Narrative:

VFR aircraft Y was cleared for a visual approach runway 16R into vny. I also had a heavy that was cleared for the ILS Z runway 8 into bur. The learjet went around due to FOD on the runway. I instructed the tower to issue a vector of 210 and an altitude of 4000 feet to have the learjet come back around for a resequence. The tower not only disregarded my instructions; but they changed the data block of the learjet to indicate that they were VFR. When I finally got the learjet back on frequency; I asked them if they had cancelled IFR with the tower and their response was no. The issue was compounded by aircraft flying below the heavy airbus at 2000 feet towards a 5000 foot minimum vectoring altitude (MVA). I turned the learjet to the southwest to a lower MVA and climbed them to 6000 feet for eastbound airway traffic at 5000 feet.I acquired radar contact with a VFR slowly descending out of 7000 feet. Once I had the learjet at altitude and northbound and coordination with the tower and supervisor; the moorpark controller brought to my attention that the VFR and learjet were converging both at 6000 feet. There was still ample space between the two aircraft and traffic was exchanged. The VFR reported the learjet in sight but leveled at altitude instead of descending; causing a TCAS/RA with the learjet. The learjet also had the VFR in sight.once the two aircraft were no longer a conflict; I descended the learjet to 5000 feet. Then the tower called to notify me that the runway had reopened. I cleared the learjet again for the visual approach and they landed without incident.according to the aim paragraph 5-4-20 a visual approach is not an instrument approach procedure and therefore has no missed approach segment. If a go around is necessary for any reason; aircraft operating at controlled airports will be issued an appropriate advisory/clearance/instruction by the tower. At uncontrolled airports; aircraft are expected to remain clear of clouds and complete a landing as soon as possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished; the aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and contact ATC as soon as possible for further clearance. Separation from other IFR aircraft will be maintained under these circumstances.the tower should be sending the aircraft back to approach control unless the aircraft cancels IFR; or they indicate they can maintain their own terrain/obstruction clearance to remain in the pattern IFR with the tower.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SCT TRACON Controller received a go-around aircraft from VNY Tower that was not proceeding via the coordinated route and altitude. While issuing instructions to resolve the situation; the Controller vectored the aircraft toward a converging VFR aircraft.

Narrative: VFR Aircraft Y was cleared for a visual approach Runway 16R into VNY. I also had a Heavy that was cleared for the ILS Z Runway 8 into BUR. The Learjet went around due to FOD on the runway. I instructed the tower to issue a vector of 210 and an altitude of 4000 feet to have the Learjet come back around for a resequence. The tower not only disregarded my instructions; but they changed the data block of the Learjet to indicate that they were VFR. When I finally got the Learjet back on frequency; I asked them if they had cancelled IFR with the tower and their response was no. The issue was compounded by aircraft flying below the heavy airbus at 2000 feet towards a 5000 foot minimum vectoring altitude (MVA). I turned the Learjet to the southwest to a lower MVA and climbed them to 6000 feet for eastbound airway traffic at 5000 feet.I acquired radar contact with a VFR slowly descending out of 7000 feet. Once I had the Learjet at altitude and northbound and coordination with the tower and supervisor; the Moorpark controller brought to my attention that the VFR and Learjet were converging both at 6000 feet. There was still ample space between the two aircraft and traffic was exchanged. The VFR reported the Learjet in sight but leveled at altitude instead of descending; causing a TCAS/RA with the Learjet. The Learjet also had the VFR in sight.Once the two aircraft were no longer a conflict; I descended the Learjet to 5000 feet. Then the tower called to notify me that the runway had reopened. I cleared the Learjet again for the visual approach and they landed without incident.According to the AIM paragraph 5-4-20 a visual approach is not an instrument approach procedure and therefore has no missed approach segment. If a go around is necessary for any reason; aircraft operating at controlled airports will be issued an appropriate advisory/clearance/instruction by the Tower. At uncontrolled airports; aircraft are expected to remain clear of clouds and complete a landing as soon as possible. If a landing cannot be accomplished; the aircraft is expected to remain clear of clouds and contact ATC as soon as possible for further clearance. Separation from other IFR aircraft will be maintained under these circumstances.The tower should be sending the aircraft back to approach control unless the aircraft cancels IFR; or they indicate they can maintain their own terrain/obstruction clearance to remain in the pattern IFR with the tower.

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.