Narrative:

I got our flight departure papers and went over them with the first officer. I noticed that the departure visibility was 1/8 mi. We had discussed low visibility on the inbound flight and with other crews and determined that we could depart with 600 ft RVR or 1/16 mi visibility. I got a takeoff altitude from dispatch; while the first officer finished with the paperwork. After arriving at the aircraft; we listened to the ATIS and saw that the visibility had gone down to 1/16 mi; but we were ok with that; as the runway was rated for that. I checked the chart for the airport and saw that the low visibility taxiway was good for the entire length of runway 7/25 in both directions. During taxi out the first officer asked if he should request runway 25 as he normally does; as that is the most direct direction for our departure; and I said 'sure' as I usually do. The ground controller then cleared us to runway 25; and after taxi out cleared us for takeoff on runway 25. I made the takeoff as required and it was normal; as was the climb to altitude. However; at leveloff; for some reason; I decided to rechk the takeoff runway's visibility requirement; and found that runway 7; not runway 25 had the 1/16 mi approval. I informed the first officer and we both checked and verified this. Supplemental information from acn 696168: when doing predep paperwork we discussed the low visibility takeoff. The captain looked up the runway information for runway 7 which was in use. WX was within limits and we finished the paperwork; went to the aircraft and started engines. We discussed using runway 25 for departure because it headed us toward our destination.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757 FLT CREW DEPARTED ON RWY THAT IS NOT AUTHORIZED FOR CURRENT WX MINIMUMS.

Narrative: I GOT OUR FLT DEP PAPERS AND WENT OVER THEM WITH THE FO. I NOTICED THAT THE DEP VISIBILITY WAS 1/8 MI. WE HAD DISCUSSED LOW VISIBILITY ON THE INBOUND FLT AND WITH OTHER CREWS AND DETERMINED THAT WE COULD DEPART WITH 600 FT RVR OR 1/16 MI VISIBILITY. I GOT A TKOF ALT FROM DISPATCH; WHILE THE FO FINISHED WITH THE PAPERWORK. AFTER ARRIVING AT THE ACFT; WE LISTENED TO THE ATIS AND SAW THAT THE VISIBILITY HAD GONE DOWN TO 1/16 MI; BUT WE WERE OK WITH THAT; AS THE RWY WAS RATED FOR THAT. I CHKED THE CHART FOR THE ARPT AND SAW THAT THE LOW VISIBILITY TXWY WAS GOOD FOR THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF RWY 7/25 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. DURING TAXI OUT THE FO ASKED IF HE SHOULD REQUEST RWY 25 AS HE NORMALLY DOES; AS THAT IS THE MOST DIRECT DIRECTION FOR OUR DEP; AND I SAID 'SURE' AS I USUALLY DO. THE GND CTLR THEN CLRED US TO RWY 25; AND AFTER TAXI OUT CLRED US FOR TKOF ON RWY 25. I MADE THE TKOF AS REQUIRED AND IT WAS NORMAL; AS WAS THE CLB TO ALT. HOWEVER; AT LEVELOFF; FOR SOME REASON; I DECIDED TO RECHK THE TKOF RWY'S VISIBILITY REQUIREMENT; AND FOUND THAT RWY 7; NOT RWY 25 HAD THE 1/16 MI APPROVAL. I INFORMED THE FO AND WE BOTH CHKED AND VERIFIED THIS. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 696168: WHEN DOING PREDEP PAPERWORK WE DISCUSSED THE LOW VISIBILITY TKOF. THE CAPT LOOKED UP THE RWY INFO FOR RWY 7 WHICH WAS IN USE. WX WAS WITHIN LIMITS AND WE FINISHED THE PAPERWORK; WENT TO THE ACFT AND STARTED ENGS. WE DISCUSSED USING RWY 25 FOR DEP BECAUSE IT HEADED US TOWARD OUR DEST.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.