Narrative:

ZAB called and was given the missed approach airspace over cgz which on our map is shown as a 5NM half arc around the cgz airport (cgz lies just outside our airspace on the boundary with ZAB). I accepted a hand off on aircraft X inbound on V105 (tfd..pxr) landing dvt. Per the LOA we have control over tfd for descent to 6;000. After the fact I looked at the chart and should have realized that the entire missed approach procedure goes back to tfd and holds at 5600 (not depicted in our LOA with ZAB). I saw ZAB's traffic at 5;000 and was well clear and on a vector behind but it is possible that I had an operational deviation with the airspace that I had released to them since I descended aircraft X down to 6;000 with the evidently false pretense that V105 was not impacted by the missed approach airspace; due to the way it is depicted in the LOA. Had I thoroughly thought through this matter I would have just left aircraft X at 8;000 until my airspace. Recommendation; I should have known that the missed approach would go back to tfd; it does make sense; but perhaps the next revision of the inter facility LOA could be modified so as to prevent this from occurring because another cpc was also surprised that we might not have control for descent to 6;000 in this case. That is; the LOA does not depict V105 as being involved in the missed approach airspace. On our map the portion we give up is 3.5NM away from V105.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: P50 controller described possible airspace incursion; claiming confusion and unfamiliarity with published missed approach procedures and the airspace needed to contain the procedure.

Narrative: ZAB called and was given the missed approach airspace over CGZ which on our map is shown as a 5NM half arc around the CGZ airport (CGZ lies just outside our airspace on the boundary with ZAB). I accepted a hand off on Aircraft X inbound on V105 (TFD..PXR) landing DVT. Per the LOA we have control over TFD for descent to 6;000. After the fact I looked at the chart and should have realized that the entire missed approach procedure goes back to TFD and holds at 5600 (not depicted in our LOA with ZAB). I saw ZAB's traffic at 5;000 and was well clear and on a vector behind but it is possible that I had an operational deviation with the airspace that I had released to them since I descended Aircraft X down to 6;000 with the evidently false pretense that V105 was not impacted by the missed approach airspace; due to the way it is depicted in the LOA. Had I thoroughly thought through this matter I would have just left Aircraft X at 8;000 until my airspace. Recommendation; I should have known that the missed approach would go back to TFD; it does make sense; but perhaps the next revision of the inter facility LOA could be modified so as to prevent this from occurring because another CPC was also surprised that we might not have control for descent to 6;000 in this case. That is; the LOA does not depict V105 as being involved in the missed approach airspace. On our map the portion we give up is 3.5NM away from V105.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.