PA-31 Navajo/Chieftan/Mojave/T1040
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Confusion
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Procedure
Ceiling and visibility was OVC009 10SM; the advertised approach was RNAV/GPS Runway 26; Runway's 26 and 31 were active. A PA31; called Tower inbound on the final for Runway 26. A Cessna 402; called Tower inbound on the ILS Runway 8 circle to Runway 26. PA31 was on a two mile final for Runway 26 and Cessna 402 was over the ILS Runway 8 outer marker. I called the TRACON Operations Manager; and explained my concern over opposite direction traffic being on a two mile final for Runway 26 with another aircraft over the outer marker for the ILS Runway 8. He didn't see it as a problem. I asked him what plan B was if PA31 executed missed approach. He said the Tower would have to turn one north and one south; but he would go talk to the Controller and tell him to give us more room. I think this is a misunderstanding of procedure and a huge safety issue. Doesn't the Approach Controller have to protect for the missed approach; 7110.65. Clarification Regarding Opposite Direction Operations is needed. I recommend towers and TRACONs receive clarification from regional or national QA/QC on what the separation requirements are for opposite direction approaches. After clarification; I recommend refresher training for everyone for opposite direction operations. I also recommend that any refresher training received be incorporated into our local annual refresher training plans.
Tower Supervisor voiced concern regarding a TRACON's interpretation of the 'opposite direction' mandate that is continuing to cause confusion.