Army announces new Fort Hood investigation amid leadership change
Maj. Gen. (then-BG) John B. Richardson IV
To the surprise of nobody, the commanding general of Fort Hood has been replaced. Taking the helm of base, which has become notorious for soldiers going missing and/or murdered, is Maj. Gen. John B. Richardson IV. The Army says that the change in command was pre-planned.
Maj. Gen. Scott Efflandt, the former CG, will not be moving on to command the 1st Armored Division as planned. He will be remaining at Hood while the Army conducts several investigations into just what is going on in the Bermuda Triangle of Army posts.
Thanks to KoB for the tip.
Source; Fox News
And the heads are rolling.
Since when did a Corps commander become a MG instead of LTG? I retired from Hood in 2005 but the rank structure surely hasn’t changed that much has it?
Edited to protect PII.
AW1
The Corps Commander is LTG White. Efflandt (who I knew as a lowly COL), was the Corps Deputy CG/Senior Installation Commander.
This is pretty common on installations with multiple 2 star and up GOs. Usually the senior 2 Star in a command billet is dual hatted as the Senior Installation Commander, responsible for running the installation itself.
When I was there, both times, III Corps the MG was Deputy Corps Commander. So, the Senior Installation Commander is what we used to call the Garrison Commander?
The Corps Commander is the “Senior Mission Commander” but the Corps CG is not the Fort Hood Commander.
That is a COL who works for Installation Management Command.
The Deputy Commanding General (Ops and Support) do not actually command anything…they are deputies.
IMCOM “owns” the installation and the installation activities like law enforcement, SHARP, IG, SJA, Trial Defense, DPW and Emergency Services like fire, EMT, etc. They also run the ranges, training areas, etc.
The poor COL who commands the garrison has a bifurcated rating chain to make sure he answers to someone on the installation for day to day issues, and to IMCOM for long term issues.
This is one of the reasons they usually have a two star or below as the Senior Commander (as opposed to Senior Mission commander, and I think they are going to stop using that term); this way they do not outrank the senior rater- IMCOM is a three star command, now part of AMC.
As an example, Joint Base Langley-Eustis is the home of US Army TRADOC, which has a four star CG and a 3 star DCG. It is also home to US Army Initial Military Training Command, which has a 2 star CG (who is dual hatted as a TRADOC DCG). There is also a TRADOC training brigade and a FORSCOM sustainment brigade.
The garrison commander is an Army COL who actually commands an Air Force Mission Support Group. The Installation Senior Commander is not the TRADOC CG or the 3 star DCG, but the 2 star IMT CG.
This is also why the 2 stars at Corps are Deputy Commanders and not assistant commanders or Deputy Chiefs of Staff- they derive command authority from the CG. So, while not directly in charge of any particular units, they speak with the CG’s voice and can exercise his authority. So, with his Senior Commander hat on he is in the chain of command of both the garrison commander and the units assigned to III Corps, wherever they may be.
In other words, the Army screwed this up years ago when they created IMCOM and confused the rating chains for everyone. In my book, the issues at Ft Hood have everything to do with command climate and lack of leadership, and the 3 Star should be held accountable.
As much as I want to blame someone, I highly doubt the entire failure rests on one person. Multiple heads should roll in this.
I concur that the responsibility rarely sits with one person. I also think that heads rolling should be only after careful investigation and judicious use of the proverbial axe. Firing leaders as a way for higher leadership to say “Look! We’re doing something!” is a good way to needlessly lose what could have been good leaders.
There are always going to be people who act stupid, do bad things, kill themselves, etc. Statistically, there is going to be somewhere that has the most of these occurrences. That place seems to be Fort Hood. Maybe its the leadership. Maybe its bad luck. I hope the firings are truly justified – in which case, get rid of ’em. My opinion, however, is that the military in the last couple of decades has erred more often on the side of “Look! We’re doing something!” than not.
Does the leadership already say, “Don’t rape people”? – yes
Is racism encouraged? – Doubt it
Is any soldier in doubt that murder is unacceptable? – no
Is the leadership promoting a environment that suggests suicide is a great solution to problems? – bet not.
Not saying that’s the end all be all of leadership or there aren’t other ways leadership can make for a toxic climate, but those biggies – rape, racism, violence and suicide – are the main things preached about by every unit everywhere in every branch of the service. The people who do it are going against all of that and are very bad people or in the case of suicide, troubled souls that the safety briefs did not influence.
…and they will.
Word.
Where the hell is the Division CSM?
Uhhh…yeah!
And the Brigade CSM
And the BN CSM
And the 1SG
And the PSG
And the SL
And the Section/Team Leader
Relieving the Deputy CG at III Corps over this is like shooting the pig because the fox got into the chicken coop.
Perhaps on some world where the sky is pink and unicorns fart rose perfume that makes sense, but on this planet one has to wonder where the division, brigade, battalion, and company commanders, 1SGs and CSMs are and what they are doing before we would look at a guy who by design of the Army must rely on those leaders to…well…lead.
All true, amigo. But as the old saying puts it: “A commander is responsible for all that his unit does or fails to do.”
Fair? No. But as you know just as well as I, that’s reality. Commanders often pay the price by getting fired (or sometimes worse, in other parts of the world) when their subordinates fail in some way. It’s one of the inherent risks of command.
In a Commander’s world, sometimes shit flows uphill.
except that the III Corps DGC doesn’t actually command anything.
Where is the Garrison Commander? The Division Commanders? The Brigade Commanders?
Here is what is probably behind a lot of this. There is a large population of predators that live in the Killeen area that prey on soldiers. No Commander on Fort Hood controls that.
If SteelyL is correct in his comment above (and I believe he is), Efflandt was dual hatted as both the III Corps DCG and the Senior Installation Commander. If that’s correct, in the latter capacity he was – at least on paper – the guy “in charge” of the Fort Hood installation. That’s why he’s taking the fall.
Deserved? Fair? Probably not. But as I said above: fair or not, getting fired (or losing a future nominative assignment) because someone under your “supervision” screwed up badly is a risk inherent in command.
COL Wesbrock is the Installation Commander
LTG White is the Senior Commanding General at Fort Hood.
Deputies, no matter how senior, do not command anything.
https://home.army.mil/hood/index.php/about/fort-hood-leadership
COL Westbrook may be the Fort Hood Installation Commander. However, the Army Times (and multiple other sources) indicate that MG Efflandt had a formal supervisory role over the installation. The term for this role today appears to be “Senior Installation Commander”, and it almost always appears to be a GO assigned to the post/camp/station (examples: for Aberdeen Proving Ground, it’s a MG; ditto for SOUTHCOM and Fort McCoy). Efflandt was apparently “dual hat” appointed to this role for Fort Hood while also serving as DCG-O for III Corps. His replacement has assumed both roles.
If you want to verify that, try an Internet search using the search term “Senior Installation Commander” (include the quotation marks). You’ll find multiple references to Army GOs serving in that role, typically MGs. Add the term “Fort Hood” to that and you’ll find multiple sources indicating Efflandt had that role at Fort Hood.
Perhaps…if so that is something the Army has recently done, because all 3 times I was stationed at Hood the Corps CG was the “senior” commander of fort hood.
Again, deputies aren’t commanders.
I believe it’s indeed a fairly recent development. It was news to me too – I don’t remember it being the case the last time I served on active duty (late 2000s).
But apparently the routine today is to appoint a MG (if one is available) as “Senior Installation Commander”. If multiple MGs are stationed on one installation, it appears that one of them gets the dual-hat appointment as “Senior Installation Commander” vice the 3- or 4-star GOs who might be there.
He was already on his way out to be the Armor Division Commander at Bliss. So he was leaving anyway, he just doesn’t have a job to move to now.
“…the change in command was preplanned.” “…will not be moving on to command…”
From the time a new Commander is sworn into command his replacement is preplanned, eventually if not sooner. All God’s ring knockers gotta punch that ticket.
Pretty much a given that there would be no new choice assignment for the Gnrl once it was a girl soldier, “of color”, missing and the family demanding a “Congressional Investigation.” Everybody in her Chain of Command can start looking for gainful work.
I have all of the sympathy in the world for these Service Members and their Families in their loss. However, has anyone looked into the fact that the sheer number of people in and around Ft. Hood means that there will be some of the more sketchy members of society out and about, and the law of averages means that other people will fall prey to same. We just have to wait and see where the “investigations” take us.
Maybe some of our fellow whiskeys/whiskettes that have been stationed at Hood can shed some light. The military is made up of a cross representation of society at large. Trash gonna be trash.
Yep. If I recall correctly, Hood now has around 10-12% of the Army’s active duty force stationed there – more, if you exclude trainees and NCO/WO/Officer professional development school attendees and the TRADOC cadres at those training activities. That means you’d expect at least 10% of the Army’s serious crimes to occur in units there, and probably more like 15+%.
“some of the more sketchy members of society out and about.”
That shit has been going on for decades and decades. And you are probably right about it due to the sheer numbers of people in and around “The Great Place”.
The “grate” place…
Hood was a meat grinder, even back in the mid 90s. My first year there I spent more time in the field than I did during my year in Korea. I don’t even want to imagine what their training cycle looks like now.
I’m sure someone somewhere decided they couldn’t hang this on the Division Commanders or Corp commander, but why the Post Commander? I always assumed he was a over glorified maintenance and public works manager with no power regarding all the things that real Commanders have to deal with, like all that annual EO, sexual harassment training, enforcing those things, and actually caring for soldiers. I never served higher than a brigade HQ, so maybe my understanding of what his responsibilities were is limited, especially on a post as big as Hood.
If they sacked him based on something they’ve discovered then I’m fine with him getting the boot here.
If he was sacked as some have suggested as a show of “doing something” I hope he brings that to light as well and demands a proper hearing.
The problems of managing any large enterprise, whether a large base, city, or other government entity are that after a while the people “in charge” really don’t have their hands on the levers of power in any real sense after a while.
Everything dribbles down through the filter of bureaucracy, which tends to move at glacial speeds.
This General could have been all over these issues and have a series of standing orders for people to get out and investigate if there were elements on base contributing to these unfortunate incidents, and still no results because those below the General have their own power plays and pissing contests to go through…
Sad, unfortunate outcomes for several soldiers indicate a problem but whose problems exactly?
Thinking there’s a systemic military issue here without evidence to support that notion resolves nothing and might simply lead to a superficial change of command that alters no one’s reality at Fort Hood for the better.
Yes. In addition, “Deputy Commanders” do not actually command anything.
The Corps Commander doesn’t even command the installation–the Garrison Commander who works for IMCOM runs the installation and all of the soldiers work for one of the Divisions or Brigades.
If there is something rotten in the command structure at Fort Hood, why is the Army “sacking” a deputy? Are we to believe that the DCG-O at III Corps has so much immediate authority over commanders who he does not command over that he is peculiarly responsible?
Also, the Killeen area has been ground zero for crime for years now. Long before this guy showed up and will be long after this guy is retired.
Are we to believe that the long history of corruption in Bell County TX is his doing?
The numbers do not add up here.
Here’s what I’m thinking; he was appointed investigating officer for some of the incidents and did not “complete” his investigation “on time” and not offering up someone to the mob.
No surprise
I think the Post CO is just the small rock at the top that gets the avalanche moving downhill. We all know what flows downhill and I think the commode was just flushed. I have no doubt this will extend down to a select number of BN and even Company grade Officers and NCO’s. Those in the units that the murder suspect came from to start. There is simply too much fecal matter floating in the pond (Ft Hood) to lay the blame on just a couple for the toxic leadership.
The III Corps DCG-O does not command Fort Hood.
Ever.
The whole story smells…
While going through MP OSUT in 1983, we were told by instructors then that Ft Hood was the murder/felony crime capital of the US Army, due to the huge population of the post.
The military reflects civilian life in criminal conduct. How much of the Ft Hood “OMG Murder!” is a focus of national media and how much of it is above the average for the usual criminal activity.
When I PCS to 1st Cav in 93 people were telling me about high crime rates. Everybody was blaming it on all those gangsters In 2nd Armor that had just moved from Ft Polk
In truth, Fort Polk was another shithole of crime…but that is a story for another day.
Many Army Folk will say “‘X’ is the armpit of the US Army” but Fort Polk is undoubtedly the SPHINCTER of the US Army, never heard anyone ever say anything nice about that place!
let me see if I can…ummm…
I got nothing…
Polk sucks.
In other news, NAVSTA Norfolk and 32nd Street in Sandy Eggo are shitholes, too, but I don’t see base CO’S getting fired there.
YET.
So the family moved to the Fort Hood area back in 68 when Dad got back from Vietnam. I was a wee lad back in those days so I don’t recall much. But as I grew older I learned from direct observation that much of the area surrounding Fort Hood was indeed a $hithole.
I left in 85 when I joined the Marine Corps. Got assigned to Fort Hood last year (long story, switched services etc). Just finished my tour today.
In 52 years the only real change is Rancier is cleaned up a little bit, Ave D downtown has been cleaned up. The shitbags outside the gate are still there, just disbursed over a wider area, the are more tattoo shops, pawn shops, used tire shops. And most of the Korean boot shine shops have switched to ASU set up shops.
But it still doesn’t suck as bad as Fort Polk and Leesville