Narrative:

At about XA40Z, while flying at FL310, about 90 NM north of ogden VOR, inbound on the cartr 1 arrival to slc, we received a clearance from ZLC 'air carrier X abcd, you're cleared to descend to FL240 at maximum forward speed.' I acknowledged the clearance verbatim. Shortly thereafter, center asked us what our altitude was and I responded, 'air carrier X abcd, passing FL300 for FL240 at maximum speed as requested.' the controller countered that the clearance had been for air carrier X abce and immediately cleared us to 16000 ft at normal speed. Further conversation centered around similar flight numbers, etc. Upon arrival at slc, I met with the flight crew of air carrier X abce who reassured me that the controller was mistaken and had cleared air carrier X abcd originally as I expected. Approximately 6 months ago, my company notified me that the FAA was filing an altitude violation against me under similar circumstances around slc, only to determine later that the alleged violation happened to an air carrier X crew on the same flight the day before mine, and that there had been a mixup with regards to interpretation of zulu times. Nevertheless, the slc arrival corridors remain one of the worst pilot altitude violation traps in this country due to controller workloads and experience levels, and complicated arrival plate procedures. The arrival plates should be simplified, or done away with completely. I have no solution with regard to the controllers.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR B727 CAPT RPTS THAT ZLC USED ANOTHER ACFT'S CALL SIGN WHEN CALLING HIM. THE OTHER ACFT'S CAPT CONFIRMED THIS. THE RPTR DISLIKES THE ATC SIT AND THE CTLRS AT ZLC IN GENERAL.

Narrative: AT ABOUT XA40Z, WHILE FLYING AT FL310, ABOUT 90 NM N OF OGDEN VOR, INBOUND ON THE CARTR 1 ARR TO SLC, WE RECEIVED A CLRNC FROM ZLC 'ACR X ABCD, YOU'RE CLRED TO DSND TO FL240 AT MAX FORWARD SPD.' I ACKNOWLEDGED THE CLRNC VERBATIM. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, CTR ASKED US WHAT OUR ALT WAS AND I RESPONDED, 'ACR X ABCD, PASSING FL300 FOR FL240 AT MAX SPD AS REQUESTED.' THE CTLR COUNTERED THAT THE CLRNC HAD BEEN FOR ACR X ABCE AND IMMEDIATELY CLRED US TO 16000 FT AT NORMAL SPD. FURTHER CONVERSATION CTRED AROUND SIMILAR FLT NUMBERS, ETC. UPON ARR AT SLC, I MET WITH THE FLC OF ACR X ABCE WHO REASSURED ME THAT THE CTLR WAS MISTAKEN AND HAD CLRED ACR X ABCD ORIGINALLY AS I EXPECTED. APPROX 6 MONTHS AGO, MY COMPANY NOTIFIED ME THAT THE FAA WAS FILING AN ALT VIOLATION AGAINST ME UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES AROUND SLC, ONLY TO DETERMINE LATER THAT THE ALLEGED VIOLATION HAPPENED TO AN ACR X CREW ON THE SAME FLT THE DAY BEFORE MINE, AND THAT THERE HAD BEEN A MIXUP WITH REGARDS TO INTERP OF ZULU TIMES. NEVERTHELESS, THE SLC ARR CORRIDORS REMAIN ONE OF THE WORST PLT ALT VIOLATION TRAPS IN THIS COUNTRY DUE TO CTLR WORKLOADS AND EXPERIENCE LEVELS, AND COMPLICATED ARR PLATE PROCS. THE ARR PLATES SHOULD BE SIMPLIFIED, OR DONE AWAY WITH COMPLETELY. I HAVE NO SOLUTION WITH REGARD TO THE CTLRS.

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.