Date: 201808
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Aircraft: A320
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Parked
Aircraft component: AC Generator/Alternator
Component problem: Improperly Operated; Malfunctioning
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Communication Breakdown; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural MEL / CDL
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Pre-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Procedure; Aircraft
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: During flight plan review; we noted [an] MEL. Reviewing the MEL; we observed that it signifies inoperative Engine Driven Generator; and since 'IDG' was mentioned; we thought that IDG was disconnected. We noted that this MEL comes with several M; O; and DP requirements. One of them being the following maintenance requirement:Install the placards as follows: 1. On the ELEC Panel (35VU) to read: L (R) ENG IDG INOP.Therefore; we prepared for and briefed operation with a Single Engine Driven Generator. After engine start; we observed both engine driven generators operating normally; which was unexpected and confusing. We then contacted ZZZ Station Maintenance thinking that perhaps the generator was repaired but the logbook was not updated. We were told that the MEL was still active; and the problem with the generator still existed; it was not repaired due to lack of parts. We asked them why the generator was operational; and not IDG disconnected or otherwise rendered inoperative as the MEL indicated. We were told that the problem was intermittent; so the generator was left useable. Thoroughly confused by then; we contacted Dispatch about a possible MEL discrepancy. We were told the same story as above; and that the aircraft already operated in the above condition the previous day.Since we were not getting anywhere with this; and not wanting to delay the departure any further; and since safety of operation was not impacted because all generators were operational - we departed for ZZZ1. Nevertheless; after further review of the situation; it is my belief that either Maintenance is using this MEL improperly; or the MEL is not written clearly to address the situation as above.Based on my aviation career to this date; if a problem is observed and logbook write-up made; and then Maintenance decides to defer repairs using a MEL; the malfunctioning equipment is rendered inoperative and not used in flight until repaired. Our MEL states: 'Flight Crews will not operate any deactivated or placarded inoperative item or system.' In this situation; dispatched with MEL 24-XX signifies to me operation with inoperative Engine Driven Generator. And yet the generator in question was operative; and we were expected to use it. This; to me; contradicts the letter of our MEL. [The cause was] either incorrect usage of the MEL by Maintenance; or lack of Company guidance that the above described MEL use is indeed approved.If indeed the company and the FAA approve the usage of the MEL as described above - when a component that faulted - and was written up - is deemed defective; and it is placed on deferral using MEL; but is left operational for as long as it still works - then this should be clearly stated in the MEL; as to preclude flight crew confusion and possible resulting flight delays or cancellations due to flight crew trying to deal with the issue. Otherwise; if faced with similar situation in the future; I will refuse the flight until the MEL is removed; or the component in question [is] deactivated following all the maintenance steps listed in the MEL.




Synopsis: A320 pilot reported that the IDG was improperly deferred.