Date: 201409
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZSE.ARTCC, WA
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Dawn
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZSE
ATC / advisory: Center ZSE
Aircraft component: Aero Charts
Component problem: Design
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Second reporter function: First Officer; Pilot Not Flying
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; 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
Contributing factors: Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Chart Or Publication

Narrative: We were filed and cleared to BFI via the CHINS STAR to land 13R. When cleared to descend via the arrival I put 11000 in the FMC for the altitude at RADDY because I saw the note on the plate referencing Boeing Field. I did not see the note was only for 31L. The crossing should have been 16000. The note above for turbo jets appeared to be for SeaTac. The controller advised us upon reaching 11000 that 'for future reference the crossing at RADDY is 16000.' I questioned this and he pointed out the note on the plate was for 31L. His next comment was 'no problem; this is a poorly written arrival and it not the first time and it won't be the last.' There was no traffic conflict but if it had been at a busier time there could have been.The 'descend via' the arrival procedure should be more airport specific and there should be clearer notes if they are going to be used. I feel this clearance should have been 'cross RADDY at 16000' if it was the old way. I hope this will prompt some clean up on the use of a single arrival plate for multiple airports. There seems to be too many plates for some airports and too little definition on ones like this.


Second narrative: We were cleared to descend via CHINS9 arrival for BFI. The CHINS9 arrival covers both SEA and BFI. After reviewing the chart; both pilots agreed to cross Raddy at 11;000 feet. The chart states altitude constraints for landing north; landing south; and landing BFI. We used landing BFI. When descending through 14;000 feet; the controller asked us to level off at 12;000. He stated we should have leveled off at 16;000 [feet]. He also stated this was a common occurrence on the CHINS9 arrival to BFI. We leveled off at 12;000 feet. We reviewed the chart again. Underneath landing BFI in small print is stated runway 31. We were landing 13R. This chart is misleading. If it necessary to use one arrival for two airports; it would be better to clearly state the restrictions for each airport separately to reduce misinterpretation.


Synopsis: Air carrier flight crew intending to land on Runway 13L at BFI and cleared to descend via the CHINS STAR misinterpreted the chart crossing restrictions. They crossed RADDY at 11;000 instead of 16;000 as directed by the generic 'TURBOJETS LANDING SOUTH' that pertains to arrivals at 'all' airports served by the arrival.