A B757-200 TOOK OFF FROM DEN WITH MISMATCH BTWN ATC CLRNC AND COMPANY RELEASE.

Narrative

DEPARTED DEN AFTER MUCH CONFUSION AND MISCOM BTWN THE FLT CREW; DISPATCH; AND DEN CLRNC DELIVERY (ATC) CONCERNING A REVISED SEGMENT OF THE PDC. MAY HAVE INADVERTENTLY DEPARTED WITH AN ATC CLRNC DIFFERENT THAN THE ROUTING IN THE AMENDED DISPATCH RELEASE. AFTER RECEIVING THE HOWGOZIT INFLT; NOTICED A DIFFERENCE IN THE ROUTING VERSUS THE ATC RECEIVED ROUTING. WE RECEIVED THE PDC WITH A REVISED SEGMENT CHANGING THE DEP TO THE DEN 4 DIRECT OAL AND NOTIFIED DISPATCH WITH THE CHANGE. ALSO QUESTIONED IF METHOD #1 STILL APPLICABLE. THIS ALSO HAPPENED AFTER A DIVERSION THE PREVIOUS EVENING ON OUR FLT. THE CHANGE WAS SENT TO DISPATCH; THE DATA CHKED AND WE RECEIVED A RELEASE VIA ACARS 'OK TO DEPART AND CONTINUE UNDER METHOD #1.' I WAS EXPECTING THE SAME ANSWER BASED ON OUR WT AND ROUTING BEING THE SAME ALONG WITH ALL THE TERRAIN CONSIDERATIONS. INSTEAD I RECEIVED MULTIPLE MESSAGES THAT DUE TO COMPUTER LIMITATIONS ARE UNABLE TO FLT PLAN THAT RTE EITHER METHOD #1 OR #2. THE FLT WAS DELAYED TRYING TO RESOLVE THE CLRNC ISSUE AND FIND A LEGAL DISPATCH. WE WERE TOLD BY CLRNC DELIVERY THAT 99% OF THE TIME THE FILED PLAN OF DIRECT RIF DIRECT OAL IS REVISED TO DIRECT OAL DUE TO ENRTE CTR RESTRS. CLRNC DELIVERY CONSULTED WITH CTR TO HELP US FIND ALTERNATIVE ROUTING TO SEND TO DISPATCH. HE MENTIONED THAT THE CTR CTLR WAS AWARE OF DRIFTDOWN CRITERIA. WE WERE TOLD THAT ROUTING OVER LARAMIE OR ALAMOSA WERE ONLY ACCEPTABLE ALTERNATIVES AND THAT INFO WAS RELAYED TO DISPATCH. DISPATCH ADVISED US THAT ATC HAD ALSO CONTACTED THEM AND THEY WERE REFILING OUR FLT PLAN. RLS 2 ROUTING WAS ROCKI4 DBL J80 OAL. WE SAT AWAITING VOICE CLRNC AND HAD TO ASK DISPATCH TO REFILE AGAIN BECAUSE DEN HAD NOT RECEIVED A CLRNC. WHEN CONTACTED BY CLRNC DELIVERY; THEY SAID 'FINALLY RECEIVED YOUR COMPANY FILED FLT PLAN' -- AND GAVE US CLRNC AS 'DEN 4 OAL 10000 FT.' I MISTAKENLY ASSUMED THIS WAS THE REFILED COMPANY FLT PLAN DUE TO TERMINOLOGY USED. IN TRYING TO GET FLT OUT FOR PAX CONNECTIONS; I DID NOT REQUEST COPY OF NEW FLT PLAN BECAUSE IT WAS SO SIMILAR TO OUR ORIGINAL ROUTING (AND KNEW TERRAIN AND FUEL WERE ADEQUATE); BUT WHICH WOULD HAVE SHOWN DISCREPANCY. REALIZED THAT THIS WAS A LARGER AND MORE COMPLICATED PROB THAN WE WERE AWARE OF AFTER DEBRIEFING WITH DISPATCH AND DISPATCH MGR VIA TELEPHONE AFTER FLT. WE DISCUSSED THE NEED TO BE ABLE TO REVISE FLT PLANS DUE TO REVISED SEGMENTS PREDEP; BUT THAT LIMIT PREVENTS BEING ABLE TO FLT PLAN ON REVISED SEGMENTS BEING ISSUED BY DEN. WAS TOLD THAT IT IS PART OF A COMPLEX SITUATION CONCERNING DIVISION OF CTR SECTORS AND THAT OUR DATABASES ARE NOT PROGRAMMED WITH THE ENRTE FIXES USED TO PREVENT THE CONFLICTS. WAS INFORMED THAT THIS WOULD BE TOPIC OF DISCUSSION THE NEXT DAY WITH THE ATC COORD TO FIND A SOLUTION.