Narrative:

When taxi clearance was called for; ATC asked which runway we would prefer to use; runway 22 or runway 28. I responded runway 28 mistakenly after misreading the airport diagram chart. Taxi clearance was given to runway 28. Taxi was initiated with my mistaken thinking we were actually cleared for runway 22. Taxi proceeded without incident including crossing runway 28. The situation was revealed when we called for takeoff clearance at runway 22. The tower asked us our location and we answered at runway 22. The tower controller sounded confused and then advised us that taxi instructions were actually for runway 28. I immediately recognized my error and advised the tower of this. No incident was noted by ATC and we proceeded with our flight. I believe this incident was clearly based on my misreading the airport chart. My company uses efb's exclusively for our approach and airport diagrams. These have proven to be difficult to read under certain lighting conditions. We also had a passenger onboard that was late. This was causing us to extend an already long duty day. We had been on duty for 10.5 hours at this point. I think that the combination of rushing; and poor visibility of the airport diagram contributed to this error. Fatigue may have been a factor although we did have 13 hours of rest prior to this duty day.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: BE40 FLT CREW HAS RWY INCURSION UPON MISREADING OF EFB ARPT DIAGRAM.

Narrative: WHEN TAXI CLEARANCE WAS CALLED FOR; ATC ASKED WHICH RWY WE WOULD PREFER TO USE; RWY 22 OR RWY 28. I RESPONDED RWY 28 MISTAKENLY AFTER MISREADING THE AIRPORT DIAGRAM CHART. TAXI CLEARANCE WAS GIVEN TO RWY 28. TAXI WAS INITIATED WITH MY MISTAKEN THINKING WE WERE ACTUALLY CLEARED FOR RWY 22. TAXI PROCEEDED WITHOUT INCIDENT INCLUDING CROSSING RWY 28. THE SITUATION WAS REVEALED WHEN WE CALLED FOR TAKEOFF CLEARANCE AT RWY 22. THE TOWER ASKED US OUR LOCATION AND WE ANSWERED AT RWY 22. THE TOWER CONTROLLER SOUNDED CONFUSED AND THEN ADVISED US THAT TAXI INSTRUCTIONS WERE ACTUALLY FOR RWY 28. I IMMEDIATELY RECOGNIZED MY ERROR AND ADVISED THE TOWER OF THIS. NO INCIDENT WAS NOTED BY ATC AND WE PROCEEDED WITH OUR FLIGHT. I BELIEVE THIS INCIDENT WAS CLEARLY BASED ON MY MISREADING THE AIRPORT CHART. MY COMPANY USES EFB'S EXCLUSIVELY FOR OUR APPROACH AND AIRPORT DIAGRAMS. THESE HAVE PROVEN TO BE DIFFICULT TO READ UNDER CERTAIN LIGHTING CONDITIONS. WE ALSO HAD A PASSENGER ONBOARD THAT WAS LATE. THIS WAS CAUSING US TO EXTEND AN ALREADY LONG DUTY DAY. WE HAD BEEN ON DUTY FOR 10.5 HOURS AT THIS POINT. I THINK THAT THE COMBINATION OF RUSHING; AND POOR VISIBILITY OF THE AIRPORT DIAGRAM CONTRIBUTED TO THIS ERROR. FATIGUE MAY HAVE BEEN A FACTOR ALTHOUGH WE DID HAVE 13 HOURS OF REST PRIOR TO THIS DUTY DAY.

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.