Narrative:

At time of filing for flight from kingman (igm) to ogden (ogd) WX was 800, 1 mi forecasted to remain about the same. Departed igm at XX26 with 1 patient, 2 medical personnel and 2 family members. I had filed provo as alternate because of the good WX there but planned to use slc if WX permitted and ogd was too bad due to closeness of hospital facility. About 70 mi south of ogd, I received the ATIS for ogd. They were reporting 500 and 5/8 in snow and fog, using ILS runway 3. I was vectored by slc center for the approach and after intercepting the localizer was turned over to ogd tower and cleared about 1900 ft to land. I had the runway in sight and reported it to the tower well above decision ht and again was cleared to land. After unloading the patient and while 'cleaning up the cockpit' I checked the approach chart. That's when it dawned on me that the ATIS had said 5/8 mi visibility and the minimum for the approach was 3/4 mi. The 5/8 on the ATIS just never registered as being below the 3/4 required. I don't know if I was expecting the minimums to be 200 and 1/2 or if I was so involved with getting into ogden that I didn't register the ATIS 5/8 mi. Either way a mistake was made by me in accepting the approach clearance. This was indeed a learning experience for me and thankfully the approach and landing were uneventful. But looking back, the visibility was better than 3/4 mi. More attention will be paid to approach charts in the future.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT OF AN SMT AMBULANCE FLT MADE AN INST APCH BELOW PUBLISHED MINIMUMS.

Narrative: AT TIME OF FILING FOR FLT FROM KINGMAN (IGM) TO OGDEN (OGD) WX WAS 800, 1 MI FORECASTED TO REMAIN ABOUT THE SAME. DEPARTED IGM AT XX26 WITH 1 PATIENT, 2 MEDICAL PERSONNEL AND 2 FAMILY MEMBERS. I HAD FILED PROVO AS ALTERNATE BECAUSE OF THE GOOD WX THERE BUT PLANNED TO USE SLC IF WX PERMITTED AND OGD WAS TOO BAD DUE TO CLOSENESS OF HOSPITAL FACILITY. ABOUT 70 MI S OF OGD, I RECEIVED THE ATIS FOR OGD. THEY WERE RPTING 500 AND 5/8 IN SNOW AND FOG, USING ILS RWY 3. I WAS VECTORED BY SLC CTR FOR THE APCH AND AFTER INTERCEPTING THE LOC WAS TURNED OVER TO OGD TWR AND CLRED ABOUT 1900 FT TO LAND. I HAD THE RWY IN SIGHT AND RPTED IT TO THE TWR WELL ABOVE DECISION HT AND AGAIN WAS CLRED TO LAND. AFTER UNLOADING THE PATIENT AND WHILE 'CLEANING UP THE COCKPIT' I CHKED THE APCH CHART. THAT'S WHEN IT DAWNED ON ME THAT THE ATIS HAD SAID 5/8 MI VISIBILITY AND THE MINIMUM FOR THE APCH WAS 3/4 MI. THE 5/8 ON THE ATIS JUST NEVER REGISTERED AS BEING BELOW THE 3/4 REQUIRED. I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS EXPECTING THE MINIMUMS TO BE 200 AND 1/2 OR IF I WAS SO INVOLVED WITH GETTING INTO OGDEN THAT I DIDN'T REGISTER THE ATIS 5/8 MI. EITHER WAY A MISTAKE WAS MADE BY ME IN ACCEPTING THE APCH CLRNC. THIS WAS INDEED A LEARNING EXPERIENCE FOR ME AND THANKFULLY THE APCH AND LNDG WERE UNEVENTFUL. BUT LOOKING BACK, THE VISIBILITY WAS BETTER THAN 3/4 MI. MORE ATTN WILL BE PAID TO APCH CHARTS IN THE FUTURE.

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.