A B737-700 FO REPORTS ON THE CONFUSION EXISTING WITHIN AN AIRLINE OVER THE DESIGN AND FUNCTIONALITY OF THE ACFT LOGBOOK SO FAR AS DEFERRALS AND PAGE UPDATING FOR AIRWORTHINESS PURPOSES AT ZZZ; US.

Narrative

THIS INCIDENT INVOLVED THE MAINT LOGBOOK ON A B737-700. THE ACFT ARRIVED IN TUCSON; AZ FOR A SCHEDULED DEP TO SEATTLE; WA. AS THE FO ON THE FLT; I WAS THE FIRST TO ARRIVE AT THE ACFT AND CONDUCTED THE PREFLIGHT; WHICH INCLUDED A REVIEW OF THE MAINT LOGBOOK. DURING THE REVIEW OF THE LOGBOOK; I NOTICED THAT ON LOG PAGE XXXXX THERE WAS A WRITE-UP THAT SAID 'E.A. YYYYY DUE.' IN THE CORRECTIVE ACTION IT SAID 'REQUIRED BEFORE REVENUE FLTS' WITH A DEFERRED MAINT CODE OF 'MCT' NOT A 'Y' WHICH WOULD HAVE MEANT THAT THE CORRECTIVE ACTION HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. I LOOKED IN THE MIG-2B'S FOR THE CORRECTIVE ACTION TO ENSURE THAT IT HAD BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. I FOUND NO EVIDENCE IN EITHER THE OLD OR THE NEW BOOK IN ANY OF THE MIG-2B'S THAT THE CORRECTIVE ACTION WAS ACCOMPLISHED. THE PREVIOUS PAGE OF THE MIG-2A SHOWED THAT E.A ZZZZZ WAS ACCOMPLISHED AND IT REFERRED TO THE NEXT PAGE FOR EA YYYYY; THE DISCREPANCY IN QUESTION. (THE ACTUAL PAGE NUMBER REFERRED TO WAS INCORRECT AS IT WAS MISPRINTED) I BROUGHT THIS OPEN DISCREPANCY TO THE CAPTS ATTENTION; LEFT THE COCKPIT TO COMPLETE MY PREFLT. UPON MY ARRIVAL BACK TO THE COCKPIT; THE CAPT WAS ON THE CELL PHONE WITH MAINT CTL IN ZZZ ABOUT THE SUBJECT. AFTER COMPLETING THE PHONE CONVERSATION THE CAPT INFORMED ME THAT MAINT CTL WAS FAXING THE CORRECTED LOG PAGE TO US FOR INCLUSION IN THE BOOK. WHEN THE FAX ARRIVED AT THE ACFT; IT WAS A COMPUTER PRINT OUT FROM THE MAIN COMPUTER; NOT THE CORRECTED LOGBOOK PAGE. THE CAPT LOOKED AT IT AND SAID THAT HE WAS SATISFIED SINCE IT STATED AT THE BOTTOM OF THE COMPUTER PRINTOUT THAT 'E.A. YYYYY WAS COMPLIED WITH.' I LOOKED AT IT AND SAID THAT NORMALLY WE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE MIG-2A 'WHITE SHEET' THAT WAS THEN ATTACHED OVER THE EXISTING YELLOW COPY OF THE MIG-2A AS THE CORRECTED VERSION. THE CAPT DISAGREED AND SAID HE ALWAYS GOT THE COMPUTER PRINTOUT. I HAD NEVER SEEN THAT PARTICULAR COMPUTER PRINTOUT BEFORE. THE CAPT ASKED IF I WAS HAPPY WITH WHAT WE HAD AND MY RESPONSE WAS NO; THAT IT WAS CLEAR THE E.A. (ENGINEERING ACTION) HAD BEEN COMPLIED WITH BUT THE PAPERWORK WAS NOT CORRECT AS I UNDERSTOOD IT. HE SAID THAT IT WAS CORRECT AND WE WERE TAKING IT AS IT WAS. SINCE OUR FLT OPS MANUAL IS VERY CLEAR THAT IT IS THE CAPT WHO SHALL DETERMINE THE STATUS OF THE ACFT MAINT LOG I DEFERRED TO HIM BUT SAID I WOULD FILE A REPORT ON THE INCIDENT. LOOKING INTO THE ISSUE MORE IN DEPTH UPON RETURN FROM THE TRIP; I VERIFIED FROM BOTH THE LINE MAINT SUPVR AND MAINT CTL (A DIFFERENT INDIVIDUAL) THAT THE PROCEDURES FOLLOWED WERE NOT CORRECT. EVEN THE COPY OF THE CORRECTED MIG-2A; THAT I WANTED; HAD RECENTLY BEEN REVISED TO THE DISCREPANCY BEING TRANSFERRED TO A NEW LOG PAGE AND THE PROBLEM BEING CORRECTED ON THE NEW LOG PAGE. THE MAINT COMPUTER PRINTOUT WAS CORRECT IN THAT THE E.A. HAD BEEN COMPLIED WITH BUT THE DOCUMENTATION WAS NOT CORRECT. THE COMPANY IS TRYING TO REVISE PROCEDURES THAT WILL ELIMINATE MISUNDERSTANDING OF PROPER METHODS BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE A MORE CONCERTED EFFORT TO EDUCATE EVERYONE AND THE DOCUMENTATION NEEDS TO BE SIMPLIFIED SO THAT IT DOESN'T TAKE A LAWYER TO ENDURE THAT THE PAPERWORK IS READY TO GO FLY. INCIDENTALLY THERE HAD BEEN TWO AIRWORTHINESS RELEASES SIGNED OFF BY MAINT AFTER THIS ERROR WAS MADE WITHOUT THEIR CATCHING IT SO IT IS NOT JUST THE PLTS THAT HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THE LOGBOOKS.