Narrative:

While on a flight from muskegon, mi to chicago meigs field, I was routed west of south bend, in and assigned direct cgt VOR. Ord approach informed me that the visibility at meigs was 1.5 mi and asked me my intentions. Not wishing to divert to mdw I decided I had 2 choices: I could cancel IFR and request a SVFR clearance to meigs, or I could request a contact approach. The aim states in paragraph 385 that in order to receive a contact approach the airport must have 'a standard or special INS approach procedure.' I was not certain if the shore visibility approach to meigs was considered to be a special INS approach procedure, so I asked ord approach if they could issue me a contact approach to meigs. Ord approach assured me that they could and told me to proceed RNAV direct to the airport and descend to 2000'. At a point 6 mi from the airport, ord approach cleared me for a contact approach to runway 36 at meigs and told me to contact the tower. I called meigs tower and told them I was on a contact approach to runway 36. Their only reply was that the field was IFR. I acknowledged that and repeated that I had been cleared for a contact approach. To this there was no reply. After several seconds I asked the tower to verify that I was cleared into the control zone. They immediately replied that I was not and that any clearance that I had received for a contact approach was between me and ord approach and had nothing to do with them. At that point I was well inside the radius of the control zone and apparently west/O a clearance. I then requested and was issued a SVFR clearance and landed west/O incident. If a contact approach is not authority/authorized for meigs, ord approach should have known and never issued me the clearance.. If it is an authorized procedure, there was a lack of communications between approach and the meigs tower personnel.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMT X WAS CLEARED FOR AN UNAUTH CONTACT APCH. SYSTEM ERROR.

Narrative: WHILE ON A FLT FROM MUSKEGON, MI TO CHICAGO MEIGS FIELD, I WAS ROUTED W OF SOUTH BEND, IN AND ASSIGNED DIRECT CGT VOR. ORD APCH INFORMED ME THAT THE VISIBILITY AT MEIGS WAS 1.5 MI AND ASKED ME MY INTENTIONS. NOT WISHING TO DIVERT TO MDW I DECIDED I HAD 2 CHOICES: I COULD CANCEL IFR AND REQUEST A SVFR CLRNC TO MEIGS, OR I COULD REQUEST A CONTACT APCH. THE AIM STATES IN PARAGRAPH 385 THAT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE A CONTACT APCH THE ARPT MUST HAVE 'A STANDARD OR SPECIAL INS APCH PROC.' I WAS NOT CERTAIN IF THE SHORE VIS APCH TO MEIGS WAS CONSIDERED TO BE A SPECIAL INS APCH PROC, SO I ASKED ORD APCH IF THEY COULD ISSUE ME A CONTACT APCH TO MEIGS. ORD APCH ASSURED ME THAT THEY COULD AND TOLD ME TO PROCEED RNAV DIRECT TO THE ARPT AND DSND TO 2000'. AT A POINT 6 MI FROM THE ARPT, ORD APCH CLRED ME FOR A CONTACT APCH TO RWY 36 AT MEIGS AND TOLD ME TO CONTACT THE TWR. I CALLED MEIGS TWR AND TOLD THEM I WAS ON A CONTACT APCH TO RWY 36. THEIR ONLY REPLY WAS THAT THE FIELD WAS IFR. I ACKNOWLEDGED THAT AND REPEATED THAT I HAD BEEN CLRED FOR A CONTACT APCH. TO THIS THERE WAS NO REPLY. AFTER SEVERAL SECS I ASKED THE TWR TO VERIFY THAT I WAS CLRED INTO THE CTL ZONE. THEY IMMEDIATELY REPLIED THAT I WAS NOT AND THAT ANY CLRNC THAT I HAD RECEIVED FOR A CONTACT APCH WAS BTWN ME AND ORD APCH AND HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM. AT THAT POINT I WAS WELL INSIDE THE RADIUS OF THE CTL ZONE AND APPARENTLY W/O A CLRNC. I THEN REQUESTED AND WAS ISSUED A SVFR CLRNC AND LANDED W/O INCIDENT. IF A CONTACT APCH IS NOT AUTH FOR MEIGS, ORD APCH SHOULD HAVE KNOWN AND NEVER ISSUED ME THE CLRNC.. IF IT IS AN AUTHORIZED PROC, THERE WAS A LACK OF COMS BTWN APCH AND THE MEIGS TWR PERSONNEL.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.