Extension Board

[StillDark&Hungry]

Not that I know all the facts, but, following the events on the South coast on Dec 27th, what are the implications of a valid ATCO failing an extension Board on grounds OTHER than sector specific procedures?

ie if the examiners thought you couldn't work the "kit" on a new sector, can they pull your license completely? and, if so, what is the point in agreeing to extend?

[250 kts]

Well tell us what happened on the 27th and we may be able to answer the question.

Can't believe there was a board held on this date anyway as not usually enough traffic around.

[Down Ampney]

Any controller's competency to use the kit is an ongoing issue and subject to scrutiny by your LCE. This can become an issue at any time so is not really connected with an extension board.
If deficiencies are noted during an extension board the procedure would be for the examiners to draw attention of the facts to the LCE who is then responsible for taking appropriate action. Such action would be considered in consultation with the Watch Manager and the controller concerned and might involve additional training if necessary. SRG would, doubtless, maintain an interest in the situation and require some satisfaction regarding the action taken.

[StillDark&Hungry]

250k

Amazing as it sounds there was a board on the day mentioned!

DA

My thoughts exactly, hence the thread, starts to get messy though if, for example, a person had had his LCE the week before on his/her other sectors and been considered competent!

Anyway, why were SRG involved at all? thought with the new RGAT system SRG participation was only required at an initial board?

[Numpo-Nigit]

Apparently, SRG have announced that they intend to be present at ALL validity boards, both initial and extension, for at least the first twelve months of NERC.

Now, I wonder if the date of December 27th was chosen to keep at least one SRG examiner (relatively) sober over the Christmas period ..... ???

[VectorLine]

Just wondering.. as I have been away for a while........

Was the board on the 27/12 an extension to a '3rd sector' - or was it one of the crop of 'single sector' controllers trying to get their 'other bit', so to speak?

I ask because as I understand it, until you have your 'full completment' (e.g. 1/2 AND 25/26 or 15-17 AND 18-21 etc..), failure to validate procedures still apply. i.e. controller in question can still be "chopped"

Doubt it would be the case though. But I imagine that SRG would want to be involved in all single sector extension boards.

Anyway - was it 2nd or 3rd sector group?????

[Numpo-Nigit]

Without wishing to identify the individual concerned, it was a controller who had previously been valid on the sector at LATCC. Presumably the validation had been lost "by the stroke of a pen" as part of the management realisation that OCT could not convert all the existing LATCC validations due to "limited resources" - what a useful decision that was - bonuses all round !!!

[StillDark&Hungry]

VectorLine

I'm sure I'll be corrected - but I think it would have been a 4th Sector! for the person concerned, and, just to add spice to the subject, it was the LACC examiners 1st after completing supernumerary's!!:rolleyes: