Narrative:

I had a controller in charge relieving me at the time of the event. I came back and took the desk. I went up to the controller on sector 11R and noticed he had 4 aircraft showing two separate conflicts. The one I'm reporting on I thought had separation but after further review the controller did not have proper separation. This report is actually two separate events between two aircraft and 5 minutes apart.aircraft X 33000 feet was 34NM behind aircraft Y 34000 feet. Both aircrafts data blocks auto acquired on radar. Aircraft X requested 35000 feet. The controller climbed aircraft X to 35000 feet without radar identifying one of the aircraft. 7110.65 allows radar separation in that area if just one aircraft is radar identified. Aircraft X was level at xa:48.at xa:51 aircraft Y requested 35000 feet. The controller then climbed aircraft Y to 35000 feet with aircraft X 34 NM behind him at 35000 feet still with only 34 NM between aircraft. The controller said he was using 20 ATD. 20 ATD could have been used but was not set up properly. Neither aircraft was asked their distance to the next waypoint the controller figured I have 20 NM between them on radar so I can just apply 20 NM separation. Aircraft Y was level at 35000 feet at xa:54. Both aircraft were matched and they were radar identified just over an hour later on a different radar site. Separation between aircraft increased to 43 NM as they approached the second radar site.I would like to see a briefing item on this come down from the airspace and procedures office on the proper way to set up reduced separation like 20 ATD in atop (advanced technologies and oceanic procedures).

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZAN Supervisor observed a Controller using incorrect oceanic reduced separation procedures to climb an aircraft to the same altitude as an aircraft it was following.

Narrative: I had a Controller In Charge relieving me at the time of the event. I came back and took the desk. I went up to the controller on sector 11R and noticed he had 4 aircraft showing two separate conflicts. The one I'm reporting on I thought had separation but after further review the controller did not have proper separation. This report is actually two separate events between two aircraft and 5 minutes apart.Aircraft X 33000 feet was 34NM behind Aircraft Y 34000 feet. Both aircrafts data blocks auto acquired on radar. Aircraft X requested 35000 feet. The controller climbed Aircraft X to 35000 feet without radar identifying one of the aircraft. 7110.65 allows radar separation in that area if just one aircraft is radar identified. Aircraft X was level at XA:48.At XA:51 Aircraft Y requested 35000 feet. The controller then climbed Aircraft Y to 35000 feet with Aircraft X 34 NM behind him at 35000 feet still with only 34 NM between aircraft. The controller said he was using 20 ATD. 20 ATD could have been used but was not set up properly. Neither aircraft was asked their distance to the next waypoint the controller figured I have 20 NM between them on radar so I can just apply 20 NM separation. Aircraft Y was level at 35000 feet at XA:54. Both aircraft were matched and they were radar identified just over an hour later on a different radar site. Separation between aircraft increased to 43 NM as they approached the second radar site.I would like to see a briefing item on this come down from the Airspace and Procedures office on the proper way to set up reduced separation like 20 ATD in ATOP (Advanced Technologies and Oceanic Procedures).

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.