Orgasmic:
It will be your primary task if the regulations say it is. Your beef seems to be 'I can't do it all myself', which is reasonable in the current environment of a single radar controller, which is what most smaller civil airfields have. A military approach room generally has 3 controllers to share the task (RA, Director and Zone/LARS). If you are going to be mandated to provide ATSOCAS then your employer will have to put his hand in his pocket and get more staff because your RA won't be able to do it all himself.
Ok - reality check (you're obviously military). We don't get funded by the LARS system. Why should our business fund something which it gets no benefit from. In the real world getting that past the accountants isn't going to happen. Notwithstanding we do it because it has a benefit from a flight safety point of view, but it will never be our primary task. With that in mind it won't be offered rather than "putting hands into pockets". Tough, but true.
My licence, my livelihood. If the regulations for ATSOCAS are perceived to be detrimental to licence preservation then forget it - as a licence holder I have the right to say no, no matter what the regulations.
And this is the likelihood. Those who can will turn round and just say "forget it, not giving ATSOCAS, it's too much hassle". Those who need the service will be the losers as this review is in danger of making it less available - not more.
However - to get back to the main thread
With respect to the linked documents above, I am disappointed that the authors did not dispell some of the comments from the survey, especially the issue of responsibility for terrain clearance - clearly defined in JSP552 for mil users. What is needed is better education of the masses as to the current regulations, not a new set of regulations mimicking the present that users will not read/learn either.
I couldn't agree more.