Narrative:

During the preflight planning stage of flight a NOTAM was discovered that restricted use of runway 12 to 5;300 ft of usable length; although runway 30 was still available full length. The weather was forecast to be at minimums for the approach requirements to 30 and we departed with the expectation that runway 30 would be our only available option. Upon receiving the arrival ATIS during our descent; we decided to contact dispatch because the ceiling was 200 ft below the MDA for runway 30. Dispatch advised that the full length of runway 12 was available for use and the NOTAM restricting it to 5;300 ft did not apply to us. Using runway 12 would allow for an approach below the cloud ceiling so we thought our flight would end with an uneventful landing to runway 12. On the final approach segment of our flight things became very confusing. This was the first time myself or the first officer had made an approach to runway 12 and no visual descent guidance existed for it (ILS glide-path was out of service). Additionally; a NOTAM for non-standard runway markings was in our paperwork. Prior to breaking out of the cloud layer; smx tower cleared us to land runway 12; full length. Soon afterwards we entered VMC flight conditions while descending through 900 ft MSL and spotted the runway. Thinking we had use of the full runway I established a descent rate that would place the aircraft between what appeared to be the 500 ft and 1;000 ft touchdown markers. However; this runway surface was black in color and differed from the larger portion of the runway which was a lighter gray color. A runway number was not visible on the darker section of the runway; but we both assumed it was part of the closed 1;000 ft that we were authorized to land on. Around 500 ft AGL we noticed a barricade that separated the black and gray portions of the runway and I immediately adjusted our descent rate to land beyond the barricade in a stabilized manner. The rest of the landing was uneventful.a few things could have prevented this and made things much safer. 1) smx tower could have warned us the black section of runway was unusable. 2) a pictorial or textural description of where to land on the runway could be included in the smx charts. 3) NOTAM's could be more clear in nature and include the fact that a barricade is in place to mark the start of runway 12.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Air Carrier Captain reports confusing NOTAM's and non-standard markings during an instrument approach and landing on Runway 12 at SMX.

Narrative: During the preflight planning stage of flight a NOTAM was discovered that restricted use of Runway 12 to 5;300 FT of usable length; although Runway 30 was still available full length. The weather was forecast to be at minimums for the approach requirements to 30 and we departed with the expectation that Runway 30 would be our only available option. Upon receiving the arrival ATIS during our descent; we decided to contact Dispatch because the ceiling was 200 FT below the MDA for Runway 30. Dispatch advised that the full length of Runway 12 was available for use and the NOTAM restricting it to 5;300 FT did not apply to us. Using Runway 12 would allow for an approach below the cloud ceiling so we thought our flight would end with an uneventful landing to Runway 12. On the final approach segment of our flight things became very confusing. This was the first time myself or the First Officer had made an approach to Runway 12 and no visual descent guidance existed for it (ILS Glide-path was out of service). Additionally; a NOTAM for non-standard runway markings was in our paperwork. Prior to breaking out of the cloud layer; SMX Tower cleared us to land Runway 12; full length. Soon afterwards we entered VMC flight conditions while descending through 900 FT MSL and spotted the runway. Thinking we had use of the full runway I established a descent rate that would place the aircraft between what appeared to be the 500 FT and 1;000 FT touchdown markers. However; this runway surface was black in color and differed from the larger portion of the runway which was a lighter gray color. A runway number was not visible on the darker section of the runway; but we both assumed it was part of the closed 1;000 FT that we were authorized to land on. Around 500 FT AGL we noticed a barricade that separated the black and gray portions of the runway and I immediately adjusted our descent rate to land beyond the barricade in a stabilized manner. The rest of the landing was uneventful.A few things could have prevented this and made things much safer. 1) SMX Tower could have warned us the black section of runway was unusable. 2) A pictorial or textural description of where to land on the runway could be included in the SMX charts. 3) NOTAM's could be more clear in nature and include the fact that a barricade is in place to mark the start of Runway 12.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 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.