Narrative:

Student pilot C172 was in right traffic for runway 25 doing full stop taxi backs; both the tail number and 'student pilot' were clearly marked on the handwritten strip. As [the] C172 departed there were two other aircraft inbound from the north-west and were both VFR. After being switched from sector X; [a] C182 was on a 5 mile final set up for RNAV 25 practice approach and requested a circling approach to runway 31. The tower controller advised her to continue and to expect a circle to runway 31 on a 1 mile final. As C182 approached the 1 mile final; C172 was 1/2 mile from the base turn. C182 was then instructed to start the circle for runway 31 and told about C172 and instructed to reference her base turn off of that traffic. C172 was then turned base and cleared to land and also was told about traffic landing runway 31. When C172 was on 1/2 mile final the controller misidentified that aircraft as another that was also in the pattern and on the downwind at that time he then cleared that aircraft to land. The controller acknowledged the clarification of position from the aircraft on the downwind and then cleared C172 to land and gave her instructions to hold short of runway 31. I was aware that C172 was a student pilot and could not be given that instruction; however I could not get the local controller to understand what I was telling him. The local controller was trying to explain to C182 what the traffic landing on runway 25 was instructed to do. C172 never read back the hold short instructions and landed on runway 25 at the same time that C182 was touching down on runway 31. C172 was clearly confused as she exited the runway. She then explained briefly that she could not accept a lahso clearance because she was a student pilot. C172 was told to contact ground and the ground controller taxied her back to runway 25 where she requested taxi back to parking. The controllers' lack of standard phraseology made it difficult for C172 to understand exactly what was being asked of her. One of the two aircraft should have been sent around to solve a problem that was clearly developing. The confusion of the two aircraft on the downwind and the final complicated the problem; which was made even worse by non-standard phraseology. It took so long for the local controller to explain in plain language what he needed; that he could not comprehend that he needed to send someone around. I don't think the controller even recognized that I was telling him that someone needed to be sent around to avoid a loss of separation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Tower Controller described a confused intersecting runway landing event resulting in less than required separation when the Local Controller failed to note the involved student pilot was prohibited from any type LAHSO.

Narrative: Student pilot C172 was in right traffic for Runway 25 doing full stop taxi backs; both the tail number and 'student pilot' were clearly marked on the handwritten strip. As [the] C172 departed there were two other aircraft inbound from the north-west and were both VFR. After being switched from Sector X; [a] C182 was on a 5 mile final set up for RNAV 25 practice approach and requested a circling approach to Runway 31. The Tower Controller advised her to continue and to expect a circle to Runway 31 on a 1 mile final. As C182 approached the 1 mile final; C172 was 1/2 mile from the base turn. C182 was then instructed to start the circle for Runway 31 and told about C172 and instructed to reference her base turn off of that traffic. C172 was then turned base and cleared to land and also was told about traffic landing Runway 31. When C172 was on 1/2 mile final the Controller misidentified that aircraft as another that was also in the pattern and on the downwind at that time he then cleared that aircraft to land. The Controller acknowledged the clarification of position from the aircraft on the downwind and then cleared C172 to land and gave her instructions to hold short of Runway 31. I was aware that C172 was a student pilot and could not be given that instruction; however I could not get the Local Controller to understand what I was telling him. The Local Controller was trying to explain to C182 what the traffic landing on Runway 25 was instructed to do. C172 never read back the hold short instructions and landed on Runway 25 at the same time that C182 was touching down on Runway 31. C172 was clearly confused as she exited the runway. She then explained briefly that she could not accept a LAHSO clearance because she was a student pilot. C172 was told to contact Ground and the Ground Controller taxied her back to Runway 25 where she requested taxi back to parking. The Controllers' lack of standard phraseology made it difficult for C172 to understand exactly what was being asked of her. One of the two aircraft should have been sent around to solve a problem that was clearly developing. The confusion of the two aircraft on the downwind and the final complicated the problem; which was made even worse by non-standard phraseology. It took so long for the Local Controller to explain in plain language what he needed; that he could not comprehend that he needed to send someone around. I don't think the Controller even recognized that I was telling him that someone needed to be sent around to avoid a loss of separation.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.