Narrative:

As I was training a developmental controller at the danville 'D' position (sector 57; which owns 11;000 up to FL230); the boiler sector; (sector 46-which owns FL240 and above) called to point out a CRJ2 descending from FL270 to FL230 heading southeast toward vhp VOR. My trainee replied 'point out approved' on the CRJ2. Because the western 2/3's of the danville sector is a 'shared airspace' climb corridor with both sectors 44 and 43 from FL190 to FL230; the CRJ2 must also be pointed out to sector 44 before sector 57 can accept a point out. The boiler sector (sector 46) is well aware that the climb corridor exists in that area; but is not required to make a point out to sectors 43 or 44 when descending through this corridor; that responsibility is put on the danville sector (57). When receiving a point out call from another sector on an aircraft that will transit the climb corridor; the danville sector must tell that sector attempting to make a point out 'I'll call you back.' then the danville sector is required to make a point out to either sector 43 or 44; or both; before danville is able to call the first sector back and accept the point out. This creates a dangerous situation in which aircraft may be descended into a busy climb corridor without being pointed out to all the controllers controlling aircraft within that corridor. Both sectors 43 and 44 can climb aircraft through the danville sector (57) climb corridor without pointing these aircraft out to the danville sector. In situations as described above; some high altitude controllers take the time to point out descending aircraft to both the danville sector and to sector 43 or 44 if needed. However; other high altitude controllers don't pvd a data block up to or initiate a point out to sector 43 or 44; even though they know there is a climb corridor in place and there could be aircraft in that corridor. The high altitude controllers must be required to make point outs to all the sectors who could have aircraft within the climb corridors before going through that airspace. This situation needs to be fixed soon before there is a loss of separation or worse in one of ZAU's busiest departure tracks. Recommendation; the high altitude controllers must be required to make point outs to all the sectors who could have aircraft within the climb corridors before going through that airspace. This situation needs to be fixed soon before there is a loss of separation or worse in one of ZAU's busiest departure tracks. The best situation is to eliminate the shared airspace. This clears up all the confusion over who has to point out what aircraft to whom.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: ZAU Controller expressed concern regarding the existing coordination procedures covering a 'shared airspace' climb corridor; claiming certain sectors fail to comply with mandatory coordination requirements.

Narrative: As I was training a Developmental Controller at the Danville 'D' position (Sector 57; which owns 11;000 up to FL230); the Boiler Sector; (Sector 46-which owns FL240 and above) called to point out a CRJ2 descending from FL270 to FL230 heading southeast toward VHP VOR. My trainee replied 'point out approved' on the CRJ2. Because the western 2/3's of the Danville Sector is a 'shared airspace' climb corridor with both Sectors 44 and 43 from FL190 to FL230; the CRJ2 must also be pointed out to Sector 44 before Sector 57 can accept a point out. The Boiler Sector (Sector 46) is well aware that the climb corridor exists in that area; but is not required to make a point out to Sectors 43 or 44 when descending through this corridor; that responsibility is put on the Danville Sector (57). When receiving a point out call from another sector on an aircraft that will transit the climb corridor; the Danville sector must tell that sector attempting to make a point out 'I'll call you back.' Then the Danville sector is required to make a point out to either Sector 43 or 44; or both; before Danville is able to call the first sector back and accept the point out. This creates a dangerous situation in which aircraft may be descended into a busy climb corridor without being pointed out to all the controllers controlling aircraft within that corridor. Both Sectors 43 and 44 can climb aircraft through the Danville Sector (57) climb corridor without pointing these aircraft out to the Danville Sector. In situations as described above; some high altitude controllers take the time to point out descending aircraft to both the Danville Sector and to Sector 43 or 44 if needed. However; other high altitude controllers don't PVD a data block up to or initiate a point out to Sector 43 or 44; even though they know there is a climb corridor in place and there could be aircraft in that corridor. The high altitude controllers must be required to make point outs to all the sectors who could have aircraft within the climb corridors before going through that airspace. This situation needs to be fixed soon before there is a loss of separation or worse in one of ZAU's busiest departure tracks. Recommendation; the high altitude controllers must be required to make point outs to all the sectors who could have aircraft within the climb corridors before going through that airspace. This situation needs to be fixed soon before there is a loss of separation or worse in one of ZAU's busiest departure tracks. The best situation is to eliminate the shared airspace. This clears up all the confusion over who has to point out what aircraft to whom.

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.