SJC Tower Controller described unwanted operational events when SJC winds favor the use of Runway 12 but NorCal Traffic Management elects to dictate the use of Runway 30 because of SOIA operations at SFO; resulting in delays and opposite direction traffic at SJC.

Narrative

SJC is located in a microclimate area and normally experiences southeast winds this time of year. This environment poses problems for SFO when they want to conduct SOIA approaches. Apparently; when this approach was designed one of its many criteria includes SJC cannot be landing Runway 12. On those occasions when this occurs SJC will receive numerous calls from NCT Flow either requesting that we change to a 30 operation; even though the winds favor using Runway 12 or if we are considering using Runway 12 that we hold off as long as possible because it prevents the use of SOIA. This was the case in May 2009 when we arrived at the facility to begin operations the wind was 12010 KTS. The CIC coordinated that we were going to open on Runway 12 and the NCT Traffic Management Unit requested that we not do so as they were going to 'run SOIA' FAAO 7110.65 3-5-1 Runway Selection: Except where a 'runway use' program is in effect; use the runway most nearly aligned with the wind when 5KTS or more. SJC does not currently have nor has it ever had a 'runway use' program except perhaps a 'calm wind' runway; which would normally be Runway 30/29. I felt the CIC took an unnecessary risk by not opening up on Runway12 to accommodate NCT Traffic Management Unit request and it was not until it started raining that the SJC CIC advised NCT Traffic Management Unit that we were changing runways as he was concerned about safety considering the weather conditions. I believe that the lack of experience by the CIC coupled with the pressure from NCT resulted in making a poor decision to operate in this configuration. Two days later again we had southeast winds that required that we land Runway 12. This would prevent SFO from running SOIA. The SJC FLM was informed by the CIC that we were going to change and the FLM concurred. This generated calls from NCT and additional calls from the command center. It was decided by the command center in consultation with NCT to ground stop (GS) any aircraft that could not accept a Runway 30 arrival with a tail wind component and SJC would conduct opposite landing/departure that is; we would depart Runway 12 and land Runway 30 so SFO could continue running SOIA. This operation created a huge workload for the San Jose controllers; as they had to deal with opposite direction ground movement and this unusual operation generated many questions by the users. In addition; SJC was issuing departure headings turn left heading 090 immediately after departure; which has done because we were launching aircraft into arrivals opposite direction creating more of a risk to safety. The day after again SJC had southeast winds up to 12KTS and once again the decision to depart Runway 12 and land Runway 30 was determined by the command center to accommodate SFO SOIA operations even though SJC FLM advised against this operation. Aircraft were told that they could either land Runway 30 with a tailwind component or divert to another airport. I believe the FAA; by making this determination; put the user in a situation that placed themselves and passengers at risk. This situation could have been easily resolved to allow NCT to conduct visual approaches to Runway 12 by ensuring aircraft turn base inside NUQ as the weather at the time would allow this type of operation. Perhaps flow restrictions could have been increased to SJC to ensure aircraft would not have to extent to follow preceding traffic. This would have protected the SOIA approaches and would have resulted in an overall safer operation.