Date: 201409
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ANC.Airport, AK
Flight conditions: VMC
Aircraft: SR22
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: VFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: TRACON A11; Tower ANC
Second aircraft: Widebody; Low Wing; 4 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Approach; Instructor
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Training / Qualification; Distraction; Situational Awareness; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: I was providing OJT on the North Radar (NR) position when a SR22 came off and wanted to flight check a new RNP procedure to runway XX.  Runway XX was our departure runway at this time.  The procedure took place in South Radar (SR) so that sector worked him the majority of the time.  There was OJT also on SR at the time.  At this time; there was also OJT on Local Control with a high hour trainee who has struggled through the program.  The SR controller called tower and told them the intentions of the SR22; which was to fly a low approach and proceed on the missed approach procedure; which was basically runway heading.  The SR controller then transferred the SR22 to tower frequency when turning final.   When the SR22 was on about a 5 mile final; the SR OJTI asked if there was a heavy in position on runway XX; which I confirmed using our ASDE.  It was discussed that that wouldn't work with the SR22 flying a low approach.  We witnessed the SR22 fly over the approach end at approximately 500 ft while a B744 departed and was about a mile and a half in front of the SR22.  Tower called down to me and my trainee on NR stating 'The Cirrus doesn't want to fly the missed approach you gave him due to wake turbulence.'   We realized she just had a major deal and was thinking she was in recovery mode.  Upon further review; I was made aware that she thinks she was covered because she told the SR22 to maintain visual separation with the heavy B744 and caution for wake turbulence.  I'm only a TRACON controller; but it is my understanding that a low approach is considered a full length departure and they can't maintain visual separation and wave the wake turbulence on the heavy departure.  I asked a supervisor about the incident; and he looked it up and stated that there was no log of it.  I asked tower controllers about the incident and they said nothing was done during the event and it was not event brought up as a bad operation by the supervisor in charge up in the tower at the time. This tower trainee has struggled and taken much longer to get through the program than should be allowed; with multiple controllers and supervisors saying she should have been washed out many months ago.  Two days after this incident; her supervisor certified her on local.  This is a slap in the face to all the controllers who had to work hard and prove themselves competent to get certified.  For a trainee to have multiple deals and NMACs in a short amount of time and then get certified is a black mark on the FAA.  I recommend her certification ride be reviewed and for her to be disciplined for her loss of separation between a small and a heavy jet.  I also recommend her supervisor be disciplined for covering up a deal and to look into her certification standards.




Synopsis: Controller describes an aircraft; making a low approach at 500 feet while a heavy aircraft; a mile and a half in front of it; was climbing out on departure; resulting in a loss of separation.