Date: 201605
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: MD-80 Series (DC-9-80) Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise; Parked
ATC / advisory: Center ZZZ; Ramp ZZZ
Aircraft component: Turbine Engine
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting; Workload; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight; Aircraft In Service At Gate
Result: Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory; General Maintenance Action
Contributing factors: Procedure; Aircraft; Chart Or Publication; Company Policy
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: On this flight we had an engine EGT read a high temp. More specifically our number 2 engine EGT got to 604C. We did a FLEX 30 takeoff so no limitations were exceeded however referencing QRH due to note 4 we needed to make a logbook entry. We called at a safe altitude and gave them the parameters; since they were in limits to continue flight we continued to our filed destination and maintenance met us at the gate. When maintenance came back from their inspection with the logbook we saw that they had deferred the Automatic Reserve Thrust (ART) system as maintenance control had told him to do. Referencing the bulletin issued; this was an improper and old procedure. When brought to the mechanics attention he became nervous he was sent improper paperwork to follow as he found out later he was sent the previous years procedure. The Captain (CA) and I followed up with the duty pilot. He then told us deferring the ART was a good procedure since the plane wouldn't be going on the Maximum Takeoff Performance (MTOP) until it got back to a maintenance station after battling with him that the bulletin applied we asked to talk to the fleet manager. Once we got in touch with the [company] Manager; that Manager assured us that this was NOT ok. They were no longer to defer the ART as it's a working system per the bulletin previously mentioned. Then I inquired about a [previous] MEL as I needed it the last 3 times I put an engine on the MTOP. Now all the sudden I was informed by the fleet manager that it was not needed. We took off and flew to our planned destination; uneventfully.I have had 4 engines put on the MTOP and have had 4 different procedures to place them on the MTOP so far. There needs to be information sent to the pilot group of what we must do and or see to properly place an engine on MTOP (I.e no ART deferral; whether or not we need a deferral; what has to be on the release; etc) so it's the same every time. Also; maintenance needs to have a standard procedure to place an engine on the MTOP to follow every time we do this so its the same on their end as well. Also; I have had 2 encounters with the duty pilots and both times I have received wrong information from them in favor of getting the airplane off the ground. The duty pilots need to make safety a bigger priority than getting the airplane off the ground; which seems to be the case with all the departments. Were more worried about completing the flight than being legal and safe.




Synopsis: An MD-80 First Officer reported a engine EGT high temperature which was entered in the aircraft maintenance log. Following much discussion and disagreement; Maintenance did not place the engine on a watch list or apply an MEL until after arrival at a maintenance station.