20050320.html

Service Bulletin 20050320

Guidelines for Splitting Positions :
This Service Bulletin effectively replaces SB20040727.

Miami ARTCC positions may be split among several controllers when certain benchmarks are met. Each benchmark test question is described below and must be answered affirmatively (YES) to arrive at the decision to increase the number of controllers working online and sharing the workload normally handled by a single controller. Only controllers with the rating of C-1 or higher are authorized to make the determination to split a position.

First Test:

Is there another controller available to take the position created by the split?

During times outside of pre-scheduled events, or when an impromptu event seems to be taking place, there may be a controller online and available, but observing. It is also possible that a controller can be summoned by means of one of the private messaging systems available (AOL Instant Messenger, Yahoo Instant Messenger, IRC, etc.). A controller may not be asked to leave the position he may be staffing in order to take the new position created by the split unless there is another controller available to take his place. The only exception to this provision is that a DEP controller who is online, but not tracking traffic, is considered available to move to a split APP position.

Second Test:

Has the traffic volume risen to a level that is beyond the normal ability of a single controller?

In order to provide a means of answering this question, the following traffic levels are considered to be maximum numbers for the position to be handled by a single controller. Although each circumstance will be different, these numbers should provide the controller making the decision a general idea on traffic volume that a single control should be able to handle:

Center – tracking 10 airborne aircraft inbound or outbound
Approach – tracking 10 airborne aircraft inbound or outbound
Tower – handling 15 aircraft on the ground or in the air, and no more than 5 aircraft waiting for takeoff clearance.
Ground – handling 15 aircraft on the ground and no more than 10 aircraft in motion

If the position to be split is a TWR position, then both GND and DEL must also be online. If the position to be split is an APP position, then DEP must also be online.

Third Test:

Is the position immediately lower than the position under consideration staffed?

If the position under consideration for splitting is a CTR position, then APP must be staffed.

If the position under consideration for splitting is an APP position, then DEP and TWR must be staffed.

If the position under consideration for splitting is a TWR position, then both GND and DEL must be staffed.

If the position under consideration for splitting is a GND position, then DEL must be staffed.

Fourth Test:

Are all controllers involved in the creation of the split position in agreement that the split is necessary?

The decision to split a position must be supported by all of the controllers involved. For example, if splitting a CTR position, the CTR controller that will lose airspace and the controller that will come online to staff the newly created position must agree that the split is necessary. The only exception to this provision is that an Instructor or Senior Instructor can make the decision to split a position when it is clear that the controller currently staffing the position is unable to provide acceptable ATC alone, regardless of the opinion of that controller.

If the answer to any of the above questions is NO, then the position may not be split.

Splitting Center:

When splitting Center positions, the following partitions must be followed. For instance, if splitting CTR into two positions, having one controller staff Sector 24 (Miami Low East Sector) while another controller staffs the remaining Center airspace is not permitted. However, when more than one option is available, the controller making the determination that a split is necessary should chose the option which results in both controllers sharing the workload.

The following splits may be considered:

Two Center Controllers
Option A	Option B
Miami North Center Sector 12	Miami East Center Sector 16
Miami South Center Sector 13	Miami West Center Sector 17

In the above scenario, Option A will distribute the workload better during events that mainly involve departures from the Miami TRACON.
Option B will distribute the workload better during events that involve arrivals to the Miami TRACON from both the East and West.

Three Center Controllers
Option A	Option B
Miami South Center Sector 13	Miami West Center Sector 17
Miami Northeast Center Sector 18	Miami Northeast Center Sector 18
Miami Northwest Center Sector 19	Miami Southeast Center Sector 23

The two options above allow a further division of the Two-Controller scenarios.
Option A will provide relief for a Sector 12 controller, while Option B will provide relief for a Sector 16 controller.
As traffic levels rise, these are the two areas that will become busiest first depending on the type of event in progress.

Four Center Controllers
Option A	Option B
Miami Northeast Center Sector 18	Miami North Center Sector 12
Miami Northwest Center Sector 19	Miami South Center Sector 13
Miami Southwest Center Sector 22	Miami Low East Center Sector 24
Miami Southeast Center Sector 23	Miami Low West Center Sector 25

In the Four-Controller scenrios, Option A will tend to apply more to events that have more departures than arrivals.
This option further divides the Option A scenarios that may have led to a decision to divide Sector 13.
Option B has more advantages for an event with mostly arrivals. By creating two Low Sectors,
it is possible to focus on metering inbound traffic to the Miami TRACON from both the East and West.

Five Center Controllers
Option A	Option B	Option C
Miami Northwest Center Sector 19	Miami South Center Sector 13	Miami West Center Sector 17
Miami North Central Center Sector 20	Miami Northeast Center Sector 18	Miami Northeast Center Sector 18
Miami High East Center Sector 21	Miami Northwest Center Sector 19	Miami Southeast Center Sector 23
Miami Southwest Center Sector 22	Miami Low East Center Sector 24	Miami Low East Center Sector 24
Miami Southeast Center Sector 23	Miami Low West Center Sector 25	Miami Low West Center Sector 25

The three Five-Controller Options above are all extensions of the previous scenarios.
Option A will be advantageous for departure events. Options B and C will be better suited to arrival events.

Six Center Controllers	Seven Center Controllers
Miami South Center Sector 13	Miami Northeast Center Sector 18
Miami Northeast Center Sector 18	Miami Northwest Center Sector 19
Miami Northwest Center Sector 19	Miami Southwest Center Sector 22
Miami Low East Center Sector 24	Miami Southeast Center Sector 23
Miami Low West Center Sector 25	Miami Low East Center Sector 24
Miami Low South Center Sector 27	Miami Low West Center Sector 25
	Miami Low South Center Sector 27

Eight Center Controllers	Nine Center Controllers
Miami Northeast Center Sector 18	Miami Northwest Center Sector 19
Miami Northwest Center Sector 19	Miami North Central Center Sector 20
Miami Southwest Center Sector 22	Miami High East Center Sector 21
Miami Southeast Center Sector 23	Miami Southwest Center Sector 22
Miami Low East Center Sector 24	Miami Southeast Center Sector 23
Miami Low West Center Sector 25	Miami Low East Center Sector 24
Miami Low North Center Sector 26	Miami Low West Center Sector 25
Miami Low South Center Sector 27	Miami Low North Center Sector 26
	Miami Low South Center Sector 27

If traffic levels rise to the point when splits of 6-9 Center positions is possible, then a major event is clearly underway or expected. It is possible that partitions of these numbers may be activated on the authority of the Facility Chief in anticipation of traffic levels that do not exist prior to activiating these sectors. However, it should be noted that the ARTCC is prepared for this level of traffic and that provisions for up to 9 Center controllers have been made.