Date: 201310
Local time of day: 1201-1800
Location: ZID.ARTCC, IN
Aircraft: King Air C90 E90
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Final Approach
ATC / advisory: Center ZID
Second aircraft: PA-46 Malibu/Malibu Mirage/Malibu Matrix
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Airspace Structure; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: I was working the London RADAR; it was an IFR day. A King Air was requesting the RNAV23 approach at AAS; which is an airport located just a mile or two outside of London's airspace; in Area 1; Sector 19 New Hope. The King Air was coming from the southwest and it's not uncommon for our area; Sector 21; to issue the approach clearance to this airport. I pointed out the King Air to Sector 19 and told him that he is doing an instrument approach; I thought I included the fact that it was the RNAV23; but not fully sure. He said point out approved. I issued the approach clearance; sometime went by; and the king Air reported established inbound; he was then switched to advisory frequency. A minute or two after that ZME (Nashville low) called me for a point out and a block at GLW airport for a PA-46. This aircraft was coming in from the west; and was probably out of 060 at the beginning of the phone call. I hesitated and said; 'I have an aircraft on an approach at AAS;' with ZME still on the line; I was looking up our confliction chart on the ERIDS. I asked him if he had a moment while I looked and if he had cleared him yet. The PA-46 was heading for ZERAX; the IAP for RNAV26. He said he hadn't cleared him yet. As I looked my confliction chart; there was nothing on my chart about GLW. I also wondered why ZME was calling me because it's not that close to Sector 21 and the PA-46 was already on the ZME New Hope boundary. I 'quick looked' New Hope and they apparently had taken the point out as it was slant zeroed on their scope. I then said point out approved and I'll block; by this time the aircraft was around 045 descending. This left me unsettled. As I started looking into the approach charts more; I looked on my ERIDS for the protected airspace for AAS; including the missed approach fix for the King Air. It was in the same area as ZERAX. If my King Air would have done a missed approach he would have climbed to 030 direct KANOA; the PA-46's altitude at ZERAX was 030. I tried to resector my ERIDS to Area 1 to see what their confliction chart showed with these two approaches. I went through the different sectors until one was available; and it showed that indeed they were a confliction. By now; the PA-46 was already procedure turn inbound heading away from the confliction. FSS called shortly there after with a down time. Recommendation; I wondered why did this happen. Why did Sector 19 take a point out on my King Air and then another on PA-46; did they not know that the two approaches conflicted? These are 2 airports that they clear aircraft for approach. They had the resources to look to see if it was a confliction. My conclusions on this would be: 1 - under no circumstances should Sector 21 clear an aircraft into or out of AAS; and it should remain solely with Sector 19. 2- provide all and the correct resources to Sector 21 to continue to clear aircraft at AAS. 3 - Have Area 1 become familiar with their airports; potential conflictions; protected airspace; since they have the resources available at the sector.




Synopsis: ZID Controller described an unsafe event involving two aircraft making an IFR approach to an airport near the boundary of ZID and ZME; the reporter suggesting increased controller familiarity with the potential conflicts in this area.