Air Traffic Control Developmental
Communication Breakdown
ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
General None Reported / Taken
Human Factors
I was training on a combined sector. A CRJ-200 departed ahead of the C680. The Air Carrier was a CRJ-200 series and was not climbing very well. The C680 was a Citation climbing much better and was gaining speed on the CRJ-200. As per the Automated Information Transfer (AIT); I flashed the C680 then the CRJ-200 to our high sector. The high sector put in FL310 for the C680 and later FL290 for the CRJ-200. I was scanning; and possibly coordinating point outs for the CRJ-200; when the 310 was put into the data block for the C680. The high sector called me and asked me if it will work out between the C680 and the CRJ-200 and if they had speeds. I went to my R-Side and asked do they have speeds. He said no and I coordinated that. The high sector said to stop the CRJ-200 at 270 and the C680 at 290. I say OK and turned to my R-Side and say stop (pointing at the CRJ-200 at 270 then pointing the C680 at 290). I didn't verbally say the call signs as I was pointing to them on the scope. I do not recall seeing the 310 in the data block ever; only the 290. When my R-Side asked did you tell me to stop him at 290; I said it was in the data block so no; thinking that was the only altitude that was put in there. As the C680 kept climbing through 290; the high sector asked what is he going to and my R-Side said 310 because no one told me to stop him. My R-Side told the C680 to descend to 290 then the high sector said no keep him going to 310 is OK. The data block was already handed off to Center and we could not change it. I did not call the Center to coordinate what he was climbing to. Miscommunication was key here. The high sector put in an altitude of 310 and my R-Side immediately said 310. I think the error occurred between me and my R-Side. My R-Side must not have understood what I was meaning when I pointed at the scope at the two aircraft and said 270 and 290 respectively. I should have gotten a more clear acknowledgment from my R-Side.
Enroute Developmental Controller described a mis-communications event between him and the R-Side Controller eventually leading to an airspace incursion.