Narrative:

The oapm RNAV arrival into iah from the southwest corner post is the Tejas2 arrival and has a NOTAM for turbojets pilots to maintain mach number until descending via the arrival and then maintain 280kts when transitioning to IAS. When asked aircraft X claimed to be at 300kts. I asked if aircraft X was aware of the 280kts restriction and he said I had not issued it so he was not flying at 280kts. I explained the speed restriction was in the NOTAMS and the pilot then keyed up to explain to me that he was not required to reduce his speed until gmann. I stated the NOTAM for the pilot and asked him to reduce to published speed. Upon frequency change to approach control the pilot again began to explain to me in length that he was not required to reduce speed until transitioning to IAS and that he hadn't transitioned until FL270. This is a common occurrence with pilots on the southwest corner post and creates a hazard to flight safety as is causes unnecessary frequency congestion while aircraft are in a situation of rapid congestion. Pilots have complained that the NOTAM is in a list of roughly 40 or so NOTAMS for the airport; however; that should not negate responsibility. I recommend that the speed reduction is more clearly stated or restated (to include a distance from fix to begin speed reduction or altitude) since different aircraft types transition at different altitudes. I also highly suggest the speed restriction be added to the actual STAR and not just as a NOTAM.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZHU Controller describes problems with various aircraft inbound to IAH that are not clear with a NOTAM that has speed restrictions on it that relate to a STAR for IAH.

Narrative: The OAPM RNAV arrival into IAH from the southwest corner post is the Tejas2 arrival and has a NOTAM for turbojets pilots to maintain mach number until descending via the arrival and then maintain 280kts when transitioning to IAS. When asked Aircraft X claimed to be at 300kts. I asked if Aircraft X was aware of the 280kts restriction and he said I had not issued it so he was not flying at 280kts. I explained the speed restriction was in the NOTAMS and the pilot then keyed up to explain to me that he was not required to reduce his speed until GMANN. I stated the NOTAM for the pilot and asked him to reduce to published speed. Upon frequency change to approach control the pilot again began to explain to me in length that he was not required to reduce speed until transitioning to IAS and that he hadn't transitioned until FL270. This is a common occurrence with pilots on the southwest corner post and creates a hazard to flight safety as is causes unnecessary frequency congestion while aircraft are in a situation of rapid congestion. Pilots have complained that the NOTAM is in a list of roughly 40 or so NOTAMS for the airport; however; that should not negate responsibility. I recommend that the speed reduction is more clearly stated or restated (to include a distance from fix to begin speed reduction or altitude) since different aircraft types transition at different altitudes. I also highly suggest the speed restriction be added to the actual STAR and not just as a NOTAM.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.