B737-300 flight crew uses wrong takeoff data for runway 34 under construction at slc.

Attributes
ACN	699186
Time
Date	200606
Local Time Of Day	0601 To 1200
Place
Locale Reference	airport : slc.airport
State Reference	UT
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	B737-300
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : takeoff roll
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 120 flight time total : 11000 flight time type : 30
ASRS Report	699186
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight crew : first officer
Events
Anomaly	non adherence : company policies non adherence : far
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Company Flight Crew Human Performance Aircraft Airport Chart Or Publication
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

On taxi out for runway 34R at slc; taxiway H was under construction; generating a page which mentions a temporary displaced threshold for runway 34R. Displaced thresholds are normally used for taxi and takeoff. Arriving at runway 34R at taxiway H1 we were told to go into position and hold. We crossed onto runway 34R at which time an MD80 did a slow speed abort on takeoff roll and cleared runway. At that time the tower told us we were cleared for takeoff and not to apply takeoff power until reaching the displaced threshold before taxiway H3. En route and after further examination of slc NOTAMS it states to enter runway 34R at taxiway H1 and not to apply takeoff power until reaching the temporary displaced threshold at H3; and to use 34RX for ACARS performance data. At that point I went back into ACARS to confirm that we had met performance limits. There was still 10400 ft available for takeoff from 34RX displaced threshold; which satisfied performance criteria for our allowable takeoff gross weight. The human factors are that I am a new captain at an unfamiliar airport. The technical factor is that ACARS should not be able to produce performance data for a portion of a runway that is not available for takeoff. It was also not clearly marked at which point to apply takeoff power for runway 34R as it is in other runways such as sfo on runway 1R.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-300 FLT CREW USES WRONG TKOF DATA FOR RWY 34 UNDER CONSTRUCTION AT SLC.

Narrative: ON TAXI OUT FOR RWY 34R AT SLC; TXWY H WAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION; GENERATING A PAGE WHICH MENTIONS A TEMPORARY DISPLACED THRESHOLD FOR RWY 34R. DISPLACED THRESHOLDS ARE NORMALLY USED FOR TAXI AND TKOF. ARRIVING AT RWY 34R AT TXWY H1 WE WERE TOLD TO GO INTO POS AND HOLD. WE CROSSED ONTO RWY 34R AT WHICH TIME AN MD80 DID A SLOW SPD ABORT ON TKOF ROLL AND CLRED RWY. AT THAT TIME THE TWR TOLD US WE WERE CLRED FOR TKOF AND NOT TO APPLY TKOF PWR UNTIL REACHING THE DISPLACED THRESHOLD BEFORE TXWY H3. ENRTE AND AFTER FURTHER EXAMINATION OF SLC NOTAMS IT STATES TO ENTER RWY 34R AT TXWY H1 AND NOT TO APPLY TKOF PWR UNTIL REACHING THE TEMPORARY DISPLACED THRESHOLD AT H3; AND TO USE 34RX FOR ACARS PERFORMANCE DATA. AT THAT POINT I WENT BACK INTO ACARS TO CONFIRM THAT WE HAD MET PERFORMANCE LIMITS. THERE WAS STILL 10400 FT AVAILABLE FOR TKOF FROM 34RX DISPLACED THRESHOLD; WHICH SATISFIED PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR OUR ALLOWABLE TKOF GROSS WT. THE HUMAN FACTORS ARE THAT I AM A NEW CAPT AT AN UNFAMILIAR ARPT. THE TECHNICAL FACTOR IS THAT ACARS SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PRODUCE PERFORMANCE DATA FOR A PORTION OF A RWY THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE FOR TKOF. IT WAS ALSO NOT CLRLY MARKED AT WHICH POINT TO APPLY TKOF PWR FOR RWY 34R AS IT IS IN OTHER RWYS SUCH AS SFO ON RWY 1R.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.