Narrative:

Had a flight plan bwi-lax of 6 hours 14 mins. Was trying to make flight non-stop with all legalities. Called bwi tower and told them I would take delay at gate if I could get minimum ground time as we were fuel critical to lax. Somehow, the ctrs escalated to an emergency or a priority situation. We asked for and got a block altitude FL310 to FL330. Told center would be drifting up 100 ft about every 5 mins. This was to keep aircraft at optimum fuel altitude. Even though the request was given, it evidently angered one of the ctrs. They questioned the company as to how can you be fuel critical at bwi if you have 38000 pounds of fuel. They want the term minimum fuel advisory used instead of fuel critical even though the meaning in the flight operations manual is exactly the same. After talking to everyone, I still don't know what all the commotion is about. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter states that he never use the words 'fuel emergency.' he does not know what all of the fuss is about, except that a controller along the way may have objected to the special handling that the reporter's flight was getting. A controller wrote a letter that was sent on to the air carrier's chief of dispatch who contacted the reporter for amplification, and suggested that the reporter send a report to the ASRS. The FAA has taken no action, but violation action was threatened at one point. The reporter wonders, 'why?' apparently, the air traffic system is very sensitive about any use of words indicating that there may be a fuel problem anywhere in the flight after a foreign aircraft ran out of fuel killing several people.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR MLG PLT CREATED QUITE A STIR WHEN HE ASKED FOR SPECIAL HANDLING TO SAVE FUEL ON A CROSS CONTINENTAL FLT.

Narrative: HAD A FLT PLAN BWI-LAX OF 6 HRS 14 MINS. WAS TRYING TO MAKE FLT NON-STOP WITH ALL LEGALITIES. CALLED BWI TWR AND TOLD THEM I WOULD TAKE DELAY AT GATE IF I COULD GET MINIMUM GND TIME AS WE WERE FUEL CRITICAL TO LAX. SOMEHOW, THE CTRS ESCALATED TO AN EMER OR A PRIORITY SIT. WE ASKED FOR AND GOT A BLOCK ALT FL310 TO FL330. TOLD CTR WOULD BE DRIFTING UP 100 FT ABOUT EVERY 5 MINS. THIS WAS TO KEEP ACFT AT OPTIMUM FUEL ALT. EVEN THOUGH THE REQUEST WAS GIVEN, IT EVIDENTLY ANGERED ONE OF THE CTRS. THEY QUESTIONED THE COMPANY AS TO HOW CAN YOU BE FUEL CRITICAL AT BWI IF YOU HAVE 38000 LBS OF FUEL. THEY WANT THE TERM MINIMUM FUEL ADVISORY USED INSTEAD OF FUEL CRITICAL EVEN THOUGH THE MEANING IN THE FLT OPS MANUAL IS EXACTLY THE SAME. AFTER TALKING TO EVERYONE, I STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT ALL THE COMMOTION IS ABOUT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR STATES THAT HE NEVER USE THE WORDS 'FUEL EMER.' HE DOES NOT KNOW WHAT ALL OF THE FUSS IS ABOUT, EXCEPT THAT A CTLR ALONG THE WAY MAY HAVE OBJECTED TO THE SPECIAL HANDLING THAT THE RPTR'S FLT WAS GETTING. A CTLR WROTE A LETTER THAT WAS SENT ON TO THE ACR'S CHIEF OF DISPATCH WHO CONTACTED THE RPTR FOR AMPLIFICATION, AND SUGGESTED THAT THE RPTR SEND A RPT TO THE ASRS. THE FAA HAS TAKEN NO ACTION, BUT VIOLATION ACTION WAS THREATENED AT ONE POINT. THE RPTR WONDERS, 'WHY?' APPARENTLY, THE AIR TFC SYS IS VERY SENSITIVE ABOUT ANY USE OF WORDS INDICATING THAT THERE MAY BE A FUEL PROB ANYWHERE IN THE FLT AFTER A FOREIGN ACFT RAN OUT OF FUEL KILLING SEVERAL PEOPLE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.