Narrative:

[I was] working 3 arrivals into sequence for lih and two departures outbound; also working the oceanic arrivals/departures unassisted. I rated the complexity a little higher because I had to closely monitor the arrival and departures. The traffic was fairly average but required pretty steady work to manage. As my first two arrivals were transitioning onto the approach into lih a piper navajo; called requesting flight following about 6 miles from lih eastbound. I gave him a code and the altimeter and held onto my arrivals instead of switching them to tower right away to ensure they would clear the navajo. After radar identifying the navajo I issued him traffic for the B717 inbound and also for a B757 about 20 miles away to alert him to the inbound B757. I also called traffic to the B757 at least twice. After at least one more traffic advisory the navajo reported he had the B757 in sight. I issued a cautionary wake turbulence advisory. At this time he had climbed to 5;500 ft and I had advised the B757 that the navajo had reported he was climbing VFR to 5;500. I think the navajo reported the B757 at 7 miles. I advised the B757 I would keep him at 6;000 until he cleared the navajo. The navajo then advised me he would climb above the B757. I recommended that he stay below the B757 and subsequently advised he turn northbound if he wanted to avoid the B757's wake but he climbed as I was giving the B757 another traffic advisory and was already leaving 6;300 when the B757 reported he had descended due to TCAS RA. It was all but over when I was making the transmission so I never got a chance to issue the safety alert; just a broken advisory. Clearly; I'm not happy with the navajo's decision and I believe he was unaware that by climbing in such close proximity to the B757 he would cause an RA. However; I rated the event as 'minor' because the navajo reported having the B757 in sight and was able to; at least in his judgment; safely avoid the B757. Recommendation; at hcf we are a terminal facility but the area I work in is enroute. There is a common perception here that we should issue hard altitudes and headings to VFR aircraft; not recommended or suggested as is done at my former facility and as I was taught at the FAA academy. 'Hcf approach' confuses the heck out of pilots. They expect certain services from ARTCC's; tower's; and approach controls. We are provided them with center services while calling ourselves 'approach'. This wasn't a factor as far in this event as far as I know but it's been a recurring problem here that nobody seems to want to address.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: HCF Controller described a TCAS RA event between an Air Carrier and a VFR aircraft applying see and avoid

Narrative: [I was] working 3 arrivals into sequence for LIH and two departures outbound; also working the oceanic arrivals/departures unassisted. I rated the complexity a little higher because I had to closely monitor the arrival and departures. The traffic was fairly average but required pretty steady work to manage. As my first two arrivals were transitioning onto the approach into LIH a Piper Navajo; called requesting flight following about 6 miles from LIH eastbound. I gave him a code and the altimeter and held onto my arrivals instead of switching them to Tower right away to ensure they would clear the Navajo. After RADAR identifying the Navajo I issued him traffic for the B717 inbound and also for a B757 about 20 miles away to alert him to the inbound B757. I also called traffic to the B757 at least twice. After at least one more traffic advisory the Navajo reported he had the B757 in sight. I issued a cautionary wake turbulence advisory. At this time he had climbed to 5;500 FT and I had advised the B757 that the Navajo had reported he was climbing VFR to 5;500. I think the Navajo reported the B757 at 7 miles. I advised the B757 I would keep him at 6;000 until he cleared the Navajo. The Navajo then advised me he would climb above the B757. I recommended that he stay below the B757 and subsequently advised he turn northbound if he wanted to avoid the B757's wake but he climbed as I was giving the B757 another traffic advisory and was already leaving 6;300 when the B757 reported he had descended due to TCAS RA. It was all but over when I was making the transmission so I never got a chance to issue the safety alert; just a broken advisory. Clearly; I'm not happy with the Navajo's decision and I believe he was unaware that by climbing in such close proximity to the B757 he would cause an RA. However; I rated the event as 'minor' because the Navajo reported having the B757 in sight and was able to; at least in his judgment; safely avoid the B757. Recommendation; at HCF we are a terminal facility but the area I work in is enroute. There is a common perception here that we should issue hard altitudes and headings to VFR aircraft; not recommended or suggested as is done at my former facility and as I was taught at the FAA Academy. 'HCF Approach' confuses the heck out of pilots. They expect certain services from ARTCC's; Tower's; and Approach Controls. We are provided them with center services while calling ourselves 'approach'. This wasn't a factor as far in this event as far as I know but it's been a recurring problem here that nobody seems to want to address.

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.