A Navy service member is being cited for abuse of power after reportedly retaliating against a subordinate after the individual reported an error, a Defense Department Office of Inspector General investigation found.
The IG report, released on Oct. 15, showed that the events that triggered the reprisal began on Oct. 28, 2020, when an employee of the Navy Cyber Warfare Development Group informed their supervisor of a potential mistake in a report provided to the U.S. Fleet Cyber Command, U.S. 10th Fleet.
The supervisor and subordinate were involved in a project tasked with providing a weekly Commander’s Update Brief, according to the report. The PowerPoint updates would indicate whether a “mission area” was capable, partially capable or not capable.
The subordinate, a program manager from 2018 to 2021, brought up concerns during the October 2020 meeting about labeling certain signal intelligence missions as capable when they were not.
“We are not accurately reporting,” the subordinate reportedly claimed, to which the supervisor reportedly responded, “There are some things you just don’t want people to know.”
Two witnesses who were at the meeting were unable to recall the specific exchange about inaccurate mission statuses. The supervisor also claimed to not recall the meeting and said they never spoke with the subordinate about such a mistake.
Shortly after, on Nov. 5, 2020, the subordinate reportedly argued with an instructor during a training event and was subsequently denied access to the event as a result.
US Cyber Command driving out redundancies in warfighting architecture
Following that incident, the supervisor conducted a preliminary inquiry into the event, speaking to two witnesses who said the subordinate’s behavior “demonstrated his desire to circumvent policy and created confusion regarding which queries could be conducted within the boundary of law and policy,” according to the investigation.
The inquiry’s results determined that the subordinate was not in violation of the Uniform Cody of Military Justice. Despite the outcome absolving the subordinate of wrongdoing, the supervisor told investigators that the event caused him to lose confidence in the subordinate.
On Dec. 10, 2020, the supervisor submitted a non-judicial punishment for the subordinate. The supervisor then suspended the subordinate’s access to Sensitive Compartmented Information.
In his report to the Defense Department regarding the suspension, the supervisor chose not to include the findings of the preliminary inquiry.
On Dec. 18, 2020, the subordinate declined the non-judicial punishment and requested a court-martial. From there, the pair exchanged a series of rebuttals to the Navy Personnel Command.
The IG investigation, meanwhile, determined the evidence used to justify the removal of the subordinate’s security clearance was not strong enough, adding that there was an abuse of authority and animosity toward the subordinate on the supervisor’s part.
On March 13, 2023, the Defense Department reinstated the subordinate’s access to classified information.
Both the subordinate and supervisor have since retired.
