Narrative:

Departing ZZZ I noticed the efsf had a tolerance error of -1263 gallons. We spent several minutes trying to resolve the issue with dispatch and the station. Dispatch and the station had no idea what our reference to the tolerance discrepancy or fuel problem was or what protocol to follow in order to resolve the issue or correct the error.the captain and I elected to depart after following the psob which has priority over the fom and fight manual (note the flight deck fuel quantity was within +/- 1;000 lbs). I believe that the psob procedure is missing a critical element. There could be a problem with the fuel quantity system on board and checking gallons added and density is the only way to determine the fuel quantity system is working correctly.I have had several major issues with fuel loads and the efsf over the past several months. In this instance not a single person in the operation was alerted to the tolerance error of -1263 gallons. Today was an entry error on the part of the fueler. Ten or more years ago; we had an airbus almost out of fuel land in ZZZ2. The quantity was so low that the tanks could not be measured using under the wing procedures all the while the flight deck gauges showed plenty of fuel.reviewing the psob; talking with dispatch and load planning there are no red flags or alert messages to flight deck; dispatch; load planning or station/fueler when a gross error is present or has occurred. Adding to the issue every pilot I have talked to no longer looks at the fuel sheet (nearly all don't think that is a requirement to depart - a simple check of the gauges and all is legal).as I interpret the psob; a fsf of some type shall be delivered to the cockpit. Most pilots have read past the paragraph 1 note in the psob.a side note: we took a delay out of ZZZ1 and had an argument with the fueler that they had to provide a fsf. He was adamant that he did not have to provide us with a form. Ultimately we received one and departed.another area that has potential issues: ZZZ2; ACARS at the gate is not reliable. As stated in the psob paragraph 3:another potential risk is not receiving and efsm during a temporary ACARS outage. To increase our dependability; simplify our operation; and protect the pilots form inadvertently departing without a fsf; a new procedure was developed to verify boarded fuel without the fsf.all pilots I have talked with consider the ZZZ2 ACARS issue to be covered in this instance. I believe the intention was to protect against more widespread case of ACARS outages. In either case; we should have fallback procedures. Simply emailing the receipt to the cockpit would suffice.an additional ongoing problem with our current procedures; is no one is alerted when load planning lowers ferry fuel within forty-five minutes of departure. With the current procedure; it is possible that the flight deck would only catch this on the before push checklist if at all. That will almost certainly cause an unnecessary delay.finally; I have several emails from dispatch and load planning supervisor stating:if there is a discrepancy/tolerance it is the flight crew to advise fueling or the station prior to departure.my concern is that no one is responsible for detecting a bad fuel load. Flight deck procedure will not detect the error. Dispatch; lp and the station are not looking or are no longer trained to look for and recognize errors.finally; our procedure across all applicable documents contradict one another.psobparagraph 1.a fsf or efsf is not required for pushback if the following conditions are met. There is no requirement in the psob to review or scrutinize the efsf.fom (8.10.2):an efsf or fsf is not required and boarded fuel verification is complete if:FM (4.40.8)bullet 3. Enter actual gallons boarded. (Superseded by july psob).bullet 4. Last paragraph. No longer applicable but very important.would a pilot be held accountable for not performing the check per the FM? One last question; is the FAA ok with no one at the company reviewing a fuel service form or a thorough review and verification check of fuel load as is the case today? Fuel sheet tolerance gross error of -1263 gallons. No one is required to check tolerance; accuracy of fuel load or paperwork. When requesting help from dispatch or load planning they are not trained in fuel sheets? Several emails indicating it is up to the pilot to catch all errors and resolve at the station level. The threat is we are not require to have on board or review the fuel sheet. How can it be expected that pilots resolve the issue? This fuel sheet was issued a few days ago. It is ok to contact captain X. The issue with the fuel sheet is the load is out of tolerance if the math is done the old fashioned way. Also note: our gauges read 200 lbs more than below the wing. How is that possible? Almost every fuel sheet has the same math error 1 in 10 are out of 'mathematical' tolerance.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air carrier First Officer reported tolerance errors in procedures for fueling and checking correct fuel loads on Company aircraft.

Narrative: Departing ZZZ I noticed the eFSF had a tolerance error of -1263 gallons. We spent several minutes trying to resolve the issue with Dispatch and the Station. Dispatch and the Station had no idea what our reference to the tolerance discrepancy or fuel problem was or what protocol to follow in order to resolve the issue or correct the error.The Captain and I elected to depart after following the PSOB which has priority over the FOM and Fight Manual (note the flight deck fuel quantity was within +/- 1;000 lbs). I believe that the PSOB Procedure is missing a critical element. There could be a problem with the fuel quantity system on board and checking gallons added and density is the only way to determine the fuel quantity system is working correctly.I have had several major issues with fuel loads and the eFSF over the past several months. In this instance not a single person in the operation was alerted to the tolerance error of -1263 gallons. Today was an entry error on the part of the fueler. Ten or more years ago; we had an Airbus almost out of fuel land in ZZZ2. The quantity was so low that the tanks could not be measured using under the wing procedures all the while the flight deck gauges showed plenty of fuel.Reviewing the PSOB; talking with Dispatch and Load Planning there are NO red flags or alert messages to Flight Deck; Dispatch; Load Planning or Station/Fueler when a gross error is present or has occurred. Adding to the issue every pilot I have talked to no longer looks at the fuel sheet (nearly all don't think that is a requirement to depart - a simple check of the gauges and all is legal).As I interpret the PSOB; a FSF of some type SHALL be delivered to the Cockpit. Most pilots have read past the Paragraph 1 note in the PSOB.A side note: We took a delay out of ZZZ1 and had an argument with the fueler that they had to provide a FSF. He was adamant that he did not have to provide us with a form. Ultimately we received one and departed.Another area that has potential issues: ZZZ2; ACARS at the gate is not reliable. As stated in the PSOB Paragraph 3:Another potential risk is not receiving and eFSM during a temporary ACARS outage. To increase our dependability; simplify our operation; and protect the pilots form inadvertently departing without a FSF; a new procedure was developed to verify boarded fuel without the FSF.All pilots I have talked with consider the ZZZ2 ACARS issue to be covered in this instance. I believe the intention was to protect against more widespread case of ACARS outages. In either case; we should have fallback procedures. Simply emailing the receipt to the cockpit would suffice.An additional ongoing problem with our current procedures; is no one is alerted when Load Planning lowers Ferry Fuel within forty-five minutes of departure. With the current procedure; it is possible that the flight deck would only catch this on the Before Push Checklist if at all. That will almost certainly cause an unnecessary delay.Finally; I have several emails from Dispatch and Load Planning Supervisor stating:If there is a discrepancy/tolerance IT IS THE FLIGHT CREW TO ADVISE FUELING OR THE STATION PRIOR TO DEPARTURE.My concern is that no one is responsible for detecting a bad fuel load. Flight deck procedure will not detect the error. Dispatch; LP and the Station are not looking or are no longer trained to look for and recognize errors.Finally; our procedure across all applicable documents contradict one another.PSOBParagraph 1.A FSF or eFSF is NOT required for pushback if the following conditions are met. There is NO REQUIREMENT in the PSOB to review or scrutinize the EFSF.FOM (8.10.2):An eFSF or FSF is not required and boarded fuel verification is complete if:FM (4.40.8)Bullet 3. Enter actual Gallons Boarded. (Superseded by July PSOB).Bullet 4. Last paragraph. No longer applicable but very important.Would a pilot be held accountable for not performing the check per the FM? One last question; is the FAA ok with no one at the company reviewing a Fuel Service Form or a thorough review and Verification Check of fuel load as is the case today? Fuel sheet tolerance gross error of -1263 gallons. No one is required to check tolerance; accuracy of fuel load or paperwork. When requesting help from dispatch or load planning they are not trained in fuel sheets? Several emails indicating it is up to the pilot to catch all errors and resolve at the station level. The threat is we are not require to have on board or review the fuel sheet. How can it be expected that pilots resolve the issue? This fuel sheet was issued a few days ago. It is ok to contact Captain X. The issue with the fuel sheet is the load is out of tolerance if the math is done the old fashioned way. Also note: our gauges read 200 lbs more than below the wing. How is that possible? Almost every fuel sheet has the same math error 1 in 10 are out of 'mathematical' tolerance.

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.