Military vehicle on runway had less than standard separation from aircraft X. System error.

Attributes
ACN	209363
Time
Date	199204
Day	Wed
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : far
State Reference	ND
Altitude	agl bound lower : 0 agl bound upper : 50
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tower : far artcc : zdc
Make Model Name	Small Transport
Flight Phase	landing : go around landing other
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : ground
Qualification	controller : non radar
ASRS Report	209363
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : local
Qualification	controller : non radar
Events
Anomaly	conflict : ground less severe conflict : airborne less severe incursion : runway non adherence : published procedure
Independent Detector	other controllera other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	flight crew : took evasive action other other
Consequence	Other
Miss Distance	horizontal : 2000 vertical : 50
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Inter Facility Coordination Failure Operational Error

Narrative:

Runways 21, 17, 13 advertised active on ATIS. Runway 21 was coordinated to ground for use for most of the session. Local coordinated to take it back for landing aircraft, ground returned it to local. Shortly after coordination, a military vehicle called to cross runway 21. Ground issued the clearance, then realizing that there was an aircraft X on short final, went back to the military vehicle to have it hold short, but it was already in the intersection. Aircraft X initiated a go around over the runway just prior to the numbers. Contributing factors were a runway change to runway 35/31 in progress and that runway 21 had belonged to ground for a large portion of time. I believe the situation occurred in part due to the infrequent use of runway 21. My suggestions for prevention are to not allow ground to take runway 21 when advertised as active, thus curbing the reflex action of crossing that runway. Or a better reminder for ground when it's being used. (We currently write a strip and place it on our pad but it tends to blend with other strips.)

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MIL VEHICLE ON RWY HAD LTSS FROM ACFT X. SYS ERROR.

Narrative: RWYS 21, 17, 13 ADVERTISED ACTIVE ON ATIS. RWY 21 WAS COORDINATED TO GND FOR USE FOR MOST OF THE SESSION. LCL COORDINATED TO TAKE IT BACK FOR LNDG ACFT, GND RETURNED IT TO LCL. SHORTLY AFTER COORD, A MIL VEHICLE CALLED TO CROSS RWY 21. GND ISSUED THE CLRNC, THEN REALIZING THAT THERE WAS AN ACFT X ON SHORT FINAL, WENT BACK TO THE MIL VEHICLE TO HAVE IT HOLD SHORT, BUT IT WAS ALREADY IN THE INTXN. ACFT X INITIATED A GAR OVER THE RWY JUST PRIOR TO THE NUMBERS. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS WERE A RWY CHANGE TO RWY 35/31 IN PROGRESS AND THAT RWY 21 HAD BELONGED TO GND FOR A LARGE PORTION OF TIME. I BELIEVE THE SITUATION OCCURRED IN PART DUE TO THE INFREQUENT USE OF RWY 21. MY SUGGESTIONS FOR PREVENTION ARE TO NOT ALLOW GND TO TAKE RWY 21 WHEN ADVERTISED AS ACTIVE, THUS CURBING THE REFLEX ACTION OF XING THAT RWY. OR A BETTER REMINDER FOR GND WHEN IT'S BEING USED. (WE CURRENTLY WRITE A STRIP AND PLACE IT ON OUR PAD BUT IT TENDS TO BLEND WITH OTHER STRIPS.)

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.