Narrative:

We had another runway incursion at abq today due to poor airport signage. I was working ground control at abq. C414 had just landed runway 8 and had exited the runway at E5. I instructed C414 to taxi via taxiway east; hold short runway 3. I also told the pilot that traffic was on a 1 mile final. The pilot read back the hold short instruction. The pilot then crossed the hold short line for the runway as a B737 was touching down on runway 3. I told the pilot of C414 to hold his position; which was inside of the hold short line; but not yet on runway 3. B737 landed safely and I eventually taxied the C414 to parking. As instructed by my supervisor; I informed the pilot of C414 that he may have been involved in a pilot deviation and instructed him to contact the tower via land line. The airport signage at the intersection of runway 03/21 and taxiway east only shows runway 21. Runway 3 is not indicated. Controllers and pilots have had problems at this intersection for years. Although it may be 'standard;' it's very confusing and has led to problems before. My facility has specifically asked abq airport management to fix this problem; but the FAA flight standards will not allow the change; citing 'standard marking regulations.' the FAA's standard marking regulations are unsafe; and could result in a catastrophic accident on the ground someday. We have a site-specific problem; and are unable to make site-specific changes because of FAA policies. This problem has existed at abq for years. Our attempts to fix this problem have all been rejected.callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: the reporter said that the incident reported involved a pilot that was very familiar with the airport but that the pilot still erred and crossed the hold point. The reporter confirmed that the FAA was refusing to allow the airport to place a 'non-standard' sign on taxiway 'east.' the reporter indicated that because the controllers are aware of the potential problem; all of them take great care in preventing this exact type of problem. This prevention effort reduces the actual events; making justification for the signage more difficult with the FAA officials. The reporter felt that both the FAA facility and airport staff are very supportive of some type of sign to assist pilots.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ABQ CTLR DESCRIBED PLT DEV WHEN LNDG ACFT CROSSED RWY 21/3 HOLD LINE ON TXWY E BECAUSE OF AN ALLEGED POOR SIGNAGE ISSUE.

Narrative: WE HAD ANOTHER RWY INCURSION AT ABQ TODAY DUE TO POOR ARPT SIGNAGE. I WAS WORKING GND CTL AT ABQ. C414 HAD JUST LANDED RWY 8 AND HAD EXITED THE RWY AT E5. I INSTRUCTED C414 TO TAXI VIA TXWY E; HOLD SHORT RWY 3. I ALSO TOLD THE PLT THAT TFC WAS ON A 1 MILE FINAL. THE PLT READ BACK THE HOLD SHORT INSTRUCTION. THE PLT THEN CROSSED THE HOLD SHORT LINE FOR THE RWY AS A B737 WAS TOUCHING DOWN ON RWY 3. I TOLD THE PLT OF C414 TO HOLD HIS POSITION; WHICH WAS INSIDE OF THE HOLD SHORT LINE; BUT NOT YET ON RWY 3. B737 LANDED SAFELY AND I EVENTUALLY TAXIED THE C414 TO PARKING. AS INSTRUCTED BY MY SUPVR; I INFORMED THE PLT OF C414 THAT HE MAY HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN A PLT DEV AND INSTRUCTED HIM TO CONTACT THE TWR VIA LAND LINE. THE ARPT SIGNAGE AT THE INTXN OF RWY 03/21 AND TXWY E ONLY SHOWS RWY 21. RWY 3 IS NOT INDICATED. CTLRS AND PLTS HAVE HAD PROBS AT THIS INTXN FOR YEARS. ALTHOUGH IT MAY BE 'STANDARD;' IT'S VERY CONFUSING AND HAS LED TO PROBS BEFORE. MY FACILITY HAS SPECIFICALLY ASKED ABQ ARPT MANAGEMENT TO FIX THIS PROB; BUT THE FAA FLT STANDARDS WILL NOT ALLOW THE CHANGE; CITING 'STANDARD MARKING REGULATIONS.' THE FAA'S STANDARD MARKING REGULATIONS ARE UNSAFE; AND COULD RESULT IN A CATASTROPHIC ACCIDENT ON THE GND SOMEDAY. WE HAVE A SITE-SPECIFIC PROB; AND ARE UNABLE TO MAKE SITE-SPECIFIC CHANGES BECAUSE OF FAA POLICIES. THIS PROB HAS EXISTED AT ABQ FOR YEARS. OUR ATTEMPTS TO FIX THIS PROB HAVE ALL BEEN REJECTED.CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THE RPTR SAID THAT THE INCIDENT REPORTED INVOLVED A PLT THAT WAS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE ARPT BUT THAT THE PLT STILL ERRED AND CROSSED THE HOLD POINT. THE RPTR CONFIRMED THAT THE FAA WAS REFUSING TO ALLOW THE ARPT TO PLACE A 'NON-STANDARD' SIGN ON TXWY 'E.' THE RPTR INDICATED THAT BECAUSE THE CTLRS ARE AWARE OF THE POTENTIAL PROB; ALL OF THEM TAKE GREAT CARE IN PREVENTING THIS EXACT TYPE OF PROB. THIS PREVENTION EFFORT REDUCES THE ACTUAL EVENTS; MAKING JUSTIFICATION FOR THE SIGNAGE MORE DIFFICULT WITH THE FAA OFFICIALS. THE RPTR FELT THAT BOTH THE FAA FACILITY AND ARPT STAFF ARE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF SOME TYPE OF SIGN TO ASSIST PLTS.

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.