Narrative:

Aircraft X; called me for transition to sql airport. I cleared aircraft X into the class B airspace at 4;000. Sfo is in runway 28 shoreline departure configuration due to construction/repair. Just south of the golden gate bridge; I assigned aircraft X a heading of 180 to remain clear of richmond departures that were turning east to a heading of 040. Sfo tower departed aircraft Y on a rebas departure. This departure is supposed to make a right turn to intercept the sfo 342 degree radial climbing to 5;000. Immediately in trail aircraft Z was departed on a shoreline departure. This departure makes a right turn to a heading of 040 climbing to 10;000. Richmond; myself; and the ci-1 noticed that aircraft Y was not turning. Nothing had been coordinated with ci-1; so we had no idea what was happening. As a precaution; I assigned aircraft X a heading of 240 in order to provide as much space as possible to protect both him and aircraft Y. Aircraft Y began a northbound turn still talking with the tower. Aircraft Y is at 021 feet in a 2;600 foot MVA and heading right at the obstruction at mt. San bruno. The next MVA is 2;900 feet. Aircraft Y checks on with richmond and is sorted out from there. I assigned a heading 160 to aircraft X to continue his transition. The next departure is aircraft Z on a rebas departure. Richmond and I immediately observe that the aircraft is not turning and aircraft X is now an immediate conflict. Right behind aircraft Z is aircraft a a heavy on the shoreline departure. I instruct aircraft X to turn right heading 300 as quickly as possible to move him away from the aircraft Z climbing to 5;000. There was no altitude separation at this time. The ci-1 immediately got on the line with sfo tower and issued an amended altitude of 3;000 to aircraft Z. We were not talking with any of the sfo departures at this point. This situation was totally out of control and just plain dangerous. The deficiencies and incorrect actions on behalf of the tower are appalling. Anything other than what is spelled out in the LOA must be coordinated/apreqed with the ci-1. The tower controller issued control instructions that entered another controller's airspace without approval or coordination. This resulted in conflict (aircraft X) twice. [This operation] demonstrated a lack of understanding and or knowledge regarding vectoring aircraft below the MVA. It is reasonable to assume; based on these actions; the controller does not understand that when an aircraft is vectored off of a SID; the controller assumes responsibility for terrain separation. If my sector had been busy; we could be talking about near mid air collisions in addition to conflicting with VFR aircraft and colliding with planet earth. As I returned from my break from writing this report; the same scenario occurred again with a different controller. That this happened a third time with a different controller suggests the strong possibility that some of the controllers at sfo tower have gotten together and decided that this procedure is within their authority and is ok. This needs to be addressed immediately. Permission to forward this report granted.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: NCT controllers describe situation where SFO Tower launches aircraft into NCT airspace not correctly separated causing the Controller to have to react and separate traffic.

Narrative: Aircraft X; called me for transition to SQL airport. I cleared Aircraft X into the class B airspace at 4;000. SFO is in RWY 28 Shoreline Departure configuration due to construction/repair. Just south of the Golden Gate Bridge; I assigned Aircraft X a heading of 180 to remain clear of Richmond departures that were turning east to a heading of 040. SFO Tower departed Aircraft Y on a REBAS departure. This departure is supposed to make a right turn to intercept the SFO 342 degree radial climbing to 5;000. Immediately in trail Aircraft Z was departed on a Shoreline Departure. This departure makes a right turn to a heading of 040 climbing to 10;000. Richmond; myself; and the CI-1 noticed that Aircraft Y was not turning. Nothing had been coordinated with CI-1; so we had no idea what was happening. As a precaution; I assigned Aircraft X a heading of 240 in order to provide as much space as possible to protect both him and Aircraft Y. Aircraft Y began a northbound turn still talking with the Tower. Aircraft Y is at 021 feet in a 2;600 foot MVA and heading right at the obstruction at Mt. San Bruno. The next MVA is 2;900 feet. Aircraft Y checks on with Richmond and is sorted out from there. I assigned a heading 160 to Aircraft X to continue his transition. The next departure is Aircraft Z on a REBAS departure. Richmond and I immediately observe that the aircraft is not turning and Aircraft X is now an immediate conflict. Right behind Aircraft Z is Aircraft A a Heavy on the Shoreline Departure. I instruct Aircraft X to turn right heading 300 as quickly as possible to move him away from the Aircraft Z climbing to 5;000. There was no altitude separation at this time. The CI-1 immediately got on the line with SFO Tower and issued an amended altitude of 3;000 to Aircraft Z. We were not talking with any of the SFO departures at this point. This situation was totally out of control and just plain dangerous. The deficiencies and incorrect actions on behalf of the Tower are appalling. Anything other than what is spelled out in the LOA must be coordinated/apreqed with the CI-1. The Tower Controller issued control instructions that entered another controller's airspace without approval or coordination. This resulted in conflict (Aircraft X) twice. [This operation] demonstrated a lack of understanding and or knowledge regarding vectoring aircraft below the MVA. It is reasonable to assume; based on these actions; the Controller does not understand that when an aircraft is vectored off of a SID; the Controller assumes responsibility for terrain separation. If my sector had been busy; we could be talking about near mid air collisions in addition to conflicting with VFR aircraft and colliding with planet earth. As I returned from my break from writing this report; the same scenario occurred again with a different controller. That this happened a third time with a different controller suggests the strong possibility that some of the controllers at SFO Tower have gotten together and decided that this procedure is within their authority and is ok. This needs to be addressed immediately. Permission to forward this report granted.

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.