If there's anything I've learned over the past two years is that as all knowing as the CCC wants to pretend to be, there is a lot of sea-lawyering going on when they don't know a 4.0 answer off the top of their head, and as such, I never put much stock in what my CCC's have had to say when it comes to officer programs.
That said, I'm not saying you're right, or wrong, I'm just saying I'm not putting some stock in it. The only people that REALLY know whats going on is Millington and P-cola. 99.999999999999% of everything everyone else is saying is the bastard child of a conjecture-BS-guessing-worst game of telephone in history orgy from the parties involved.
Notice how everyone has a source and EVERYONE'S source is %1000 Credible, but nobodies source has a name. And nobody has a name for "THAT GUY" that screwed up. And I'm not trying to bash here, but if in this case, "CCC" was in good enough with a source that said an Admiral fvcked up, the source would have known the name, and in all likelihood mentioned it without thinking about it to the "CCC" they are in good with. And if the CCC didn't want to put a name on the admiral, in all likelihood would have at least given a general hint along the lines of "An admiral in (insert city or command) had it on his desk for 3 weeks, and its now just getting passed along." There's no credibility in this story. There's no credibility in most sources that are in the know on STA-21 results.
Jsimon, I wasn't trying to bash on you, and i'm not questioning your relationship with your CCC, it was just a perfect example and easy to use to explain.