Narrative:

My first officer and I arrived at the hrl airport to begin our 7-LEG day, the last day of a 4-DAY pairing. Our inbound aircraft was on time and we performed a normal crew change. I did not notice which runway they had landed on, but I believe it was runway 17R. Cockpit preparation was normal. I scanned the hrl NOTAMS, but did not notice any items pertaining to runway closures (we had landed on runway 17R the previous evening). After start, we were cleared to taxi to runway 35L (opc = ok with 8 KT tailwind component) and cleared for takeoff, which was normal. The runway appeared perfectly svcable, with no construction or hazardous areas whatsoever. The flight was uneventful. I was not aware of any problems with runway closure until the next day when the chief called to inquire about these circumstances and to tell me that someone had reported us for taking off on closed runway 17R (it was actually runway 35L). During a subsequent call to the chief, I learned that hrl tower had allowed numerous aircraft to operate from this runway recently. We did not intentionally violate any far's or company policies and regulations. While I may have been remiss in not noticing a runway closure in the printed NOTAMS, any uncertainty that I felt was completely ameliorated by the normal visual appearance of the runway and the tower's approval to use it. Tower approval, based on my aviation experience, generally supersedes printed NOTAMS and implicitly states that such NOTAM'ed closures are no longer in effect. I further believe that we did not endanger our customers or our aircraft in any way.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 DEPARTS HRL ON CLOSED RWY.

Narrative: MY FO AND I ARRIVED AT THE HRL ARPT TO BEGIN OUR 7-LEG DAY, THE LAST DAY OF A 4-DAY PAIRING. OUR INBOUND ACFT WAS ON TIME AND WE PERFORMED A NORMAL CREW CHANGE. I DID NOT NOTICE WHICH RWY THEY HAD LANDED ON, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS RWY 17R. COCKPIT PREPARATION WAS NORMAL. I SCANNED THE HRL NOTAMS, BUT DID NOT NOTICE ANY ITEMS PERTAINING TO RWY CLOSURES (WE HAD LANDED ON RWY 17R THE PREVIOUS EVENING). AFTER START, WE WERE CLRED TO TAXI TO RWY 35L (OPC = OK WITH 8 KT TAILWIND COMPONENT) AND CLRED FOR TKOF, WHICH WAS NORMAL. THE RWY APPEARED PERFECTLY SVCABLE, WITH NO CONSTRUCTION OR HAZARDOUS AREAS WHATSOEVER. THE FLT WAS UNEVENTFUL. I WAS NOT AWARE OF ANY PROBS WITH RWY CLOSURE UNTIL THE NEXT DAY WHEN THE CHIEF CALLED TO INQUIRE ABOUT THESE CIRCUMSTANCES AND TO TELL ME THAT SOMEONE HAD RPTED US FOR TAKING OFF ON CLOSED RWY 17R (IT WAS ACTUALLY RWY 35L). DURING A SUBSEQUENT CALL TO THE CHIEF, I LEARNED THAT HRL TWR HAD ALLOWED NUMEROUS ACFT TO OPERATE FROM THIS RWY RECENTLY. WE DID NOT INTENTIONALLY VIOLATE ANY FAR'S OR COMPANY POLICIES AND REGS. WHILE I MAY HAVE BEEN REMISS IN NOT NOTICING A RWY CLOSURE IN THE PRINTED NOTAMS, ANY UNCERTAINTY THAT I FELT WAS COMPLETELY AMELIORATED BY THE NORMAL VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE RWY AND THE TWR'S APPROVAL TO USE IT. TWR APPROVAL, BASED ON MY AVIATION EXPERIENCE, GENERALLY SUPERSEDES PRINTED NOTAMS AND IMPLICITLY STATES THAT SUCH NOTAM'ED CLOSURES ARE NO LONGER IN EFFECT. I FURTHER BELIEVE THAT WE DID NOT ENDANGER OUR CUSTOMERS OR OUR ACFT IN ANY WAY.

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.