, no response has been received from engineering. The confusion was the aed could be MEL'ed under 25-17. I made the decision at that point to MEL the aed per 'may be inoperative or missing provided' and have an aed scheduled to be installed at the first maintenance base visited. The next e-mail that was in my 'in box' was dated may/wed/04. It addressed all maintenance controllers. The e-mail stated that as of apr/mon/04, one serviceable aed must be installed on each airplane. Since airplanes have only 1 aed installed, the airplane will be grounded if an aed is found unserviceable. It further stated that the second part of MEL 25-17 dealing with the aed is to be ignored. This part of MEL 25-17 would be deleted on the next MEL revision.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B737 WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE ON A REVENUE FLT WITH AN AUTOMATED EXTERNAL DEFIBRILLATOR INOP, DUE TO PUB DEFICIENCY.

Narrative: ON MAY/FRI/04, I WAS INFORMED, VIA E-MAIL, DATED MAY/FRI/04, THAT AN INAPPROPRIATE MEL WAS ISSUED BY ME TO AN UNKNOWN AIRPLANE. THE DATE OF THE ISSUE WAS MAY/SAT/04. THE MEL WAS FOR AN AED THAT HAD A RED FLASHING 'X.' THE E-MAIL WENT ON TO SAY THAT AS OF APR/MON/04, AED'S CANNOT BE MEL'ED IF UNSERVICEABLE. MY RESEARCH SHOWED THE AIRPLANE IN QUESTION WAS A B737. THE MEL 25-17, EMER MEDICAL EQUIP WAS ISSUED MAY/SAT/04, AT XA21 IN MEL 25-17 WAS CLRED ON MAY/SUN/04. ZZZ1 WAS THE FIRST MAINT BASE VISITED AFTER LEAVING ON MAY/SAT/04. MAINT CALLED ASKING IF THE AED COULD BE MEL'ED UNDER 25-17 DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE WORDING OF THE MEL 25-17 IS CONFUSING. AFTER READING MEL 25-17 4 TIMES AND BEING CONFUSED BY THE WORDING, I CONSULTED MY FELLOW CTLRS' OPINION. THE CTLRS' RESPONSES WERE THAT 3 MAINT CTLRS MINIMUM, HAD E-MAILED ENGINEERING IN THE PAST 2 MONTHS ASKING UNDER EXACTLY WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES AED'S AND EEMK'S CAN BE MEL'ED PER 25-17. TO DATE, NO RESPONSE HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM ENGINEERING. THE CONFUSION WAS THE AED COULD BE MEL'ED UNDER 25-17. I MADE THE DECISION AT THAT POINT TO MEL THE AED PER 'MAY BE INOP OR MISSING PROVIDED' AND HAVE AN AED SCHEDULED TO BE INSTALLED AT THE FIRST MAINT BASE VISITED. THE NEXT E-MAIL THAT WAS IN MY 'IN BOX' WAS DATED MAY/WED/04. IT ADDRESSED ALL MAINT CTLRS. THE E-MAIL STATED THAT AS OF APR/MON/04, ONE SERVICEABLE AED MUST BE INSTALLED ON EACH AIRPLANE. SINCE AIRPLANES HAVE ONLY 1 AED INSTALLED, THE AIRPLANE WILL BE GNDED IF AN AED IS FOUND UNSERVICEABLE. IT FURTHER STATED THAT THE SECOND PART OF MEL 25-17 DEALING WITH THE AED IS TO BE IGNORED. THIS PART OF MEL 25-17 WOULD BE DELETED ON THE NEXT MEL REVISION.

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.