A maintenance controller reports about the confusion of which series of A319's have and do not have ...

Narrative:

Working as a maintenance controller on nov/xa/08; I received a call from an airline mechanic who completed his assigned check on aircraft. He found 1 portable halon fire extinguisher to be out of date (svcable time limit expired). After reviewing the MEL I felt the aircraft could be legally dispatched under MEL 26-26. This states that 4 portable fire extinguishers are required for dispatch: 1 on the flight deck; 3 in the passenger compartment; 2 of which must be halon; 1 must be H2O. I asked the mechanic if we met the requirements of the MEL. At that time he said we did and I issued the MEL for having 1 portable fire extinguisher missing/unsvcable. On nov/xa/08 night at approximately XA50; I received a call from the outbound flight crew and dispatcher assigned to aircraft X preparing to depart from ZZZ. They were questioning the use of MEL 26-26-24A for this aircraft. The flight crew explained that this series of airbus aircraft do not have an H2O portable fire extinguisher on board. The cabin crew (flight attendants assigned to the flight) looked for and could not find an H20 portable fire extinguisher thus notifying the PIC. I then referenced the check job card; knowing that the emergency equipment is checked once a week to confirm the expiration date and content of the cabin emergency equipment. This is where I verified the captain's concern that an H20 portable fire extinguisher is not installed on this series of airbus aircraft. At that point I contacted maintenance and asked them to check stock for a portable halon fire extinguisher. They had the one in stock that was required for that series of aircraft. It was installed; in place of the missing unit and the MEL cleared. The aircraft was then released for flight within 20 mins of its scheduled departure time from ZZZ. This may have been prevented by including a note to restrict the MEL or by requiring the same fleet types to carry the same emergency equipment on board. At this time our mechanics see a mix series of the same fleet type of airbus aircraft at any given night. A mistake like this; even though it would be considered to be a complacent error; is easily made given these circumstances.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A MAINTENANCE CONTROLLER REPORTS ABOUT THE CONFUSION OF WHICH SERIES OF A319'S HAVE AND DO NOT HAVE H2O PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS ON BOARD AND THEREFORE REQUIRE TWO HALON EXTINGUISHERS TO SATISFY THE MAINTENANCE RELEASE.

Narrative: WORKING AS A MAINT CTLR ON NOV/XA/08; I RECEIVED A CALL FROM AN AIRLINE MECH WHO COMPLETED HIS ASSIGNED CHK ON ACFT. HE FOUND 1 PORTABLE HALON FIRE EXTINGUISHER TO BE OUT OF DATE (SVCABLE TIME LIMIT EXPIRED). AFTER REVIEWING THE MEL I FELT THE ACFT COULD BE LEGALLY DISPATCHED UNDER MEL 26-26. THIS STATES THAT 4 PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHERS ARE REQUIRED FOR DISPATCH: 1 ON THE FLT DECK; 3 IN THE PAX COMPARTMENT; 2 OF WHICH MUST BE HALON; 1 MUST BE H2O. I ASKED THE MECH IF WE MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MEL. AT THAT TIME HE SAID WE DID AND I ISSUED THE MEL FOR HAVING 1 PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHER MISSING/UNSVCABLE. ON NOV/XA/08 NIGHT AT APPROX XA50; I RECEIVED A CALL FROM THE OUTBOUND FLT CREW AND DISPATCHER ASSIGNED TO ACFT X PREPARING TO DEPART FROM ZZZ. THEY WERE QUESTIONING THE USE OF MEL 26-26-24A FOR THIS ACFT. THE FLT CREW EXPLAINED THAT THIS SERIES OF AIRBUS ACFT DO NOT HAVE AN H2O PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHER ON BOARD. THE CABIN CREW (FLT ATTENDANTS ASSIGNED TO THE FLT) LOOKED FOR AND COULD NOT FIND AN H20 PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHER THUS NOTIFYING THE PIC. I THEN REFERENCED THE CHK JOB CARD; KNOWING THAT THE EMER EQUIP IS CHKED ONCE A WK TO CONFIRM THE EXPIRATION DATE AND CONTENT OF THE CABIN EMER EQUIP. THIS IS WHERE I VERIFIED THE CAPT'S CONCERN THAT AN H20 PORTABLE FIRE EXTINGUISHER IS NOT INSTALLED ON THIS SERIES OF AIRBUS ACFT. AT THAT POINT I CONTACTED MAINT AND ASKED THEM TO CHK STOCK FOR A PORTABLE HALON FIRE EXTINGUISHER. THEY HAD THE ONE IN STOCK THAT WAS REQUIRED FOR THAT SERIES OF ACFT. IT WAS INSTALLED; IN PLACE OF THE MISSING UNIT AND THE MEL CLEARED. THE ACFT WAS THEN RELEASED FOR FLT WITHIN 20 MINS OF ITS SCHEDULED DEP TIME FROM ZZZ. THIS MAY HAVE BEEN PREVENTED BY INCLUDING A NOTE TO RESTRICT THE MEL OR BY REQUIRING THE SAME FLEET TYPES TO CARRY THE SAME EMER EQUIP ON BOARD. AT THIS TIME OUR MECHS SEE A MIX SERIES OF THE SAME FLEET TYPE OF AIRBUS ACFT AT ANY GIVEN NIGHT. A MISTAKE LIKE THIS; EVEN THOUGH IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE A COMPLACENT ERROR; IS EASILY MADE GIVEN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.

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.

Attributes
ACN	811533
Time
Date	200811
Place
Locale Reference	airport : zzz.airport
State Reference	US
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A319
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	other personnel other
ASRS Report	811533
Person 2
Qualification	flight attendant : currently qualified
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical maintenance problem : non compliance with mel maintenance problem : improper maintenance non adherence : published procedure non adherence : far
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	other
Consequence	other
Factors
Maintenance	contributing factor : manuals performance deficiency : logbook entry performance deficiency : installation performance deficiency : scheduled maintenance performance deficiency : non compliance with legal requirements
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Maintenance Human Performance Aircraft Chart Or Publication
Primary Problem	Maintenance Human Performance

A maintenance controller reports about the confusion of which series of A319's have and do not have H2O portable fire extinguishers on board and therefore require two halon extinguishers to satisfy the maintenance release.