Date: 201502
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: EYW.Airport, FL
Flight conditions: IMC
Light: Night
Aircraft: Light Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turboprop Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class D EYW
ATC / advisory: Tower EYW
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Pilot Flying; Captain
Reporter qualification: Flight Crew Air Transport Pilot (ATP)
Human factors: Confusion; Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Dispatcher
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural FAR; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Flight Crew; Person Dispatch
When detected: In-flight
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure; Weather
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Key West was reporting IMC and conducting ASR to [RWY] 27. There is not a DA (Decision Altitude) listed under the night section and the notes are implied to circle to land; which we were not doing. We held and contacted the dispatcher to get clarification. They concluded that I was legal to commence the approach if the tower is currently conducting it and can relay the DA and missed approach instructions. The tower was able to give me all the information and clarified they are doing ASR [RWY] 27 approaches at night. We continued based on the information given to us and broke out of IMC conditions; called it visual at 1;300 MSL and landed.


Second narrative: Received a call from flight to EYW; stating that weather was no longer VFR and was sitting at 900 ft.; 10 sm. He wanted clarity on whether or not he would be able to shoot an ASR approach on runway 27 under those flight conditions since the ASR's minimums were published as 500 ft. and 1/1/4 SM but had an N/A in a column referencing 'Night Flying.' While I reviewed the WX; I asked another Dispatcher; if he could call ATC and verify that they do conduct ASR approaches at night in EYW. He called and spoke with Both MIA Center and the EYW TOWER; and they both confirmed that they do conduct night time ASR approaches into EYW and would be able to take care of the flight. After getting confirmation from both ATC and the Tower; I felt reassured and I relayed this information to the Captain then told him to contact the tower if he needed further confirmation but that they had told us that they could accommodate him with an ASR approach. The Duty Manager was present for the event and also agreed with the decision since both MIA ATC and the EYW Tower said they did conduct night time ASR approaches but after we all thought it over we thought it best to try to get a hold of the DO (Director of Operations); and get his final opinion on the flight. While the other Dispatcher called the DO; I tried multiple times to reach the flight to ask him to have ATC put him into a holding pattern but had no luck. After speaking with the DO; the other Dispatcher said the DO told him not to have the flight land even though we got confirmation from both MIA ATC and the EYW tower because it goes against the approach plate and they should have never allowed the flight to do the ASR approach to begin with. I notified the other Dispatcher that I was unable to reach the flight and he called the tower to have them put the flight into holding; but they had informed him that the flight had just landed. To avoid this happening in the future if the approach plate seems confusing I will not make a decision until I have properly used all my resources. If there should be a next time; I will take the approach plate at face value and not base it solely off of interpretation as well as consult with the supervisor or DO.


Synopsis: Air Carrier flight crew reports arriving at EYW to find the only available approach is an ASR to Runway 27 which is not authorized at night; according to the approach plate. After consulting with the Dispatcher it is decided that the ASR is legal with ATC approval. VMC are encountered at 1;300 feet and the flight lands visually.