Narrative:

This morning's weather briefing indicated a strong low had moved into the delta and brought warm air over a cold surface which could create slippery conditions. NOTAMS from the prior day showed all surfaces at bethel were contaminated with water over thin or patchy snow and ice. But the temperature had since dropped below freezing. Any water would now be ice with some traction. There were no PIREPS available. And there were no braking action reports. There was nothing to preclude our flight from proceeding as planned. The only open consideration was a headwind which would put us on bethel airport at the morning runway inspection time. We landed runway 18; via the GPS approach; minutes ahead of aircraft Y. We stopped abeam the runway 11/29 intersection and performed a 180 degree turn to exit the runway at taxiway C. At this time; on the local frequency; I advised aircraft Y 'braking action fair. The runway is covered with a crusty snow.' the contamination was thin. They gratefully acknowledged. About 1 minute later; as we cleared the runway at taxiway C; the bethel state maintenance voice announced 'braking action nil. Runway 18 at bethel is closed.' at this time; aircraft Y was on the GPS 18 approach and announced: 'ah; aircraft Y on a 6 miles final...can you open it so we can land?...we have been through this before...are you familiar with our agreement?' airport maintenance voice restated: 'runway closed and braking action nil.' he said: 'you guys will pack this stuff down and it'll take forever to get it off.' I announced that we had just landed and the braking action was 'fair;' and a filed PIREP was pending. Aircraft Y asked if the runway was clear and announced that they were going to land. The voice responded: 'you can land. But expect to wait (to get out); 'cause it's going to be closed.' aircraft Y landed uneventfully and PIREP'ed the braking action as 'fair-good.' it appeared to me the bethel airport maintenance report was more than inaccurate; it was fraudulent. When I asked airport maintenance for the name of the person who issued the NOTAM for 'nil braking action;' the voice on the radio refused to give me the name. He told me to get it from kenai AFSS. The supervisor at kenai AFSS refused to give me the name; but offered the airport manager's name and number. Over several years; our company has had repeated encounters of his nature at the bethel airport during winter months. Unwarranted diversions to alternate airports have been made at great expense. In other instances we have avoided a diversion by inquiring about the nature of the runway closure. And; only after persuasive tact and discussion of the associated costs and fallout caused by a diversion was the reluctant airport maintenance person persuaded to open the runway. The senior captains at our company testify that at no other airport in the state does such a situation occur without cause. This issue goes farther than the cost of diversion to alternate; it goes to the safety of a flight. When an aircraft dispatches to destination; it is based upon the careful evaluation of certain factors to assure a safe landing. Variation in weather; runway contamination; and disabled aircraft on runway are common barriers to landing over which an air carrier has no control. Spontaneous runway maintenance should not be one of these variables. If the aircraft Y flight had diverted to its chosen alternate airport; and the airport manager; guided by the policies of his office; chose to close the runway under the same pretense; then the flight would be required to declare an emergency. Again; this is not the first; or second; time a situation of this nature at bet has occurred.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Freighter Captain lands at Bethel and announces braking action fair on CTAF. Airport worker announces shortly that braking action is nil and the airport is closed. Aircraft on final announces they will be landing then reports braking action as fair to good. Airport worker did not want aircraft to pack snow that he would be removing from runway.

Narrative: This morning's weather briefing indicated a strong low had moved into the Delta and brought warm air over a cold surface which could create slippery conditions. NOTAMS from the prior day showed all surfaces at Bethel were contaminated with water over thin or patchy snow and ice. But the temperature had since dropped below freezing. Any water would now be ice with some traction. There were no PIREPS available. And there were no braking action reports. There was nothing to preclude our flight from proceeding as planned. The only open consideration was a headwind which would put us on Bethel Airport at the morning runway inspection time. We landed Runway 18; via the GPS approach; minutes ahead of Aircraft Y. We stopped abeam the Runway 11/29 intersection and performed a 180 degree turn to exit the runway at Taxiway C. At this time; on the local frequency; I advised Aircraft Y 'Braking action fair. The runway is covered with a crusty snow.' The contamination was thin. They gratefully acknowledged. About 1 minute later; as we cleared the runway at Taxiway C; the Bethel State Maintenance voice announced 'Braking action nil. Runway 18 at Bethel is closed.' At this time; Aircraft Y was on the GPS 18 approach and announced: 'Ah; Aircraft Y on a 6 miles final...Can you open it so we can land?...We have been through this before...are you familiar with our agreement?' Airport Maintenance voice restated: 'runway closed and braking action nil.' He said: 'You guys will pack this stuff down and it'll take forever to get it off.' I announced that we had just landed and the braking action was 'fair;' and a filed PIREP was pending. Aircraft Y asked if the runway was clear and announced that they were going to land. The voice responded: 'You can land. But expect to wait (to get out); 'cause it's going to be closed.' Aircraft Y landed uneventfully and PIREP'ed the braking action as 'fair-good.' It appeared to me the Bethel Airport Maintenance report was more than inaccurate; it was fraudulent. When I asked Airport Maintenance for the name of the person who issued the NOTAM for 'nil braking action;' the voice on the radio refused to give me the name. He told me to get it from Kenai AFSS. The Supervisor at Kenai AFSS refused to give me the name; but offered the Airport Manager's name and number. Over several years; our company has had repeated encounters of his nature at the Bethel airport during winter months. Unwarranted diversions to alternate airports have been made at great expense. In other instances we have avoided a diversion by inquiring about the nature of the runway closure. And; only after persuasive tact and discussion of the associated costs and fallout caused by a diversion was the reluctant airport maintenance person persuaded to open the runway. The senior Captains at our company testify that at no other airport in the state does such a situation occur without cause. This issue goes farther than the cost of diversion to alternate; it goes to the safety of a flight. When an aircraft dispatches to destination; it is based upon the careful evaluation of certain factors to assure a safe landing. Variation in weather; runway contamination; and disabled aircraft on runway are common barriers to landing over which an air carrier has no control. Spontaneous runway maintenance should not be one of these variables. If the Aircraft Y flight had diverted to its chosen alternate airport; and the Airport Manager; guided by the policies of his office; chose to close the runway under the same pretense; then the flight would be required to declare an emergency. Again; this is not the first; or second; time a situation of this nature at BET has occurred.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.