Narrative:

Flight XXX, rno to sfo scheduled XA15 departure. Paperwork indicated no open or deferred maintenance write-ups. Preflight activities routine (ie, busy). My leg, first flight of a 5 leg day. Departure briefing lengthier than normal due to complicated engine failure on takeoff terrain avoidance procedure and having a jump seater in the cockpit who required briefing. Just moments before departure the lead flight attendant handed the written count of aircraft occupants to our jump seater, who placed the paper towel on the center pedestal, all without comment. Received our final weight manifest via ACARS and looked at the paper towel to verify the flight attendant's passenger number with the station number. While doing so, I noticed a note also written on the towel regarding 'something needed,' which I believed to be cabin supplies to be requested from our sfo station. Pushback, engine start and taxi normal. During the taxi out, I looked at the towel again and read the note, 'need seat belt seat XXX.' I made note of this mentally, believing a seat belt was dirty or soiled and could use replacing in sfo. Climb out normal. Began cruise. After our routine cruise activities were complete on the short 31 min leg, I mentioned to the captain the note and the apparent need to have a seat belt replaced in sfo. The captain contacted the lead flight attendant and to our surprise, learned that the seat in question had no seat belt whatsoever. The problem is that we violated FARS by not having the discrepancy declared and addressed prior to pushback in rno. The captain wrote up the seat belt en route. On the ground in sfo and after the passenger and jump seater had deplaned, the captain spoke with the lead flight attendant. He stated that aircraft discrepancies need to be positively verbalized, not just written. He explained how he and I had just violated FARS. The flight attendant mentioned that someone she believed to be a rno mechanic had mentioned the lack of seat belt to her in rno. The captain also contacted rno maintenance to investigate further. Human performance considerations center around communications. The error chain began with rno maintenance. They should have notified the captain. The flight attendant should have verbalized the written note. Further, I should have fully read the note initially and inquired to understand it fully. I perceived that new aircraft problems would be verbalized, not just written. The flight attendant perceived that the mechanic had already spoken to us. Contributing might have been the early hour reporting time, the long previous day's 7.3 hour, 4 legs worth of flying, the delay getting to our rooms at the hotel, and the high workload involved with a full load departing rno to the south with a complicated engine out procedure.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-300 DEPARTS WITH MISSING PAX SEAT BELT.

Narrative: FLT XXX, RNO TO SFO SCHEDULED XA15 DEP. PAPERWORK INDICATED NO OPEN OR DEFERRED MAINT WRITE-UPS. PREFLT ACTIVITIES ROUTINE (IE, BUSY). MY LEG, FIRST FLT OF A 5 LEG DAY. DEP BRIEFING LENGTHIER THAN NORMAL DUE TO COMPLICATED ENG FAILURE ON TKOF TERRAIN AVOIDANCE PROC AND HAVING A JUMP SEATER IN THE COCKPIT WHO REQUIRED BRIEFING. JUST MOMENTS BEFORE DEP THE LEAD FLT ATTENDANT HANDED THE WRITTEN COUNT OF ACFT OCCUPANTS TO OUR JUMP SEATER, WHO PLACED THE PAPER TOWEL ON THE CTR PEDESTAL, ALL WITHOUT COMMENT. RECEIVED OUR FINAL WT MANIFEST VIA ACARS AND LOOKED AT THE PAPER TOWEL TO VERIFY THE FLT ATTENDANT'S PAX NUMBER WITH THE STATION NUMBER. WHILE DOING SO, I NOTICED A NOTE ALSO WRITTEN ON THE TOWEL REGARDING 'SOMETHING NEEDED,' WHICH I BELIEVED TO BE CABIN SUPPLIES TO BE REQUESTED FROM OUR SFO STATION. PUSHBACK, ENG START AND TAXI NORMAL. DURING THE TAXI OUT, I LOOKED AT THE TOWEL AGAIN AND READ THE NOTE, 'NEED SEAT BELT SEAT XXX.' I MADE NOTE OF THIS MENTALLY, BELIEVING A SEAT BELT WAS DIRTY OR SOILED AND COULD USE REPLACING IN SFO. CLBOUT NORMAL. BEGAN CRUISE. AFTER OUR ROUTINE CRUISE ACTIVITIES WERE COMPLETE ON THE SHORT 31 MIN LEG, I MENTIONED TO THE CAPT THE NOTE AND THE APPARENT NEED TO HAVE A SEAT BELT REPLACED IN SFO. THE CAPT CONTACTED THE LEAD FLT ATTENDANT AND TO OUR SURPRISE, LEARNED THAT THE SEAT IN QUESTION HAD NO SEAT BELT WHATSOEVER. THE PROB IS THAT WE VIOLATED FARS BY NOT HAVING THE DISCREPANCY DECLARED AND ADDRESSED PRIOR TO PUSHBACK IN RNO. THE CAPT WROTE UP THE SEAT BELT ENRTE. ON THE GND IN SFO AND AFTER THE PAX AND JUMP SEATER HAD DEPLANED, THE CAPT SPOKE WITH THE LEAD FLT ATTENDANT. HE STATED THAT ACFT DISCREPANCIES NEED TO BE POSITIVELY VERBALIZED, NOT JUST WRITTEN. HE EXPLAINED HOW HE AND I HAD JUST VIOLATED FARS. THE FLT ATTENDANT MENTIONED THAT SOMEONE SHE BELIEVED TO BE A RNO MECH HAD MENTIONED THE LACK OF SEAT BELT TO HER IN RNO. THE CAPT ALSO CONTACTED RNO MAINT TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER. HUMAN PERFORMANCE CONSIDERATIONS CTR AROUND COMS. THE ERROR CHAIN BEGAN WITH RNO MAINT. THEY SHOULD HAVE NOTIFIED THE CAPT. THE FLT ATTENDANT SHOULD HAVE VERBALIZED THE WRITTEN NOTE. FURTHER, I SHOULD HAVE FULLY READ THE NOTE INITIALLY AND INQUIRED TO UNDERSTAND IT FULLY. I PERCEIVED THAT NEW ACFT PROBS WOULD BE VERBALIZED, NOT JUST WRITTEN. THE FLT ATTENDANT PERCEIVED THAT THE MECH HAD ALREADY SPOKEN TO US. CONTRIBUTING MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE EARLY HR RPTING TIME, THE LONG PREVIOUS DAY'S 7.3 HR, 4 LEGS WORTH OF FLYING, THE DELAY GETTING TO OUR ROOMS AT THE HOTEL, AND THE HIGH WORKLOAD INVOLVED WITH A FULL LOAD DEPARTING RNO TO THE S WITH A COMPLICATED ENG OUT PROC.

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.