Narrative:

An small aircraft was making practice instrument approachs at each satellite airport. This was the last approach to a full stop. An small transport was cleared IFR, short range clearance to the annas intersection. Both aircraft got visibility on each other, but the small transport should not have been released. I was working 2 sectors combined, and had approachs at both satellite airports in progress, as well as holding for these 2 approachs. I was controling 2/3's of our airspace with 6 total frequencys. Besides the 2 satellite airports being busy simultaneously, I had en route traffic and was feeding ric arrs to a final controller. I also was working departures. The traffic vol and amount of airspace to be watched was too much. In addition, a random drug test was in progress and this was very disruptive to our position coverage and breaks. Several controllers received extra pay for not having lunch by the sixth hour. A great deal of commotion/upset/noise was caused by the testing. I had no idea the procedure was so strict in sequence nor that it was so disruptive since it was my first experience with a random testing. Suggestions: 1) controller staffing should be such that a controller is responsible for a single sector only at such busy times. 2) random testing should be redesigned to accommodate position and staffing coverage instead of all airspace/airplanes being relegated to secondary importance.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: SMT WAS INADVERTENTLY RELEASED AND WAS A POTENTIAL CONFLICTION TO ANOTHER ACFT. VISUAL SEPARATION WAS USED TO MAINTAIN LEGAL SEPARATION.

Narrative: AN SMA WAS MAKING PRACTICE INSTRUMENT APCHS AT EACH SATELLITE ARPT. THIS WAS THE LAST APCH TO A FULL STOP. AN SMT WAS CLRED IFR, SHORT RANGE CLRNC TO THE ANNAS INTXN. BOTH ACFT GOT VIS ON EACH OTHER, BUT THE SMT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN RELEASED. I WAS WORKING 2 SECTORS COMBINED, AND HAD APCHS AT BOTH SATELLITE ARPTS IN PROGRESS, AS WELL AS HOLDING FOR THESE 2 APCHS. I WAS CTLING 2/3'S OF OUR AIRSPACE WITH 6 TOTAL FREQS. BESIDES THE 2 SATELLITE ARPTS BEING BUSY SIMULTANEOUSLY, I HAD ENRTE TFC AND WAS FEEDING RIC ARRS TO A FINAL CTLR. I ALSO WAS WORKING DEPS. THE TFC VOL AND AMOUNT OF AIRSPACE TO BE WATCHED WAS TOO MUCH. IN ADDITION, A RANDOM DRUG TEST WAS IN PROGRESS AND THIS WAS VERY DISRUPTIVE TO OUR POS COVERAGE AND BREAKS. SEVERAL CTLRS RECEIVED EXTRA PAY FOR NOT HAVING LUNCH BY THE SIXTH HOUR. A GREAT DEAL OF COMMOTION/UPSET/NOISE WAS CAUSED BY THE TESTING. I HAD NO IDEA THE PROC WAS SO STRICT IN SEQUENCE NOR THAT IT WAS SO DISRUPTIVE SINCE IT WAS MY FIRST EXPERIENCE WITH A RANDOM TESTING. SUGGESTIONS: 1) CTLR STAFFING SHOULD BE SUCH THAT A CTLR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR A SINGLE SECTOR ONLY AT SUCH BUSY TIMES. 2) RANDOM TESTING SHOULD BE REDESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE POS AND STAFFING COVERAGE INSTEAD OF ALL AIRSPACE/AIRPLANES BEING RELEGATED TO SECONDARY IMPORTANCE.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 2007 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.