MD80 CREW FOUND CARGO LOADED IN A CARGO PIT THAT WAS MEL'ED INOP.

Date: 2002-05 · Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model · Phase: ground

Anomalies: aircraft-equipment-problem-critical|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-mel-cdl|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-published-material-policy|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-maintenance|deviation-discrepancy-procedural-far|other-cargo-loaded-into-compartment-that-was-mel-ed-inoperative-cargo-handler-language-barrier

Synopsis

MD80 CREW FOUND CARGO LOADED IN A CARGO PIT THAT WAS MEL'ED INOP.

Narrative

WHILE PULLING UP THE PAPERWORK FOR MY FLT; I NOTICED AN MEL ITEM ON THE FLT PLAN SAYING THE MID CARGO COMPARTMENT WAS INOP. THE TKOF PERFORMANCE SETTING THEN HAD 800 LBS OF CARGO PLANNED TO BE LOADED IN THERE. WHEN I GOT TO THE AIRPLANE I TALKED TO THE FO AND HE WENT DOWN TO CHK. THE CARGO COMPARTMENT WAS INDEED LOADED. I INFORMED THE STATION PERSONNEL OF THE DISCREPANCY AND WENT DOWN TO SEE IF THERE WAS AN INOP STICKER ON THE DOOR AS REQUIRED BY THE MEL. THERE WAS; HOWEVER; THE STICKER WAS NOT OVER THE HANDLE -- IT WAS OFF TO THE SIDE. ALSO; IT SEEMED MOST OF THE LOADING CREW'S FIRST LANGUAGE WASN'T ENGLISH. I THEN INFORMED LOAD PLANNING OF THE PROB. SHE SAID SHE WAS NOT AWARE OF THE MEL AND SAID SHE WOULD CONFER WITH THE STATION; WHICH TOOK A FEW MINS. I CALLED HER BACK. SHE SAID THEY WOULD OFFLOAD THE CARGO AND SHE TOLD ME WHERE THEY COULD PUT IT WHICH I PASSED ALONG. I THEN ASKED HER TO SEND ME A NEW TKOF PERFORMANCE SETTING REFLECTING THE NEW LOAD AND WE THEN WENT ON OUR WAY. NOW THAT WAS TO BE THE THIRD LEG THAT THAT ACFT WAS TO FLY IN THAT CONDITION. WHY IT HADN'T BEEN PASSED ON TO LOAD PLANNING IS A QUESTION; AND PERHAPS THE MEL SHOULD BE CHANGED TO REQUIRE THAT THE INOP STICKER BE PUT OVER THE HANDLE SO THAT IT WOULD BE MORE VISIBLE AND APT TO PROMPT A QUESTION. ALL OF THIS IS THE REASON FOR OUR DELAYED DEP.

Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.