Narrative:

We were on a revenue flight from atl to dhn. At approximately 120 mi out of dhn, we got the dhn ASOS. It said that the southeast portion of taxiway a had its taxiway lights out. It also said the tower had closed for the night. At approximately 40 mi outside the airport, ZJX advised us that the southeast portion of taxiway a had taxiway lights out. We (captain and myself) discussed and agreed to land. The runway lights were on and set to medium intensity and we planned to land on runway 32 and depart the runway at taxiway D, which is on the northwest end of taxiway a. We landed on runway 32, and turned off the runway at taxiway D. We turned left on taxiway a toward the ramp. This portion of taxiway a had taxiway lights. As we continued, we saw that the taxiway lights were unlit for a short portion of taxiway a. We had to taxi without taxiway lights, but the taxiway was well lit from fluorescent lights from an FBO ramp and the taxiway had centerline marking. The next day, we asked the chief pilot and flight manager about the situation. They were unsure as to whether it was legal to taxi without taxi lights under the far's. We both felt it was safe operation, but was it legal? If you could respond on the matter, we would appreciate it. Also, I would like to say that the taxi lights being out was not in the NOTAMS and we were unaware until the ASOS at dhn. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: it was clarified with reporter regarding the airport taxiway lighting not being required lighting per far 121(B)(2)(ii).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CL65 FLC TAXIED TO PARKING WITHOUT SOME ARPT TXWY LIGHTING DUE TO A MALFUNCTION IN THE LIGHTING SYS.

Narrative: WE WERE ON A REVENUE FLT FROM ATL TO DHN. AT APPROX 120 MI OUT OF DHN, WE GOT THE DHN ASOS. IT SAID THAT THE SE PORTION OF TXWY A HAD ITS TXWY LIGHTS OUT. IT ALSO SAID THE TWR HAD CLOSED FOR THE NIGHT. AT APPROX 40 MI OUTSIDE THE ARPT, ZJX ADVISED US THAT THE SE PORTION OF TXWY A HAD TXWY LIGHTS OUT. WE (CAPT AND MYSELF) DISCUSSED AND AGREED TO LAND. THE RWY LIGHTS WERE ON AND SET TO MEDIUM INTENSITY AND WE PLANNED TO LAND ON RWY 32 AND DEPART THE RWY AT TXWY D, WHICH IS ON THE NW END OF TXWY A. WE LANDED ON RWY 32, AND TURNED OFF THE RWY AT TXWY D. WE TURNED L ON TXWY A TOWARD THE RAMP. THIS PORTION OF TXWY A HAD TXWY LIGHTS. AS WE CONTINUED, WE SAW THAT THE TXWY LIGHTS WERE UNLIT FOR A SHORT PORTION OF TXWY A. WE HAD TO TAXI WITHOUT TXWY LIGHTS, BUT THE TXWY WAS WELL LIT FROM FLUORESCENT LIGHTS FROM AN FBO RAMP AND THE TXWY HAD CTRLINE MARKING. THE NEXT DAY, WE ASKED THE CHIEF PLT AND FLT MGR ABOUT THE SIT. THEY WERE UNSURE AS TO WHETHER IT WAS LEGAL TO TAXI WITHOUT TAXI LIGHTS UNDER THE FAR'S. WE BOTH FELT IT WAS SAFE OP, BUT WAS IT LEGAL? IF YOU COULD RESPOND ON THE MATTER, WE WOULD APPRECIATE IT. ALSO, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THE TAXI LIGHTS BEING OUT WAS NOT IN THE NOTAMS AND WE WERE UNAWARE UNTIL THE ASOS AT DHN. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: IT WAS CLARIFIED WITH RPTR REGARDING THE ARPT TXWY LIGHTING NOT BEING REQUIRED LIGHTING PER FAR 121(B)(2)(II).

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.