A320
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Workload; Troubleshooting; Communication Breakdown; Confusion
Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Procedure; Chart Or Publication; Aircraft
The Mechanic at our departure airport delivered a paper copy of the MEL along with a diagram of which section of the cargo compartment that was inop.  He said we could use CP4 for cargo but the damaged section could not be used.  The First Officer and I along with the Mechanic discussed the MEL 25.50-03 and we continued on our way.  We arrived at our destination and the confusion began regarding the MEL because cargo was in CP4 but not in the inop section.  We verified this with a Station Ramp Agent.  I called and spoke to Dispatch and Maintenance Control as we began to load the aircraft for our next flight.  Maintenance Control said the MEL restricts us from using CP4 (rear cargo compartment) all together.  The bags for our next flight were loaded into CP1 and we continued on our way.I believe the MEL wording should be changed to read:  The rear or front cargo compartment must not be used for any luggage.  Our load sheet is broken down into zones and the MEL refers to cargo compartments. We were under the assumption that cargo could be in section CP4 but not CP3.  Our cargo load sheet was accurate and listed all cargo in CP4 and CP3 (inop section) was empty.
An A320 had a MEL referencing CP3 cargo compartment damage; but there was confusion over whether cargo could be loaded in CP4 and only the damaged area excluded. It was determined the MEL restricted any cargo carriage in that compartment.