Narrative:

The subject flight took place, as shown above, in our C340, registration aircraft X. We obtained a standard WX briefing via telephone from rancho murrieta FSS at approximately XA00 that morning. In addition, I checked available WX and WX data via the internet, including satellite and radar information. At approximately XC15, I received updated information including a review of radar from rancho murrieta via telephone. The controller advised me that it was moderate to heavy rain in an area from approximately bakersfield through the northern part of the los angeles basin up to an area north of orange county airport, our destination. The controller indicated that there were multiple icing reports between 9000-15000 ft. I agreed with the controller's recommendation that we may want to stay at a high altitude until we were south of the los angeles basin, and then commence descent. We were airborne from mather approximately XD00 hours and climbed to FL230. This altitude placed us above all cloud layers and precipitation. As was suggested by the controller at rancho murrieta, we called high altitude flight watch north of bakersfield, and then received updated reports indicating the icing was still a significant factor, and that moderate rain was still in progress in the same areas as noted above. I knew the typical profile in the ZLA area was to descend us below the incoming traffic from the east to the lax airport, typically somewhere south of lake hughes down to an altitude of 13000 ft or below. In the vicinity of bakersfield when ZOA handed us off to ZLA, we advised ZLA of the WX information we had received from los angeles flight watch. Because of the potential and reported icing, we asked for a delayed descent. We indicated that we would be willing to accept any deviations necessary to accommodate ZLA's traffic in the los angeles area. We suggested that we would be happy to deviate well to the east or west if that was of help. The los angeles controller acknowledged the information, and over the next few mins proceeded to ask several aircraft of their flight conditions to include icing. While we did not know the exact location of aircraft, we heard at least 2 aircraft report light to moderate icing. The controller directed us to proceed direct to lake hughes then to victor 459 seal beach direct to orange county, and to descend to 13000 ft. He directed us to reach that altitude prior or before 10 mi south of lake hughes. We told the controller that we would accept the routing, but could not accept the descent because of the icing conditions reported by los angeles flight watch and confirmed by at least two of the aircraft we heard respond to him. The controller became noticeably agitated and told us he had assigned us 13000 ft and to read back the clearance. We again told him that we could not accept the clearance at that altitude and again indicated that we would accept whatever deviation was necessary to accommodate his traffic. The controller at that point seemed to be increasingly angry, and assigned us to 15000 ft, and assured us that altitude would keep us above the clouds, which were sloping down as we proceeded south. He then xferred us to the next controller. As we proceeded further south, still in the northern portion of the los angeles basin, we were asked to descend to 13000 ft. At that time we again asked about icing condition. The second controller also seemed aggravated. Later he asked us to descend to 9000 ft. We told him that we could not accept that clearance because we were already experiencing light icing. The controller allowed us to temporarily stay at the higher altitude, but told us we were to telephone ZLA immediately upon landing. He issued a telephone number to call. We continued the flight without further incident. After landing at sna, we telephoned the ZLA center as instructed. The ZLA employee we spoke with indicated that he had received a report from a supervisor indicating that we had refused clrncs, and they could not understand why. He told me 'we would not descend you into icing conditions.' I told the center employee the facts, as stated above in this letter, and asked if I had violated any rules and regulations. He said 'no,' but insinuated that I had made things inconvenient for them.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT IN C340 INBOUND TO SNA FOUND ZLA CTLRS UNCOOPERATIVE WHEN HE REFUSED EARLY DSCNT BECAUSE OF RPTED ICING CONDITIONS.

Narrative: THE SUBJECT FLT TOOK PLACE, AS SHOWN ABOVE, IN OUR C340, REGISTRATION ACFT X. WE OBTAINED A STANDARD WX BRIEFING VIA TELEPHONE FROM RANCHO MURRIETA FSS AT APPROX XA00 THAT MORNING. IN ADDITION, I CHKED AVAILABLE WX AND WX DATA VIA THE INTERNET, INCLUDING SATELLITE AND RADAR INFO. AT APPROX XC15, I RECEIVED UPDATED INFO INCLUDING A REVIEW OF RADAR FROM RANCHO MURRIETA VIA TELEPHONE. THE CTLR ADVISED ME THAT IT WAS MODERATE TO HVY RAIN IN AN AREA FROM APPROX BAKERSFIELD THROUGH THE NORTHERN PART OF THE LOS ANGELES BASIN UP TO AN AREA N OF ORANGE COUNTY ARPT, OUR DEST. THE CTLR INDICATED THAT THERE WERE MULTIPLE ICING RPTS BTWN 9000-15000 FT. I AGREED WITH THE CTLR'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WE MAY WANT TO STAY AT A HIGH ALT UNTIL WE WERE S OF THE LOS ANGELES BASIN, AND THEN COMMENCE DSCNT. WE WERE AIRBORNE FROM MATHER APPROX XD00 HRS AND CLBED TO FL230. THIS ALT PLACED US ABOVE ALL CLOUD LAYERS AND PRECIP. AS WAS SUGGESTED BY THE CTLR AT RANCHO MURRIETA, WE CALLED HIGH ALT FLT WATCH N OF BAKERSFIELD, AND THEN RECEIVED UPDATED RPTS INDICATING THE ICING WAS STILL A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR, AND THAT MODERATE RAIN WAS STILL IN PROGRESS IN THE SAME AREAS AS NOTED ABOVE. I KNEW THE TYPICAL PROFILE IN THE ZLA AREA WAS TO DSND US BELOW THE INCOMING TFC FROM THE E TO THE LAX ARPT, TYPICALLY SOMEWHERE S OF LAKE HUGHES DOWN TO AN ALT OF 13000 FT OR BELOW. IN THE VICINITY OF BAKERSFIELD WHEN ZOA HANDED US OFF TO ZLA, WE ADVISED ZLA OF THE WX INFO WE HAD RECEIVED FROM LOS ANGELES FLT WATCH. BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL AND RPTED ICING, WE ASKED FOR A DELAYED DSCNT. WE INDICATED THAT WE WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT ANY DEVS NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE ZLA'S TFC IN THE LOS ANGELES AREA. WE SUGGESTED THAT WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO DEVIATE WELL TO THE E OR W IF THAT WAS OF HELP. THE LOS ANGELES CTLR ACKNOWLEDGED THE INFO, AND OVER THE NEXT FEW MINS PROCEEDED TO ASK SEVERAL ACFT OF THEIR FLT CONDITIONS TO INCLUDE ICING. WHILE WE DID NOT KNOW THE EXACT LOCATION OF ACFT, WE HEARD AT LEAST 2 ACFT RPT LIGHT TO MODERATE ICING. THE CTLR DIRECTED US TO PROCEED DIRECT TO LAKE HUGHES THEN TO VICTOR 459 SEAL BEACH DIRECT TO ORANGE COUNTY, AND TO DSND TO 13000 FT. HE DIRECTED US TO REACH THAT ALT PRIOR OR BEFORE 10 MI S OF LAKE HUGHES. WE TOLD THE CTLR THAT WE WOULD ACCEPT THE ROUTING, BUT COULD NOT ACCEPT THE DSCNT BECAUSE OF THE ICING CONDITIONS RPTED BY LOS ANGELES FLT WATCH AND CONFIRMED BY AT LEAST TWO OF THE ACFT WE HEARD RESPOND TO HIM. THE CTLR BECAME NOTICEABLY AGITATED AND TOLD US HE HAD ASSIGNED US 13000 FT AND TO READ BACK THE CLRNC. WE AGAIN TOLD HIM THAT WE COULD NOT ACCEPT THE CLRNC AT THAT ALT AND AGAIN INDICATED THAT WE WOULD ACCEPT WHATEVER DEV WAS NECESSARY TO ACCOMMODATE HIS TFC. THE CTLR AT THAT POINT SEEMED TO BE INCREASINGLY ANGRY, AND ASSIGNED US TO 15000 FT, AND ASSURED US THAT ALT WOULD KEEP US ABOVE THE CLOUDS, WHICH WERE SLOPING DOWN AS WE PROCEEDED S. HE THEN XFERRED US TO THE NEXT CTLR. AS WE PROCEEDED FURTHER S, STILL IN THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE LOS ANGELES BASIN, WE WERE ASKED TO DSND TO 13000 FT. AT THAT TIME WE AGAIN ASKED ABOUT ICING CONDITION. THE SECOND CTLR ALSO SEEMED AGGRAVATED. LATER HE ASKED US TO DSND TO 9000 FT. WE TOLD HIM THAT WE COULD NOT ACCEPT THAT CLRNC BECAUSE WE WERE ALREADY EXPERIENCING LIGHT ICING. THE CTLR ALLOWED US TO TEMPORARILY STAY AT THE HIGHER ALT, BUT TOLD US WE WERE TO TELEPHONE ZLA IMMEDIATELY UPON LNDG. HE ISSUED A TELEPHONE NUMBER TO CALL. WE CONTINUED THE FLT WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. AFTER LNDG AT SNA, WE TELEPHONED THE ZLA CTR AS INSTRUCTED. THE ZLA EMPLOYEE WE SPOKE WITH INDICATED THAT HE HAD RECEIVED A RPT FROM A SUPVR INDICATING THAT WE HAD REFUSED CLRNCS, AND THEY COULD NOT UNDERSTAND WHY. HE TOLD ME 'WE WOULD NOT DSND YOU INTO ICING CONDITIONS.' I TOLD THE CTR EMPLOYEE THE FACTS, AS STATED ABOVE IN THIS LETTER, AND ASKED IF I HAD VIOLATED ANY RULES AND REGS. HE SAID 'NO,' BUT INSINUATED THAT I HAD MADE THINGS INCONVENIENT FOR THEM.

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.