Narrative:

Center gave us a crossing of 14;000 ft at gmann intersection. We started our descent while maintaining the notamed 280 KTS. Somewhere around 16;000 - 18;000 ft we got a frequency change to approach. We checked in with the crossing restriction and ATC gave us a 'at gmann descend via the tejas 2 arrival.' we interpreted that as; after gmann continue via the published profile being that we were already crossing through the minimum published altitude of 16;000 ft that was located at gmann. There was no urgency or any indication that the plan had changed for our fast approaching restriction that was now higher than the previous instruction and higher than we were at the time when we had time to think about it. We acknowledged and continued with our checklist. The next aircraft behind us checked in with the same info and ATC gave them the same instructions. They were high and started querying what ATC really wanted; to continue in the previous ATC instructions of 14;000 ft or change it to the higher above below restriction of 16;000 ft - 19;000 ft. At gmann ATC just repeated the clearance and the frequency went silent for a bit. After a minute or two; ATC came back on and said 'this is just as confusing to us as it is to you.' he explained some center vs. Approach agreements and how they interpret the new clearance verbiage. He basically said that if I give an aircraft a new clearance; it supersedes the previous clearance. He said this info was for all aircraft on frequency and left it as a bit of an open discussion. A few of us had suggestions and he sent us all on to our next frequencies. At no point were we ever queried about our altitude or asked what we were doing. Conflicting instructions and expectations from center versus approach. If center could give us a crossing that falls within the limits of the original charted crossing; or if approach could just leave us on the existing crossing and we could continue on the arrival profile after the previously issued clearance confusion would be greatly reduced. This didn't appear to be a traffic issue; just a normal procedural issue and miss understanding between the groups. Querying ATC when instructions may seem a little off.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Center Controller issues clearance to pilot; next aircraft receives the same instructions. Pilot of second aircraft is confused and asks for clarification. Controller finally comes back with statement of; 'This is just as confusing to me as it is to you;' then opens frequency for dialog. Discussion about what Approach is expecting and what Center is expecting.

Narrative: Center gave us a crossing of 14;000 FT at GMANN intersection. We started our descent while maintaining the NOTAMED 280 KTS. Somewhere around 16;000 - 18;000 FT we got a frequency change to approach. We checked in with the crossing restriction and ATC gave us a 'at GMANN descend via the TEJAS 2 arrival.' We interpreted that as; after GMANN continue via the published profile being that we were already crossing through the minimum published altitude of 16;000 FT that was located at GMANN. There was no urgency or any indication that the plan had changed for our fast approaching restriction that was now higher than the previous instruction and higher than we were at the time when we had time to think about it. We acknowledged and continued with our checklist. The next aircraft behind us checked in with the same info and ATC gave them the same instructions. They were high and started querying what ATC really wanted; to continue in the previous ATC instructions of 14;000 FT or change it to the higher above below restriction of 16;000 FT - 19;000 FT. At GMANN ATC just repeated the clearance and the frequency went silent for a bit. After a minute or two; ATC came back on and said 'This is just as confusing to us as it is to you.' He explained some Center vs. Approach agreements and how they interpret the new clearance verbiage. He basically said that if I give an aircraft a new clearance; it supersedes the previous clearance. He said this info was for all aircraft on frequency and left it as a bit of an open discussion. A few of us had suggestions and he sent us all on to our next frequencies. At no point were we ever queried about our altitude or asked what we were doing. Conflicting instructions and expectations from Center versus Approach. If Center could give us a crossing that falls within the limits of the original charted crossing; or if Approach could just leave us on the existing crossing and we could continue on the arrival profile after the previously issued clearance confusion would be greatly reduced. This didn't appear to be a traffic issue; just a normal procedural issue and miss understanding between the groups. Querying ATC when instructions may seem a little off.

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.