Less than standard separation between 2 air carrier. Operational error.

Attributes
ACN	85099
Time
Date	198804
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	atc facility : eno
State Reference	DE
Altitude	msl bound lower : 26000 msl bound upper : 26700
Environment
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	artcc : zdc
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	descent other
Route In Use	enroute airway : j191
Flight Plan	IFR
Aircraft 2
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	Large Transport, Low Wing, 3 Turbojet Eng
Flight Phase	cruise other
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : radar
Qualification	controller : radar
Experience	controller radar : 32
ASRS Report	85099
Person 2
Function	flight crew : captain oversight : pic
Qualification	pilot : atp
Events
Anomaly	conflict : airborne less severe non adherence : required legal separation
Independent Detector	atc equipment other atc equipment : unspecified
Resolutory Action	none taken : detected after the fact
Consequence	faa : investigated
Miss Distance	horizontal : 25800 vertical : 700
Supplementary
Primary Problem	ATC Human Performance
Air Traffic Incident	Operational Error

Narrative:

Air carrier X was being descended to FL240 en route to ewr via J191 eno. Air carrier Y was en route via J37 J191 to rdu at FL260. Controller judgement was that air carrier X was sufficiently past point of confliction (with route of Y) to be descended to FL240. Judgement apparently was in error and less than standard sep occurred. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following: reporter gave yrs in ATC. Says operational error was classified as minor. Gave closest distances as 4.3 mi and 700' vertical. He had thought X would pass more than 5 mi from opp direction air carrier Y. This sector has to get aircraft landing ny area to lower altitude for handoff to N90. Very tight airspace since eecp went into effect. Biggest problems occur when aircraft have to be held. Sectors are so small that holding aircraft get into adjacent controller airspace. Supplemental information from acn 85106: I believe this to be a procedural error. At the sector I was working we have to dive aircraft through other aircraft to achieve what is required. There is little or no room in which to vector aircraft in the sector.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: LESS THAN STANDARD SEPARATION BETWEEN 2 ACR. OPERATIONAL ERROR.

Narrative: ACR X WAS BEING DSNDED TO FL240 ENRTE TO EWR VIA J191 ENO. ACR Y WAS ENRTE VIA J37 J191 TO RDU AT FL260. CTLR JUDGEMENT WAS THAT ACR X WAS SUFFICIENTLY PAST POINT OF CONFLICTION (WITH ROUTE OF Y) TO BE DSNDED TO FL240. JUDGEMENT APPARENTLY WAS IN ERROR AND LESS THAN STANDARD SEP OCCURRED. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: RPTR GAVE YRS IN ATC. SAYS OPERROR WAS CLASSIFIED AS MINOR. GAVE CLOSEST DISTANCES AS 4.3 MI AND 700' VERT. HE HAD THOUGHT X WOULD PASS MORE THAN 5 MI FROM OPP DIRECTION ACR Y. THIS SECTOR HAS TO GET ACFT LNDG NY AREA TO LOWER ALT FOR HDOF TO N90. VERY TIGHT AIRSPACE SINCE EECP WENT INTO EFFECT. BIGGEST PROBS OCCUR WHEN ACFT HAVE TO BE HELD. SECTORS ARE SO SMALL THAT HOLDING ACFT GET INTO ADJACENT CTLR AIRSPACE. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 85106: I BELIEVE THIS TO BE A PROCEDURAL ERROR. AT THE SECTOR I WAS WORKING WE HAVE TO DIVE ACFT THROUGH OTHER ACFT TO ACHIEVE WHAT IS REQUIRED. THERE IS LITTLE OR NO ROOM IN WHICH TO VECTOR ACFT IN THE SECTOR.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of August 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.