Narrative:

Air carrier X was enroute; westbound near yocky intersection. Air carrier Y was northbound. Both aircraft were at FL320. Training was being conducted at rbl hi. The sector was busy and complex at the time of the incident. The rbl sector team became aware of the situation as conflict alert activated. The solution chosen was to descend air carrier Y to FL310. Coordination was attempted with the flm/dac sectors to inform them of the descent; as the data block was already being handed off to sector 93. Separation was ensured; however; further coordination was needed to complete the hand off to the flm sector. That was when it became known that the flm/dacos sectors were split. Coordination was completed to effect hand off. As the incident was being discussed today; I became aware that the hand off to flm sector was not completed in a timely manner and that operational deviation paperwork was most likely being processed. I want to note the flm/dacos sectors had been combined during most of my work shift. This incident took place toward the end of the work shift. To my knowledge; no notification was received to indicate the flm/dacos sectors had been split. With the thought the sectors were still combined; it was not abnormal for the data block to flash to sector 93 and I believed the earlier coordination to be sufficient when calling to coordinate the descent from FL320 to FL310. In general; this scenario is not uncommon where traffic northbound from rbl is in conflict with traffic westbound from flm. During normal operation; the rbl sector takes action to either change course or altitude of an aircraft to resolve the conflict. The reason this situation developed was due to high volume and complexity in the rbl sector during the course of training. Since air carrier Y was still being flashed to the dacos sector at FL320 and there was traffic in dacos sector at FL320 (air carrier X); it would make sense to me that the dacos controller; in whose airspace the separation loss would take place; would initiate coordination to resolve the situation. If my opinion is allowed; I think it is poor practice to simply allow the data block to continue flashing; while in conflict with another aircraft; and not even attempt to coordinate to find out if action is being taken. I know that when I am aware of a conflict that will take place in my airspace; I take action to resolve the situation. While resolving the traffic conflict between air carrier X and air carrier Y was easily accomplished; a combination of factors played a role in air carrier Y being handed off late to the flm sector; level at FL310. Recommendation [I would like] better coordination efforts between area 7 and area 2.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZID Controller described an operational deviation during a training period when a hand off was made assuming the receiving sectors were combined when in fact they were split; the reporter alleging no notification regarding the sector split was received.

Narrative: Air Carrier X was enroute; westbound near YOCKY Intersection. Air Carrier Y was northbound. Both aircraft were at FL320. Training was being conducted at RBL HI. The sector was busy and complex at the time of the incident. The RBL Sector team became aware of the situation as Conflict Alert activated. The solution chosen was to descend Air Carrier Y to FL310. Coordination was attempted with the FLM/DAC sectors to inform them of the descent; as the data block was already being handed off to Sector 93. Separation was ensured; however; further coordination was needed to complete the hand off to the FLM Sector. That was when it became known that the FLM/DACOS Sectors were split. Coordination was completed to effect hand off. As the incident was being discussed today; I became aware that the hand off to FLM Sector was not completed in a timely manner and that operational deviation paperwork was most likely being processed. I want to note the FLM/DACOS Sectors had been combined during most of my work shift. This incident took place toward the end of the work shift. To my knowledge; no notification was received to indicate the FLM/DACOS Sectors had been split. With the thought the sectors were still combined; it was not abnormal for the data block to flash to Sector 93 and I believed the earlier coordination to be sufficient when calling to coordinate the descent from FL320 to FL310. In general; this scenario is not uncommon where traffic northbound from RBL is in conflict with traffic westbound from FLM. During normal operation; the RBL Sector takes action to either change course or altitude of an aircraft to resolve the conflict. The reason this situation developed was due to high volume and complexity in the RBL Sector during the course of training. Since Air Carrier Y was still being flashed to the DACOS Sector at FL320 and there was traffic in DACOS Sector at FL320 (Air Carrier X); it would make sense to me that the DACOS Controller; in whose airspace the separation loss would take place; would initiate coordination to resolve the situation. If my opinion is allowed; I think it is poor practice to simply allow the data block to continue flashing; while in conflict with another aircraft; and not even attempt to coordinate to find out if action is being taken. I know that when I am aware of a conflict that will take place in my airspace; I take action to resolve the situation. While resolving the traffic conflict between Air Carrier X and Air Carrier Y was easily accomplished; a combination of factors played a role in Air Carrier Y being handed off late to the FLM Sector; level at FL310. Recommendation [I would like] better coordination efforts between Area 7 and Area 2.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.