Narrative:

I was working sector 90 (FL240 through FL330). There wasn't much going on. The sector was combined with [sector] 47 (low; FL230 and below); sector 80 (FL340 and above) was split off. We have an ait (automation information transfer) procedure through on what we term as the 'modified departure' out of phx. These aircraft; when the various moas east of phx are cold; are sent out of phx on a heading; the low sector at ZAB (46; FL250 and below) then issues direct ewm or elp depending on the route. Sector 91 (FL260 to FL330) climbs them to the filed altitude or FL330; whichever is higher; flashes them to [sector] 90; who then; if they don't need to talk to them; flashes them to 80. Sector 80 (FL340 and above) then has control at the common boundary (coincidental with 90) to climb. We have had several events on this ait with inadvertent ods (operational deviations) involving the auto-flash to sector 80. The auto flash in our facility is set at 25 miles from the boundary above FL180. By the time [sector] 46 climbs them; flashes; and ships them to [sector] 91; the aircraft is often very close to 25 miles from the boundary. Many people in my area flash the aircraft to the next sector when climbing off phx or tus when they talk to them. By delaying the flash to [sector] 90; the aircraft filed above FL340 going eastbound will auto flash to [sector] 80. When [sector] 91 is busy; this is very easy to overlook. In this case; a B737 auto-flashed to [sector] 80 and bypassed [sector] 90. I noticed them limited about thirty miles inside my airspace out of about FL290 or so. I didn't have any traffic. There was training occurring on [sector] 91 on the r-side. Sector 65 (FL340 and above) was combined and; last [time] I had looked at the (tsd) traffic situation display; [it] was showing in yellow alert with 22 aircraft. I'm not sure if it was in alert at this time. There are several ways to partially solve this problem. Unfortunately none of them are fool proof. One way is to have the controllers on [sector] 91 flash the aircraft (with an interim of FL330) to [sector] 90 as soon as they take the hand off from [sector] 46. The theory is that keying in the interim will act as a prompt to manually flash to [sector] 90. A second way is to cease the ait as written and flash the aircraft to [sector] 90 and physically ship the aircraft to [sector] 90. This way; again theory dictating; the aircraft being on frequency will prompt the controller to bring up the data block. Unfortunately; both of these methods are flawed in that high levels of workload can lead to shifts in situation awareness and cause the auto flash to 'work as designed.' a very long term solution would be to bisect [sectors] 91/65 and [sectors] 90/80 in half and create one stratum rather than a high/ultra high split that makes the east/west distance much smaller and takes away the disadvantages of stratum splits; climbers; and auto-flash design problems.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: A ZAB Controller described an Operational Deviation involving a very complex series of automated procedures that includes a number sectors and airspace variability's.

Narrative: I was working Sector 90 (FL240 through FL330). There wasn't much going on. The sector was combined with [Sector] 47 (low; FL230 and below); Sector 80 (FL340 and above) was split off. We have an AIT (Automation Information Transfer) procedure through on what we term as the 'modified departure' out of PHX. These aircraft; when the various MOAs east of PHX are cold; are sent out of PHX on a heading; the low sector at ZAB (46; FL250 and below) then issues direct EWM or ELP depending on the route. Sector 91 (FL260 to FL330) climbs them to the filed altitude or FL330; whichever is higher; flashes them to [Sector] 90; who then; if they don't need to talk to them; flashes them to 80. Sector 80 (FL340 and above) then has control at the common boundary (coincidental with 90) to climb. We have had several events on this AIT with inadvertent ODs (Operational Deviations) involving the auto-flash to Sector 80. The auto flash in our facility is set at 25 miles from the boundary above FL180. By the time [Sector] 46 climbs them; flashes; and ships them to [Sector] 91; the aircraft is often very close to 25 miles from the boundary. Many people in my area flash the aircraft to the next sector when climbing off PHX or TUS when they talk to them. By delaying the flash to [Sector] 90; the aircraft filed above FL340 going eastbound will auto flash to [Sector] 80. When [Sector] 91 is busy; this is very easy to overlook. In this case; a B737 auto-flashed to [Sector] 80 and bypassed [Sector] 90. I noticed them limited about thirty miles inside my airspace out of about FL290 or so. I didn't have any traffic. There was training occurring on [Sector] 91 on the R-Side. Sector 65 (FL340 and above) was combined and; last [time] I had looked at the (TSD) Traffic Situation Display; [it] was showing in yellow alert with 22 aircraft. I'm not sure if it was in alert at this time. There are several ways to partially solve this problem. Unfortunately none of them are fool proof. One way is to have the controllers on [Sector] 91 flash the aircraft (with an interim of FL330) to [Sector] 90 as soon as they take the hand off from [Sector] 46. The theory is that keying in the interim will act as a prompt to manually flash to [Sector] 90. A second way is to cease the AIT as written and flash the aircraft to [Sector] 90 and physically ship the aircraft to [Sector] 90. This way; again theory dictating; the aircraft being on frequency will prompt the controller to bring up the data block. Unfortunately; both of these methods are flawed in that high levels of workload can lead to shifts in situation awareness and cause the auto flash to 'work as designed.' A very long term solution would be to bisect [Sectors] 91/65 and [Sectors] 90/80 in half and create one stratum rather than a high/ultra high split that makes the east/west distance much smaller and takes away the disadvantages of stratum splits; climbers; and auto-flash design problems.

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.