Narrative:

Local procedures were implemented to comply with national direction for 30-degree turn-ons to final during VFR conditions. No changes were made to final airspace maps when 3 finals are open in the same area (dump) to accommodate the new procedures. If 3 final positions to the north or south dump are open (this occurs almost always during the peak rushes approximately 7 times during the day) there is no way to comply with the new procedures without coordinating around them. Every flm (supervisor) is doing it a little different and are each instigated their own interpretation. In order to comply with the new procedures a large amount of aircraft need to be upwind-downwind (approximately 40 more flying miles for each aircraft) to stay in compliance with the new procedures. This is ineffective for the facility; dangerous for the controllers and costly for the airlines. In order to manipulate the situation created; either blanket point outs are being instigated by the flm's through finals airspace or they are coordinating blanket point outs with departures attempting to get into the correct airspace or they are intentionally not opening a 3rd final in order to eliminate the problem. They are creating dangerous situations and compromising the safety or the air traffic system. Proposed solution: the facility is currently researching RNAV arrivals to the airport and other airspace changes that would make the airport more effective. These changes may be months or years off; until that time I suggest they do a quick fix so the procedures fit the airspace or cease and desist until the other changes are implemented. In order to do trips VFR with the 30 degrees turn the center runway 16L already has rules of where they need to be established and cleared; it is very similar to running an ILS in triple simultaneous approaches. The outbound runways utilize the 10-degree turns. There is a push to have altitude established; one outbound could stay at 130 and the other go to 120 without the dump airspace. Anything outside the dump airspace below 130 is owned by the departure controller. If this suggestion doesn't meet their needs they could take on changing departure airspace to get lower altitudes. The bottom line is the entire facility should not be coordinating around procedures that they created. It pretty much says there is something wrong with the procedures! This suggestion is just a quick (temporary) fix and just changes airspace maps when there are 3 different final controllers working each runway. The same idea is implied in a north configuration.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: D01 Controller voiced concern regarding the new 30-degree VFR turn-on procedures that make coordination compliance complex and difficult; adding supervisory interpretations and operational practices vary significantly.

Narrative: Local procedures were implemented to comply with national direction for 30-degree turn-ons to final during VFR conditions. No changes were made to final airspace maps when 3 finals are open in the same area (dump) to accommodate the new procedures. If 3 final positions to the north or south dump are open (this occurs almost always during the peak rushes approximately 7 times during the day) there is no way to comply with the new procedures without coordinating around them. Every FLM (Supervisor) is doing it a little different and are each instigated their own interpretation. In order to comply with the new procedures a large amount of aircraft need to be upwind-downwind (approximately 40 more flying miles for each aircraft) to stay in compliance with the new procedures. This is ineffective for the facility; dangerous for the Controllers and costly for the airlines. In order to manipulate the situation created; either blanket point outs are being instigated by the FLM'S through finals airspace or they are coordinating blanket point outs with departures attempting to get into the correct airspace or they are intentionally not opening a 3rd final in order to eliminate the problem. They are creating dangerous situations and compromising the safety or the air traffic system. Proposed solution: The facility is currently researching RNAV arrivals to the airport and other airspace changes that would make the airport more effective. These changes may be months or years off; until that time I suggest they do a quick fix so the procedures fit the airspace or cease and desist until the other changes are implemented. In order to do trips VFR with the 30 degrees turn the center Runway 16L already has rules of where they need to be established and cleared; it is very similar to running an ILS in triple simultaneous approaches. The outbound runways utilize the 10-degree turns. There is a push to have altitude established; one outbound could stay at 130 and the other go to 120 without the dump airspace. Anything outside the dump airspace below 130 is owned by the Departure Controller. If this suggestion doesn't meet their needs they could take on changing departure airspace to get lower altitudes. The bottom line is the entire facility should not be coordinating around procedures that they created. It pretty much says there is something wrong with the procedures! This suggestion is just a quick (temporary) fix and just changes airspace maps when there are 3 different final controllers working each runway. The same idea is implied in a north configuration.

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.