Narrative:

During the position relief briefing; the d-side said that ATR-72 was requesting direct mia at 4;000 ft; freeport approach was aware and was sending him direct mia; and that the current controller was working on the coordination with mia approach lima sector. The controller also 'route displayed' the aircraft's current route of flight. I noted that ATR-72 was [not] entering lima's airspace; but rather delta or zulu scope's airspace. After the relief briefing concluded; I immediately called delta to apreq the aircraft direct. The controller in mia explained it wasn't his airspace and to call lima. Lima 'unabled' the aircraft direct. I told the r-side; then called zfp approach for control on ATR-72 . By the time the aircraft was radar identified and the r-side had enough time to issue a heading to rejoin the ANNEY2 arrival to mia; mia approach - zulu scope called and said ATR-72 was approved direct to mia if we hadn't turned him back yet. While I was on the line; the r-side was issuing control instructions to ATR-72. I stopped the r-side and told the r-side direct mia was approved. I confirmed it with mia approach zulu; the r-side re-issued the routing direct and flashed the aircraft on to zulu. He accepted a radar hand off on the aircraft and the r-side switched him to the appropriate frequency. A few minutes later 'zappa' called on the 24 line to apreq something; both me and the r-side were on the line. The r-side approved the requested coordination. The mia approach controller was saying that ATR-72 violated his protected airspace and the aircraft was not on an approved route. The r-side trainer responded back that they were informed by the d-side that zulu approved ATR-72 to enter mia airspace on his route. The controller restated the aircraft entered his airspace without coordination and hung up the line. If there is any other overlapping or other specifics about mia approach airspace; I'm unaware of it. Recommendation; new maps for mia approach airspace. If there are other specifics then the above listed airspace breakdown; then it needs to be trained. I have seen the individual scope airspace maps of mia approach; but not the overlap or how the maps relate to my airspace. It was always instructed as an informational example: here's what mia approach maps are; glance at them once; now this is what you need to know. I've observed deviation and cpc having difficulties interpreting what scopes to be calling; for what; when aircraft are going to specific destinations and how the scopes combine and who to flash/ship the aircraft to. One map with the airspace and to who owns what; like we get for our own airspace would help.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZMA Controller experienced a reported airspace incursion into MIA TRACON's airspace. The reporter questioned the accusation; and noted the video maps used at the TRACON and Center need to be aligned more accurately.

Narrative: During the position relief briefing; the D-Side said that ATR-72 was requesting direct MIA at 4;000 FT; Freeport Approach was aware and was sending him direct MIA; and that the current controller was working on the coordination with MIA approach Lima sector. The Controller also 'route displayed' the aircraft's current route of flight. I noted that ATR-72 was [not] entering Lima's airspace; but rather Delta or Zulu scope's airspace. After the relief briefing concluded; I immediately called Delta to APREQ the aircraft direct. The Controller in MIA explained it wasn't his airspace and to call Lima. Lima 'unabled' the aircraft direct. I told the R-Side; then called ZFP Approach for control on ATR-72 . By the time the aircraft was RADAR identified and the R-Side had enough time to issue a heading to rejoin the ANNEY2 arrival to MIA; MIA Approach - Zulu Scope called and said ATR-72 was approved direct to MIA if we hadn't turned him back yet. While I was on the line; the R-Side was issuing control instructions to ATR-72. I stopped the R-side and told the R-side direct MIA was approved. I confirmed it with MIA Approach Zulu; the R-Side re-issued the routing direct and flashed the aircraft on to Zulu. He accepted a RADAR hand off on the aircraft and the R-Side switched him to the appropriate frequency. A few minutes later 'ZAPPA' called on the 24 line to APREQ something; both me and the R-Side were on the line. The R-Side approved the requested coordination. The MIA Approach Controller was saying that ATR-72 violated his protected airspace and the aircraft was not on an approved route. The R-Side trainer responded back that they were informed by the D-Side that Zulu approved ATR-72 to enter MIA airspace on his route. The Controller restated the aircraft entered his airspace without coordination and hung up the line. If there is any other overlapping or other specifics about MIA Approach airspace; I'm unaware of it. Recommendation; new maps for MIA Approach airspace. If there are other specifics then the above listed airspace breakdown; then it needs to be trained. I have seen the individual scope airspace maps of MIA Approach; but not the overlap or how the maps relate to my airspace. It was always instructed as an informational example: here's what MIA Approach maps are; glance at them once; now this is what you need to know. I've observed DEV and CPC having difficulties interpreting what scopes to be calling; for what; when aircraft are going to specific destinations and how the scopes combine and who to flash/ship the aircraft to. One map with the airspace and to who owns what; like we get for our own airspace would help.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2013 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.