Narrative:

I diverted to hollister (3o7) from a planned flight to mry. I had never been to hollister, and was unfamiliar with the airport layout. Approximately 8 mi out, I called for a TA on the CTAF frequency. Aircraft Y in the pattern advised that runway 31 was in use, and that winds were light. Shortly thereafter, aircraft Z reported being 6 mi north, inbound for landing on runway 24. Aircraft Z was then also advised that runway 31 was in use. I called downwind and base for runway 31. I heard no further calls from aircraft Z until I was turning final for runway 31, at which point aircraft Z reported final for runway 24. I spotted aircraft Z, perceived no conflict, and called short final for runway 31. I crossed runway 24 on my landing rollout, exited onto the parallel taxiway, and called clear of runway 31. As I was crossing runway 24 on the taxi to parking, aircraft Z alerted me to the fact that he was still on runway 24. Aircraft Z, at that point, appeared to be at normal taxi speed, approximately 75-100 ft away at my 8 O'clock position. Neither aircraft had to take any evasive action, and both continued taxiing to park. This was a potentially hazardous situation, however. This situation occurred because I allowed myself to become distraction inside the cockpit while taxiing on an unfamiliar field. A contributing factor was aircraft Z's use of a crossing runway after being advised that other aircraft were using runway 31. I have since reviewed the FAA's materials on preventing runway incursions, following the recommendations contained therein will prevent a recurrence.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A PA28 SINGLE PLT CUT OFF ANOTHER SMA DURING THEIR RESPECTIVE ROLLOUTS ON INTERSECTING RWYS AT 3O7.

Narrative: I DIVERTED TO HOLLISTER (3O7) FROM A PLANNED FLT TO MRY. I HAD NEVER BEEN TO HOLLISTER, AND WAS UNFAMILIAR WITH THE ARPT LAYOUT. APPROX 8 MI OUT, I CALLED FOR A TA ON THE CTAF FREQ. ACFT Y IN THE PATTERN ADVISED THAT RWY 31 WAS IN USE, AND THAT WINDS WERE LIGHT. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, ACFT Z RPTED BEING 6 MI N, INBOUND FOR LNDG ON RWY 24. ACFT Z WAS THEN ALSO ADVISED THAT RWY 31 WAS IN USE. I CALLED DOWNWIND AND BASE FOR RWY 31. I HEARD NO FURTHER CALLS FROM ACFT Z UNTIL I WAS TURNING FINAL FOR RWY 31, AT WHICH POINT ACFT Z RPTED FINAL FOR RWY 24. I SPOTTED ACFT Z, PERCEIVED NO CONFLICT, AND CALLED SHORT FINAL FOR RWY 31. I CROSSED RWY 24 ON MY LNDG ROLLOUT, EXITED ONTO THE PARALLEL TXWY, AND CALLED CLR OF RWY 31. AS I WAS XING RWY 24 ON THE TAXI TO PARKING, ACFT Z ALERTED ME TO THE FACT THAT HE WAS STILL ON RWY 24. ACFT Z, AT THAT POINT, APPEARED TO BE AT NORMAL TAXI SPD, APPROX 75-100 FT AWAY AT MY 8 O'CLOCK POS. NEITHER ACFT HAD TO TAKE ANY EVASIVE ACTION, AND BOTH CONTINUED TAXIING TO PARK. THIS WAS A POTENTIALLY HAZARDOUS SIT, HOWEVER. THIS SIT OCCURRED BECAUSE I ALLOWED MYSELF TO BECOME DISTR INSIDE THE COCKPIT WHILE TAXIING ON AN UNFAMILIAR FIELD. A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR WAS ACFT Z'S USE OF A XING RWY AFTER BEING ADVISED THAT OTHER ACFT WERE USING RWY 31. I HAVE SINCE REVIEWED THE FAA'S MATERIALS ON PREVENTING RWY INCURSIONS, FOLLOWING THE RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED THEREIN WILL PREVENT A RECURRENCE.

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.