A controller described a loss of separation that occurred when one altitude was intended but another...

Narrative:

A B737 had been issued the crossing restriction (100/250 KTS) for the keatn 5 arrival into cle by the previous controller. A learjet departed cak on an incorrect routing southwest bound climbing to 080; almost head-on with the B737. I pointed the learjet out to cle approach climbing initially to 090 and then higher later. When the learjet checked on frequency; I had intended to climb him to 090 but transposed the altitude with the altitude of his traffic; the B737 descending to 100. I mistakenly issued 100 to the learjet but put an interim of 090 in the data block and then issued his traffic the B737 as descending to 1;000 ft above. I then issued the traffic the learjet to the B737 climbing to 1;000 ft below. ZID was flashing another air carrier to me; also on the keatn 5 arrival; and I was contemplating whether or not I would have to turn the learjet for the new air carrier when I saw the learjet go through 090. I immediately confirmed the learjet's altitude and told him to descend to 090; at the same time the B737 was informing me that he was responding to a TCAS alert and turning right. With the new host and uret we have the ability to have all departures kick-out 'blue routing' from every airport and approach control. At the time of the event I was also contemplating whether to apreq the learjet or put him on a correct departure route per ZID/ZOB LOA.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A Controller described a loss of separation that occurred when one altitude was intended but another was assigned.

Narrative: A B737 had been issued the crossing restriction (100/250 KTS) for the KEATN 5 Arrival into CLE by the previous controller. A Learjet departed CAK on an incorrect routing southwest bound climbing to 080; almost head-on with the B737. I pointed the Learjet out to CLE Approach climbing initially to 090 and then higher later. When the Learjet checked on frequency; I had intended to climb him to 090 but transposed the altitude with the altitude of his traffic; the B737 descending to 100. I mistakenly issued 100 to the Learjet but put an interim of 090 in the Data Block and then issued his traffic the B737 as descending to 1;000 FT above. I then issued the traffic the Learjet to the B737 climbing to 1;000 FT below. ZID was flashing another Air Carrier to me; also on the KEATN 5 arrival; and I was contemplating whether or not I would have to turn the Learjet for the new Air Carrier when I saw the Learjet go through 090. I immediately confirmed the Learjet's altitude and told him to descend to 090; at the same time the B737 was informing me that he was responding to a TCAS alert and turning right. With the new Host and URET we have the ability to have all departures kick-out 'blue routing' from every airport and Approach Control. At the time of the event I was also contemplating whether to APREQ the Learjet or put him on a correct departure route per ZID/ZOB LOA.

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.

Attributes
ACN	913401
Time
Date	201010
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	ZOB.ARTCC
State Reference	OH
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	B737-400
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Descent
Route In Use	STAR KEATN 5
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Learjet 35
Flight Phase	Climb
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Person 2
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Developmental
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

A controller described a loss of separation that occurred when one altitude was intended but another was assigned.