A320 CAPT REPORTS THAT HE FEELS HE IS TAKING ON THE ADDITIONAL BURDEN OF ACCOMPLISHING MAINT ACTIONS.

Narrative

WHILE FLT PLANNING; I NOTICED THAT THE R #2 ENG TANK FUEL XFER VALVE WAS INOP IN THE CLOSED POS. I READ THE MEL CARD AFTER ARRIVING AT THE ACFT. THE MAINT SECTION READS; IN PART; AS FOLLOWS: PERFORM THE FOLLOWING PROC TO OPEN REMAINING INTER-CELL XFER VALVES (ICTV) BEFORE DEP. IT THEN DESCRIBES A COMPLEX PROC INVOLVING THE OPENING AND CLOSING OF NUMEROUS CIRCUIT BREAKERS WITH 10-SECOND DELAYS BTWN PULLING EACH ONE. THE FLT CREW ITEMS INCLUDE VERIFYING THE VALVES INDICATE 'OPEN' BEFORE PUSHBACK; AND A COMPLEX FALL BACK PROC IF THE VALVES DO NOT INDICATE 'OPEN.' DUE TO THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROC AND IN THE INTEREST OF SAFETY; I REQUESTED MAINT PERFORM THEIR ITEMS AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. SHORTLY AFTER THIS REQUEST I NOTICED OUR FLT TIME HAD SLIPPED FURTHER (THE FLT WAS ALREADY DELAYED DUE TO THE ACFT'S LATE ARR); AND THE DELAY REASON WAS FLT CREW. I CALLED THE ZONE CTLR AND ASKED WHY I WAS CHARGED WITH THE DELAY. THE CTLR STATED THAT A MAINT SUPVR HAD TOLD HER THAT I WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROC; NOT MAINT. I ALSO RECEIVED AN ACARS; FROM THE SAME CTLR LATER INFLT; STATING 'REGARDING: DELAY. ACCORDING TO MEL UNDER FLT CREW ITEM C FUEL XFER VALVES MUST BE VERIFIED OPEN BY FLT CREW. THANK YOU.' THE RECORD STILL SHOWS US AS THE ONLY DELAY CHARGED TO THE FLT. I FELT I WAS BEING INTIMIDATED; BY BEING CHARGED WITH THE DELAY; INTO PERFORMING A COMPLEX PROC THAT COULD MORE SAFELY BE PERFORMED BY MAINT PROFESSIONALS. THIS GOES ALONG WITH A TREND I THINK HAS STARTED DURING THE PAST 2 MONTHS. FOR EXAMPLE; A MAINT CTLR HAS CALLED MY MGR ABOUT ME; ON 2 SEPARATE OCCASIONS; AFTER BECOMING UPSET OVER MY RPTING OF DEFECTS WHILE AT NON-MAINT STATIONS. I HAVE ALSO BEEN ASKED BY MAINT; WHILE INFLT; TO RESET A CIRCUIT BREAKER THAT WAS NOT PART OF ANY APPROVED INFLT FLT MANUAL PROC; WITHOUT ANY REF TO THE USE OF CAPT'S EMER AUTH AS DETAILED IN THE FLT MANUAL. I DECLINED; SINCE THE INOP SYS (XPONDER #1) WAS NOT CRITICAL TO THE SAFE CONTINUATION OF THE FLT. THIS INSTANCE SEEMED TO BE A CASE OF ATTEMPTING TO RESTORE A REDUNDANT SYS WITHOUT HAVING TO USE CONTRACT MAINT AT A NON-MAINT STATION. IS SAFETY STILL OUR #1 PRIORITY; OR HAS THAT CHANGED?