Narrative:

At approximately XA05 EDT, oct/xa/97, after pushing back at gate at cle, I asked for a clearance to taxi. Because the clearance I received was issued quickly and was confusing, I asked him to repeat it. When repeated, he reissued it in a different format with additional instructions to taxi on the ramp around the B concourse and proceed to taxiway U. (I don't believe I repeated the clearance back, but instead just said 'roger.') while taxiing, I asked the first officer to check the airport chart to see if he could make some sense of the taxi route. After arriving on taxiway J, approximately 4-6 commuter-type aircraft were ahead of us and we fell in line. It soon became obvious why taxiway J was not used to cross runway 28, as it had barricades erected on it. We continued to follow the aircraft in front of us through taxiway U and onto runway 28. For approximately 5 mins, we sat on runway 28 and slowly moved up in line as the aircraft in front of us were cleared across runway 23L and onto runway 23R. When the commuter in front of us was cleared to cross runway 23L, I moved to a point short of the holding position that they and the other aircraft had previously occupied. (This was about a 30 degree heading to taxiway Z, with us still situated on runway 28.) after holding there for about 30 seconds, the aircraft on 1 1/2 mi final was told to 'go around because of an aircraft too close to the runway.' I asked the first officer if he thought we were the conflict and he replied that 'it must be another aircraft further down the runway.' I have since been informed by my flight manager that we in fact were the conflict and that the runway 23L hold line is situated on runway 28. The air carrier duty manager has learned that the violation at this intersection is not an isolated incident, but in fact is a 'hot topic' and happens quite regularly (over 20 times in the last 6 months, including several incidents where aircraft tried to take off on runway 28, by mistake, in the last 10 days). Apparently this has been such a problem area over the past yr, that numerous agencies/groups (the FAA in washington, dc, the cleveland tower, the local FAA FSDO, the city of cleveland, and even the local cleveland newspapers) are fully aware of it. To try and solve this problem, we have been told that the following has been changed at cle international: the phraseology of the ATIS, taxi instructions and how they are issued, to include a full readback by the pilot, the taxi route, blocking txwys (barricading txwys J and west), and recently adding 'wig-wag' lights to mark the runway 23L hold short line. I believe that one of the contributing factors to this possible incursion was the fact that the runway 23L hold short line is located on an active runway (which I don't ever recall seeing in my 34 yrs of private, military or commercial flying). This is possibly one of the reasons that the hold short line and wig-wag lights went unnoticed. As I spent 17 of my 30 yrs in the military in the 'safety business,' I am very interested in trying to help find a solution to this continuing problem area. Some suggestions would be to: 1) depict where this runway 23L hold short line is located on the expanded area on commercial chart. 2) add the runway 23L hold short line information on page xx (arrival/departure paragraph X, 'taxi caution' and departure, paragraph Y 'runway 23L/23R'). 3) paint the runway 23L hold short line with high visibility paint. 4) require that taxi instructions include that the runway 23L hold short line is located on runway 28 (note: the only place that explains where this line is located is page yy, coded taxi rtes, which are not normally read by the pilot unless he receives a color-coded route from ATC). 5) better suggestion (in a pilot's view) would be to only use taxiway J and hold short of runway 28. 6) direction signs for runways 23L/right and runway 28 could be painted on taxiway J and on runway 28 to prevent takeoffs on the wrong runway. It is still unclr to me why runway 28 is used for taxi purposes, especially since it is presently a 'hot topic' area and has been an area of concern for over 1 yr.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 ACFT MOVING UP TO HOLD SHORT LINE AT CLE ARPT APPARENTLY TAXIED TOO CLOSE TO ACTIVE RWY AND TWR LCL CTLR SENT ACFT ON FINAL APCH AROUND. RPTR CAPT INCLUDES SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVING THE ARPT MARKINGS AS WELL AS IMPROVED INFO ON THE ARPT PAGE TO ALERT FLCS OF THE PROB AREA.

Narrative: AT APPROX XA05 EDT, OCT/XA/97, AFTER PUSHING BACK AT GATE AT CLE, I ASKED FOR A CLRNC TO TAXI. BECAUSE THE CLRNC I RECEIVED WAS ISSUED QUICKLY AND WAS CONFUSING, I ASKED HIM TO REPEAT IT. WHEN REPEATED, HE REISSUED IT IN A DIFFERENT FORMAT WITH ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS TO TAXI ON THE RAMP AROUND THE B CONCOURSE AND PROCEED TO TXWY U. (I DON'T BELIEVE I REPEATED THE CLRNC BACK, BUT INSTEAD JUST SAID 'ROGER.') WHILE TAXIING, I ASKED THE FO TO CHK THE ARPT CHART TO SEE IF HE COULD MAKE SOME SENSE OF THE TAXI RTE. AFTER ARRIVING ON TXWY J, APPROX 4-6 COMMUTER-TYPE ACFT WERE AHEAD OF US AND WE FELL IN LINE. IT SOON BECAME OBVIOUS WHY TXWY J WAS NOT USED TO CROSS RWY 28, AS IT HAD BARRICADES ERECTED ON IT. WE CONTINUED TO FOLLOW THE ACFT IN FRONT OF US THROUGH TXWY U AND ONTO RWY 28. FOR APPROX 5 MINS, WE SAT ON RWY 28 AND SLOWLY MOVED UP IN LINE AS THE ACFT IN FRONT OF US WERE CLRED ACROSS RWY 23L AND ONTO RWY 23R. WHEN THE COMMUTER IN FRONT OF US WAS CLRED TO CROSS RWY 23L, I MOVED TO A POINT SHORT OF THE HOLDING POS THAT THEY AND THE OTHER ACFT HAD PREVIOUSLY OCCUPIED. (THIS WAS ABOUT A 30 DEG HDG TO TXWY Z, WITH US STILL SITUATED ON RWY 28.) AFTER HOLDING THERE FOR ABOUT 30 SECONDS, THE ACFT ON 1 1/2 MI FINAL WAS TOLD TO 'GAR BECAUSE OF AN ACFT TOO CLOSE TO THE RWY.' I ASKED THE FO IF HE THOUGHT WE WERE THE CONFLICT AND HE REPLIED THAT 'IT MUST BE ANOTHER ACFT FURTHER DOWN THE RWY.' I HAVE SINCE BEEN INFORMED BY MY FLT MGR THAT WE IN FACT WERE THE CONFLICT AND THAT THE RWY 23L HOLD LINE IS SITUATED ON RWY 28. THE ACR DUTY MGR HAS LEARNED THAT THE VIOLATION AT THIS INTXN IS NOT AN ISOLATED INCIDENT, BUT IN FACT IS A 'HOT TOPIC' AND HAPPENS QUITE REGULARLY (OVER 20 TIMES IN THE LAST 6 MONTHS, INCLUDING SEVERAL INCIDENTS WHERE ACFT TRIED TO TAKE OFF ON RWY 28, BY MISTAKE, IN THE LAST 10 DAYS). APPARENTLY THIS HAS BEEN SUCH A PROB AREA OVER THE PAST YR, THAT NUMEROUS AGENCIES/GROUPS (THE FAA IN WASHINGTON, DC, THE CLEVELAND TWR, THE LCL FAA FSDO, THE CITY OF CLEVELAND, AND EVEN THE LCL CLEVELAND NEWSPAPERS) ARE FULLY AWARE OF IT. TO TRY AND SOLVE THIS PROB, WE HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN CHANGED AT CLE INTL: THE PHRASEOLOGY OF THE ATIS, TAXI INSTRUCTIONS AND HOW THEY ARE ISSUED, TO INCLUDE A FULL READBACK BY THE PLT, THE TAXI RTE, BLOCKING TXWYS (BARRICADING TXWYS J AND W), AND RECENTLY ADDING 'WIG-WAG' LIGHTS TO MARK THE RWY 23L HOLD SHORT LINE. I BELIEVE THAT ONE OF THE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS TO THIS POSSIBLE INCURSION WAS THE FACT THAT THE RWY 23L HOLD SHORT LINE IS LOCATED ON AN ACTIVE RWY (WHICH I DON'T EVER RECALL SEEING IN MY 34 YRS OF PVT, MIL OR COMMERCIAL FLYING). THIS IS POSSIBLY ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE HOLD SHORT LINE AND WIG-WAG LIGHTS WENT UNNOTICED. AS I SPENT 17 OF MY 30 YRS IN THE MIL IN THE 'SAFETY BUSINESS,' I AM VERY INTERESTED IN TRYING TO HELP FIND A SOLUTION TO THIS CONTINUING PROB AREA. SOME SUGGESTIONS WOULD BE TO: 1) DEPICT WHERE THIS RWY 23L HOLD SHORT LINE IS LOCATED ON THE EXPANDED AREA ON COMMERCIAL CHART. 2) ADD THE RWY 23L HOLD SHORT LINE INFO ON PAGE XX (ARR/DEP PARAGRAPH X, 'TAXI CAUTION' AND DEP, PARAGRAPH Y 'RWY 23L/23R'). 3) PAINT THE RWY 23L HOLD SHORT LINE WITH HIGH VISIBILITY PAINT. 4) REQUIRE THAT TAXI INSTRUCTIONS INCLUDE THAT THE RWY 23L HOLD SHORT LINE IS LOCATED ON RWY 28 (NOTE: THE ONLY PLACE THAT EXPLAINS WHERE THIS LINE IS LOCATED IS PAGE YY, CODED TAXI RTES, WHICH ARE NOT NORMALLY READ BY THE PLT UNLESS HE RECEIVES A COLOR-CODED RTE FROM ATC). 5) BETTER SUGGESTION (IN A PLT'S VIEW) WOULD BE TO ONLY USE TXWY J AND HOLD SHORT OF RWY 28. 6) DIRECTION SIGNS FOR RWYS 23L/R AND RWY 28 COULD BE PAINTED ON TXWY J AND ON RWY 28 TO PREVENT TKOFS ON THE WRONG RWY. IT IS STILL UNCLR TO ME WHY RWY 28 IS USED FOR TAXI PURPOSES, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT IS PRESENTLY A 'HOT TOPIC' AREA AND HAS BEEN AN AREA OF CONCERN FOR OVER 1 YR.

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.