2 interps of 1 clearance.

Attributes
ACN	293975
Time
Date	199501
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1801 To 2400
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : sli
State Reference	CA
Altitude	msl bound lower : 4000 msl bound upper : 4000
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : sna
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	descent : approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : instructor
Qualification	pilot : atp pilot : cfi
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 20 flight time total : 4000 flight time type : 1500
ASRS Report	293975
Person 2
Affiliation	Other
Function	instruction : trainee
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : clearance other anomaly other
Independent Detector	other controllera
Resolutory Action	other
Consequence	Other
Supplementary
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Pilot Deviation
Situations
ATC Facility	procedure or policy : unspecified

Narrative:

As this is a radar environment, vectors are normally given to the final approach segment. We wished to execute the VOR 30 approach to lgb as published. So after being handed off from ont approach to socal approach we informed them of our request for the full VOR approach as published. We were then handed off to the final controller and he asked of our intentions to fly the published approach with the transition and procedure turn, and if the turn was going to be east of the VOR. We were a little confused as that both the VOR and ILS parallel each other and both have holding patterns depicted for procedure turns and both are southeast, not east, but close? We were informed that traffic permitting we would be allowed to continue, but may have to be taken off the approach and vectored to the ILS. We proceeded to the VOR, entered the published holding pattern for the procedure turn. Outbound from the VOR ATC requested us to report the turn inbound so as to give us clearance at that time. As we were turning inbound we confirmed twice with ATC that we were on the inbound turn. We were then cleared for the approach, no approach was specified. About the time we crossed the VOR inbound to the airport ATC got real excited. By this time it was apparent that there were 2 versions of our clearance, the one that we had because of what we requested and believed we got, and the one that ATC thought he had given us. We were never told to expect or that we were cleared for a particular approach. We had only been told that if there was a problem we would be taken off the approach and vectored to the ILS. ATC was under the impression that we were cleared for the ILS, not the VOR. Contributing factors were we did not confirm with the second controller that we were getting the VOR approach, and ATC appeared to be a little confused as to what the published procedure was, and was not paying much attention to where we were and what we were doing. If he had, I doubt if he would have cleared us for the approach when he did.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: 2 INTERPS OF 1 CLRNC.

Narrative: AS THIS IS A RADAR ENVIRONMENT, VECTORS ARE NORMALLY GIVEN TO THE FINAL APCH SEGMENT. WE WISHED TO EXECUTE THE VOR 30 APCH TO LGB AS PUBLISHED. SO AFTER BEING HANDED OFF FROM ONT APCH TO SOCAL APCH WE INFORMED THEM OF OUR REQUEST FOR THE FULL VOR APCH AS PUBLISHED. WE WERE THEN HANDED OFF TO THE FINAL CTLR AND HE ASKED OF OUR INTENTIONS TO FLY THE PUBLISHED APCH WITH THE TRANSITION AND PROC TURN, AND IF THE TURN WAS GOING TO BE E OF THE VOR. WE WERE A LITTLE CONFUSED AS THAT BOTH THE VOR AND ILS PARALLEL EACH OTHER AND BOTH HAVE HOLDING PATTERNS DEPICTED FOR PROC TURNS AND BOTH ARE SE, NOT E, BUT CLOSE? WE WERE INFORMED THAT TFC PERMITTING WE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE, BUT MAY HAVE TO BE TAKEN OFF THE APCH AND VECTORED TO THE ILS. WE PROCEEDED TO THE VOR, ENTERED THE PUBLISHED HOLDING PATTERN FOR THE PROC TURN. OUTBOUND FROM THE VOR ATC REQUESTED US TO RPT THE TURN INBOUND SO AS TO GIVE US CLRNC AT THAT TIME. AS WE WERE TURNING INBOUND WE CONFIRMED TWICE WITH ATC THAT WE WERE ON THE INBOUND TURN. WE WERE THEN CLRED FOR THE APCH, NO APCH WAS SPECIFIED. ABOUT THE TIME WE CROSSED THE VOR INBOUND TO THE ARPT ATC GOT REAL EXCITED. BY THIS TIME IT WAS APPARENT THAT THERE WERE 2 VERSIONS OF OUR CLRNC, THE ONE THAT WE HAD BECAUSE OF WHAT WE REQUESTED AND BELIEVED WE GOT, AND THE ONE THAT ATC THOUGHT HE HAD GIVEN US. WE WERE NEVER TOLD TO EXPECT OR THAT WE WERE CLRED FOR A PARTICULAR APCH. WE HAD ONLY BEEN TOLD THAT IF THERE WAS A PROB WE WOULD BE TAKEN OFF THE APCH AND VECTORED TO THE ILS. ATC WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT WE WERE CLRED FOR THE ILS, NOT THE VOR. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE WE DID NOT CONFIRM WITH THE SECOND CTLR THAT WE WERE GETTING THE VOR APCH, AND ATC APPEARED TO BE A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHAT THE PUBLISHED PROC WAS, AND WAS NOT PAYING MUCH ATTN TO WHERE WE WERE AND WHAT WE WERE DOING. IF HE HAD, I DOUBT IF HE WOULD HAVE CLRED US FOR THE APCH WHEN HE DID.

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.