Small Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Flight Crew Last 90 Days 90; Flight Crew Total 10100; Flight Crew Type 500
Time Pressure; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Human-Machine Interface
Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
A normal pre-flight check was conducted and a Pre-Departure Clearance (PDC) was requested; received and printed. The PDC assigned the BNDTO ONE RNAV DEPARTURE with the CRGER transition and then the filed route. The PDC also gave the following information: departure frequency; transponder code; and it stated to 'Climb VIA SID' and it did not state an initial climb altitude. The route was loaded into the Flight Management System and it was briefed. The RNAV departure waypoints were briefed and altitude restrictions at waypoint SCAMM of at or below 5000 and waypoint CUZZZ at or above 13000 were briefed and confirmed using the chart. It was discussed that 5000 would be loaded into the altitude selector as altitude protection until we were handed off to departure control.During taxi a runway change was assigned changing the departure runway from 15L to 15R. The runway change was made in the FMS and waypoints and altitude restrictions were again verified. The takeoff clearance was received to RNAV direct to SCAMM. After takeoff and when handed off to Houston Departure Control; the Departure Controller was advised of our altitude and informed that the aircraft was climbing via the SID. After about a minute the Controller asked what altitude the aircraft was climbing to and the Controller was again informed that the climb was being made via the SID. The Controller asked what our PDC gave us for our initial altitude and was informed that the PDC did not include an initial altitude.At this time I asked the Controller what altitude they wanted the aircraft at; the Controller said that Houston Center would give a higher altitude. The flight was subsequently assigned an altitude of 16;000.The flight was then cleared direct to waypoint CUZZZ. CUZZZ was not in the waypoint list so a 290 degree heading was given and then instructed to proceed direct to waypoint ZUUUU. When handed off to Houston Center a phone number was given by the Controller and the PIC was asked to call the Terminal Radar Approach Control (TRACON). No TCAS events were generated during this incident.
The reporter reiterated his original concerns and remained convinced the procedure is; at the very least; poorly formatted. He did not understand how the unambiguous 'clearance' to '...cross SCAMM at or below 5;000 contained in the 'INITIAL CLIMB' text could be interpreted otherwise than it clearly states and was displayed on his navigation display.He further noted the difference between the INITIAL CLIMB text for runways 15 L&R and all other runways--which included no altitude beyond 'climb [on heading] to 600 FT; EXPECT RADAR vectors to SHAAK'. The 'EXPECT...' language clearly indicating any further 'cleared' activity would happen subsequent to reaching 600 FT would be the result of verbal clearances transmitted from Departure Control; clearly reinforcing the difference between those departures and the 'clearance language' utilized in 15 L&R departures. He further noted that the 'MAINTAIN 4;000 FT' advisory would have been more easily assimilated by busy flight crews had it been included in the 'INITIAL CLIMB' box instead of 'ROUTING'; especially as the 'routing' to be expected would initially be via radar vectors to 'on course'.His final comment was that 'MAINTAIN 4;000 FT' located in the 'ROUTING' box was not the most obvious place to look for a cleared altitude; especially following text entitled 'initial CLIMB.'He had no explanation for the loss of the CRGER transition data from his FMS.
Received PDC clearance giving our route and our routing was given was BNDTO1 CREGER JCT SJT MAG. The clearance stated our squawk code departure frequency and stated climb via the SID. It did not state a initial altitude. The Captain and I briefed the departure setting and it showed a 5;000 and 13;000 foot climb restriction. We took off 15R and was given an instruction to the first fix on departure which we complied with. As soon as we were handed over to departure I as SIC made contact with with Houston departure and told them we were climbing via the departure up to 13;000. After just about a minute the Controller asked our altitude again and we told the Controller. Controller asked what altitude was assigned on our PDC. We said it just stated to climb via the SID. Controller told us it should state 4;000.  Again we said it did not. The Captain then asked what altitude she wanted us at at that time. She gave us 16;000. As we were being handed over to Center they gave us a number for the PIC to call the TRACON. The PIC did call the TRACON and was told we were not the first to have this issue with the new SIDs and STARs. We did not have a TCAS event with this situation.
A Corporate Jet flight crew; departing Runway 15R at IAH failed to level at 4;000 while flying the BNDTO RNAV SID from IAH. After reading the INITIAL CLIMB text clearing them to fly the charted route and having been cleared to 'climb via' the SID they climbed so as to cross SCAMM at or below 5;000 as charted. Departure Control took exception to climb beyond 4;000 FT as was shown in the ROUTING text.