PHL APCH CTLR REPORTED SUPVR CRITICISM FOR USING ALT VS. LATERAL SEPARATION DURING SAPR1 PROCS THAT RESULTED IN GAR.

Narrative

I WAS WORKING FV2 POS DURING SAPR1 OP. THERE ARE VERY FEW PROCS IN PLACE FOR THIS OP; RELYING MOSTLY ON STANDARD SEPARATION IN 7110.65 AND SHARED RESPONSIBILITIES BTWN FV1 AND FV2 FOR VISUAL SEPARATION APPLICATION. I WAS VECTORING MY ARRS TO RWY 27L; USING THE MXE 107 DEG RADIAL INBOUND; BUT; KEEPING MY TFC ABOVE THE RWY 27R TFC. ONCE THE ARR FOR EITHER RWY RPTED THE OPPOSING TFC IN SIGHT; I APPLIED VISUAL SEPARATION BTWN THE TWO; VERIFIED THAT THE RWY WAS IN SIGHT AND ISSUED APCH CLRNC INFO. I HAD ONE ARR WHO DID NOT SEE THE OPPOSITE TFC AND HAD TO BE TAKEN OFF THE FINAL FOR RESEQUENCING TO ANOTHER RWY. DURING THIS TIME; SUPVR X TOLD ME TO TAKE THE TFC DOWN TO THE SAME ALT AS THE TFC INBOUND TO THE ADJACENT RWY. I TOLD HIM THAT I WAS USING VERT SEPARATION UNTIL HE HAD THE TFC IN SIGHT. AFTER THIS SESSION WAS OVER MY MGR SAT ME DOWN AND EXPLAINED THAT I SHOULD TAKE MY TFC TO THE SAME ALT AS THE ADJACENT RWY TFC AND USE LATERAL SEPARATION INSTEAD. I EXPLAINED THAT I DIDN'T WANT TO BET ON THE COME; HOPING TO USE VISUAL SEPARATION AND THAT I PREFER POSITIVE VERT SEPARATION. HE SAID TO USE THE MXE 107 DEG RADIAL AND APPLY LATERAL SEPARATION INSTEAD. I AM UNCOMFORTABLE APPLYING ANYTHING OTHER THAN SEPARATION THAT IS GUARANTEED TO WORK. I SPENT THE EVENING RESEARCHING THIS SUBJECT AND SPOKE TO THE TRAINING DEPT THE VERY NEXT DAY WHO CONCURRED WITH MY JUDGEMENT. I TOLD SUPVR Y ABOUT THE CONVERSATION WITH THE TRAINING OFFICE AND HE SAID THAT I COULD USE VERT SEPARATION IF I WANT. THERE ARE ADDITIONAL ISSUES WITH THIS OP. NO BREAKOUT PROCS; NO AIRSPACE FOR FV2 W OF THE SO CALLED BREAKOUT POINT. NO PROCS TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE ATIS INFO IS BROADCAST; NO METHOD TO KEEP ACFT IN THE CLASS B ONCE THEY ARE VECTORED IN IT. ALTHOUGH SHARED RESPONSIBILITIES EXIST; THERE ARE NO DEFINED PROCS BEING USED BTWN THE SECTORS RUNNING THIS CONVERGING TFC.