Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Confusion; Distraction; Workload
Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Chart Or Publication; Procedure
On arrival into XNA; Razorback Approach gave us a heading to intercept the ILS 34; and cleared us for the approach. When we were unable to tune the LOC frequency (110.55); and notified Approach. The controller told us to use 111.55; which tuned properly. Approach queried if we were able to be established on the localizer. We confirmed that we could; continued the approach and landing uneventfully.After landing; we reviewed NOTAMs for XNA. One new one popped up; saying the ILS 34 AMEND 3 was NA. We had referenced both AMEND 3 (current) and the previous version in Jeppesen Flight Deck Pro on our iPads. Both show 110.55 as the correct ILS frequency. There was no mention in any NOTAMs of a correction to the frequency. My FO looked at the plate on Airnav. It showed 111.55. He also looked at Foreflight on his personal iPad; which also showed 111.55. It looks like our Jeppesen approaches were incorrect. We later heard an [air carrier] inbound to XNA having the same problem. Approach once again issued 111.55 as the correct frequency. The pilot reported that his documentation showed a different frequency.
Fractional Captain reported the ILS frequency for Runway 34 at XNA; as published by Jeppesen chart 21-2 (110.55); was incorrect. ATC provided the correct frequency of 111.55 and the approach was completed uneventfully.