Narrative:

While X was climbing to 4000 ft I made a pointout to abe approach for approval to climb to 8000 ft, which was approved with a provision on traffic to the west, which I believed was traffic (crossing west to east) at 5000 ft. I then climbed the falcon X to 5000 ft to keep him on a continuous climb, and called har approach for approval to 8000 ft in the abe approved pointout area. I was told to stand by. Because of the conflicting altitudes of the departing and crossing traffic, I turned the falcon X to 360 degrees and 5000 ft. Har approach had since taken the automated handoff, so I recalled them to climb to 8000 ft, which was then approved. The falcon X was issued the climb to 8000 ft and instructed to proceed (turn right, northwest) on course leaving 6000 ft of the traffic at 5000 ft eastbound. Shortly thereafter, the falcon X reported a TCASII alert and questioned possible traffic at 7000 ft and at the same time har approach called to inquire if I knew about Y flight at 7000 ft. I replied, 'negative' and that the falcon was proceeding on course. Subsequently, the falcon reported TCASII traffic at 5 O'clock and 7000 ft and that he was leaving 6900 ft. I observed the falcon to be approximately 4 mi from said traffic. Contributing factors: it appears that the traffic believed to be a factor for X was colocated with an aircraft that actually was the 7000 ft, aircraft Y, but since I assumed that the tagged aircraft that abe and rdu were viewing was Y the climb was based on. The coordination was not thorough.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CPR X CLB THROUGH OCCUPIED ALT HAD LTSS FROM Y. SYS ERROR.

Narrative: WHILE X WAS CLBING TO 4000 FT I MADE A POINTOUT TO ABE APCH FOR APPROVAL TO CLB TO 8000 FT, WHICH WAS APPROVED WITH A PROVISION ON TFC TO THE W, WHICH I BELIEVED WAS TFC (XING W TO E) AT 5000 FT. I THEN CLBED THE FALCON X TO 5000 FT TO KEEP HIM ON A CONTINUOUS CLB, AND CALLED HAR APCH FOR APPROVAL TO 8000 FT IN THE ABE APPROVED POINTOUT AREA. I WAS TOLD TO STAND BY. BECAUSE OF THE CONFLICTING ALTS OF THE DEPARTING AND XING TFC, I TURNED THE FALCON X TO 360 DEGS AND 5000 FT. HAR APCH HAD SINCE TAKEN THE AUTOMATED HDOF, SO I RECALLED THEM TO CLB TO 8000 FT, WHICH WAS THEN APPROVED. THE FALCON X WAS ISSUED THE CLB TO 8000 FT AND INSTRUCTED TO PROCEED (TURN R, NW) ON COURSE LEAVING 6000 FT OF THE TFC AT 5000 FT EBOUND. SHORTLY THEREAFTER, THE FALCON X RPTED A TCASII ALERT AND QUESTIONED POSSIBLE TFC AT 7000 FT AND AT THE SAME TIME HAR APCH CALLED TO INQUIRE IF I KNEW ABOUT Y FLT AT 7000 FT. I REPLIED, 'NEGATIVE' AND THAT THE FALCON WAS PROCEEDING ON COURSE. SUBSEQUENTLY, THE FALCON RPTED TCASII TFC AT 5 O'CLOCK AND 7000 FT AND THAT HE WAS LEAVING 6900 FT. I OBSERVED THE FALCON TO BE APPROX 4 MI FROM SAID TFC. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS: IT APPEARS THAT THE TFC BELIEVED TO BE A FACTOR FOR X WAS COLOCATED WITH AN ACFT THAT ACTUALLY WAS THE 7000 FT, ACFT Y, BUT SINCE I ASSUMED THAT THE TAGGED ACFT THAT ABE AND RDU WERE VIEWING WAS Y THE CLB WAS BASED ON. THE COORD WAS NOT THOROUGH.

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.