DURING CONTINUOUS SNOW REMOVAL OPS AT ANC; AK; AN ACR FLIES THE WRONG ILS UNTIL CORRECTED BY TWR AFTER THE HDOF FROM TRACON.

Narrative

ATIS ADVERTISING 'CONTINUOUS SNOW REMOVAL (ORDER ENCLOSED; ILS 6R/L); 6R IS CLOSED; 6L ONLY ARRIVAL RWY IN USE.' ACR X CHECKS IN ON ARRIVAL SECTOR WITH CURRENT ATIS CODE; TOLD TO 'EXPECT ILS 6L.' 6R IS NORMAL RWY FOR AIR CARRIER ARRIVALS. PILOT CLEARED TO DESCEND ON FMS ARRIVAL AND SENT TO FINAL FREQ AT APPROPRIATE TIME. ACR X CHECKS IN ON FINAL (MY POSITION) AND TOLD AGAIN TO EXPECT 6L. ACFT SUBSEQUENTLY CLEARED FOR 'ILS 6L; MAINTAIN 170 KTS TO WEBBI.' PILOT ACKNOWLEDGED 'CLEARED FOR APPROACH.' WHEN SENT TO TOWER; PILOT REPORTED ON FINAL FOR 6R AND WAS ADAMANT THAT WAS APPROACH HE WAS CLEARED FOR. ACFT LANDED 6L WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. I BELIEVE THIS WAS CAUSED BY 'CONTINUOUS SNOW REMOVAL' PROCEDURE. THE ATIS TOLD THE PILOT TO EXPECT THE ILS TO 6R; EVEN THOUGH THE RWY WAS CLOSED; AND HAD BEEN CLOSED FOR NEARLY AN HOUR. THE APPARENT PURPOSE OF THIS PROCEDURE IS TO ELIMINATE THE NEED TO ISSUE A NOTAM AND MAKE A NEW ATIS WHEN A RWY IS CLOSED. I THINK THIS PROCEDURE WILL EVENTUALLY LEAD TO AN ACFT LANDING ON A CLOSED RWY; OCCUPIED BY SNOWPLOWS; ALL TO SAVE FIVE MINUTES OF WORK. CALLBACK REVEALED THAT THIS PROCEDURE HAS BEEN IN USE FOR SEVERAL YEARS. IT HAS WORKED QUITE WELL EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE INCIDENT. THERE HAS BEEN DISTRIBUTION OF THIS PROCEDURE TO ALL THE OPERATIONS OFFICES OF THE CARRIERS AND OTHER USERS OF THE AIRPORT. THE REPORTER IS CONCERNED; HOWEVER; ABOUT THE ADVERTISING OF AN APPROACH THAT IS NOT AVAILABLE. THERE ARE THE ISSUES OF A NO RADIO ACFT WHO MAY FLY THE WRONG APPROACH WHEN THE RWY IS OCCUPIED BY EQUIPMENT.