Date: 201903
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Weather elements / visibility: Wind
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight phase: Parked
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Other / Unknown
Human factors: Other / Unknown
Second reporter function: Lead Technician
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Maintenance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Maintenance
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Company Policy; Weather
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: The National Weather Service reported wind gusts that reached 78 mph at ZZZ Airport from a line of thunderstorms that moved through the area earlier in the morning. This line of storms had been predicted in the forecast to move through the area with 60-70 mph wind gusts two days prior to arriving at ZZZ. In preparation for a 'high wind event;' the [procedures manual] covers the aircraft park procedure.After the storms passed and the ramp reopened; I took the logbook out to Aircraft X in preparation for its first flight of the day. As I approached the aircraft; I immediately noticed the nose gear turned 90 degrees to the right of the aircraft center-line; with the torque links connected and no by-pass pin installed. It was clear to me that the aircraft had moved from its original parked position. I made an entry in the logbook and returned the logbook to the office and notified supervision.The [procedures manual] provides a list of items to do based on possible wind speeds. Example: (35-58 mph)1) Make sure aircraft are secure.2) If possible; make sure aircraft parked outdoors have sufficient clearance from hazards.3) Get prepared for wind speed of more than 58 mph.Clearly; based on the predicted forecast; supervision should have been prepared for possible winds over 58 mph. Under the above criteria; [the procedures manual] states: 'A parked aircraft that experiences a weather vane OR movement; regardless of wind speed; requires a 'High Wind Event Inspection.' The [procedures manual] lists abnormal aircraft conditions. [It] states: 'A parked aircraft experiences ground winds of more than 65 knots OR if the aircraft has moved regardless of wind speed;' is an abnormal aircraft condition. Aircraft X was subjected to this abnormal condition when it was moved from its parked position by excessive wind.An aircraft that has moved from its original parked position by forces of nature is a critical observation left out of [the Engineering Authorization]; clarifying on what is considered evidence of an extreme high wind event.In addition; the B737 maintenance manual lists three separate conditions that require an 'Exceeding Maximum NLG Towing Angle' conditional inspection:1) Accidental turn of the nose landing gear greater than the maximum steering angle with torsion links attached.2) Steering from the flight deck with towbar installed and the steering system activated.3) Towing more than the maximum towing loads.It is clear that the nose gear turned 90 degrees to the right with the torsion links connected; and the by-pass pin NOT installed; exceeded the maximum steering angle (B737 Maintenance Manual) requiring a conditional inspection.Aircraft X has flown 13 legs as of this writing and continues today to fly without an 'Extreme High Wind Event-Conditional Inspection'; or 'Exceeding Maximum NLG Towing Angle or Maximum Towing Load-Conditional Inspection' being accomplished. The incident with Aircraft X I'm referencing; clearing puts our team members; customers and aircraft in jeopardy. In my opinion; this event occurred because the potential for out-of-service aircraft was going to be a strain on the flight schedule and the time constraint to do the inspections would cause delays and possible cancellations.My suggestion in avoiding the recurrence of this event; is not to manipulate the inspection policy on the day of the incident by having engineering create EA's (Engineering Authorization's) omitting critical information.


Second narrative: A high wind event occurred at ZZZ. The max windspeed was 68 kt. I immediately took note of aircraft on the gates and made [maintenance logbook] entries to do the high wind inspections per the [procedures manual; with a] work card for high wind inspections. The inspection was pencil whipped by the dayshift manager. He signed it off as not required per the work card. The [procedures manual] is clear that an inspection has to be done. Listening to an upper management conference call I heard [one manager] say the inspections weren't required because the aircraft didn't jump the chocks. Some paperwork gives that as an 'example' that the aircraft was subject to a high wind event. Management was just trying to get out of the inspections because of the delays it would cause. Management went as far as having engineering issue [Engineering Authorization's] for [another model of aircraft] because they didn't want to do the inspection outlined in the Maintenance Manual.Stop allowing management to pencil whip inspections. Make a clarification that jumping wheel chocks is only an example of evidence of the aircraft being subjected to high wind; not a conditional requirement that it had to jump the chocks or the inspection isn't required.


Synopsis: Maintenance staff report that required inspections were not accomplished following high wind event.