Narrative:

Small aircraft was direct to the facno intersection for an approach into sfm airport. I cleared him to cross facno at or above 2;300 feet; the altitude depicted on the approach plate in our [information display]; which is also in compliance with our MVA. Our chart shows a 1 minute holding pattern at facno at 2;300 feet; so when I saw the aircraft approximately 4 miles beyond I asked if he was established in the holding pattern. He informed me that he was still 1 mile from havan and then would join the holding pattern. Thinking it to be pilot error; we got into a back-and-forth that resulted in us realizing that our saids was out-of-date. Once it became clear that it was our fault; the aircraft was already within the higher MVA near havan. The aircraft flew the pattern under the MVA and continued on the approach safely.I blame myself for not immediately turning the aircraft away from the MVA when I noticed him too far pass facno ; but by the time it became clear that it was not his confusion but our incorrect information it was too late to do anything. That said; the pilot's clearance was facno and then to report localizer inbound. Havan was never in his clearance; so the pilot should have questioned the clearance; rather than improvising as he did. The fact is he flew to a fix to which he was not cleared. But that being said; since our charts resulted in his proximity to the terrain there was no pilot deviation considered or brasher warning issued. Our support staff needs to keep all of our information up-to-date. This chart was changed four months before this incident. It's outrageous to think that this whole situation all comes down to an outdated chart.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PWM TRACON Controller reported their information display system had out of date approach chart information which caused them to allow an aircraft to fly below the Minimum Vectoring Altitude.

Narrative: Small aircraft was direct to the FACNO intersection for an approach into SFM airport. I cleared him to cross FACNO at or above 2;300 feet; the altitude depicted on the approach plate in our [Information Display]; which is also in compliance with our MVA. Our chart shows a 1 minute holding pattern at FACNO at 2;300 feet; so when I saw the aircraft approximately 4 miles beyond I asked if he was established in the holding pattern. He informed me that he was still 1 mile from HAVAN and then would join the holding pattern. Thinking it to be pilot error; we got into a back-and-forth that resulted in us realizing that our SAIDS was out-of-date. Once it became clear that it was our fault; the aircraft was already within the higher MVA near HAVAN. The aircraft flew the pattern under the MVA and continued on the approach safely.I blame myself for not immediately turning the aircraft away from the MVA when I noticed him too far pass FACNO ; but by the time it became clear that it was not his confusion but our incorrect information it was too late to do anything. That said; the pilot's clearance was FACNO and then to report localizer inbound. HAVAN was never in his clearance; so the pilot should have questioned the clearance; rather than improvising as he did. The fact is he flew to a fix to which he was not cleared. But that being said; since our charts resulted in his proximity to the terrain there was no pilot deviation considered or brasher warning issued. Our support staff needs to keep all of our information up-to-date. This chart was changed four months before this incident. It's outrageous to think that this whole situation all comes down to an outdated chart.

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.