ACR FO EXHIBITS A MOD LEVEL OF CONCERN REGARDING THE FLC'S MINIMUM FUEL ADVISORY THEY GAVE ATC. LANDED WITH ADEQUATE FUEL. SINCE THE CTLR ASKED FOR FUEL IN MINS FLC THOUGHT CTLR INTERPRETED ADVISORY AS A DECLARATION OF AN EMER.

Narrative

DURING NON STOP FLT FROM SFO TO EWR GOT A MAJOR RERTE FROM ATC DUE TO WX IN THE CHICAGO/CLEVELAND AIRSPACE. IT ADDED 45 MINS TO FLT TIME AND DROPPED OUR PLANNED LNDG FUEL FROM 11800 LBS TO 6400 LBS. WHEN STILL ABOUT 1 HR FROM EWR; ZBW CLRED US TO MAINTAIN 33000 FT AND EXPECT 27000 FT BY ART. THIS PREMATURE DSCNT WOULD HAVE DROPPED OUR LNDG FUEL TO ABOUT 5000 LBS OR LESS; WHICH WOULD HAVE GIVEN US LESS THAN 45 MINS FUEL RESERVES AT EWR. AT THIS TIME THE CAPT DECLARED A 'FUEL ADVISORY' OR 'MINIMUM FUEL ADVISORY.' OUR 'FOM' STATES THAT THIS IS NOT AN EMER SIT AND IT DOES NOT IMPLY THE NEED FOR TFC PRIORITY. HOWEVER; WE THINK THAT WE WERE GIVEN TFC PRIORITY BY ATC AND ALSO WERE ASKED 2 OR 3 TIMES ABOUT OUR FUEL REMAINING IN MINS. SINCE THE WX AT EWR AND AT OTHER AREA ARPTS WAS GOOD; I FEEL THAT WE WERE NEVER IN A DANGEROUS SIT. BECAUSE OF HAVING STAYED AT ALT UNTIL CLOSE TO EWR; OUR FUEL AT THE GATE WAS 7300 LBS; WHICH GAVE US MORE THAN THE LEGAL RESERVES REQUIRED FOR THE CONDITIONS. I THINK THAT DECLARING A MINIMUM FUEL ADVISORY WAS THE CORRECT JUDGEMENT GIVEN THE CIRCUMSTANCES; EVEN THOUGH IT WAS BORDERLINE. I SHOULD ADD THAT MOST OF US LIKE TO LAND THIS AIRPLANE WITH NO LESS THAN 9000 LBS OF FUEL EVEN THOUGH THE MINIMUM LNDG FUEL IS 1800 LBS (JUST ENOUGH FOR A VFR GAR; CLOSE PATTERN AND LNDG).