Narrative:

Cleared to taxi to sju runway 8. Construction was underway at the airport and the runway hold short lines were painted on the parallel taxiway. While taxing for takeoff, I observed the hold short lines near the runway, but as we approached, it became clear that they had been painted over and that the lines on the parallel taxiway were controling. Technically, this was a runway incursion but there were no conflicts. As we were taxiing, it appeared that the hold short lines adjacent to the runway were controling. The ICAO runway hold short markings (signage) were not present. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the new lines on the parallel taxiway had not, to his knowledge, been notamed. He felt that the lines were placed there to assist in the movement of construction equipment that was working near the end of the departure runway 8, near taxiway Z. He could not remember exactly where the lines were but as he saw the old lines on taxiway Y the tower controller advised him that the 'hold lines were 300 ft behind you.' reporter cited the fact that he had been to sju airport a lot and had expected to see the hold lines on taxiway Y, not on the parallel taxiway. There was no associated 'sign' near the new hold lines. Aside from the short advisory call to him, ATC did not indicate any other problem or pending violations. Reporter feels that the new lines were not to keep aircraft separated but aircraft away from access to the work area where there might be vehicles present.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR PIC TAXIES PAST HOLD SHORT LINES PAINTED ON THE PARALLEL TXWY ON THE WAY TO AN ACTIVE RWY. CTLR ADVISES HIM OF THE DEV AFTER HE PASSES THE LINES.

Narrative: CLRED TO TAXI TO SJU RWY 8. CONSTRUCTION WAS UNDERWAY AT THE ARPT AND THE RWY HOLD SHORT LINES WERE PAINTED ON THE PARALLEL TXWY. WHILE TAXING FOR TKOF, I OBSERVED THE HOLD SHORT LINES NEAR THE RWY, BUT AS WE APCHED, IT BECAME CLR THAT THEY HAD BEEN PAINTED OVER AND THAT THE LINES ON THE PARALLEL TXWY WERE CTLING. TECHNICALLY, THIS WAS A RWY INCURSION BUT THERE WERE NO CONFLICTS. AS WE WERE TAXIING, IT APPEARED THAT THE HOLD SHORT LINES ADJACENT TO THE RWY WERE CTLING. THE ICAO RWY HOLD SHORT MARKINGS (SIGNAGE) WERE NOT PRESENT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE NEW LINES ON THE PARALLEL TXWY HAD NOT, TO HIS KNOWLEDGE, BEEN NOTAMED. HE FELT THAT THE LINES WERE PLACED THERE TO ASSIST IN THE MOVEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIP THAT WAS WORKING NEAR THE END OF THE DEP RWY 8, NEAR TXWY Z. HE COULD NOT REMEMBER EXACTLY WHERE THE LINES WERE BUT AS HE SAW THE OLD LINES ON TXWY Y THE TWR CTLR ADVISED HIM THAT THE 'HOLD LINES WERE 300 FT BEHIND YOU.' RPTR CITED THE FACT THAT HE HAD BEEN TO SJU ARPT A LOT AND HAD EXPECTED TO SEE THE HOLD LINES ON TXWY Y, NOT ON THE PARALLEL TXWY. THERE WAS NO ASSOCIATED 'SIGN' NEAR THE NEW HOLD LINES. ASIDE FROM THE SHORT ADVISORY CALL TO HIM, ATC DID NOT INDICATE ANY OTHER PROB OR PENDING VIOLATIONS. RPTR FEELS THAT THE NEW LINES WERE NOT TO KEEP ACFT SEPARATED BUT ACFT AWAY FROM ACCESS TO THE WORK AREA WHERE THERE MIGHT BE VEHICLES PRESENT.

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.