Narrative:

We were flight xyz, a B757 airliner, cleared for approach to runway 36L dfw airport. Called tower at OM and understood we were cleared to land runway 36L. Approaching the runway, saw a commuter turboprop entering our runway. I thought he was going to cross but instead he turned on runway and proceeded to take off. With our speed, I felt we would overtake him on the runway if we landed, so I initiated a go around and notified the tower. During go around, tower seemed to indicate he cleared us to land on runway 36R, but neither I nor the first officer recall hearing runway 36R. We were not asked to sidestep to runway 36R or asked if we wanted runway 36R or could accept it. At no time was either aircraft in danger of hitting each other due to early go around. I believe it was an honest misunderstanding between us and the tower. I believe no aircraft once cleared for an approach to one runway should be cleared to land on another without his consent. The aircraft that took off should have refused the takeoff clearance seeing us on close final. The go around kept us all safe and out of danger. Supplemental information from acn 428980: we were switched to tower at approximately 12-15 mi out on final and cleared to land on runway 36L. We picked up the runway at approximately 5 mi. At approximately 1000 ft AGL we noticed a small commuter aircraft taxiing onto our runway for takeoff. This situation reminded me of the accident at lax where the B737 landed on the commuter plane.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A B757 PERFORMS A GAR ON SHORT FINAL AT DFW DUE TO A COMMUTER TAKING OFF ON RWY 36L AHEAD OF THEM.

Narrative: WE WERE FLT XYZ, A B757 AIRLINER, CLRED FOR APCH TO RWY 36L DFW ARPT. CALLED TWR AT OM AND UNDERSTOOD WE WERE CLRED TO LAND RWY 36L. APCHING THE RWY, SAW A COMMUTER TURBOPROP ENTERING OUR RWY. I THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO CROSS BUT INSTEAD HE TURNED ON RWY AND PROCEEDED TO TAKE OFF. WITH OUR SPD, I FELT WE WOULD OVERTAKE HIM ON THE RWY IF WE LANDED, SO I INITIATED A GAR AND NOTIFIED THE TWR. DURING GAR, TWR SEEMED TO INDICATE HE CLRED US TO LAND ON RWY 36R, BUT NEITHER I NOR THE FO RECALL HEARING RWY 36R. WE WERE NOT ASKED TO SIDESTEP TO RWY 36R OR ASKED IF WE WANTED RWY 36R OR COULD ACCEPT IT. AT NO TIME WAS EITHER ACFT IN DANGER OF HITTING EACH OTHER DUE TO EARLY GAR. I BELIEVE IT WAS AN HONEST MISUNDERSTANDING BTWN US AND THE TWR. I BELIEVE NO ACFT ONCE CLRED FOR AN APCH TO ONE RWY SHOULD BE CLRED TO LAND ON ANOTHER WITHOUT HIS CONSENT. THE ACFT THAT TOOK OFF SHOULD HAVE REFUSED THE TKOF CLRNC SEEING US ON CLOSE FINAL. THE GAR KEPT US ALL SAFE AND OUT OF DANGER. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 428980: WE WERE SWITCHED TO TWR AT APPROX 12-15 MI OUT ON FINAL AND CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 36L. WE PICKED UP THE RWY AT APPROX 5 MI. AT APPROX 1000 FT AGL WE NOTICED A SMALL COMMUTER ACFT TAXIING ONTO OUR RWY FOR TKOF. THIS SIT REMINDED ME OF THE ACCIDENT AT LAX WHERE THE B737 LANDED ON THE COMMUTER PLANE.

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.