Share This Page

Military ethics concerns spread to Navy nuclear program

| Tuesday, Feb. 4, 2014, 8:12 p.m.

WASHINGTON — The Navy said on Tuesday it is investigating about 30 senior sailors linked to alleged cheating on tests meant to qualify them to train others to operate naval nuclear power reactors.

Sidelining about one-fifth of the reactor training contingent, about 30, may pinch the Navy's training program, senior officials said.

It is the second exam-cheating scandal to hit the military this year, on top of disclosures in recent months of ethical lapses at all ranks in the military.

Unlike an Air Force cheating probe that has implicated nearly 100 officers responsible for land-based nuclear missiles that stand ready for short-notice launch, those implicated in the Navy investigation have no responsibility for nuclear weapons. The Air Force probe is centered on Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mont., but could spread to its two other nuclear missile bases, in North Dakota and Wyoming.

The Navy said the implicated sailors are accused of having cheated on written tests they must pass to be certified as instructors at a nuclear propulsion school at Charleston, S.C. The Navy uses two nuclear reactors there to train sailors for duty aboard any of dozens of submarines and aircraft carriers around the world whose on-board reactors provide propulsion. They are not part of any weapons systems.

The accused sailors previously had undergone reactor operations training at Charleston before deploying aboard a nuclear-power vessel. In the normal course of career moves, they returned to Charleston to serve as instructors, for which they must pass requalification exams.

Adm. John Richardson, director of the Navy's nuclear propulsion program, said a number of senior sailors are alleged to have provided test information to peers. He was not more specific, but one official said the information was shared from the sailors' home computers, which could be a violation of security rules because information about nuclear reactors operations is classified.

Adm. Jonathan Greenert, the chief of naval operations, said he is upset to learn of the breakdown in discipline.

“To say I am disappointed would be an understatement,” Greenert said. “We expect more from our sailors — especially our senior sailors.”

Neither Greenert nor Richardson identified the rank of the alleged cheaters but described them as senior enlisted members. There are about 150 nuclear power reactor instructors at the Charleston site. With about 30 of them banned, at least temporarily, from performing their duties, the training program might suffer.

Richardson said he could not discuss possible disciplinary action against those involved because the probe was ongoing. However, he said that anyone in the naval nuclear power program — either in a training setting or aboard a ship at sea — who is caught cheating would usually be removed from the program and “generally” would be kicked out of the Navy.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.