Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: PHX.Airport, AZ
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: B737 Next Generation Undifferentiated
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class B PHX
ATC / advisory: TRACON P50
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Component problem: Improperly Operated
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; First Officer
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Troubleshooting; Workload; Confusion; Human-Machine Interface
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; 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; Flight Crew Took Evasive Action; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew FLC complied w / Automation / Advisory
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Pre-flighted and departed.  In accordance with Company directives issued concerning JeppTC Pro Mid-Cycle Chart Changes; NAV DATA Base on FMC was configured to correct dates AUGXXSEPXY/XZ was changed to SEPXAOCTXB/XZ.  As a result of doing this the filled and cleared EAGUL5 PHX arrival issued now became the EAGUL6 with corresponding different crossing restrictions in the FMC data base.  The flight was filed for the EAGUL5; yet the FMC was programmed to the EAGUL6; this was not noticed by aircrew as the only EAGUL arrival now in the data base was the 6 not the 5.  On the EAGUL arrival point GEENO now had a crossing restriction 'Between 12000' & 11000'' instead of the former 10;000' which ATC was expecting.  In flight upon noticing the altitude mis-understanding; ATC told us that the EAGUL6 started 'tomorrow'; yet; it was approximately XE15Z on the XAth.  The difference in filed EAGUL5 and planned EAGUL6 should have been noticed prior to departure and Dispatch/ATC queried at that time.  It was my understanding that these Jepp Mid-Cycle changes became effective XA01Z; XA September as was distributed via the Company web site and crew information messages.  However; once again; failure to notice the difference between filed route and FMC programmed route was due to me.Approaching GEENO; ATC directed a lateral separation for our aircraft to de-conflict with departing PHX traffic.  After execution of this; ATC provide vectors to final Runway 8. Perhaps both EAGUL arrivals were in the former NAV DATA Base and once selected to the other NAV DATA base to reflect XA01Z during pre-flight we only had the EAGUL6.  Upon landing at PHX the NAV DATA Base was swapped again and the 'NAV DATA Base Out of Date' message appeared.  FMC was left in configuration SEPXAOCTXB/XZ.Direction was given how to approach the JeppTC Pro Mid-Cycle Chart Changes from the Jepp side of the house.  Perhaps further instruction concerning how this change should be handled via FMC procedures needs to be included.  Perhaps instruction for both the planning and execution needs to be addressed for operations that may be 'non-standard'.




Synopsis: A flight crew changed the FMC NAV DATABASE on XA00Z SEP to the next month which changed the PHX arrival to EAGUL 6 but the Company had filed the PHX EAGUL 5 arrival with the previous calendar day's date. ATC caught the error over GEENO because of a crossing restricting difference.