Las controller reported a technical loss of separation event when traffic departing runway 25R was l...

Narrative:

Air carrier X (B190) was on 3 mile final for runway 19L. Cleared air carrier Y for take off runway 25R without delay to beat the B190 landing the intersecting runway. Air carrier Y did not roll expeditiously; when I saw air carrier X less than 2 miles; I canceled air carrier Y's take off clearance; pilot did not acknowledge and continued to roll. I let air carrier X land as I felt it was safer to allow him to land even though traffic was departing the intersecting runway rather than send him around. Air carrier X landed and slowed to taxi speed prior to air carrier Y passing through the runway intersection. Air carrier Y was airborne prior to the runway intersection. With 19L being a 10;000 ft runway and 25R being a 14;000 ft runway; I feel that it is always safer to allow an aircraft to land the [runway] 19's with an aircraft on departure roll on 25R rather than send them around. There is no way two aircraft would ever meet at the runway intersection as aircraft departing 25R are always airborne prior to the intersection and the [runway] 19 arrivals always exit prior to the intersection. This is especially true if the [runway] 19 arrival is a propeller aircraft. I think this rule needs to be looked at a lot closer and reconsidered.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LAS Controller reported a technical loss of separation event when traffic departing Runway 25R was late in rolling with traffic landing on Runway 19L; the reporter electing not to issue a go around to Runway 19L traffic.

Narrative: Air Carrier X (B190) was on 3 mile final for Runway 19L. Cleared Air Carrier Y for take off Runway 25R without delay to beat the B190 landing the intersecting runway. Air Carrier Y did not roll expeditiously; when I saw Air Carrier X less than 2 miles; I canceled Air Carrier Y's take off clearance; pilot did not acknowledge and continued to roll. I let Air Carrier X land as I felt it was safer to allow him to land even though traffic was departing the intersecting runway rather than send him around. Air Carrier X landed and slowed to taxi speed prior to Air Carrier Y passing through the runway intersection. Air Carrier Y was airborne prior to the runway intersection. With 19L being a 10;000 FT runway and 25R being a 14;000 FT runway; I feel that it is always safer to allow an aircraft to land the [Runway] 19's with an aircraft on departure roll on 25R rather than send them around. There is no way two aircraft would ever meet at the runway intersection as aircraft departing 25R are always airborne prior to the intersection and the [Runway] 19 arrivals always exit prior to the intersection. This is especially true if the [Runway] 19 arrival is a propeller aircraft. I think this rule needs to be looked at a lot closer and reconsidered.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.

Attributes
ACN	926837
Time
Date	201101
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	LAS.Airport
State Reference	NV
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Takeoff
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Beech 1900
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 135
Flight Phase	Landing
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Local
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Ground Conflict Less Severe Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Las controller reported a technical loss of separation event when traffic departing runway 25R was late in rolling with traffic landing on runway 19L; the reporter electing not to issue a go around to runway 19L traffic.