Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Air Traffic Control Time Certified In Pos 1 (yrs) 16.5
Situational Awareness; Troubleshooting; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown
ATC Issue All Types; Airspace Violation All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Procedure; Human Factors
I have two issues with the same aircraft. Working the Quartz position; ZAB46 handed off Aircraft X a Non RNAV aircraft to me. ZAB46 coordinated the aircraft at 16;000 because of a parachute jump aircraft at 15;000 at Coolidge Airport (P08). Coolidge airport is approx. 42.6 miles from the PXR ASR-9 and 1.6 miles from the edge of the airspace. If the aircraft was to be jumping there then it would have been reasonable that there was a point out made to Phoenix TRACON Quartz; Willy or Santan positions since the aircraft is in close proximity to the area of jurisdiction (AOJ). But there was no point out made on the IFR parachute jump aircraft. The second issue I have is that when Aircraft X reported on frequency he advised me that he was tracking the PXR130R. The ZAB/P50 Letter of Agreement (LOA) states that the Non RNAV aircraft are to be on a 'RV thru BRDEY Gate expect direct to airport and cross the boundary/BRDEY.' Aircraft X was not on a vector; he was established on the PXR130R that places the aircraft in my airspace for approx. 1.5 miles before it enters departures (Santan) airspace without coordination. The aircraft cannot be contained within my airspace if ZAB46 continues to route traffic direct PXR or on a radial as they did. Reporting this to management falls on deaf ears and the FLM (Front Line Manager) usually states there is nothing I can do. This does not even comply with JO N7110.65 since the receiving controller does not know how he will be receiving the aircraft. What heading is he placed on? Paragraph 5-4-5 states: Advise the receiving controller of pertinent information not contained in the data block or flight progress strip unless covered in a LOA or facility directive. Pertinent information includes: 1. Assigned heading. Well what is in the current LOA does not comply with this since the receiving controller does not know what the 'Assigned heading' is! Why do we continually have to file reports on these types of events?  Even when this LOA was in the draft stage; the Article 48 workgroup and procedures Manager were advised that this did not meet the requirements set forth by headquarters recently when we had to rebrief these items via eLMS (Electronic Learning Management System)/verbally.This is unacceptable and both facilities know of this issue since the procedure went into effect and they have not resolved the issue. God forbid and aircraft is climbing out on the KATMAN departure; we will have a loss or worst a near midair. This needs to be resolved immediately but nobody appears to be doing anything to fix this issue. In the meantime ZAB46 controllers are not feeding the aircraft in accordance with the current LOA and there is no consistency either. Have the aircraft placed on a vector so it will be contained within the receiving controller's airspace. Require ZAB46 advice the receiving controller of the assigned heading as required by JO N7110.65 5-4-5g. Or place the heading that will be assigned in the LOA as is allowed.
P50 Controller describes two incidents involving the same aircraft. First issue was the relationship to a jump area that ZAB did not point out to the appropriate sectors. Second issue was the aircraft was not on an assigned heading that the TRACON Controller knew about. Coordination was not complete.