MKE controller voiced concern regarding the lack of published MVA's for surrounding airspace after facility acquired additional airspace. Reporter alleged poor planning; hurried airspace change and staffing at other facility as contributory.

Narrative

Sometime in 2008 MKE ATCT assumed responsibility for new airspace in central Wisconsin. Previously; the Oshkosh sector in ZAU had worked the airspace. MKE ATCT designated the new sectors Ripon High (H) and Ripon Low (L). I was reviewing procedures to refresh my knowledge and maintain my skills. As I was looking at the MVA charts for my facility's area I suddenly realized there was no published MVA for the areas adjacent to our Ripon High and Low sectors where we had new areas of jurisdiction which began in 2008. The MVA was only published to the edge of the Ripon sector and not beyond. Without a Minimum Vectoring Altitude to use as a safe base altitude; all the aircraft that I had vectored outside of my airspace were thus not provided a verified safe altitude these last 21 months. The Letters of Agreement between Green Bay Approach and MKE ATCT mandate that all departures off ATW and MTW are issued radar vectors and GRB releases control for turns and climbs to MKE. Additionally; there are airports near the boundary of MKE's Ripon sector and the adjacent facilities of Madison ATCT; Volk RAPCON; GRB ATCT; and ZMP and ZAU centers where their controllers have release control of an arrival to me and I vectored and changed the altitude of the aircraft in their airspace without having an MVA to use as a safe lowest altitude to vector aircraft. I did this because it was how I was trained in my lab simulations and how I was trained when I received my OJT. The facility has continued to encourage me to vector without a MVA by mandating it in the Letters of Agreement. When I became aware there was no MVA to safely use I notified the supervisor on duty. The Supervisor suggested I discuss it with the person who handles MVA and such at MKE. I spoke to the person who handles MVAs and pointed out that unlike the airspace adjacent to the old MKE sectors no MVA adjacent to the Ripon sectors was ever published for our use yet our LOA with GRB ATCT requires them to put aircraft on radar vectors and us to vector them outside our airspace. The Specialist told me that was something they had been working on for a while and it had been pushed back by other things. They indicated it might be a few months before they could get a radar map in place. I asked if it was possible to put out a notice to the controllers giving them a safe altitude to use for vectoring aircraft released to us just out side our boundaries. They indicated that I was just a controller and such a request appropriately should really have to come from someone else perhaps I should talk to my Union Representative. I asked what I could do then with the aircraft assigned vectors by adjacent facilities where I had no MVA to use. They recommended I not change any heading or altitude assigned by the other facility regardless of the control granted to me until the aircraft entered our airspace where I had a published MVA to use. That way the other facility would be responsible for the MVA. I asked if a notice could be put out to tell controllers we had no MVA published to use outside our airspace and how they should wait for the aircraft to enter our sector before changing anything assigned. It was explained to me I was just a controller and I should talk to someone else to get a request for a Pre-Position Briefing Item. Over the last 21 months or so I have vectored well over one thousand arrival and departure aircraft within 10 miles of my boundary while the facility had no published MVA for me to use there. As I had control of the aircraft from the adjacent facilities the issue is limited to maintaining a safe altitude for the MVA. While I never assigned an altitude below the MVA within my sector; I cannot at this time ensure it was or is the safe altitude to use in those instances adjacent to my airspace. I subsequently spoke to my NATCA Safety Representative and the Facility Assistant Air Traffic Manager. They assured me that a Pre-Duty Briefing Item with guidance forcontrollers will be put out today. Recommendation; I feel the situation occurred because of the staffing problems at ZAU. There was a sudden rush to push up our acquisition of the Oshkosh sector from them because of their equipment and staffing issues. The result was MKE got the airspace almost a year before it was originally planned. With the time crunch; the making of an MVA chart to cover our new MULTI radar sector based off center long range radar and other ATCT facilities RADAR was omitted. I do not know if there currently exists a check list but perhaps there could be developed a check list for facilities to use when developing new airspace areas.