Narrative:

Confign: landing converging parallel approachs to runways 16L, 16R, 26, and 25. This is a bad confign with no out should something go wrong. Air carrier Y was a medical emergency. He was vectored for a visual approach to runway 26 behind air carrier X. I did not receive handoff on air carrier Y until 3 mi final. Spacing behind air carrier X (who was landing) was very tight. There were aircraft landing runway 25 parallel to both air carrier X and air carrier Y. There were numerous aircraft landing on runways 16L and 16R. All aircraft on these 3 runways were on other frequencys. I elected to allow air carrier Y to land even though air carrier X was still on runway (8000 ft ahead) because this was safer than sending air carrier Y around. This was due to the medical emergency and the other numerous separation problems I would have if either air carrier X or air carrier Y went around. I brought this to my supervisor's attention before air carrier Y landed to ensure he did not have a problem with it. He then watched the operation. I told him I just had a deal with both air carrier X and air carrier Y on the runway. He said 'don't worry about it, no you didn't.' while I believe this was an operational error, it was without question the safest alternative for the situation I was handed. This confign has been challenged in the past for precisely the above reasons.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: DEN TWR CTLR ALLOWED A B737 MEDICAL EMER TO LAND WITH AN A319 STILL ON THE RWY ROLLING OUT.

Narrative: CONFIGN: LNDG CONVERGING PARALLEL APCHS TO RWYS 16L, 16R, 26, AND 25. THIS IS A BAD CONFIGN WITH NO OUT SHOULD SOMETHING GO WRONG. ACR Y WAS A MEDICAL EMER. HE WAS VECTORED FOR A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 26 BEHIND ACR X. I DID NOT RECEIVE HDOF ON ACR Y UNTIL 3 MI FINAL. SPACING BEHIND ACR X (WHO WAS LNDG) WAS VERY TIGHT. THERE WERE ACFT LNDG RWY 25 PARALLEL TO BOTH ACR X AND ACR Y. THERE WERE NUMEROUS ACFT LNDG ON RWYS 16L AND 16R. ALL ACFT ON THESE 3 RWYS WERE ON OTHER FREQS. I ELECTED TO ALLOW ACR Y TO LAND EVEN THOUGH ACR X WAS STILL ON RWY (8000 FT AHEAD) BECAUSE THIS WAS SAFER THAN SENDING ACR Y AROUND. THIS WAS DUE TO THE MEDICAL EMER AND THE OTHER NUMEROUS SEPARATION PROBS I WOULD HAVE IF EITHER ACR X OR ACR Y WENT AROUND. I BROUGHT THIS TO MY SUPVR'S ATTN BEFORE ACR Y LANDED TO ENSURE HE DID NOT HAVE A PROB WITH IT. HE THEN WATCHED THE OP. I TOLD HIM I JUST HAD A DEAL WITH BOTH ACR X AND ACR Y ON THE RWY. HE SAID 'DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT, NO YOU DIDN'T.' WHILE I BELIEVE THIS WAS AN OPERROR, IT WAS WITHOUT QUESTION THE SAFEST ALTERNATIVE FOR THE SIT I WAS HANDED. THIS CONFIGN HAS BEEN CHALLENGED IN THE PAST FOR PRECISELY THE ABOVE REASONS.

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.