Narrative:

Tower called approach and asked for an opposite direction release on air carrier X departing runway 4 on the Nevue1 departure. I advised tower released and tower read back 'released; runway heading.' the SOP dictates all opposite direction releases will be issued runway heading unless the departure will not be in conflict with arrivals to other runways. Air carrier Y was cleared for a visual approach to runway 26 and was on tower frequency. Air carrier X departure roll was indicated by the strip dropped from the tower and the strip marking indicated runway heading. When air carrier X 'tagged up' and contacted radar it was observed air carrier X was not flying runway heading but instead was flying the Nevue1 departure; at which time I turned air carrier X left to heading 040 and issued traffic on air carrier Y. After the conflict had been resolved and air carrier X was turned away from air carrier Y and out climbed the crj; air carrier X was turned direct nevue and advised to resume the departure. Air carrier X was asked after traffic was no factor if they had been issued runway heading and if they were aware of the aircraft on final for runway 26 and the pilot advised that he was not aware of the aircraft and was not given runway heading. Tower advised they were maintaining visual separation as they had air carrier Y on frequency. Departing traffic should have their clearances amended to take them off of departures that are in conflict with arriving traffic to other runways prior to the departures taking the runway.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ELP Approach Controller describes a conflict between a B737 departing Runway 4 and a CRJ200 landing Runway 26L. The B737 should have been advised of the traffic and given runway heading; but was not; and turned into the traffic on the previously assigned SID.

Narrative: Tower called Approach and asked for an opposite direction release on Air Carrier X departing Runway 4 on the Nevue1 Departure. I advised Tower released and Tower read back 'released; runway heading.' The SOP dictates all opposite direction releases will be issued runway heading unless the departure will not be in conflict with arrivals to other runways. Air Carrier Y was cleared for a visual approach to Runway 26 and was on Tower frequency. Air Carrier X departure roll was indicated by the strip dropped from the Tower and the strip marking indicated runway heading. When Air Carrier X 'tagged up' and contacted radar it was observed Air Carrier X was not flying runway heading but instead was flying the Nevue1 Departure; at which time I turned Air Carrier X left to heading 040 and issued traffic on Air Carrier Y. After the conflict had been resolved and Air Carrier X was turned away from Air Carrier Y and out climbed the CRJ; Air Carrier X was turned direct NEVUE and advised to resume the departure. Air Carrier X was asked after traffic was no factor if they had been issued runway heading and if they were aware of the aircraft on final for Runway 26 and the pilot advised that he was not aware of the aircraft and was not given runway heading. Tower advised they were maintaining visual separation as they had Air Carrier Y on frequency. Departing traffic should have their clearances amended to take them off of departures that are in conflict with arriving traffic to other runways prior to the departures taking the runway.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.