ZAU controller voiced concern regarding the location of the benky intersection as depicted on the be...

Narrative:

While working the plano sector (51); I cleared air carrier X to hold at the benky intersection. The pilot questioned which benky she should hold at because the two arrivals; the bradford 5 (BDF5) and the BENKY1; depict the benky intersection on different radials off of the bdf VOR. I instructed the pilot to use the BDF5. I then advised the supervisor. The supervisor initially took no action; it was not until an adjacent sector drew a graphic depiction of the differences between the arrivals that he/she notified the omic (operations manager in charge). I also notified chicago TRACON (C90) of the problem. C90 called back to either the omic or tmu and said they wanted us to use the BENKY1. I advised the supervisor that the BENKY1 arrival is the one that is published incorrectly and asked why we would choose that one. He responded that that was what C90 wanted. The benky intersection as depicted on the BDF5 arrival is the only one we depict on our video maps making it the only logical option. In addition the BENKY1 is an RNAV STAR and not all airplanes are capable of using it. Recommendation; all RNAV stars need to be flight checked prior to publication.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZAU Controller voiced concern regarding the location of the BENKY Intersection as depicted on the Benky 1 and Bradford 5 STARS; claiming the location of the two holding patterns are different; utilizing different BDF radials.

Narrative: While working the PLANO Sector (51); I cleared Air Carrier X to hold at the BENKY Intersection. The pilot questioned which BENKY she should hold at because the two arrivals; the Bradford 5 (BDF5) and the BENKY1; depict the BENKY intersection on different radials off of the BDF VOR. I instructed the pilot to use the BDF5. I then advised the Supervisor. The Supervisor initially took no action; it was not until an adjacent sector drew a graphic depiction of the differences between the arrivals that he/she notified the OMIC (Operations Manager In Charge). I also notified Chicago TRACON (C90) of the problem. C90 called back to either the OMIC or TMU and said they wanted us to use the BENKY1. I advised the supervisor that the BENKY1 arrival is the one that is published incorrectly and asked why we would choose that one. He responded that that was what C90 wanted. The BENKY intersection as depicted on the BDF5 arrival is the only one we depict on our video maps making it the only logical option. In addition the BENKY1 is an RNAV STAR and not all airplanes are capable of using it. Recommendation; all RNAV STARS need to be flight checked prior to publication.

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	887917
Time
Date	201005
Local Time Of Day	1201-1800
Place
Locale Reference	ZAU.ARTCC
State Reference	IL
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Commercial Fixed Wing
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Descent
Route In Use	STAR BENKY ONE
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types

ZAU controller voiced concern regarding the location of the benky intersection as depicted on the benky 1 and bradford 5 stars; claiming the location of the two holding patterns are different; utilizing different bdf radials.