Narrative:

Corp jet X issued taxi instructions to 'taxi to runway 23.' taxi route was not direct route to approach end of runway; aircraft needed to cross active runway (runway 23) to reach approach end. Aircraft xed runway 23 west/O requesting crossing clearance or receiving crossing clearance. Pilot said he xed (when asked about it by me) that he 'xed the active because he was told to taxi to runway 23.' I suggested that the pilot check the airman's information manual which will show he is not authority/authorized to cross an active runway when taxiing to the same runway. Tower and ground control observed the incident but did not act immediately because our intention was to taxi aircraft and no other aircraft were using the runway. This has happened before, with other aircraft which I cannot document at this time, once by an small aircraft pilot and once by a student with instrument in small aircraft. I suggest pilots be better informed about crossing an active runway to get to the approach end west/O clearance, or the rules should be changed. In reality, we've started assuming pilots don't know the rule, so we issue more complex taxi instructions so that they cannot get it wrong! Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information. Reporter restated that there was no traffic conflict this time. We discussed the high probability that a lot of pilots would think they are cleared to cross any runway or taxiway when they have received a 'taxi to' clearance. Analyst counseled reporter that good controller technique would be to instruct aircraft to hold short of runway 23 on taxiway bravo. He agreed that the technique might save a lot of grief sometime if there is conflicting traffic involved.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RWY INCURSION BY CORP JET.

Narrative: CORP JET X ISSUED TAXI INSTRUCTIONS TO 'TAXI TO RWY 23.' TAXI RTE WAS NOT DIRECT RTE TO APCH END OF RWY; ACFT NEEDED TO CROSS ACTIVE RWY (RWY 23) TO REACH APCH END. ACFT XED RWY 23 W/O REQUESTING XING CLRNC OR RECEIVING XING CLRNC. PLT SAID HE XED (WHEN ASKED ABOUT IT BY ME) THAT HE 'XED THE ACTIVE BECAUSE HE WAS TOLD TO TAXI TO RWY 23.' I SUGGESTED THAT THE PLT CHK THE AIRMAN'S INFO MANUAL WHICH WILL SHOW HE IS NOT AUTH TO CROSS AN ACTIVE RWY WHEN TAXIING TO THE SAME RWY. TWR AND GND CTL OBSERVED THE INCIDENT BUT DID NOT ACT IMMEDIATELY BECAUSE OUR INTENTION WAS TO TAXI ACFT AND NO OTHER ACFT WERE USING THE RWY. THIS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE, WITH OTHER ACFT WHICH I CANNOT DOCUMENT AT THIS TIME, ONCE BY AN SMA PLT AND ONCE BY A STUDENT WITH INSTR IN SMA. I SUGGEST PLTS BE BETTER INFORMED ABOUT XING AN ACTIVE RWY TO GET TO THE APCH END W/O CLRNC, OR THE RULES SHOULD BE CHANGED. IN REALITY, WE'VE STARTED ASSUMING PLTS DON'T KNOW THE RULE, SO WE ISSUE MORE COMPLEX TAXI INSTRUCTIONS SO THAT THEY CANNOT GET IT WRONG! CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO. RPTR RESTATED THAT THERE WAS NO TFC CONFLICT THIS TIME. WE DISCUSSED THE HIGH PROBABILITY THAT A LOT OF PLTS WOULD THINK THEY ARE CLRED TO CROSS ANY RWY OR TXWY WHEN THEY HAVE RECEIVED A 'TAXI TO' CLRNC. ANALYST COUNSELED RPTR THAT GOOD CTLR TECHNIQUE WOULD BE TO INSTRUCT ACFT TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 23 ON TXWY BRAVO. HE AGREED THAT THE TECHNIQUE MIGHT SAVE A LOT OF GRIEF SOMETIME IF THERE IS CONFLICTING TFC INVOLVED.

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.