ATC ENRTE CLRNC NOT UNDERSTOOD.

Narrative

FILED RTE: MIA AGW BR53L RAJAY BR55V COBBL BR3L GTK A555 DDP SJU. ON A FLT FROM MIA-SJU AND RECEIVING VARIOUS RADAR VECTORS FROM ZMA; WE WERE ISSUED A HDG TO INTERCEPT A555 SE OF GTK THEN FLT PLAN RTE; WHICH WAS READ BACK BY THE FO AS 'HDG 130 TO INTERCEPT A555 FLT PLAN RTE.' IF ZMA ISSUED A DIFFERENT ARR RTE FOR SJU WE DID NOT ACKNOWLEDGE IT THROUGH OUR READBACK. AFTER BEING HANDED OFF TO ZSU WE WERE INSTRUCTED 'CLRED TO FL290 CROSS COQUI INTXN AT 11000 FT; PLT'S DISCRETION.' AFTER DISCUSSING THE CLRNC WITH THE FO WE DETERMINED THE CLRNC WAS PLT'S DISCRETION TO FL290 THEN CROSS COQUI AT 11000 FT. REVIEWING THE ARR ROUTING BASED ON OUR LAST ASSIGNED CLRNC FROM ZMA; COQUI INTXN WAS NOT ON OUR ROUTING. I INFORMED ZSU OUR LAST CLRNC WAS A555 TO DDP THEN SJU. COQUI INTXN IS ON AIRWAY RTE 6. USING TERMINOLOGY SUCH AS 'FLT PLAN RTE' WHEN AN AIRWAY USES A NAME LIKE 'RTE 6' COULD HAVE RESULTED IN THE MISINTERP. ZSU ISSUED A HDG TO INTERCEPT RTE 6. A SHORT TIME LATER ZSU INFORMED US THAT WE WERE TO DSND TO FL290 THEN CROSS COQUI AT 11000 FT; THAT DSCNT TO FL290 WAS NOT AT PLT'S DISCRETION; BUT THE DSCNT TO CROSS COQUI WAS. I INFORMED ZSU THAT WE UNDERSTOOD THE CLRNC TO BE PLT'S DISCRETION TO FL290 THEN CROSS COQUI AT 11000 FT. WE RECEIVED A 20 DEG HDG CHANGE AND COMPLIED WITH CTR'S INSTRUCTIONS. WHEN A CLRNC IS ISSUED; WHICH CONTAINS NONSTANDARD TERMINOLOGY OR FORMAT; IT SHOULD BE QUESTIONED UNTIL ITS INTENDED MEANING IS UNDERSTOOD. WE RECEIVE DSCNT CLRNCS WITH XING RESTR VERY REGULARLY FROM ZID; BUT IN A DIFFERENT FORMAT THAN ISSUED BY ZSU WHICH LED TO MISINTERP. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 274034: WHEN A CLRNC IS ISSUED WHICH CONTAINS NONSTANDARD TERMINOLOGY OR FORMAT; IT SHOULD BE QUESTIONED UNTIL COMPLETELY UNDERSTOOD. OFTEN THERE IS AN IMPLIED PRESSURE ON THE CREW TO GET THE CLRNC RIGHT THE FIRST TIME AND THERE IS A RELUCTANCE TO TAKE THE TIME TO QUESTION/CLARIFY THE CTLR'S CLRNC. WE REGULARLY RECEIVE A VARIETY OF DSCNT CLRNCS WITH XING RESTRS FROM ZID AND THEY ARE ALL VERY CLR BECAUSE THEY USE STANDARD TERMINOLOGY; PHRASEOLOGY AND FORMAT; AND SEEM TO BE DIFFERENT THAN THE ONE ISSUED BY ZSU WHICH RESULTED IN THIS CONFUSION AND MISINTERP.