A TRACON controller reported providing instructions for a military formation flight break up in acco...

Narrative:

A formation flight requested breakup. I issued a beacon code to the second aircraft; issued holding instructions as requested 4000 feet and approved aircraft X go to initial as requested. I instructed aircraft X 'when able descend to 2500 feet'. I was informed I had an operational error because I didn't tell aircraft Y to instruct aircraft X to descend to 2500 feet when able. FAA 7110.65W paragraph 2-1-13 note 1 states' separation responsibility between aircraft within the formation during transition to individual control rests with the pilots concerned until approved separation has been approved.'a memorandum interprets this to mean we can only issue control instructions through the lead aircraft. How can this interpretation be construed from this note? It clearly states that separation responsibility rests with the pilots does it not? To add this extra requirement when it's obviously not the intent of this note is ridiculous. It's apparent that [the memorandum] is intending to complicate and infer a simple interpretation. This facility has had numerous operational errors attributed to this incorrect memorandum. Redact this memorandum and apply this note as it's obviously intended. Military flights know they are responsible for their separation until another form of separation is attained.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A TRACON Controller reported providing instructions for a military formation flight break up in accordance with FAA H 7110.65 but did not relay instructions through the flight lead.

Narrative: A formation flight requested breakup. I issued a beacon code to the second aircraft; issued holding instructions as requested 4000 feet and approved Aircraft X go to initial as requested. I instructed Aircraft X 'when able descend to 2500 feet'. I was informed I had an operational error because I didn't tell Aircraft Y to instruct Aircraft X to descend to 2500 feet when able. FAA 7110.65W paragraph 2-1-13 Note 1 states' Separation responsibility between aircraft within the formation during transition to individual control rests with the pilots concerned until approved separation has been approved.'A memorandum interprets this to mean we can only issue control instructions through the lead aircraft. How can this interpretation be construed from this note? It clearly states that separation responsibility rests with the pilots does it not? To add this extra requirement when it's obviously not the intent of this note is ridiculous. It's apparent that [the memorandum] is intending to complicate and infer a simple interpretation. This facility has had numerous operational errors attributed to this incorrect memorandum. Redact this memorandum and apply this note as it's obviously intended. Military flights know they are responsible for their separation until another form of separation is attained.

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.

Attributes
ACN	1446873
Time
Date	201705
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	PCT.TRACON
State Reference	VA
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Fighting Falcon F16
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Cruise
Route In Use	Vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	Fighting Falcon F16
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	Cruise
Route In Use	Vectors
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Approach
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Experience	Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 3.0
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

A TRACON controller reported providing instructions for a military formation flight break up in accordance with FAA H 7110.65 but did not relay instructions through the flight lead.