Narrative:

We took off with 13.0 fuel on board. During climbout; at approximately FL180; we received a fuel imbalance yellow on number 1 fuel gauge. According to gauge; fuel was burning out of number 1 tank at a high rate. It seemed double the rate as usual. Fuel flows were the same on both engines. Fuel burned matched and were equal on both engines. Total fuel remaining equaled the planned fuel remaining. We even had a flight attendant (flight attendant) check the wings for a possible fuel leak. We chose to run the imbal QRH. Crossfeed open and number 1 pumps off; we were able to slow the fuel burn out of the number 1 tank; but were not able to stop it. We called maintenance control over the radio and were advised to follow the QRH. At that point we had approximately 5.3 in the number 2 tank and 2.2 in the #1 tank [so] we decided the prudent action was to [advise ATC] and divert to [a nearby alternate]. We landed with 1.9 number 1 and 5.1 number 2 showing on the fuel gauges. We landed with no problems and taxied to the gate. FMC fuel burn calculations had us landing with the correct fuel in [destination]; we just could not stop the fuel burning from the number 1 tank.it would be nice during airborne patch to maintenance if they were allowed to help you trouble shoot and not just say 'legally all we can say is follow the QRH.' not looking for someone to tell me what to do; but extra eyes troubleshooting would be nice.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-700 flight crew reported diverting to an alternate airport after experiencing fuel system anomalies.

Narrative: We took off with 13.0 fuel on board. During climbout; at approximately FL180; we received a fuel imbalance yellow on Number 1 fuel gauge. According to gauge; fuel was burning out of Number 1 tank at a high rate. It seemed double the rate as usual. Fuel flows were the same on both engines. Fuel burned matched and were equal on both engines. Total fuel remaining equaled the planned fuel remaining. We even had a FA (Flight Attendant) check the wings for a possible fuel leak. We chose to run the IMBAL QRH. CROSSFEED open and Number 1 pumps off; we were able to slow the fuel burn out of the Number 1 tank; but were not able to stop it. We called Maintenance Control over the radio and were advised to follow the QRH. At that point we had approximately 5.3 in the Number 2 tank and 2.2 in the #1 tank [so] we decided the prudent action was to [advise ATC] and divert to [a nearby alternate]. We landed with 1.9 Number 1 and 5.1 Number 2 showing on the fuel gauges. We landed with no problems and taxied to the gate. FMC fuel burn calculations had us landing with the correct fuel in [destination]; we just could not stop the fuel burning from the Number 1 tank.It would be nice during airborne patch to Maintenance if they were allowed to help you trouble shoot and not just say 'Legally all we can say is follow the QRH.' Not looking for someone to tell me what to do; but extra eyes troubleshooting would be nice.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.