Michael Boorda

Boorda was a product of an enlisted-to-officer commissioning program in the early 1960s. Known as the Integration Program, this was designed to provide an opportunity for enlisted personnel who possessed outstanding qualifications and motivation for a naval career to obtain a commission. Boorda was the first Chief of Naval Operations to have risen from the enlisted rates, one of only four such modern service chiefs (the others being Air Force General Larry D. Welch, USMC General Alfred Gray, and Army General John Shalikashvili). Upon assuming this position, Boorda immediately re-established the historic program, naming it "Seaman to Admiral", as part of a STA-21 initiative for young sailors to earn their commission and become naval officers. Boorda believed "people should have the opportunity to excel, and be all they can be, even if they don't get a perfect or traditional start."[9]

Boorda was particularly interested in C4I initiatives to place command and control, communications, computers, and intelligence assets on naval ships. Essentially this manifested itself as more robust combat information systems, with improved satellite and communication links, as well as placing more defensive assets on traditionally non-combatant ships such as support vessels. Boorda initiated efforts during the proposal phase for the future LPD-17 amphibious class to be fitted with first-class C4I suites, radars, communications, and defense systems-anti-torpedo, anti-missile, and anti-NBC (nuclear, biological, and chemical), along with blast-hardened bulkheads that will absorb and dissipate much more punishment than is possible with present designs. This effort was a departure from past efforts, which relied on simply assigning a destroyer or cruiser to provide these functions for amphibious forces.[10] The ship was commissioned January 14, 2006, nine years after Boorda's death.

Boorda also spearheaded efforts to change the U.S. Navy's officer fitness report, enlisted evaluation, and enlisted advancement systems. The new systems were more systematic and consistent. The systems also allowed a more concise rating of an officer's or sailor's advancement potential. This rating allowed a command to mark only 20% of officers or sailors as "early promotes", and set strict grading criteria for each evaluation mark. The new system linked each promotion marking to the advancement system.[11]

Boorda signed a policy for naval oceanography (the first such revision in 10 years), which emphasized, among other things, that, in addition to deep-water missions, naval oceanographers must master the complicated tangle of the oceanographic/geographic subject areas that make up the science of the littorals, or near-shore areas, as well as the complex weather patterns characteristic of any coastal area.

Boorda's vision brought the navy's new focus on littoral operations into alignment with naval projection policies. But this new program also created a large backlog of high priority oceanographic, hydrographic, and geophysical survey requirements. To meet those requirements, the navy expanded its oceanographic efforts from traditional platforms (ships, boats, planes) to new technologies (satellites, remote sensors, etc.), and efforts to work with other national and international agencies.[12]

In the wake of the Tailhook scandal, Boorda faced hostility from a majority of naval flag officers who reportedly believed he had betrayed the Navy by allying himself with Clinton administration demands for reform of the Navy's officer corps. Naval aviators, in particular, were incensed by the treatment of Stan Arthur (Vice Chief of Naval Operations and senior Naval aviator), whose nomination for the post of commander, United States Pacific Command was withdrawn by President Clinton at the behest of U.S. Senator David Durenberger.[13]

Durenberger raised questions over Arthur's possible mishandling of sexual harassment allegations brought by one of the Senator's constituents, Rebecca Hansen, a female student naval aviator who had not successfully completed flight training.[14][15]

The administration expected protracted hearings to ensue over Arthur's nomination, and the Pacific Command position to remain unfilled during this period. Arthur decided to retire on February 1, 1995. Boorda issued an unusual public defense of Arthur and his decision not to fight for the nomination, saying that "Stan Arthur is an officer of integrity ... who chose to take this selfless action ... in the interests of more rapidly filling a critical leadership position. Those who postulate other reasons for the withdrawal are simply wrong."[14]

Boorda's headstone at Arlington National Cemetery located at Section 64, Grave 7101, Grid MM-17

Boorda died on May 16, 1996,[16] in the garden outside his home at the Washington Navy Yard. Boorda reportedly left two typed and unsigned suicide notes in his home, neither of which was released publicly, but were said to have been addressed to his wife and to his public information officer.[2][17]

Boorda was reported to have been distraught over a media investigation led by decorated U.S. Army Vietnam War veteran David Hackworth of Newsweek, into two miniature bronze letter "V"s that Boorda had worn for years on two of his uniform's service ribbons. In the Navy, the Combat Distinguishing Device, or "V" device, is worn on a ribbon to denote a specific decoration was awarded for heroism in or direct exposure to combat.[18] Photographs of Boorda in uniform showed him wearing the "V" devices on his Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal and Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal ribbons in the 1980s.[19] However, Boorda stopped wearing the "V" devices on these service ribbons about a year before the Hackworth investigation, after being informed by the Navy that he was not authorized to wear them.

Reports at the time of Boorda's suicide indicated that his wearing of the two "V" devices on the two service ribbons had not been an intentional deception on his part, but had been an unintentional mistake that resulted from his following verbal instructions delivered to commanders during the Vietnam War by Admiral Elmo Zumwalt when he was Chief of Naval Operations, as well as conflicting interpretations and updating of Navy award regulations.[20] Newsweek later reported that "Hackworth believed that wearing an undeserved combat pin for valor was a grave matter of honor in the military, 'the worst thing you can do.'" Boorda's suicide took place shortly before he was to have met with two Newsweek reporters that day regarding his wearing of the "V" devices.[21] Boorda was said to have been worried that the issue would cause more trouble for the U.S. Navy's reputation.

Former Chief of Naval Operations Zumwalt, who was Boorda's commander during the Vietnam War and who verbally authorized "V" devices for Boorda and many other sailors, wrote a letter to the effect that Boorda's wearing of the devices was "appropriate, justified and proper." However, wearing the Navy's Combat Distinguishing Device on a specific decoration that may authorize the device requires written authorization for the device on a printed award citation.

External video
You may watch the memorial service for Admiral Boorda at Washington National Cathedral on May 21, 1996[22]

Boorda was survived by his wife, Bettie Moran Boorda, four children and eleven grandchildren. Boorda was interred at Arlington National Cemetery on May 19, 1996, with a tombstone marked with the Star of David.[23][24] On May 21, a public memorial service was held at the Washington National Cathedral[25][26] that was broadcast nationally by CNN[27] with tape delay broadcast on the C-SPAN network.

In June 1998, then Navy Secretary John Dalton put into Boorda's file a letter from Admiral Zumwalt stating it was "'appropriate, justified and proper' for Boorda to attach the "V" devices to the ribbons on his uniform." According to the Associated Press, "the Navy also modified Boorda's record to list the V's among his other decorations... recognition that they were earned."[28] However, later that year, one of Boorda's sons requested a formal review of his father's service record. In a decision dated June 24, 1999, the Department of the Navy Board for Correction of Naval Records,[29] the ultimate arbiter of whether or not Boorda was entitled to wear the "V" devices, determined that despite the additions to Boorda's personnel file, he was not.[7]

The Navy's annual Admiral Boorda award was established and first awarded in 2003.[33] The award recognizes a Navy military and civilian individual. The call for nominations for the 2015 award indicated that the award was intended for those who have made significant contributions towards Navy personnel readiness either through research or analysis or the direct application of analytical results to policies and laws.[34]