Narrative:

Lifeguard flight was inbound to slc, the pilot stated he had a critical patient. He needed priority handling. 7110.65 states that just the fact that the pilot uses lifeguard call sign he is to be given priority handling. We could not get slc approach to give him priority handling. We were told to put him over ffu. It was VFR, traffic was light. Slc approach does this on a regular basis. Is it going to take someone's death to fix this problem? When we at ZLC get a lifeguard flight we will move other planes out of the way to get the lifeguard in first. The other pilots have never complained. They understand. Callback conversation with the facility and reporter revealed the following information: analyst talked with a member of the facility and was told that it has not been resolved but that they are working on it with the center. Reporter indicated that the runway confign affects the handling of direct flts to the VOR at FL240 as it is sometimes more difficult to descend these flts and position them on the ILS whereas a routing to a fix would have been more beneficial in expediting the aircraft. Analyst learned from the controller reporter that the aircraft was approximately 30 mi east of ffu at about FL250 when the attempt was made to give the direct route to the lifeguard aircraft. Reporter stated the controller supervisor had coordinated with TRACON supervisor who disapproved the request. Reporter alleges the regional office has sided with the TRACON as they felt it is the TRACON's call regarding the routing to be used.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR CLAIMS APCH CTL WOULD NOT GIVE PRIORITY HANDLING TO A LIFEGUARD ACFT WITH A PLT RPTED CRITICAL PATIENT ONBOARD.

Narrative: LIFEGUARD FLT WAS INBOUND TO SLC, THE PLT STATED HE HAD A CRITICAL PATIENT. HE NEEDED PRIORITY HANDLING. 7110.65 STATES THAT JUST THE FACT THAT THE PLT USES LIFEGUARD CALL SIGN HE IS TO BE GIVEN PRIORITY HANDLING. WE COULD NOT GET SLC APCH TO GIVE HIM PRIORITY HANDLING. WE WERE TOLD TO PUT HIM OVER FFU. IT WAS VFR, TFC WAS LIGHT. SLC APCH DOES THIS ON A REGULAR BASIS. IS IT GOING TO TAKE SOMEONE'S DEATH TO FIX THIS PROB? WHEN WE AT ZLC GET A LIFEGUARD FLT WE WILL MOVE OTHER PLANES OUT OF THE WAY TO GET THE LIFEGUARD IN FIRST. THE OTHER PLTS HAVE NEVER COMPLAINED. THEY UNDERSTAND. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH THE FACILITY AND RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: ANALYST TALKED WITH A MEMBER OF THE FACILITY AND WAS TOLD THAT IT HAS NOT BEEN RESOLVED BUT THAT THEY ARE WORKING ON IT WITH THE CTR. RPTR INDICATED THAT THE RWY CONFIGN AFFECTS THE HANDLING OF DIRECT FLTS TO THE VOR AT FL240 AS IT IS SOMETIMES MORE DIFFICULT TO DSND THESE FLTS AND POS THEM ON THE ILS WHEREAS A ROUTING TO A FIX WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE BENEFICIAL IN EXPEDITING THE ACFT. ANALYST LEARNED FROM THE CTLR RPTR THAT THE ACFT WAS APPROX 30 MI E OF FFU AT ABOUT FL250 WHEN THE ATTEMPT WAS MADE TO GIVE THE DIRECT RTE TO THE LIFEGUARD ACFT. RPTR STATED THE CTLR SUPVR HAD COORDINATED WITH TRACON SUPVR WHO DISAPPROVED THE REQUEST. RPTR ALLEGES THE REGIONAL OFFICE HAS SIDED WITH THE TRACON AS THEY FELT IT IS THE TRACON'S CALL REGARDING THE ROUTING TO BE USED.

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.