Narrative:

I was departing on a flight from iwi to cdw, and had filed an IFR flight plan. Because of marginal WX, I telephoned brunswick approach for my IFR clearance and release. Controller gave me a full route clearance, including 'climb and maintain 6000 ft,' a transponder code, and instructed me to contact 128.3 when ready to depart. The controller did not ask for my intended departure runway. I told the controller there was no rco at wiscasset, and suggested he give me a void time. Controller instructed me to hold while he telephoned portland approach. While on hold, I overheard the conversation the controller was having with portland, his readback to portland included 'maintain 3000 ft.' the controller then gave me my release and void time, and to contact 125.5 (portland approach) upon departure. Note: normally, the departure frequency for wiscasset IFR departures is 118.15, brunswick approach. The controller did not give me the 3000 ft altitude instruction. I asked the controller if my previous altitude clearance was still good, and he corrected my altitude instructions to 'maintain 3000 ft.' the brunswick controller did not seem to have much experience. I departed wiscasset before the designated void time, and immediately was in IMC flight conditions. I contacted portland approach, indicating '1500 ft climbing to 3000 ft.' the portland controller asked for my position and intentions (as though I was a VFR pilot intending to request flight following). I said that I was on an IFR release from wiscasset. The controller said 'I have a departure for your call sign from lewiston, but not wiscasset.' the portland controller then gave me a new clearance and transponder code. The flight continued uneventfully. I am not aware if any collision hazard existed. I was apparently departing into unclred airspace in the vicinity of wiscasset airport, since the portland controller was expecting me to depart from lewiston. I believe that the hazardous condition was caused by 1) inexperienced controller at brunswick, 2) failure of controller to follow proper IFR clearance procedures, and 3) my failure to re-verify the clearance, having suspected that the controller may have made some procedural mistakes.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: IFR C182 DEP FROM IWI EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING THE APPARENT ATC CONFUSION REF THE DEP ARPT.

Narrative: I WAS DEPARTING ON A FLT FROM IWI TO CDW, AND HAD FILED AN IFR FLT PLAN. BECAUSE OF MARGINAL WX, I TELEPHONED BRUNSWICK APCH FOR MY IFR CLRNC AND RELEASE. CTLR GAVE ME A FULL RTE CLRNC, INCLUDING 'CLB AND MAINTAIN 6000 FT,' A XPONDER CODE, AND INSTRUCTED ME TO CONTACT 128.3 WHEN READY TO DEPART. THE CTLR DID NOT ASK FOR MY INTENDED DEP RWY. I TOLD THE CTLR THERE WAS NO RCO AT WISCASSET, AND SUGGESTED HE GIVE ME A VOID TIME. CTLR INSTRUCTED ME TO HOLD WHILE HE TELEPHONED PORTLAND APCH. WHILE ON HOLD, I OVERHEARD THE CONVERSATION THE CTLR WAS HAVING WITH PORTLAND, HIS READBACK TO PORTLAND INCLUDED 'MAINTAIN 3000 FT.' THE CTLR THEN GAVE ME MY RELEASE AND VOID TIME, AND TO CONTACT 125.5 (PORTLAND APCH) UPON DEP. NOTE: NORMALLY, THE DEP FREQ FOR WISCASSET IFR DEPS IS 118.15, BRUNSWICK APCH. THE CTLR DID NOT GIVE ME THE 3000 FT ALT INSTRUCTION. I ASKED THE CTLR IF MY PREVIOUS ALT CLRNC WAS STILL GOOD, AND HE CORRECTED MY ALT INSTRUCTIONS TO 'MAINTAIN 3000 FT.' THE BRUNSWICK CTLR DID NOT SEEM TO HAVE MUCH EXPERIENCE. I DEPARTED WISCASSET BEFORE THE DESIGNATED VOID TIME, AND IMMEDIATELY WAS IN IMC FLT CONDITIONS. I CONTACTED PORTLAND APCH, INDICATING '1500 FT CLBING TO 3000 FT.' THE PORTLAND CTLR ASKED FOR MY POS AND INTENTIONS (AS THOUGH I WAS A VFR PLT INTENDING TO REQUEST FLT FOLLOWING). I SAID THAT I WAS ON AN IFR RELEASE FROM WISCASSET. THE CTLR SAID 'I HAVE A DEP FOR YOUR CALL SIGN FROM LEWISTON, BUT NOT WISCASSET.' THE PORTLAND CTLR THEN GAVE ME A NEW CLRNC AND XPONDER CODE. THE FLT CONTINUED UNEVENTFULLY. I AM NOT AWARE IF ANY COLLISION HAZARD EXISTED. I WAS APPARENTLY DEPARTING INTO UNCLRED AIRSPACE IN THE VICINITY OF WISCASSET ARPT, SINCE THE PORTLAND CTLR WAS EXPECTING ME TO DEPART FROM LEWISTON. I BELIEVE THAT THE HAZARDOUS CONDITION WAS CAUSED BY 1) INEXPERIENCED CTLR AT BRUNSWICK, 2) FAILURE OF CTLR TO FOLLOW PROPER IFR CLRNC PROCS, AND 3) MY FAILURE TO RE-VERIFY THE CLRNC, HAVING SUSPECTED THAT THE CTLR MAY HAVE MADE SOME PROCEDURAL MISTAKES.

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.