Date: 202105
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: APC.Airport, CA
Flight conditions: VMC
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Any Unknown or Unlisted Aircraft Manufacturer
Operator: Air Carrier
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Taxi
ATC / advisory: Ground APC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Not Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Instrument; Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP); Flight Crew Flight Instructor; Flight Crew Multiengine
Human factors: Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Taxiway
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: Taxi
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Airport
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: Very poorly written NOTAM creating a dilemma in operations. After landing on Runway 6; Napa Tower cleared us to back taxi on Runway 6 and exit on Taxiway C. We stated that we were unable Taxiway C due to our aircraft weighing more than 30;000 lbs. There was a NOTAM 04/006 in effect stating 'Taxiway C closed to aircraft more than 30;000 lb'. Tower then stated that it was OK and reissued the clearance for us to exit Taxiway C. I was hesitant; but we complied with the clearance and exited Taxiway C so as not to create a potentially bigger problem with other traffic. But I also stated on the frequency for the tapes that we are exiting on Taxiway C in compliance with our clearance despite weighing more than 30;000 lbs per the NOTAM. I think we made the wise decision to comply with ATC under the circumstances; but the pilot should not be put into that situation of either violating a clearance or violating a known published NOTAM. Per many NOTAMs at APC; Runway 1L/19R was closed with many other taxiways closed also. We were very aware of the NOTAMs and pre-briefed our certain back taxi on Runway 6 during our approach briefing before top of descent. We were very situationally aware and not surprised except for the clearance to exit on Taxiway C (it was supposedly closed to us). I politely had a short discussion with Ground Control during taxi in to the ramp and expressed my concern about being issued a clearance that made us technically in violation of the NOTAM. He said it was OK; but he would discuss it with the supervisor. I did not mention this to Ground Control; but the NOTAM should have stated more clearly and accurately that Taxiway C is closed north of Taxiway H to aircraft over 30;000 lbs. The NOTAM for Taxiway C has been in place for a long time-- certainly before the NOTAMs for Runway 1L/19R and other taxiways were more recent. Somebody didn't review the consequences of the older Taxiway C NOTAM when they published the more recent ones. It created an operational problem needlessly. Napa Tower did not appear concerned; but I hope they and Airport Ops fix this situation.




Synopsis: Captain reported concerns when ATC directed him to taxi on a taxiway that was NOTAMed closed to aircraft over 30;000 pounds at APC airport.