Narrative:

I was cleared for ILS runway 25R approach into lvk in IMC conditions circle runway 7. When breaking out of the clouds at approximately 1500 ft, I asked lvk tower for an option to land and then execute the missed approach. They checked with sck approach and informed me that there was IFR traffic behind me, thus unable to give the missed approach. I was then cleared for the option which I made and asked for a VFR departure to the south (which was VFR). Lvk then reported unable due to airport below minimums, then stated 'maintain SVFR conditions, what are your intentions?' I replied I would return for landing and pick up a clearance back to oak which was reporting 4500 ft and 20 mi visibility (approximation of visibility). After landing, ground instructed me to call the tower on the telephone. He (ATC) was concerned that I didn't land instead of executing the option. I replied I was cleared for the option which he disagreed on. I apologized for confusing matters and admitted I should have just landed and picked up a clearance for oak. He said he wouldn't take any action. We then filed a tower en route, departed IFR, canceled after VFR on top and landed in oak. The reason for the confusion was due to being cleared for the option. However, in retrospect, I should realize in the case of an airport reporting IFR, I should have landed and clarified it on the ground. The conditions at the time although reporting IFR were such that SVFR could and was maintained after the touch- and-go. The reason I asked to depart to the south VFR was because I had just picked up oak ATIS and they were reporting 4500 ft and visibility (don't remember). We could easily see that on short final at lvk that the south was clearly VFR, and it was for this reason I then asked (after being denied missed approach due to inbound traffic on the ILS runway 25R lvk) for a departure to the south in order to 'sneak' out VFR to oak. Again, after being denied, I reported I would return in the pattern to land and pick up a clearance from ground from which I did. ATC was very cordial and stated nothing would be done (any action). However, he did ask me where I was based (oak) and my name, which has prompted me to write this statement.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMA RPTR SAYS TWR CLRED HIM FOR THE 'OPTION' DURING AN INST APCH. TECHNICALLY, BEING CLRED FOR AN OPTION PERMITS THE PLT TO EXECUTE A MISSED APCH AT HIS DISCRETION. HOWEVER, ONCE THE ACFT HAS BEEN SIGHTED BY THE TWR, STOCKTON COULD CLR THE NEXT ACFT FOR THE APCH ASSUMING THAT THE RPTR'S APCH WOULD TERMINATE IN A LNDG. ALSO, A TOUCH-AND-GO CANNOT BE MADE INTO SVFR WX. AN SVFR CLRNC OUT OF THE CLASS D MUST BE OBTAINED FIRST.

Narrative: I WAS CLRED FOR ILS RWY 25R APCH INTO LVK IN IMC CONDITIONS CIRCLE RWY 7. WHEN BREAKING OUT OF THE CLOUDS AT APPROX 1500 FT, I ASKED LVK TWR FOR AN OPTION TO LAND AND THEN EXECUTE THE MISSED APCH. THEY CHKED WITH SCK APCH AND INFORMED ME THAT THERE WAS IFR TFC BEHIND ME, THUS UNABLE TO GIVE THE MISSED APCH. I WAS THEN CLRED FOR THE OPTION WHICH I MADE AND ASKED FOR A VFR DEP TO THE S (WHICH WAS VFR). LVK THEN RPTED UNABLE DUE TO ARPT BELOW MINIMUMS, THEN STATED 'MAINTAIN SVFR CONDITIONS, WHAT ARE YOUR INTENTIONS?' I REPLIED I WOULD RETURN FOR LNDG AND PICK UP A CLRNC BACK TO OAK WHICH WAS RPTING 4500 FT AND 20 MI VISIBILITY (APPROXIMATION OF VISIBILITY). AFTER LNDG, GND INSTRUCTED ME TO CALL THE TWR ON THE TELEPHONE. HE (ATC) WAS CONCERNED THAT I DIDN'T LAND INSTEAD OF EXECUTING THE OPTION. I REPLIED I WAS CLRED FOR THE OPTION WHICH HE DISAGREED ON. I APOLOGIZED FOR CONFUSING MATTERS AND ADMITTED I SHOULD HAVE JUST LANDED AND PICKED UP A CLRNC FOR OAK. HE SAID HE WOULDN'T TAKE ANY ACTION. WE THEN FILED A TWR ENRTE, DEPARTED IFR, CANCELED AFTER VFR ON TOP AND LANDED IN OAK. THE REASON FOR THE CONFUSION WAS DUE TO BEING CLRED FOR THE OPTION. HOWEVER, IN RETROSPECT, I SHOULD REALIZE IN THE CASE OF AN ARPT RPTING IFR, I SHOULD HAVE LANDED AND CLARIFIED IT ON THE GND. THE CONDITIONS AT THE TIME ALTHOUGH RPTING IFR WERE SUCH THAT SVFR COULD AND WAS MAINTAINED AFTER THE TOUCH- AND-GO. THE REASON I ASKED TO DEPART TO THE S VFR WAS BECAUSE I HAD JUST PICKED UP OAK ATIS AND THEY WERE RPTING 4500 FT AND VISIBILITY (DON'T REMEMBER). WE COULD EASILY SEE THAT ON SHORT FINAL AT LVK THAT THE S WAS CLRLY VFR, AND IT WAS FOR THIS REASON I THEN ASKED (AFTER BEING DENIED MISSED APCH DUE TO INBOUND TFC ON THE ILS RWY 25R LVK) FOR A DEP TO THE S IN ORDER TO 'SNEAK' OUT VFR TO OAK. AGAIN, AFTER BEING DENIED, I RPTED I WOULD RETURN IN THE PATTERN TO LAND AND PICK UP A CLRNC FROM GND FROM WHICH I DID. ATC WAS VERY CORDIAL AND STATED NOTHING WOULD BE DONE (ANY ACTION). HOWEVER, HE DID ASK ME WHERE I WAS BASED (OAK) AND MY NAME, WHICH HAS PROMPTED ME TO WRITE THIS STATEMENT.

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.