Narrative:

The runway 34 ILS in sea was OTS, leaving only the 16R ILS system available for us. ATIS reported 7 scattered 9 broken 23 overlays 6 rfl - 48/47 3609. On short final to 16R, the tower operator gave the wind as '36013.' the allowable tailwind component for the large transport is 10 KTS. The captain elected to continue to landing as the safest course of action after considering the light gross weight of the aircraft and the ragged, low ceiling in the area in which the circling maneuver would have had to be completed. I think the wind was deliberately misrpted on the ATIS to maintain the more easily accomplished ILS to 16R, and not decrease the acceptance rate of the airport. This flight crew would certainly have accepted the VOR 34 approach (had it been in use) and landed into the wind.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LGT CAPT LANDED WITH 13 KT TAILWIND RATHER THAN MAKE A CIRCLING APCH BELOW LOW SCUD.

Narrative: THE RWY 34 ILS IN SEA WAS OTS, LEAVING ONLY THE 16R ILS SYS AVAILABLE FOR US. ATIS RPTED 7 SCATTERED 9 BROKEN 23 OVERLAYS 6 RFL - 48/47 3609. ON SHORT FINAL TO 16R, THE TWR OPERATOR GAVE THE WIND AS '36013.' THE ALLOWABLE TAILWIND COMPONENT FOR THE LGT IS 10 KTS. THE CAPT ELECTED TO CONTINUE TO LNDG AS THE SAFEST COURSE OF ACTION AFTER CONSIDERING THE LIGHT GROSS WT OF THE ACFT AND THE RAGGED, LOW CEILING IN THE AREA IN WHICH THE CIRCLING MANEUVER WOULD HAVE HAD TO BE COMPLETED. I THINK THE WIND WAS DELIBERATELY MISRPTED ON THE ATIS TO MAINTAIN THE MORE EASILY ACCOMPLISHED ILS TO 16R, AND NOT DECREASE THE ACCEPTANCE RATE OF THE ARPT. THIS FLT CREW WOULD CERTAINLY HAVE ACCEPTED THE VOR 34 APCH (HAD IT BEEN IN USE) AND LANDED INTO THE WIND.

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.