Narrative:

An operational error occurred approximately 1 - 1 1/2 mi northwest of the departure end of runway 32L. We were changing from 2 runways inbound and outbound. Runway 32L in only and runway 32R out only. North local controller departing runway 32R, departed air carrier X to a 340 degree heading then turned the aircraft left to a 290 degree heading in front of runway 32L departures which are required to fly runway heading until out of 1500 ft (SID). South local yelled out 'what heading is air carrier X outbound.' the trainee immediately told air carrier Y to turn left to 220 degrees. The aircraft were 9/16 of a mi apart with no vertical separation. The situation occurred because the north local controller disregarded any prior coordination of heading that was in place. The controller subsequently tried to blame the area supervisor by lying and saying the area supervisor told him that he owned all departures. The controller upon questioning, retracted that idea, yet upper management is intent on implicating the area supervisor. My suggestion as to how to prevent a recurrence is to do something that doesn't have area supervisors in such a vulnerable situation. This controller is probably going to be reinstated without being decertified.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: CTLR NON COMPLIANCE WITH ATCT INTERFAC COORD ACR X WRONG HDG ASSIGNED HAD LTSS FROM ACR Y. SYS ERROR.

Narrative: AN OPERROR OCCURRED APPROX 1 - 1 1/2 MI NW OF THE DEP END OF RWY 32L. WE WERE CHANGING FROM 2 RWYS INBOUND AND OUTBOUND. RWY 32L IN ONLY AND RWY 32R OUT ONLY. N LCL CTLR DEPARTING RWY 32R, DEPARTED ACR X TO A 340 DEG HDG THEN TURNED THE ACFT L TO A 290 DEG HDG IN FRONT OF RWY 32L DEPS WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO FLY RWY HDG UNTIL OUT OF 1500 FT (SID). S LCL YELLED OUT 'WHAT HDG IS ACR X OUTBOUND.' THE TRAINEE IMMEDIATELY TOLD ACR Y TO TURN L TO 220 DEGS. THE ACFT WERE 9/16 OF A MI APART WITH NO VERT SEPARATION. THE SIT OCCURRED BECAUSE THE N LCL CTLR DISREGARDED ANY PRIOR COORD OF HDG THAT WAS IN PLACE. THE CTLR SUBSEQUENTLY TRIED TO BLAME THE AREA SUPVR BY LYING AND SAYING THE AREA SUPVR TOLD HIM THAT HE OWNED ALL DEPS. THE CTLR UPON QUESTIONING, RETRACTED THAT IDEA, YET UPPER MGMNT IS INTENT ON IMPLICATING THE AREA SUPVR. MY SUGGESTION AS TO HOW TO PREVENT A RECURRENCE IS TO DO SOMETHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE AREA SUPVRS IN SUCH A VULNERABLE SIT. THIS CTLR IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE REINSTATED WITHOUT BEING DECERTIFIED.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.