Narrative:

Departing tul in the evening and moderate turbulence is reported. I was given the richy 5 departure with a tilts transition and an assigned altitude of 15000'. After departure I climbed to 15000' and was nwbnd to the VOR. I climbed immediately to 15000' due to turbulence and high terrain and in addition to avoid possible conflicting traffic. I was told by the controller that I should have crossed richy intersection at 12000'. I am confused because the chart says southeast and swbnd traffic had to be at 12000'. My intent was to descend to 12000' on my course reversal to richy intersection. If center wants us to cross at 12000' right at richy no matter to any direction of flight, it is not clear. Please note squaw valley VOR it clearly says cross at or above 11000'. I have talked to several pilots in our company and they all agree it is not clear at all, I believe it should be changed. Callback conversation with reporter revealed following information. Reporter states he has flown this same procedure many times and never been challenged before. Wants clarification and will call center for same. Many pilots he has spoken with agree that the interpretation he uses is correct.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ALT OVERSHOOT ON CLIMB OUT. EXCEEDED CROSSING RESTRICTION.

Narrative: DEPARTING TUL IN THE EVENING AND MODERATE TURB IS RPTED. I WAS GIVEN THE RICHY 5 DEP WITH A TILTS TRANSITION AND AN ASSIGNED ALT OF 15000'. AFTER DEP I CLBED TO 15000' AND WAS NWBND TO THE VOR. I CLBED IMMEDIATELY TO 15000' DUE TO TURB AND HIGH TERRAIN AND IN ADDITION TO AVOID POSSIBLE CONFLICTING TFC. I WAS TOLD BY THE CTLR THAT I SHOULD HAVE CROSSED RICHY INTXN AT 12000'. I AM CONFUSED BECAUSE THE CHART SAYS SE AND SWBND TFC HAD TO BE AT 12000'. MY INTENT WAS TO DSND TO 12000' ON MY COURSE REVERSAL TO RICHY INTXN. IF CENTER WANTS US TO CROSS AT 12000' RIGHT AT RICHY NO MATTER TO ANY DIRECTION OF FLT, IT IS NOT CLR. PLEASE NOTE SQUAW VALLEY VOR IT CLRLY SAYS CROSS AT OR ABOVE 11000'. I HAVE TALKED TO SEVERAL PLTS IN OUR COMPANY AND THEY ALL AGREE IT IS NOT CLR AT ALL, I BELIEVE IT SHOULD BE CHANGED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED FOLLOWING INFO. RPTR STATES HE HAS FLOWN THIS SAME PROC MANY TIMES AND NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED BEFORE. WANTS CLARIFICATION AND WILL CALL CENTER FOR SAME. MANY PLTS HE HAS SPOKEN WITH AGREE THAT THE INTERPRETATION HE USES IS CORRECT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.