Congress says it learned from the press—nearly a month late—that a nuclear sub’s entire command team was fired.
Story Snapshot
- House Armed Services leaders say the Navy failed to notify them about the USS South Dakota firings.
- The commanding officer was officially removed for “loss of confidence”; other details remain unconfirmed.
- Reports link the action to a suspected grounding, which the Navy has not publicly verified.
- The gap in notice fuels fears of secrecy in a high-risk, nuclear-powered fleet.
What Congress Says Happened and When
Representatives Joe Courtney and Adam Smith wrote Navy leaders on November 12, 2026, saying the House Armed Services Committee was not told that the USS South Dakota’s commanding officer, executive officer, and chief of the boat were relieved on October 14. Their letter describes media queries on November 11 and publication the next day, implying Congress learned the basics from reporters, not the Navy. The lawmakers demanded prompt answers on both the reliefs and the underlying incident.
The Navy publicly confirmed the removal of the commanding officer, Commander Daniel Goodwin, citing a “loss of confidence.” Officials did not confirm that the Virginia-class submarine grounded or that the executive officer and chief of the boat were also dismissed, even as several outlets reported both points. That partial confirmation left key facts unsettled in public view and intensified congressional frustration over the lack of timely notice.
Who Was Removed and Why It Matters
Reports identified the relieved leaders as Commander Daniel Goodwin, Lieutenant Commander Jacqueline Penichet, and Senior Chief Information Systems Technician (Submarines) Jon Nogaj. Removing an entire command triad on a nuclear-powered attack submarine is rare and serious, because it signals broad leadership issues rather than one officer’s lapse. The Navy’s official statement explained only Goodwin’s dismissal, creating a gap between reported facts and the service’s public account.
Media coverage linked the firings to a suspected grounding, a type of navigational contact that can damage a submarine and endanger its crew. The Navy has not publicly verified a grounding or described any damage. That silence may reflect an ongoing investigation or security limits, but it also deepens mistrust for Americans who feel powerful agencies often choose secrecy over accountability, especially on high-stakes programs funded by taxpayers.
What Is Known, What Is Not, and Why It Grates
Congressional oversight usually expects prompt notice when major command actions occur on nuclear-powered vessels. The lawmakers’ letter stresses that such notice did not happen here, though the record so far does not cite a statute that required it. The Navy’s statement used standard “loss of confidence” language, which signals accountability without disclosing facts. That approach leaves both liberals and conservatives feeling the system protects itself first and informs the public later.
OOOooofffff!!!!😮😮😮
Entire command team of USS South Dakota relieved following grounding incident. (The entire command triad of the USS South Dakota (SSN-790)—including Commanding Officer Cmdr. Daniel Goodwin, Executive Officer Lt. Cmdr. Jacqueline Penichet, and Chief of the… pic.twitter.com/qmUL2hzhdK
— 🔱⚓️🏴☠️🇺🇸I'm The One Called Doc🇺🇸🏴☠️⚓️🔱 (@hmcrem) November 13, 2026
Past cases show why details matter. After the 2021 USS Connecticut grounding, the Navy released a formal investigation months later that found the mishap was preventable and listed multiple failures, along with corrective actions. That history cuts both ways today. It suggests the Navy may still be investigating the USS South Dakota. It also shows why Congress pushes for faster, clearer updates when leadership changes on a nuclear platform raise safety and readiness questions.
Sources:
militarytimes.com, theday.com, courtney.house.gov, washingtonexaminer.com
