Narrative:

Rhv weather was reporting 2 1/2 SM OVC011. We have two RNAV approaches. On the ATIS 'RNAV GPS runway 31R approach in use' was broadcast. The RNAV Y has a MDA of 1;340 ft the RNAV Z has a MDA of 510 ft. I accepted information hand off on a cirrus who was inbound to rhv. There was no information in the scratch pad regarding approach in use. At one mile final I noticed his altitude was remaining at 1;300 at which point I realized the aircraft was on the RNAV Y approach and was likely going missed. As the cirrus was over the field he reported the field in sight and asked to go into right traffic. I asked the controller in charge if that was legal and he said if he cancels IFR. Then we remembered that rhv was below basic VFR minimums and I told cirrus unable and to contact departure. It was my mistake not to give any missed approach instructions. I called toga sector on the land line to coordinate the missed approach he gave me the option of heading 290 or published missed. I said published missed but the cirrus was already off my frequency. Licke sector called to inquire why if the cirrus had the field in sight I didn't allow him to circle. I asked if the approach clearance did not include circle to land if the tower could issue that and he said yes. While all of this was happening; sjc tower called to inquire about the cirrus entering their airspace; and I told them missed approach and was talking to nct. In the confusion I had forgot to coordinate with sjc for IFR missed approach before nct per the nct rhv LOA 6 b (2). Recommendation: 1. Accurate secondary scratch pad entries for approaches. Now that we have two approaches to the same runway the LOA needs to be updated accordingly. Then I would have been able to be prepared for a missed approach and notify the appropriate sectors in a timely fashion. 2. Refresher training; either right and I; face to face; or team brief; before the 'bad weather' months as we are a VFR tower and do not deal with these situations very often.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: RHV Controller described a confused missed approach event because of two RNAV procedures to the same runway with different minimums; lack of scratch pad information and uncertainly regarding applicable IFR procedures.

Narrative: RHV weather was reporting 2 1/2 SM OVC011. We have two RNAV approaches. On the ATIS 'RNAV GPS Runway 31R approach in use' was broadcast. The RNAV Y has a MDA of 1;340 FT the RNAV Z has a MDA of 510 FT. I accepted information hand off on a Cirrus who was inbound to RHV. There was no information in the scratch pad regarding approach in use. At one mile final I noticed his altitude was remaining at 1;300 at which point I realized the aircraft was on the RNAV Y approach and was likely going missed. As the Cirrus was over the field he reported the field in sight and asked to go into right traffic. I asked the CIC if that was legal and he said if he cancels IFR. Then we remembered that RHV was below basic VFR minimums and I told Cirrus unable and to contact departure. It was my mistake not to give any missed approach instructions. I called Toga Sector on the land line to coordinate the missed approach he gave me the option of heading 290 or published missed. I said published missed but the Cirrus was already off my frequency. Licke Sector called to inquire why if the Cirrus had the field in sight I didn't allow him to circle. I asked if the approach clearance did not include circle to land if the tower could issue that and he said yes. While all of this was happening; SJC Tower called to inquire about the Cirrus entering their airspace; and I told them missed approach and was talking to NCT. In the confusion I had forgot to coordinate with SJC for IFR missed approach before NCT per the NCT RHV LOA 6 b (2). Recommendation: 1. Accurate secondary scratch pad entries for approaches. Now that we have two approaches to the same runway the LOA needs to be updated accordingly. Then I would have been able to be prepared for a missed approach and notify the appropriate sectors in a timely fashion. 2. Refresher training; either R and I; face to face; or team brief; before the 'bad weather' months as we are a VFR Tower and do not deal with these situations very often.

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.