Narrative:

Our new runway 35 adds capacity to the airport; but if an aircraft executes a go around on runway 35 (balked landing) it could be a very big conflict with a departure off runway 30R or even more so off runway 30L. Because of this situation; msp tower orders require us to discontinue runway 35 arrs if there is any windshear reported on final to runway 35 to avoid the potentially unsafe situation of a go around on runway 35 and traffic departing runway 30L or runway 30R. Recently; air carrier X has decided to redefine windshear as any gain or loss of 15 KTS or more. They have briefed their pilots to call a gain or loss of airspeed less than 15 KTS as 'speed fluctuations.' this way; msp can keep landing runway 35 causing less delays to air carrier X. We; as controllers; have been told by supervisors that if the pilot doesn't use the word 'windshear' or it doesn't exceed 15 KTS change of airspeed; that runway 35 arrs will keep coming and that 'air carrier X came up with this and has agreed to it.' it seems that air carrier X and FAA management have decided to compromise safety for the purpose of reducing delays into msp airport. I think there is a very valid safety concern when msp tower has agreed not to land runway 35 when there is evidence of windshear on final approach to runway 35; and then msp tower along with air carrier X decides to make up their own definitions of windshear so that msp can keep arrs coming to runway 35 while compromising the very safety they were trying to ensure when they made the procedure to discontinue runway 35 arrs as soon as windshear is detected on final to runway 35. Something is very unsafe about this new twist on the definition of windshear just to avoid delays to air carrier X in the name of making more money.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MSP TWR CTLR VOICED CONCERN REGARDING RWY 35 GAR PROCS THAT MAY CONFLICT WITH RWY 30L/R DEPS AND LCL DEFINITION OF WINDSHEAR EVENTS.

Narrative: OUR NEW RWY 35 ADDS CAPACITY TO THE ARPT; BUT IF AN ACFT EXECUTES A GAR ON RWY 35 (BALKED LNDG) IT COULD BE A VERY BIG CONFLICT WITH A DEP OFF RWY 30R OR EVEN MORE SO OFF RWY 30L. BECAUSE OF THIS SITUATION; MSP TWR ORDERS REQUIRE US TO DISCONTINUE RWY 35 ARRS IF THERE IS ANY WINDSHEAR RPTED ON FINAL TO RWY 35 TO AVOID THE POTENTIALLY UNSAFE SITUATION OF A GAR ON RWY 35 AND TFC DEPARTING RWY 30L OR RWY 30R. RECENTLY; ACR X HAS DECIDED TO REDEFINE WINDSHEAR AS ANY GAIN OR LOSS OF 15 KTS OR MORE. THEY HAVE BRIEFED THEIR PLTS TO CALL A GAIN OR LOSS OF AIRSPD LESS THAN 15 KTS AS 'SPD FLUCTUATIONS.' THIS WAY; MSP CAN KEEP LNDG RWY 35 CAUSING LESS DELAYS TO ACR X. WE; AS CTLRS; HAVE BEEN TOLD BY SUPVRS THAT IF THE PLT DOESN'T USE THE WORD 'WINDSHEAR' OR IT DOESN'T EXCEED 15 KTS CHANGE OF AIRSPD; THAT RWY 35 ARRS WILL KEEP COMING AND THAT 'ACR X CAME UP WITH THIS AND HAS AGREED TO IT.' IT SEEMS THAT ACR X AND FAA MGMNT HAVE DECIDED TO COMPROMISE SAFETY FOR THE PURPOSE OF REDUCING DELAYS INTO MSP ARPT. I THINK THERE IS A VERY VALID SAFETY CONCERN WHEN MSP TWR HAS AGREED NOT TO LAND RWY 35 WHEN THERE IS EVIDENCE OF WINDSHEAR ON FINAL APCH TO RWY 35; AND THEN MSP TWR ALONG WITH ACR X DECIDES TO MAKE UP THEIR OWN DEFINITIONS OF WINDSHEAR SO THAT MSP CAN KEEP ARRS COMING TO RWY 35 WHILE COMPROMISING THE VERY SAFETY THEY WERE TRYING TO ENSURE WHEN THEY MADE THE PROC TO DISCONTINUE RWY 35 ARRS AS SOON AS WINDSHEAR IS DETECTED ON FINAL TO RWY 35. SOMETHING IS VERY UNSAFE ABOUT THIS NEW TWIST ON THE DEFINITION OF WINDSHEAR JUST TO AVOID DELAYS TO ACR X IN THE NAME OF MAKING MORE MONEY.

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.