Narrative:

While approaching okc for landing, I checked the ATIS about 25 mi out to see what the WX was doing. It advertised no ceiling and 1 mi visibility in fog. I thought I would end the flight with an easy ILS to runway 35R. The mins for that ILS is 1800 ft RVR. After checking in with approach, the controller told me that the runway 35R RVR was 1200 ft. I couldn't legally begin the approach under part 135 rules, so I told the controller that I'd have to hold and wait for the visibility to improve. Just as I was about to enter the holding pattern, I saw the airport clearly through the ground fog, I told the controller that I had the field in sight and could accept a visual approach. The controller hesitated for a moment, repeated the 1200 ft RVR, then added, 'tower visibility is up to 3 mi, so the field is VFR; you're cleared for a visibility approach to runway 35R.' I went ahead and landed on 35R with absolutely no trouble, despite the 1200 ft RVR. I thought the tower visibility made it legal to complete the approach. I discovered later, though, that RVR is controling for approachs to that specific runway. With tower visibility at 3 mi, I could have legally landed on runway 35L or runway 31 (neither have RVR meters). But 35R has an RVR meter, so I needed 1800 ft to do even a visual approach. The next time a problem like this comes up, I'll be more familiar with the regulations and I'll make sure the runway I'm landing on has visibility at or above mins, be it tower visibility or RVR. (Sure was some strange fog that morning).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ATX PLT MAKES APCH AND LNDG ON RWY WITH RVR RPTED BELOW ARPT WX MINS FOR LNDG.

Narrative: WHILE APCHING OKC FOR LNDG, I CHKED THE ATIS ABOUT 25 MI OUT TO SEE WHAT THE WX WAS DOING. IT ADVERTISED NO CEILING AND 1 MI VISIBILITY IN FOG. I THOUGHT I WOULD END THE FLT WITH AN EASY ILS TO RWY 35R. THE MINS FOR THAT ILS IS 1800 FT RVR. AFTER CHKING IN WITH APCH, THE CTLR TOLD ME THAT THE RWY 35R RVR WAS 1200 FT. I COULDN'T LEGALLY BEGIN THE APCH UNDER PART 135 RULES, SO I TOLD THE CTLR THAT I'D HAVE TO HOLD AND WAIT FOR THE VISIBILITY TO IMPROVE. JUST AS I WAS ABOUT TO ENTER THE HOLDING PATTERN, I SAW THE ARPT CLRLY THROUGH THE GND FOG, I TOLD THE CTLR THAT I HAD THE FIELD IN SIGHT AND COULD ACCEPT A VISUAL APCH. THE CTLR HESITATED FOR A MOMENT, REPEATED THE 1200 FT RVR, THEN ADDED, 'TWR VISIBILITY IS UP TO 3 MI, SO THE FIELD IS VFR; YOU'RE CLRED FOR A VIS APCH TO RWY 35R.' I WENT AHEAD AND LANDED ON 35R WITH ABSOLUTELY NO TROUBLE, DESPITE THE 1200 FT RVR. I THOUGHT THE TWR VISIBILITY MADE IT LEGAL TO COMPLETE THE APCH. I DISCOVERED LATER, THOUGH, THAT RVR IS CTLING FOR APCHS TO THAT SPECIFIC RWY. WITH TWR VISIBILITY AT 3 MI, I COULD HAVE LEGALLY LANDED ON RWY 35L OR RWY 31 (NEITHER HAVE RVR METERS). BUT 35R HAS AN RVR METER, SO I NEEDED 1800 FT TO DO EVEN A VISUAL APCH. THE NEXT TIME A PROBLEM LIKE THIS COMES UP, I'LL BE MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE REGS AND I'LL MAKE SURE THE RWY I'M LNDG ON HAS VISIBILITY AT OR ABOVE MINS, BE IT TWR VISIBILITY OR RVR. (SURE WAS SOME STRANGE FOG THAT MORNING).

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.