Date: 201501
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZME.ARTCC, TN
Light: Night
Aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class E ZME
ATC / advisory: Center ZME
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Confusion; Distraction; Situational Awareness
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Procedure

Narrative: MEM was landing 36L; 36R and 27. Aircraft X was issued descend via the BLUZZ1 arrival landing north transition (on the star indicates RWY 36L/C/R). Pilot read back correct clearance. Because RWY 27 was broadcast on ATIS; pilot entered RWY 27 into FMS which; unknowingly to pilots and controllers; profiles the aircraft to descend as if MEM is in a south configuration (STAR shows RWY 18L/C/R and RWY 9/27 for south transition). The reason this is super unsafe is there is a 4;000 FT difference in what the airplane does as it transitions from ZME to Memphis approach as well as a 50 knot speed difference on the 2 different transitions.This is basically cut and paste from my report that was filed on [date removed]. Below is the response from the ERC: They had some issues with this when the new procedures were first implemented; but they have had very few issues with this recently. We did verify that the ATIS on the day in question announced that the active runways were 36L & R and 27. The R7 controller issued the BLUZZ arrival landing north. The pilot should have stayed on the transition he was cleared. If there was a lack of understanding; he should have asked the controller. There are notes on all of the STARs that expressly mention that ZME will issue the descend via and Memphis Approach will assign landing runway. Taking the RWY 9/27 transition off of the STARS is not really an option. The system has been clearly defined as to expectations from the aircraft involved. This was a case of the pilot assuming the transition would be for RWY 27. However; should we receive more reports of this happening we will revisit the issue.This has happened to myself twice in the past 32 days. If you haven't had enough reports it must be because the other controllers are not taking the time to submit the problems. Aircraft X was caught going below the altitude early and was back at the correct altitude before even going into approach airspace. Talking with M03 about this issue isn't the correct response this time. The only way I see a fix for this is to completely take RWY 9/27 off the chart like I said in the prior report. Aircraft X is based at MEM which makes it even worse because this pilot should know these procedures as well as anyone! Why is taking RWY 9/27 off the stars 'Not really an option'?




Synopsis: ZME Controller reports of a STAR that goes to three runways. ATIS stated a specific runway in use; pilot sets up aircraft to land on that runway. Unknown to ATC pilot is going to a different runway than cleared and there is a 4;000 foot difference of altitudes between runway Controller wanted and the runway the pilot was descending for.