Date: 201407
Local time of day: 0001-0600
Location: ZLC.ARTCC, UT
Aircraft: B737-300
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Flight phase: Cruise
Airspace: Class A ZLC
ATC / advisory: Center ZLC
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Dispatcher
Reporter qualification: Dispatch Dispatcher
Human factors: Situational Awareness
Second reporter function: Captain
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control
Result: Air Traffic Control Issued Advisory / Alert; Air Traffic Control Issued New Clearance; Flight Crew Became Reoriented; Flight Crew Returned To Clearance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Flight was planned and released by the previous midnight shift dispatcher. The flight plan was filed using our normal routing; but because of the early departure time; it should have been filed on a noise abatement route. There was a 2nd release sent with the correct route for fuel burn purposes; but that flight strip was not filed with ATC. The PDC on ACARS shows where ATC made the change from the original route to SLNT8 LIN PEONS INSLO DTA. But nothing beyond that; which should mean 'as filed'. Upon reaching DTA; SLC contacted the flight regarding confusion as to whether the flight was proceeding to EKR or RLG. They were instructed to contact ZLC upon landing. I did receive a phone call from ZLC CTR asking if RBL was part of the flight strip. I replied that it was the original filing; but that a new release was issued with the special routing; but it was not filed that way. The change in filing came from ZOA CTR on his PDC. I was not involved in the preflight planning of either flight release. I was queried by the flight crew via ACARS; asking if RBL was part of their flight strip. I replied the same as I told ATC; it was part of the original filing.


Second narrative: Flight was dispatched on Release #2. The original Company Dispatch Release was planned by an overnight dispatcher. The original release plan had a turbulence/weather avoidance plan between waypoints DTA and MCK and was submitted to ATC as follows:OAK6 OAK DCT LIN DCT PEONS DCT INSLO DCT DTA DCT RLG DCT AKO DCT MCK DCT PWE.... I was informed by Company Dispatch that when the morning Dispatcher reviewed the filed route for the flight; a change was made to the departure procedure to include the normal noise abatement SLNT8. The Dispatcher also determined that the turbulence/weather avoidance route was no longer required and changed the route back to the best fuel burn route. This new route was never filed with ATC by the Dispatcher. The Company Dispatch Release #2 is what I received and the route from my release was as follows:KOAK SLNT8 LIN PEONS INSLO DTA J84 EKR DVV MCK J130 PWE ....During the preflight; we received a PDC from Oakland Clearance Delivery and the following is what was displayed on the screen. ACARS PRE DEP CLR FL350-SLNT8 LIN PEONS INSLODTA KOAK OAK6 OAK LIN***XXXX EDCTCLIMB VIA SID; EXCP MNTN 15;000EXP FINAL ALT 10 MINUTES AFT DEPCTC NORCAL DEP ON 120.9END OF MESSAGEAfter reviewing the Company Dispatch Release #2; the PDC; and the SLNT8; we determined we were cleared as filed following waypoint DTA per the PDC. We were never aware there was a previous filed route and we were not advised of any route changes on the REMARKS section of the Company Dispatch Release #2. The only item that may have raised a flag was the OAK6 on the PDC which may have indicated a previously submitted route; but then I have been trained to fly the PDC between the '-' (dashes) and then route as filed which according to my Company Dispatch Release #2; was not to RLG and AKO as expected by SLC Center. While flying in SLC Center airspace and beyond waypoint DTA; SLC Center queried us about our routing. We informed the Controller we were as filed on J84 to EKR; then DVV. The Controller said we were filed to fly direct RLG after DTA and then AKO. We disagreed telling the Controller that RLG and AKO was not listed on our flight plan. The Controller then directed us to fly direct DVV MCK J130 PWE .... We did as directed and continued until we were notified by DEN Center that SLC wanted to talk to us regarding a 'possible Pilot Deviation' and issued us a phone number to call.I contacted Company Dispatch and Company Manager ATC Systems and that is when the discovery process informed me of how Company Dispatch had failed to inform me of our actual filed route. Later in the day; I contacted Salt Lake City Center and spoke with a Supervisor. He asked me for my view of what happened. After explaining what we had to work with; the Supervisor informed me that no action will be taken considering that is appeared that Company Dispatch had set our flight up for failure by not properly filing after altering the route. He asked me to advise Company Dispatch of this omission and I accomplished this by informing Company Manager ATC Systems.If Dispatch changes a filed route; I recommend there is an annotation made in the REMARKS section of the release. Until then; I will have to ask for a full route read back by Clearance Delivery if I suspect the route is modified.


Synopsis: The Dispatcher and the Captain involved describe the events leading up to a track deviation. The route had been revised on the dispatch release but never refiled with ATC.