Narrative:

Push with minimal staffing and no supervisors so we have to cover the controller in charge (controller in charge) as well. The controller in charge decided not to split the approach and en-route; so working all on our typical configuration of 2 scopes one sector with numerous frequencies. I had a 2 or 3 overflights at altitude; a few arrivals into saipan; a few departures off andersen along with arrivals into guam. As well as military aircraft including aircraft X. Aircraft X [reported a situation] and started conducting fuel dumping.as I was working that and vectoring to final for guam; I had a departure come off andersen aircraft Y which I took him behind a flight inbound to gum; turned him and told him out of a higher altitude to go on top of aircraft Z ( I think FL240) cleared direct natss. Meanwhile I was also starting aircraft a down out of his altitude for guam. I got busy with the vectoring to final and the [aircraft] inbound to andersen. During all this aircraft a said he had a request; I told him standby. After a few minutes I went back to him and he said disregard 'your too busy; we are good); I asked him again as I had time now and was willing to accommodate. He asked if I had any traffic out by him; at which I responded I did not and the closest plane was aircraft B several thousand feet and 20 plus miles away from him. However; after thinking about it aircraft B did cut across his flight path and could have been a factor. I asked the controller in charge as he was watching ifshe saw any traffic; to which he responded no. However; to be honest; I have no idea if aircraft B was a factor or not for aircraft a so I am not sure if there was a loss or not; or that it could have been another aircraft due regard or not tracked up such as a [foreign aircraft] as they occasionally appear out this way. Aircraft B never said a word and aircraft a never had a TCAS event or altered their flight; he just said he saw traffic and they descended a little quicker to get under the traffic. We do not have an en-route conflict alert like the centers do; it's mostly for the approach side; nor do we have the ability for me to go back and look at the replay; so I have no idea. Long story short; I do not think there was a loss; but there was certainly a lack of my oversight and a workload that should be less by splitting the sectors. Push for the approach and en-route sectors to be split during the afternoon push; regardless of our staffing.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Guam Center Controller reported a possible loss of separation between two aircraft due to lack of oversight and high workload environment as a result of minimal staffing.

Narrative: Push with minimal staffing and no supervisors so we have to cover the Controller in Charge (CIC) as well. The CIC decided not to split the approach and en-route; so working all on our typical configuration of 2 scopes one sector with numerous frequencies. I had a 2 or 3 overflights at altitude; a few arrivals into Saipan; a few departures off Andersen along with arrivals into Guam. As well as military aircraft including Aircraft X. Aircraft X [reported a situation] and started conducting fuel dumping.As I was working that and vectoring to final for Guam; I had a departure come off Andersen Aircraft Y which I took him behind a flight inbound to GUM; turned him and told him out of a higher altitude to go on top of Aircraft Z ( I think FL240) cleared direct NATSS. Meanwhile I was also starting Aircraft A down out of his altitude for Guam. I got busy with the vectoring to final and the [aircraft] inbound to Andersen. During all this Aircraft A said he had a request; I told him standby. After a few minutes I went back to him and he said disregard 'Your too busy; we are good); I asked him again as I had time now and was willing to accommodate. He asked if I had any traffic out by him; at which I responded I did not and the closest plane was Aircraft B several thousand feet and 20 plus miles away from him. However; after thinking about it Aircraft B did cut across his flight path and could have been a factor. I asked the CIC as he was watching ifshe saw any traffic; to which he responded no. However; to be honest; I have no idea if Aircraft B was a factor or not for Aircraft A So I am not sure if there was a loss or not; or that it could have been another aircraft due regard or not tracked up such as a [foreign aircraft] as they occasionally appear out this way. Aircraft B never said a word and Aircraft A never had a TCAS event or altered their flight; he just said he saw traffic and they descended a little quicker to get under the traffic. We do not have an en-route Conflict Alert like the Centers do; it's mostly for the approach side; nor do we have the ability for me to go back and look at the replay; so I have no idea. Long story short; I do not think there was a loss; but there was certainly a lack of my oversight and a workload that should be less by splitting the sectors. Push for the approach and en-route sectors to be split during the afternoon push; regardless of our staffing.

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.