Narrative:

While on approach doing a CAT III approach, ATC asked to maintain 160 KTS to the marker. I slowed 2 mi prior to 128 KTS, the approach speed so as to arrive on speed at the marker. Air carrier Y behind could only slow to 148 KTS. I was in the slot at the marker 5 mi out. I felt that this was a safe operation doing a CAT III approach. Instructed to call ATC and he said I deviated from a clearance. Slowing to be at approach speed is not a violation. Air carrier Y went around because he was following too close. When I called ATC as requested and spoke with someone there, he asked, 'do you know why you were asked to call?' and I said 'no.' he then started by saying that I had violated ATC directive by slowing below 160 KTS at the marker and telling me how I cost air carrier Y $4000 to go around, and if his guys got charged with the violation, that they would spend some time on the beach. With this kind of attitude, I did not want to converse with him. If he had talked to me in a civil tone, I would have been more than happy to cooperate with him. For the conditions at the airport at that time and having to do a CAT III approach, I slowed to approach speed about 2 mi from the marker and in landing confign. The aircraft was light, thus a slower approach speed. In my opinion, the controller had the aircraft too close together for the conditions. They were running as if it were VFR. I operated the aircraft in a safe manner and to get my passenger to their destination in a safe manner.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B757-200 CREW REDUCED ATC CLRED SPD ON APCH BECAUSE C3 WX EXISTED WHICH REQUIRED AN AUTOLAND. THE CREW DID NOT GET ATC CLRNC FOR THE SPD REDUCTION.

Narrative: WHILE ON APCH DOING A CAT III APCH, ATC ASKED TO MAINTAIN 160 KTS TO THE MARKER. I SLOWED 2 MI PRIOR TO 128 KTS, THE APCH SPD SO AS TO ARRIVE ON SPD AT THE MARKER. ACR Y BEHIND COULD ONLY SLOW TO 148 KTS. I WAS IN THE SLOT AT THE MARKER 5 MI OUT. I FELT THAT THIS WAS A SAFE OP DOING A CAT III APCH. INSTRUCTED TO CALL ATC AND HE SAID I DEVIATED FROM A CLRNC. SLOWING TO BE AT APCH SPD IS NOT A VIOLATION. ACR Y WENT AROUND BECAUSE HE WAS FOLLOWING TOO CLOSE. WHEN I CALLED ATC AS REQUESTED AND SPOKE WITH SOMEONE THERE, HE ASKED, 'DO YOU KNOW WHY YOU WERE ASKED TO CALL?' AND I SAID 'NO.' HE THEN STARTED BY SAYING THAT I HAD VIOLATED ATC DIRECTIVE BY SLOWING BELOW 160 KTS AT THE MARKER AND TELLING ME HOW I COST ACR Y $4000 TO GO AROUND, AND IF HIS GUYS GOT CHARGED WITH THE VIOLATION, THAT THEY WOULD SPEND SOME TIME ON THE BEACH. WITH THIS KIND OF ATTITUDE, I DID NOT WANT TO CONVERSE WITH HIM. IF HE HAD TALKED TO ME IN A CIVIL TONE, I WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE THAN HAPPY TO COOPERATE WITH HIM. FOR THE CONDITIONS AT THE ARPT AT THAT TIME AND HAVING TO DO A CAT III APCH, I SLOWED TO APCH SPD ABOUT 2 MI FROM THE MARKER AND IN LNDG CONFIGN. THE ACFT WAS LIGHT, THUS A SLOWER APCH SPD. IN MY OPINION, THE CTLR HAD THE ACFT TOO CLOSE TOGETHER FOR THE CONDITIONS. THEY WERE RUNNING AS IF IT WERE VFR. I OPERATED THE ACFT IN A SAFE MANNER AND TO GET MY PAX TO THEIR DEST IN A SAFE MANNER.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 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.