ORD controllers indicated that supervisors and management personnel failed to comply with published SOP standards regarding weather and runway operational procedures and directed controllers to operate contrary to the SOP.
Synopsis
ORD controllers indicated that supervisors and management personnel failed to comply with published SOP standards regarding weather and runway operational procedures and directed controllers to operate contrary to the SOP.
Narrative
I am a FPL and having been put in this uncomfortable position; I feel this is a potentially unsafe situation; especially since it goes against our SOP. The weather was approximately BKN007 [and] 3 SM [visibility] and had been at or around that for most of the shift. As I remember; I was told to open up the 3LC position (Runway 32L and it's intersection T10) as we had previously been working a configuration suited to the weather; IFR west flow in which we land 27L and 27R; depart 22L; and land and depart on Runway 28. Our SOP states that for minimums ceiling 1;500 FT or less and visibility 5 SM or less that we will not depart 32L. The Supervisor told me to depart T10. That approach would give us 10 miles between the 27R arrivals and I should 'shoot the gaps.' This isn't the first time the 'modified' configuration has been used; but the first time I'd been placed in that position. I feel it does not leave the 27R missed approach many outs. The North satellite restriction also came on which meant that our departures and missed approaches would have limited options in the case of a missed approach. Recommendation; do not allow supervisors to implement operational configurations that are not allowed per the SOP; specifically 32L operation when landing Runway 27R in less than 1500/5.
Second reporter narrative
The O'Hare Tower SOP dictates that when ORD is on west flow configuration (27R; 27L; 28) ORD shall not depart Runway 32R if a 27R arrival is within 10 mile final. The SOP also states that ORD shall not depart aircraft off Runway 32L during west flow unless the ceiling is at least 1;500 FT and the visibility is 5 miles. Weather at the time was 300 FT OVC; VIS 2-1/2. Tower Management intentionally disregarded the weather requirements and advertised and operated west flow in low IFR conditions. I questioned the operation by pointing out the weather and the SOP requirements with the Supervisor on duty. The Supervisor called the OPS managers and they made the decision to continue the operation although it was illegal. The Supervisor specifically told me to not to send 27R arrivals around. Air Carrier X departed 32R in front of Air Carrier Y who was on the 27R final and within 10 miles. Several other aircraft departed 32L in front of 27R arrivals in IFR conditions. The operation continued even after the Supervisor was advised that an MD80 who landed 27R reported getting runway 27R right at minimums. At one point I also coordinated with the 32L Controller; a newly checked out Controller; to inform him/her that this operation was not in accordance with the SOP and also to coordinate what I would do with missed approaches. An Operations Manager who was apparently monitoring the frequency cut in and stated that they were hitting an IFR gap with the 32 departures. I am not aware of anything which allows us to depart runway 32L and 'hit a gap' with the 27R arrivals. The ORD SOP requires that we must have 1;500 FT ceiling and 5 miles visibility minimum to conduct this operation. In an apparent effort to get the ORD arrival rate higher; our supervision on duty decided to ignore the weather and run a VFR configuration in IFR weather. This put the safety of the flying public at risk and it also put every controller on duty in a precarious position of being forced to disregard training; procedures; and most of all safety or risk being insubordinate. There was no misunderstanding of requirements or any other outside influence which contributed to their decision. This was an outright intentional decision to ignore rules because they thought their way was better. What happened on this shift should be unacceptable.
Source: NASA Aviation Safety Reporting System (public domain). Reports are voluntary submissions and are not verified by NASA.