Narrative:

On initial contact with bloomington tower ATC, we were told to enter a right base for runway 29 and report 2 mi out. As we continued the approach, another aircraft was also no the frequency on a downwind for another runway at bloomington, runway 21, and had been cleared to land on runway 21. Both the captain and I continued looking for this aircraft. It was dark night VMC, and with city lights in the background, we were unable to make visibility contact with this traffic. The captain was flying and I informed the tower that we were entering a 3 mi base for runway 29. ATC acknowledged, and cleared us to land on runway 29. The approach to landing continued as normal and was clear of traffic. Upon main gear T/D, the controller began to scream at an aircraft that he was told to hold short of runway 29 and to clear the runway immediately. Upon hearing that there was a possible runway incursion, we immediately executed a go around. As we entered a left traffic pattern for runway 29, ATC cleared us to land on runway 29, and a normal approach to landing was made west/O further incident. Although the tower has the best overall view of aircraft on runways and txwys, in this particular incident it is hard to say whether ATC should have first instructed us to initiate a go around. It is important that ATC issue corrective actions to both aircraft involved in a potential conflict.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: POTENTIAL CONFLICT ON RWY AS ONE ACFT FAILS TO HOLD SHORT ON MULTIPLE RWY OPERATION INTERSECTING RWYS.

Narrative: ON INITIAL CONTACT WITH BLOOMINGTON TWR ATC, WE WERE TOLD TO ENTER A RIGHT BASE FOR RWY 29 AND RPT 2 MI OUT. AS WE CONTINUED THE APCH, ANOTHER ACFT WAS ALSO NO THE FREQ ON A DOWNWIND FOR ANOTHER RWY AT BLOOMINGTON, RWY 21, AND HAD BEEN CLRED TO LAND ON RWY 21. BOTH THE CAPT AND I CONTINUED LOOKING FOR THIS ACFT. IT WAS DARK NIGHT VMC, AND WITH CITY LIGHTS IN THE BACKGROUND, WE WERE UNABLE TO MAKE VIS CONTACT WITH THIS TFC. THE CAPT WAS FLYING AND I INFORMED THE TWR THAT WE WERE ENTERING A 3 MI BASE FOR RWY 29. ATC ACKNOWLEDGED, AND CLRED US TO LAND ON RWY 29. THE APCH TO LNDG CONTINUED AS NORMAL AND WAS CLR OF TFC. UPON MAIN GEAR T/D, THE CTLR BEGAN TO SCREAM AT AN ACFT THAT HE WAS TOLD TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 29 AND TO CLR THE RWY IMMEDIATELY. UPON HEARING THAT THERE WAS A POSSIBLE RWY INCURSION, WE IMMEDIATELY EXECUTED A GAR. AS WE ENTERED A LEFT TFC PATTERN FOR RWY 29, ATC CLRED US TO LAND ON RWY 29, AND A NORMAL APCH TO LNDG WAS MADE W/O FURTHER INCIDENT. ALTHOUGH THE TWR HAS THE BEST OVERALL VIEW OF ACFT ON RWYS AND TXWYS, IN THIS PARTICULAR INCIDENT IT IS HARD TO SAY WHETHER ATC SHOULD HAVE FIRST INSTRUCTED US TO INITIATE A GAR. IT IS IMPORTANT THAT ATC ISSUE CORRECTIVE ACTIONS TO BOTH ACFT INVOLVED IN A POTENTIAL CONFLICT.

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.