AN ACR B737-300 FLC CROSSED THE HOLD LINE FOR RWY 9L AT MIA WITHOUT AUTH. THE FLC COMPLAINED THAT THE HOLD LINE PAINT IS CHIPPED AND WORN AND THE HOLD LINE LIGHTS WERE NOT ON WHEN THEY PASSED THE LINE. ADDITIONALLY; THE LINE WAS NOT ON THEIR CHARTS AND ITS LOCATION IS SOME DISTANCE FROM THE RWY.

Narrative

FROM THE F CONCOURSE; TAXI CLRNC WAS RECEIVED TO TAXI TO RWY 9L VIA TXWY P AT MIA. APCHING TXWY M; INSTRUCTIONS WERE RECEIVED TO 'FOLLOW AN ACR B757 AND SWITCH TO TWR FREQ.' MIA TWR REQUESTED THAT WE DEPART ON RWY 12; CAUSING A DIVISION OF ATTN FOR PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS. IT WAS DETERMINED THAT RWY 12 WAS NOT USABLE FOR PERFORMANCE REASONS AND TAXI WAS CONTINUED TO RWY 9L. WHILE WELL CLR OF RWY 9L; INSTRUCTIONS WERE RECEIVED BY MIA TWR TO MAKE A 180 DEG TURN AND TAXI SE TO PROVIDE ROOM FOR ANOTHER ACFT TO TKOF FROM RWY 12. AFTER THE OTHER ACFT WAS CLR; WE ONCE AGAIN TAXIED TOWARD THE APCH END OF RWY 9L. THIS TIME A ROW OF AMBER HOLD SHORT LIGHTS WERE VISIBLE AND WE HELD SHORT OF THEM; REALIZING THAT THEY HAD BEEN PASSED THE FIRST TIME. 2 LIGHT CONDITIONS EXISTED AT THE TIME AND THE PAINTED MARKINGS WERE NOT VISIBLE ON THE TXWY. THE AMBER HOLD LIGHTS WERE NOT ILLUMINATED ON THE FIRST PASS. I FEEL THAT THE HOLD SHORT POINT SHOULD BE MORE CLRLY MARKED TO PREVENT THIS TYPE OF INCIDENT. AN UNEVENTFUL DEP WAS MADE FROM RWY 9L FOLLOWING THIS INCIDENT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: THIS B737-300 ACR FLC APPARENTLY PASSED THE HOLD LINE FOR RWY 9L THE FIRST TIME THEY TAXIED TOWARD THE RWY. THE RPTR SAID THAT THE FIRST TIME THEY CROSSED IT THE AMBER HOLD LINE LIGHTS WERE NOT ILLUMINATED; BUT ON THE SECOND APCH THEY WERE AND THE HOLD LINE WAS CLRLY SEEN. THE RPTR SAID THAT HE WAS SURPRISED BY THE PLACEMENT OF THE HOLD LINE SO FAR FROM THE RWY AND AT AN ANGLE INSTEAD OF PARALLEL TO THE RWY. HE SAID THAT ON SECOND THOUGHT; AN ANGLED HOLD LINE WAS PROBABLY THE ONLY TYPE THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE IF IT STAYS AT SOME DISTANCE FROM RWY 9L.