Date: 201708
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZUA.ARTCC, GU
Aircraft: Military
Operating under: Part 91
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Tactical
Flight phase: Descent
Airspace: Class A ZUA
ATC / advisory: Center ZUA
Second aircraft: Military
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Workload; Time Pressure; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict
Detector: Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Flight Crew Requested ATC Assistance / Clarification
Contributing factors: Procedure; Human Factors; Aircraft
Primary problem: Aircraft

Narrative: Push with minimal staffing and no supervisors so we have to cover the Controller in Charge (CIC) as well. The CIC decided not to split the approach and en-route; so working all on our typical configuration of 2 scopes one sector with numerous frequencies. I had a 2 or 3 overflights at altitude; a few arrivals into Saipan; a few departures off Andersen along with arrivals into Guam. As well as military aircraft including Aircraft X. Aircraft X [reported a situation] and started conducting fuel dumping.As I was working that and vectoring to final for Guam; I had a departure come off Andersen Aircraft Y which I took him behind a flight inbound to GUM; turned him and told him out of a higher altitude to go on top of Aircraft Z ( I think FL240) cleared direct NATSS. Meanwhile I was also starting Aircraft A down out of his altitude for Guam. I got busy with the vectoring to final and the [aircraft] inbound to Andersen. During all this Aircraft A said he had a request; I told him standby. After a few minutes I went back to him and he said disregard 'Your too busy; we are good); I asked him again as I had time now and was willing to accommodate. He asked if I had any traffic out by him; at which I responded I did not and the closest plane was Aircraft B several thousand feet and 20 plus miles away from him. However; after thinking about it Aircraft B did cut across his flight path and could have been a factor. I asked the CIC as he was watching ifshe saw any traffic; to which he responded no. However; to be honest; I have no idea if Aircraft B was a factor or not for Aircraft A So I am not sure if there was a loss or not; or that it could have been another aircraft due regard or not tracked up such as a [foreign aircraft] as they occasionally appear out this way. Aircraft B never said a word and Aircraft A never had a TCAS event or altered their flight; he just said he saw traffic and they descended a little quicker to get under the traffic. We do not have an en-route Conflict Alert like the Centers do; it's mostly for the approach side; nor do we have the ability for me to go back and look at the replay; so I have no idea. Long story short; I do not think there was a loss; but there was certainly a lack of my oversight and a workload that should be less by splitting the sectors. Push for the approach and en-route sectors to be split during the afternoon push; regardless of our staffing.




Synopsis: Guam Center Controller reported a possible loss of separation between two aircraft due to lack of oversight and high workload environment as a result of minimal staffing.