Narrative:

I had contacted maintenance control in ZZZZ to ask them about the oil level in the #2 engine. I had noticed that it had burned 3 quarts on the way to ZZZZ from ZZZ. I spoke to maintenance control and advised him that I was concerned about the oil level right on the minimum of 5.2 quarts for our 3 hour flight back to ZZZ. His reply was 'as long as it is in the green we are ok.' my first officer and I monitored the status #2 engine throughout the flight. After the #2 engine start; we noticed the oil level dropped to 3.6 quarts still in the green (or in this case white). On the takeoff roll; it dropped down to 2.7 quarts until around 5;000 ft; it then returned to 3.4 quarts. Throughout the flight; I monitored the level along with oil pressure and temperature all seemed to be normal. About 1 hour 30 minutes from ZZZ the level dropped down to 3.2 quarts and was steady for the remainder of the flight. Upon landing in ZZZ and taxi in to the gate; after 2 minutes we shut down #2 engine only to receive an EICAS message '#2 engine oil low level' warning. At this time the oil level was at 4.1 quarts in the amber. I proceeded to write it up and called maintenance control to advise him. Maintenance controller advised me that maintenance was on the way to do a service check and that they would top it off with oil. I said that is fine but we still need to put this in the book. I felt like I was getting some resistance from the maintenance control and the maintenance personnel who were servicing the aircraft. My responsibility is to write it up; not be asked or suggested to not have to put this in the maintenance log. This EICAS message happened well before I even blocked in to the gate. Part of maintenance control responsibilities to recognize that there is a problem and this was problem that should have been followed under power plant oil consumption program which would have directed him to start monitoring the consumption instead of 'topping it off with oil.'

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An ERJ170 flight crew experienced high oil consumption and low oil quantity during their flight and wrote it up inbound. The reporter expressed some concern about the company's handling of the write up.

Narrative: I had contacted Maintenance Control in ZZZZ to ask them about the oil level in the #2 engine. I had noticed that it had burned 3 quarts on the way to ZZZZ from ZZZ. I spoke to Maintenance Control and advised him that I was concerned about the oil level right on the minimum of 5.2 quarts for our 3 hour flight back to ZZZ. His reply was 'as long as it is in the green we are OK.' My First Officer and I monitored the status #2 engine throughout the flight. After the #2 engine start; we noticed the oil level dropped to 3.6 quarts still in the green (or in this case white). On the takeoff roll; it dropped down to 2.7 quarts until around 5;000 FT; it then returned to 3.4 quarts. Throughout the flight; I monitored the level along with oil pressure and temperature all seemed to be normal. About 1 hour 30 minutes from ZZZ the level dropped down to 3.2 quarts and was steady for the remainder of the flight. Upon landing in ZZZ and taxi in to the gate; after 2 minutes we shut down #2 engine only to receive an EICAS message '#2 engine oil low level' warning. At this time the oil level was at 4.1 quarts in the amber. I proceeded to write it up and called Maintenance Control to advise him. Maintenance Controller advised me that Maintenance was on the way to do a service check and that they would top it off with oil. I said that is fine but we still need to put this in the book. I felt like I was getting some resistance from the Maintenance Control and the maintenance personnel who were servicing the aircraft. My responsibility is to write it up; not be asked or suggested to not have to put this in the Maintenance log. This EICAS message happened well before I even blocked in to the gate. Part of Maintenance Control responsibilities to recognize that there is a problem and this was problem that should have been followed under power plant oil consumption program which would have directed him to start monitoring the consumption instead of 'topping it off with oil.'

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.