Narrative:

Flight sea-pit during walk around of medium large transport aircraft I noted very light blue streaks emitting from forward lavatory waste drain. FAA maintenance inspector came up to inform us of this fact. I concurred and suggested we would write it up and have them look at it in pittsburgh where we have maintenance (we were at sea). The vent was not leaking on the ground. She appeared to agree it should be written up, so we did. She made no mention that she thought it was a safety hazard or that it should have been on the MEL. In my experience, it appeared to be a very minor leak and in fact there is no way to substantiate that it was still leaking in-flight. If the inspector wasn't comfortable with the situation and felt it should have been drained, why not tell us to do so? We don't want to create a flight hazard, if it was possible in this case. Supplemental information from acn 238696: my copilot told inspector he (copilot) had only noticed discoloration during his walk around. Inspector told us 'you might want to have maintenance take a look when you get to pit (our destination).' we left sea and en route decided to note inspector's observation for our maintenance. On further contemplation, we should have had sea maintenance look at the leak and MEL'ed the aircraft prior to flight.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MLG PREFLT INSPECTION INDICATES LEAK OF LAVATORY WASTE DRAIN. FAA INSPECTOR PRESENT. CREW MAKES LOGBOOK ENTRY BUT DEFERS MAINT CHK UNTIL PIT.

Narrative: FLT SEA-PIT DURING WALK AROUND OF MLG ACFT I NOTED VERY LIGHT BLUE STREAKS EMITTING FROM FORWARD LAVATORY WASTE DRAIN. FAA MAINT INSPECTOR CAME UP TO INFORM US OF THIS FACT. I CONCURRED AND SUGGESTED WE WOULD WRITE IT UP AND HAVE THEM LOOK AT IT IN PITTSBURGH WHERE WE HAVE MAINT (WE WERE AT SEA). THE VENT WAS NOT LEAKING ON THE GND. SHE APPEARED TO AGREE IT SHOULD BE WRITTEN UP, SO WE DID. SHE MADE NO MENTION THAT SHE THOUGHT IT WAS A SAFETY HAZARD OR THAT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE MEL. IN MY EXPERIENCE, IT APPEARED TO BE A VERY MINOR LEAK AND IN FACT THERE IS NO WAY TO SUBSTANTIATE THAT IT WAS STILL LEAKING INFLT. IF THE INSPECTOR WASN'T COMFORTABLE WITH THE SIT AND FELT IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN DRAINED, WHY NOT TELL US TO DO SO? WE DON'T WANT TO CREATE A FLT HAZARD, IF IT WAS POSSIBLE IN THIS CASE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 238696: MY COPLT TOLD INSPECTOR HE (COPLT) HAD ONLY NOTICED DISCOLORATION DURING HIS WALK AROUND. INSPECTOR TOLD US 'YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE MAINT TAKE A LOOK WHEN YOU GET TO PIT (OUR DEST).' WE LEFT SEA AND ENRTE DECIDED TO NOTE INSPECTOR'S OBSERVATION FOR OUR MAINT. ON FURTHER CONTEMPLATION, WE SHOULD HAVE HAD SEA MAINT LOOK AT THE LEAK AND MEL'ED THE ACFT PRIOR TO FLT.

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.