A B757 CAPT; WITH COMPANY AND UNION APPROVAL; HAD 2 LIFT RAFTS REMOVED FROM THE FLT DECK AND PLACED IN THE CARGO HOLD. IN DOING SO; IT WAS FOUND OUT LATER HE VIOLATED 3 FARS.

Narrative

MY INTERP OF AN LOA WITH THE COMPANY WAS THAT ONLY 1 JUMP SEATER COULD BE CARRIED WITH 2 LIFE RAFTS ON THE FLT DECK. I CALLED THE PLTS UNION AND WAS TOLD I WAS CORRECT AND THE LIFE RAFTS SHOULD BE PUT IN THE BELLY. I TALKED TO THE COMPANY TWICE AND WAS TOLD THAT MAINT SHOULD HAVE PUT THE RAFTS IN THE BELLY. I TOLD THE COMPANY THAT I WOULD PUT THE RAFTS IN THE BELLY IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR DESIRE TO PUT 2 MGRS ON THE JUMP SEATS. THE ASSISTANT CHIEF PLT I TALKED TO IN LOUISVILLE DID NOT DISAGREE WITH THAT PLAN. NOTHING WAS MENTIONED ABOUT THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SVC ORDER TO REMOVE THE RAFTS FROM THE FLT DECK. MAINT; A CONTRACT MECH; PUT THE RAFTS IN THE BELLY. HE MADE NO MENTION OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SVC ORDER AND MADE NO ENTRY IN THE LOGBOOK. UPON LNDG IN GUAYAQUIL; EQUADOR; I MADE AN ENTRY IN THE LOGBOOK THAT THE RAFTS WERE PLACED IN THE BELLY SO THE CAPT OF THE NEXT FLT WOULD BE SURE TO NOTICE THAT THE RAFTS WERE NOT ON THE FLT DECK. THE NEXT FLT WAS FROM GUAYAQUIL TO MIAMI. UPON ARR AT GUAYAQUIL; A CHIEF PLT IN MIA TOLD ME THAT I HAD VIOLATED 3 FARS: FLYING WITH AN OPEN LOGBOOK; FLYING THE ACFT IN A NONSTANDARD CONFIGN; AND FLYING THE ACFT WITH HAZMAT IN THE BELLY WITHOUT PROPER DOCUMENTATION. I WAS NEVER INSTRUCTED THAT THE HAZMAT IN THE RAFTS WERE NOT COVERED UNDER SOME SORT OF EXEMPTION; NOR DID THE MECH; THE GATEWAY OR THE LOUISVILLE ASSISTANT CHIEF PLT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT SPECIAL HANDLING OF THE RAFTS. THE SDF CHIEF PLTS WERE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LOA. THE CONTRACT MECH WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE REQUIRED ACTION IF RAFTS ARE REMOVED FROM THE FLT DECK OF THE B757 CARGO CONFIGN AND THE PLTS UNION AND THE COMPANY HAVE DIFFERING INTERPS OF THE LOA. I FELT I DID WHAT THE COMPANY WANTED AND ACTUALLY TOLD ME WAS OK TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR JUMP SEATERS.