Narrative:

I was working ground control and local control combined. The WX was MVFR due to a ceiling around 2000 ft and improving from the northwest. Air carrier X, B737, was just taxiing up to the approach end of runway 6 ready for departure. Air carrier Y, B737, 10+ mi out on approach to runway 6. I taxied air carrier X into position and hold on runway 6. The plan was to clear air carrier X for takeoff when an arrival air carrier turned off runway 6. While I was waiting for the air carrier to clear runway 6, aircraft Z, a light twin GA, called inbound on the ILS runway 33 (an intersecting runway) to get beneath the cloud layer and then cancel IFR and proceed VFR to the south. This diverted my attention from the runway 6 operation. Then aircraft zz on final to runway 33 called. The unfamiliar type of this aircraft caused concern. In an effort to determine if this aircraft type could hold short of runway 6 (going through the lists at the position), I continued to allow my attention to be diverted from the runway 6 operation. Air carrier Y calls outside the OM on final to runway 6, I cleared him to land with air carrier X still holding in position, and forgotten about. While I am still trying to determine if the runway 33 aircraft can hold short of runway 6, air carrier Y closes to about a 2 mi final when air carrier X calls and says he's 'still holding in position.' I cleared air carrier X for immediate takeoff, but by the time they got going, I wasn't going to have the separation I needed to allow air carrier Y to land. I sent air carrier Y around with a turn to the left to avoid the departing air carrier. I believe the aircraft type distraction was compounded by the FAA changing over to lahso procedures and the FAA converting to the ICAO type designations at the same time. Lahso allows some aircraft types to hold short that previously could not. And some aircraft types that, previously to lahso, could hold short, now can not. That's fine, but to now mix in different type designations is another matter. And during the transition period, there are 2 lists to have to go through, the old type and the new ICAO type. And the lists are only useful if the pilot/flight service specialist/prior controller gets the new aircraft type designation correct to begin with. As it turned out in this case, the aircraft type that was entered into the ARTS data block scratch pad does not exist. FAA handbook 7110.65 requires that traffic be exchanged when a controller has both, an arrival that has been cleared to land, and an aircraft holding in position on the same runway. A message to departing pilots, if you are holding in position and you hear a landing clearance for the same runway, and you are not told about the arrival, something is wrong. To arriving pilots, if you are on approach with a landing clearance, and a controller puts someone in position on the same runway and you are not told about that aircraft, something is wrong.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RPTR IMPLIES DISTR USING LAHSO PROCS FOR FORGETTING ABOUT AN ACR B737 IN POS ON RWY 6 WITH OTHER ACR B737 ON FINAL FOR THE SAME RWY.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING GND CTL AND LCL CTL COMBINED. THE WX WAS MVFR DUE TO A CEILING AROUND 2000 FT AND IMPROVING FROM THE NW. ACR X, B737, WAS JUST TAXIING UP TO THE APCH END OF RWY 6 READY FOR DEP. ACR Y, B737, 10+ MI OUT ON APCH TO RWY 6. I TAXIED ACR X INTO POS AND HOLD ON RWY 6. THE PLAN WAS TO CLR ACR X FOR TKOF WHEN AN ARR ACR TURNED OFF RWY 6. WHILE I WAS WAITING FOR THE ACR TO CLR RWY 6, ACFT Z, A LIGHT TWIN GA, CALLED INBOUND ON THE ILS RWY 33 (AN INTERSECTING RWY) TO GET BENEATH THE CLOUD LAYER AND THEN CANCEL IFR AND PROCEED VFR TO THE S. THIS DIVERTED MY ATTN FROM THE RWY 6 OP. THEN ACFT ZZ ON FINAL TO RWY 33 CALLED. THE UNFAMILIAR TYPE OF THIS ACFT CAUSED CONCERN. IN AN EFFORT TO DETERMINE IF THIS ACFT TYPE COULD HOLD SHORT OF RWY 6 (GOING THROUGH THE LISTS AT THE POS), I CONTINUED TO ALLOW MY ATTN TO BE DIVERTED FROM THE RWY 6 OP. ACR Y CALLS OUTSIDE THE OM ON FINAL TO RWY 6, I CLRED HIM TO LAND WITH ACR X STILL HOLDING IN POS, AND FORGOTTEN ABOUT. WHILE I AM STILL TRYING TO DETERMINE IF THE RWY 33 ACFT CAN HOLD SHORT OF RWY 6, ACR Y CLOSES TO ABOUT A 2 MI FINAL WHEN ACR X CALLS AND SAYS HE'S 'STILL HOLDING IN POS.' I CLRED ACR X FOR IMMEDIATE TKOF, BUT BY THE TIME THEY GOT GOING, I WASN'T GOING TO HAVE THE SEPARATION I NEEDED TO ALLOW ACR Y TO LAND. I SENT ACR Y AROUND WITH A TURN TO THE L TO AVOID THE DEPARTING ACR. I BELIEVE THE ACFT TYPE DISTR WAS COMPOUNDED BY THE FAA CHANGING OVER TO LAHSO PROCS AND THE FAA CONVERTING TO THE ICAO TYPE DESIGNATIONS AT THE SAME TIME. LAHSO ALLOWS SOME ACFT TYPES TO HOLD SHORT THAT PREVIOUSLY COULD NOT. AND SOME ACFT TYPES THAT, PREVIOUSLY TO LAHSO, COULD HOLD SHORT, NOW CAN NOT. THAT'S FINE, BUT TO NOW MIX IN DIFFERENT TYPE DESIGNATIONS IS ANOTHER MATTER. AND DURING THE TRANSITION PERIOD, THERE ARE 2 LISTS TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH, THE OLD TYPE AND THE NEW ICAO TYPE. AND THE LISTS ARE ONLY USEFUL IF THE PLT/FLT SVC SPECIALIST/PRIOR CTLR GETS THE NEW ACFT TYPE DESIGNATION CORRECT TO BEGIN WITH. AS IT TURNED OUT IN THIS CASE, THE ACFT TYPE THAT WAS ENTERED INTO THE ARTS DATA BLOCK SCRATCH PAD DOES NOT EXIST. FAA HANDBOOK 7110.65 REQUIRES THAT TFC BE EXCHANGED WHEN A CTLR HAS BOTH, AN ARR THAT HAS BEEN CLRED TO LAND, AND AN ACFT HOLDING IN POS ON THE SAME RWY. A MESSAGE TO DEPARTING PLTS, IF YOU ARE HOLDING IN POS AND YOU HEAR A LNDG CLRNC FOR THE SAME RWY, AND YOU ARE NOT TOLD ABOUT THE ARR, SOMETHING IS WRONG. TO ARRIVING PLTS, IF YOU ARE ON APCH WITH A LNDG CLRNC, AND A CTLR PUTS SOMEONE IN POS ON THE SAME RWY AND YOU ARE NOT TOLD ABOUT THAT ACFT, SOMETHING IS WRONG.

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.