Narrative:

During the phase inspection and 5 yr wing attach bolt replacement, I found that the right wing lower aft attach bolt fitting was damaged by the incorrect previous installation of the radius washer (installed backwards). I then wrote up a discrepancy for the damage found. Later I was told to install the new bolt. I could still see the damaged area yet the discrepancy was signed off by my lead and an inspector. When I asked about the damaged area I was instructed by my lead not to worry about it that he had taken care and signed it off. I installed the new bolt as instructed. I feel strongly that this wing attach fitting should be properly repaired before something happens. Ps: I was previously removed from an inspector position (7 yrs) I feel because I would not 'be flexible' with the rules and FARS. Callback conversation with reporter revealed he following information: the reporter stated the wing attach fitting was damaged by the tapered washer that is positioned under the bolt. The washer was reportedly installed backwards with the large end installed into the attach fitting socket and the attach bolt inserted and torqued allowing the washer to work against the attach fitting socket and wear a circular ring in the attach fitting. The reporter is concerned because this bolt is a mandatory 5 yr lifetime replacement and will see another 5 yrs before replacement and the attach fitting inspection. The reporter worked as an aircraft inspector with this organization for 7 yrs and was demoted to technician for not being 'flexible enough' with far and maintenance manual limits. The reporter contacted the local FAA flight standards district office with documented maintenance discrepancies with no follow-up. This technician was advised by the manager that he is now on a short list of people to be discharged.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A BE300 WING ATTACH BOLT WAS REPLACED BUT TECHNICIAN REPLACING BOLT RPTS DAMAGE FOUND TO WING ATTACH FITTING DOCUMENTED BUT NOT REPAIRED.

Narrative: DURING THE PHASE INSPECTION AND 5 YR WING ATTACH BOLT REPLACEMENT, I FOUND THAT THE R WING LOWER AFT ATTACH BOLT FITTING WAS DAMAGED BY THE INCORRECT PREVIOUS INSTALLATION OF THE RADIUS WASHER (INSTALLED BACKWARDS). I THEN WROTE UP A DISCREPANCY FOR THE DAMAGE FOUND. LATER I WAS TOLD TO INSTALL THE NEW BOLT. I COULD STILL SEE THE DAMAGED AREA YET THE DISCREPANCY WAS SIGNED OFF BY MY LEAD AND AN INSPECTOR. WHEN I ASKED ABOUT THE DAMAGED AREA I WAS INSTRUCTED BY MY LEAD NOT TO WORRY ABOUT IT THAT HE HAD TAKEN CARE AND SIGNED IT OFF. I INSTALLED THE NEW BOLT AS INSTRUCTED. I FEEL STRONGLY THAT THIS WING ATTACH FITTING SHOULD BE PROPERLY REPAIRED BEFORE SOMETHING HAPPENS. PS: I WAS PREVIOUSLY REMOVED FROM AN INSPECTOR POSITION (7 YRS) I FEEL BECAUSE I WOULD NOT 'BE FLEXIBLE' WITH THE RULES AND FARS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED HE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATED THE WING ATTACH FITTING WAS DAMAGED BY THE TAPERED WASHER THAT IS POSITIONED UNDER THE BOLT. THE WASHER WAS REPORTEDLY INSTALLED BACKWARDS WITH THE LARGE END INSTALLED INTO THE ATTACH FITTING SOCKET AND THE ATTACH BOLT INSERTED AND TORQUED ALLOWING THE WASHER TO WORK AGAINST THE ATTACH FITTING SOCKET AND WEAR A CIRCULAR RING IN THE ATTACH FITTING. THE RPTR IS CONCERNED BECAUSE THIS BOLT IS A MANDATORY 5 YR LIFETIME REPLACEMENT AND WILL SEE ANOTHER 5 YRS BEFORE REPLACEMENT AND THE ATTACH FITTING INSPECTION. THE RPTR WORKED AS AN ACFT INSPECTOR WITH THIS ORGANIZATION FOR 7 YRS AND WAS DEMOTED TO TECHNICIAN FOR NOT BEING 'FLEXIBLE ENOUGH' WITH FAR AND MAINT MANUAL LIMITS. THE RPTR CONTACTED THE LOCAL FAA FLT STANDARDS DISTRICT OFFICE WITH DOCUMENTED MAINT DISCREPANCIES WITH NO FOLLOW-UP. THIS TECHNICIAN WAS ADVISED BY THE MANAGER THAT HE IS NOW ON A SHORT LIST OF PEOPLE TO BE DISCHARGED.

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.