Enroute controller described a possible loss of separation event between an IFR arrival and departur...

Narrative:

I was working numerous aircraft at 3 combined sectors on the midnight shift. I was preparing to take over approach airspace. I had 2 arrivals to work into the airport. Conditions were visual. Before tower and TRACON closed; tower called and said they issued a departure to a king air up to 2;000 ft; and that he would not be ready to depart for a while. I asked if they issued the pilot a hold for release. They said they had not. I advised them that I had 2 arrivals that I would be working into the airport. They again said that the aircraft was not even ready to taxi. I called the tower back shortly after to verify the situation. They said that they told the pilot to call me on frequency when he was ready to depart. Shortly after tower and TRACON closed and I issued a visual approach to a B737. The B737 said he was going to land runway 5. After a few minutes I realized I had not yet brought up the correct frequency; so I turned it on. After changing the B737 to advisory frequency; I noticed a beacon code over the airport. I looked in my departure list and saw that it was the code of a B350. I immediately tried to get a hold of the pilot and was successful in doing so. He said he had departed runway 23. He also said that he was unable to contact anyone so they decided to take off. I advised him of traffic on final and he said traffic in sight we're turning to the north. He then asked if he should be VFR. I also tired to contact the B737 to advise of traffic but was unsuccessful. I then told the B350 to maintain VFR at or above 2;500 (mia is 2;500). Leaving the mia I reissued his clearance. Not long after the B737 canceled IFR on the ground. My d-side answered the call from the B737 and also asked if he had seen the king air traffic. They did not. Recommendation; late night can be very difficult for us to take over approach. In the summer; traffic levels are high; even later at night and workload can increase. This may have been a contributing factor. I also feel that there is too much confusion between the rules that we use as an enroute center; and the ones that tower and approach control use. A hold for release should have been issued to the departing aircraft despite they fact that tower had given the clearance and that it didn't appear that he would be departing anytime soon.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Enroute Controller described a possible loss of separation event between an IFR arrival and departure from an airport that had closed both the Tower and TRACON for the mid-shift; the reporter noted the hold for release procedure was not followed by the closing facilities.

Narrative: I was working numerous aircraft at 3 combined sectors on the midnight shift. I was preparing to take over Approach airspace. I had 2 arrivals to work into the airport. Conditions were visual. Before Tower and TRACON closed; Tower called and said they issued a departure to a King Air up to 2;000 FT; and that he would not be ready to depart for a while. I asked if they issued the pilot a hold for release. They said they had not. I advised them that I had 2 arrivals that I would be working into the airport. They again said that the aircraft was not even ready to taxi. I called the Tower back shortly after to verify the situation. They said that they told the pilot to call me on frequency when he was ready to depart. Shortly after Tower and TRACON closed and I issued a Visual Approach to a B737. The B737 said he was going to land Runway 5. After a few minutes I realized I had not yet brought up the correct frequency; so I turned it on. After changing the B737 to advisory frequency; I noticed a Beacon Code over the airport. I looked in my departure list and saw that it was the code of a B350. I immediately tried to get a hold of the pilot and was successful in doing so. He said he had departed Runway 23. He also said that he was unable to contact anyone so they decided to take off. I advised him of traffic on final and he said traffic in sight we're turning to the north. He then asked if he should be VFR. I also tired to contact the B737 to advise of traffic but was unsuccessful. I then told the B350 to maintain VFR at or above 2;500 (MIA is 2;500). Leaving the MIA I reissued his clearance. Not long after the B737 canceled IFR on the ground. My D-Side answered the call from the B737 and also asked if he had seen the King Air traffic. They did not. Recommendation; late night can be very difficult for us to take over Approach. In the summer; traffic levels are high; even later at night and workload can increase. This may have been a contributing factor. I also feel that there is too much confusion between the rules that we use as an enroute Center; and the ones that Tower and Approach Control use. A hold for release should have been issued to the departing aircraft despite they fact that Tower had given the clearance and that it didn't appear that he would be departing anytime soon.

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	954688
Time
Date	201106
Local Time Of Day	0001-0600
Place
Locale Reference	ZZZ.ARTCC
State Reference	US
Aircraft 1
Make Model Name	Super King Air 350
Flight Phase	Initial Climb
Aircraft 2
Make Model Name	B737 Undifferentiated or Other Model
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	Final Approach
Route In Use	Visual Approach
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Function	Enroute
Qualification	Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Events
Anomaly	ATC Issue All Types Conflict Airborne Conflict

Enroute controller described a possible loss of separation event between an IFR arrival and departure from an airport that had closed both the tower and TRACON for the mid-shift; the reporter noted the hold for release procedure was not followed by the closing facilities.