A Maintenance Controller unfamiliar with CRJ-900 aircraft follows instructions from his shift Manager to defer a Flight Crew report of a Flaps Half Speed message after takeoff using MEL 27-51-X. Controller was later informed he should have used a different MEL. Controller also noted the lack of MEL clarity contributed to the improper deferral.

Narrative

March 2010; the Flight Crew reported a Flaps Half Speed after takeoff from ZZZ during retraction. They reported it to Dispatch by an ACARS message which Dispatch gave to Maintenance Control. When they arrived in ZZZ1; they called with a reference number and deferred it over the phone. When the ACARS messages was received from Dispatch the Maintenance Control shift manager instructed me to defer it with the Crew when they arrived in ZZZ1. We discussed which MEL to use and then the other Maintenance Controller on duty agreed to back-up the MEL. I took the call and deferred the item with the Crew under MEL 27-51-X; but was told yesterday that it should have been deferred under MEL 27-51-X-X. I have not been to a CRJ-900 Familiarization (FAM) Course and was going by what I was told to defer the item under. I did not realize that deferring the Flap System did not stop them from using the flaps as with most aircraft. I am not as familiar with the CRJ-900 aircraft because I haven't been to class yet and was going by what information I was given. I was a go-between taking the information and passing it on to the crew. I asked a lot of questions but apparently not enough to avoid this from happening. Replaced the skew detectors to return the aircraft to service. The MEL for the flap system that was used should be written clearer to identify that it should be used for a Flap Fault message and not be used for a Flaps Half Speed message.