Narrative:

I was working one of the departure sectors. The sector works two airports north and north-eastbound departures as well as some arrivals. Tower departed aircraft X; 3.025 miles behind a slower aircraft Y; both on the same SID. It was a hot day and departures were having problems making crossing restrictions because of the heat. After aircraft X departed I noticed that I had 3 miles separation but the aircraft X was speeding up. Heavy aircraft use speed to help climb rates on hot days and in my opinion a speed reduction would not be the best solution for aircraft X. Tower had departures scanned down; so a turn to the left for either plane was not a good solution.at the time my best course of action was to wait until aircraft Y was over [fix] to turn to his departure fix; and wait until aircraft X was closer to [fix] to turn him northbound to avoid overtaking aircraft Y. Aircraft Y was at 3600 feet turning to the transition fix while aircraft X was turning northbound on a 360 heading. The separation was reduced to 800 feet and 2.94 miles before I had divergence and altitude separation. In our letter of agreement section 9; paragraph B; subsection 1; states'(1) separate successive IFR departures using recat separation except:(a) separate aircraft on the same initial exit fix by at least 7 miles if performance will cause decreasing separation and the recat separation is 7 miles or less.' the local controller violated this agreement by giving minimum separation on departure; not taking aircraft characteristics in mind; and without prior coordination; resulting in a loss of separation. Tower on multiple occasions have violated the letter of agreement between our facilities with no accountability. The controllers at the TRACON have been told on multiple occasions that [a safety report] is the only course of action to correct the problem. As I understand [safety reporting] is a great tool for problem reporting; it should not be a 'only' course to report controller deviations without any accountability towards those controllers. I feel that [safety reporting] has allowed management at TRACON to avoid confrontations with adjacent facilities; leaving the controllers at nct to fend for themselves. The answer of 'well this is the norm'; or 'this is how we do it here' is unacceptable. After reporting issues with the two towers to management; I have been told to '[report] it' or 'I will call them' and nothing is done. These problems occur daily; while TRACON controllers are getting performance review counseling for actions of other controllers.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A TRACON Controller reported receiving successive departures form the Tower with less than required separation.

Narrative: I was working one of the Departure sectors. The sector works two airports North and north-eastbound departures as well as some arrivals. Tower departed Aircraft X; 3.025 miles behind a slower Aircraft Y; both on the same SID. It was a hot day and departures were having problems making crossing restrictions because of the heat. After Aircraft X departed I noticed that I had 3 miles separation but the Aircraft X was speeding up. Heavy aircraft use speed to help climb rates on hot days and in my opinion a speed reduction would not be the best solution for Aircraft X. Tower had departures scanned down; so a turn to the left for either plane was not a good solution.At the time my best course of action was to wait until Aircraft Y was over [fix] to turn to his departure fix; and wait until Aircraft X was closer to [fix] to turn him northbound to avoid overtaking Aircraft Y. Aircraft Y was at 3600 feet turning to the transition fix while Aircraft X was turning northbound on a 360 heading. The separation was reduced to 800 feet and 2.94 miles before I had divergence and altitude separation. In our letter of agreement Section 9; paragraph B; subsection 1; states'(1) Separate successive IFR departures using RECAT separation except:(a) Separate aircraft on the same initial exit fix by at least 7 miles if performance will cause decreasing separation and the RECAT separation is 7 miles or less.' The local controller violated this agreement by giving minimum separation on departure; not taking aircraft characteristics in mind; and without prior coordination; resulting in a loss of separation. Tower on multiple occasions have violated the Letter of Agreement between our facilities with no accountability. The controllers at the TRACON have been told on multiple occasions that [a safety report] is the only course of action to correct the problem. As I understand [safety reporting] is a great tool for problem reporting; it should not be a 'only' course to report controller deviations without any accountability towards those controllers. I feel that [safety reporting] has allowed management at TRACON to avoid confrontations with adjacent facilities; leaving the controllers at NCT to fend for themselves. The answer of 'well this is the norm'; or 'this is how we do it here' is unacceptable. After reporting issues with the two towers to management; I have been told to '[report] it' or 'I will call them' and nothing is done. These problems occur daily; while TRACON controllers are getting performance review counseling for actions of other controllers.

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.