NAVINSGEN 201203467 Senior Official Investigation Commander Strike Group THREE 8 Feb 2013

7/28/2019 NAVINSGEN 201203467 Senior Official Investigation Commander Strike Group THREE 8 Feb 2013

1/41


2/41

Office of the Naval Inspector GeneralCase Number: 201203467Report of Invest igat ion

8 February 2013Subj: SENIOR OFFICIAL CASE 201203467; ALLEGATIONS OF IMPROPER

CONDUCT BY RDML CHARLES M. GAOUETTE, USN*****

Preliminary Statement1. On 13 October 2012, USN, th eof USS JOHN C STENNIS (CVN 74), (Complainant)emai led the Naval Inspec to r Genera l (NAVINSGEN) and made acomplain t aga ins t RDML Charles M. Gaouet te , USN, Commander,Car r ie r St r ike Group THREE (CCSG-3), (Subjec t ) . Complainanta l leged t h a t Subjec t was an abusive l eader and provided a numberof examples of what he be l ieved to be improper behavior bySubjec t . Complainant s ta ted tha t Subjec t ' s abus ive leaderships ty l e crea ted a hos t i l e working environment fo r the St r ike Groups t a f f and St r ike Group Warfare Commanders.2. Complainant fu r the r a l leged t ha t Subjec t made "bla tan t lyderoga tory remarks" about ce r ta in minor i ty Flag Off ice r s dur ingpr iva te conversa t ions with him and t h a t he engaged in"unwarranted persona l a t tacks" aga ins t two of these of f i c e r sdur ing a pr iva te dinner conversa t ion they shared toge ther with

USN, USS MOBILE BAY (CG 53) .Addi t iona l ly , Complainant provided a photograph of an e n l i s t e dAfrican-American male a i r c r a f t mechanic onboard STENNIS t ha tSubjec t took and subsequently emai led to s ix White male sen io rNavy Capta ins in th e St r ike Group. Complainant charac te r izedthe p ic tu re as "an obvious a t tempt to s o l i c i t s t e r e o t y p i c a lsexua l humor and innuendo."

Summary of Findings and Conclusions3. To address these a l l ega t ions we examined whether , viewed ini t s t o t a l i t y , Subjec t ' s conduct as CCSG-3 between Apr i l andOctober 2012 adhered to the l eadership qua l i t i e s requ i red byArt i c l e 1131 of the U.S. Navy Regula t ions (NAVREGS), "ExemplaryConduct." We conclude it did no t .

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls without p r i o r approval of the Naval IG .

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c) FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)



3/41

4. We then cons ider whether S u b jec t ' s conduct was an abuse o fau thor i ty i n v io la t ion of NAVREGS Art i c l e 1023, and conclude itwas not . We did f ind , however, t ha t in add i t ion to f a l l i ngs h o r t o f reasonab le expec ta t ions fo r exemplary conduct ,Subjec t ' s comments and emai l s about minor i ty personnel v io la t edprov i s ions in SECNAVINST 5350.16A, "Equal Opportuni ty within th eDepartment of the Navy" and OPNAVINST 5354.1F, "Navy EqualOpportuni ty Pol icy ," t h a t requ i re Commanders to "promote ap o s i t i v e command c l imate through persona l example" and chargea l l se rv ice members to " t r e a t othe rs with d ig n i ty and r espec t . "We a l so determined t ha t some o f h is conversa t ions withsubordinates diminished confidence in , o r re spec t fo r , supe r io ro f f i c e r s i n v i o l a t io n of NAVREGS Art i c l e 1133, "LanguageReflec t ing on a Super io r . "

*****

5. NAVINSGEN formulated th e fo l lowing a l l ega t ions :Allegat ion #1: That S u b jec t ' s conduct while execu t ing h isdu t ies as Commander, Car r ie r S t r ike Group THREE from Apr i l 2012u n t i l October 2012 d id not adhere to the requ i rements o fNAVREGS, A r t i c l e 1131, Exemplary Conduct .Conclusion: The a l l ega t ion i s subs tan t ia ted .Allegat ion #2: That S u b jec t ' s conduct whi le execu t ing h isdut i e s as Commander, Car r ie r S t r ike Group THREE from Apr i l 2012u n t i l October 2012, inc luded ins tances of abus ive l e ade rsh ip , inv io la t ion o f U.S. Navy Regulat ions (NAVREGS) A r t i c l e 1023, Abuseof Authori ty .Conclusion: The a l l ega t ion i s not s u b s t an t i a t ed .Allegat ion #3: That Subjec t sen t a r ac i a l l y of fens ive emai l tomembers of h is command i n v io la t ion o f SECNAVINST 5350.16A,Equal Opportuni ty with in the Department of the Navy andOPNAVINST 5354.1F, CH-1, Navy Equal Opportuni ty Pol icy .Conclusion: The a l l ega t ion i s subs tan t ia ted .Allegat ion #4: That Subjec t spoke in a manner which tended todiminish confidence in o r re spec t due to ADMUSN; VADM , USN; and RADM ,

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r i o r approval of th e Naval IG.

2

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)


4/41

USN; in vio la t ion of NAVREGS, Art i c l e 1133, Language Reflec t ingon a Super io r .Conclusion: The a l l ega t ion i s subs tan t ia ted .

Findings of FactBackground

6. On 2 March 2012, USS JOHN C STENNIS (CVN 74) and i t sassocia ted St r ike Group re turned from a seven-month deployment.Thereaf te r , STENNIS was des igna ted as the "surge" c a r r i e r shoulda shor t -no t ice requirement fo r a c a r r i e r to deploy becomenecessary . Complainant i s the STENNIS ,having on , 2011.7. RDML Gaouette assumed command of C ar r i e r S t r i k e Group THREEon 6 Apr i l 2012; the STENNIS was h is f l a g s h i ~ . On 27 August2012, the STENNIS St r ike Group departed fo r an eight-month surgedeployment under Subjec t ' s command.8. En route , STENNIS and MOBILE BAY crossed the Pac i f i c Ocean,t r a ns i t e d the S t r a i t of Malacca and ente red the Indian Ocean.The St r ike Group "chopped" to the Opera t iona l Contro l ofCommander, Naval Forces Cent ra l Command/Commander, FIFTH F lee ton 17 October 2012. Car r ie r A ir Group NINE (CAG NINE) wasembarked aboard STENNIS and a i r c r a f t from CAG NINE began f ly ingOperat ion Enduring Freedom (OEF) combat so r t i e s from the NorthArabian Sea i n to Afghanis tan immediately t he r e a f t e r .9. In the fo l lowing paragraphs, we pre sen t a l l th e fac t sassocia ted with t h i s case . We have done t h i s in an e f f o r t tohelp the reader form a comprehensive p ic tu re o f Subjec t ' sconduct over the course of h is t ime in command. It i s th et o t a l i t y of Subjec t ' s conduct t ha t we subsequent ly examineaga ins t the Exemplary Conduct and Abuse of Author i ty s tandards .10. For convenience in present ing these f a c t s , they are groupedunder the fo l lowing headings: In te rac t ions with Senior Sta f f ,Confronta t ion about Handling of STENNIS, Subjec t ' sAlleged Deris ive Comments to Complainant, Subjec t ' s AllegedMistreatment of Jun io r Personnel , Subjec t ' s Language in Speechesand Writ ten Communications, Subjec t ' s Use of Profan i ty andMiddle Finger Gesture a t Foc ' s le Fol l i e s , Alleged Racia l lyOffensive Email and Comments about Minori ty Flag Off ice r s .

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l of the Naval IG.

3

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


5/41

Interact ions with Senior Staf fComplainant's Allegat ions About Treatment o f Senior Staf f

11. Complainant s ta ted tha t Subjec t was abusive dur ing WarfareCommander video t e leconferences (VTCs) . According toComplainant, on one occas ion Subjec t "exploded and launched i n toan unprofess iona l , unbalanced, and d is tu rb ing t i rade" about h isperceived l ack of teamwork. Complainant a l leged t h a t dur ingt h i s pa r t i cu l a r VTC, Subjec t "b la t an t ly and c l e a r ly threa tenedto 'des t roy th e ca ree rs ' of those ind iv idua l s who d id no t f a l lin l ine with h i s v i s ion . " He sa id Sub jec t ' s t h r e a t was made asa genera l comment and he did no t d i r e c t h is comments to any oneof h is Warfare Commanders i n pa r t i c u l a r .12. Complainant a l so a l l eged t ha t he witnessed Subjec t"publ ic ly reprimand" , USN,Dest royer Squadron TWENTY ONE, and , USN,Subjec t ' s , on mult ip le occas ions "regard ingi s sues t ha t were beyond t h e i r [ individual ] con t ro l andf requent ly of minimal s ign i f i cance to the miss ion ." Complainant t e s t i f i e d t h a t and , USN,

, CAG NINE, shared t h e i r own s t o r i e s o f "s imi la rexper iences and i n t e rac t ions with Subject" wi th him in separa teconversa t ions .13. We in terviewed the and Subjec t ' s

and asked them about t h e i r ind iv idua l exper iences withSubjec t . The i r indiv idua l tes t imonies about those exper iencesa re summarized in the fo l lowing paragraphs:

Testimony of14. t e s t i f i e d t ha t Subjec t would l e t those t ha t hadno t met h is expec ta t ions know in c l e a r terms t h a t he wasdispleased with t h e i r performance of du t ies and i n s t ruc ted themabout how to co r rec t the s i t ua t ion . sa id he "neverheard [Subject] ra i se h is voice ," however, when giving d i r e c t i o nto co r r ec t a pa r t i c u l a r ac t ion t ha t had no t been accompl ished ashe expected. a l so t e s t i f i e d t ha t he d id no t be l ievet ha t Subjec t was abusive i n h i s dea l ings with him. He sa idSubjec t was "very s t ra ightforward [when speaking to o ther sinc luding himself] and many t imes he was s t r a igh t fo rwardpubl ic ly ." noted t ha t Subjec t ' s . l eadersh ip s ty l e wasno t h is l eadership s ty l e b ut he did not be l ieve anything Subjec t

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l of the Naval IG.

4


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c) FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


6/41

did was reason enough fo r anyone to "throw up [ thei r ] hands andsay , I ' ve had i t . " summarized h is opinion about howd i f f i c u l t Subjec t was to work fo r in comparison to a l l prev iouscommanders he worked fo r . On a sca le of 1 to 10 with one be ingthe e a s i e s t person to work fo r and 10 being the most d i f f i c u l tto work fo r , r a ted Subjec t a s i x .

Testimony of15. As of MOBILE BAY, i n t e r a c t ion withSubjec t was pr imar i ly by VTC. He t e s t i f i e d t h a t dur ing the manyt e leconferences he p a r t i c i p a t e d i n with Subjec t , he d id notr eca l l a t ime when Subjec t had shown an exp los ion of anger o rmade a publ i c reprimand d i rec ted a t him. He d id r e c a l l a t ime,however, when "was given a f a i r ly s t rong r e bu t t a l onthe VTC." noted t ha t while " .. it was a s t rongr e bu t t a l , probably in 25 years of naval se rv ice and working withprevious COs... it was no t in the top 10" t ha t he had witnessed .fu r the r t e s t i f i e d t ha t while h is persona li n t e rac t ions with Subjec t had not been d i f f i c u l t , he was aware,as a r e su l t of pr iva te conversat ions with andComplainant t h a t they had had severa l par t i cu l a r l y d i f f i c u l ti nd iv idua l conversa t ions with him.

Testimony o f16. t e s t i f i e d t ha t there had been t imes dur ingWarfare Commander VTCs when Subjec t voiced h is d isp leasure withsomething he had o r had not done. He reca l l ed having walked outof more than one of t h e i r meetings th inking to himsel f : "Boy,t h a t d i d n ' t go so well" but he had never f e l t "humil ia ted" o r"persona l ly a t t acked" by Subjec t dur ing any of t h e i ri n t e rac t ions . s ta ted h is b e l i e f t h a t among theWarfare Commanders there are one o r more ind iv idua l s who have"had profound profes s iona l disagreements and a re unwi l l ing o runable to reconci le those wi th [Subjec t ] . " alsot e s t i f i e d t h a t Subjec t i s a d i f f i c u l t man to work fo r and t h a tas a r e su l t , he has made adjustments to h is approach t o h i sperformance of warfare commander du t ies to accommodate Subjec t ' sexpec ta t ions . views Subjec t ' s des i re to conductsome aspec ts of the St r ike Group 's business d i f fe ren t l y than itmay have been done under the previous St r ike Group Commander asan appropr i a t e exe rc i se of Subjec t ' s "pre roga t ive of command."

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo no t r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval o f th e Naval IG.

5

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


7/41

Testimony of17. As Subjec t ' s , has the mostf requen t in te rac t ion with Subjec t of any of th e sen io r Captainsin the St r ike Group. observed t h a t Subjec t i s "f i rmwith people" but he had "never heard him a t t ack an indiv idua l"o r swear a t an ind iv idua l . t e s t i f i e d t h a t Subjec t"doesn ' t use a lo t of four l e t t e r words. In f a c t , he ra re lyuses those . He i s pre t ty s e l f -c on t ro l l e d about t ha t . "Regarding VTCs, could no t r e c a l l a t ime when anyWarfare Commander was openly reprimanded by Subjec t .noted t ha t Subjec t can be very fo rce fu l when heexpla ins to people why something they brought to him was no tacceptable . He sa id in doing so , however, Subjec t was ca re fu lto make h is remarks about the produc t , no t the ind iv idua lpresent ing the produc t . On a persona l l eve l , sa idt ha t he had only had one heated exchange with Subjec t but "Weworked through t ha t , and I am good to go."18. The foregoing tes t imony from ,, and , showed t ha t Subjec t could be veryd i f f i c u l t to work with a t t imes . Each in t h e i r own wayt e s t i f i e d t h a t Subjec t ' s s ty l e of l eade rsh ip was no t t h e i r s ty l eof l eadership , but they d id not say he was abus ive . It wasc lea r to us from t h e i r respect ive t e s t imonies , however, t ha tthese sen io r of f i c e r s were extremely r e l u c t a n t to say anythingt ha t might appear d i s respec t fu l o r be considered c r i t i c i sm oft h e i r super io r . Thei r l oya l ty in t h i s regard i s admirable but ,reading between the l i n e s , we be l i eve they were ind iv idua l lyuncomfortable with the e n t i r e s i t ua t ion while Subjec t was incharge and simply decided to put on profes s iona l b l inder s andfocus on the mission a t hand.

Subject 's Testimony about His Treatment o f Subordinates19. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t a l l ega t ions of him being abusive d idno t happen in the manner descr ibed by Complainant. In h is19 November 2012, wri t ten. s ta tement , Sub jec t s t a t e d :

I r e j e c t th e a l l ega t ion t ha t my l eadership s ty l e i sabusive . I have never threa tened to adverse ly a f f e c tany o f f i c e r ' s caree r . I have no t pub l ic ly reprimandedof f i ce r s . While I have used profan i ty on occas ion toemphasize a po in t , it was never to demean or a t t ackany person under my command.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approval o f the Naval IG.6

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)FOIA EX (b)(6) & (



8/41

Confrontation about handling o f STENNIS20. Complainant repor ted he had a confronta t ion with Subjec t on6 October 2012, while he was on the naviga t ion br idge of STENNISd i rec t ing the s h ip ' s movements dur ing i t s S t r a i t of Malaccat r a n s i t . Complainant s t a t ed , Subjec t "blew up a t me andlaunched i n to a t i r ade in f ron t of my j un io r personne l . [I t ]was a c l e a r a t t empt to debase me in f ron t of my br idge team a t avery c r i t i c a l t ime of the t r a n s i t . "21. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t dur ing the STENNIS's t r a n s i t of th eS t r a i t of Malacca he observed STENNIS proceeding through thes t r a i t a t what he f e l t was an excess ive ly high and unsafe r a t eof speed fo r the preva i l ing t r a f f i c dens i ty . Subjec t sa id heobserved STENNIS dur ing two pa r t i c u l a r ly close , Closes t Poin t ofApproach (CPA), events with l a rge t anker vesse l s . He sa id , a tno t ime did STENNIS provide the whis t le s igna l s o r radio c a l l srequi red by In te rna t iona l Law to expla in STENNIS maneuvers tothe o ther ves se l s within v i sua l range of STENNIS. Subjec tt e s t i f i e d he was "mort i f ied" by how STENNIS was being maneuveredby Complainant. 122. Expla ining h is dec is ion to go to the naviga t ion br idge andspeak with Complainant dur ing the t r a n s i t as opposed to wai t ingu n t i l some o th e r t ime, Subjec t t e s t i f i e d :

I was mindful of the ARLEIGH BURKE inc iden t inNorfolk , where the Commodore was on the br idge , knewthe ship was s tand ing in to danger and he d id nothing.And it was my r e sp o n s i b i l i t y as Senior O f f i ce r PresentAfloa t to weigh- in. 2

In te rna t iona l Regulat ions fo r Prevent ing Col l i s ions a t Sea, 1972 (COLREGS)are publ i shed by the In te rna t iona l Maritime Organiza t ion (IMO), and s e t ou t ,i n t e r a l i a , th e " ru les o f th e road" o r nav iga t ion ru les to be followed bysh ips and o ther ves se l s a t sea in or de r to prevent c o l l i s i o n s between tw o o rmore vesse l s . COLREGS spec i fy r equ i red s igna l s between power-dr iven vesse l swhen they a re in s igh t o f one another . For example, Rule 34 s t a t e s t h a t"when v e s s e l s a re in s igh t of one another , a power-dr iven v e s s e l underway,when maneuvering as author ized o r required by t he se Rules , s h a l l i nd ica tet h a t maneuver by th e fo l lowing s igna l s on he r whis t l e : one shor t b l a s t tomean 'I am a l t e r i n g my course to s ta rboard ' .... " Rule 34 a l so s t a t e s t h a t "avesse l t h a t reaches agreement with another vesse l in a head-on, cross ing, o rover taking s i tua t ion , as fo r example, by using th e radiote lephone asprescr ibed by th e Vesse l Bridge- to-Br idge Radiotelephone Act .. , i s not obl igedto sound th e whis t l e s igna l s p resc r ibed by t h i s Rule, b u t may do so .2 USS ARLEIGH BURKE (DDG-51) ran aground on 15 May 2007. At the t ime o fgrounding, Commander, Des t royer Squadron TWO (CDS-2), the s h i p ' s Immediate

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r i o r approval of th e Naval IG.7

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


9/41

23. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d he went to the br idge and motioned fo rth e indiv iduals in c lose proximi ty to Complainant t o s t ep awayso t h a t he could speak with Complainant pr iva t e ly . Subjec t sa idt ha t he spoke in a q u ie t voice and br i e f l y exp la ined h is concernfo r the sa fe ty of STENNIS to Complainant and then ordered him toslow STENNIS saying: " , slow the fuck down."24. We in terviewed seve ra l sh ips ' company of f i c e r s who werepre sen t on th e STENNIS naviga t ion br idge . .

, USN, i s the STENNIS . to ld ust ha t the conversa t ion between Subjec t and Complainant l a s tedonly 15 to 30 seconds. He t e s t i f i e d he cou ldn ' t c l e a r ly hearwhat was sa id from where he was s tand ing , 15 - 20 f e e t away.

sa id al though he could not hear what was sa id bythe Subjec t to Complainant, Complainant was fac ing h is di rec t ionand "looked l i ke he was being reprimanded." He sa id Complainanthad a look o f "shock" on h is face dur ing the encounte r wi thSubjec t .25. , USN, i s ass igned as an Off ice r of theDeck (OOD) onboard STENNIS. t e s t i f i e d about Subjec tcoming to the bridge and speaking to Complainant s t a t i ng :

I saw the and the Admiral have a b r i e fexchange of words. I cou ldn ' t make out anyth ing t h a tthey were saying, because I was on the o ther s ide ofthe br idge . I t was br i e f , and the Admiral l e f t th ebr idge .

The Admiral came over , s tood r i gh t next to the. I was running through my c h e c k l i s t fo r manoverboard , so I only noted [ the Subjec t when he wasannounced onto the br idge] . It's not abnormal fo r theAdmiral to come on the br idge dur ing the spec ia levolut ion .

26. The , , USN, sa idt ha t he thought the conversa t ion between Subjec t and Complainantl a s t ed somewhat longer than and reca l l edSuper io r in Command (ISIC) was aboard. CDS-2 was c r i t i c i z e d in th ei nves t iga t ion t h a t followed the grounding fo r no t having recognized adangerous s i t u a t i o n as it developed.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r i o r approval o f th e Naval IG.

8

FOIA EX (b)(6

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c) FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c) FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)




10/41

the event . He sa id the Subjec t spoke to Complainant fo r about"two minutes" . sa id he was busy a t h is s t a t i on anddid not h ea r what was sa id between them but agreed wi th ourpropos i t i on t ha t the conversa t ion was pointed and a t some po in tbecame one way.27. was the dur ing th e t r a n s i t .He was s t a t ioned on the Flag Bridge with Subjec t andcor robora ted Subjec t ' s tes t imony about how STENNIS was beingmaneuvered. 3 sa id t ha t the re were c lose CPAs betweenSTENNIS and o th e r ships t r a ns i t i ng the s t r a i t . He fu r t h e rs t a t e d t ha t Subjec t expressed h is opin ion " t h a t STENNIS was notconforming with the ru les of the road as [ the ru les] provided i rec t ion fo r safe speed." went on to say t ha tSubjec t was " incredulous about th e way t h a t the ship wasmaneuvering. He was t ry ing to f igure out an appropr ia te way tog e t the a t ten t ion to g e t him to slow down."28. We note here tha t , as , i ssuedan orde r to STENNIS and MOBILE BAY as they approached th een t rance to th e s t r a i t t ha t the ships were to "maneuverindependently to avoid shipping." Under t h i s guidance, eachship would be expected to ad jus t i t s course and speed tomaneuver sa fe ly within the t r a f f i c separa t ion scheme.29. , USN, i s ass igned as CCSG-3 S t a f f

. t e s t i f i e d he was on the FlagBridge support ing Subjec t dur ing the s t r a i t t r a n s i t . He sa id hehad a c l e a r view of STENNIS Voyage Management System (VMS)display and observed STENNIS depar t the l e f t s ide of the vesse lt r a f f i c separa t ion scheme and cross through th e opposing t r a f f i csepara t ion lane to the l e f t while maneuvering around slowert r a f f i c in th e S t r a i t of Malacca. noted t ha t VMSshowed STENNIS going 25 knots a t the t ime.30. , USN, i s ass igned as CCSG-3 S t a f f

). t e s t i f i e d t ha t p r i o r tothe t r a n s i t and upon l ea rning t ha t STENNIS planned a 25 knott r a n s i t through the s t r a i t , Subjec t ordered him to have the sh ipp u l l back t h e i r t r a n s i t plan and resubmit with a lower Speed of

Flag Bridge on STENNIS i s one l eve l below th e Naviga t ion Bridge theloca t ion from which s h ip ' s movements are con t ro l led by th e s h i p ' s Capta inthrough h is O f f i c e r of the Deck. From Flag Bridge, Subjec t had a near lyi d e n t i c a l view o f ocean waters ad jacen t to STENNIS as d id Complainant onel eve l above.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval of the Naval IG .

9

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)



11/41

Advance (SOA). Subject subsequent ly approved a 22 Knot SOA.sa id t ha t Subjec t addressed safe t r a n s i t speed a tWarfare Commander meet ings in the days l eading up to the s t r a i t

t r a n s i t and made sure everyone knew " tha t Safe ty of Navigat ionoverr ides any SOA and t ha t he was OK with a r r i v i n g a t the nextp o r t a day l a t e i f it meant we go t the re sa fe . There was nopressure to go f a s t . "31. Before l eaving t h i s topic , we cons ider how the c o n f l i c t i n gtes t imony about the encounter f i t s t oge the r . Complainantal leged t ha t Subjec t conf ronted him on the br idge dur ingSTENNIS's S t r a i t of Malacca t r a n s i t and "blew up a t [him] andlaunched i n to a t i r ade in f ron t of j un io rpersonne l . " Testimony from and

makes c l e a r t ha t the Subjec t d id n o t blow up o ry e l l a t Complainant, however, t h e i r tes t imony a l so makes c l e a rtha t from t h e i r perspec t ive t h e i r was havinga one-way, sen io r to subordinate , conversa t ion about how theship was being maneuvered during the s t r a i t t r a n s i t .

Subject 's Alleged Derisive Comments to Complainant32. Complainant a l so al leged t ha t during two meet ings Subjec tto ld him t h a t he was "nothing but a fucking shoe who onlymanages an a i rpo r t 12 hours a day," o r words to t ha t e f f e c t .Complainant s t a t e d t ha t Subjec t ' s comments were " inappropr i a t eand der i s ive" and "designed to demean" him. He fu r t h e r a l legedt ha t Subjec t made t h i s re fe rence about him mult ip le t imes dur ingthe two separa te meetings . Complainant added t h a t Subjec t madeth e comments during pr iva te meetings a t which the re were nowitnesses. 4

33. Subjec t denies having ca l l ed Complainant a "fucking shoe."He s t a t e d t ha t he had two separa te meet ings with Complainantfo l lowing th e S t r a i t of Malacca t r a n s i t a t which t ime heat tempted to impress upon complainant h is concern fo r howSTENNIS was being handled with regard to the i n t e rn a t i o n a lnaviga t ion ru l e s . Subjec t t e s t i f i e d :

What I sa id to him was ... When you ' r e doing f l i g h t ops,you ' re a pr iv i l eged ves se l . You have p r i o r i t y over apower dr iven vesse l in your way. My words were, 'When

4 Th e term "shoe" (or Black Shoe) i s a col loquial ism fo r a Surface WarfareOff ice r . Subjec t i s a Surface Warfare Off ice r . Complainant , a NavalAvia tor , wears brown shoes .

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo no t r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l of th e Naval IG .

10

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


12/41

you ' re not doing f l i gh t ops, you ' re j u s t , ano therasshole on th e water . And the same ru les apply to youas apply to everybody e lse . Okay?' [I] never ca l l edhim a shoe. [I] never sa id a l l you do i s run ana i rpo r t 12 hours a day. I don ' t know where he ' sge t t ing t ha t .

34. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t he met with Complainant fo r about anhour on October 10, 2012, to review th e naviga t ion ru lesprescr ibed in COLREGs and to s pe c i f i c a l l y address h is concernsabout how Complainant drove STENNIS. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t h a t heobserved Complainant dr ive STENNIS as i f it were always " .. avessel r e s t r i c t ed in i t s a b i l i t y to maneuver" as def ined by th eru les . 5

35. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t on 11 October 2012, he met withComplainant a second time and t o ld him t h a t he discussed h isconcerns regard ing Complainant 's handling of STENNIS dur ing i t srecent S t r a i t of Malacca t r a n s i t with VADM David H. Buss, USN,the Type Commander. Subjec t sa id t ha t Complainant " jus tblanched" when t o ld of the conversa t ion with VADM Buss.36. Here again , we a re faced with conf l i c t ing tes t imony; theComplainant 's account and the Subjec t ' s reco l l ec t ion do notmatch. Complainant a l l eg es t ha t in these two pr iva t econversa t ions Subjec t made " inappropr ia te and der i s ive" comments"des igned to demean" him. We determined t ha t t he se meet ingswere ca l l ed by the Subjec t in orde r fo r him to speak withComplainant about h is handling of STENNIS. We were unable toreconci le t h e i r conf l i c t ing tes t imony about t h e i r p r i v a t econversa t ions . While these conversa t ions were no doubts p i r i t e d , and by e i t he r account Subjec t addressed Complainant inderoga tory terms, it was within Subjec t ' s command au thor i ty toprovide a pr iva te c r i t i que of the performance o f h issubord ina te .

5 A "vesse l r e s t r i c t ed in h er ab i l i t y to maneuver" means a v e s s e l which, dueto t he na tu r e o f he r work, i s r e s t r i c t ed in he r a b i l i t y to maneuver asr equ i r ed by [COLREGs] and i s the re fo re unable to keep out o f the wa y ofanother v e s s e l . Th e term "vesse l s r e s t r i c t ed in t h e i r a b i l i t y to maneuver"s h a l l inc lude but not be l im i ted to : a vesse l engaged in the launching o rrecovery o f a i r c r a f t ...

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval of the Naval IG.

ll


13/41

Subject 's Alleged Mistreatment of Junior Personnel37. Based on our in te rv iews, we l ea rned of i n t e r a c t i o n s Subjec thad with j un io r personne l t ha t we considered in making ourdete rmina t ion about whether Subjec t engaged in abus ive behavior .The f i r s t of these inc iden ts occurred i n Sub jec t ' s of f i c e whenh is s t a f f S p e c i a l i s t was ca l l ed in to br i e f him abouta pa r t i c u l a r adminis t ra t ive mat te r re la ted to h i s p re fe r redmethod of rece iv ing tax exempt pay in the war zone.

, USN, to Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t h a t, USN, from CCSG-3 S t a f f and , USN,

from the STENNIS, br ie fed Subjec t about h is tax exempt payopt ions . According to , they were no t able to exp la inthese opt ions to Subjec t ' s s a t i s f a c t i on . Before he dismissed

, and , Subjec t t o re up the paperworkwhich had been provided to him fo r s igna tu re . sa id

was v i s ib ly shaken a f t e r t h e i r meet ing with Subjec t .Testimony of

38. submit ted a wri t t en s ta tement about the inc iden t .She wrote :

The Admiral seemed f a i r ly ag i t a t ed before we even gots t a r t ed ! But, expla ined the opt ions andwhy they were ava i lab le to the Admiral and no t o ther ssuch as me and .[Subject] asked a few ques t ions while holding theform. t r i ed to answer the ques t ions . TheAdmiral did not seem to understand. The Admiralturned to me and sa id " look, j u s t expla in it to mel ike you would anyone e l s e . " I t r i ed to r e - i t e r a t ewhat was t ry ing to expla in . It appears hestill d i d n ' t unders tand.Then he asked ... ," do you recommend t h a tpeople do th i s?" t o ld him "no." At t h a tpoin t t he Admiral was angry, he held up th e form andasked "why was I t o ld to s ign t h i s then!" I sa id to[Subject] t ha t he did NOT have to s ign it ... t h i s wasan opt ion NOT a requirement and t ha t we were the rej u s t to l e t him know h is opt ions .

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo no t r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l o f the Naval IG.

12

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c) FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


14/41

He began to r ip up the paper and sa id "Ok, thankyou" ... and we were dismissed.

Subject 's Testimony39. Subject admit ted t ear ing up the paperwork. He t e s t i f i e d ," there was no a t t empt on my pa r t to i n f e r any s o r t of emphasiso r drama on t ea r ing t ha t paper up. I j u s t t o re it up."

Testimony of40. , USN, i s fo r Subjec t . Shet e s t i f i e d about h er day-to-day i n t e r a c t i o n with him.t e s t i f i e d she heard Subjec t e leva te h is voice to emphasize apoin t he was t ry ing to make on a number of d i f f e r e n t occas ions ,bu t she sa id t ha t when he d id so it was no t to the po in t ofye l l ing .41. t e s t i f i e d about conversa t ions she had withvar ious people aboard STENNIS t h a t came up to h e r and askedabout her exper ience working fo r Subjec t . She s t a t e d :

So now when you go through the sh ip , even ac tua l lyprobably more than a month ago, walking through th eship , you know, you have Sai lo rs who say, " I heardhe ' s r e a l hard to work fo r , " you know, or " I d o n ' t seehow you do i t . "You know, people say t ha t .And I always say, "He's human l i ke anyone e l s e . Id o n ' t know what you ' re saying, you know."

Testimony of42. , USN, i s the fo r CCSG-3.He i n i t i a l l y repor ted to CCSG-3 as fo r Subjec t bu t wasreassigned to h is cur ren t du t ies not too long i n to h i s t o u r as

. About h is change in du t ies , t e s t i f i e d :Me and the Admiral weren ' t exac t ly seeing eye to eyeas fa r as j u s t our da i ly kind of i n t e rac t ions witheach o ther .

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease out s ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approval of the Naval IG .

13

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & ( FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


15/41

And he had made the s ta tement , when he f i r s t got here ,t ha t he compared it to a no f a u l t marr iage , and t ha t ,you know, w e ' l l t r y it fo r a couple months, and fo rwhatever reason t ha t I had any i s sues with him o r hehad any i s sues with me, we would change j obs .Obviously I would change jobs , and you know, it wouldbe no t de t r imenta l o r anything, it 's j u s t sometimespersona l i t i e s don ' t work out t oge the r .

43. t e s t i f i e d t ha t the re were t imes Subjec t ye l l ed a thim. He sa id he a l so observed Subjec t y e l l a t o th e r members ofth e St r ike Group s t a f f and the Warfare Commanders. He sa id

"seemed to t ake the brunt of i t , " but l a t e rbecame a t a rge t fo r Sub jec t ' s ye l l ing . s t a t e d t ha tthere was "no j u s t i f i c a t i o n in ye l l ing a t someone."

44. s t a t ed :I t would seem to me t ha t while - - though he ' sd i f f i c u l t to work fo r .. I don ' t even know how muchpeople want to t a lk to him anymore. I d o n ' t know howmuch t ha t would necessa r i ly impact the sh i p ' s and youknow, the A ir Wing's a b i l i t y to cont inue to do themission as a whole, I t h ink .So in t h a t regard, I would say it's not impact ing. Imean, we can still keep doing the job we' re out hereto do. [He] j u s t makes it more d i f f i c u l t .

Testimony o f45. t e s t i f i e d t ha t he took over from as

j u s t p r i o r to the St r ike Group's deployment in August . Hesa id p r i o r to deployment he and shared quar t e rs .

t e s t i f i ed :There were many t imes , s ince we d id room toge ther ,when would come from work, and he would goon a vent ing sess ion of what happened dur ing t ha t day.So when I go t t o ld I was going to be theneed less to say, I had had my dru the rs about it ...


14

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)


16/41

46. sa id Subjec t vac i l l a ted about how the day-to-daymanagement of h is schedule would be accomplished and how s t a f fproduc ts would be presented to him fo r h is cons idera t ion andapproval . Those changes resu l t ed in a g r ea t dea l of f rus t r a t i onfo r and, in opin ion , o ther s on the s t a f f andin the St r ike Group l eadership team. He sa id members of theSt r ike Group s t a f f t r i ed to avoid contac t with Subjec t becausethey were no t sure how they might be rece ived by him.47. Providing an example of the s t a f f ' s reac t ion to Subjec t ' sgenera l demeanor, t e s t i f i e d :

I sit r i g h t next to the , who s i t s next to the, and we would always, you know,something would come up, br ing it to th e boss .And it would be, "I 'm not taking i t . "nobody wanted to go in the re . Becausewhat was going to happen.

You know,you never knew

48. informed us dur ing h is in te rv iew t h a t he haddecided to submit h is l e t t e r of r es igna t ion from Naval Service .He t e s t i f i e d t ha t it was more than j u s t h is t rea tment bySubject , which fac tored i n to h i s f i na l decis ion to leave ac t iveduty. He t e s t i f i e d , however, t ha t working fo r Subjec t "made itvery easy to wri t e t ha t l e t t e r and submit i t . "

Testimony o f49. , USN, i s the STENNIS

. He summarized h is own opin ion about Subjec t ' sl eadership s ty l e and t e s t i f i ed :

I f you ' re asking me do I th ink he ' s crossed the l i net h a t would ge t him f i red , I 'm not sure about t ha t ...I'll make the s ta tement t ha t [Subject ' s s ty le ] i s notthe leadership s ty l e t ha t the Navy cur ren t ly preachesand t ha t we' re t ry ing to pursue , t ha t , you know, whatwe want in a l eader , you know, the th ings t h a t we t r yto hold dear , I don ' t th ink he ' s got it, I mean, but Imean i f you f i r ed everybody fo r being a j e rk , wewouldn ' t have very many people in the Navy.

FOR O F F I C I ~ USE ONLYDo no t r e l ease out s ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval o f th e Naval IG.

15

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)



17/41

Subject 's Language in Speeches and Written Communications50. Complainant a l leged tha t , in speeches to St r ike Grouppersonne l and wri t t en guidance to the Commanders and CommandingOff i ce rs of th e St r ike Group, Subjec t used profan i ty and madeover ly aggress ive s ta tements . He quoted two examples:

And should they (Iran) be so misguided as to take act ionaga ins t us , we w i l l cu t out t h e i r hear t s and throw them onthe ash heap of h i s to ry . We w i l l crush them .... kick the l i v ing s h i t out of the enemy.

July 2012 A ll Hands Call51. In July 2012, while STENNIS was a t sea and undergoing i t ssusta inment t ra in ing exerc ises (SUSTEX), Subjec t rece ivedu n o f f i c i a l confi rmat ion from VADM Gerald R. Beaman, USN,Commander, U.S. THIRD Flee t , t h a t STENNIS, along with MOBILEBAY, would surge deploy to the Middle East in August 2012.Thereaf te r , Subjec t dra f ted and de l ive red a speech, which hemarked as c l a s s i f i ed "SECRET," to no t i fy h i s s t a f f , members ofthe embarked C ar r i e r A ir Group and Dest royer Squadron, and th eSTENNIS crew t ha t an ea r ly deployment was going to happen.S u b jec t ' s speech was recorded, de l ive red to MOBILE BAY, and,subsequently , played fo r the MOBILE BAY crew as wel l . 652. Subjec t ' s speech conta ined spec i f i c re fe rences to I r an andexpressed h is understanding of I r a n ' s po te n t i a l impact on theworld economy should they take ac t ion to c lose the S t r a i t ofHormuz from commercial t r a f f i c . Subjec t t o ld h i s audience:

But t h i s i s what YOU need to know: the very su rv iva lof the United Sta tes i s a t r i sk i f the I r an ians havet h e i r way. This a i r c r a f t ca r r i e r , t h i s A ir Group andour c ru i s e r were b u i l t with one purpose: t o de te r

NAVINSGEN N2 determined the informat ion in the speech to be u n c l a s s i f i e d .Moreover, we determined t h a t marking th e unc lass i f i ed t e x t SECRET was af a i l u r e to fol low procedures ou t l ined in Chapter 4 o f SECNAV M-5510.36,Department of th e Navy In format ion Secur i ty Program. NAVINSGEN e lec ted n otto make t h i s a separa te a l l ega t ion , however, and views t h i s as an i s sue to bepr ope r ly addressed by th e Subjec t ' s cha in of command. S u b j e c t ' s SCIindoc t r ina ted s t a tu s r equ i res s p e c i f i c a l l y r e levan t t r a in in g onc l a s s i f i c a t i o n markings d i r ec ted by SSO Navy in BANIF 05-012. Thei n d i v i d u a l ' s Chain of Command should ensure he completes t h i s t r a in ing andthen document t h a t t r a in ing in h i s secu r i ty record.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls without p r io r approval o f th e Naval IG .

16


18/41

aggress ion - but should de te rrence f a i l - to quicklydefea t the enemies of peace and freedom. In o th e rwords, shipmates , t h i s i s why we have a Navy. Sowe' re going.

53. Subjec t ' s speech a l so inc luded:Some of you a re probably worr ied about somethinghappening to us . Well don ' t . This i s a well -seasonedteam from Airman and Seaman to Admiral.. We a re wel l equipped, wel l - t r a ined .and we have the love andsuppor t of the American people behind us. Comparet ha t to our decrep i t and cor rup t adversary [Iran] .Thei r mil i ta ry i s a house of cards -hor r ib ly undercapable as a r e su l t of cr ipp l ing sanc t ions fo r over adecade. And should they be so misguided as to takeac t ion aga ins t us , we w i l l cu t out t h e i r hear t s andthrow them on th e ash heap of h i s to ry . We w i l l crushthem.

September 2012 All-Hands Speech and Statement of Pr ior i t i es54. In e a r l y September 2012, a f t e r the St r ike Group s a i l e d fo ri t s surge deployment, Subjec t de l ive red a second speech a t ana l l -hands c a l l in the STENNIS hanger bay. His second speechprovided h is audience with a h i s t o r i ca l perspect ive of theMiddle East and offered an expanded discuss ion of the bas icpoin ts he presented to Str ike Group personne l in h is f i r s tspeech. In t h i s speech, Subjec t s ta ted the St r ike Group shouldbe prepared to "kick the l iv ing s h i t out of the enemy."55. On 13 September 2012, Subjec t i ssued h is "Peacet ime andWartime P r i o r i t i e s fo r JOHN C STENNIS Str ike Group" in a wri t t enmemorandum to the Commanders and Commanding Off ice r s of theSt r ike Group. Under the heading, "Wartime Pr io r i t i e s , " Subjec twrote: "Kick the l i v ing s h i t out of the enemy." This sec t ionof the memorandum fu r the r s t a t ed :

I f we t r a in and opera te l ike we' re going to war, t h a tw i l l be easy. A ll w e ' l l need i s the permiss ion.We're s a i l i ng i n to h i s to ry to make our mark. Never inour l i fe t ime has the re been such an impor tan t c a l l i ngfo r a St r ike Group. Secre ta ry Pane t ta t o ld you beforewe s a i l e d t ha t he was sending the bes t . You a re th e

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval of the Naval IG.

17


19/41

bes t , but we' re only as good as our l a s t dance. Theworld w i l l be watching. Le t ' s make America proud ofu s .Subject 's Testimony about His All Hands Communications

56. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t the purpose of h is July speech wastwofold . He wanted to make t imely no t i f i c a t i on of th e pendingsurge deployment to St r ike Group personnel , par t i cu l a r l y th ejun io r personnel , so t ha t they would have th e maximum t imeposs ib le to make plans with t h e i r f ami l i es . He also wanted toprovide St r ike Group personnel with a c l e a r reason they couldunderstand fo r the STENNIS and MOBILE BAY having been se lec tedto re turn to the Middle East a f t e r such a s h o r t pe r iod of t ime .a t home fol lowing t h e i r previous deployment.57. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t h a t he marked h is July speech asc l a s s i f i ed SECRET when he dra f ted it in orde r to minimize theposs i b i l i t y t h a t it would be shared premature ly outs ide theSt r ike Group. He s t a t e d t ha t it did not conta in any c l a s s i f i edin format ion .58. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d he used h is second speech as anoppor tuni ty to convey some of h is extens ive knowledge about thet hea te r to Str ike Group personnel . He s t a t e d t ha t i n h isprevious assignment as the Deputy Commander of the U.S. FIFTHFlee t , he was afforded spec i f i c in s igh t s about the region.Subject . sa id he be l ieved shar ing h i s in s igh t s with the S a i l o r onthe deck p la t e would help them b e t t e r understand the connect ionbetween t h e i r day- to-day work and the world around them.Subjec t a l so t e s t i f i e d he used the second speech as anoppor tuni ty to discuss h is Commander's wartime p r io r i t i e s . Inh is speech he s t a t ed :

But some of you a re th inking - t h i s i s n ' t exac t ly whatyou sa id on the lMC back in July... What about cu t t ingout the hear t s of our enemies and throwing them on theash heap of his tory?Well, t ha t br ings me to my wartime p r io r i t i e s . I f ouradversa ry should be so unwise as to i n i t i a t eh o s t i l i t i e s with t h i s St r ike Group, and t he P re s iden tdec ides to do something in r e tu rn , those th reep r i o r i t i e s neck down to one.


18


20/41

Kick the l i v ing s h i t out of the enemy. I f we t r a i nand opera te l ike we' re going to war, t ha t w i l l beeasy. A ll w e ' l l need i s the permiss ion .We're sa i l i ng i n to h i s to ry to make our mark. Never inour l i fe t ime has the re been such an impor tan t c a l l i ngfo r a St r ike Group. 7 Secre ta ry Pane t ta sa id l a s t weekt ha t he was sending the bes t . You a re the bes t , butwe' re only as good as our l a s t dance. The world w i l lbe watching. Le t ' s make America proud of us .

59. Subsequent to providing tes t imony, Subjec t sen t a wri t t ens ta tement , dated 19 November 2012, to the Naval InspectorGeneral . In h is s tatement , Subject wrote tha t in add i t ion tomotiva t ing St r ike Group personne l by providing them with a c l e a rpurpose fo r having to deploy aga in so soon, he was t ry ing toguard aga ins t the poss i b i l i t y t ha t St r ike Group personne l mightdevelop a complacent , "been the re done t ha t , " a t t i t ude . Subjec tfu r the r explained h is th inking by s t a t i ng : "Complacency l eads tod i s t r a c t i on . In our profe ss ion , d i s t r a c t i on can have t r a g i cconsequences."

Witness Testimony about Subject 's A ll Hands Remarks60. We in terviewed a t o t a l of 43 witnesses inc luding the St r ikeGroup's Warfare Commanders and key members of t h e i r r espec t ives t a f f s , as wel l as jun io r of f i c e r s and j un io r e n l i s t e d personnelfrom STENNIS, the embarked A ir Group and Des t royer Squadron. Wea l so in terviewed the , ,and of MOBILE BAY. Most of those wein te rv iewed were ques t ioned s pe c i f i c a l l y about t h e i r reac t ion tothe two speeches made by Subjec t . Vir tua l ly a l l the witnesseswe spoke to about the speeches , regardless of t h e i r rank, sa idthey be l ieved Subjec t de l ive red h is speeches to provide themwith motivat ion fo r t h e i r surge deployment. Some of those wein te rv iewed ques t ioned Subjec t ' s choice of words s t a t i ng t ha tthey did not r eca l l ano ther Flag Off ice r using profan i ty whenspeaking pub l ic ly . A few of th e of f i c e r s ass igned to STENNISexpressed concern t ha t Subjec t ' s remarks crossed "the l ine" o rcould be i n fe r red to mean t ha t Subjec t in tended to l ead theSt r ike Group in an over ly aggress ive manner.

At th e t ime o f Subjec t ' s speeches, the re wa s cons ide r ab le pub l ic mediacoverage regarding renewed s ta tements by va r ious h i g h - l e v e l I r an ian o f f i c i a l stha t I r an might c lose the S t r a i t of Hormuz as sanc t ions a g a i n s t t h e i r count rycont inued to b i t e a t I r an ' s economy.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval of the Naval IG .

19

FOIA EX (b)


FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)


21/41

61. We cons idered th e words t h a t Subjec t spoke and wrote , h isaudience, h is tes t imony regarding the purpose fo r th e speechesand h is commander 's p r i o r i t i e s memorandum, and th e t es t imony o fwitnesses who heard the speeches and read th e memorandum,inc lud ing wi tnesses who, l i ke th e Complainant, expressed concernwith the genera l tone of what Subjec t sa id and wrote .62. With regard to whether S u b jec t ' s s ta tements "we w i l l cu tout t h e i r h ea r t s and throw them on th e ash heap of h i s t o ry , ""wi l l crush them," and "kick th e l i v ing s h i t out o f the enemy,"we determined t h a t these s t a tements were hyperbol ic i n con tex tand not i nappropr i a t e fo r th e in tended aud ience .

Use o f Profanity and Middle Finger Gesture at Foc's le Fol l i e s63. Complainant a l leged, and witnesses s t a t ed , t h a t on th enigh t of 16 October 2012, Subjec t a t t ended C ar r i e r A ir GroupNINE's Foc ' s le Fo l l i e s and a t th e conclus ion of the f o l l i e s madea presen ta t ion dur ing which he "waved h is middle f inger toeveryone in th e crowd" and then s t a t e d , " I d o n ' t know who I 'mgoing to fuck f i r s t o r hardes t , VFA-14 o r VFA-41." 8 Complainantadded t h a t the s ta tements were made in j e s t and d i r ec t ed a t th esquadrons t h a t had mocked Subjec t dur ing s k i t s .64. Witnesses t e s t i f i e d t h a t a i r wing and o th e r of f i c e r s fromSubjec t ' s s t a f f and STENNIS were pre sen t a t th e Foc ' s le F o l l i e s .65. Subjec t admi t ted t h a t he made th e ges tu re and t e s t i f i e d her eca l l ed say ing " I d o n ' t know who I 'm going to fuck more [VFA 14o r VFA 41], b u t we've go t e igh t months to f igure it o u t . " Het e s t i f i e d t ha t h is "goal was to turn around and give it to themevery b i t as much as they gave it to [him] " in t h e i r re spec t ivesk i t s .66. Regarding th e middle f inge r d i sp lay , Subjec t t e s t i f i e d :

And so I g ot up, and I sa id , "When I was f ly ing withhe t o ld me a gree t ing t h a t you guys use when

you ' re waving to each othe r in th e a i rp lane , " and IFoc ' s le F o l l i e s i s a t r a d i t i o n in Naval Avia t ion. At the end of each l i n eper iod, the o f f i c e r s from th e squadrons embarked aboard the c a r r i e r ga ther torecognize th e p i l o t s t h a t performed the bes t , and to make fun o f each o t h e r .

It i s common fo r the St r ike Group Commander, CO of the ca r r i e r , and /or A i rWing leadership to be made fun o f during one o r more s k i t s perfo rmed bysquadron personne l . Witness te s t imony in t h i s case es tab l i shed Subjec t ando ther s were made fun o f during th e October 16th f o l l i e s he ld onboard STENNIS.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval o f the Naval IG .

20

FOIA EX (b)(6) &


22/41

ind ica ted with my middle f inger . And raucousl augh te r . This i s exac t ly what they want. And I wasa war f i gh t e r t a lk ing to o the r war f i gh t e r s .

67. Regarding the comment to the members of VFA 14 and VFA 41,Subjec t t e s t i f i e d :And then I sa id - - the tw o sk i t s t ha t had p i l lo r i ed[me] the most came from guys in squadron VFA 41 andVFA 14. And t ha t i s [when] I said. . "I don ' t know whoI 'm going to fuck more, but we've go t e igh t months tof igure it ou t , " i s what I sa id a t the end of t ha t .

68. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t he a l so complimented th e crews andt o ld them, "You guys did spectacuJ.,ar on our c a r r i e rc e r t i f i c a t i on" and added, "we' re going to have a grea t c ru i se .Thanks fo r t h i s . "69. Subjec t a l so t e s t i f i e d t ha t h is pa r t a t th e Foc ' s le Fo l l i e s"was grea t" and the feedback he go t "from and th e was itwas outs tanding. 'You cou ldn ' t have done b e t t e r ' , 'It was outof the pa rk ' . " Subjec t a l so sa id t ha t he d id n o t bel ieve therewas any problem with h is displaying h is middle f inger o r h iss ta tement in the con tex t of t h ~ Foc ' s le Fol l i e s . He sa id , "Thatsomebody would mis in te rp re t t h i s i s beyond me."70. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t when f i r s t i nv i t ed to the Foc ' s leFo l l i e s he sa id he would no t a t tend . He sa id t h a t he unders toodt ha t a t these events " they g ive each o ther a little hard t ime,sometimes, a little too much. I d i d n ' t t h ink a s a ' shoe ' Iwould l ike i t . " He sa id he l a t e r changed h is mind and agreed toa t t end , but t h a t he had provided guidance t ha t the re were th reeth ings he wanted no t discussed, "Gender, race , sexua lor ien ta t ion . . my guidance was don ' t embarrass the Navy."71. Subjec t a l so provided con tex t behind h is making the ges tu reand the comment. He t e s t i f i e d " I t was an a t t empt to conveycomradeship to people t ha t i n t e rac ted in t h i s fa sh ion . " Hes t a t ed :

We l i ve in a cu l tu re where we ask people to r i sk t h e i rl i ve s . Espec ia l ly the p i l o t s t ha t land those machineson those ca r r i e r s . They have a cu l tu re . A cu l tu rebased on mutual t eas ing . Giving each o ther a hard

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo no t r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l of th e Naval IG.

21

FOIA EX (b)(6) FOIA EX (b)(


23/41

t ime. For the purposes of my presen ta t ion of Foc ' s leFo l l i e s , I was adapt ing to t ha t cu l tu re .

72. We in terviewed some of the of f i c e r s presen t a t th e Foc ' s leF o l l i e s . For the most pa r t , the witnesses t e s t i f i e d t ha t theywere not offended and unders tood Subjec t was responding to s k i t st ha t poked fun a t him. One witness s t a t ed , "he bas ica l ly wasshowing t ha t he can take t ha t r ibb ing and he can throw it r i g h tback." Other witnesses t e s t i f i e d t ha t they d id not see theges ture o r r eca l l th e comment.73. On the o th e r hand, one Commander t e s t i f i e d :

My sense was not t h a t he was he was angry . Mysense was t ha t he was t ry ing to br ing himsel f tothe l e v e l of the l i eu tenan t s , the JO 's [ jun io roff i ce rs ] a t Fol l i e s . I r e a l l y f e l t l i ketha t probably was inappropr ia te , and t ha t asSt r ike Group Commander . . he ' s supposed to bes e t t i ng the example, no t devolv ing down to t ha tl eve l .

74. Subjec t ' s conduct a t Foc ' s le Fol l i e s i s no t disputed .75. Most of the witnesses we in terviewed abou t the Foc ' s leFo l l i e s t e s t i f i e d they were not offended by t he ge s tu re he madeo r the words he spoke. Thei r test imony a l igned with Subjec t ' stes t imony t h a t he only intended to "give it to them every b i t asmuch" as they gave it to him in t h e i r s k i t s . We were morepersuaded, however, by the tes t imony of the Commander who s ta tedtha t Subjec t "was t ry ing to br ing himse l f to th e l eve l of thel i eu tenan t s , the JO ' s . " We agreed with the witness t ha t Subjec tshould have been s e t t i ng the example, "not devolving down tot ha t l eve l " .76. Moreover, Subjec t ' s language a t Foc ' s le F o l l i e s i l l u s t r a t e sthe r i sk any Commander assumes by the use of profan i ty in publ i cspeech, even in ins tances where a reasonable pe rson might notf ind it objec t ionab le . A Commander who does so may f ind itd i f f i c u l t to t he r e a f t e r co r r ec t a subordinate who uses s i m i l a rlanguage, even in s i tua t ions where it i s c l e a r ly inappropr ia te ,without j u s t ly being accused of s e t t i ng a double s tandard .

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease out s ide IG channe ls without p r io r approval of the Naval IG .

22


24/41

Alleged Racial ly Offensive Email77. On 5 October 2012, using h i s unc lass i f i ed government emailaccount , Subjec t sen t an emai l to s ix White sen io r members ofSt r ike Group l eadership - , , and ;

USN, STENNIS ;, USN, , CAG NINE; andComplainant. 9 Attached to the emai l was a photograph Subjec ttook of an e n l i s t e d African-American male Sa i lo r s tanding on thenose of an EA-6B a i r c r a f t . The Sai lo r p ic tu red was s tanding

a s t r i de th e r e fue l ing probe on the nose of the a i r c r a f tprepar ing to place a pro tec t ive (weather) cover over th e end ofthe r e fue l ing probe. In h is emai l s , Subjec t wrote comments tosugges t to the reader t ha t the r e fue l ing probe was a g ian t penisemanating from the Sai lo r .78. Subjec t wrote in h is f i r s t emai l conveying th e p i c t u re hehad taken, " I be l i eve th i s [p ic ture] speaks fo r i t s e l f . " In asecond emai l to the same s ix o f f i c e r s , Subjec t wrote: " I see aphoto con tes t . F i r s t up: It's twoo, i t s twoo [ i t a l i c sadded] .... "79. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t "it's twoo, it's twoo .." i s dia logfrom the movie Blazing Saddles . He sa id the dia log from themovie i s an "o f f -co lo r joke .. it's a sexua l a l lus ion .. " and it'sabout " race ."80. Blazing Saddles , a 1974 Mel Brooks movie, was a parody ofthe Western movie genre . In the movie, Madeline Kahn plays thepa r t of L i l i von Shtupp, a saloon worker h i red to seduce Bart ,the town's she r i f f , played by Cleavon L i t t l e . In one scene,Li l i , who speaks with a German accen t , asks Bart , who i sAfrican-American, " Is it twoo what they say about you people aregif ted?" Next, the re i s the sound of a z ipper , and L i l l iexclaims, "Oh, it 's twoo, it's twoo, it's twoo, it's twoo."

9 We contac ted Navy Personnel Command and reques ted e th n i c i t y / r a c edete rmina t ion fo r these s ix o f f i c e r s . Ass is tan t Commander, Navy PersonnelCommand fo r Career Progress ion (PERS-8) s t a t e d t h a t these o f f i c e r s s e l f r epor t ed in t h e i r o f f i c i a l personnel f i l e t h a t they were White, No Ethn ic i ty ,with the except ion of Complainant who i s l i s t e d as White, Mexican.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l of th e Naval IG.

23

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)




25/41

Comments about Minority Flag Off icers81. Complainant a l leged t ha t i n ea r ly July 2012, a t a WarfareCommanders' so c i a l funct ion p r i o r to deployment, Subjec t s t a t e dtha t the pr imary reason ADM , VADMand RADM had been "ass igned to t h e i r cur ren tpos i t ions and rank [was] s t r i c t l y because of t h e i r e thnic i ty ,thus p o l i t i c a l . "82. Complainant t e s t i f i e d t ha t Subjec t to ld him t ha t minor i tyof f ice r s were "br inging down" the qua l i ty of th e SurfaceCommunity's pool of Flag Off ice r s . He t e s t i f i e d t ha t Subjec tsa id to him:

The reason why the Surface Community has so many[minority] Flag Off i ce rs and not the Aviat ionCommunity, i s because the Avia t ion Community t akescare of t ha t . They e i t he r can ' t g e t in , or t he y ' r enot ge t t ing through the f l i gh t school .

83. Complainant t e s t i f i e d t ha t Subjec t also spoke improper lyabout minor i ty Flag Off i ce rs dur ing a dinner conversa t ion theyhad with when the STENNIS was conduct ing a p o r tv i s i t in Phuket , Thailand. Complainant and wentto dinner a t a l o ca l res t au ran t . Complainant i nv i t ed Subjec t toj o in them fo r dinner but he ar r ived a f t e r they had f in i shedea t ing . Complainant al leged t ha t a f t e r Subjec t jo ined them, he"again ra i sed inappropr ia te i s sues with Navy leadership andminor i t i e s in pos i t ions of re spons ib i l i ty . " Complainant fu r t h e ral leged t ha t Subjec t s ta ted in genera l terms "minor i t ies werebringing down the Surface Community with too many minor i ty FlagOff ice r s . "84. t e s t i f i e d t ha t he reca l l ed t ha t Subjec t maderemarks a t the dinner in Phuket about VADM andRADM With regard to comments about VADM ,

t e s t i f i e d t ha t Subjec t s ta ted t h a t VADMwas not "very humble" in h er comments fo r a news a r t i c l e abouthe r recen t promotion. reca l l ed tha t in the newsa r t i c l e VADM s ta ted she had been promoted to Vice Admiral"despi te the e f fo r t s of others" and "despi te some bar r i e r s . "85. a l so t e s t i f i e d t ha t Subjec t s t a t e d t ha tVADM minori ty s ta tus may have a ided " in h er speed ofse lec t ion" to th ree s t a r s . t e s t i f i e d t h a t

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval of th e Naval IG .

24

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c) (b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)


26/41

Subjec t commented t ha t because of her minor i ty s t a tusVADM "may not have had to cross as many hurdles in thesame fashion to ge t where she was a t . "86. t e s t i f i e d t ha t a t the d inner Subjec t a l sospoke about RADM " in a l ine of di scuss ion of d ive r s i t y ofFlag Off ice rs . "87. a l so s t a t e d t ha t a t the dinner the re was "agenera l re fe rence to minor i ty precepts t ha t I 'm not fami l i a rwith, but I 'm c e r t a in t ha t there are some - - something inprecepts probably fo r Flag [Off icers ] ." s ta tedtha t the discuss ion "was regarding d ive r s i t y and the d ive r s i t yoppor tuni ty in - - I guess poss ib ly [Subjec t ' s ] f rus t r a t i on withthat-- and I don ' t know in what sense ."88. added t ha t he f e l t uncomfortable abouthaving the conversa t ion and he was su rp r i sed t h a t Subjec t spokethe way he d id because he perce ived the remarks as a "s l i gh t l yborde r l ine conversa t ion .. regarding d ive r s i t y . "sa id he was l e f t with the impression t ha t Subjec t did notbe l ieve VADM and RADM "were the h ighes t performingFlag Off ice rs . "89. t e s t i f i e d t ha t a f t e r Subjec t depar ted , heand Complainant spoke about Subjec t ' s remarks.t e s t i f i ed :

But [ ] d id say a f t e r the fac t t ha t , you know,he f e l t l i ke tha t conversa t ion was inaccura te and someof the s ta tements [Subject] - - o r the infe rences[Subject] made he d i dn ' t agree with, and he had workedfo r both those Admirals. But he d id not cha l lenge[Subject] - - the s ta tements a t the d inner i t s e l f .I don ' t be l i eve there was any discuss ion over thecomments being r a c i s t . The discuss ion as I r e c o l l e c tit was regarding dive rs i ty and the d ive r s i t yoppor tuni ty i n - - I guess poss ib ly [Subjec t ' s ]f rus t r a t i on with tha t , tha t - - and I d o n ' t know inwhat sense . I mean, I c a n ' t speak fo r t h a t .But I d o n ' t t h a t ' s - - and t h a t ' s what I r e c o l l e c t .And also in the fo l low-on conversa t ion with

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo no t r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r i o r approval of the Naval IG.

25

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)


27/41

t he re was - - a t no p o i n t was it brought up t ha t thosewere r a c i s t comments.

90. was ques t ioned about whether o r not he had everheard Subjec t s t a t e t h a t an Afr ican-Amer ican Flag Off ice r waspromoted based on race and not a b i l i t y . t e s t i f i e d :

I d o n ' t th ink he has ever made a se r ious remark int h a t regard.. . . I f I have heard remarks made l i ke t ha t ,it i s , I 'm sure it was in j e s t .

91. a l so t e s t i f i e d t h a t Subjec t , "one o r twot imes , " made s ta tements ind ica t ing he bel i eved t ha t in someins tances "someone was given a little leg up based on sex o rrace" fo r Flag Off i ce r promot ions. high l igh ted t h a tth e comments were not p e jo r a t i v e , b ut "more o f a comment o f ,'This i s th e r e a l i t y , ' versus , 'Th i s i s something I c a n ' t l i vew i t h ' . "92. t e s t i f i e d about a conversa t ion he had withSubjec t in September 2012 dur ing which they d i scussed promotionoppor tun i t i e s to Flag Off i ce r . sa id he did notp lace any pa r t i c u l a r s ign i f i cance on t h e i r di scuss ion ; it was,in h is words, " j u s t guys shoot ing the breeze about th e Flags e l ec t i o n process , how narrow it was." s t a t e d t ha tSubjec t and he spoke s pe c i f i c a l l y about th e promot ionoppor tun i t i e s of th e St r ike Group Major Commanders. Het e s t i f i e d :

There i s a little more oppor tun i ty fo r A ir Flags thant he re were fo r Surface F lags , and then we - - t ha t i swhen we g ot in to th e - - you know, 'There probab ly i sgoing to be a d i v e r s i t y s e l e c t on t h a t Surface board,which would f u r th e r narrow oppor tun i t i e s fo r maybesome of our guys l a t e r down th e r o ad , ' so it was j u s ta discuss1on on ava i lab le s l o t s , and the re was no - - Id i d n ' t a t t ach any b ig r a c i a l connec t iv i ty to it o th e rthan it was j u s t th e f ac t of l i f e ...

93. Subjec t denied ever having made a s ta tement t h a t wasr a c i a l l y based about any Flag Off i ce r . 10 He s pe c i f i c a l l y deniedbeing d i s r e sp e c t fu l of ADM and RADM

10 Subjec t t e s t i f i e d on November 8, 2012.FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Do no t r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l of th e Naval IG .26

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)(b)(6) &(7)(c)


28/41

94. Subjec t t e s t i f i e d t ha t he reca l l ed one conversa t ion withComplainant about VADM , however, he could not r e c a l l withce r ta in ty when t h e i r conversat ions took place . Subjec tt e s t i f i e d he t o ld Complainant how tw o of h is f r i ends " d idn ' tfare wel l a t [VADM ] hands ."95. In h is 19 November 2012, wri t t en s ta tement , Sub jec tprovided ad d i t i o n a l in format ion regarding comments he made toComplainant about VADM . He wrote:

[S]ometime in the spr ing o r summer 2012, I expressedmy b e l i e f and disappoin tment t ha t VADM hadended the careers of two f r i ends of mine.... Bothgentlemen are f r i ends of mine, and I have found bothto be outs tanding Naval of f i c e r s . They both se rvedunder VADM while in major command, and bothreceived paper tha t e f fec t ive ly ended t h e i r chancesfo r fu r the r promotions. In re t rospec t , I recognizet ha t having t h i s conversa t ion with one of mysubord ina tes was unwise, and I reg re t it. I w i l l say ,though, t ha t a t no t ime did I r e f e r i n a nega t ive wayto VADM o r dur ing t h i s discuss iono r in any o ther discuss ion . I simply expressed myreg re t t h a t two f ine Naval of f i c e r s had beendisadvantaged, one of whom i s an African-American .

96. Subjec t a l so admit ted making comments about the newsa r t i c l e wri t t en about VADM , bu t h is r e c o l l e c t i o n was t ha the made h is comments about the a r t i c l e onboard STENNIS fol lowinga Warfare Commander meeting. Regarding h is comments aboutVADM and the a r t i c l e , Subjec t t e s t i f i e d :

I 'd read the a r t i c l e and I thought it was focused onse l f . And they t e l l us as Flags you ' re n o t supposedto al low a r t i c l e s to be wri t t en about s e l f . And Iexpressed t ha t opin ion in the War Room.And it was a pe t ty comment on my pa r t , a small-mindedcomment.I don ' t cons ider what I sa id to be dis respec t fu l . Icons ide red it to be c r i t i c a l of the a r t i c l e .

97. In h is 19 November 2012, wri t t en s ta tement , Sub jec tprovided fu r the r in format ion regarding the a r t i c l e wri t t en

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r i o r approval o f the Naval IG.27

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c) (b)(6) &(7)(c)


29/41

about VADM . He asse r ted t ha t the only remarks hemade about the a r t i c l e were made "sometime in September o rOctober 2012" while aboard STENNIS. Subjec t wrote:

There was an a r t i c l e in CHINFO Cl ips t i t l e dto become

I thought th e a r t i c l e was f r ivo lous andse l f -cen te red and expressed t ha t sen t iment . Again, Irecognize my comments were pe t ty . In no way, however,d id I e i t he r s t a t e o r imply t ha t VADM hadar r ived a t h er posi t ion because of demographics. Mycomments were roo ted in f rus t r a t i on a t an a r t i c l e t ha tread as over ly se l f - congra tu la to ry . However, removedfrom th e s i t ua t ion , I know t ha t impress ion would havebeen bes t kep t to myself and I r e g re t the pe t tycomments I made.

Upon r e f l e c t i on , I can c lea r ly see t ha t it was no tappropr ia te fo r me to harbor opin ions about a fe l lowFlag Off ice r and to express t ha t opinion. How ar epor t ing sen io r eva lua tes ano ther o f f i c e r i s thepurview of t ha t repor t ing senior ; it i s no t thebus iness of o ther of f i c e r s to second-guess t ha teva lua t ion . Regardless of the d i spos i t ion of t h i scase , I w i l l render an apology to VADM .

98. Subjec t denied having a conversa t ion within which he discussed Flag Off ice r se lec t ion boardprecep t s . He denied t ha t he s pe c i f i c a l l y t a lked withabout how the se lec t ion board precep t s mightimpact St r ike Group Warfare Commanders.99. Subjec t a l so t e s t i f i e d t ha t he only spoke about ADMwith Complainant in th e con tex t of coordina t ing the Admira l ' sv i s i t to STENNIS in September. Subjec t denied having made anyremark t ha t was d i s respec t fu l toward ADM .100. Subjec t denied having ever sa id t ha t minor i ty Flag Off ice rse lec t ions were br inging down the Surface Line Community.

*****

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo no t r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l o f th e Naval IG.

28

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

FOIA EX (b)(6) & (b)(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)

(b)(6) &(7)(c)


30/41

Allegat ion #1: That Su b j e c t ' s conduct while execut ing h isdu t i e s as Commander, Car r i e r S t r ike Group THREE from Apr i l 2012u n t i l October 2012 d id no t adhere to the requ i rements ofNAVREGS, Ar t i c l e 1131, Exemplary Cond uct.

Applicable Standard Allegat ion #1101. The or i g i na l formulat ion of Ar t i c l e 1131 appears asArt i c l e 1 of the "Rules fo r th e Regulat ion of th e Navy of theUnited Colonies of North-America." Ar t i c l e 1 s t a t e s :

The Commanders of a l l sh ips and vesse l s belong ing toth e THIRTEEN UNITED COLONIES, a re s t r i c t l y r equ i red toshew in themselves a good example of honor and v i r t ueto t h e i r of f i ce r s and men, and to be very v i g i l a n t i ni n spec t ing the behaviour of a l l such as a re underthem, and to discountenance and suppress a l ldi sso lu t e , immoral and d iso rde r ly pra c t i c e s ; and a l so ,such as are con t ra ry to the ru l e s of d i s c ip l i ne andobedience , and t o c o r r e c t those who a re g u i l t y of thesame accord ing to the usage of the sea . 11

102. John Adams i s considered the pr i nc i pa l au thor of theor i g i na l Navy r egu la t ions . While he borrowed heav i ly from theRegulat ions of the B r i t i s h Royal Navy, the requirement todemonstrate a good example of honor and v i r t ue appears unique . 12103. Art i c l e 1131, the cu r ren t formula t ion of th e exemplaryconduct requirement , s t a t e s :

A ll Commanding Off i ce r s and o ther s i n a u t ho r i t y in thenaval se rv ice are r equ i red to show in themselves agood example of v i r t ue , honor, pa t r io t i sm, andsubord ina t ion ; to be v i g i l a n t in i n spec t ing theconduct of a l l persons who are placed under t h e i rcommand; to guard aga ins t and suppress a l l d i s s o l u t eand immoral prac t i ces , and to co r r ec t , according tothe laws and r egu la t ions of the Navy, a l l persons whoare gu i l t y of them; and to take a l l necessa ry andproper measures , under th e laws, r egu la t ions , andcustoms of the naval se rv ice , to promote and sa feguardthe morale , the phys i ca l wel l -be ing and th e gene ra l

11 Courtesy of Naval His tory and Heri tage Command websi te . Seeht tp : / /www.his tory .navy.mi l / faqs / faq59-5 .h tm12 Emphasis .added.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not re l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r i o r approva l of th e Naval IG.

29


31/41

wel fare o f the o f f i c e r s and e n l i s t e d persons undert h e i r command o r charge.

104. Using i d e n t i c a l language, Congress gave A r t i c l e 1131 as t a t u t o ry foundat ion when it enac ted 34 USC 265 i n 1950, whichbecame 10 USC 5947 in 1956. Congress enac ted s i m i l a rl e g i s l a t i on app l i cab le to th e Army and A ir Force in 1997.105. Our l a s t major discuss ion o f A r t i c l e 1131, in a sen io ro f f i c i a l i n v es t i g a t i o n conducted in 2003, ind ica ted o ur b e l i e ft h a t no discuss ion of the s t andard would be complete withou tre fe rence to the f o l l o w i n ~ John Paul Jones d es c r ip t i o n o f anava l of f i c e r :

It i s by no means enough t h a t an o f f i c e r of the navyshould be a capab le mar iner . He must be t h a t o fcourse , but a l so a grea t dea l more. He should be aswel l a gent leman of l i b e r a l educat ion , r e f inedmanners, punc t i l ious cour tesy , ... Coming now to viewth e nava l o f f i c e r aboard ship and in re la t ion to thoseunder h is command, he should be the soul o f t ac t ,pat ience , jus t i ce , f irmness an d char i ty . . . . In h isi n t e rcourse with subord ina tes he should eve r main ta inthe a t t i t u d e of the commander, but t ha t need by nomeans preven t him from the ameni t i es o f c ord i a l i t y o rthe c u l t i v a t i o n o f good ch ee r with in p roper l im i t s .Every Commanding Officer should hold with h issubordinates such re lat ions as wi l l make themconstant ly anxious to rece ive an inv i tat ion to s i t ath is mess table , an d h is bearing toward them should besuch as to encourage them to express the ir opinions tohim with freedom and to ask h is views withoutreserve . 13

Analysis - Allegat ion #1106. Almost ten years ago, our ana lys i s focused on a de ta i l eddiscuss ion o f i nd iv idua l i nc iden t s and a t tempted to use sen io ro f f i c e r witnesses as sub jec t mat t e r exper t s in determin ingwhether th e s ub je c t ' s conduct demonst ra ted such ch a r ac t e r t r a i t sas v i r t u e , pa t r io t i sm, and honor in promoting th e wel l -be ing andmorale of h is subord ina tes . As we aga in f ind it necessary toexamine th e core concepts under ly ing t h i s s tandard , we t h inkt h a t , fo r the "good example" prov i s ion of th e r egu la t ion , its u f f i c i e n t to focus on th e use of the ad j ec t i v e "exemplary" in13 Emphasis added.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l e a s e out s ide IG channels without p r io r approval o f th e Naval IG .

30


32/41

the title of the r egu la t ion . Almost a l l of th e de f in i t i ons oft h i s word t ha t appear on d i c t i o n a r i e s begin wi th the phrase"worthy of imi ta t ion" o r "deserving of imi t a t ion . " Simi la r ly /th e term "example// i s def ined as "one t ha t se rves as a pa t t e rnto be imi ta ted ."107. So our ana lys i s begins wi th ask ing a s imple ques t ion . Dowe be l i eve Subjec t 1 s conduct/ viewed in i t s t o t a l i t y / i s worthyo r deserv ing of imi ta t ion? 14 Our answer/ the p r i n c i p a l reason weconclude t h i s a l l ega t ion i s subs tan t ia ted / i s no.108. We a l so observe t ha t while th e o r i g i n a l formulat ion of th es tandard focused on the persona l conduct of commanders and t h e i rsubordinates / the cur ren t regu la t ion and a key element in Jonesdescr ip t ion of the good o f f i c e r a l so requires CommandingOff i ce rs " to promote and safeguard the morale/ the phys ica lwell -being and the genera l welfare" of t h e i r subordina tes .109. With respect to t h i s element of the r egu la t ion / thecur ren t Chief of Naval Operat ions (CNO) 1 i n h i s "Charge ofCommand 11 to prospec t ive Commanding Off i ce rs dated 8 November2011 1 s t a t ed :

The second accoun tab i l i ty s tandard i s t r u s t . OurNavy/s decen t ra l i zed command and con t ro l s t ruc ture i sb u i l t on t r u s t . Without t ru s t / we cannot de lega teau thor i ty . Without au thor i ty / we cannot f u l f i l l ourr e s pons ib i l i t i e s . Therefore 1 without the delegat ionof au thor i ty / we simply cannot e f f e c t ive ly opera te ourNavy. Trus t i s a fundamental bui ld ing block of ourcommand and con t ro l s t ruc tu re and our a b i l i t y toachieve mission success . 15As a Commanding Officer / you must bui ld t rus t withthose Off icers and Sai lors under your command. Youbui ld t rus t through your character an d in your actionswhich demonstrate profess ional competence, judgment,good sense , and respect for those you l ead. 16 Thist r u s t can only be b u i l t through persona l i n t e r a c t ionon a da i ly bas i s ...

14 This does not mean we be l ieve th e r egu la t ion r equ i res "per fec t conduct ."We reach our conclus ion a f t e r eva lua t ing the p a t t e r n c r e a t e d by th e t o t a l i t yof Subjec t ' s conduct r a t h e r than each ind iv idua l i nc iden t .15 Emphasis in the o r ig in a l .16 Emphasis added.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo n ot r e l ease ou ts ide IG channe ls wi thout p r io r approval of the Naval IG.

31


33/41

110. In ano ther context , General Matthew Ridgway descr ibedthe words of a fe l low Corps Commander a t the Bat t l e of th eBulge, who, on meeting him as they ente red they b a t t l e ,sa id simply: I 'm glad to have you on my f lank. It'scharac te r t ha t counts 17 111. Recal l ing t ha t the o f f i c e r gave no fu r t h e rexplana t ion of h is words, General Ridgway exp la ined nonewas necessary . Bel ie f in a fe l low o f f i c e r ' s ch a r ac t e r"breeds confidence and success ."112. For the most p a r t , the witnesses who had formed an opinionabout Subjec t ' s l eadership qua l i t i e s , the sen io r of f i c e r s withwhom he i n t e rac ted r egu la r ly and those j un io r personne l on h ispersona l s t a f f , l e f t little doubt they would n ot choose tobehave in the same manner as d id t h e i r Commander. In shor t , wedo not be l i eve Subjec t cons i s t en t ly exh ib i ted th e ch a r ac t e rt r a i t s t ha t would engender the t r u s t and confidence of h issubord ina tes , the second c r i t i c a l element of a l e a de r ' sob l iga t ion to demonstrate exemplary conduct.113. In add i t ion to r equ i r ing Commanders to s e t a persona lexample of conduct and promote the morale and welfa re oft h e i r subordina tes , Art i c l e 1131 a l so r equ i res Commandersto regu la te th e conduct of t h e i r subordina tes . Commanderswhose own conduct i s not exemplary in a par t i cu l a r a reaw i l l be unable to e f f e c t ive ly c r i t ique a subord ina te ' ss imi la r conduct withou t los ing t r u s t , confidence, andr espec t .114. As in 2003, we emphasize t ha t Art i c l e 1131 i s ana sp i r a t i o n a l s tandard . I t es tab l i shes a s tandard to which a l lshould s t r i ve to a t t a in but which few always meet. But t h i sdoes not mean of f i c e r s who f a i l to adhere to th e requi rements ofthe a r t i c l e may not , o r should not , be held accountable fo rt h e i r shortcomings. For the converse of Genera l Ridgway'spropos i t i on also app l ies . When exhibi ted ch a r ac t e r t r a i t s dono t breed confidence, a super ior must take ac t ion . Such ac t ion ,however, need no t be pun i t ive in na tu re . In a l l e ga t ion 2, weexpla in why we f ind Subjec t ' s conduct , while f a l l i ng s h o r t of

17 This i n c i d e n t i s recounted by Dr. Richard Swain in h is a r t i c l e "Ref lec t ionon an Ethic of Off icership" publ i shed in the Spring 2007 ed i t ion o fParameters .

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLYDo not r e l ease ou ts ide IG channels wi thout p r io r approva l o f the Naval IG.

32

Date post:	03-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	samlagrone
View:	231 times
Download:	0 times

NAVINSGEN 201203467 Senior Official Investigation Commander Strike Group THREE 8 Feb 2013

Documents