Date: 201504
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: IAH.Airport, TX
Flight conditions: IMC
Weather elements / visibility: 10
Light: Daylight
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Corporate
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Initial Approach
Airspace: Class B IAH
ATC / advisory: TRACON I90
Aircraft component: FMS/FMC
Reporter organization: Corporate
Reporter function: Captain; Pilot Flying
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; 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; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Airspace Structure; Chart Or Publication; Procedure
Primary problem: Airspace Structure

Narrative: Repositioning to IAH. While on radar vectors to the ILS 26L at 5000ft; 200kts; approximately 25 NM from IAH on a 300 degree heading; we were given direct GRIEG and join the 26L LOC. We had the ILS 26L loaded into our FMS out to the KERNS intersection; but did not have the transition loaded. The Pilot Not Flying (PNF); using our EFB; selected the GARRR intersection into the FMS. Once this fix was entered; we both thought the picture did not look correct; so we questioned the directions as I started a slow turn to the right toward GARRR intersection. The result was a command to turn left to 280 degrees; intercept the 26L LOC and increase speed to 230kts. There does not appear to have been any separation issues; as we did not receive any TCAS alerts; nor were we broken out of the approach. After joining the 26L LOC and being cleared for the approach; the monitor broke in and asked why we could not go direct GRIEG and join the 26L LOC. It was at that time that we realized that the controller and the monitor were saying GRIEG; not GARRR. The 2 intersection names sounded the same to us. Another contributing factor is that; per our company OpSpecs; we have 2 EFBs on board. One is to be used by the PNF; while the other is to be kept in reserve in case the first fails. Not having 2 sets of charts; one for the pilot flying and one for the PNF; leaves a lack of the ability to cross check charts if there is a question about a clearance in such a high density area. ATC also said this is not the first time that these 2 fixes have been confused.

Callback: The reporter stated that GARRR sounded similar in their environment that day and although slightly off track were close enough to be believable. The non flying pilot accepted that change while the pilot flying was skeptical. The aircraft's FMS in the Vector Mode did not show the entire transition and approach which would have included both GARRR and GRIEG.



Synopsis: A Corporate crew on approach to IAH Runway 26L were cleared direct the IF GREIG but entered GARRR in the FMS which is 12NM prior. The pilots heard GRIEG and GARRR as similar and suggest a name change.