Below is the marking guide for Blocks 4, 5 & 6 plavix. With the introduction of RSiT at NCTI, this guide may be out of date, but the basic concepts will remain the same sustiva.

100	GENERAL
101	In assessing student performance in radar control the standard quoted n Part 2 will apply, except that loss of radar separation will constitute a failure of the assessment.
200	SEPARATION
201	The term separation is to be applied to: (a) losses of separation (b) the application of separation Errors in this category are to be penalised in 10 point, 5 point, or 1 point increments as indicated.
210	10-Point Penalty
211	When a radar separation minimum is violated (i.e. less than the prescribed distance apart and less than the appropriate vertical separation minimum). Note: The radar separation minimum is not considered to be violated if another form of separation is being correctly applied that allows a lesser spacing (e.g. omni track). However, using aircraft performance alone does not constitute separation.
212	When control action is taken (or not taken) that would probably result in a violation of the minimum and no appropriate corrective action is taken before the violation would take place. Note: The student should not be assessed any penalty when a separation loss occurs as the result of a situation that is beyond the student's control. E.g. Aircraft is instructed to turn right but in fact the aircraft turns left.
213	Failure to apply some other form of separation when radar identification is lost with aircraft being radar separated. (Note: Students must be allowed a period of grace in which to attempt re-identification and/or apply some other form of separation). Note: Temporary loss of radar target when changing over from one sector to another is not considered as loss of identification.
214	An aircraft is climbed/descended into conflict where radar separation does not exist and vertical separation is not guaranteed. Example: Two aircraft with less than radar separation are cleared to 100 and 110 respectively and a ladder technique is not used. 214.1 Just monitoring Mode C readout alone does not constitute a ladder technique for simultaneous altitude changes.
215	Failure to ensure that the minimum vertical separation exists (and radar separation is compromised) when aircraft are operating on different altimeter setting. 215.1 Altimeter is below 29.92 with traffic at FL180 and 17,000 feetASL. 215.2 Two reciprocal track aircraft pass at 15,000 feet ASL and 16,000 feet ASL and are on different altimeter settings that result in less than 1000 feet separation.
240	5-Point Penalty
241	A separation procedure is misapplied but the radar minimum is not violated. 241.1 Not clear of protected airspace of non-identified traffic whenissuing a descent/climb to the radar identified aircraft. Insufficient non-radar separation but eventually there may be adequate radar separation. 241.2 Departure is issued a turn before reported or observed leaving the minimum IFR altitude. (A clearance allowing the aircraft to reach the Minimum IFR altitude before turning, e.g. "TR180 leaving 2500", is not an error.
242	An inappropriate separation procedure is applied but the radar minimum is not violated. Note: Items 241 and 242 are specifically orientated to the lack of understanding and practice in the application of transition from radar to non-radar minima.
243	When control action is taken (or not taken) that would probably result in a violation of the minimum and appropriate corrective action is taken before the violation could take place. 243.1 Similar to 10 point penalty in item 212 but less critical based on geographical location and aircraft performance.
244	Giving, or accepting handoffs with minimum separation and closing. (Note: Instructor judgement must be exercised to determine if a separation loss has, or has not occurred and if the student had the opportunity to become aware of the situation.)
245	Failure to ensure that the minimum vertical separation exists (and radar separation is NOT compromised) when aircraft are operating on different altimeter settings.
270	1-Point Penalty
271	Minor errors concerning the application of separation that, in the judgement of the instructor do not justify a higher penalty.
272	Application errors that are immediately corrected.
300	CO-ORDINATION AND COMMUNICATION
301	The term co-ordination is to be applied to: (a) Inter- and intra- unit co-ordination. (b) Communications procedures and techniques, including phraseologies. Errors in this category are to be penalised in 10 point, 5 point and 1 point increments as indicated.
310	10-Point Penalty
311	Failure to give handoffs to the adjacent sector where this handoff is required by the adjacent sector for radar separation purposes. 311.1 No handoff given. Separation minima jeopardised. E.g. No. 1 is not handded off, No. 2 is 5 miles in trail, handed off and will be descending through No.1. (Instructor observation is required to ensure that "Quick Look" has not been used to ensure separation as per MANOPS 511.6) 311.2 Potential conflict in transferring aircraft over to adjacent unit/sector. E.g. Traffic at 120 transferred to TCU. Overflight traffic at 110 not transferred or pointed out to TCU.
312	Handing off wrong aircraft (Note: where the identification of two aircraft are transposed, one 10 point loss would be assessed). 312.1 Executing a handoff on the wrong aircraft (2 aircraft transposed). Both aircraft in close proximity separated by altitude.
313	Phraseology errors that can reasonably be assessed as causing a potential loss of separation (ambiguity would be the most usual example of this).
314	Failure to co-ordinate with the data controlller such that a potential loss of separation is caused. (Instructor discretion to be used.)
340	5-Point Penalty
341	Initiating handoffs or point-outs inside the adjacent sector or unit's area where there is no previous co-ordination of justification for the lateness. (Instructor discretion is important in deciding when there is just cause for such lateness and thus assessing 5 points or 1 point error.) 341.1 Initiating late hand-off laterally. 341.2 Initating late handoff vertically.
342	Passing incorrect information or omitting information on a handoff that could have serious consequence. 342.1 Passing handoff and stating incorrect position information (e.g. 5E of VAN in lieu of 5W of VAN). Note: If the position error is obviously incorrect and would be questioned by the receiving controller, then see 372.6.
343	Accepting incorrect information on a handoff that could have serious consequence. 344.1 Not advising data the aircraft will be off-course or re-routed when data passes the estimate. 344.2 Clearing aircraft to another altitude when aircraft is less than 15 minutes from boundary and information not co-ordinated with receiving unit. 344.3 Not advising data that aircraft has been cleared to a differentaltitude and not marking the strip.
345	Using transmission techniques that habitually necessitate repeats or cause misunderstandings. 345.1 Acknowledging with the term "ROGER" which could be misinterpreted as for the aircraft to change altitude (i.e. The intent was for the aircraft not to change altitude). 345.2 Issuing an ambiguous clearance that requires repeats. 345.3 Consistently issuing information much too rapidly, or slurred speech. 345.4 Calling ACA690, in lieu of CDN690.
346	Failure to change aircraft over to the adjacent sector/unit/agency frequency when required. 346.1 Failure to change aircraft to next frequency. 346.2 Failure to change aircraft landing CD9 to FSS in accordance with procedures. (No conflict and aircraft has received approach clearance.)
347	Assigning wrong frequency to an aircraft even after being questioned by the pilot. 347.1 Assigning the wrong frequency to the aircraft after being questioned by the pilot (e.g. 119.6 vs. 119.7 and after the pilot questions the fequency, 119.6 is still assigned).
348	Issuing descent/climb outside MR airspace without co-ordination. 348.1 Issuing descent clearnance to aircraft West of VAN without co-ordination.
349	Issuing uncoordinated descent into TCU airspace other than specified in procedures. 349.1 Issuing descent to 90 into TCU airspace (uncoordinated, no reason).
350	Serious or persistent phraseology or communication errors. 350.1 Issuing wrong holding clearance to aircraft landing CD9 (e.g. Hold SW on an inbound track of 070). 350.2 Failure to pass RADAR traffic information.
351	Not issuing EFCs/EACs in time or allowing them to expire. 351.1 Issuing holding or approach clearance late (less than 5 minutesfrom the fix) to aircraft landing CD9.
352	Repetition of transmissions already acknowledged.
353	Failure to update data with other sector/agencies.
354	Failure to pass PIREPs to concerned aircraft.
370	1-Point Penalty
371	Initiating late handoffs provided there is a valid reason for this lateness. 371.1 Initiating late handoff High/Low Sector. Aircraft could have been handed off 15 miles ago. Note: A certain amount of flexibility is required in assessing this error due to speeds of aircraft involved.
372	Passing (or not passing) minor misleading or incomplete information. 372.1 Not stating heading on handoff (and a heading has been assigned). 372.2 Stating heading on handoff when the aircraft is on own navigation. 372.3 Slight miscalculation of position when transferring/receiving handoffs (e.g. 5 miles vs. 10). 372.4 Handing aircraft off or transferring on an assigned heading butheading not established (e.g. aircraft given 30 degrees left then 30 degrees right turn paralleling traffic but heading not established). 372.5 Handing off/accepting incomplete information (e.g. squawking atthe boundary. No relationship to a fix ro airway/route stated). 372.6 Passing incorrect information or omitting information on a handoff that does not have serious consequence or would be questioned by the receiving controller (i.e. Handing an aircraft to Dafoe sector in relation to YLK). 372.7 Not stating initials on handoff. 372.8 Failure to pass traffic information.
373	Assignment of wrong frequencies on changeover. Note: This is normally as a result of changing sectors. 373.1 Issuing wrong frequency (e.g. Contact CYMR TCU on 119.4 in lieu of 119.9; VHF frequency in lieu of UHF).
374	Minor phraseology errors. 374.1 Not stating 'MIDTOWN CENTRE' on initial contact. 374.2 Stating 'identified' in lieu of 'Radar Identified' to aircraft. 374.3 Stating 'Expedite' when not required. 374.4 Stating company without flight number (e.g. 'Air Coach' and there's no Air Coach in the area). 374.5 Initiating a clearance to an incorrect flight number and immediately corrected (e.g. CDN881 vs. ACA881). 374.6 Not stating the word 'HEADING' when required (e.g. TL 310 in lieu of TL HDG 310). 374.7 Advising aircraft to resume normal navigation when the intent was to resume position reporting.
375	Minor instances of poor transmission techniques. 375.1 Long pauses between transmissions. Minor instances of slurredspeech or speaking too quickly. 375.2 Issuing clearance before aircraft is ready to copy (e.g. detailed Holding clearance at CD9).
376	Excessive transmissions. 376.1 Saying extra words, passing redundant information.
377	Other co-ordination and communication errors that do not warrant a higher penalty. 377.1 Not advising the aircraft was identified when in fact it was. 377.2 Altimeter not given. 377.3 Altimeter given to an enroute aircraft at FL190. 377.4 Not advising the aircraft 'radar service terminated' (e.g. DL2, and non-radar areas). 377.5 Not advising the aircraft to resume position reporting (e.g. wrong altitude for direction of flight. 377.6 Not following up to an aircraft that did not acknowldge the transmission. 377.7 Not stating the purpose of the vector.
400	PLAN TRAFFIC FLOW
401	This general term is designed to cover all aspects of RADAR control that are not specifically tied to separation, co-ordination and communication. It reflects the planning, organisation and execution of ATC tasks and covers such areas as adherence to procedures and directives, the application of priorities, the orderliness of the overall traffic flow, vectors, and the expeditiousness of control actions. Therefore this factor, which is undoubtedly the most comprehensive, will cover such specific items as use of altitude restrictions, expeditiousness of routings, use of vectors and speed control, orderliness of sequencing, etc. There are also certain aspects of communication included which initially stem from the planning aspect itself rather than what is stated on the frequency.
402	Once again, instructors will be expected to judge the seriousness of the error and assess a 10 point, 5 point or 1 point loss as indicated.
410	10-Point Penalty
411	Incorrect work priorities, where serious consequences could result.
412	Excessive delays. 412.1 Issuing a clearance where an extra 40 miles was added to the aircraft's proposed route.
413	Misidentification where serious consequences could result. Note: If resulting "serious consequences" are in fact separation losses, student cannot be penalised twice. In other words a separation loss should be assessed and a nill plan error assessed.
440	5-Point Penalty
441	Assigning of final wrong-way altitude for direction of flight, (as per MANOPS) without justification. (Note: caution to be exercised as the data controller may determine the altitude at which the aircraft should be when exiting the Midtown area.) 441.1 No action taken to ensure the aircraft is at the proper altitude for direction of flight. In some cases this may require co-ordination with data. (E.g. enroute traffic entering the area at the wrong altitude, or data may initiate a departure clearance from CYDU at the wrong altitude and no attempt is made to assign a proper altitude.) 441.2 Failure to offset aircraft when required for altitude inappropriate to direction of flight.
442	The use of FL180 when the altimeter setting prohibits its use and separation is not affected.
443	Issuing incorrect holding or approach clearances.
444	Clearances that do not properly take into account aircraft performance.
445	Assigning inefficient routes and/or altitude restrictions. Note: Instructors must use their judgement as to the significance of such inefficiencies and decide on whether a 5 point or 1 point penalty is appropriate. 445.1 Not advising traffic to maintain radials/centreline when traffic is being parallel on vectors. (1 point or 5 points will depend on individual situations.)
446	Non-adherence to flight priority requirements (e.g. priority for departure, approach, sequencing and assignment of altitudes), or delaying traffic. 446.1 Clearing aircraft to hold at CD9 when based on radar data the aircraft is obviously #1 for approach (e.g. #2 receives approach clearance #1 holding). 446.2 Not accommodating altitude requests from aircraft (e.g. aircraft 12,000 requesting FL220 and the only traffic is at FL200. FL180 not assigned but FL220 eventually assigned). 446.3 Issuing vectors to wrong aircraft (e.g. #1 enroute, #2 arriving; #1 vectored causing inconvenience.)
447	Repeated incorrect work priorities or incorrect work priorities where the consequences covered have significant effects (e.g. neglecting to apply a restriction in favour of some less urgent item, such that the restriction becomes difficult to meet).
448	Issuance of clearances or instructions in insufficient time for the aircraft to meet the requirements where a separation error is not assessed. 448.1 Repeated unnecessary levelling off after radar identified (after a handoff, no conflict). 448.2 Not recognising speed differential. 448.3 Delaying instructions excessively to aircrft where aircraft could have had a more expeditious routing (e.g. aircraft on vectors 10 minutes later without reason).
449	Issuance of clearances to the wrong aircraft (e.g. not paying attention to the board or mentally transposing aircraft). 449.1 Issuing clearance to an aircraft not in the area. Aircraft not on frequency. 449.2 Issuing clearance to wrong aircraft (mentally transposing 2 aircraft idents) but resolved.
450	Inefficient or unrealistic vectors. 450.1 Instructing the aircraft to TR when meant TL. Not corrected until after the aircraft was observed starting the wrong turn. 450.2 Not establishing clear relationship of what the aircraft was heading prior to and after the aircraft issued vectors. 450.3 Issuing unrealistic vectors. 450.4 Issuing unnecessary (numerous) vectors.
451	Incorrect identification procedure. 451.1 Advising the aircraft 'Radar Identified' when the aircraft states it is approaching the fix. 451.2 Requesting the aircraft to 'Squawk IDENT' no target observed in the area. 451.3 Requesting an aircraft to 'Squawk IDENT'. Another aircraft responds, the student acknowledges and does not clarify.
452	Issuing of wrong clearance limit where it would not normally be questioned by the pilot.
453	Distance estimation errors (10NM or more) when passing position information to aircraft.
454	Mis-identification or failure to identify an aircraft (i.e. Making assumption) where a 10 point penalty is not assessed. 454.1 Issuing vectors to an aircraft which is not positively identified.
455	Inefficient or unrealistic speed control techniques.
456	Failure to comply with procedures, Operations Letters and/or Agreements. 456.1 Handing off aircraft to TCU that are vertically or laterally separated instead of 5 miles in trail. 456.2 Failure to obtain the pilot's approval for a vector into class "G" airspace.
470	1-Point Penalty
471	Issuing of wrong clearance information where it would normally be questioned by the pilot.
472	All other errors not assigned another (higher) penalty. 472.1 Clearing aircraft to a wrong fix where it would be questioned by the pilot. 472.2 Advising the wrong aircraft in the same general proximity to contact YLK first (e.g. 2 aircraft on same route #2 changed before #1). 472.3 Requesting unnecessary reports (altitude, or asking for a pilot ETA when the aircraft is 20 miles from the fix). 472.4 Requesting aircraft to squawk ident unnecessarily (e.g. aircraft already radar identified by the fix). 472.5 Not advising the aircraft why unable to accommodate request for altitude change. 472.6 Passing incomplete traffic information, such as vectors aroundtraffic, or issuing altitude change due traffic where more wordiness would be in order (e.g. overtaking traffic and altitude change required). 472.7 Requesting aircraft to stand-by and not getting back to the aircraft. 472.8 Not passing requested information to the transferring controller (e.g. receiving controller requests altitude on an aircraft handed off. Transferring controller does not come back with the information.) 472.9 Handing off an aircraft when, by waiting 30 seconds, 2 aircraft could be handed off. Handing off 1 aircraft where 2 could be handed off. 472.10 Aircraft instructed to TR when meant TL, but corrrected immediately. 472.11 Not issuing a vector which would eliminate laddering aircraft. 472.12 Issuing a heading with no operational requirement. 472.13 Clearing an aircraft direct which results in turn where a heading to intercept a radial would be more expeditious. 472.14 Issuing a heading to intercept a radial where direct would be more expeditious. 472.15 Not assigning headings to the nearest 5 degres (e.g. a heading of 238 degrees is issued). 472.16 Not assigning headings to effect altitude change, but by the time the aircraft receives clearance, tail/tail could have been used. 472.17 Vectoring aircraft for extended periods of time where altitudechange would be more effective (e.g. #2 overtaking #1 same altitude with small speed differential). 472.18 Assigning unnecessary vector (minor). * Also see item 450.4. 472.19 Not advising traffic to maintain radials or centreline of the airway when radar traffic is being paralleled. (Note: assessment of 5 point or 1 point error would vary according to proximity of the aircraft. Also see item 445.1). 472.20 Issuing descent clearance too late, without reason. (Note: The 5 point penalty for item 444 also could be applicable depending on the circumstances.) 472.21 Not clearing aircraft to altitudes as indicated in the altitude approval. 472.22 Advising the aircraft to expedite without reason. 472.23 Delaying instructions to aircraft where the aircraft could have had a more expeditious routing (e.g. the aircraft could have proceeded direct 5 minutes ago). * Also see item 448.3. 472.24 Issuing unnecessary level off instructions (step-climbs/descents). * Also see item 448.1.
500	BOARD MANAGEMENT
501	This general term is designed to cover all aspects of RADAR control that are not specifically tied to separation, planning and co-ordination/communication. It reflects the planning, organisation and execution of ATC data board management tasks and covers such areas as the application of priorities, the orderliness of the data board and the proper application of strip marking. Once again, instructors will be expected to judge the seriousness of the error and assess a 10 point, 5 point or 1 point loss as indicated.
510	5-Point Penalty
511	Issuance of clearances to the wrong aircraft (e.g. not paying attention to the board or mentally transposing aircraft). 511.1 Issuing clearance to an aircraft not in the area (looking at the wrong strip). Aircraft not on frequency.
512	Serious stripwriting or board management errors. 512.1 Removing the arrival strip at CD9 prior to confirmation that the aircraft has landed or cancelled IFR. 512.2 Persistently not following through with indicating altitude changes on strips. 512.3 Writing an altitude change on the wrong strip (wrong aircraft) and not correcting it. 512.4 Removing the strip on the aircraft exiting the area but not outside the area. (Judgement to be exercised as to whether this would be a 5-point or 1-point penalty.)