AN AIRBUS 320 CREW QUESTIONS THE INTERP AND LEGALITY OF THE MEL FOR DEFERRAL OF A #1 BOOST PUMP.

Narrative

I PICKED UP MY DISPATCH RELEASE NOTING IT CONTAINED AN MEL AND PROCEEDED TO THE ACFT. ARRIVING AT THE ACFT MY FO HAD THE MEL BOOK OUT AND THE MEL LOOKED UP. SHE INFORMED ME THAT HER OPINION WAS THAT WE COULD NOT BE DISPATCHED WITH THIS MEL. I READ THE MEL AND AGREED WITH HER THAT I TOO INTERPRETED THE MEL TO NOT ALLOW DISPATCH. THE MEL ON THE RELEASE WAS AS FOLLOWS: MEL L #1 FUEL PUMP INOP. IN THE MEL BOOK THE MEL READS AS FOLLOWS: SINCE THERE IS NO WORD 'OR' BTWN THE 2 EXCEPTIONS; I BELIEVE THEY BOTH APPLY. IE: EXCEPTION ONE MEANS THAT NO PUMPS MAY BE INOP WHEN JP4 IS USED. EXCEPTION TWO MEANS IF JP4 IS NOT USED THEN ONE #2 PUMP MAY BE INOP. MAINT CTL DISPATCH; AND OUR A320 FLEET MGR ASSURED ME IT WAS OK TO DISPATCH. THEIR INTERP OF THE MEL WAS THAT EXCEPTION ONE MEANT THAT YOU COULD HAVE ANY ONE PUMP INOP AS LONG AS JP4 WAS NOT USED. THEY BELIEVED THAT EXCEPTION TWO; 'ONE PUMP #2 MAY BE INOP;' ONLY APPLIED WHEN JP4 IS USED. I THINK YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE THAT THIS MEL IS OPEN TO INTERP. IT IS UNACCEPTABLE TO HAVE AN MEL THAT IS OPEN TO INTERP. VERY RELUCTANTLY I OPERATED THE FLT. ALTHOUGH I BELIEVED THAT IN ALL PROBABILITY THAT I COULD COMPLETE THE FLT SAFELY I STILL BELIEVE THAT I WAS DISPATCHED INCORRECTLY.