Narrative:

Apparently some petroleum based product was mixed with lavatory toilet fluid. This was removed prior to flight and lavatory was closed off. We flew to msp with no fluid. Then flight attendant, without consulting me, wrote the lavatory up as having gasoline in it. I do not know this to be the fluid that was mixed with the blue fluid. Plus, the fluid had been removed anyway. The word 'gasoline' in the write-up caused all sorts of questions of which I have no answers. Being the fluid was off-loaded and the not very intense fumes were removed by pressurization, I elected to fly the aircraft with a light load of passenger to msp where fluid was available. My personal opinion was there was no imminent danger. Supplemental information from acn 449977: the flight attendants noted an odd odor from the aft lavatories, despite the fact that they had been svced on the last leg. Ramp personnel were contacted regarding having the lavatories resvced. They replied that the lavatory service truck was broken. Ramp personnel then said, 'we will find a way to get it done.' about 10 mins to departure, the flight attendants claimed that the aft lavatories now smelled like kerosene. The reporter went to investigate, and found that the left aft lavatory smelled normal, while the right aft lavatory smelled slightly odd, but not of kerosene or any other petroleum product. Rather it smelled like a disinfectant or adhesive. The conclusion was that the odor was from some type of cleaner or disinfectant, or from an adhesive or tank sealant. The flight attendants remained concerned about the odor. The captain elected to have the fluid removed from both aft lavatories. No log entry was felt to be required. On descent into the next station, the lead flight attendant took the cabin logbook and wrote up the odd smell. In her discrepancy report, she claimed that the ramp agent informed her that sometimes gasoline leaks into the lavatory fluid from the truck, and that both lavatories need to be flushed before further use. This information never reached the flight crew, nor was the discrepancy discussed with the flight crew prior to departure. The miscom between the cabin and the flight crew was significant. After the decision was made to remove the fluid from both lavatories, none of the cabin crew expressed any concern with this remedy. During the 3 hour flight from spokane to the next stop, there was no contact at all with the cabin crew in any way, despite the light passenger load. This was unusual, and was an indication that the cabin crew was not satisfied with the resolution of the problem. It was also highly unusual that the lead flight attendant would make an entry in the cabin logbook without consulting the flight crew first. As a result of this incident, the reporter will make changes in the way that cabin concerns were handled. All concerns will be explicitly addressed, no matter how minor. A consensus from the entire cabin staff will be required prior to proceeding on a course of action, subject to captain's authority/authorized. 100% complete communications will be required. Supplemental information from acn 449992: I believe there was a communication breakdown, if the lead felt it was unsafe to operate the flight, she should have said something before we departed spokane.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B727 FLC IS CONCERNED OVER THE LEAD CABIN ATTENDANT WRITING UP THE AFT LAVATORY HAVING GASOLINE VAPORS AFTER THE FLUIDS HAD BEEN DUMPED BECAUSE OF A STRANGE ODOR. GEG, WA.

Narrative: APPARENTLY SOME PETROLEUM BASED PRODUCT WAS MIXED WITH LAVATORY TOILET FLUID. THIS WAS REMOVED PRIOR TO FLT AND LAVATORY WAS CLOSED OFF. WE FLEW TO MSP WITH NO FLUID. THEN FLT ATTENDANT, WITHOUT CONSULTING ME, WROTE THE LAVATORY UP AS HAVING GASOLINE IN IT. I DO NOT KNOW THIS TO BE THE FLUID THAT WAS MIXED WITH THE BLUE FLUID. PLUS, THE FLUID HAD BEEN REMOVED ANYWAY. THE WORD 'GASOLINE' IN THE WRITE-UP CAUSED ALL SORTS OF QUESTIONS OF WHICH I HAVE NO ANSWERS. BEING THE FLUID WAS OFF-LOADED AND THE NOT VERY INTENSE FUMES WERE REMOVED BY PRESSURIZATION, I ELECTED TO FLY THE ACFT WITH A LIGHT LOAD OF PAX TO MSP WHERE FLUID WAS AVAILABLE. MY PERSONAL OPINION WAS THERE WAS NO IMMINENT DANGER. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 449977: THE FLT ATTENDANTS NOTED AN ODD ODOR FROM THE AFT LAVATORIES, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THEY HAD BEEN SVCED ON THE LAST LEG. RAMP PERSONNEL WERE CONTACTED REGARDING HAVING THE LAVATORIES RESVCED. THEY REPLIED THAT THE LAVATORY SVC TRUCK WAS BROKEN. RAMP PERSONNEL THEN SAID, 'WE WILL FIND A WAY TO GET IT DONE.' ABOUT 10 MINS TO DEP, THE FLT ATTENDANTS CLAIMED THAT THE AFT LAVATORIES NOW SMELLED LIKE KEROSENE. THE RPTR WENT TO INVESTIGATE, AND FOUND THAT THE L AFT LAVATORY SMELLED NORMAL, WHILE THE R AFT LAVATORY SMELLED SLIGHTLY ODD, BUT NOT OF KEROSENE OR ANY OTHER PETROLEUM PRODUCT. RATHER IT SMELLED LIKE A DISINFECTANT OR ADHESIVE. THE CONCLUSION WAS THAT THE ODOR WAS FROM SOME TYPE OF CLEANER OR DISINFECTANT, OR FROM AN ADHESIVE OR TANK SEALANT. THE FLT ATTENDANTS REMAINED CONCERNED ABOUT THE ODOR. THE CAPT ELECTED TO HAVE THE FLUID REMOVED FROM BOTH AFT LAVATORIES. NO LOG ENTRY WAS FELT TO BE REQUIRED. ON DSCNT INTO THE NEXT STATION, THE LEAD FLT ATTENDANT TOOK THE CABIN LOGBOOK AND WROTE UP THE ODD SMELL. IN HER DISCREPANCY RPT, SHE CLAIMED THAT THE RAMP AGENT INFORMED HER THAT SOMETIMES GASOLINE LEAKS INTO THE LAVATORY FLUID FROM THE TRUCK, AND THAT BOTH LAVATORIES NEED TO BE FLUSHED BEFORE FURTHER USE. THIS INFO NEVER REACHED THE FLC, NOR WAS THE DISCREPANCY DISCUSSED WITH THE FLC PRIOR TO DEP. THE MISCOM BTWN THE CABIN AND THE FLC WAS SIGNIFICANT. AFTER THE DECISION WAS MADE TO REMOVE THE FLUID FROM BOTH LAVATORIES, NONE OF THE CABIN CREW EXPRESSED ANY CONCERN WITH THIS REMEDY. DURING THE 3 HR FLT FROM SPOKANE TO THE NEXT STOP, THERE WAS NO CONTACT AT ALL WITH THE CABIN CREW IN ANY WAY, DESPITE THE LIGHT PAX LOAD. THIS WAS UNUSUAL, AND WAS AN INDICATION THAT THE CABIN CREW WAS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE RESOLUTION OF THE PROB. IT WAS ALSO HIGHLY UNUSUAL THAT THE LEAD FLT ATTENDANT WOULD MAKE AN ENTRY IN THE CABIN LOGBOOK WITHOUT CONSULTING THE FLC FIRST. AS A RESULT OF THIS INCIDENT, THE RPTR WILL MAKE CHANGES IN THE WAY THAT CABIN CONCERNS WERE HANDLED. ALL CONCERNS WILL BE EXPLICITLY ADDRESSED, NO MATTER HOW MINOR. A CONSENSUS FROM THE ENTIRE CABIN STAFF WILL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO PROCEEDING ON A COURSE OF ACTION, SUBJECT TO CAPT'S AUTH. 100% COMPLETE COMS WILL BE REQUIRED. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 449992: I BELIEVE THERE WAS A COM BREAKDOWN, IF THE LEAD FELT IT WAS UNSAFE TO OPERATE THE FLT, SHE SHOULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING BEFORE WE DEPARTED SPOKANE.

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.