Narrative:

This morning; laguardia airport (lga) opened up landing ILS runway 04 and departing runway 13 (wc/cc). Weather was IFR with an RVR fluctuating between 5;500 feet and 6;500 feet. Wind was from the ene at or below 6 knots all morning. ILS runway 04 has an RVR minimum of 5;000 feet. Tower did state that they were planning on switch to ILS runway 22 around the middle of the day with the wind forecasted to shift to the south. About a half hour after the tower opened; the RVR for runway 4 dropped well below 5;000 feet (3;000 feet at around XA30L). By this time; I asked the tower to switch over to runway 22 ILS since the minimums for that ILS were much lower (1;800 for ILS & 1;200 for CAT ii). Tower said they the sup was on the phone coordinating the 'possibility' of the runway change. After about 15 minutes of waiting and spinning 4 aircraft including a runway 04 arrival that went around due to the weather diminishing; the tower finally put up the ILS for runway 22.I went on break and came back roughly around XB15L. I also took the sequence position at this time. By this time; aircraft were being vectored in for the ILS to runway 22 (RVR was around 2;200 feet - 2;800 feet). However; the ATIS was still advertising ILS runway 04. When I asked the controller working our north feed why this was; I was told that the tower didn't want to switch the ATIS over in anticipation of going back to runway 04. I overheard my south feed controller reiterating the runway assignment to the pilots on frequency on more than one occasion. From this; I held all traffic coming into lga airport. It was my reasoning that pilots were confused about the runway assignment being broadcasted on the ATIS and what the controller was issuing. When the controller issued the correct runway in use; other pilots on frequency chimed in to verify for themselves that they were going to that runway too. When I informed the OM about holding; he said that the ATIS issue is being worked on and that there would be a telcon reference it. The controllers on position nor I would release arrivals into lga from the centers until the situation was fixed since frequency congestion and safety was a factor.the ATIS was not changed over until roughly XC00L; about 1.5 hours since the ILS was switched over. Whatever reasoning was behind not cutting the ATIS is highly unacceptable and detrimental to the safety of air traffic on frequency. When one pilot questions the arrival runway and it conflicts with what's broadcasted; all other pilots on frequency will follow suit causing frequency congestion. If traffic and complexity were higher this morning; turns for the downwind would have been missed and airspace deviations would have been an imminent possibility with the adjacent airports and their traffic.last time I checked; if the landing runway was changed; a new ATIS must be broadcasted to reflect these changes. I; as a tower controller; never held myself from cutting a new ATIS in anticipation of returning to the previous arrival runway. Regardless of whether the ATIS wasn't changed in anticipation to return to the previous arriving runway; or if it wasn't changed out of sheer spite; these actions are highly unacceptable! If the tower switched the ILS over to runway 22; and arrivals were steadily flowing in for a long period of time; there should be no 'anticipation' of switching runways again. If the ILS swings over to the other runway; so too should reflect the ATIS. Never in my career have I heard of needing a telcon as to why an ATIS wasn't cut for such a long period of time with very inclement weather throughout the airspace.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LGA was changing runways to an approach to a runway with lower landing minimums. The Tower would not broadcast the runway change via a new ATIS broadcast. This causes confusion and frequency congestion for the pilots and controllers on the TRACON frequencies. The tower hesitated to change the ATIS because they felt they would be changing back to the original runway shortly.

Narrative: This morning; LaGuardia Airport (LGA) opened up landing ILS Runway 04 and departing Runway 13 (WC/CC). Weather was IFR with an RVR fluctuating between 5;500 feet and 6;500 feet. Wind was from the ENE at or below 6 Knots all morning. ILS Runway 04 has an RVR minimum of 5;000 feet. Tower did state that they were planning on switch to ILS Runway 22 around the middle of the day with the wind forecasted to shift to the South. About a half hour after the tower opened; the RVR for Runway 4 dropped well below 5;000 feet (3;000 feet at around XA30L). By this time; I asked the tower to switch over to Runway 22 ILS since the minimums for that ILS were much lower (1;800 for ILS & 1;200 for CAT II). Tower said they the Sup was on the phone coordinating the 'possibility' of the Runway change. After about 15 minutes of waiting and spinning 4 aircraft including a Runway 04 arrival that went around due to the weather diminishing; the tower finally put up the ILS for Runway 22.I went on break and came back roughly around XB15L. I also took the Sequence position at this time. By this time; aircraft were being vectored in for the ILS to Runway 22 (RVR was around 2;200 feet - 2;800 feet). However; the ATIS was STILL advertising ILS Runway 04. When I asked the controller working our north feed why this was; I was told that the Tower didn't want to switch the ATIS over in anticipation of going back to Runway 04. I overheard my south feed controller reiterating the Runway assignment to the pilots on frequency on more than one occasion. From this; I held all traffic coming into LGA airport. It was my reasoning that pilots were confused about the Runway assignment being broadcasted on the ATIS and what the controller was issuing. When the controller issued the correct Runway in use; other pilots on frequency chimed in to verify for themselves that they were going to that Runway too. When I informed the OM about holding; he said that the ATIS issue is being worked on and that there would be a TELCON reference it. The controllers on position nor I would release arrivals into LGA from the Centers until the situation was fixed since frequency congestion and safety was a factor.The ATIS was not changed over until roughly XC00L; about 1.5 hours since the ILS was switched over. Whatever reasoning was behind not cutting the ATIS is highly unacceptable and detrimental to the safety of Air Traffic on frequency. When one pilot questions the arrival runway and it conflicts with what's broadcasted; all other pilots on frequency will follow suit causing frequency congestion. If traffic and complexity were higher this morning; turns for the downwind would have been missed and airspace deviations would have been an imminent possibility with the adjacent airports and their traffic.Last time I checked; if the landing Runway was changed; a NEW ATIS must be broadcasted to reflect these changes. I; as a Tower controller; NEVER held myself from cutting a new ATIS in anticipation of returning to the previous arrival Runway. Regardless of whether the ATIS wasn't changed in anticipation to return to the previous arriving runway; or if it wasn't changed out of sheer spite; these actions are HIGHLY UNACCEPTABLE! If the Tower switched the ILS over to Runway 22; and arrivals were steadily flowing in for a long period of time; there should be no 'anticipation' of switching Runways again. If the ILS swings over to the other Runway; so too should reflect the ATIS. Never in my Career have I heard of needing a TELCON as to why an ATIS wasn't cut for such a long period of time with very inclement weather throughout the airspace.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.