Narrative:

Slc commercial plates are incorrect in two instances.wevic 3 RNAV departure: myrup is listed on the commercial plate with airspeed of 230 KTS. The FMS database also has it above 13;000 MSL. We queried the controller and he verified that this was indeed a departure restriction.in reviewing the [runway] 34R ILS (11-5) for arrival; the FMS database and the chart differ for algie. The chart reflects below 10;000 and the database indicates above 10;000. The controller verified that it should be above 10;000.also; we were not flying a localizer only approach; but the step down fix at iruyu indicates below 4;900; which would be a very unusual step down fix. On arrival; runway 34R was closed. We were given intercept the localizer 35. I queried the controller that there wasn't a localizer 35; only an lda 35. He was very rude in informing me that the lda was a localizer. I informed him that it was not a localizer approach. We could see the runway and requested a visual approach. [Runway] 34R became available and we transitioned to land [runway] 34R from a visual approach.these altitudes for slc need to be reviewed; and I believe all the other altitudes on approaches/departures in slc should be examined also. My experience was only with this approach and departure. Also; controller terminology needs to match the approach he wants the aircrew to fly. In our case; he should have been specific and instructed us to intercept the lda 35.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A pilot noted that SLC ILS or LOC Runway 34R commercial chart 11-5 contains two errors. Intersection ALGIE is shown to be crossed below 10;000 FT and Intersection IRUYU is shown to be crossed below 4;900 FT. Both crossing constraint altitudes should be above their respective intersections.

Narrative: SLC commercial plates are incorrect in two instances.WEVIC 3 RNAV Departure: MYRUP is listed on the commercial plate with airspeed of 230 KTS. The FMS database also has it Above 13;000 MSL. We queried the Controller and he verified that this was indeed a departure restriction.In reviewing the [Runway] 34R ILS (11-5) for arrival; the FMS database and the chart differ for ALGIE. The chart reflects below 10;000 and the database indicates above 10;000. The Controller verified that it should be above 10;000.Also; we were not flying a LOC only approach; but the step down fix at IRUYU indicates below 4;900; which would be a very unusual step down fix. On arrival; Runway 34R was closed. We were given intercept the Localizer 35. I queried the Controller that there wasn't a LOC 35; only an LDA 35. He was very rude in informing me that the LDA was a localizer. I informed him that it was not a localizer approach. We could see the runway and requested a visual approach. [Runway] 34R became available and we transitioned to land [Runway] 34R from a visual approach.These altitudes for SLC need to be reviewed; and I believe all the other altitudes on approaches/departures in SLC should be examined also. My experience was only with this approach and departure. Also; Controller terminology needs to match the approach he wants the aircrew to fly. In our case; he should have been specific and instructed us to intercept the LDA 35.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.