Narrative:

Our pre departure clearance clearance was to fly the RNAV departure and climb via the SID except maintain 4000 feet. When we checked in with departure control; we stated; 'company # checking in at 2000 feet; climbing to 4000 feet via the TERPZ6.' the controller responded; 'roger; climb via the SID.' in my mind; we were climbing via the SID and I wondered if we had just had a change to our clearance. I asked the pilot monitoring to confirm the altitude we were cleared to and the controller said; '17;000 feet. When I say climb via SID; it deletes all previous restrictions.' this may be true. It may be right out of the ATC controller's handbook. But it's the very first time I've ever heard it. Every other controller I've ever heard modify a climb via clearance states something like; 'roger; climb via the SID to 17;000 feet' or 'climb via SID; delete the 4000 feet restriction;' etc.; something that makes it patently clear that a new altitude has been issued.as I said; this may be entirely correct terminology; but it seems unwise to just decide; out of the blue; to start using a new way to clear that most of us have never heard before; and expect crystal clear interpretations. With something as safety critical as an altitude clearance in congested airspace; I think it would be wise to ensure clarity in such clearances. I think it would also be wise to prescribe a climb via clearance that is issued the same all over the country. Presently there are at least half a dozen different ways such clearance show up on our pre departure clearance's. It shouldn't be a creative writing attempt. There should be a formula followed by all ATC facilities.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A 737 First Officer reported being unsure of their assigned altitude climbing out of BWI on the TERPZ6 SID due to the phraseology used by ATC.

Narrative: Our PDC clearance was to fly the RNAV Departure and climb via the SID except maintain 4000 feet. When we checked in with Departure Control; we stated; 'Company # checking in at 2000 feet; climbing to 4000 feet via the TERPZ6.' The Controller responded; 'Roger; climb via the SID.' In my mind; we WERE climbing via the SID and I wondered if we had just had a change to our clearance. I asked the Pilot Monitoring to confirm the altitude we were cleared to and the Controller said; '17;000 feet. When I say climb via SID; it deletes all previous restrictions.' This may be true. It may be right out of the ATC Controller's Handbook. But it's the very first time I've ever heard it. Every other Controller I've ever heard modify a climb via clearance states something like; 'Roger; climb via the SID to 17;000 feet' or 'climb via SID; delete the 4000 feet restriction;' etc.; something that makes it patently clear that a new altitude has been issued.As I said; this may be entirely correct terminology; but it seems unwise to just decide; out of the blue; to start using a new way to clear that most of us have never heard before; and expect crystal clear interpretations. With something as Safety critical as an altitude clearance in congested airspace; I think it would be wise to ensure clarity in such clearances. I think it would also be wise to prescribe a climb via clearance that is issued the same all over the country. Presently there are at least half a dozen different ways such clearance show up on our PDC's. It shouldn't be a creative writing attempt. There should be a formula followed by all ATC facilities.

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.