A Lead Mechanic/Inspector reports about unapproved and undocumented maintenance deviations by unlicensed mechanics from a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) drawing; involving electrical wire routing for a WiFi system installation on numerous CRJ-700/900 aircraft.
Synopsis
A Lead Mechanic/Inspector reports about unapproved and undocumented maintenance deviations by unlicensed mechanics from a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) drawing; involving electrical wire routing for a WiFi system installation on numerous CRJ-700/900 aircraft.
Narrative
XXX services performed Company X's WiFi Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) #STO2541CH installations on [approximately] twenty-seven CRJ-700 and 900 aircraft for Air Carrier X from August through November 2011. I was employed with XXX services as a Lead/Inspector after the initial start-up of the installations in ZZZ. Upon my arrival I questioned the deviations from the [STC] installation drawings in the cockpit area; as the routing for the Circuit Breaker (C/B) installation was not per the [STC] drawing. I questioned the practice and was told by Company X WiFi representative and XXX services Management [who were] onsite; that drawing changes were in work and it was good [deviations were OK].I also noted areas under the aft lavatory [that] did not have any stand-offs installed. There seemed to be several undocumented deviations to the main routing installation drawing #P1311-20110. Again; when I questioned any deviations; I was told all changes were in work with upcoming revisions etc. I was demoted from my Lead position due to my unwillingness to just sign paperwork without questions and chose to resign at that time; December 2011. I'm confident these aircraft are not per the STC drawings and do not feel confident that any changes were applied as I was told by both Company X WiFi representatives and XXX services Management. XXX services continued to perform this STC installation on Air Carriers Y and Z aircraft. I was uncomfortable with the answers provided and recently came across the final revisions of the aforementioned drawings and verified the changes had not been accomplished.
NASA callback
Reporter stated she was involved with the WiFi STC prototype to develop the WiFi drawings that became a standard STC for WiFi installations on numerous aircraft. The STC is owned by Company X and contracted out to companies like her former employer; XXX services; to install the actual electrical equipment wiring and operating components.Reporter stated the WiFi electrical wiring ran the entire length of the fuselage under the cabin floor boards; along the cargo pit ceilings into the E/E Compartment; then up the cockpit wall to the overhead panel. Most of the mechanics installing the wiring and components were unlicensed and never signed-off any of the work they did. That was usually done by the Lead Mechanic or Inspector. Reporter stated she did not have the ability to check the routing of installed wiring in many areas and because of the electrical wire routing deviations from the STC drawings; she was concerned EMF effects could affect fuel pump electrical wire harnesses. The STC was very specific that WiFi electrical power wires had to be routed and secured a specific distance from any fuel associated wiring.Reporter also stated the original STC WiFi drawings and wiring installation directions were never revised; indicating approval of the deviations made by XXX services employees. Because of those concerns and the fact she was expected to sign-off the undocumented and unapproved deviation installations; she resigned from XXX services.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.