Sources: USS San Francisco skipper faces admiral's mast in sub grounding

Stars & Stripes ^ | 2/11/5 | Jon R. Anderson

[SmithL]

The skipper of the nuclear-powered submarine that crashed into the side of an undersea mountain is quietly being sent before an “admiral’s mast” in Japan this weekend to face charges of endangering his ship, according to several active-duty and retired Navy sources familiar with the case.

Cmdr. Kevin Mooney was slated to appear before 7th Fleet commander Vice Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert in Yokosuka on Saturday morning, the sources said.

The Navy’s highest form of nonjudicial punishment, admiral’s mast falls short of the criminal proceedings of a court martial, but can result in anything from full exoneration to fines, reprimands, and loss of qualifications.

Publicly, Navy officials decline to comment on Mooney’s case.

“It would be inappropriate to discuss any nonjudicial punishment proceedings at this time,” said Greenert’s spokesman, Cmdr. Ike Skelton.

On Jan. 18, the San Francisco, a Los Angeles-class, fast-attack submarine, is believed to have rammed into an undersea mountain 350 nautical miles south of its homeport at Guam. One sailor was killed and another 23 injured in the incident.

The sub suffered massive damage to its sonar dome and bow structure, but was able to limp back to Guam where it is now in dry dock. Navy officials are still unsure if the sub can be salvaged.

Mooney’s mast, however, comes before the detailed investigation into the accident is complete. And unlike most nonjudicial punishment throughout the rest of the military, sailors from sea-going commands cannot refuse mast and demand a court- martial.

At issue, say officials, is whether charts supplied to Mooney provided any clue of dangerous waters. Officials at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency in Bethesda, told reporters after the accident that the main maps used by the U.S. Navy did not reveal any obstacle anywhere near the sight of the crash.

Officials familiar with case, however, say another, much older chart was believed to be aboard the San Francisco indicating discolored water several miles away.

Early findings of the Navy’s investigation appear to indicate some level of “questionable” practices by Mooney, according to a Feb. 7 letter obtained by Stars and Stripes to Greenert from the commander of Pacific submarine forces Rear Adm. P.F. Sullivan.

Preliminary findings of the grounding, reads the letter, “highlights the questionable Voyage Planning processes and navigation practices Cdr. Kevin Mooney implemented and maintained while in command. He was responsible for the safe surfaced and submerged navigation of the ship, and should be held accountable.”

Still, the vast majority of the three-page letter outlines Mooney’s many accomplishments while in command of the San Francisco.

Sullivan said he had personally selected Mooney “to correct significant command climate and performance issues” aboard the ship.

Since taking command in late 2003, Sullivan said Mooney was directly responsible for transforming a down-in-the-dumps crew into one of the best in the fleet.

The ship, he wrote, got the highest marks of any Pacific submarine in a grueling Tactical Readiness Evaluation, among other top line certifications of its nuclear propulsion system and engineering departments.

Mooney’s “operational planning skill and command presence ensured the ship’s success in dynamic operations of vital importance to national security,” adds Sullivan.

“In the face of huge quality-of-life challenges faced by his ship, including a five-month deployment to San Diego for material repairs and transforming Guam into a viable submarine homeport, retention and reenlistment rates significantly exceed fleet norms” under Mooney, writes Sullivan.

“Despite the intense scrutiny under which he has been placed as a result of this tragedy, Cmdr. Mooney has conducted himself with honor and dignity. I ask that you consider his positive contributions to the U.S. Navy during your deliberations at Admiral’s Mast.”

[SmithL]

A source says Cmdr. Kevin Mooney, above, is slated to appear before 7th Fleet commander Vice Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert in Yokosuka on Saturday morning in connection with the Jan. 8 grounding of the USS San Francisco, shown below in dry dock at U.S. Naval Base Guam.

[SmithL]

USS San Francisco Ping

[null and void]

This is a good thing, yes?

Better that a court martial?

[Brilliant]

His career's over. Perhaps should be.

[null and void]

Perhaps. Time, and the Admiral, will tell...

[injin]

umm...hello...I'm no Submariner , but isn't there something
called Sonar that would detect obstacles in the course of travel? radar? something? How about windows ! ?

[SmithL]

Already Updated:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1341628/posts

[Coyoteman]

How about windows !

They have better software that that!

[SmithL]

NO, no, no and no.

[martin_fierro]

[OneLoyalAmerican]

among other top line certifications of its nuclear propulsion system and engineering departments.

Just a guess: The damage control department fared pretty well too.

[injin]

well darn!.....must be why the Greenville speared that
fishing trawler / fisheries educational vessel.

[Goodgirlinred]

I was wondering about sonar myself. I don't think subs have windows. LOL! If they did not give him any nautical maps that showed anything like that mountain, then how was he to have avoided it? Unless he was to have found it by sonar. Everything he had accomplished and then this don't add up. Something funny is going on. Why not a court martial? Someone died. I watch JAG. Harm and Mac would have sent it to Court Martial, but not until they had finished investigating. Hmmmm, something is wrong here.

[Rokke]

"I'm no Submariner "

Based on the rest of your post, that statement is redundant.

[injin]

I think so ;)

[Abcdefg]

Face the Admiral's mast? Don't ask, don't tell.

[drt1]

I believe they were running quiet, using passive sonar only, which would not detect anything not making noise.

[CitizenM]

I believe it goes this way: At the completion of Article 32 (the investigation) there is always a Commanding Officer or Admiral's Mast (like going in front of a magistrate or a judge or a justice of the peace in civilian terms). He can resolve it, or send it on to a Court Martial

[SmithL]

Unless it was a mighty noisy mountain, passive sonar never would have heard it.

[doug from upland]

This is a shame. The man dedicated his life to the Navy and this nation.

[CedarDave]

Good story on the accident here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1333990/posts

Click here to see all the stories:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=usssanfrancisco

[Doohickey]

No.

[Doohickey]

Ping!

[Goodgirlinred]

Then how was he to have known it was there?

[SmithL]

That fishing trawler had some of the most sophisticated sensors in the ocean. How did it end up directly over the Greeneville?

[Goodgirlinred]

Oh. Well, hopefully they will give him good defense counsel.

[pennyfarmer]

They were not running active sonar possibly for reasons dealing with the mission they were on. The thing about active sonar is everyone in the water will be able to tell you are there(nullifying any stealth advantages offered by a sub). Any one who has been active duty on board any ship has heard active sonar. Believe me its loud.

People who have not been in the Navy sometimes don't understand some of these things, like I don't understand Army or Air force. Everyone just know that the Navy practices like its the real thing every time they do something. They play worst case scenario every chance they get.

[Doohickey]

Officials familiar with case, however, say another, much older chart was believed to be aboard the San Francisco indicating discolored water several miles away.

This doesn't smell right. Everyone from the CO down to the ANAV would have been fried for using a chart other than the one DMA had listed as effective.

[drt1]

It is that. From the limited information I have I wonder on ht basis they hold him responsible other than that someone has to be so held, irrespective of 'real' responsibility. A shame all around.

[SmithL]

It SHOULD have been on his charts (but it wasn't).

[bayourod]

Perhaps we need to develop the type passive sonar program that starships use to detect cloaked ships. They look for the absence of background solar noise. If a sub's sonar detects fish talking everywhere except in a mountain shaped area, it might be a mountain.

[Goodgirlinred]

Well, I repeat, how was he to have known it was there if he did not have a nautical map with it shown on it?

[Strategerist]

That fishing trawler had some of the most sophisticated sensors in the ocean. How did it end up directly over the Greeneville?

All it had was a fish finder. Those point down and generally not out to the sides much distance.

The Greenville didn't surface straight up. They would never have known it was there till just before it hit.

And even then, it's not like they're used to seeing submarines on the fish finder. Would have likely just looked like a dense school of something heading up rapidly...never would have occured to them what it was.

[Doohickey]

No, it's because active sonar is only used in specific situations like clearing baffles and is usless at 30+ knots anyway.

[pennyfarmer]

No counsel just you and the Old Man during a mast.

Sometimes there has to be a fall guy. No one said that the military is fair, but if you are the captain and bad things happen out of your control it doesn't really matter you will take the fall.

Every ship sinking will result in a captain going to court martial.

[Goodgirlinred]

That sucks.

[drt1]

I agree, without active sonar or a chart that was accurate, he would have no way of knowing. That's why I wonder what else is at play here.

Perhaps he was going faster than the mission or conditions warranted or some other thing but, you're right, without being provided with the proper tools he should not be held responsible for the work product so to speak.

[rlmorel]

Agreed.

[Goodgirlinred]

Not his fault then. He should not have to take the fall.

[Goodgirlinred]

Exactly. I wonder what else is going on here?

[rlmorel]

Perhaps for the same reason fighter aircraft do not generally use their onboard radar systems unless they are actively engaged with a enemy or prospective enemy. Using radar (or sonar) lets everyone know what you are, who you are, and where you are. In the submarine service, that is the worst thing you can do.

[SmithL]

There's the right way, the wrong way, and the Navy way. Like every other Captain before him, Commander Mooney understood the rules of the game when he took command. I don't have to like it, but I can't say that I'm surprised.

[pennyfarmer]

That's why I wonder what else is at play here.

He's the Captain. Thats it.....

Sometimes the Captain goes down with the ship, and sometimes he goes down when it gets back. But he will always go down when there are mishaps like this one.

[Doohickey]

It's hard to explain, but that's just not the way the Navy works. Someone is always accountable. It may not seem fair, but the military isn't about fair. That's the way it is, that's the way it always has been, and that's the way it always will be.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

I was always told that an Admiral's/Captain's mast was the same as an article 15 for Army and Air Force. They can only do one or the other, but not both. For an Officer either is a career ender.

[drt1]

Yeah, I know that but this fact of blind and blanket responsibility doesn't sit well even though it is the way the Navy deals with this type of mishap.

[BykrBayb]

Thanks for the ping.

I read in an article shortly after it happened (or maybe it was on tv or radio) another captain said the San Fran was going to fast for the area at the time. I don't know how he could know, but that's the closest I've come to hearing anything the captain may have done wrong.

[HairOfTheDog]

This is a shame. The man dedicated his life to the Navy and this nation.

I agree.

[Goodgirlinred]

Well, they better let him retire at full rank and pay.

[pennyfarmer]

When you go to Admiral or Captain's mast they can recommend you go to courts martial. You will not have punishment dealt at mast if you are going to courts martial.