Approach controller was surprised when an aircraft on final refused to comply with an approach clear...

Attributes
ACN	982745
Time
Date	201112
Local Time Of Day	0001-0600
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.Airport
State Reference	US
Environment
Flight Conditions	IMC
Light	Night
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Learjet 31
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Approach Departure
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Person 2
Function	Pilot Not Flying First Officer
Qualification	Flight Crew Multiengine Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP) Flight Crew Instrument
Experience	Flight Crew Last 90 Days 100 Flight Crew Total 5000 Flight Crew Type 3000
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Inflight Event / Encounter Fuel Issue

Narrative:

A learjet 31 was on the ILS approach for runway 2R with IFR traffic landing runway 2C preceding. When issued approach clearance the learjet 31 was issued a speed restriction by the arrival controller that he never complied with. As the 2 aircraft began to compress on final; I issued another speed restriction; it was not going to be enough to maintain separation; so I canceled the learjet 31's approach clearance and issued control instructions to ensure separation was maintained. The learjet 31 replied to my cancellation of his approach with 'unable.' after trying to verify that this was actually his response I was told he declared minimum fuel with center. This information was never relayed to approach or myself prior to this point. We were able to see the aircraft just after the unable response and provide visual separation; but that was not a given in our weather conditions at the time and it was unacceptable that there was no communication of any fuel issues prior to that point. The pilot needs to be responsible for relaying any fuel issues as he changes facilities. There is to much room for this to slip between the cracks.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Approach Controller was surprised when an aircraft on final refused to comply with an approach clearance cancellation; only to discover a minimum fuel status that was not relayed properly.

Narrative: A Learjet 31 was on the ILS Approach for Runway 2R with IFR traffic landing Runway 2C preceding. When issued approach clearance the Learjet 31 was issued a speed restriction by the Arrival Controller that he never complied with. As the 2 aircraft began to compress on final; I issued another speed restriction; it was not going to be enough to maintain separation; so I canceled the Learjet 31's approach clearance and issued control instructions to ensure separation was maintained. The Learjet 31 replied to my cancellation of his approach with 'unable.' After trying to verify that this was actually his response I was told he declared minimum fuel with Center. This information was never relayed to approach or myself prior to this point. We were able to see the aircraft just after the unable response and provide visual separation; but that was not a given in our weather conditions at the time and it was unacceptable that there was no communication of any fuel issues prior to that point. The pilot needs to be responsible for relaying any fuel issues as he changes facilities. There is to much room for this to slip between the cracks.

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.

Approach controller was surprised when an aircraft on final refused to comply with an approach clearance cancellation; only to discover a minimum fuel status that was not relayed properly.