Narrative:

MVFR conditions in okc area -- working ZFW airspace adjacent to okc approach. West side -- okc hands off aircraft X; an IFR mooney landing hinton; ok; (2o8). On initial contact; aircraft X requested RNAV35 into 2o8. Since it was MVFR at okc I pulled the approach plate 'binder' to review the plate. The chart had a small slip of paper overlying the chart; which is how our airspace office usually displays NOTAMS on apches. Reading the NOTAM -- the wording 'orig...procedure na' made no sense to me I asked 4 other controllers what it meant to them and no one knew. I subsequently cleared aircraft X for the approach -- to maintain at or above 3500 ft until IAF. So the aircraft X is maneuvering towards the IAF at 3500 ft when I ask another controller who is a cfii what he thought the NOTAM meant. He said it meant what it said -- original not available. I immediately cancelled aircraft X's clearance and climbed him back to the minimum radar altitude of 4000 ft. When I told him the approach was notamed not avail -- the pilot said; 'oh -- I knew it was. I thought it might be usable though.' I write this event up because I feel the system at ZFW for approach NOTAMS is lacking. There is no requirement for controllers to consult our chart binders before clrncs issued. Just be up-to-date with NOTAMS on briefing board at sector. This NOTAM was not on the board nor was it on the list kept current at the supervisor desk. I strongly feel that if an approach is deemed unusable -- the chart should either be removed or a clearly written and possibly visually significant (like a red X or something) note should leave no doubt that an approach is notamed out. Also -- clear emphasis should be added that controllers should review approach plates prior to any MVFR or lower clearance issued to double check that someone forgot to write down a NOTAM like this one.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZFW CTLR EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING THE NOTAM DISPLAY AND DISPERSAL SYSTEM USED IN THE CTL ROOM.

Narrative: MVFR CONDITIONS IN OKC AREA -- WORKING ZFW AIRSPACE ADJACENT TO OKC APCH. WEST SIDE -- OKC HANDS OFF ACFT X; AN IFR MOONEY LNDG HINTON; OK; (2O8). ON INITIAL CONTACT; ACFT X REQUESTED RNAV35 INTO 2O8. SINCE IT WAS MVFR AT OKC I PULLED THE APCH PLATE 'BINDER' TO REVIEW THE PLATE. THE CHART HAD A SMALL SLIP OF PAPER OVERLYING THE CHART; WHICH IS HOW OUR AIRSPACE OFFICE USUALLY DISPLAYS NOTAMS ON APCHES. READING THE NOTAM -- THE WORDING 'ORIG...PROC NA' MADE NO SENSE TO ME I ASKED 4 OTHER CTLRS WHAT IT MEANT TO THEM AND NO ONE KNEW. I SUBSEQUENTLY CLRED ACFT X FOR THE APCH -- TO MAINTAIN AT OR ABOVE 3500 FT UNTIL IAF. SO THE ACFT X IS MANEUVERING TOWARDS THE IAF AT 3500 FT WHEN I ASK ANOTHER CTLR WHO IS A CFII WHAT HE THOUGHT THE NOTAM MEANT. HE SAID IT MEANT WHAT IT SAID -- ORIGINAL NOT AVAILABLE. I IMMEDIATELY CANCELLED ACFT X'S CLRNC AND CLBED HIM BACK TO THE MINIMUM RADAR ALT OF 4000 FT. WHEN I TOLD HIM THE APCH WAS NOTAMED NOT AVAIL -- THE PLT SAID; 'OH -- I KNEW IT WAS. I THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE USABLE THOUGH.' I WRITE THIS EVENT UP BECAUSE I FEEL THE SYSTEM AT ZFW FOR APCH NOTAMS IS LACKING. THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR CTLRS TO CONSULT OUR CHART BINDERS BEFORE CLRNCS ISSUED. JUST BE UP-TO-DATE WITH NOTAMS ON BRIEFING BOARD AT SECTOR. THIS NOTAM WAS NOT ON THE BOARD NOR WAS IT ON THE LIST KEPT CURRENT AT THE SUPVR DESK. I STRONGLY FEEL THAT IF AN APCH IS DEEMED UNUSABLE -- THE CHART SHOULD EITHER BE REMOVED OR A CLEARLY WRITTEN AND POSSIBLY VISUALLY SIGNIFICANT (LIKE A RED X OR SOMETHING) NOTE SHOULD LEAVE NO DOUBT THAT AN APCH IS NOTAMED OUT. ALSO -- CLEAR EMPHASIS SHOULD BE ADDED THAT CTLRS SHOULD REVIEW APCH PLATES PRIOR TO ANY MVFR OR LOWER CLRNC ISSUED TO DOUBLE CHK THAT SOMEONE FORGOT TO WRITE DOWN A NOTAM LIKE THIS ONE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.