Nonetheless, if you have to have it, you have to have it.
There are many illustrations that helpfully demonstrate the rules.
WASHINGTON (NNS) -- The Navy's fraternization policy has been updated, clarifying what relationships are appropriate for Sailors, because today's current operational tempo and individual augmentee assignments have made it commonplace for Sailors to serve side by side with the U. Army and Air Force, and with our multinational partners in operations throughout the world.
The update, OPNAVINST 5370.2C, was released April 27.
In other words, if Sailors see an officer having one of those types of relationships with an enlisted Sailor, they might wonder whether the officer is giving preferential treatment to that Sailor in situations like duty assignments or special privileges, which could create morale problems.
Typically, personal relationships among officers or among enlisted members are not prohibited.
"The updates specifically dictate that the Navy fraternization policy prohibiting certain types of relationships is applicable to relationships with members of other U. armed services and with members of foreign military services," said Lt. Kim Dixon, spokesperson for the Navy's chief of personnel's diversity directorate which issued the change.
"As a result of a scheduled policy review, it was determined the policy needed to be updated," said Cmdr.
Coast Guard official admitted at a recent congressional oversight hearing that the U. Coast Guard “has not been aggressively enforcing the compliance” of vessel response plans filed under federal Salvage and Marine Firefighting (SMFF) regulations.Examples of unduly familiar relationships include dating, sharing an apartment or house, engaging in intimate behavior, gambling, and borrowing money.These types of relationships are prohibited because they undermine the respect for authority that is essential to the Navy's ability to accomplish its mission.“The shocking admission by the Coast Guard that it cannot, and is not, enforcing its own marine firefighting rules should be a warning to all ship owners, P&I insurers and legal teams,” said Nicholas Nedeau, CEO of Rapid Ocean Response Corporation (ROR), which “This is a disaster just waiting to happen and insurers should insist upon a dedicated network of fire-response vessels—instead of taking their chances on the current and risky ‘vessel of opportunity’ approach to emergency response.” The admission was made at a May 3 public hearing of the House Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, when Coast Guard Rear Adm.Paul Thomas, Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy, lamented that the Coast Guard doesn’t have resources to enforce its own rules.
If you have a black-and-white e-reader, I would not recommend getting the Kindle edition.