Oakland ARTCC atcs does not coordinate a revised altitude of an aircraft with a receiving facility; ...

Narrative:

I relieved a controller at the sector just after aircraft had been climbed to FL300. Previously the aircraft had been coordinated with anc center at FL280.I received a message in my sector queue advising me that the coordination with anc needed to be revised. I opened the coordination window several times; but for some reason the different altitude did not come to my attention. I acknowledged a 'manual' acceptance of the coordination process instead of a 'send' process. The 'manual' process showed that the coordination was complete (although it was not). If I had completed the process using the 'send' button the new information would have been transmitted to anc center and the correct information would have been received by the controller. This would have completed the coordination in the correct manner. The aircraft entered anc centers' airspace at FL300 but the controller expected the aircraft to enter his airspace at FL280 which caused the 'airspace deviation'. The pre and post briefing was limited and did not contain all the information that was necessary. Probably the most important fact that should have been included in the briefing was the fact that an aircraft had just been cleared to a new altitude and the re-coordination had not been accomplished.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Oakland ARTCC ATCs does not coordinate a revised altitude of an aircraft with a receiving facility; resulting in an operational deviation.

Narrative: I relieved a controller at the sector just after aircraft had been climbed to FL300. Previously the aircraft had been coordinated with ANC Center at FL280.I received a message in my sector queue advising me that the coordination with ANC needed to be revised. I opened the coordination window several times; but for some reason the different altitude did not come to my attention. I acknowledged a 'manual' acceptance of the coordination process instead of a 'SEND' process. The 'manual' process showed that the coordination was complete (although it was not). If I had completed the process using the 'SEND' button the new information would have been transmitted to ANC Center and the correct information would have been received by the controller. This would have completed the coordination in the correct manner. The Aircraft entered ANC Centers' airspace at FL300 but the controller expected the aircraft to enter his airspace at FL280 which caused the 'airspace deviation'. The pre and post briefing was limited and did not contain all the information that was necessary. Probably the most important fact that should have been included in the briefing was the fact that an aircraft had just been cleared to a new altitude and the RE-coordination had not been accomplished.

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.

Attributes
ACN	868045
Time
Date	200912
Local Time Of Day	1801-2400
Place
Locale Reference	ZOA.ARTCC
State Reference	CA
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Widebody Low Wing 2 Turbojet Eng
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Cruise
Route In Use	None
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Oceanic
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Airspace Violation All Types Deviation - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Oakland ARTCC atcs does not coordinate a revised altitude of an aircraft with a receiving facility; resulting in an operational deviation.