The 10-7 page is just one of the pages that Jeppesen publishes for my airline and it and the subsequent 10-7A,10-7B etc. are considered airport information pages. For us it simply states that 9L is not used for departure for noise abatement reasons. My life is way too short to have launched a 1000 hour inqiury with the airline as to why this is in the book and how to get it changed and how many people would need to sit in on a meeting with Jeppesen to formulate a review plan and if a contractor should be studied to determine if this statement is valid at all times etc.
In other words I simply read the thing and took it for what it was worth but was certainly surprised by it.
Of course I have landed on 9L many times--it is just that I have not been there when it was being used for takeoff ---which when I am only there perhaps 4 times a month hat makes sense that the odds of me seeing this runway used for departure are slim.
I did look through my books however (in a serious case of geekdom I must admit that I am doing this at home!), and indeed noticed that all the 10-3 departure pages list 9L as a possibility so all the obstacle data must be in. One of those things perhaps that just does not come up that often for some of us and I never really noticed it as all my departures seem to be 27 R/L or 9R with the turn at LON 2 DME to a heading of 220. Sort of like asking the European crews if they knew that ORD had until not so long ago a runway 36? Not long enough for large jet use but I have seen departures from it.