Narrative:

Air carrier X was a camrn arrival to jfk and was issued 250 knots and 5 miles south of camrn at 11 thousand. Air carrier Y was an isp arrival level at 13 thousand. There was an additional aircraft level at 15 thousand which was a DSH8 and was landing at hvn. This aircraft was slower and ahead of air carrier Y and direct plume. I had initially issued a left turn to air carrier Y. Air carrier X came back and said that he would be unable to make the restriction. I then issued the air carrier X to cross camrn at 11 thousand and 250 knots. I then turned air carrier Y 20 degrees left to move the confliction point further north. Upon realizing that this would not be sufficient I issued a heading of 040 which would have provided positive separation. Unfortunately; I incorrectly issued the heading to the DSH8 at 15 thousand. Upon realizing that a loss of separation was still occurring; I issued an additional left turn to air carrier Y to mitigate the loss of separation. Recommendation; sector 68 is a complex sector that has many confliction points with aircraft climbing and descending through each others altitudes. When uret was implemented all flight progress strips were removed. Furthermore; uret was implemented without any procedures/sops to address the proper methods to document the various headings/speeds/altitudes issued. If flight progress strips were still used I would have recognized that I issued the 040 heading to the wrong aircraft. I would recommend in the future that uret be removed from sector 68 along with other sectors that share this complexity. If this cannot be done; I would recommend that a comprehensive SOP be developed to correctly implement uret at sector 68.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZNY Controller described a loss of separation event involving three arrival aircraft to three different airports; the reporter listing the URET implementation and the absence of strip information as casual factors.

Narrative: Air Carrier X was a CAMRN arrival to JFK and was issued 250 knots and 5 miles south of CAMRN at 11 thousand. Air Carrier Y was an ISP arrival level at 13 thousand. There was an additional aircraft level at 15 thousand which was a DSH8 and was landing at HVN. This aircraft was slower and ahead of Air Carrier Y and direct PLUME. I had initially issued a left turn to Air Carrier Y. Air Carrier X came back and said that he would be unable to make the restriction. I then issued the Air Carrier X to cross CAMRN at 11 thousand and 250 knots. I then turned Air Carrier Y 20 degrees left to move the confliction point further north. Upon realizing that this would not be sufficient I issued a heading of 040 which would have provided positive separation. Unfortunately; I incorrectly issued the heading to the DSH8 at 15 thousand. Upon realizing that a loss of separation was still occurring; I issued an additional left turn to Air Carrier Y to mitigate the loss of separation. Recommendation; Sector 68 is a complex sector that has many confliction points with aircraft climbing and descending through each others altitudes. When URET was implemented all flight progress strips were removed. Furthermore; URET was implemented without any procedures/SOPs to address the proper methods to document the various headings/speeds/altitudes issued. If flight progress strips were still used I would have recognized that I issued the 040 heading to the wrong aircraft. I would recommend in the future that URET be removed from Sector 68 along with other sectors that share this complexity. If this cannot be done; I would recommend that a comprehensive SOP be developed to correctly implement URET at Sector 68.

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.