Air carrier Captain reported inaccurate Dangerous Goods documents and lack of ground equipment for proper ventilation for dry ice cargo.
Synopsis
Air carrier Captain reported inaccurate Dangerous Goods documents and lack of ground equipment for proper ventilation for dry ice cargo.
Narrative
Flight had MEL 49-XX-X-X in effect. No APU pneumatics. Upon ACARS initialization we received a dry ice notification that we rejected due to no air conditioning cart located plane side and needed to operate a pack without APU air. Load supervisor promptly came onboard and assured us planned dry ice load would be below 1;300 pounds. Mechanic then came onboard for face to face and noted our statement that we had dry ice but below required amount for an air conditioning cart. We asked if we could get air hooked up for ventilation. He stated the huffer cart needed for engine start was not able to serve as air conditioning cart; so he said he would arrange for an AC cart to be delivered. We were never informed of its delivery nor witnessing duct pressure increasing indicating it was plugged in. Upon load complete NOTOC was delivered onboard and we discovered dry ice load was now above 1;400 pounds threshold. Approximately 1;100 pounds of dry ice was loaded at position 3L. With the cargo door already closed; and at departure time; we continued pushback process with single engine start at the gate with a crossbleed start thereafter. There was a minor language barrier with the mechanic and used some of our preflight time with him to verify MEL status of aircraft. There was a LARGE language barrier with the load supervisor. It was apparent to us she was concerned she had authorized loading the can prior to verifying with us we had proper ventilation in accordance with our dry ice procedures.
Second reporter narrative
This flight was from ZZZZ-ZZZZ1. The 767 was dispatched with MEL 49-XX-X-X; APU pneumatics inoperative. When we got to the aircraft I had a question about the deferred items log and asked the FO to call ops and ask for a mechanic. Shortly after initialization of the ACARS; we got the message to turn on the air conditioning packs for dry ice. I rejected this message and included the MEL in the comments of the rejection. The mechanic came up and answered my question on the log and we asked him for an air conditioning cart and he said there wasn't one available; only a huffer to start the engine which could not power the packs. The load supervisor showed up and told us not to worry; the dry ice was now under 1300 pounds. When the loading was complete; the load supervisor came back upstairs with the NOTOC and informed us that they had gone over 1400 pounds of dry ice; total was 1479.8 pounds. Of this; 1113.6 pounds was loaded in a single container in position 3L. We blocked out and proceeded on our way to ZZZZ1. While airborne; I called dispatch and informed that we had over 1400 pounds loaded on the main deck and asked him to call ZZZZ1 and ask them to have an air conditioning cart available when we blocked in. It was only after blocking in at ZZZZ1 that the load supervisor and mechanic informed me that there were no air conditioning carts at all at the ZZZZ1 Airport. The load supervisor told me his plan was to unload the can at 3L and let the main deck air out prior to off loading the rest of the cargo.The load supervisor in ZZZZ should have let us know prior to loading at or above 1400 pounds of dry ice that she had been mistaken earlier when she told us there was going to be under 1300 pounds. When she brought the NOTOC up; she brought another load supervisor with her; but by that time the dry ice was already on the aircraft and we didn't know that ZZZZ1 had no air conditioning carts. I would think if it is known that there is going to be this much dry ice on an aircraft with no APU pneumatics; the locations would coordinate with one another and ensure both the load and unload can be accomplished while adhering to all company procedures.This should happen long before the pilots ever get to the aircraft.
More incidents for this aircraft family →
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.