I was going to save this until we got a definition of procedural service, but Tim is thinking along the same lines as me at the moment:
Basic fact 1) Instructions within a
MATZ are only mandatory for
military aircraft.
Basic fact 2) An ATZ assumes the status of the class of airspace that surrounds it, though Rule 39 defines conditions of entry for ATZ's based on a) who it belongs to and b) type of ATC service provided. All bar 3 Military ATZ's are in class 'G' airspace for which no clearance is required for either VFR or IFR flight. All of the corresponding MATZ's are therefore class 'G'
Bear the above in mind for the following scenario:
Civil aircraft requests MATZ (not ATZ) penetration, showing good airmanship. Controller issues "Procedurally cleared to transit the xyz MATZ at 2000ft". Aircraft complies with this instruction and has mid air with fast jet traffic returning non-R/T.
At the subsequent BOI ATCO is sent to court martial on the basis that
he issued a clearance that he was not entitled to issue to a civil aircraft operating quite lawfully in class 'G' airspace. Wording of said clearance lulling private pilot into a false sense of security as to his safety.
As well as being found guilty at the court martial, the victims next of kin sue the controller succesfully in a civil action on the basis of the BOI's findings and the court martials guilty verdict.
WBS - run this one by the ATCEEB when you get back to work. I guarantee a certain amount of head scratching and maybe even the demise of such procedural clearances by the end of the week
