Narrative:

Aircraft arrived at gate from the hangar at XA04. It was scheduled to depart at XA30. Maintenance was called at XA35 by maintenance control and advised the aircraft had a write-up for pusher system fail caution light that illuminated after engine start. The technician working the problem pulled up and printed from engineering pubs. On the technician's way out of the office the lead informed him that 'I think it's pre modification but I need to check.' the lead initiated dialog with technical services at that time as there is currently no modification data available on engineering pubs. Approximately 1/2 hour elapsed until technical services could give the lead an answer to whether or not the aircraft was pre- or post-modification and the word came back that the aircraft was post-modification. The lead then called the technician and relayed that the aircraft was post-modification; that service letter was not applicable and the flight information manual needed to be used for return to service. At that time the technician informed the lead that the aircraft was signed off and gone. Service letter was the technical data referenced on the log page for releasing the aircraft. Maintenance control was notified of the discrepancy and had maintenance initiate a write-up to clear with the flight information manual task; which they did. All checked good and the aircraft was returned to service.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A DHC8-400 WAS RETURNED TO SVC USING THE INCORRECT REF TO CLR PUSHER SYS FAIL CAUTION MESSAGE. ITEM CLRED WITH A SVC LETTER.

Narrative: ACFT ARRIVED AT GATE FROM THE HANGAR AT XA04. IT WAS SCHEDULED TO DEPART AT XA30. MAINT WAS CALLED AT XA35 BY MAINT CTL AND ADVISED THE ACFT HAD A WRITE-UP FOR PUSHER SYS FAIL CAUTION LIGHT THAT ILLUMINATED AFTER ENG START. THE TECHNICIAN WORKING THE PROB PULLED UP AND PRINTED FROM ENGINEERING PUBS. ON THE TECHNICIAN'S WAY OUT OF THE OFFICE THE LEAD INFORMED HIM THAT 'I THINK IT'S PRE MODIFICATION BUT I NEED TO CHK.' THE LEAD INITIATED DIALOG WITH TECHNICAL SVCS AT THAT TIME AS THERE IS CURRENTLY NO MODIFICATION DATA AVAILABLE ON ENGINEERING PUBS. APPROX 1/2 HR ELAPSED UNTIL TECHNICAL SVCS COULD GIVE THE LEAD AN ANSWER TO WHETHER OR NOT THE ACFT WAS PRE- OR POST-MODIFICATION AND THE WORD CAME BACK THAT THE ACFT WAS POST-MODIFICATION. THE LEAD THEN CALLED THE TECHNICIAN AND RELAYED THAT THE ACFT WAS POST-MODIFICATION; THAT SVC LETTER WAS NOT APPLICABLE AND THE FLT INFO MANUAL NEEDED TO BE USED FOR RETURN TO SVC. AT THAT TIME THE TECHNICIAN INFORMED THE LEAD THAT THE ACFT WAS SIGNED OFF AND GONE. SVC LETTER WAS THE TECHNICAL DATA REFED ON THE LOG PAGE FOR RELEASING THE ACFT. MAINT CTL WAS NOTIFIED OF THE DISCREPANCY AND HAD MAINT INITIATE A WRITE-UP TO CLR WITH THE FLT INFO MANUAL TASK; WHICH THEY DID. ALL CHKED GOOD AND THE ACFT WAS RETURNED TO SVC.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.