FLT CREW OBJECTS TO APCH CTLR INSTRUCTIONS REFERENCE CROSSING POINT AND ALT ON ILS APCH.

Narrative

ATL APCH CTLR GAVE A LATE TURN ON VECTOR WHICH WENT THROUGH THE LOC OF 26R ILS; THEN GAVE A HDG TO REINTERCEPT THE LOC AND ASKED FOR THE BEST RATE OF TURN. THE CTLR CLRED US FOR THE 26R ILS; CROSS CEGRO AT 2700'. I TOLD MY F/O THAT 2700' WAS ABOVE THE G/S; HE ADVISED THE CTLR THE 2700' AT CEGRO WAS FOR THE NONPRECISION AND WAS ABOVE THE G/S. THEN THE CTLR SAID CROSS THE MARKER AT 2700'. MY F/O ADVISED THE CTLR NO MARKER EXISTED 26R ILS. THE CTLR COMMENTED IN A SARCASTIC TONE (MY PERCEPTION) THAT HIS APCH PAGE SHOWED IT; AND THEN SAID MAINTAIN 3000'; CLRED FOR 26R ILS. MY S/O RECALLS THE CTLR SAID CEGRO MORE THAN ONE TIME. WE WERE CLOSE TO THE TWR HDOF POINT; HOWEVER; THE CTLR HAD NOT GIVEN US THE FREQ CHANGE; WAS BUSY TALKING TO OTHER ACFT; OR WAS TOO BUSY AND FORGOT. THEREFORE; WE ADVISED WE WERE CHANGING TO THE TWR. THEN THE CTLR SAID CONTACT THE TWR; 119.5. WE CALLED THE TWR AND WERE CLRED TO LAND ON 26R. DURING TAXI; WE WERE GIVEN PHONE NUMBER. MY F/O TALKED TO APCH CTL SUPVR WHO AGREED WE HAD THE CURRENT APCH PROCS WHICH AGREED WITH HIS PROCS. ATC SUPVR SAID HE WOULD TALK TO THE CTLR; AND THEN CLOSED BY SAYING; 'HAVE A NICE DAY.' ATL 26L ILS HAS A MARKER (REDAN) AND A NONPRECISION XING OF 2600'; THEREFORE THE CTLR MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONFUSED WITH THE 26L AND 26R PROCS OR HE MIGHT HAVE INTENDED TO SAY CROSS BALLI AT 2700' BUT SAID CEGRO INSTEAD. ATL ATIS GAVE 27L ILS AND 26R ILS FOR LNDG AND THERE WERE NO NOTAMS REGARDING ANY PROCS. WE WERE VECTORED FROM THE N FOR 26R AND CLRED FOR 26R ILS. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR SAYS THEY WERE ESTABLISHED ON THE ILS LOC WELL BEFORE REACHING CEGRO OR REDAN. CALLBACK DID NOT REVEAL ANY OTHER NEW INFO REF THIS INCIDENT; BUT DID GIVE ANALYST A CHANCE TO POINT OUT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN NOAA AND COMMERCIAL APCH CHARTS; AND TO COUNSEL REPORTER TO FACT THAT CTLR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN TOO FAR OFF BASE IN THIS CASE. ANALYST THANKED REPORTER FOR SENDING THE RPT; AND ADVISED HIM THAT ASRS MAY BE ABLE TO TAKE SOME CORRECTIVE ACTION AS A RESULT OF HIS INITIATIVE. ALSO DISCUSSED SOME OTHER RPTS WHICH RPTR HAS SUBMITTED. 2 OF HIS PREVIOUS RPTS HAD RESULTED IN ALERT BULLETINS BEING ISSUED; AND HE WANTED TO KNOW IF WE HAD RECEIVED ANY RESPONSES. I ADVISED HIM THAT I WOULD CHK INTO THE MATTER. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 81896: I TOLD HIM THAT OUR APCH CHARTS SHOW NO OM ON THE 26R ILS APCH. APCH CTL'S CONFUSION WITH THE PROC CREATED A SIGNIFICANT DISTR FOR US DURING FINAL APCH. WE DISCUSSED THIS SITUATION WITH THE ATL APCH CTL SUPVR BY PHONE. HIS FIRST CONCERN WAS THAT OUR APCH CHARTS WERE DIFFERENT FROM HIS. AFTER SOME DISCUSSION; HE AGREED THAT THERE WAS NO OM ON THE 26R ILS; AND AGREED TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER WITH THE APCH CTLR. APPARENTLY OUR CHARTS ARE IN AGREEMENT.