Disbanded?
Jargon ahead…
Bubblehead, tirelessly scouring the Net for any and all news submarine-ish, found this little note on the Navy’s official site.
The Fiscal Year ’07 active-duty commander line promotion selection board was disbanded Feb. 21 after it was discovered that written material not specifically approved by the Secretary of the Navy for distribution to board members was made available to selection board members, both prior to and during the selection board.
…
Rear Adm. David Gove, commander, Navy Personnel Command, has convened an investigation into the issue. The officer who sent the unapproved material has been relieved, pending the outcome of the investigation.
These boards are run rather tightly because of the implications on people’s careers–folks get pretty persnickety about doing it right because the ramifications of sloppy procedure are painful when whoever gets the short end of the stick figures it out. (It’s bad enough to have some people make it and some not, and being a human enterprise it’s not perfect–adding extraneous stuff is worse.)
Well, cancelling a board in progress is definitely not normal. I’d love to hear the back story on that one. I’d also guess that this will delay the results of said new promotion board just a touch. (And a lot of others, most likely, until the perturbations settle out.)
While Bubblehead’s at it he mentioned the submarine department head board results now available on the Web, unlike the painfully secretive (to the point of not getting the information to the right people at the right time) list of exec and skipper selectees. I don’t have any news on it–right now, I live in a joint job in a hole in the ground, and yanked the 1120 eject handle really really hard a couple of months ago, so I’m out of the loop. As a matter of fact, the board fracas completely missed us.
My take on the DH results publishing? Probably a feeler like Pers-42 did in 2000 for about fifteen seconds (and LTs are easier to start with) before the whining started.
(By the way, Bubbles doesn’t know this, but I’m working right now with more than one JO who was positively influenced by him in his active duty previous life, including one who’s convinced he’s commissioned because of the recommendation letter Bubbles wrote for him. It’s all about influence, and looks like our Bubbles had it in spades as far as these LTs are concerned. Good on ‘im.)
13 Responses to “Disbanded?”
Trackback URL for Disbanded?: http://gmapalumni.org/chapomatic/wp-trackback.php?p=1499
February 24th, 2006 at 11:37 pm
1. A “senior officer” inappropriately provider materials to the board. Rumor has it that he was a submariner. The end result will be a new board and several month delay in the results being released. So persons on the edge will be left on edge that much longer.
2. They have been published the CO/XO results via mesaage for the past two boards, much of the whining about that is OBE.
February 24th, 2006 at 11:38 pm
mesaage=message
February 25th, 2006 at 12:06 am
Misconduct probe delays O-5 promotions
By Mark D. Faram
Times staff writer
More than 3,600 lieutenant commanders will have to wait a little longer to find out if their gold leaves will turn to silver next year.
That’s because Navy officials have disbanded the fiscal 2007 line commander selection board due to potential misconduct at Navy Personnel Command in Millington, Tenn.
The call was made Feb. 21 by Vice Adm. John Harvey, the Navy’s chief of personnel, after he had received word that “inappropriate correspondence†had been received by members of the selection board.
“My recommendation to suspend [the board] was because of the possibility of compromise — not because I had determined conclusively that a compromise had actually occurred,†Harvey said. “It’s so important to the Navy as a whole that this process be absolutely above reproach in the fullest meaning of those words with absolutely no hint of irregularity.â€
Rear Adm. David Gove, NPC’s commander, is leading an inverstigation into the matter.
Harvey was not able to describe the nature of the correspondence, but did say the “senior officer†who crafted the unapproved material has been relieved, pending the outcome of the investigation.
The problem was uncovered early in the day Feb. 21 when the correspondence was discovered “in the board spaces,†Harvey said.
The board’s president immediately suspended the panel and Harvey was notified.
Navy regulations strictly regulate communication with board members prior to and during a board’s deliberations. In addition, those who sit in on any board are prohibited from revealing anything that happens while the board is in session.
By the end of the day, Harvey had recommended to Navy Secretary Donald Winter and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Mike Mullen that the board be officially disbanded .
Permission was immediately granted, Harvey said.
“I’m hoping we’ll be able to wrap this up in a week or so,†Harvey said of the investigation.
Still, he considered the issue so important that he flew from Washington, D.C., to Millington the next day to discuss the problem.
“It was very important for me to come and talk to everyone concerned about what this process means to us as the bureau and how our Navy as an institution is dependent on the integrity of this process — nothing is more important,†Harvey said in a phone conversation from Millington, minutes after holding an all-hands call about the issue.
Harvey said the board would be rescheduled “as soon as possible†and officials were already searching for a spot in personnel command’s already busy selection board schedule.
Harvey stressed that setting the new board date was not dependent on the completion of the investigation.
The board, which convened Feb. 14, was in the process of deliberating the promotion of 1,772 officers who were either in or above the promotion zone, as well as also considering an additional 1,868 below-zone officers eligible for promotion.
The 69 board members and recorders who had traveled to Millington to participate in the board have been sent back to their commands. New members will be required when the new board convenes.
Any deliberations and documents generated by the first board during its aborted, week-long session will be sealed and locked away, Harvey said.
“In essence, the new board must start over from scratch,†Harvey said.
Harvey’ action is not unprecedented. Boards have been disbanded three times in the past four years and others have been investigated, though no misconduct was found in subsequent investigations, officials say.
In 2002, the fiscal 2003 reserve line commander board was disbanded, followed in 2003 with the fiscal 2004 active duty supply corps board.
In addition, the fiscal 2005 active-duty chief warrant officer 5 board got shut down in early 2004.
And last year, the E-8 selection board was investigated after an e-mail leak of the board’s selection list was sent out prior to final Navy approval. The investigation found the problem occurred after the board had adjourned, and the message was released.
February 25th, 2006 at 1:26 am
Thanks for the article, although a link would have been good so I don’t have to worry about taking the whole article from somebody (fair use).
With all due respect to an anonymous commenter to my site, I don’t believe you.
I know more than five officers who were not notified of their selection status in the method and time supposedly required for the last two boards. If you find a DTG for a message that wasn’t PERSFOR submarine flags, fine, even if one of those was put out, nice; but that is not what I saw on the waterfront the last two boards. It worked okay when the CO was not apprehensive to tell a guy, when the guy was within the submarine chain of command, and where an admiral was nearby who knew to go looking. When those conditions were not met, officers were left in the dark until either they got a hold of the detailer (and that sucks for the detailer, of course) or subvert the system another way.
The method used for notifying XO candidates was different from what you described from my observation, and I argue not effective in actually letting the affected officers get notified properly, and for those not selected just another way to prove how valuable SS and nonselect are to the community. Not whining, just observing.
What you may have seen or heard about was the message a squadron commodore would put out to his boats once he got the word. Some commodores did that. Some did not. One CO either file 13′d the message or decided not to tell his XO nonselect until the guy found out another way. Many XO candidates are not going to see one of those messages because they’re usually on shore.
February 25th, 2006 at 8:31 am
This used to be the story. Not anymore. No, it is not from the Commodore. CNSF, VADM Munns sends the message out to the Submarine Force. I will get the date time group and the last message for you on Monday. I don’t know what you saw on the waterfront but believe me the waterfront was pleasantly surprised to see the message. Concur that those on shore duty may not see the message. One of the problems is that a Senior Officer is designated to inform those selelected or not. This has varying degrees of success. But it is easy to get the message now. Even on shore duty, the messages are quickly circulated via e-mail among the community. Atleast I can speak for those at the War College, NDU, and on the Joint Staff.
Pers-42 also included the message process in the most recent community status brief, can’t remember if it was verbal or on a slide. Unfortunately they haven’t posted the new brief online (still Jan 05) argh!!!. There website has much to be desired.
With regard to the CO/XO screening discussion that has taken to the blogosphere.
1.) Pers-42 isn’t the smoothest running outfit, OK, get over it.
2.) The screening process is pretty damn fair. But remember “ducks will always vote for ducks.” Should have recognized that this was the “nuclear navy†before we joined.
3.) Service in the Navy, is just that. It is about seizing opportunities and serving wherever the organization, however anachronistic, has a place for you.
February 25th, 2006 at 11:22 am
Chap — Have those guys get ahold of me! (joel.bubblehead (at) gmail.com).
Subpen — I’m not denying that, normally, people were getting notified. I was on deployment on the Stennis when I found out I screened for XO, and found out pretty quick. I’d still be surprised if there’s a list/message that, say, a YG92 guy could find that would show which of his peers screened. For me, a YG89 guy, such a list didn’t exist.
February 25th, 2006 at 12:58 pm
Bubs, there was a list, and it had rankings. You just didn’t get to see it.
Not arguing with Subpen’s 1, 2, or 3, just saying that Pers-42 fails its people in a time when it shouldn’t. If the last board had a message come out, great…didn’t see it, and Munns wasn’t there the previous year, which casts a pall on your “past two boards” claim. (I was in on one of those conversations at CSL shortly before this.) And if you’re not inside the lifelines how does this message get to the guy? (F’rinstance, what about the PEP, the ESG sub ops, the joint guy, the IA? Those are all guys that deserve to be told on time and correctly. It didn’t happen. That is a failure. Would the same team fail to notify if it was a QA or NR issue? Why is that?)
Who in the community is the person responsible to mentor non due course guys who aren’t chuckleheads and are needed for 1120 jobs? Bet you didn’t see that in the annual brief.
Yeah, I “got over it”, all right, by recognizing that my contributions were actually welcomed elsewhere. Others in my situation “got over it” by getting out at the 15 year point because they were sick of being shoved aside, or getting out as priors as soon as possible before the O-5 promotion board even met, or distancing themselves from the community as far as possible once they finished their XO tour. Not the call I made, but I see the faces of those who did stay to 20 as 1120s and it was a lot of humble pie to eat.
They’re dedicated folks doing the work in the 42 shop, but the American submariner culture is such that a non-due-course guy is leprous. Submariners are an arrogant group by nature and nurture so that’s hard for some to take. Add shabby treatment from the selection and post-selection notification process, and there’s significant incentive to GTFO as soon as feasible. The fiasco with years of near-zero O-5 selection rates for XOSS/nonselect means that the guys who at the beginning of their career were top 10% at least are now The Guy Who Didn’t Make Rank–and the other communities try to figure out why we eat our own at O-4/5.
Those guys in the sub community management shop who need control grade billets? Guess they’d better freaking “get over it”, too, huh.
Good luck with that.
February 25th, 2006 at 3:47 pm
Chap, can’t argue with much of that. Concur with most. Unfortunatley, who are chuckleheads are not, is a matter of opinion. There are those who wrongly see every non-select as one.
But granted we do a horrible job with that enter side of the community, in my view, and it is tragic. We must do better but I doubt we will. It is inherent in the Navy and works that way in other communities (it is all about command–in many ways that is right for a Navy though).
My point is that one needs to control your destiny, sounds like you did (good on you).
But the messages were definitely sent and I will post last year’s on Monday or so. Not arguing that wasn’t badly mismanged in the past (it certainly was) and I was part of that decision to send the message. Now atleast we look one another in the eye.
All in all, we need more solutions and the only to change things is to work hard day-to-day exerting as much influence as possible.
I just started looking at blogs…been at sea…and I am disappointed that few people still inside the community participate in these discussions. So, the good points made are lost to those who may have some impact. Out here!!!
February 27th, 2006 at 4:28 pm
DTG of said message and header as promised:
R 271220Z MAY 05 psn 147148H28
FM COMNAVSUBFOR NORFOLK VA
TO ALSUBFOR
BT
UNCLAS//N02300//
MSGID/GENADMIN/COMNAVSUBFOR/-/MAY//
SUBJ/FY06 SUBMARINE COMMANDING OFFICER AND EXECUTIVE OFFICER SCREENING BOARD RESULTS//
March 1st, 2006 at 5:45 pm
No response. What happened to “I don’t believe you?”
March 1st, 2006 at 7:10 pm
Took me a day to go looking in the message database. It ain’t there. I’m sure it’s in somebody else’s database, but not where I work.
[sarcasm]Oh, Pardon Me, oh all important anonymous commenter, that I was SO LATE in achieving your Previously Unknown And So Important Deadline. I’ll refund all the money you paid me.[/sarcasm]
What I was going to do, assuming I found the message, was to look at all the names, figure out what organizations they were in when the message came out, then congratulate you for getting the message out but then gently note that sending a message to ALSUBFOR is similar to putting a Word file on FlagSESWeb and assuming that the nonsubmariners–or non-Navy officers, or non-US officers in charge of the guys–will go look for the information somehow. Still doesn’t correct the failure.
I’m glad the message went out in ’05. I did not see one in ’04, the last one for which I have information, and still believe your “last two years” claim is false. I believe the message going out is a good first step but as executed inadequate to follow not only basic courtesy for someone we’re supposed to mentor, but also to actually, you know, inform the person subject to the board of the results of said board.
But since I couldn’t find the message I will only be able to guess that based on anecdotal evidence from previous boards and the places we put department heads on their shore tours, that in ’05 some guys got the word, and some guys did not. Just like happened every other time I looked.
March 1st, 2006 at 8:11 pm
I don’t make false claims. So far the FACTS are on my side. Still looking for the 04 message, I will track it down. Aren’t all posters an anonymous? But I concur with the ALL IMPORTANT part.
March 1st, 2006 at 8:49 pm
Claim what you will; there are all sorts of exciting claims made on the interwebs. If you manage to find this message and have those mysterious facts, fine, I will stand corrected, though I have to way to confirm it and have personal experience otherwise. I was thinking 04/03 and perhaps there was actually an 04 message that just didn’t get to department heads and post department heads serving on the waterfront.
People still didn’t get the word. The system failed them. Even if an ALSUBFOR is sent out this year, they will not get the word and they will be treated badly yet again.
As to “anonymous”: Yes, of course your IP is logged. Some people put their email and URL; some people have a track record to follow, especially in such a small community.