Home » Documents » Document: Gauoette Inspector General Report

Document: Gauoette Inspector General Report

Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette receives honors from side boys during a change of command ceremony for Commander, Carrier Strike Group (CSG) 3 on April 5, 2012. US Navy Photo

Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette receives honors from side boys during a change of command ceremony for Commander, Carrier Strike Group (CSG) 3 on April 5, 2012. US Navy Photo

Rear Adm. Charles M. Gauoette was relieved of command of Stennis Carrier Strike Group in October, following an incident where Gauoette admonished USS John C. Stennis CO Capt. Ronald Reis for ship handling during a transit through the Strait of Malacca, according to reports from The New York Times and Navy Times.

“That animosity boiled over on the navigation bridge Oct. 6, while the ship was moving at nearly 25 knots through the Strait of Malacca. One officer on the flag bridge saw the ship’s track cross the lane for ships going the other direction to maneuver around slower traffic. Gaouette was unsettled. He rushed up from the flag bridge to confront Reis; the name of this officer has been redacted from the report, but a Navy official familiar with the report confirmed it was Reis,” reported Navy Times.

An Oct. 20 complaint from Reis prompted the Office of the Naval Inspector General to conduct an investigation accusing Gaouette of abusive leadership and racially insensitive remarks and emails. The investigation finished on Feb. 8 and obtained by USNI News via a Freedom of Information Act request.

“We examined whether, viewed in its totality, Subject’s conduct as CCSG-3 between April and October 2012 adhered to the leadership qualities required by Article 1131 of the U.S. Navy Regulations
(NAVREGS), ‘Exemplary Conduct’,” read the report.
“We conclude it did not.”

The IG office substantiated three allegations related to racially insensitive remarks and emails but did not substantiate the allegation of abusive leadership.

Following the report, Adm. John Richardson director of Navy reactors, issued, “a nonpunitive letter of caution and ordered that a copy of the investigation be put in the one-star’s service record — effectively ending his career,” reported Navy Times.

The following is the Feb. 8, IG report.

Please note: The document contains offensive language and references racial stereotypes.


  • Bo

    While, certainly, some of the Subject’s acts were unprofessional; my fear is that subordinates – some thin-skinned and some malicious – will use the IG system to destroy warriors. The Navy should not be about “sensitivity training” and “EEO-compliance” but rather about “killing our Republic’s enemies” if need be. Why were this officer’s statements about Iran even questioned?

  • Jeff

    Very worrisome that RDML Gaouette was under investigation for making “overly aggressive” remarks which contained “profanity.”

  • CaptainParker

    Excuse me…but the basic issue here is that the ship commanders were derelict in their duties in terms of maneuvering their vessels in a confined area. Whether the Admiral’s comments were brusque, demeaning, insensitive, whatever…corrective action was called for. He gave it…and it cost him his career. Are officers in the current military men or ueber-sensitive wimps? The fact that a race card was also played speaks a great deal what was involved here – some mediocre performers were caught with their hands in the cookie jar and they found a way to gut their critic. This is sorry…very sorry…and it isn’t the Admiral’s conduct I’m referring to. Enough with this rampant political correctness.


    Admiral King is rolling over……

  • flyr

    It certainly sounds like the Stennis skipper knowing that his fitness report might be less than spectacular after the confrontation filed the complaint and utilized his contacts in Navy and Obama administration to deliver a first strike to the Task Force Commander.

    Recklessly operating the ship in one of only a few congested oil chokepoints runs the risk of an international incident including sinking a supertanker and or damaging the Stennis.

    The report casually mentions that one or two of the three inappropriate comments were found as the Admiral’s emails were searched.

    When our military leaders are operating in real time there’s no room for nit picky political correctness.

    This action follows the systematic purge of many of our most effective and popular military leaders at the hands of the Obama Administration.

  • nought

    A blast from the past.

    During the Civil War the Radicals Republicans in, and out of government, and the Committee on the Conduct of the War tried to purge the military of members they thought were not sufficiently dedicated to the Abolition of Slavery Crusade. Sometimes they were successful, for example Generals Stone and F.J. Porter. The fact that choices of the RR may not have been as competent and led to a longer war and more causalities was a secondary consideration.

  • Pingback: Is Obama purging the US military leadership? | The Fabius Maximus website()