Narrative:

At xa:03Z, one msp tower controller was controling both runway 30L and 30R on different frequencys and I thought I heard our aircraft to 'position and hold, 30L, be ready for an immediate.' I responded 'roger, call sign, position and hold 30L.' at the same time, unknown to us, another aircraft squashed my response. We were in position for approximately one minute, when the tower controller sent an aircraft around and told us to vacate the runway. At xa:10Z a different controller again cleared us for takeoff. Several days later, after talking to a msp tower supervisor, we determined that if the tower controller had heard my response, he would have told us that the takeoff clearance was not for us. I think this situation could have been prevented if there had been one controller for each runway or if very light traffic, one controller using only one frequency for both runways. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter stated that the combining of frequencys with any other tower function should be avoided when using multiple runways. He also believes that by doing this, it would be the single strongest action the FAA can take to mitigate the runway incursion problem.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: G IV FLC ACKNOWLEDGES A CLRNC NOT MEANT FOR THEM TO TAXI IN POS AND HOLD ON RWY 30L AT MSP, WHICH RESULTED IN LNDG CORPORATE JET TFC EXECUTING A GAR.

Narrative: AT XA:03Z, ONE MSP TOWER CTLR WAS CTLING BOTH RWY 30L AND 30R ON DIFFERENT FREQS AND I THOUGHT I HEARD OUR ACFT TO 'POS AND HOLD, 30L, BE READY FOR AN IMMEDIATE.' I RESPONDED 'ROGER, CALL SIGN, POS AND HOLD 30L.' AT THE SAME TIME, UNKNOWN TO US, ANOTHER ACFT SQUASHED MY RESPONSE. WE WERE IN POS FOR APPROX ONE MINUTE, WHEN THE TWR CTLR SENT AN ACFT AROUND AND TOLD US TO VACATE THE RWY. AT XA:10Z A DIFFERENT CTLR AGAIN CLRED US FOR TAKEOFF. SEVERAL DAYS LATER, AFTER TALKING TO A MSP TWR SUPVR, WE DETERMINED THAT IF THE TWR CTLR HAD HEARD MY RESPONSE, HE WOULD HAVE TOLD US THAT THE TAKEOFF CLRNC WAS NOT FOR US. I THINK THIS SITUATION COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF THERE HAD BEEN ONE CTLR FOR EACH RWY OR IF VERY LIGHT TFC, ONE CTLR USING ONLY ONE FREQ FOR BOTH RWYS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR STATED THAT THE COMBINING OF FREQS WITH ANY OTHER TWR FUNCTION SHOULD BE AVOIDED WHEN USING MULTIPLE RWYS. HE ALSO BELIEVES THAT BY DOING THIS, IT WOULD BE THE SINGLE STRONGEST ACTION THE FAA CAN TAKE TO MITIGATE THE RWY INCURSION PROBLEM.

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.