Narrative:

During the midnight shift; while new york center was in the darc; I got a manual hand off from them on a flight that wanted to land at penn yan airport (peo). When ZNY called; I had no information on the aircraft; and the plane was not very far from my boundary. I took the flight plan information and started a track on the aircraft. While waiting for the aircraft to check in; I asked the another controller on the shift with me what to do with this aircraft; we are responsible for the peo airport on late night shifts; but I have very little idea in actuality on how to work a plane into that airport. Running an approach is not something I ever do in our airspace; and I felt that my level of knowledge (or lack of; more correctly!) was an unsafe situation. Between the other controller on duty and myself; we got as far as pulling up the erids information for the airport; asking the pilot what kind of approach he wanted (the visual) ensuring that he had the current weather (he did)...this is where my knowledge stopped. I was unsure what the minimum altitudes were in that area...MVA; mia; MOCA; I sort of knew where to look for them; but did not have that ready. The plane was already at 6;000 ft; an altitude which we normally only own over lake ontario. We pick up this altitude over land only on the late night shifts. My uncertainty over the altitudes was also unsafe. At this point the aircraft was probably within 30 NM of the airport; and I called the roc approach to point-out; and the approach controller completely bailed me out and offered to work the aircraft into peo for me. I thanked him profusely; and processed the flight plan information to him via an ARTS force. The roc controller was concerned that he might not get radar contact on the plane until he was about 10 NM away from the field. He took an automated hand off about 12-15 NM from the airport; and I called back to verify that he had all the information. I switched the aircraft to approach control; and he landed safely; I received his IFR cancellation via FSS. After the plane had landed; the roc approach controller called back and we talked about the penn yan situation; and the concerns we both had about the handling of that airport on the late night shifts. The controller was extremely helpful; and we discussed the ways the situation could be improved. It is my opinion; and that of many of my co-workers; that the peo airport should be the control of rochester approach on the late night shifts. We are an enroute center area that does not run approaches. We are not proficient in approaches. We have had approach cbi's; and a briefing every half-year or so; but that does not make us experienced and it definitely does not make us safe. The penn yan airport is ours on the late night shift because we assume airspace that normally belongs to elmira approach. Not only do we not run approaches in general; we specifically don't run approaches at that airport because it isn't ours during the normal shift. It is an unsafe situation to have us running approaches into this airport. Certainly; further training of the controllers in our area would be helpful. However; I don't feel this is the solution because we still would never be proficient at providing approach services since it is used so infrequently. When discussing this with the roc approach controller; he said that they had been in discussions with our center about approach control assuming this airspace. It seems that everyone thinks that this is a pretty good idea. This controller said that they don't mind running the approaches into peo; but they are limited by frequency coverage in the vicinity of peo once the airplane descends to 2;500 ft or below. The approach control has been asking the FAA to install an rco (remote communications outlet); but the FAA doesn't want to spend the money.this is a serious situation that is finally starting to be addressed. It is not a critical safety issue only because there are not many planes trying to land there on the midnights. However; that doesn't make it any safer for the one plane that is needing our services and trusting us to do a thorough job in providing separation and approach guidance. I am a certified IFR pilot; I know some things about approaches; and I felt very unsafe trying to figure out how to work this plane into penn yan. Roc approach is willing to take this; we are willing to give it to them; (as I understand the situation) all that is needed is some support from the FAA which doesn't seem to be forthcoming.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZOB Controller described an unsafe event when; during a late night shift; an IFR aircraft required Approach Control services into PEO Airport. The reporter noted his/her unfamiliarity with this type of ATC handling.

Narrative: During the midnight shift; while New York Center was in the DARC; I got a manual hand off from them on a flight that wanted to land at Penn Yan Airport (PEO). When ZNY called; I had no information on the aircraft; and the plane was not very far from my boundary. I took the Flight Plan information and started a track on the aircraft. While waiting for the aircraft to check in; I asked the another Controller on the shift with me what to do with this aircraft; we are responsible for the PEO Airport on late night shifts; but I have very little idea in actuality on how to work a plane into that airport. Running an approach is not something I ever do in our airspace; and I felt that my level of knowledge (or lack of; more correctly!) was an unsafe situation. Between the other Controller on duty and myself; we got as far as pulling up the ERIDS information for the airport; asking the pilot what kind of approach he wanted (the visual) ensuring that he had the current weather (he did)...this is where my knowledge stopped. I was unsure what the minimum altitudes were in that area...MVA; MIA; MOCA; I sort of knew where to look for them; but did not have that ready. The plane was already at 6;000 FT; an altitude which we normally only own over Lake Ontario. We pick up this altitude over land only on the late night shifts. My uncertainty over the altitudes was also unsafe. At this point the aircraft was probably within 30 NM of the airport; and I called the ROC Approach to point-out; and the Approach Controller completely bailed me out and offered to work the aircraft into PEO for me. I thanked him profusely; and processed the Flight Plan information to him via an ARTS force. The ROC Controller was concerned that he might not get RADAR contact on the plane until he was about 10 NM away from the field. He took an automated hand off about 12-15 NM from the airport; and I called back to verify that he had all the information. I switched the aircraft to Approach Control; and he landed safely; I received his IFR cancellation via FSS. After the plane had landed; the ROC Approach Controller called back and we talked about the Penn Yan situation; and the concerns we both had about the handling of that airport on the late night shifts. The Controller was extremely helpful; and we discussed the ways the situation could be improved. It is my opinion; and that of many of my co-workers; that the PEO airport should be the control of Rochester Approach on the late night shifts. We are an Enroute Center Area that does not run approaches. We are not proficient in approaches. We have had approach CBI's; and a briefing every half-year or so; but that does not make us experienced and it definitely does not make us safe. The Penn Yan Airport is ours on the late night shift because we assume airspace that normally belongs to Elmira Approach. Not only do we not run approaches in general; we specifically don't run approaches at that airport because it isn't ours during the normal shift. It is an unsafe situation to have us running approaches into this airport. Certainly; further training of the controllers in our area would be helpful. However; I don't feel this is the solution because we still would never be proficient at providing approach services since it is used so infrequently. When discussing this with the ROC Approach Controller; he said that they had been in discussions with our Center about Approach Control assuming this airspace. It seems that everyone thinks that this is a pretty good idea. This controller said that they don't mind running the approaches into PEO; but they are limited by frequency coverage in the vicinity of PEO once the airplane descends to 2;500 FT or below. The Approach Control has been asking the FAA to install an RCO (remote communications outlet); but the FAA doesn't want to spend the money.This is a serious situation that is finally starting to be addressed. It is not a critical safety issue only because there are not many planes trying to land there on the midnights. However; that doesn't make it any safer for the one plane that is needing our services and trusting us to do a thorough job in providing separation and approach guidance. I am a certified IFR pilot; I know some things about approaches; and I felt very unsafe trying to figure out how to work this plane into Penn Yan. ROC Approach is willing to take this; we are willing to give it to them; (as I understand the situation) all that is needed is some support from the FAA which doesn't seem to be forthcoming.

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.