Narrative:

We were on a visual approach to runway 31 at cmx announcing our intentions on the published frequency of 123.6. We called our company 3 times for a traffic check, no response (nothing new). As we landed we noticed a light twin on the approach end of runway 13 rolling. I broadcasted on 123.6 for the light twin to announce his intentions. That's when green bay FSS told us the new advisory frequency was 122.7. Frequency 122.7 was not published on our charts nor was it in our WX or NOTAMS. Company policy requires us to get a traffic check from operations before landing. As I stated earlier, we were unable to contact company. Even if we had, they would not have been able to see the traffic on the end of runway 13 (not visible from where they stand). Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter said the landing airport was their alternate and that, although it was approved for regular operations, it was not approved as an alternate. He said they landed on the occupied runway because they were anxious to get on the ground. He said his captain was given a few days off because of this incident. He said visibility was restr because of snow on the ground.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR LTT LANDED AT AN ALTERNATE WITHOUT OBTAINING WX REPORT FROM COMPANY COM. LANDED ON OCCUPIED RWY FORCING ANOTHER ACFT TO ABORT TKOF.

Narrative: WE WERE ON A VISUAL APCH TO RWY 31 AT CMX ANNOUNCING OUR INTENTIONS ON THE PUBLISHED FREQ OF 123.6. WE CALLED OUR COMPANY 3 TIMES FOR A TFC CHK, NO RESPONSE (NOTHING NEW). AS WE LANDED WE NOTICED A LIGHT TWIN ON THE APCH END OF RWY 13 ROLLING. I BROADCASTED ON 123.6 FOR THE LIGHT TWIN TO ANNOUNCE HIS INTENTIONS. THAT'S WHEN GREEN BAY FSS TOLD US THE NEW ADVISORY FREQ WAS 122.7. FREQ 122.7 WAS NOT PUBLISHED ON OUR CHARTS NOR WAS IT IN OUR WX OR NOTAMS. COMPANY POLICY REQUIRES US TO GET A TFC CHK FROM OPS BEFORE LNDG. AS I STATED EARLIER, WE WERE UNABLE TO CONTACT COMPANY. EVEN IF WE HAD, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO SEE THE TFC ON THE END OF RWY 13 (NOT VISIBLE FROM WHERE THEY STAND). CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR SAID THE LNDG ARPT WAS THEIR ALTERNATE AND THAT, ALTHOUGH IT WAS APPROVED FOR REGULAR OPS, IT WAS NOT APPROVED AS AN ALTERNATE. HE SAID THEY LANDED ON THE OCCUPIED RWY BECAUSE THEY WERE ANXIOUS TO GET ON THE GND. HE SAID HIS CAPT WAS GIVEN A FEW DAYS OFF BECAUSE OF THIS INCIDENT. HE SAID VIS WAS RESTR BECAUSE OF SNOW ON THE GND.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.