Narrative:

I was working our lake henry sector (low altitude). I was working approximately 10 aircraft at the time of this occurrence. At the time I had to point out an aircraft to 2 other sectors. I believed this air carrier Z missed his restriction. Upon examination of the tapes it was evident I missed the pilot's readback (I had given the pilot the restriction 2 times.) while this was going on I had 2 aircraft head-on at 17000 ft. At 8 mi apart I turned air carrier X 40 degrees to the right and climbed him to FL200 and to expedite through FL180. I descended the air carrier Y to 16000 ft. I observed air carrier X start his climb to 17300 ft. At that time I know I would have separation. About 40 seconds later I observed air carrier X at about 16700 ft. I asked the pilot to verify his altitude. At that time, the pilot informed me that he was responding to a TCASII RA and descending. I don't think either of the aircraft involved in this incident were the problem. The aircraft that I believed that I gave the crossing restriction to was the problem. After 2 times restating his restriction he still got it wrong. His poor phraseology and lack of concern for the restriction was the problem. The pilots need to remember they are not the only ones using the airspace. Sometimes controllers have 3 or 4 things going on at one time. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter stated there was a flight crew ATC review. Captain of air carrier Y was TCASII equipped but did not receive an RA or TA. Air carrier X was an large transport, air carrier Y was an light transport. Reporter stated the air carrier company whose flight crew missed the altitude restriction uses very poor sloppy phraseology and has a problem with flight crew technique listening. After facility management review this incident was classified TCASII induced less than standard separation.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ACR X NON ADHERENCE TO ATC CLRNC CLB THROUGH OCCUPIED ALT TCASII RA DSND HAD LTSS FROM ACR Y. PLTDEV.

Narrative: I WAS WORKING OUR LAKE HENRY SECTOR (LOW ALT). I WAS WORKING APPROX 10 ACFT AT THE TIME OF THIS OCCURRENCE. AT THE TIME I HAD TO POINT OUT AN ACFT TO 2 OTHER SECTORS. I BELIEVED THIS ACR Z MISSED HIS RESTRICTION. UPON EXAMINATION OF THE TAPES IT WAS EVIDENT I MISSED THE PLT'S READBACK (I HAD GIVEN THE PLT THE RESTRICTION 2 TIMES.) WHILE THIS WAS GOING ON I HAD 2 ACFT HEAD-ON AT 17000 FT. AT 8 MI APART I TURNED ACR X 40 DEGS TO THE R AND CLBED HIM TO FL200 AND TO EXPEDITE THROUGH FL180. I DSNDED THE ACR Y TO 16000 FT. I OBSERVED ACR X START HIS CLB TO 17300 FT. AT THAT TIME I KNOW I WOULD HAVE SEPARATION. ABOUT 40 SECONDS LATER I OBSERVED ACR X AT ABOUT 16700 FT. I ASKED THE PLT TO VERIFY HIS ALT. AT THAT TIME, THE PLT INFORMED ME THAT HE WAS RESPONDING TO A TCASII RA AND DSNDING. I DON'T THINK EITHER OF THE ACFT INVOLVED IN THIS INCIDENT WERE THE PROB. THE ACFT THAT I BELIEVED THAT I GAVE THE XING RESTRICTION TO WAS THE PROB. AFTER 2 TIMES RESTATING HIS RESTRICTION HE STILL GOT IT WRONG. HIS POOR PHRASEOLOGY AND LACK OF CONCERN FOR THE RESTRICTION WAS THE PROB. THE PLTS NEED TO REMEMBER THEY ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES USING THE AIRSPACE. SOMETIMES CTLRS HAVE 3 OR 4 THINGS GOING ON AT ONE TIME. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH REPORTER REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR STATED THERE WAS A FLC ATC REVIEW. CAPT OF ACR Y WAS TCASII EQUIPPED BUT DID NOT RECEIVE AN RA OR TA. ACR X WAS AN LGT, ACR Y WAS AN LTT. RPTR STATED THE ACR COMPANY WHOSE FLC MISSED THE ALT RESTRICTION USES VERY POOR SLOPPY PHRASEOLOGY AND HAS A PROB WITH FLC TECHNIQUE LISTENING. AFTER FACILITY MGMNT REVIEW THIS INCIDENT WAS CLASSIFIED TCASII INDUCED LTSS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 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.