Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Multiengine
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 82
Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Passenger Misconduct
General Flight Cancelled / Delayed; General Maintenance Action
Aircraft; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors
Sat in ZZZ for hours for a delayed flight coming from ZZZ1. During the swap; the outgoing Captain informed me that the Crew that brought the aircraft into ZZZ1 said that upon landing the right thrust reverser malfunctioned. The delay was due to Contract Maintenance MEL'ing the right thrust reverser. During pre-flight I checked the logbook; Release; and stickers as well as looked up the MEL on my EFB. During this time the 'A' Flight Attendant informed me that a passenger was refusing to wear their mask and creating a scene and that the CSR had been called. Eventually the passenger was removed and an updated report was sent to the aircraft. During the distraction I neglected to click on the hyperlink in the MEL in the Maintenance portion labeled MEL SP#XX Thrust Reverser System. If I had I would have noticed on that a Circuit Breaker for the #2 Engine should have been pulled and collared. Upon landing in ZZZ2 I informed the outgoing Captain of the MEL. During my commute home I received a text from said Captain that he found the wrong CB had been collared and that he had written it up and ZZZ2 Maintenance was fixing the issue. Upon reviewing the SP#XX I can only assume that the CB for the #1 Engine had been pulled instead.
Inbound Captain advised that they had received the aircraft late in ZZZ due to Thrust Reverser MEL applied in ZZZ1 on previous flight and then further delayed on their flight due to a Passenger refusing to comply with mask requirements.In reviewing the logbook I found that the MEL sticker in the front of the logbook was not completed. The MEL number was not entered; the Special procedures performed were not entered and the circuit breakers pulled and collared were not entered.   When I reviewed the logbook entry; the special procedures were references SP-XX.  I also observed C/B's  #2 Engine TR Sync Lock and #2 Engine TR INTLK pulled and collared.I then reviewed the MEL and SP-XX and discovered the following errors.1. SP XX calls for the #2 Engine TR Sync Lock c/b and the #2 Engine TR Control c/b to be pulled and collared.  the Control C/B was NOT collared as prescribed in SP XXnd the INTLK c/b WAS collared contrary to SP XX2. There was no MEL sticker placed on the Inoperative TR lever.3. There was no MEL sticker placed above the respected N1 gauge.I contacted Maintenance Control to confirm my understanding of the MEL regarding the incorrect Circuit Breakers and they confirmed the wrong circuit breaker had been pulled.  Notified ZZZ2 Maintenance and entered the discrepancy in the logbook. ZZZ2 Maintenance arrived and corrected the circuit breaker configuration and signed off the discrepancy I had entered. Missing information on the logbook sticker was also corrected.I have long felt that our MEL is VERY inadequate when it comes to circuit breaker identification.  In this particular instance the nomenclature is correct and was just applied incorrectly by the Mechanic; but if the C/B locations were included  it would have been much more apparent to the Mechanic as well as flight crew that the two C/B would not be immediately adjacent to each other.  I have brought this to the attention of Flight Ops previously with regards to other MEL's and have been advised that changes are slated for a future revision that has been delayed due to aircraft out of service returns; COVID and other issues. I also feel it should be reinforced to flight crews that MEL compliance is not solely the responsibility of the Maintenance department and that we should always verify (to the limits of our abilities) those aspects of MEL compliance which we have ready access to on each airplane we accept regardless of previous crews acceptance of the aircraft.
Two air carrier captains reported delays due to incorrect MEL procedures performed by maintenance and a passenger not complying with face mask policy.