COVID-19

[ea6bflyr]

From the SECNAV, HIPCON B for ALL Navy personnel that are fully immunized regardless of local HIPCON level:

 

[Spekkio]

The article written by the HSC-22 CO that hit the street a few days ago.

I wouldn't necessarily call an Op-Ed on USNI 'bad press.'

Someone in his position wouldn’t do anything unless his legal advisors say something is legal.

So I don’t know exactly what you’re getting at, but if this is what I think it might be, how come we haven’t been doing this thing from the very beginning?

That the scuttlebutt that we can't lift restrictions for immunized individuals because it's not legal was just that - scuttlebutt.

 

[Treetop Flyer]

What actually changes switching from C to B

 

[SlickAg]

I wouldn't necessarily call an Op-Ed on USNI 'bad press.'

That the scuttlebutt that we can't lift restrictions for immunized individuals because it's not legal was just that - scuttlebutt.

To your first point: not my words, someone else’s. But typically, sitting O-5 COs don’t write articles questioning the party line. So kudos to him. And I think “they” were smart enough to realize they needed to head this one off at the pass. Do I think this happened overnight? No. But I have a hard time believing the release date is pure coincidence. I’ll ask again, why wasn’t this the plan from the very beginning?

Second point: normally I’d agree with you. In this case, the scuttlebutt came directly from the source to the carrier CO.

 

[RandomGoat1248]

What actually changes switching from C to B

No more FRAGORD.

 

[Spekkio]

For the Navy, the restrictions in the FRAGO signed out by USFFC only apply to HPCON C. For the other services largely ignoring the issue, probably nothing.

 

[SlickAg]

What actually changes switching from C to B

You can basically do things off-base again in accordance with local restrictions. Eat at restaurants, get tattoos, go to the beach, go to the gym, get a haircut, go to sporting events, etc.

 

[Spekkio]

To your first point: not my words, someone else’s. But typically, sitting O-5 COs don’t write articles questioning the party line. So kudos to him.

Absolutely. Brought up an issue that we've been dealing with far too long and it helped result in action.

I’ll ask again, why wasn’t this the plan from the very beginning?

I can't answer for sure. I would guess one reason is because it took a while for the data to build up, and the vaccine's effectiveness was not proven longer than 3 months at the time it received EUA. I'd guess another reason is because it's really easy for us to pontificate on a forum about COVID restrictions when we wouldn't be the ones responsible for sailors dying / experiencing long-term health effects, taking another strategic asset out of action for two months, and a media shit storm if we got it wrong.

I think a better question is why weren't guidelines and enforcement consistent across the services? Also, can we nix the DOD stop movement now?

 

[Treetop Flyer]

From the SECNAV, HIPCON B for ALL Navy personnel that are fully immunized regardless of local HIPCON level:View attachment 30681

Where did you find that? Is there a link? It’s not dated and I’m not finding it on my own.

 

[ea6bflyr]

Where did you find that? Is there a link? It’s not dated and I’m not finding it on my own.

Message traffic...followed by NAVADMIN 086/21

edit: ALNAV 032/21:

UNCLASSIFIED// ROUTINE R 302043Z APR 21 MID200000813095U
FM SECNAV WASHINGTON DC
TO ALNAV SECNAV WASHINGTON DC
ZEN/CNO WASHINGTON DC ZEN/CMC WASHINGTON DC
ZEN/CMC WASHINGTON DC
BT
UNCLAS ALNAV 032/21
MSGID/GENADMIN/SECNAV WASHINGTON DC/-/APR//
SUBJ/UPDATE TO DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY HEALTH PROTECTION CONDITION POLICIES//
RMKS/

1. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY, IMMUNIZED SAILORS AND MARINES WILL BE SUBJECT TO INDIVIDUAL RESTRICTIONS NO HIGHER THAN THOSE CORRESPONDING TO HEALTH PROTECTION CONDITION (HPCON) B, REGARDLESS OF THE HPCON STATUS OF THE INSTALLATION TO WHICH THEY ARE ASSIGNED. FURTHER, RECENT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE GUIDANCE WILL ALLOW MANY INSTALLATIONS TO TRANSITION FROM HPCON C TO HPCON B WHERE APPLICABLE, THOSE CHANGES WILL BE IMMEDIATE.
2. SAILORS AND MARINES HAVE MADE MANY SACRIFICES TO PROTECT THEIR COMMUNITIES, THEIR FELLOW SERVICE MEMBERS, AND THEMSELVES DURING THE PANDEMIC, AND I AM GRATEFUL FOR THE DEDICATION ALL OF YOU HAVE SHOWN IN THIS FIGHT. PLEASE REMEMBER THE BATTLE AGAINST COVID-19 IS FAR FROM OVER AND CONDITIONS WORLDWIDE ARE CONSTANTLY CHANGING. YOUR BEHAVIOR ON LIBERTY AND THE RESPONSIBILITY YOU DEMONSTRATE MUST AT ALL TIMES REFLECT THE PROFESSIONALISM OF OUR FORCE AND AN ALERT RECOGNITION OF THE THREAT THAT REMAINS. WE WILL CONTINUE TO REVISE POLICIES AS CONDITIONS CHANGE. THANK YOU FOR ALL THAT YOU AND YOUR FAMILIES HAVE DONE SO FAR TO GET US TO THIS POINT.
3. RELEASED BY THE HONORABLE THOMAS W. HARKER, ACTING SECRETARY OF THE NAVY.//

BT
#3932
NNNN
UNCLASSIFIED//

 

[SlickAg]

Absolutely. Brought up an issue that we've been dealing with far too long and it helped result in action.


I can't answer for sure. I would guess one reason is because it took a while for the data to build up, and the vaccine's effectiveness was not proven longer than 3 months at the time it received EUA. I'd guess another reason is because it's really easy for us to pontificate on a forum about COVID restrictions when we wouldn't be the ones responsible for sailors dying / experiencing long-term health effects, taking another strategic asset out of action for two months, and a media shit storm if we got it wrong.

I think a better question is why weren't guidelines and enforcement consistent across the services? Also, can we nix the DOD stop movement now?

I understand what you’re saying. However, every other branch managed to exist without our service’s equivalent of the fragord/page 13. Should a ship be treated differently? I understand the complications. However, if the folks in the Pentagon and the Navy Staff can be treated differently than everyone else...you see where I’m going with this? It’s become pretty clear that a one size fits all approach doesn’t work with covid. Different circumstances call for different approaches. While a move in the right direction, ultimately I fear it’s too little too late. Recruit the man, retain the family. If a service member isn’t over the hump to retirement, I think “don’t worry honey, this won’t happen again” is sort of a tough sell at this point.

On a separate but related note, I think at this point it’s difficult to argue that the response to covid has become nothing but political manipulation. Case in point below, one year ago it was xenophobia to block off travel. Now it’s this administration’s policy as well. What sort of message does this send?

 

[Spekkio]

I understand what you’re saying. However, every other branch managed to exist without our service’s equivalent of the fragord/page 13. Should a ship be treated differently? I understand the complications. However, if the folks in the Pentagon and the Navy Staff can be treated differently than everyone else...you see where I’m going with this? It’s become pretty clear that a one size fits all approach doesn’t work with covid. Different circumstances call for different approaches. While a move in the right direction, ultimately I fear it’s too little too late. Recruit the man, retain the family. If a service member isn’t over the hump to retirement, I think “don’t worry honey, this won’t happen again” is sort of a tough sell at this point.

The DOD guidance that the FRAGORD implemented wasn't specific to the Navy. It just wasn't a big deal to other services so it wasn't enforced as vigorously; they are more concerned with tackling a white supremacy problem that we mostly don't have to deal with.

 

[SlickAg]

The DOD guidance that the FRAGORD implemented wasn't specific to the Navy. It just wasn't a big deal to other services so it wasn't enforced as vigorously; they are more concerned with tackling a white supremacy problem that we mostly don't have to deal with.

So the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and NOAA Corps all signed their service’s equivalent of a page 13 that essentially locked them into their homes for a year when they weren’t at work?

 

[Spekkio]

So the Army, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and NOAA Corps all signed their service’s equivalent of a page 13 that essentially locked them into their homes for a year when they weren’t at work?

No. They left it up to the installation commanders, figured that following local guidelines was sufficient, and moved onto other problems.

 

[Mirage]

The DOD guidance that the FRAGORD implemented wasn't specific to the Navy. It just wasn't a big deal to other services so it wasn't enforced as vigorously; they are more concerned with tackling a white supremacy problem that we mostly don't have to deal with.

The restrictions created by the FRAGORD were not created by other branches. It isn't a question of vigorous enforcement. They just knew better than to shoot themselves in the foot by going high and right and subjecting sailors (who aren't even deployable or on a sea tour) to a complete lockdown when the rest of the cities they're in are not restricted in any way.

The narrative you're creating where the other branches didn't have time to deal with COVID because they were too busy with white supremacy is ludicrous. And what makes you say we mostly don't have to deal with white supremacy? Have we done less than the other branches in this regard?