Narrative:

Captain mistakenly taxied onto runway 9 at kbos from taxiway xray (approximately 500' from threshold) instead of from taxiway S1 at threshold. Tower asked if we were ok to go from that point, and believing an intersection departure was company approved and considering our weight was well below maximum for the runway (91200' vs 106600) we accepted a takeoff clearance from that point. After level off at cruise we checked the airport analysis book and found an intersection departure for runway 15R but not runway 9 as we had thought. Contributing to the event was a lack of clear taxiway and runway signs which led to the use of the wrong taxiway adjacent to the correct one. Also, once the error had been discovered could have back-taxied to the threshold or held in position while checking for intersection runway analysis. While checking for intersection analysis found a note at the bottom of the runway 9 VFR takeoff procedure. That note states that the pilot must confirm visually that no ships are traversing the channel and also confirm with the tower that none are traversing. We did confirm visually but were not aware that the tower must also be asked. This note is not provided to the pilots anywhere except the airport analysis book, which is not required unless operations does not provide a takeoff weights (tow) message. Believe that special procedures such as these should be included in airport notes (with WX) tow message and weight and balance, to inform the pilots and insure compliance.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR MLG INTERSECTION TKOF AT BOS. PROC NOT APPROVED BY COMPANY.

Narrative: CAPT MISTAKENLY TAXIED ONTO RWY 9 AT KBOS FROM TXWY XRAY (APPROX 500' FROM THRESHOLD) INSTEAD OF FROM TXWY S1 AT THRESHOLD. TWR ASKED IF WE WERE OK TO GO FROM THAT POINT, AND BELIEVING AN INTXN DEP WAS COMPANY APPROVED AND CONSIDERING OUR WT WAS WELL BELOW MAX FOR THE RWY (91200' VS 106600) WE ACCEPTED A TKOF CLRNC FROM THAT POINT. AFTER LEVEL OFF AT CRUISE WE CHKED THE ARPT ANALYSIS BOOK AND FOUND AN INTXN DEP FOR RWY 15R BUT NOT RWY 9 AS WE HAD THOUGHT. CONTRIBUTING TO THE EVENT WAS A LACK OF CLR TXWY AND RWY SIGNS WHICH LED TO THE USE OF THE WRONG TXWY ADJACENT TO THE CORRECT ONE. ALSO, ONCE THE ERROR HAD BEEN DISCOVERED COULD HAVE BACK-TAXIED TO THE THRESHOLD OR HELD IN POS WHILE CHKING FOR INTXN RWY ANALYSIS. WHILE CHKING FOR INTXN ANALYSIS FOUND A NOTE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE RWY 9 VFR TKOF PROC. THAT NOTE STATES THAT THE PLT MUST CONFIRM VISUALLY THAT NO SHIPS ARE TRAVERSING THE CHANNEL AND ALSO CONFIRM WITH THE TWR THAT NONE ARE TRAVERSING. WE DID CONFIRM VISUALLY BUT WERE NOT AWARE THAT THE TWR MUST ALSO BE ASKED. THIS NOTE IS NOT PROVIDED TO THE PLTS ANYWHERE EXCEPT THE ARPT ANALYSIS BOOK, WHICH IS NOT REQUIRED UNLESS OPS DOES NOT PROVIDE A TKOF WTS (TOW) MESSAGE. BELIEVE THAT SPECIAL PROCS SUCH AS THESE SHOULD BE INCLUDED IN ARPT NOTES (WITH WX) TOW MESSAGE AND WT AND BALANCE, TO INFORM THE PLTS AND INSURE COMPLIANCE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.