Narrative:

Log page XXX was in deferral status and I was responsible for entering the quality control comments into the log page in aircraft history. This transaction occurs after the aircraft log page is entered into aircraft history. My responsibility is to research and verify that the data entered is valid with the basis for deferral as stated on the log page. This action alerts records that the log page can be set up with a forecast for tracking the proper time limits as stated on the log page. This log page was generated in XXX and the technician put his recorded dimensions into the log page corrective action field. The dimensions given on this log page were bird strike dents at station 178-188 and stringer 23R-24R; 1 dent 3 inches by .112 deep; 1 dent 2 inches by .100 deep. Placed on deferred item as per srm to inspect each 5000 flight cycles or more frequent. Aircraft ok to continue deferred item C/north XXX. Based on this data along with the sketch of the damage provided in the attachments on the maintenance operations deferral information sheet generated by maintenance control; the data was correct and the deferral criteria was met as was stated on the log page entry. My next step was to enter the quality control remarks and stated; 'per 737-800 srm; allowable skin damage; inspect dents every 5000 flight cycles or more frequently.' on the evening of jun/xa/08 FAA inspector XXX questioned the dent on the aircraft and requested that it be re-measured. When the damage was re-measured it was determined that the dent was 7.5 inches by 7.5 inches by 0.135 deep on fuselage station 181-188 near stringer 24. This was determined to be out of srm limits and log page XXX was generated for its repair. Engineering authority/authorized XXX revision a was issued to comply with repair to the area and to repeat inspections at intervals not to exceed 24000 flight cycles. Log page XXX and deferred item status was closed out when the repair was completed. I have reviewed all of the data that was given to me in the form of log page entry and maintenance operations deferral information page sketch attachments and have come to the conclusion that the entry was valid based on the information given. If the damage was indeed larger than recorded by the mechanic and not correctly entered into the log page and reported to maintenance control for deferral; I have no way of knowing this and had no valid reason to deny the quality control comments. Personally; I will ask more questions from maintenance control for them to have the mechanic be more specific in the damage location and being more accurate in their sketches of the damage. Many times the log page is entered after the aircraft has left the deferring station and I have no idea of what the true log page entry is until it is entered. My only visibility of the deferral before log page entry into aircraft history is the maintenance operating deferral information sheet. Many times the aircraft history page is less information than the maintenance operations deferral information sheet and the deferring technician has to be contacted for updating the log page to correctly reflect the condition and measurements for basis of deferral. The time span between when the mechanic gets the control number for his deferral and the entry into aircraft history of the log page can be several hours. By this time the aircraft has departed the deferring station and could possibly have completed several legs. Until the log page gets entered into aircraft history; I can do nothing but speculate. Also; the disparity between the log page entry and the maintenance operations deferral information page is prevalent many times. I cannot fully approve a deferred item until the entry is made into the aircraft history and until I can truly verify that the deferral criteria have been met based on the data entered. There has to be a tie to what is entered into the log page discrepancy and entered into aircraft history to link itself to the discrepancy field in the maintenance operations deferral information page. It is of my opinion that many times the cart (maintenance operations deferral information page) has been put in front of the horse (log page entered into the aircraft history) and things seem to be backwards.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A MAINT INSPECTION SUPERVISOR WHO HAD PREVIOUSLY DEFERRED A B737-800 FUSELAGE BIRD STRIKE DENTS; BASED ON INFORMATION FROM AN OUTLYING STATION; IS INFORMED 60 DAYS LATER THAT ONE OF THE DENTS EXCEEDS THE SRM LIMITS.

Narrative: LOG PAGE XXX WAS IN DEFERRAL STATUS AND I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENTERING THE QUALITY CTL COMMENTS INTO THE LOG PAGE IN ACFT HISTORY. THIS TRANSACTION OCCURS AFTER THE ACFT LOG PAGE IS ENTERED INTO ACFT HISTORY. MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO RESEARCH AND VERIFY THAT THE DATA ENTERED IS VALID WITH THE BASIS FOR DEFERRAL AS STATED ON THE LOG PAGE. THIS ACTION ALERTS RECORDS THAT THE LOG PAGE CAN BE SET UP WITH A FORECAST FOR TRACKING THE PROPER TIME LIMITS AS STATED ON THE LOG PAGE. THIS LOG PAGE WAS GENERATED IN XXX AND THE TECHNICIAN PUT HIS RECORDED DIMENSIONS INTO THE LOG PAGE CORRECTIVE ACTION FIELD. THE DIMENSIONS GIVEN ON THIS LOG PAGE WERE BIRD STRIKE DENTS AT STATION 178-188 AND STRINGER 23R-24R; 1 DENT 3 INCHES BY .112 DEEP; 1 DENT 2 INCHES BY .100 DEEP. PLACED ON DEFERRED ITEM AS PER SRM TO INSPECT EACH 5000 FLT CYCLES OR MORE FREQUENT. ACFT OK TO CONTINUE DEFERRED ITEM C/N XXX. BASED ON THIS DATA ALONG WITH THE SKETCH OF THE DAMAGE PROVIDED IN THE ATTACHMENTS ON THE MAINT OPS DEFERRAL INFO SHEET GENERATED BY MAINT CTL; THE DATA WAS CORRECT AND THE DEFERRAL CRITERIA WAS MET AS WAS STATED ON THE LOG PAGE ENTRY. MY NEXT STEP WAS TO ENTER THE QUALITY CTL REMARKS AND STATED; 'PER 737-800 SRM; ALLOWABLE SKIN DAMAGE; INSPECT DENTS EVERY 5000 FLT CYCLES OR MORE FREQUENTLY.' ON THE EVENING OF JUN/XA/08 FAA INSPECTOR XXX QUESTIONED THE DENT ON THE ACFT AND REQUESTED THAT IT BE RE-MEASURED. WHEN THE DAMAGE WAS RE-MEASURED IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE DENT WAS 7.5 INCHES BY 7.5 INCHES BY 0.135 DEEP ON FUSELAGE STATION 181-188 NEAR STRINGER 24. THIS WAS DETERMINED TO BE OUT OF SRM LIMITS AND LOG PAGE XXX WAS GENERATED FOR ITS REPAIR. ENGINEERING AUTH XXX REVISION A WAS ISSUED TO COMPLY WITH REPAIR TO THE AREA AND TO REPEAT INSPECTIONS AT INTERVALS NOT TO EXCEED 24000 FLT CYCLES. LOG PAGE XXX AND DEFERRED ITEM STATUS WAS CLOSED OUT WHEN THE REPAIR WAS COMPLETED. I HAVE REVIEWED ALL OF THE DATA THAT WAS GIVEN TO ME IN THE FORM OF LOG PAGE ENTRY AND MAINT OPS DEFERRAL INFO PAGE SKETCH ATTACHMENTS AND HAVE COME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE ENTRY WAS VALID BASED ON THE INFO GIVEN. IF THE DAMAGE WAS INDEED LARGER THAN RECORDED BY THE MECH AND NOT CORRECTLY ENTERED INTO THE LOG PAGE AND RPTED TO MAINT CTL FOR DEFERRAL; I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING THIS AND HAD NO VALID REASON TO DENY THE QUALITY CTL COMMENTS. PERSONALLY; I WILL ASK MORE QUESTIONS FROM MAINT CTL FOR THEM TO HAVE THE MECH BE MORE SPECIFIC IN THE DAMAGE LOCATION AND BEING MORE ACCURATE IN THEIR SKETCHES OF THE DAMAGE. MANY TIMES THE LOG PAGE IS ENTERED AFTER THE ACFT HAS LEFT THE DEFERRING STATION AND I HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT THE TRUE LOG PAGE ENTRY IS UNTIL IT IS ENTERED. MY ONLY VISIBILITY OF THE DEFERRAL BEFORE LOG PAGE ENTRY INTO ACFT HISTORY IS THE MAINT OPERATING DEFERRAL INFO SHEET. MANY TIMES THE ACFT HISTORY PAGE IS LESS INFO THAN THE MAINT OPS DEFERRAL INFO SHEET AND THE DEFERRING TECHNICIAN HAS TO BE CONTACTED FOR UPDATING THE LOG PAGE TO CORRECTLY REFLECT THE CONDITION AND MEASUREMENTS FOR BASIS OF DEFERRAL. THE TIME SPAN BTWN WHEN THE MECH GETS THE CTL NUMBER FOR HIS DEFERRAL AND THE ENTRY INTO ACFT HISTORY OF THE LOG PAGE CAN BE SEVERAL HRS. BY THIS TIME THE ACFT HAS DEPARTED THE DEFERRING STATION AND COULD POSSIBLY HAVE COMPLETED SEVERAL LEGS. UNTIL THE LOG PAGE GETS ENTERED INTO ACFT HISTORY; I CAN DO NOTHING BUT SPECULATE. ALSO; THE DISPARITY BTWN THE LOG PAGE ENTRY AND THE MAINT OPS DEFERRAL INFO PAGE IS PREVALENT MANY TIMES. I CANNOT FULLY APPROVE A DEFERRED ITEM UNTIL THE ENTRY IS MADE INTO THE ACFT HISTORY AND UNTIL I CAN TRULY VERIFY THAT THE DEFERRAL CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MET BASED ON THE DATA ENTERED. THERE HAS TO BE A TIE TO WHAT IS ENTERED INTO THE LOG PAGE DISCREPANCY AND ENTERED INTO ACFT HISTORY TO LINK ITSELF TO THE DISCREPANCY FIELD IN THE MAINT OPS DEFERRAL INFO PAGE. IT IS OF MY OPINION THAT MANY TIMES THE CART (MAINT OPS DEFERRAL INFO PAGE) HAS BEEN PUT IN FRONT OF THE HORSE (LOG PAGE ENTERED INTO THE ACFT HISTORY) AND THINGS SEEM TO BE BACKWARDS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 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.