CDCCL ????

[skylark1532]

Anyway, does any MRO carry out the proceedures for open tanks IAW the type AMM? Haven't seen many that do!

Alber, this statement worries me. Manufacturers do not publish AMMs for fun or simply to absolve themselves of liability. MRO's are required by law to follow applicable current maintenance data or instructions for continuing airworthiness. This may be either in the form of AMM, SRM or CMM data or other applicable current data approved or deemed approved by the controlling NAA such as from the NAA itself (eg AD) or TC or STC holder (eg service bulletin or equiv) or approved modification/repair author (eg Part 21 approved mod or repair). Under the law of most countries, an MRO's capacity to alter or generate maintenance data is extremely closely controlled and requires a degree of communication with the TC holder or author of the maintenance data and the person responsible for continuing airworthiness of the aircraft, before using such data. Generally the MRO cannot just maintain the way it wants, when they want. If you as an individual working in an MRO are under pressure to bypass or ignore current approved maintenance data, I would suggest you make an anonymous report of the situation to your controlling regulatory authority.

In the particular topic for discussion, ie a defective fuel pump, the AMM's for most aircraft types do not require emptying and purging the fuel tank to replace and test the pump; this includes situations where a fuel pump circuit breaker is tripped. But in maintenance, simply resetting a fuel pump circuit breaker that has tripped during operation without any defect investigation in accordance with maintenance data, is (for some aircraft types) not only asking for trouble and just plane stupid, but illegal, such as for some aircraft types if the tank is empty or below a certain fuel level etc. This is the situation for which I may be quoted as saying "don't do it".