FLC TAKES CLRNC FOR ACFT WITH SIMILAR CALL SIGN.

Narrative

WHILE ENRTE TO PIT; WE ACCEPTED A CLRNC TO 4000 FT MSL. BEFORE ARRIVING AT 4000 FT; HOWEVER; WE THOUGHT THAT WE HEARD THE CTLR CLRING US TO DSND TO 3000 FT MSL. THE PNF READ BACK THE CLRNC INCLUDING THE CALL SIGN. WHEN LEVEL AT 3000 FT AND AFTER BEING QUERIED BY ATC IN REGARD TO OUR ALT; WE WERE INFORMED BY THE CTLR THAT HE WANTED US AT 4000 FT AND THAT HE THOUGHT WE MIGHT HAVE RESPONDED TO A CLRNC ISSUED TO ANOTHER ACFT WITH THE SAME COMPANY AND WITH A SIMILAR FLT NUMBER. WHEN QUESTIONED FURTHER THE CTLR SAID THAT THE READBACK FOR THE CLRNC TO 3000 FT HAD BEEN PARTIALLY GARBLED AND UNREADABLE. ONCE ON THE GND WE CONTACTED THE ATC SUPVR BY TELEPHONE WHO; AFTER REPLAYING THE ATC TAPE RECORDING; SAID THAT THE CLRNC TO DSND TO 3000 FT WAS INDEED MEANT FOR ANOTHER ACFT AND THAT THE READBACK WAS PARTIALLY UNINTELLIGIBLE. I FEEL THAT THIS SIT MIGHT HAVE BEEN AVERTED IF WE HAD BEEN WARNED OF THE PRESENCE OF COMPANY WITH A SIMILAR FLT NUMBER ON THE FREQ. I ALSO FEEL THAT SINCE THE READBACK OF THE CLRNC WAS PARTIALLY UNREADABLE; THIS EVENT WOULD HAVE BEEN AVERTED IF THE CTLR WOULD HAVE ASKED FOR A VERIFICATION OF THE READBACK. OF COURSE PAYING CLOSER ATTN TO THE CLRNCS THAT ARE GIVEN TO ANY FLC WOULD HELP TO AVERT SITS SUCH AS THIS IN THE FUTURE.