POTENTIAL BETWEEN SMA AND OPPOSITE DIRECTION SMA AND ALSO WITH CLIMBING DEPARTING SMT IN ARSA.

Narrative

LATER WHILE IN BUR ARSA I WAS TOLD TO FLY WBOUND AT OR ABOVE 3500' (A VFR EBOUND ALT) WHILE BUR WAS WORKING AN EBOUND. SMA AT 3500'; THIS WAS POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS; SO I STAYED AT 4000'. THEN; BUR CLBED AN SMT DEP FROM BUR RWY 15 TO 4000'; VECTORS TO SMO. THIS TOO WAS A POTENTIAL CONFLICT. I BELIEVE MINIMUM SEP STANDARDS WERE VIOLATED. I HAD TO DEVIATE FOR BOTH ACFT. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING: TFC ADVISORY WAS NOT GIVEN TO SMA A; BUT HE KNEW THE TFC WAS THERE BECAUSE HE HEARD APCH CTLR GIVE SMA A AND TFC TO THE 2 OTHER ACFT. STATED NOT GOOD AT ESTIMATING DISTANCES OF ACFT; BUT SAW THEM BOTH WELL. NO DANGER OF NMAC; JUST THE POTENTIAL BY HAVING GIVEN HIM THE MINIMUM OF 3500' MSL WHEN APCH HAD THE SMA B EBOUND AT THAT ALT. HE STATED THE CTLR WAS VERY BUSY AND THAT THEY USUALLY TOOK THE WBOUND. IN THIS CASE; SMA A GOING INTO VNY AT 2500' MSL. ALSO STATED THAT THE BUR DEPS FOR SMO WERE NORMALLY GIVEN 2000' MSL; BUT DIDN'T KNOW WHY THE DIFFERENT PROC THIS DAY. FEELS NOW VFR CORRIDOR NOW OPEN WILL SAVE MANY PROBS. DOES KNOW WHY FAA RAISED TOP OF TCA TO 12000' MSL.