Narrative:

I was working the military coordinator position; combined with the denver arrival position in tmu. We had scheduled airspace for PR2 MOA/atcaa and gateway west atcaa; which is scheduled by ZLC in coordination with rca base ops. All of these pieces of airspace were scheduled from xa:15-xd:15. At xa:13 the ZLC military coordinator sent an automated entry through the ntml [national traffic management log] indicating the airspace was being returned to ZDV/ZLC/ZMP as it was not going to be used. ZLC sent two entries: the first returned the PR2 low/high moas from xa:15-xd:15. The second entry returned both the PR2 and gateway atcaas; but only from xa:15-xb:59. Normally the PR2 moas and atcaa are always treated the same; so I was not expecting to see that they were returning the airspace in non-standard pieces and for different timeframes. It also is quite common that when these two airspace groups are canceled; they are canceled for the entire scheduled timeframe; and certainly not for different times. I read the first PR2 cancelation was for the entire period; and this caused me to overlook the different specifics in the second message which were intended to clarify and differentiate the partial cancelation times. I sent automation messages to our operational areas and verbally coordinated all areas were canceled through xd:15. When I returned to tmu at xc:15 I was told that ZLC had called complaining that our controllers weren't showing the atcaas as going hot again at xc:00. I then assisted in getting the correct information entered into esis [enhanced status information system] and coordinated with our operational areas.we currently have no standardized format on how military airspace between ZLC/ZDV should be returned to us. Rca is the military user of this airspace and is well known for making extremely frequent real-time changes to these areas which cause numerous potential points of failure as the information is entered by ZLC in one system; and by the military in another. This information is frequently not in agreement between the various systems; which leads to confusion; as well as problems with inaccurate notams being issued; and then not canceled or amended as appropriate. The automated message format for canceling or amending active or imminently scheduled military information between ZLC/ZDV needs to be standardized. Additionally there should be a verbal notification requirement for these real time changes. As this was a very non-standard type of change to these airspace groups I would expect a verbal conversation between the two facilities would have highlighted and clarified the unusual aspects; and would have prevented the problem from occurring.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Denver Center Military Coordinator and Traffic Management Controller reported of problems related to military airspace usage and coordination between ATC facilities.

Narrative: I was working the Military Coordinator position; combined with the Denver Arrival position in TMU. We had scheduled airspace for PR2 MOA/ATCAA and Gateway West ATCAA; which is scheduled by ZLC in coordination with RCA Base Ops. All of these pieces of airspace were scheduled from XA:15-XD:15. At XA:13 The ZLC military coordinator sent an automated entry through the NTML [National Traffic Management Log] indicating the airspace was being returned to ZDV/ZLC/ZMP as it was not going to be used. ZLC sent two entries: the first returned the PR2 low/high MOAs from XA:15-XD:15. The second entry returned both the PR2 and Gateway ATCAAs; but only from XA:15-XB:59. Normally the PR2 MOAs and ATCAA are always treated the same; so I was not expecting to see that they were returning the airspace in non-standard pieces and for different timeframes. It also is quite common that when these two airspace groups are canceled; they are canceled for the entire scheduled timeframe; and certainly not for different times. I read the first PR2 cancelation was for the entire period; and this caused me to overlook the different specifics in the second message which were intended to clarify and differentiate the partial cancelation times. I sent automation messages to our operational areas and verbally coordinated all areas were canceled through XD:15. When I returned to TMU at XC:15 I was told that ZLC had called complaining that our controllers weren't showing the ATCAAs as going hot again at XC:00. I then assisted in getting the correct information entered into ESIS [Enhanced Status Information System] and coordinated with our operational areas.We currently have no standardized format on how military airspace between ZLC/ZDV should be returned to us. RCA is the military user of this airspace and is well known for making extremely frequent real-time changes to these areas which cause numerous potential points of failure as the information is entered by ZLC in one system; and by the military in another. This information is frequently not in agreement between the various systems; which leads to confusion; as well as problems with inaccurate NOTAMs being issued; and then not canceled or amended as appropriate. The automated message format for canceling or amending active or imminently scheduled military information between ZLC/ZDV needs to be standardized. Additionally there should be a verbal notification requirement for these real time changes. As this was a very non-standard type of change to these airspace groups I would expect a verbal conversation between the two facilities would have highlighted and clarified the unusual aspects; and would have prevented the problem from occurring.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site 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.