Narrative:

FAA inspector made a routine visit to the hangar. Upon inspection of the right engine on aircraft; he noticed that the idg harness (subject to ad 2001-06-07) appeared to have the incorrect installation of the support clamps and protective sleeve. Due to the complexity; as well as various configurations possible; he and I spent approximately 2 hours trying to decide if the installation was actually incorrect; as well as the proper installation needed. We decided it was incorrect per canadair alert service bulletin A601R-24-103; revision B; which is referenced in the ad. He left it to me to decide the corrective action. I instructed the mechanic assigned to the task to configure the clamps per the procedure in part B of alert service bulletin A601R-24-103; revision B. Upon reading the procedure steps east (1)(C); and east(1)(K); on page 13 of the service bulletin; it appeared to me that there were three clamps installed where there should only be two; as stated in the procedure. These steps refer to 'the first and second engine clamps' as the only clamps between the idg terminals and the 'third engine clamp' as marked in the illustration on page 15. However; there are actually three clamps between the idg terminal and the 'third engine clamp.' by viewing the illustration; which is not very clear; I decided that the clamp and associated stand-off bracket and hardware below the fuel/oil heat exchanger was not supposed to be installed. I told the mechanic to remove them; which he did. The harness then appeared to be in compliance with the service bulletin. The next night; we had a meeting at the beginning of the shift to discuss the ad and possible FAA action to perform repeat inspections to verify compliance. After another extensive review of the service bulletin; I came to the conclusion that the clamp; stand-off bracket; and hardware that we removed the previous night should have remained installed; and that by removing them we are in non-compliance of ad 2001-06-07. The clamp in question is shown in the crj ipc; chapter 71-50-00; temporary revision TR71-0016; figure 1; item 230. The associated stand-off bracket and hardware were also removed.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated the airworthiness directive (ad); ad 2001-06-07 seemed fairly straightforward until the various configurations of the crj-200's have to be considered when applying the service bulletin referenced in the airworthiness directive. A certain series of the cl-600-2b19 (crj-200); fall under ad 2001-06-07 and known as pre-production ad aircraft; require an inspection of the engine idg electrical wire harness and the installation of a protective sleeve and certain 'P' type clamps. Later production aircraft had expanded and improved on the original modification required by the service bulletin. Clamps were removed and added; including brackets and a longer harness sleeve different from those required under the service bulletin. These aircraft became known as post-production cut-in series not affected by the ad. Reporter stated his carrier has both pre and post series aircraft. The issue gets complicated when an engine change is required. Engines on a post-production aircraft have the factory modified harness sleeve; clamps and brackets. During an engine change the idg electrical harness and sleeve stay with the aircraft; but the clamps stay with the engine. So; if a post-production engine is placed on a pre-production series aircraft that falls under the service bulletin; that engine must be de-modified back to the service bulletin requirements. The same condition exists if a pre-production engine is installed on a post-production series aircraft; except now the engine must be modified from the service bulletin requirement to meet the post-production standards. Reporter also stated that the technical illustrations are terrible when trying to comply with the required hardware installations. The aircraft manufacturer's ipc; chapter 71-50-00; has a temporary revision that shows and allows for the stand-off bracket and hardware to remain that was issued after the service bulletin was issued; and neither document references the other. Reporter's carrier is now doing a revisit of the entire fleet to check for noncompliance and new task cards are supposed to be issued with digital photos.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR MAINTENANCE INSPECTOR REPORTS CONFUSION AND COMPLEXITY IN APPLYING AN AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE; AD (2001-06-07) AND THE REFERENCED SERVICE BULLETIN (A601R-24-103) TO THEIR COMPANY PRE AND POST PRODUCTION CL-600-2B19 AIRCRAFT.

Narrative: FAA INSPECTOR MADE A ROUTINE VISIT TO THE HANGAR. UPON INSPECTION OF THE RIGHT ENGINE ON AIRCRAFT; HE NOTICED THAT THE IDG HARNESS (SUBJECT TO AD 2001-06-07) APPEARED TO HAVE THE INCORRECT INSTALLATION OF THE SUPPORT CLAMPS AND PROTECTIVE SLEEVE. DUE TO THE COMPLEXITY; AS WELL AS VARIOUS CONFIGURATIONS POSSIBLE; HE AND I SPENT APPROXIMATELY 2 HOURS TRYING TO DECIDE IF THE INSTALLATION WAS ACTUALLY INCORRECT; AS WELL AS THE PROPER INSTALLATION NEEDED. WE DECIDED IT WAS INCORRECT PER CANADAIR ALERT SVC BULLETIN A601R-24-103; REVISION B; WHICH IS REFERENCED IN THE AD. HE LEFT IT TO ME TO DECIDE THE CORRECTIVE ACTION. I INSTRUCTED THE MECHANIC ASSIGNED TO THE TASK TO CONFIGURE THE CLAMPS PER THE PROCEDURE IN PART B OF ALERT SVC BULLETIN A601R-24-103; REVISION B. UPON READING THE PROCEDURE STEPS E (1)(C); AND E(1)(K); ON PAGE 13 OF THE SVC BULLETIN; IT APPEARED TO ME THAT THERE WERE THREE CLAMPS INSTALLED WHERE THERE SHOULD ONLY BE TWO; AS STATED IN THE PROCEDURE. THESE STEPS REFER TO 'THE FIRST AND SECOND ENGINE CLAMPS' AS THE ONLY CLAMPS BETWEEN THE IDG TERMINALS AND THE 'THIRD ENGINE CLAMP' AS MARKED IN THE ILLUSTRATION ON PAGE 15. HOWEVER; THERE ARE ACTUALLY THREE CLAMPS BETWEEN THE IDG TERMINAL AND THE 'THIRD ENGINE CLAMP.' BY VIEWING THE ILLUSTRATION; WHICH IS NOT VERY CLEAR; I DECIDED THAT THE CLAMP AND ASSOCIATED STAND-OFF BRACKET AND HARDWARE BELOW THE FUEL/OIL HEAT EXCHANGER WAS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE INSTALLED. I TOLD THE MECHANIC TO REMOVE THEM; WHICH HE DID. THE HARNESS THEN APPEARED TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SVC BULLETIN. THE NEXT NIGHT; WE HAD A MEETING AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SHIFT TO DISCUSS THE AD AND POSSIBLE FAA ACTION TO PERFORM REPEAT INSPECTIONS TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE. AFTER ANOTHER EXTENSIVE REVIEW OF THE SERVICE BULLETIN; I CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE CLAMP; STAND-OFF BRACKET; AND HARDWARE THAT WE REMOVED THE PREVIOUS NIGHT SHOULD HAVE REMAINED INSTALLED; AND THAT BY REMOVING THEM WE ARE IN NON-COMPLIANCE OF AD 2001-06-07. THE CLAMP IN QUESTION IS SHOWN IN THE CRJ IPC; CHAPTER 71-50-00; TEMPORARY REVISION TR71-0016; FIGURE 1; ITEM 230. THE ASSOCIATED STAND-OFF BRACKET AND HARDWARE WERE ALSO REMOVED.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: REPORTER STATED THE AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE (AD); AD 2001-06-07 SEEMED FAIRLY STRAIGHTFORWARD UNTIL THE VARIOUS CONFIGURATIONS OF THE CRJ-200'S HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED WHEN APPLYING THE SERVICE BULLETIN REFERENCED IN THE AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE. A CERTAIN SERIES OF THE CL-600-2B19 (CRJ-200); FALL UNDER AD 2001-06-07 AND KNOWN AS PRE-PRODUCTION AD AIRCRAFT; REQUIRE AN INSPECTION OF THE ENGINE IDG ELECTRICAL WIRE HARNESS AND THE INSTALLATION OF A PROTECTIVE SLEEVE AND CERTAIN 'P' TYPE CLAMPS. LATER PRODUCTION AIRCRAFT HAD EXPANDED AND IMPROVED ON THE ORIGINAL MODIFICATION REQUIRED BY THE SERVICE BULLETIN. CLAMPS WERE REMOVED AND ADDED; INCLUDING BRACKETS AND A LONGER HARNESS SLEEVE DIFFERENT FROM THOSE REQUIRED UNDER THE SERVICE BULLETIN. THESE AIRCRAFT BECAME KNOWN AS POST-PRODUCTION CUT-IN SERIES NOT AFFECTED BY THE AD. REPORTER STATED HIS CARRIER HAS BOTH PRE AND POST SERIES AIRCRAFT. THE ISSUE GETS COMPLICATED WHEN AN ENGINE CHANGE IS REQUIRED. ENGINES ON A POST-PRODUCTION AIRCRAFT HAVE THE FACTORY MODIFIED HARNESS SLEEVE; CLAMPS AND BRACKETS. DURING AN ENGINE CHANGE THE IDG ELECTRICAL HARNESS AND SLEEVE STAY WITH THE AIRCRAFT; BUT THE CLAMPS STAY WITH THE ENGINE. SO; IF A POST-PRODUCTION ENGINE IS PLACED ON A PRE-PRODUCTION SERIES AIRCRAFT THAT FALLS UNDER THE SERVICE BULLETIN; THAT ENGINE MUST BE DE-MODIFIED BACK TO THE SERVICE BULLETIN REQUIREMENTS. THE SAME CONDITION EXISTS IF A PRE-PRODUCTION ENGINE IS INSTALLED ON A POST-PRODUCTION SERIES AIRCRAFT; EXCEPT NOW THE ENGINE MUST BE MODIFIED FROM THE SERVICE BULLETIN REQUIREMENT TO MEET THE POST-PRODUCTION STANDARDS. REPORTER ALSO STATED THAT THE TECHNICAL ILLUSTRATIONS ARE TERRIBLE WHEN TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIRED HARDWARE INSTALLATIONS. THE AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURER'S IPC; CHAPTER 71-50-00; HAS A TEMPORARY REVISION THAT SHOWS AND ALLOWS FOR THE STAND-OFF BRACKET AND HARDWARE TO REMAIN THAT WAS ISSUED AFTER THE SERVICE BULLETIN WAS ISSUED; AND NEITHER DOCUMENT REFERENCES THE OTHER. RPTR'S CARRIER IS NOW DOING A REVISIT OF THE ENTIRE FLEET TO CHECK FOR NONCOMPLIANCE AND NEW TASK CARDS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ISSUED WITH DIGITAL PHOTOS.

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.