Date: 202108
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: EWR.Airport, NJ
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: Widebody Transport
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Tower EWR
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Ground Incursion Ramp; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Flight Crew Became Reoriented
Contributing factors: Incorrect / Not Installed / Unavailable Part; Human Factors; Chart Or Publication; Environment - Non Weather Related
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: After landing on Runway 22R; we contacted Ground who advised us to taxi via Bravo; November. Since Bravo was directly off the nose of the aircraft; the Captain assumed; and I didn't disagree; that November was somewhere down Bravo closer to our arrival gate. Unfortunately; November was also directly across the nose and nobody noticed it until the Captain has commenced the same turn which resulted in a Boeing 787 taking out some taxi lights the week prior. As we were taxiing northbound on Bravo; Ground gave us a phone number to call which led to an intra-cockpit discussion of what we might have done wrong. Not finding any fault on our own; the Ground Controller advised us of the incorrect turn as we continued to taxi to the gate. This discussion never ceased until we were already into the gate area. No attempt was made to contact the ramp prior to entering the ramp area because ATIS stated (paraphrased) Company extended ramp procedures not in effect". When we read that during the approach briefing; we incorrectly thought it meant "Company ramp procedures effect". If the latter statement had been correct; we would have been correct to taxi to the gate with Ground...who had been talking to us the whole time. The expectation bias of believing that the ramp was closed; combined with the continuous chatter from EWR Ground led to us believing we were OK to taxi to the gate. When Ground finally let us go; I switched to Operations vs. Ramp for gate and we were told to contact Ramp...who was more than a little upset. Apparently the Captain hadn't followed the correct wide-body line but had followed the taxi line which met the one we were already on. The wide-body gate is not well marked as such at the intersection of all these lines to make it readily apparent to us; although a post-incident discussion and analysis showed us that the textual description of WB taxi lines is clearly something we could and should have seen. Despite having sufficient clearance; which was visually confirmed; Ramp was understandably angry with us for not contacting them and for following the eastern; rather than center taxi line."


Second narrative: Landing 22R we exited highspeed B4. During arrival briefing we discussed that the normal ground flow was for arrival traffic to utilize A; as B is used for traffic taxiing out. Exiting B4 ATC said to join N and contact Ground. That intersection is a junction of B4; N; A & B. Obviously a dynamic situation as we are clearing the runway and changing controllers. We joined N and as we switched to Ground Control made the hard right turn onto A consistent with our arrival briefing and consistent with the need to clear the runway rather than stopping leaving the rear of the aircraft still on the runway. After switching to Ground; the controller inquired as to our turn onto A. The controller queried us wondering if the signage was not clear. He referenced a recent incident where taxiway lights had been damaged by a wide body making a similar (or same) turn recently. He suggested that we were not the first ones to make this turn. In a follow up phone call we suggested that the instructions be more specific; such as 'join N and a right turn on B' so that there is no guesswork on anybody's part. EWR ATIS indicated 'Company expanded ramp procedures not in effect'. We were still with Ground discussing our runway exit as we approached the alleyway. Ground control did not switch us to Ramp Control. On our 'late' switch to Ramp Control we discovered we were on the wrong frequency. Upon coming up on the correct Ramp Control; we were admonished for entering the alleyway before contacting them and for being on the wrong line". Contributing factors were 1) missing the note regarding using the center of 3 lines for wide-bodies; 2) the fact that the only graphic depiction of the lines is not on the ramp diagram; not on any of the 10-7's; not on the gate page. It only appears on the secondary JeppPro AMM display of 10-9; and 3) The lead in line from RK ties into the left alleyway taxi line rather than the center as in every other similar situation I have ever seen. 4) There is considerable anxiety and distraction caused by ongoing company responses to Covid. While Covid has knocked the wind out of the travel and airline industry; the company's actions to pile on additional unnecessary restrictions and requirements add a huge level of stress; anxiety and uncertainty; adding completely unnecessary and avoidable threats and distractions to the conduct of our duties across the board! I am making more mistakes and I am witnessing my crew members and others like ground staff; ramp agents and maintenance personnel doing the same."


Synopsis: Air Carrier Flight Crew reported a taxiway and ramp incursion in EWR by not following ATIS; ATC Ground and Ramp procedures.