SR20 pilot reported that ATC did not let him use the MOCA altitude that was published on his route. ...

Narrative:

The MOCA on V386 southeast of soggi is 9;400 ft; and ATC denied this altitude on request of pilot. Initially; ATC demanded 11;000 ft which would have meant certain icing; but later allowed 10;000 ft as this was their MVA.this FAA manual is outdated: https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/instrument_procedures_handbook/media/FAA-H-8083-16.pdf page 2-35 incorrectly states; 'if both a MEA and a MOCA are prescribed for a particular route or route segment; pilots may operate an aircraft below the MEA down to; but not below; the MOCA; only when within 22 NM of the VOR.'the more correct authority is far 91.177(a); 'the applicable minimum altitudes prescribed in parts 95 and 97 of this chapter. However; if both a MEA and a MOCA are prescribed for a particular route or route segment; a person may operate an aircraft below the MEA down to; but not below; the MOCA; provided the applicable navigation signals are available. For aircraft using VOR for navigation; this applies only when the aircraft is within 22 nautical miles of that VOR (based on the reasonable estimate by the pilot operating the aircraft of that distance).' in other words; if a pilot of a GPS equipped aircraft requests a MOCA to avoid icing above; ATC should not force the pilot up to the MEA and into the icing.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SR20 pilot reported that ATC did not let him use the MOCA altitude that was published on his route. Pilot wanted to be lower to get out of possible icing conditions.

Narrative: The MOCA on V386 southeast of SOGGI is 9;400 ft; and ATC denied this altitude on request of pilot. Initially; ATC demanded 11;000 ft which would have meant certain icing; but later allowed 10;000 ft as this was their MVA.This FAA manual is outdated: https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/handbooks_manuals/aviation/instrument_procedures_handbook/media/FAA-H-8083-16.pdf Page 2-35 incorrectly states; 'If both a MEA and a MOCA are prescribed for a particular route or route segment; pilots may operate an aircraft below the MEA down to; but not below; the MOCA; only when within 22 NM of the VOR.'The more correct authority is FAR 91.177(a); 'The applicable minimum altitudes prescribed in parts 95 and 97 of this chapter. However; if both a MEA and a MOCA are prescribed for a particular route or route segment; a person may operate an aircraft below the MEA down to; but not below; the MOCA; provided the applicable navigation signals are available. For aircraft using VOR for navigation; this applies only when the aircraft is within 22 nautical miles of that VOR (based on the reasonable estimate by the pilot operating the aircraft of that distance).' In other words; if a pilot of a GPS equipped aircraft requests a MOCA to avoid icing above; ATC should not force the pilot up to the MEA and into the icing.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1411504
Time
Date	201612
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	ZLA.ARTCC
State Reference	CA
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	SR20
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Cruise
Route In Use	Airway V386
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Single Pilot
Qualification	Flight Crew Commercial Flight Crew Instrument Flight Crew Multiengine
Experience	Flight Crew Last 90 Days 25 Flight Crew Total 2200 Flight Crew Type 1400
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural FAR Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence