Narrative:

Less than standard separation between 2 IFR aircraft. Due to aircraft, runway 28 was required for weight (full load). On departure, runway 28/10 was active. Assigned 250 degree heading by tower. After established on 250 degree heading, told to join palco 5, contact center. Radar contact by sju. Aircraft #2 was in TCASII threat area descending to 2800 ft. We were at 3000 ft, took action to avoid hitting ATR72 by turning back to the 250 degree heading. When clear, turned back to palco. ATR given turn by sju. First officer saw bottom of ATR in hard left turn. I asked the controller what type of separation he was using. 'None' was his answer -- 'I left it up to the tower.'

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737-700 AND ATR72 HAD AN NMAC IN TJSJ CLASS C AIRSPACE.

Narrative: LTSS BTWN 2 IFR ACFT. DUE TO ACFT, RWY 28 WAS REQUIRED FOR WT (FULL LOAD). ON DEP, RWY 28/10 WAS ACTIVE. ASSIGNED 250 DEG HDG BY TWR. AFTER ESTABLISHED ON 250 DEG HDG, TOLD TO JOIN PALCO 5, CONTACT CTR. RADAR CONTACT BY SJU. ACFT #2 WAS IN TCASII THREAT AREA DSNDING TO 2800 FT. WE WERE AT 3000 FT, TOOK ACTION TO AVOID HITTING ATR72 BY TURNING BACK TO THE 250 DEG HDG. WHEN CLR, TURNED BACK TO PALCO. ATR GIVEN TURN BY SJU. FO SAW BOTTOM OF ATR IN HARD L TURN. I ASKED THE CTLR WHAT TYPE OF SEPARATION HE WAS USING. 'NONE' WAS HIS ANSWER -- 'I LEFT IT UP TO THE TWR.'

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.