A MAINT RPT ON THE INCORRECT ASSESSMENT BY A MAINT CREW PERSON OF WHAT THE B737-300 FLC COULD DO IN CONFORMING WITH THE MANDATES OF THE MEL ACTIONS FOR AN APU WARNING SYS ON THE GND AT DEN; CO.

Narrative

CONTACTED FLT VIA A COMMERCIAL RADIO PATCH WITH AN APU FAULT DETECTOR WARNING LIGHT ILLUMINATED. PROCEEDED TO DEFER WARNING LIGHT AS PER MEL 2611B. THE ITEM WAS DEFERRED PER THE MEL PROCS. THE CIRCUIT BREAKER FOR THE APU DETECTION SYS WAS PULLED AND COLLARED IN THE COCKPIT; AN INOP STICKER WAS INSTALLED ON THE WARNING LIGHT. THE MEL WAS SENT TO THE COCKPIT FOR THE CREW TO REVIEW. FLC MENTIONED WE CAN ACCOMPLISH EVERYTHING EXCEPT PULLING THE CIRCUIT BREAKER ON THE APU CTL MODULE IN THE E&E COMPARTMENT. MY COMMENT WAS; 'WE'LL PULL THE CIRCUIT BREAKER AT THE NEXT MAINT STATION.' AFTER THE PHONE PATCH WAS TERMINATED; I REALIZED THAT THE TRIP SHOULD HAVE RETURNED TO THE BLOCKS TO HAVE MAINT PULL THE CIRCUIT BREAKER. ONCE I REALIZED MY MISTAKE; I CONTACTED THE DOWN-LINE STATION TO PULL THE CIRCUIT BREAKER ON THE APU CTL MODULE EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A NON MAINT STATION. THE ROOT CAUSE OF THIS CONFUSION IS THAT OTHER RELATED MEL DEALING WITH DEACTIVATING APU GIVES US THE OPTION OF PULLING THE CIRCUIT BREAKER AT THE NEXT MAINT STATION. AIRLINE OPERATIONAL ENGINEERING WAS CONTACTED TO SEEK RELIEF TO INSURE ALL MEL'S RELATED TO DEACTIVATING APU SYS ARE UNIFORM NO MATTER WHAT ATA CHAPTER IT IS ASSOCIATED WITH.