Air carrier flight crew reported flying RNAV approach into airport that was not AMOC approved in terms of possible 5G interference.
Synopsis
Air carrier flight crew reported flying RNAV approach into airport that was not AMOC approved in terms of possible 5G interference.
Narrative
We were on the way to ZZZ from ZZZ1 and I was PM (pilot Monitoring). ZZZ does not have a D-ATIS; and as I like to work ahead on a short flight; was trying to listen for the ATIS as early as possible on the cruise. However due to our altitude and distance; the frequency overlaps with ZZZ ATIS and some other frequency; making it difficult to listen for the full details. I heard the approach being used was the ILS XX into ZZZ; and that the airport had clear skies and light winds; a nice VFR day. CA (Captain) suggested we do the RNAV XX for Runway XX for practice; and I agreed. CA build the approach; we buy it; he briefs it; and we go over the procedure for RNP approaches together. I make a point of saying there are no active 5G NOTAMs in effect at the end of the checklist; thinking I'm being extra careful since the checklist doesn't specifically caution us to look for them; and think that everything is normal. We don't really stop and look for any NOTAMS that affect the approach into Runway XX; since the CA had looked for those before departure; and didn't see anything against Runway XX. I send for landing numbers; which does advise us whether or not 5G NOTAMs are in effect; but as what I know is a bad habit to have formed I skim through as if it were a nuisance message; since for most approaches we do is not a factor; and in my mind the ATIS never pointed it out. ATC clears us for the approach; and the CA flies it normally to landing; as the weather conditions were as mild as can be in this instance. Once we pull up to the gate and start preparing for a quick turn; I now clearly hear the ZZZ ATIS stating that 5G NOTAMs are in effect; and realizing we just violated SOP policy by flying an RNP approach for a runway without an AMOC; I go back and look at the NOTAMs from the inbound release; and see it clear as day that NOTAMs were posted there; as well as look back to the 5G message from the landing numbers; as it still had not been dropped by the airplane; also stating 5G NOTAMs in effect; SOP policies apply. As soon as the CA returns to the flight deck from briefing the FAs for our next leg I let him now what just happened; and he also immediately realize that we both failed to cross check each other on a pretty consequential briefing item. I mostly blame what happened on complacency; since this was my first time flying an RNP approach that was not backing up a visual approach; and I have also gotten very used to flying to the same handful of airports where the 5G SOP either doesn't apply; or isn't a factor because the minimums haven't in my experience deteriorated to the point of needing a CAT II approach/ airport doesn't support have an RNP approach. I should have also been more careful as well in the sense that it was also my first time flying to ZZZ; and I took ZZZ for granted due to it being a 'quieter' airport.I have to be careful of not getting too complacent with my procedures; no matter the role; just because most of the time things go a certain way. The 5G policy is in effect for a reason; and shouldn't underplay it; regardless of how often they come into play. I should also review the NOTAMs on the release more closely; so as not to lean on the CA to look out for everything; as my role as PM is also to point anything that I don't agree with or is out of the ordinary.
Second reporter narrative
While operating ZZZ1-ZZZ; I elected to perform a RNP approach to Runway XX in ZZZ. I typically perform 1-2 RNP approaches over the course of a trip to keep current and sharp on this still fairly new procedure. I have become accustomed to seeing whether or not specific runways are AMOC approved in the remarks section of a dispatch release. And as part of my brief (as required by the FOM); I always cover the remarks section. I remember stating that no runways were in the AMOC for ZZZ; meaning RNP approaches are not authorized. While enroute to ZZZ; I decided to shoot a RNP approach; forgetting that the release said no runways at ZZZ were AMOC approved. While sending for landing data via ACARS; we do receive a secondary message stating that 5G NOTAMs/SOP are in effect. However; I was turned away from the MCDU; bringing up the approach plate on my iPad in order to brief the approach; not seeing the ACARS message as my reminder. I continued to brief the approach and we flew it as normal to an uneventful landing. However; on the next flight my FO (First Officer) and I both realized that RNP approaches are currently not authorized in ZZZ. We both admitted the mistake and agreed to file a report. We discussed the scenario and; while there were no issues while executing the approach; both admitted there can be confusion with the current NOTAM/SOP procedure; i.e. when the NOTAM is in effect; it means RNP approaches are NOT authorized. Only when a runway is in the AMOC is the procedure authorized. We decided a report would be the course of action after the fact to let it be known that we executed a RNP approach that is currently not authorized.While over the course of the last few months; there are now many airports and specific runways where we operate that are AMOC approved; there are still plenty that are not. It is important to brief AMOC approved runways via the remarks section of the dispatch release; take note of them; as well as in flight when receiving the ACARS message concurrent with landing data. Additionally; this is another reason why we operate in a two crew member environment and under the notion of [confirm; initiate; monitor and intervene]. The hope is that if a mistake occurs; the other crew member will hopefully bring it to attention. Unfortunately this was a scenario where a threat presented itself and went unmitigated. Thankfully; the approach was uneventful and don't believe safety was compromised.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.