Narrative:

Recently I have recieved several departure clrncs from sfo which are unclr or inappropriate. On one occasion I was issued the stins five departure when departing of runways 1. Reviewing the departure I found no procedures for departure from that runway pair. When I questioned clearance delivery on the subject I was reissued a clearance utilizing vectors to a NAVAID. The incident today is a repeat of an identical situation some time ago on a flight from sfo to sts (filed as sfo-sau-sau 330 degree-sts 141-coati-sts). I was issued the following clearance: (departing from runway 28). 'Cleared to sts via the shoreline 8 departure. Upon departure turn right to 350 degree vectors to sau than as filed...' reviewing the shoreline 8 departure, the first thing one notices is that this is a departure to the oak VORTAC, and that there is no transition to sau. Sau is not even depicted on the plate. This being the case, the instructions given have no correlation with the depicted departure, and specifying this departure only serves to induce confusion and uncertainty. Had the clearance read simply 'cleared to sts, upon departure turn right to 350 degree, vectors for sau than as filed...' the situation and procedures to be followed would be clear, adding 'shoreline 8 departure' makes it very unclr. For instance, in the event of lost communications does one proceed to the vector NAVAID (sau), or follow the departure procedure and go to oak and once you get to oak, what do you do? Hold? Proceed to sau? I can't figure it out. If you can, please tell me. What seems to be happening is that standard clrncs are issued in accordance with prevailing conditions, west/O anyone checking to see if it is applicable, ie: if departures are off the 28's and you are at low altitude, you get the shoreline 8, if you happen to be going to eni, you get the stins 5 departure. This situation (as you can see) results in confusion, and confusion is a big contributor to risk. One last incident. Planning sfo to controller in charge I was issued 'cleared to controller in charge via regas, mxw, as filed...'since the usual clearance includes the rebas 1 departure, the captain asked me to verify the clearance. It took me several mins of conversation to get the point across that a clearance to rebas is not the same as the regas one departure, which turns out to be what they had in mind. In ths particular case there isn't much difference, but there is some, and sfo needs to situation down and review what they are really doing.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR GIVEN CLRNC INAPPROPRIATE FOR RWYS IN USE. IMPOSSIBLE TO COMPLY.

Narrative: RECENTLY I HAVE RECIEVED SEVERAL DEP CLRNCS FROM SFO WHICH ARE UNCLR OR INAPPROPRIATE. ON ONE OCCASION I WAS ISSUED THE STINS FIVE DEP WHEN DEPARTING OF RWYS 1. REVIEWING THE DEP I FOUND NO PROCS FOR DEP FROM THAT RWY PAIR. WHEN I QUESTIONED CLRNC DELIVERY ON THE SUBJECT I WAS REISSUED A CLRNC UTILIZING VECTORS TO A NAVAID. THE INCIDENT TODAY IS A REPEAT OF AN IDENTICAL SITUATION SOME TIME AGO ON A FLT FROM SFO TO STS (FILED AS SFO-SAU-SAU 330 DEG-STS 141-COATI-STS). I WAS ISSUED THE FOLLOWING CLRNC: (DEPARTING FROM RWY 28). 'CLRED TO STS VIA THE SHORELINE 8 DEP. UPON DEP TURN R TO 350 DEG VECTORS TO SAU THAN AS FILED...' REVIEWING THE SHORELINE 8 DEP, THE FIRST THING ONE NOTICES IS THAT THIS IS A DEP TO THE OAK VORTAC, AND THAT THERE IS NO TRANSITION TO SAU. SAU IS NOT EVEN DEPICTED ON THE PLATE. THIS BEING THE CASE, THE INSTRUCTIONS GIVEN HAVE NO CORRELATION WITH THE DEPICTED DEP, AND SPECIFYING THIS DEP ONLY SERVES TO INDUCE CONFUSION AND UNCERTAINTY. HAD THE CLRNC READ SIMPLY 'CLRED TO STS, UPON DEP TURN R TO 350 DEG, VECTORS FOR SAU THAN AS FILED...' THE SITUATION AND PROCS TO BE FOLLOWED WOULD BE CLR, ADDING 'SHORELINE 8 DEP' MAKES IT VERY UNCLR. FOR INSTANCE, IN THE EVENT OF LOST COMS DOES ONE PROCEED TO THE VECTOR NAVAID (SAU), OR FOLLOW THE DEP PROC AND GO TO OAK AND ONCE YOU GET TO OAK, WHAT DO YOU DO? HOLD? PROCEED TO SAU? I CAN'T FIGURE IT OUT. IF YOU CAN, PLEASE TELL ME. WHAT SEEMS TO BE HAPPENING IS THAT STANDARD CLRNCS ARE ISSUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH PREVAILING CONDITIONS, W/O ANYONE CHKING TO SEE IF IT IS APPLICABLE, IE: IF DEPS ARE OFF THE 28'S AND YOU ARE AT LOW ALT, YOU GET THE SHORELINE 8, IF YOU HAPPEN TO BE GOING TO ENI, YOU GET THE STINS 5 DEP. THIS SITUATION (AS YOU CAN SEE) RESULTS IN CONFUSION, AND CONFUSION IS A BIG CONTRIBUTOR TO RISK. ONE LAST INCIDENT. PLANNING SFO TO CIC I WAS ISSUED 'CLRED TO CIC VIA REGAS, MXW, AS FILED...'SINCE THE USUAL CLRNC INCLUDES THE REBAS 1 DEP, THE CAPT ASKED ME TO VERIFY THE CLRNC. IT TOOK ME SEVERAL MINS OF CONVERSATION TO GET THE POINT ACROSS THAT A CLRNC TO REBAS IS NOT THE SAME AS THE REGAS ONE DEP, WHICH TURNS OUT TO BE WHAT THEY HAD IN MIND. IN THS PARTICULAR CASE THERE ISN'T MUCH DIFFERENCE, BUT THERE IS SOME, AND SFO NEEDS TO SIT DOWN AND REVIEW WHAT THEY ARE REALLY DOING.

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.