Narrative:

North of stl, ATC advised rerte. On course, fuel would have arrived dfw at 10.2. The rerte was declined. ATC sad that might not be good enough, that emergency fuel declaration might be required. I said that could be done if minimum fuel was not good enough. ATC responded with a clearance to dfw via direct fsm buj arrival, with minimum fuel. I accepted and verified minimum fuel. On handoff, the next controller cleared me to dfw direct as an emergency. I responded that flight with minimum fuel was not emergency fuel. Each subsequent controller handled me as an emergency in spite of the minimum fuel update. The landing was uneventful, and tower and ground at dfw each had to be asked to secure the unneeded crash fire rescue equipment. Even with the direct dfw over stl, our arrival fuel was 10.9. Not enough to have taken the rerte and chanced our destination and alternate WX to deteriorate. There was metering in effect for the normal arrs. I suggest that when a minimum fuel situation occurs, that the proper terminology be used and the proper procedures followed. The ATC continuing the emergency fuel status of the flight was not required, and certainly wasteful of their resources and others displaced during the occurrence (their handling had the emergency been the actual situation, was flawless!).

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LGT CREW REFUSED A RERTE BECAUSE OF FUEL REMAINING AND DECLARED MINIMUM FUEL.

Narrative: N OF STL, ATC ADVISED RERTE. ON COURSE, FUEL WOULD HAVE ARRIVED DFW AT 10.2. THE RERTE WAS DECLINED. ATC SAD THAT MIGHT NOT BE GOOD ENOUGH, THAT EMER FUEL DECLARATION MIGHT BE REQUIRED. I SAID THAT COULD BE DONE IF MINIMUM FUEL WAS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. ATC RESPONDED WITH A CLRNC TO DFW VIA DIRECT FSM BUJ ARR, WITH MINIMUM FUEL. I ACCEPTED AND VERIFIED MINIMUM FUEL. ON HDOF, THE NEXT CTLR CLRED ME TO DFW DIRECT AS AN EMER. I RESPONDED THAT FLT WITH MINIMUM FUEL WAS NOT EMER FUEL. EACH SUBSEQUENT CTLR HANDLED ME AS AN EMER IN SPITE OF THE MINIMUM FUEL UPDATE. THE LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL, AND TWR AND GND AT DFW EACH HAD TO BE ASKED TO SECURE THE UNNEEDED CRASH FIRE RESCUE EQUIP. EVEN WITH THE DIRECT DFW OVER STL, OUR ARR FUEL WAS 10.9. NOT ENOUGH TO HAVE TAKEN THE RERTE AND CHANCED OUR DEST AND ALTERNATE WX TO DETERIORATE. THERE WAS METERING IN EFFECT FOR THE NORMAL ARRS. I SUGGEST THAT WHEN A MINIMUM FUEL SIT OCCURS, THAT THE PROPER TERMINOLOGY BE USED AND THE PROPER PROCS FOLLOWED. THE ATC CONTINUING THE EMER FUEL STATUS OF THE FLT WAS NOT REQUIRED, AND CERTAINLY WASTEFUL OF THEIR RESOURCES AND OTHERS DISPLACED DURING THE OCCURRENCE (THEIR HANDLING HAD THE EMER BEEN THE ACTUAL SIT, WAS FLAWLESS!).

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.