Date: 201503
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: D10.TRACON, TX
Light: Dusk
Aircraft: Embraer Phenom 100
Operator: Fractional
Operating under: Part 135
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class B DFW
ATC / advisory: TRACON D10
Second aircraft: Medium Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Departure
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Distraction; Confusion; Time Pressure
Second reporter function: Approach
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Airborne Conflict; Deviation - Altitude Crossing Restriction Not Met; Deviation - Altitude Overshoot; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance; Air Traffic Control Separated Traffic; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X checked on with me on departure climbing via the JASPA4 SID to 16;000.  During the check-in; I received a call either from the local controller in the tower to coordinate something; and did not hear the full check-in.  I radar identified the aircraft; and continued the coordination.  When the coordination was completed; Aircraft X checked in again; having apparently not heard my response.  Again; this transmission was partially blocked by; I believe; another aircraft checking in on a separate frequency.  A few minutes later; I observed Aircraft X climbing out of 10;300 or so; through the Feeder East downwind; who had 2 aircraft in that vicinity (Aircraft Y @ 11;000 & Aircraft Z @13;000 descending). At the time I noticed this rapid climb rate; I was on the landline with the local controller; who called to coordinate more departure information; as well as having 2 other aircraft checking on 2 separate frequencies; clogging my frequencies.  The rapid climb rate allowed for Aircraft X to climb through 11;000 by the time I initiated the transmission; telling him to immediately descend for a traffic alert.  Aircraft X came within 2.65 miles laterally and 300 feet vertically of Aircraft Y; who was now level at 11;000 at Aircraft X's 1-2 o'clock. Due to his rapid climb rate; Aircraft X was at 11;400 before he had his aircraft set into a descent; and Aircraft Z was at his 11 o'clock and about 1-2 miles descending through 12;400.  Feeder East (controlling Aircraft Z) immediately issued a right turn west-bound for their arrival; as my departure continued descending southeast-bound out of his flight path.  I do not know the final lateral and vertical distances between Aircraft X and Aircraft Z.  I asked Aircraft X why he was climbing; and he informed me that the tower cleared him to climb via the departure to 16;000 instead of 10;000; as per the RNAV departure requirement.  When I informed the FLM and the OMIC of the incident; they inquired with the tower as to the actual clearance given to the aircraft.  The clearance delivery controller cleared Aircraft X 'via the JASPA4 departure; top altitude 16;000.'  I do not know why the controller issued 16;000 to this particular aircraft; while issuing 10;000 to every other aircraft (as per the requirement); but they did.1) I know in this case; after being informed that the aircraft did; in fact; check in climbing to 16;000; it is irrelevant.  However; I believe the FAA's stance on the climbing via phraseology for pilots should have every pilot check in 'climbing via the departure to (altitude)' instead of just 'climbing via the departure.'2) I noticed on all of the SID plates out of DFW; the top altitude of 10;000 is not depicted on the visual representation of the departure.  It is stated on the back; in the written description; near the bottom of the narrative.  I recommend this top altitude be placed; clearly visible; on the visual depiction of the departure procedures.  I was informed shortly after this incident that on the next chart date; this should be happening.


Second narrative: I was training on Feeder East 1; 2 and Dallas East.  We were running triple approaches to DFW. Aircraft Y and Aircraft Z were both arrivals into DFW.  Aircraft X was a departure Southbound.  I issued traffic to Aircraft Y on Aircraft X climbing to 10;000.  I went to do something else in the airspace and came back to issue traffic to Aircraft Z on Aircraft X and saw Aircraft X climbing through 11;300.  I immediately issued a traffic call and issued a climb and turn.  I turned Aircraft Z Westbound and told to maintain 12;000.  Aircraft Z responded with 'we're responding to an resolution advisory (RA)' Aircraft Z made the West turn and was climbing through 12;500 when he told me was clear of conflict. At previous facilities where we had OPD's and RNAV departures we had built in separation for just this event.  Our departures climbed to 8;000 and the arrivals descended to 10;000.  That way if either one went above or below their altitude; you had a moment to realize the error before two aircraft came into a dangerous and close situation.  Here the aircraft are both descending and climbing into each other.  Since the new procedures have gone into effect here at D10 the amount of RA's have increased dramatically.


Synopsis: D10 arrival and departure Controllers plus pilot of Aircraft X report on a loss of separation due to the clearance delivery person issuing the incorrect altitude for initial climbout.