A B767-300ER WAS DISPATCHED IN NON COMPLIANCE WITH THE WRONG MEL REF FOR AN INOP ELECTRONIC ENG CTL AND TECHNICIAN ASSURANCE THAT ITEM WAS FIXED BUT NEEDS CHK IN AIR.

Narrative

WHEN PREFLTING ACFT FLT XX (B767ER) IN ZZZ; FO; FOR A DEP TO JFK; IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WERE 2 PERTINENT MCO'S IN THE LOGBOOK. ONE WAS A 'R ENG ELECTRONIC ENG CTL STATUS MESSAGE' AND THE OTHER WAS A 'TMC AUTOTHROTTLE INOP.' THE MECH ENTERED THE COCKPIT AND STATED THAT HE HAD JUST CLRED THE RELATED PROBS WHILE DOWN IN THE LOWER ELECTRONICS COMPARTMENT. HE SUGGESTED KEEPING THE MCO'S IN THE LOGBOOK AS THIS HAD HAPPENED ON A PREVIOUS FLT AND THAT IT SHOULD PROBABLY BE FLT CHKED. THE MEL WAS CHKED AND THE ACFT WAS SUITABLE FOR ETOPS FLT WHETHER THE MCO'S WERE CLRED OR NOT. AN FAA ACR INSPECTOR ARRIVED AND WAS GIVEN THE JUMP SEAT FOR THE FLT. WE DEPARTED ON TIME AND DURING CLBOUT GOT THE EICAS MESSAGES STATING THAT THE 'R ENG ELECTRONIC ENG CTL' WAS INOP AND THE AUTOTHROTTLE HAD DISCONNECTED. WE COMPLETED THE APPROPRIATE CHKLISTS AND CONTINUED THE FLT WHICH STILL ALLOWED FOR ETOPS. WHEN THE FAA INSPECTOR REVIEWED THE MCO'S IN THE LOGBOOK AND MEL; IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE ELECTRONIC ENG CTL DISCREPANCY PREVIOUSLY WRITTEN UP SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN 'ELECTRONIC ENG CTL SUPERVISORY' WRITE-UP AND NOT AN 'ELECTRONIC ENG CTL STATUS MESSAGE.' CORRECTIVE PROCS WERE SIMILAR FOR EITHER PROB. HOWEVER; THE WRITE-UP WAS INCORRECT. IN REVIEW; THE MCO NUMBERS SHOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CLOSELY XREFED IN THE MEL; WITH THE MECH STATING THAT EVERYTHING WAS CLRED. OUR ATTN WAS THEN FOCUSED ON AN ON-TIME DEP (SLOT TIME). THE PROPER ACTION FOR TKOF SHOULD HAVE BEEN TO EITHER TURN OFF BOTH ELECTRONIC ENG CTLS OR REMOVE THE MCO'S FROM THE LOGBOOK AS THE INDICATIONS OF A PROB HAD BEEN CLRED BY THE MECH.