Narrative:

I was working local control/ground control combined. WX was not a factor. Runways 9 and 13 were in use at the quad city airport. Air carrier X was inbound from the northeast and requested an arrival on runway 27, opp direction. I approved the request. Small aircraft Y was the next inbound from the northwest for runway 13. The radar controller coordinated this arrival and what I wanted done, since there appeared to be a tie of the airport reference air carrier X. He also said the land and hold short option would not work due to the wind direction. The wind was in fact within the parameters for small aircraft X to hold short of runway 27. It didn't occur to me to question that statement, since the journeyman had almost 20 yrs of ATC experience. I was considering a response as a supervisor to a disturbance in the TRACON. 2 journeymen were challenging a facility policy. Instead of giving 100% of my attention to working the position local control/ground clt, I was also going over details and options I had in handling this personnel matter. The airplanes moved faster than my attention and resulted in an aircraft landing on 1 runway prior to the first aircraft completely clearing the intersection.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: MULTIPLE RWY OPERATION INTERSECTING RWYS. ACR X AND SMA Y HAD LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION ON LNDG. SYSTEM ERROR.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING LCL CTL/GND CTL COMBINED. WX WAS NOT A FACTOR. RWYS 9 AND 13 WERE IN USE AT THE QUAD CITY ARPT. ACR X WAS INBND FROM THE NE AND REQUESTED AN ARR ON RWY 27, OPP DIRECTION. I APPROVED THE REQUEST. SMA Y WAS THE NEXT INBND FROM THE NW FOR RWY 13. THE RADAR CTLR COORDINATED THIS ARR AND WHAT I WANTED DONE, SINCE THERE APPEARED TO BE A TIE OF THE ARPT REF ACR X. HE ALSO SAID THE LAND AND HOLD SHORT OPTION WOULD NOT WORK DUE TO THE WIND DIRECTION. THE WIND WAS IN FACT WITHIN THE PARAMETERS FOR SMA X TO HOLD SHORT OF RWY 27. IT DIDN'T OCCUR TO ME TO QUESTION THAT STATEMENT, SINCE THE JOURNEYMAN HAD ALMOST 20 YRS OF ATC EXPERIENCE. I WAS CONSIDERING A RESPONSE AS A SUPVR TO A DISTURBANCE IN THE TRACON. 2 JOURNEYMEN WERE CHALLENGING A FAC POLICY. INSTEAD OF GIVING 100% OF MY ATTN TO WORKING THE POS LCL CTL/GND CLT, I WAS ALSO GOING OVER DETAILS AND OPTIONS I HAD IN HANDLING THIS PERSONNEL MATTER. THE AIRPLANES MOVED FASTER THAN MY ATTN AND RESULTED IN AN ACFT LNDG ON 1 RWY PRIOR TO THE FIRST ACFT COMPLETELY CLRING THE INTXN.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.