Narrative:

I was coordinating in the tower cab. There were several crash fire rescue equipment (sfo; phx; las;) programs in effect and I was busy getting several flow times. Smo called lax for a flow time and a release on a sfo departure. Lax is required to get the flow time; relay that information to smo; obtain a release from sct; and then give the flight plan to the local control 2 team who then releases the aircraft. Smo called me for the release time and I obtained a time from ZLA which was earlier than the time smo had requested. I then called smo to ask if the aircraft could meet the flow time I was given. Smo stated they could meet that time. I then placed the flight plan at the local control 2 assist position without obtaining the release from sct. The local control assist 2 controller then should have 'verbally run down' the aircraft to sct and the lack of a release would have been caught. However the local control 2 assist controller forgot to run the aircraft down to sct. The local control 2 assist called smo and released the aircraft without sct knowing the aircraft was coming. There was no loss of separation since lax is responsible for providing separation between lax departures and smo IFR departures. Recommendation; lax is responsible for providing separation between their departures and smo IFR departures. I think the aircraft departing smo should be run down to sct; but I do not think there is also a need to obtain a release from sct. When the aircraft is run down to sct; if there is any conflictions that lax is not aware of; sct could; at that time; hold the aircraft.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LAX Controller described a failed coordination event when published procedures with SCT were not followed concerning a SMO IFR departure; noting the existing procedures should be streamlined.

Narrative: I was coordinating in the Tower cab. There were several CFR (SFO; PHX; LAS;) programs in effect and I was busy getting several flow times. SMO called LAX for a flow time and a release on a SFO departure. LAX is required to get the flow time; relay that information to SMO; obtain a release from SCT; and then give the flight plan to the Local Control 2 team who then releases the aircraft. SMO called me for the release time and I obtained a time from ZLA which was earlier than the time SMO had requested. I then called SMO to ask if the aircraft could meet the flow time I was given. SMO stated they could meet that time. I then placed the flight plan at the Local Control 2 Assist position without obtaining the release from SCT. The Local Control Assist 2 Controller then should have 'verbally run down' the aircraft to SCT and the lack of a release would have been caught. However the Local Control 2 Assist Controller forgot to run the aircraft down to SCT. The Local Control 2 Assist called SMO and released the aircraft without SCT knowing the aircraft was coming. There was no loss of separation since LAX is responsible for providing separation between LAX departures and SMO IFR departures. Recommendation; LAX is responsible for providing separation between their departures and SMO IFR departures. I think the aircraft departing SMO should be run down to SCT; but I do not think there is also a need to obtain a release from SCT. When the aircraft is run down to SCT; if there is any conflictions that LAX is not aware of; SCT could; at that time; hold the aircraft.

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.