Narrative:

I was working ground control 1 during the afternoon departure push. Mem was landing runway 36C; departing runway 36L and runway 36R; and runway 27 had been 'released to ground control' for crossing and taxiing aircraft from their ramp area to the departure runways. During this departure push; 1) runway 27 was not advertised on the ATIS as an arrival or departure runway; 2) runway 27 was not posted in the stars system information area; 3) 'runway 27 released to ground control' was posted in the stars message area; 4) verbal coordination had taken place between the TRACON supervisor and the tower supervisor regarding the status of runway 27; 5) verbal coordination had taken place between the tower supervisor and all tower local and ground control position; and 6) 'runway 27 released to ground' strips were posted at all local and ground control position. Air carrier X; an H/DC10 called for taxi. This aircraft required runway 36C for operational reasons. Due to the fact that taxiway V was blocked by a disabled aircraft; I utilized taxiway V4; runway 27 and taxiway C for air carrier X to taxi to runway 36C. Runway 27 is routinely 'released to ground control' during the inbound/outbound pushes; and it is a common technique to utilize runway 27 to expedite the flow of traffic. As air carrier X turned eastbound onto runway 27; the crew questioned me about 'the traffic on final to runway 27.' I looked out the window and saw landing lights on the final approach course. I then looked at the STAR display and observed a BE58; 3 mi final; tagged for arrival on runway 27. I yelled at the local control 2 position and told him to 'break out the baron on runway 27; I have traffic on the runway.' the local control 2 controller was not talking to the BE58; and had to call the arrival east controller for communications xfer. When the local control 2 controller made contact with the BE58; he instructed the BE58 to make a right 360 degree turn to avoid traffic on the runway; and I was subsequently able to inform air carrier X that the BE58 was going to abandon the approach. Through discussion in the tower; I learned that the supervisor had informed the clearance delivery controller to create a new ATIS that advertised runway 27 as an active runway. The clearance delivery controller made the ATIS and then added runway 27 as an arrival runway to the system information area. The tower supervisor then coordination with the TRACON supervisor to allow runway 27 arrs. The communications chain got broke when the tower supervisor neglected to inform the tower local and ground controllers that this coordination had taken place. The 'runway 27 released to ground control' strips were still posted at both ground control strip bays; and 'runway 27 released to ground control' was still posted in the stars message area. This is a very dangerous situation that requires precise coordination. Unfortunately; the coordination is flawed on a daily basis. The status of who actually owns runway 27 is often a subject of discussion due to the fact that coordination is often incomplete. I have personally witnessed several aircraft 'go around' to ground control crossing runway 27 at inappropriate times; and due to the fact that there was confusion on who actually 'owned' runway 27. I feel that I also contributed to the problem due to the fact that I did not scan the final approach course or look at the stars display prior to issuing taxi instructions to air carrier X. I will make an effort to look out the window and scan more deliberately in the future. It would be nice to see our facility address this situation in a more proactive manner before 2 aircraft actually collide on runway 27.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MEM CTLR DESCRIBES INCIDENT WHEN RWY 27 WAS RELEASED FOR TAXIING TO GND CTL BUT COORD FAILED RESULTING IN GAR TO ACFT ON APCH TO RWY 27.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING GND CTL 1 DURING THE AFTERNOON DEP PUSH. MEM WAS LNDG RWY 36C; DEPARTING RWY 36L AND RWY 36R; AND RWY 27 HAD BEEN 'RELEASED TO GND CTL' FOR XING AND TAXIING ACFT FROM THEIR RAMP AREA TO THE DEP RWYS. DURING THIS DEP PUSH; 1) RWY 27 WAS NOT ADVERTISED ON THE ATIS AS AN ARR OR DEP RWY; 2) RWY 27 WAS NOT POSTED IN THE STARS SYS INFO AREA; 3) 'RWY 27 RELEASED TO GND CTL' WAS POSTED IN THE STARS MESSAGE AREA; 4) VERBAL COORD HAD TAKEN PLACE BTWN THE TRACON SUPVR AND THE TWR SUPVR REGARDING THE STATUS OF RWY 27; 5) VERBAL COORD HAD TAKEN PLACE BTWN THE TWR SUPVR AND ALL TWR LCL AND GND CTL POS; AND 6) 'RWY 27 RELEASED TO GND' STRIPS WERE POSTED AT ALL LCL AND GND CTL POS. ACR X; AN H/DC10 CALLED FOR TAXI. THIS ACFT REQUIRED RWY 36C FOR OPERATIONAL REASONS. DUE TO THE FACT THAT TXWY V WAS BLOCKED BY A DISABLED ACFT; I UTILIZED TXWY V4; RWY 27 AND TXWY C FOR ACR X TO TAXI TO RWY 36C. RWY 27 IS ROUTINELY 'RELEASED TO GND CTL' DURING THE INBOUND/OUTBOUND PUSHES; AND IT IS A COMMON TECHNIQUE TO UTILIZE RWY 27 TO EXPEDITE THE FLOW OF TFC. AS ACR X TURNED EBOUND ONTO RWY 27; THE CREW QUESTIONED ME ABOUT 'THE TFC ON FINAL TO RWY 27.' I LOOKED OUT THE WINDOW AND SAW LNDG LIGHTS ON THE FINAL APCH COURSE. I THEN LOOKED AT THE STAR DISPLAY AND OBSERVED A BE58; 3 MI FINAL; TAGGED FOR ARR ON RWY 27. I YELLED AT THE LCL CTL 2 POS AND TOLD HIM TO 'BREAK OUT THE BARON ON RWY 27; I HAVE TFC ON THE RWY.' THE LCL CTL 2 CTLR WAS NOT TALKING TO THE BE58; AND HAD TO CALL THE ARR E CTLR FOR COMS XFER. WHEN THE LCL CTL 2 CTLR MADE CONTACT WITH THE BE58; HE INSTRUCTED THE BE58 TO MAKE A R 360 DEG TURN TO AVOID TFC ON THE RWY; AND I WAS SUBSEQUENTLY ABLE TO INFORM ACR X THAT THE BE58 WAS GOING TO ABANDON THE APCH. THROUGH DISCUSSION IN THE TWR; I LEARNED THAT THE SUPVR HAD INFORMED THE CLRNC DELIVERY CTLR TO CREATE A NEW ATIS THAT ADVERTISED RWY 27 AS AN ACTIVE RWY. THE CLRNC DELIVERY CTLR MADE THE ATIS AND THEN ADDED RWY 27 AS AN ARR RWY TO THE SYS INFO AREA. THE TWR SUPVR THEN COORD WITH THE TRACON SUPVR TO ALLOW RWY 27 ARRS. THE COMS CHAIN GOT BROKE WHEN THE TWR SUPVR NEGLECTED TO INFORM THE TWR LCL AND GND CTLRS THAT THIS COORD HAD TAKEN PLACE. THE 'RWY 27 RELEASED TO GND CTL' STRIPS WERE STILL POSTED AT BOTH GND CTL STRIP BAYS; AND 'RWY 27 RELEASED TO GND CTL' WAS STILL POSTED IN THE STARS MESSAGE AREA. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION THAT REQUIRES PRECISE COORD. UNFORTUNATELY; THE COORD IS FLAWED ON A DAILY BASIS. THE STATUS OF WHO ACTUALLY OWNS RWY 27 IS OFTEN A SUBJECT OF DISCUSSION DUE TO THE FACT THAT COORD IS OFTEN INCOMPLETE. I HAVE PERSONALLY WITNESSED SEVERAL ACFT 'GO AROUND' TO GND CTL XING RWY 27 AT INAPPROPRIATE TIMES; AND DUE TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS CONFUSION ON WHO ACTUALLY 'OWNED' RWY 27. I FEEL THAT I ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO THE PROB DUE TO THE FACT THAT I DID NOT SCAN THE FINAL APCH COURSE OR LOOK AT THE STARS DISPLAY PRIOR TO ISSUING TAXI INSTRUCTIONS TO ACR X. I WILL MAKE AN EFFORT TO LOOK OUT THE WINDOW AND SCAN MORE DELIBERATELY IN THE FUTURE. IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE OUR FACILITY ADDRESS THIS SITUATION IN A MORE PROACTIVE MANNER BEFORE 2 ACFT ACTUALLY COLLIDE ON RWY 27.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.