Medium Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 9
Confusion; Situational Awareness; Distraction
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown
Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Airport; Company Policy; Procedure
I was working Local Control. Aircraft X was departing. About 10 minutes prior; the Supervisor received a call from Airport Authority indicating that one of their vehicles would be accessing the Runway Run Up Block and would remain clear of all runways and taxiways. The Supervisor passed this information along to me. Over the last year; EMAS (Engineered Material Arresting System) was installed on both ends of the runway. On the departure end of the runway there is a vehicle lane that is clear of the runway; but it is eerily close to it. The vehicle lane penetrates over the EMAS; but ATC does not have any control over it. There are no procedures currently to have ATC control these crossings. Basically; it allows vehicular traffic to 'look and go' without any contact with the Tower. This is currently an issue with the vehicle lane at the approach end of another runway as well. I scanned the Runway before departing Aircraft X and saw that it was clear. I never saw any OPS vehicle. While climbing; the pilot of Aircraft X asked if there was a vehicle on the runway that they had departed over. My first response was; 'What vehicle?' The pilot responded again. It was then that I noticed OPS in the run-up block of the runway from which I informed the pilot that they were in the block and clear of the runway. The pilot then replied with an 'okay'; but it was a reply that didn't seem reassured. There was no time to explain to him the specifics as other traffic and priorities took priority. Aircraft X was switched to departure control. A report was created by the Supervisor and Airport Authority was notified. Airport Authority spoke with the Supervisor.Airport Authority and the FAA must come up with an immediate change. When you are working Local Control and this type of event happens; it shakes you. That vehicle lane is too close to the runway and there is no ATC control over it. These vehicles have the ability to repeat this exact scenario. It would be the same scenario if I was landing. If so; those planes would be landing as a vehicle is crossing right in front of them. Again; the vehicle lane is clear of the runway; but that is not fair to the pilots or the controllers as well.Safety is our biggest concern and I feel this vehicle lane jeopardizes that safety. There is no light. There is no requirement they contact Tower for authorization to cross. The question I have is do the operators of these vehicles really understand the impact their movements have on our operation? Clearly in this situation; they did not. The pilot questioned it and it made me look as though I was not performing my duties safely. Any required communication from that vehicle operator to the tower would have definitely prevented this unsafe situation. I strongly recommend immediate steps be taken to require those vehicles to contact ATC at all times when crossing at those locations that are in the EMAS area; but still too close to the runway. It will prevent pilots from feeling as though Tower doesn't champion safety above all; which I and all my team members do. It will prevent controllers from feeling helpless and unable to manage a situation. This situation should have never occurred. It's not a good feeling knowing this and hope the Airport Authority addresses this immediately! The pilots and controllers deserve better!
DCA Tower Controller reported airport roads off the end of two runways are distractions and confusing for pilots and controllers when airport vehicles use the roads.