TRACK DEV OCCURS WHEN B747-400 FLT CREW MISINTERPRETS PDC REVISED SEGMENT.

Narrative

FILED MOLEN 3 ENI BOXER. PDC HAD REVISED CLRNC WHICH WAS MOLEN 3 MOLEN BOXER. ENI IS ON THE SID PAGE. SO SINCE WE WERE FILED OVER ENI AND THE AMENDED CLRNC DID NOT SPECIFICALLY STATE DIRECT BOXER AFTER MOLEN; WE FOLLOWED THE SID. AS WE TURNED TOWARDS ENI; ATC ASKED IF SFO HAD REVISED OUR CLRNC FOR DIRECT BOXER AFTER MOLEN. HE SUBSEQUENTLY GAVE US A HDG AND THEN A CLRNC DIRECT BOXER. IN RETROSPECT; I SHOULD HAVE ASKED IF WE WERE INDEED CLRED DIRECT BOXER AFTER MOLEN SINCE WE WERE SOMEWHAT CONFUSED ABOUT THE REVISED CLRNC. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 775168: PRIOR TO BEFORE START CHKLIST; THE PDC WAS RECEIVED. IT WAS THE MOLEN 3 DEP; AS EXPECTED. THE REVISED SEGMENT INDICATED THE SAME; MOLEN 3 MOLEN AND BOXER. BOXER WAS ALREADY ON OUR RTE OF FLT; SO THIS DID NOT STAND OUT AS; IN FACT; REVISED. THIS WAS LOADED INTO THE FMC; WITH THE LEGS PAGE LOOKING AS DESCRIBED IN THE CLRNC. AFTER HDOF FROM NORCAL TO ZOA; WE WERE QUERIED ABOUT GOING DIRECT TO BOXER; WHICH WE HAD NOT BEEN GIVEN BY THE PREVIOUS CTLR. THE CLRNC WAS THEN QUESTIONED; AND ZOA INDICATED WE HAD BEEN CLRED DIRECT BOXER ON THE PDC. AFTER EXAMINING THE REVISED SEGMENT AGAIN; SINCE THE TEXT WAS WORDED 'MOLEN BOXER' WE DID NOT GRASP THAT IT WAS DIRECT AFTER MOLEN. IN RETROSPECT; CLRNC SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONTACTED ON THE GND TO DISSEMINATE THE REVISED SEGMENT; IT APPEARED TO US TO BE OUR ORIGINALLY FILED RTE.