Citation X (C750)
Situational Awareness; Other / Unknown
Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Executed Go Around / Missed Approach
Human Factors; Chart Or Publication
We were set up for the LOC 16 at BVY; and at approximately 15 miles from the approach course the Controller announced a new ATIS; and that BVY was 'advertising' the RNAV 16; which we accepted. Inside the final approach fix Beverly Tower called us with a 'low altitude alert'; followed by an EGPWS 'too low; terrain' warning. We immediately executed a missed approach. We then requested; and were given; the LOC 16 approach. Again inside the final approach fix Beverly Tower announced a 'low altitude alert'; but no EGPWS alert. We landed normally from that approach. After landing and deplaning our passenger we realized that we had set minimums of 580 FT for the LOC16 approach; and during a time compressed briefing for the RNAV16 we set LPV minimums of 360 FT instead of LNAV minimums of 600 FT. We're use to looking at the minimums to the left of the approach for ILS's since we mostly do those approaches. The LNAV minimums are located to the right for the RNAV approaches. In the future we need to do a more thorough briefing of the RNAV approaches; and be sure to use the LNAV minimums. After landing we asked the Tower about the second low altitude warning and they said that happens frequently for the approaches to Runway 16.
[Narrative #2 contained no additional information.]
A CE-750 flight crew executed a missed approach due to a low altitude alert from the Tower and an EGPWS terrain warning while on the RNAV 16 approach to BVY. A second approach was successful utilizing the LOC 16 IAP although a second low altitude alert was issued by the Tower. During a debriefing the flight crew determined they had utilized the lower MDA for an LPV vice LNAV equipped aircraft.