Narrative:

About 15 mins from pushback; my first officer's advised me that we had 4 dangerous goods forms that don't agree with our manual. Our manual states that we are to carry a maximum of 2000 pounds of dry ice in the forward cargo area and a maximum of 400 pounds in the aft compartment. When we add up the 4 sheets which were all loaded in the forward compartment; they equaled 2102 pounds. I called zone and expressed my concern that this had occurred and requested that ramp take off at least 102 pounds of dry ice. Zone deferred to ramp and they send a supervisor to the aircraft. Mr X told me on the jetway (in front of 2 customer service reps working the flight) that we didn't read the forms correctly. I told him our manual states no more than 2000 pounds in the total net quantity column and he proceeded to tell me that it meant no more than 2000 pounds in the net quantity per package column which by the way was in kilograms. Understanding that each kilo weighs 2.2 pounds; we had way less than 2000 pounds according to the supervisor's explanation. Still not convinced; I asked why our manual states it is the other column. He said that this is exactly the way it is and he was correct. In the interest of not taking a delay and having a ramp supervisor (who deals with this on a daily basis); we took his word for it. Once we were airborne; accomplished all of our flight duty tasks including circumnavigating many thunderstorm areas; we had time to revisit the dangerous goods forms and use this as a learning tool for future questions. Upon reading the manual; we realized that in fact; the supervisor was incorrect and in fact; we were over the maximum amount of dry ice that we are allowed to transport. We set up a satcom call with dispatch. After explaining our story to dispatch; she agreed with the flight crew that it appeared that ZZZ ramp had erred. She arranged for a 3 way call to ZZZ and got the supervisor on the line. Dispatch explained step by step how we came up with being overweight and the supervisor followed. It appeared that this was over the supervisor's head at this point (he was the supervisor who made the call to go) and he handed it over to his trainer. The trainer argued each point that dispatch made and finally he said that the flight crew did not properly use their math in determining how much each kilo weighed. He said that the kilogram had to be divided by 2.2 to come up with pounds at which point I interrupted the trainer and told him his math was wrong and in fact the kilogram needed to be multiplied by 2.2 to come up with the weight. Furthermore; I told him that the column that the supervisor referred incorrectly to was a net quantity per package which there were 34 aboard. Multiply the 28 kilo packages times 2.2 to get the pounds and then multiply by 34 packages; there in fact was 2102 pounds of dry ice aboard. At this point; there was much silence as the supervisor and trainer were frantically trying to figure out what was going on. After being prodded by dispatch about the time they were taking to figure this out (our flight was over gander approaching our gateway for oceanic flight); the trainer rudely blurted out that 'if the captain wants to land the airplane to take off only 102 pounds of dry ice; that is his prerogative.' I responded with a query. If we were 102 pounds over maximum gross weight; would we be legal for takeoff after all; it is only 102 pounds? There was no answer. Dispatch decided to end the call and seek other help. Dispatch called the flight duty manager who used his resources to find out an answer. In the meantime; I asked dispatch if she wanted to give the ok for me to continue; if cargo loading wanted to give me the ok to continue or if dispatch wanted to call the hazmat dangerous goods hotline for them to give me the ok to continue but I made it very clear that I was uncomfortable with continuing the flight contrary to our manual and there must be a reason why there is a maximum stated in the manual and that I was not willing to jeopardize my licenses to do something that wasn't in compliance with the far's or our manual. I made this statement several times on the ACARS and onthe frequency. We now passed our gateway and were on our oceanic track west when we got the following ACARS message: the flight duty manager and B777 fleet captain says you are ok to press on to ZZZ1. Then we got another message shortly after that read.: also per cargo; this shipment arrived at XA53 local. By departure time; more than 100 pounds would've evaporated by your ETD dispatch. We are not sure how he came up with his calculations but if that were the case; shouldn't air carrier have had proper weights prior to takeoff since these weights are important to the total picture? Are the flight duty manager and flight captain allowed to make a decision contrary to our manual and air carrier policy in the interest of continuing on with a flight? Flight was continued and terminated at ZZZ1.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B777 WAS DISPATCHED WITH AN EXCESS OF DRY ICE BY ACR SHIPPING AGENTS WHO DID NOT UNDERSTAND THE LIMITATIONS OR THE KG TO LB CONVERSION PROCESS.

Narrative: ABOUT 15 MINS FROM PUSHBACK; MY FO'S ADVISED ME THAT WE HAD 4 DANGEROUS GOODS FORMS THAT DON'T AGREE WITH OUR MANUAL. OUR MANUAL STATES THAT WE ARE TO CARRY A MAX OF 2000 LBS OF DRY ICE IN THE FORWARD CARGO AREA AND A MAX OF 400 LBS IN THE AFT COMPARTMENT. WHEN WE ADD UP THE 4 SHEETS WHICH WERE ALL LOADED IN THE FORWARD COMPARTMENT; THEY EQUALED 2102 LBS. I CALLED ZONE AND EXPRESSED MY CONCERN THAT THIS HAD OCCURRED AND REQUESTED THAT RAMP TAKE OFF AT LEAST 102 LBS OF DRY ICE. ZONE DEFERRED TO RAMP AND THEY SEND A SUPVR TO THE ACFT. MR X TOLD ME ON THE JETWAY (IN FRONT OF 2 CUSTOMER SVC REPS WORKING THE FLT) THAT WE DIDN'T READ THE FORMS CORRECTLY. I TOLD HIM OUR MANUAL STATES NO MORE THAN 2000 LBS IN THE TOTAL NET QUANTITY COLUMN AND HE PROCEEDED TO TELL ME THAT IT MEANT NO MORE THAN 2000 LBS IN THE NET QUANTITY PER PACKAGE COLUMN WHICH BY THE WAY WAS IN KILOGRAMS. UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH KILO WEIGHS 2.2 LBS; WE HAD WAY LESS THAN 2000 LBS ACCORDING TO THE SUPVR'S EXPLANATION. STILL NOT CONVINCED; I ASKED WHY OUR MANUAL STATES IT IS THE OTHER COLUMN. HE SAID THAT THIS IS EXACTLY THE WAY IT IS AND HE WAS CORRECT. IN THE INTEREST OF NOT TAKING A DELAY AND HAVING A RAMP SUPVR (WHO DEALS WITH THIS ON A DAILY BASIS); WE TOOK HIS WORD FOR IT. ONCE WE WERE AIRBORNE; ACCOMPLISHED ALL OF OUR FLT DUTY TASKS INCLUDING CIRCUMNAVIGATING MANY TSTM AREAS; WE HAD TIME TO REVISIT THE DANGEROUS GOODS FORMS AND USE THIS AS A LEARNING TOOL FOR FUTURE QUESTIONS. UPON READING THE MANUAL; WE REALIZED THAT IN FACT; THE SUPVR WAS INCORRECT AND IN FACT; WE WERE OVER THE MAX AMOUNT OF DRY ICE THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO TRANSPORT. WE SET UP A SATCOM CALL WITH DISPATCH. AFTER EXPLAINING OUR STORY TO DISPATCH; SHE AGREED WITH THE FLT CREW THAT IT APPEARED THAT ZZZ RAMP HAD ERRED. SHE ARRANGED FOR A 3 WAY CALL TO ZZZ AND GOT THE SUPVR ON THE LINE. DISPATCH EXPLAINED STEP BY STEP HOW WE CAME UP WITH BEING OVERWT AND THE SUPVR FOLLOWED. IT APPEARED THAT THIS WAS OVER THE SUPVR'S HEAD AT THIS POINT (HE WAS THE SUPVR WHO MADE THE CALL TO GO) AND HE HANDED IT OVER TO HIS TRAINER. THE TRAINER ARGUED EACH POINT THAT DISPATCH MADE AND FINALLY HE SAID THAT THE FLT CREW DID NOT PROPERLY USE THEIR MATH IN DETERMINING HOW MUCH EACH KILO WEIGHED. HE SAID THAT THE KILOGRAM HAD TO BE DIVIDED BY 2.2 TO COME UP WITH LBS AT WHICH POINT I INTERRUPTED THE TRAINER AND TOLD HIM HIS MATH WAS WRONG AND IN FACT THE KILOGRAM NEEDED TO BE MULTIPLIED BY 2.2 TO COME UP WITH THE WT. FURTHERMORE; I TOLD HIM THAT THE COLUMN THAT THE SUPVR REFERRED INCORRECTLY TO WAS A NET QUANTITY PER PACKAGE WHICH THERE WERE 34 ABOARD. MULTIPLY THE 28 KILO PACKAGES TIMES 2.2 TO GET THE LBS AND THEN MULTIPLY BY 34 PACKAGES; THERE IN FACT WAS 2102 LBS OF DRY ICE ABOARD. AT THIS POINT; THERE WAS MUCH SILENCE AS THE SUPVR AND TRAINER WERE FRANTICALLY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON. AFTER BEING PRODDED BY DISPATCH ABOUT THE TIME THEY WERE TAKING TO FIGURE THIS OUT (OUR FLT WAS OVER GANDER APCHING OUR GATEWAY FOR OCEANIC FLT); THE TRAINER RUDELY BLURTED OUT THAT 'IF THE CAPT WANTS TO LAND THE AIRPLANE TO TAKE OFF ONLY 102 LBS OF DRY ICE; THAT IS HIS PREROGATIVE.' I RESPONDED WITH A QUERY. IF WE WERE 102 LBS OVER MAX GROSS WT; WOULD WE BE LEGAL FOR TKOF AFTER ALL; IT IS ONLY 102 LBS? THERE WAS NO ANSWER. DISPATCH DECIDED TO END THE CALL AND SEEK OTHER HELP. DISPATCH CALLED THE FLT DUTY MGR WHO USED HIS RESOURCES TO FIND OUT AN ANSWER. IN THE MEANTIME; I ASKED DISPATCH IF SHE WANTED TO GIVE THE OK FOR ME TO CONTINUE; IF CARGO LOADING WANTED TO GIVE ME THE OK TO CONTINUE OR IF DISPATCH WANTED TO CALL THE HAZMAT DANGEROUS GOODS HOTLINE FOR THEM TO GIVE ME THE OK TO CONTINUE BUT I MADE IT VERY CLR THAT I WAS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH CONTINUING THE FLT CONTRARY TO OUR MANUAL AND THERE MUST BE A REASON WHY THERE IS A MAX STATED IN THE MANUAL AND THAT I WAS NOT WILLING TO JEOPARDIZE MY LICENSES TO DO SOMETHING THAT WASN'T IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE FAR'S OR OUR MANUAL. I MADE THIS STATEMENT SEVERAL TIMES ON THE ACARS AND ONTHE FREQ. WE NOW PASSED OUR GATEWAY AND WERE ON OUR OCEANIC TRACK W WHEN WE GOT THE FOLLOWING ACARS MESSAGE: THE FLT DUTY MGR AND B777 FLEET CAPT SAYS YOU ARE OK TO PRESS ON TO ZZZ1. THEN WE GOT ANOTHER MESSAGE SHORTLY AFTER THAT READ.: ALSO PER CARGO; THIS SHIPMENT ARRIVED AT XA53 LCL. BY DEP TIME; MORE THAN 100 LBS WOULD'VE EVAPORATED BY YOUR ETD DISPATCH. WE ARE NOT SURE HOW HE CAME UP WITH HIS CALCULATIONS BUT IF THAT WERE THE CASE; SHOULDN'T ACR HAVE HAD PROPER WTS PRIOR TO TKOF SINCE THESE WTS ARE IMPORTANT TO THE TOTAL PICTURE? ARE THE FLT DUTY MGR AND FLT CAPT ALLOWED TO MAKE A DECISION CONTRARY TO OUR MANUAL AND ACR POLICY IN THE INTEREST OF CONTINUING ON WITH A FLT? FLT WAS CONTINUED AND TERMINATED AT ZZZ1.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of May 2009 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.