Date: 201308
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: SFO.Tower, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Takeoff / Launch
Airspace: Class B SFO
ATC / advisory: Tower SFO
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: On the PORTE 5 Departure off of 28L in SFO; the normal procedure is to turn to a 330 degree heading at 420 MSL; however; the Captain pointed out an FDC NOTAM that stated to fly 014 degrees (runway heading) until 2;000 FT MSL. When we did this; ATC told us to turn left immediately; and that they had no knowledge of the NOTAM. After a discussion with Company ATC guys; we realized that it was an alternate climb gradient procedure that was poorly written in the weather packet and confusing.


Second narrative: Our clearance was the PORTE 5 Departure which requires a turn to 330 degrees at 420 FT MSL when departing on Runway 1L or 1R out of SFO. We reviewed the entire NOTAM group in the weather packet as there were a lot of NOTAMS for SFO. An FDC NOTAM had been issued that read:'Departure Procedures AMDT 8' CHANGE DEPARTURE PROCEDURE TO READ; RWYS 1L; 1R; CLIMB HEADING 014 TO 2000 THENCE...CONTINUE CLIMB ON COURSE; REST REMAINS AS PUBLISHED.' We read and reread this NOTAM several times to ensure that we were reading it correctly. When we departed; NorCal asked us why we hadn't turned yet and I advised him that there was an FDC NOTAM that modified the procedure. I read it to him verbatim. He advised there was no conflict and I told him that we would alert our Dispatch and others as to the potential problem. On arrival LAX; I contacted our Company ATC Specialists and alerted them to this confusion as well as Flight Dispatch. One of our Specialists contacted the Manager of NorCal; and after they reviewed the FDC; he agreed that it was confusing and poorly written. The other Specialist subsequently discussed it with them as well and they said it pertained only to obstacle climb gradient issues; not all 1L and 1R departures. There are required climb gradients on the PORTE 5; but nowhere on the FDC NOTAMs does it specify a particular departure procedure. Anyway; in trying to be conscientious; we ended up in a rather confusing situation with Departure Control. Whether or not they rewrite this particular FDC is to be determined; but it is extremely insidious in that you believe that it applies to all 1L/1R departures and at the very end of the NOTAM it says 'this is takeoff minimums and (obstacle) departure procedures AMDT 8A.' No traffic conflict resulted; but it definitely was confusing.


Synopsis: B737 flight crew notes an FDC NOTAM apparently instructing them to maintain runway heading to 2;000 FT departing Runway 1L at SFO on the PORT 5 departure. ATC advises this is not correct and that the procedure is a revision to the obstacle departure procedure only.