Date: 201210
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZMA.ARTCC, FL
Aircraft: ATR 72
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Cruise
ATC / advisory: Center ZMA
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Situational Awareness; Confusion
Second reporter function: Enroute
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: ATC Equipment / Nav Facility / Buildings; Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: During the position relief briefing; the D-Side said that ATR-72 was requesting direct MIA at 4;000 FT; Freeport Approach was aware and was sending him direct MIA; and that the current controller was working on the coordination with MIA approach Lima sector. The Controller also 'route displayed' the aircraft's current route of flight. I noted that ATR-72 was [not] entering Lima's airspace; but rather Delta or Zulu scope's airspace. After the relief briefing concluded; I immediately called Delta to APREQ the aircraft direct. The Controller in MIA explained it wasn't his airspace and to call Lima. Lima 'unabled' the aircraft direct. I told the R-Side; then  called ZFP Approach for control on ATR-72 . By the time the aircraft was RADAR identified and the R-Side had enough time to issue a heading to rejoin the ANNEY2 arrival to MIA; MIA Approach - Zulu Scope called and said ATR-72 was approved direct to MIA if we hadn't turned him back yet. While I was on the line; the R-Side was issuing control instructions to ATR-72. I stopped the R-side and told the R-side direct MIA was approved. I confirmed it with MIA Approach Zulu; the R-Side re-issued the routing direct and flashed the aircraft on to Zulu. He accepted a RADAR hand off on the aircraft and the R-Side switched him to the appropriate frequency. A few minutes later 'ZAPPA' called on the 24 line to APREQ something; both me and the R-Side were on the line. The R-Side approved the requested coordination. The MIA Approach Controller was saying that ATR-72 violated his protected airspace and the aircraft was not on an approved route. The R-Side trainer responded back that they were informed by the D-Side that Zulu approved ATR-72 to enter MIA airspace on his route. The Controller restated the aircraft entered his airspace without coordination and hung up the line. If there is any other overlapping or other specifics about MIA Approach airspace; I'm unaware of it. Recommendation; new maps for MIA Approach airspace. If there are other specifics then the above listed airspace breakdown; then it needs to be trained. I have seen the individual scope airspace maps of MIA Approach; but not the overlap or how the maps relate to my airspace. It was always instructed as an informational example: here's what MIA Approach maps are; glance at them once; now this is what you need to know. I've observed DEV and CPC having difficulties interpreting what scopes to be calling; for what; when aircraft are going to specific destinations and how the scopes combine and who to flash/ship the aircraft to.  One map with the airspace and to who owns what; like we get for our own airspace would help.


Second narrative: I was being trained at R21/01. The D-Side cleared ATR-72 off of MYGF; direct to MIA at 4;000 FT. I am not sure whether the D-Side had coordinated with either ZFP Approach or MIA Approach. When the aircraft checked onto my frequency; I had been told by a different D-Side that MIA Approach now said 'unable' to ATR-72 proceeding direct to MIA. I was about to issue routing to ATR-72 back over ANNEY. ANNEY2 arrival; when Approach called the D-Side; and now said direct MIA was once again approved. I handed off the aircraft to the VALLY side of MIA Approach. A minute or two later; ZAPPA called me and said that ATR-72 was in his airspace and he did not approve direct MIA. My trainer spoke with him; and advised him that VALLY told our D-Side that direct was approved. The ZAPPA controller advised us that the aircraft still penetrated his airspace first; and that direct MIA was not approved with him. According to our Scope map the aircraft was clearly going into the VALLY side of the DTA. Recommendation; the ZAPPA and VALLY DTA's that are depicted on our scope don't appear to line up exactly with the scopes at MIA Approach. Maybe they can add the L/D/R/G/Z scopes to the 'special' areas of our maps; so we have the option to display them when we want/need to.


Synopsis: ZMA Controller experienced a reported airspace incursion into MIA TRACON's airspace. The reporter questioned the accusation; and noted the video maps used at the TRACON and Center need to be aligned more accurately.