AN ACR F-100 WAS DISPATCHED IN THE DEAD OF WINTER WITH BOTH REVERSERS INOP.

Narrative

AT THE TIME THAT I DID THE RELEASE FOR ACR FLT X; F100 I MUST HAVE BEEN COMPLACENT; IN A HURRY; OR BOTH TO HAVE MISREAD THE REQUIREMENTS OF MEL 78-01 (BOTH THRUST REVERSE INOP). I WAS CONCERNED THAT THE RWYS AT ALBANY AND ALTERNATE SYRACUSE WERE NOT SLIPPERY AND ABLE TO PROVIDE SUITABLE BRAKING FOR AN INOP THRUST REVERSER. THE MEL ITEM STATES THAT BOTH MUST BE OPERATIVE ON SLIPPERY RWYS; AND ONE MAY BE INOP IF LOCKED IN STOWED POS. ACR FLT DEPARTED CHICAGO AND ARRIVED IN ALBANY TO OVERNIGHT. ON FEB; TUES; ACFT WAS MAINT FERRIED BACK TO CHICAGO FOR REPAIRS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 262452: THRUST REVERSERS WERE UNABLE TO DEPLOY ABOVE IDLE THRUST. IN MY HASTE; I MISREAD THE MEL BOOK AND APPROVED THE PLACARD WITH BOTH REVERSERS INOP. I READ INTO THE MEL WHAT I WANTED IT TO SAY. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 262472: DURING PWRBACK I DISCOVERED THAT REVERSE THRUST WOULD NOT GO ABOVE IDLE PWR. MYSELF; DISPATCH AND TECHNICIANS ALL DETERMINED WE COULD OPERATE SAFELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ACFT MEL WITH BOTH THRUST REVERSERS PLACARDED INOP. IT WAS DISCOVERED; THROUGH CLOSER EXAMINATION OF THE MEL; THE ACFT WAS REQUIRED TO HAVE AT LEAST 1 OPERATING THRUST REVERSER. THE MEL IS WRITTEN IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT EASILY LED SEVERAL PEOPLE TO BELIEVE THE ACFT WAS LEGAL TO FLY. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 262595: BESIDES MY PERSONAL DISCOVERY OF THE MEL DEV A REWRITE OF THE ITEM IN QUESTION WOULD HELP PREVENT ANOTHER OCCURRENCE OF MISINTERP. MY COMPANY IS IN THE PROCESS OF THE REWRITE.