Narrative:

Prior to landing, captain and I discussed pfn NOTAM for landing on runway 14 and exiting taxiway F, make 90 degree turn on taxiway a -- do not continue on taxiway F into general parking as it is not stressed for weight. There are 2 txwys off of taxiway F. One going into GA parking and one going to ramp. In reading NOTAM, captain understood NOTAM to mean not to go into the GA ramp and we did not. After passing parallel taxiway and approaching 'restr' taxiway (not known at the time), tower informed us that the taxiway ahead was not stressed for air carriers, however, that md-80 aircraft (our type) are often parked on this taxiway and we should proceed with caution, being careful of a bump at the end. We proceeded with no problems. In review, 2 recommendations: change airport plate to show this limited taxiway, it looks normal. Specify the NOTAM on flight plan to be more specific as to which taxiway to use rather than vague in which not to use. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter states the problem is an FBO who uses the taxiway for his operation. He complains to the airport manager regarding jets using it when it is not stressed. He called the airport manager as the reporter aircraft taxied in. Airport manager came directly to the plane and had a very positive and constructive conversation with the flight crew. They showed him the NOTAM and he agreed that the wording was confusing. Together they worked out a more easily interpreted wording and the airport manager will reissue the NOTAM with the new phrasing. End of story.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MISINTERPRETS NOTAM AND TAXIES ONTO UNSTRESSED TXWY AREA.

Narrative: PRIOR TO LNDG, CAPT AND I DISCUSSED PFN NOTAM FOR LNDG ON RWY 14 AND EXITING TXWY F, MAKE 90 DEG TURN ON TXWY A -- DO NOT CONTINUE ON TXWY F INTO GENERAL PARKING AS IT IS NOT STRESSED FOR WT. THERE ARE 2 TXWYS OFF OF TXWY F. ONE GOING INTO GA PARKING AND ONE GOING TO RAMP. IN READING NOTAM, CAPT UNDERSTOOD NOTAM TO MEAN NOT TO GO INTO THE GA RAMP AND WE DID NOT. AFTER PASSING PARALLEL TXWY AND APCHING 'RESTR' TXWY (NOT KNOWN AT THE TIME), TWR INFORMED US THAT THE TXWY AHEAD WAS NOT STRESSED FOR AIR CARRIERS, HOWEVER, THAT MD-80 ACFT (OUR TYPE) ARE OFTEN PARKED ON THIS TXWY AND WE SHOULD PROCEED WITH CAUTION, BEING CAREFUL OF A BUMP AT THE END. WE PROCEEDED WITH NO PROBS. IN REVIEW, 2 RECOMMENDATIONS: CHANGE ARPT PLATE TO SHOW THIS LIMITED TXWY, IT LOOKS NORMAL. SPECIFY THE NOTAM ON FLT PLAN TO BE MORE SPECIFIC AS TO WHICH TXWY TO USE RATHER THAN VAGUE IN WHICH NOT TO USE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATES THE PROB IS AN FBO WHO USES THE TXWY FOR HIS OP. HE COMPLAINS TO THE ARPT MGR REGARDING JETS USING IT WHEN IT IS NOT STRESSED. HE CALLED THE ARPT MGR AS THE RPTR ACFT TAXIED IN. ARPT MGR CAME DIRECTLY TO THE PLANE AND HAD A VERY POSITIVE AND CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATION WITH THE FLC. THEY SHOWED HIM THE NOTAM AND HE AGREED THAT THE WORDING WAS CONFUSING. TOGETHER THEY WORKED OUT A MORE EASILY INTERPRETED WORDING AND THE ARPT MGR WILL REISSUE THE NOTAM WITH THE NEW PHRASING. END OF STORY.

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