INSTRUCTOR CONCERNED ABOUT CTAF FREQ CHANGE NOT BEING BROADCAST ON AWOS AS A LCL NOTAM.

Narrative

MY STUDENT AND I APCHED CJR FROM THE NE. UPON RECEIVING THE AWOS; WE LEARNED THAT THE UNICOM FREQ HAD BEEN CHANGED FROM 123.0 TO 123.075 VIA 'CULPEPER LCL NOTAM.' AFTER XMITTING OUR INTENTIONS IN THE BLIND ON 123.07 TO 'CULPEPER TFC;' WE SET UP FOR A SIMULATED ENG FAILURE/EMER APCH TO LNDG ON RWY 22. SINCE MY STUDENT WAS TOO HIGH TO MAKE A LNDG; I INSTRUCTED HER TO GO AROUND. UPON REACHING APPROX 700 FT AGL; MY STUDENT VISUALLY ACQUIRED ANOTHER AIRPLANE ON FINAL APCH TO RWY 4 AT APPROX 200 FT AGL. NOT HAVING HEARD ANY XMISSIONS ON THE CTAF OF 123.07; I SWITCHED TO 123.0 (THE OLD FREQ). UPON RAISING THE PLT WHO HAD JUST TOUCHED DOWN ON RWY 4; I INFORMED HIM OF THE FREQ CHANGE. NEXT; I SWITCHED BACK TO 123.07. UPON RAISING THE UNICOM OPERATOR; I INFORMED HIM OF THE CONFLICT AND HE SAID 'IT'S ON THE AWOS; WHAT ELSE CAN I DO?' I SUGGESTED TO HIM THAT THE REMARKS SHOULD READ THAT THE NEW UNICOM AND CTAF FREQ HAS CHANGED TO 123.075 (NOTICE THE MENTION OF THE CTAF CHANGE WAS NON EXISTENT IN THE AWOS REMARKS). HE SAID 'ISN'T (CTAF) THE SAME THING (AS UNICOM).' I REPLIED 'AT THIS ARPT; YES; BUT AT SOME ARPTS THE TWO ARE ON SEPARATE FREQS.' IN SHORT; THE UNICOM OPERATOR SEEMED VERY DEFENSIVE AND RELUCTANT TO MAKE A CHANGE IN THE REMARKS SECTION OF THE AWOS FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES. I BELIEVE THIS IS A TRAGIC ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN.