Date: 202009
Local time of day: 0601-1200
Location: ZZZ.Airport, US
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: A319
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B ZZZ
ATC / advisory: TRACON ZZZ
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Not Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Multiengine; Flight Crew Instrument
Human factors: Confusion; Workload
Second reporter function: Pilot Flying; First Officer
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT
Detector: Automation Aircraft Terrain Warning; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew FLC Overrode Automation; Flight Crew Overcame Equipment Problem
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Airport; ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings
Primary problem: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings

Narrative: ILS Z XX was briefed by FO (First Officer). Discussed early configuration by ZZZZZ per 10-X page. Approach informed us GS (glideslope) was OTS (Out of Service). Changed to RNAV (GPS) X XX. Started getting vectors and approaching ETARE we received a GPWS warning. I had the terrain in sight and instructed FO to continue approach. Aircraft was in config 3; gear up...I believe;The [manual] pages do discuss the FOQA (Flight Operations Quality Assurance) issue at ZZZ. However; the note lists two intersections. ZZZZZ (ILS Z XX) and ZZZZZ1 (RNAV (GPS) X XY. At the time I thought maybe the courses were off enough that GPWS warnings only occurred on those approaches. Obviously; it applies to ALL approaches to XY&R.I think the two intersections on the 10-Y page FOQA Alert should be removed and should read something to the effect that the aircraft should be in final approach config at least 10 miles from TD (touchdown) and that it applies to ALL approaches.


Second narrative: Inbound to ZZZ I was the pilot flying. About one hour out we set up for the arrival and reviewed the applicable company charts. I believe that the airport was VFR but visibility was limited due to FU. We were expecting XX and so read the FOQA Alert and discussed the need to be configured By ZZZZZ1. As we got a closer we were given the RNAV X with vectors. We reconfigured the box and ran through the RNAV requirements. We were vectored east of Course cleared to 8400 ft. than once on the approach cleared to 7400 ft. (between ZZZZZ2 and ZZZZZ3). At 7400 ft. the path came alive about 2 miles from ZZZZZ3. ATC gave us a current altimeter that was .01 off of our display. I Believe we got the GPWS over ZZZZZ3. I immediately disconnected the auto pilot and began a climb. The captain said 'its because of our configuration'; he could see terrain and we should finish configuring and the approach. Landed successfully at ZZZ.On the FOQA alert page we discussed the need to be configured by ZZZZZ1 which is on XY (I later figured out). When I reviewed the approach for XX my eyes fell to ZZZZZ4 which is for XX. So I highlighted ZZZZZ4 on the approach so I would be configured for (what made sense) a 7000 ft. peak about 10 miles out. When we got the RNAV in my mind the restriction was lifted because we weren't flying over that peak and configured as usual. Ok so I knew I was going to get a FOQA call but didn't expect [report] so I'll write what I was planning on saying to FOQA. The 10-XY-X Page is confusing and limited. Confusing that XY and XX have similar sounding fixes. When you take someone like me with a short memory and say 'OK we need to be configured by ZZZZZ1. Exit out of 10-Y pages pull up the approach look for the fix......'Ah ZZZZZ1 there it is' I thought I was being compliant. Limited in the fact that those two fixes are the only ones mentioned and didn't cover the RNAV to XX. I believe we would have avoided the GPWS if the Emphasis items said a generic 'inbound be configured no later than 10 miles' I would have caught that. I realize that if I would have; upon reviewing the 10-Y page transposed the ZZZZZ fix to the RVAV its roughly ETAR. But we have to defer to the lowest common denominator (which is me). Thank you for your review.


Synopsis: Flight crew reported GPWS warning on approach to landing and elected to continue.