(Navy Times) Editorial: Keep InSurvs public

[unhappycamper]

Keep InSurvs public

On March 3, the Navy fired the commanding officer of the mine countermeasures ship Devastator because of the ship’s poor material condition. Less than a month earlier, inspectors from the Navy’s ever-exacting Board of Inspection and Survey combed through the ship and, in all likelihood, did not like what they saw.

But because of a rule put in place late last year, exactly what was wrong with the Devastator and whether that cost Lt. Cmdr. Matt Tucker his job will remain a mystery. The reports of all InSurvs taking place after Dec. 1 are classified.

Adm. Jonathan Greenert, head of Fleet Forces Command, said through a spokesman that he decided to make the once-public reports secret because he didn’t want potential adversaries to discover weaknesses aboard Navy ships.

This explanation doesn’t match reality. InSurv reports lay out the material condition — but not details or capabilities of — combat and self-defense systems. For the most part, they provide a snapshot of what was broken, leaky or missing during the inspection. The InSurv for the destroyer Stout, for example, pointed out that the galley’s meat slicer and ice cream machine were inoperable, as was one of its three coffee machines.

As for the larger issues InSurvs point out — problems with the main gun and missile cells, in Stout’s case — one would expect that all deficiencies would be fixed or mitigated by the time the ship deploys.


Rest of article at: http://navytimes.com/community/opinion/navy_editorial_insurvs_031609a/%2e

[tinymontgomery]

1. Insurv is the biggest pain in the ass inspection

for ships and yes it is a make or break inspection for lots of officers. The carrier JFK failed back in the 90's and something like 3 or 4 officers were relieved. I hated getting ready for Insurv. I can agree that some parts may deserve to be kept quiet if it has to do with weapon systems, the rest should be public knowledge.