Narrative:

We landed on runway 14 at the NAS airport as a a regularly scheduled far 121 flight. I was the flying pilot and aircraft control was xferred to the captain, per standard operating procedure as set forth in our specific airline manual. While rolling out on runway 14, tower advised us to exit taxiway 'bravo' and contact ground 121.7. While still on runway 14, tower cleared another aircraft for takeoff on runway 14. Our approximately distance from the taxiway was 100-300 ft. Therefore, we made turn to the taxiway, I switched the radio frequency and contacted ground control. Upon contacting ground, the controller asked for our departing airport and we advised our departing airport. The ground controller then advised, 'hold your position' not specifically stating where to hold. We stop the aircraft upon receiving the clearance. At the time we received our clearance to hold, the aircraft entered the 'hotel' taxiway. The ground controller then asked if we received and understood the 'hold your position' clearance and informed us we violated her instructions. We advised the controller we received her clearance, but already entered the 'hotel' taxiway at the time she relayed her clearance. We entered the 'hotel' taxiway due to the length of the ATR72 aircraft and the very short distance of taxiway 'bravo' which has neither a 'holding position marking for txwys' or a 'runway boundary sign' to ensure we were clear of runway 14, which had an aircraft that already received takeoff clearance. It is my opinion that we made the correct decision to enter taxiway 'hotel to ensure we were clear of runway 14. It is also my opinion that the following were contributing factors: 1) excessive speed entering taxiway 'bravo due to additional aircraft receiving takeoff clearance before we started clearing runway 14. 2) absence of taxiway markings/boundary signs. 3) nonstd terminology by ground control. After we explained our actions to the ground controller, we taxied to the parking area for our company operations after receiving further taxi clearance. The crew was well rested and fatigue did not play any part in our decision making. I believe to prevent a recurrence of the event: the airport needs to have clearly marked txwys and or signs. The airport has some markings, but the markings are not consistent and in some places are 'non-existent.' furthermore, although this incident happened during daylight VMC conditions, many taxiway lights are obscured by high grass/weeds, which adversely affects night operations at the mynn airport, which could lead to a similar incident in the future.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATR72 CREW IMPINGED ON TXWY H WHILE CLEARING RWY 14 AT MYNN.

Narrative: WE LANDED ON RWY 14 AT THE NAS ARPT AS A A REGULARLY SCHEDULED FAR 121 FLT. I WAS THE FLYING PLT AND ACFT CTL WAS XFERRED TO THE CAPT, PER STD OPERATING PROC AS SET FORTH IN OUR SPECIFIC AIRLINE MANUAL. WHILE ROLLING OUT ON RWY 14, TWR ADVISED US TO EXIT TXWY 'BRAVO' AND CONTACT GND 121.7. WHILE STILL ON RWY 14, TWR CLRED ANOTHER ACFT FOR TKOF ON RWY 14. OUR APPROX DISTANCE FROM THE TXWY WAS 100-300 FT. THEREFORE, WE MADE TURN TO THE TXWY, I SWITCHED THE RADIO FREQ AND CONTACTED GND CTL. UPON CONTACTING GND, THE CTLR ASKED FOR OUR DEPARTING ARPT AND WE ADVISED OUR DEPARTING ARPT. THE GND CTLR THEN ADVISED, 'HOLD YOUR POS' NOT SPECIFICALLY STATING WHERE TO HOLD. WE STOP THE ACFT UPON RECEIVING THE CLRNC. AT THE TIME WE RECEIVED OUR CLRNC TO HOLD, THE ACFT ENTERED THE 'HOTEL' TXWY. THE GND CTLR THEN ASKED IF WE RECEIVED AND UNDERSTOOD THE 'HOLD YOUR POS' CLRNC AND INFORMED US WE VIOLATED HER INSTRUCTIONS. WE ADVISED THE CTLR WE RECEIVED HER CLRNC, BUT ALREADY ENTERED THE 'HOTEL' TXWY AT THE TIME SHE RELAYED HER CLRNC. WE ENTERED THE 'HOTEL' TXWY DUE TO THE LENGTH OF THE ATR72 ACFT AND THE VERY SHORT DISTANCE OF TXWY 'BRAVO' WHICH HAS NEITHER A 'HOLDING POS MARKING FOR TXWYS' OR A 'RWY BOUNDARY SIGN' TO ENSURE WE WERE CLR OF RWY 14, WHICH HAD AN ACFT THAT ALREADY RECEIVED TKOF CLRNC. IT IS MY OPINION THAT WE MADE THE CORRECT DECISION TO ENTER TXWY 'HOTEL TO ENSURE WE WERE CLR OF RWY 14. IT IS ALSO MY OPINION THAT THE FOLLOWING WERE CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: 1) EXCESSIVE SPEED ENTERING TXWY 'BRAVO DUE TO ADDITIONAL ACFT RECEIVING TKOF CLRNC BEFORE WE STARTED CLEARING RWY 14. 2) ABSENCE OF TXWY MARKINGS/BOUNDARY SIGNS. 3) NONSTD TERMINOLOGY BY GND CTL. AFTER WE EXPLAINED OUR ACTIONS TO THE GND CTLR, WE TAXIED TO THE PARKING AREA FOR OUR COMPANY OPS AFTER RECEIVING FURTHER TAXI CLRNC. THE CREW WAS WELL RESTED AND FATIGUE DID NOT PLAY ANY PART IN OUR DECISION MAKING. I BELIEVE TO PREVENT A RECURRENCE OF THE EVENT: THE ARPT NEEDS TO HAVE CLEARLY MARKED TXWYS AND OR SIGNS. THE ARPT HAS SOME MARKINGS, BUT THE MARKINGS ARE NOT CONSISTENT AND IN SOME PLACES ARE 'NON-EXISTENT.' FURTHERMORE, ALTHOUGH THIS INCIDENT HAPPENED DURING DAYLIGHT VMC CONDITIONS, MANY TXWY LIGHTS ARE OBSCURED BY HIGH GRASS/WEEDS, WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECTS NIGHT OPS AT THE MYNN ARPT, WHICH COULD LEAD TO A SIMILAR INCIDENT IN THE FUTURE.

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.