That... may be an oversimplification. I think it's clear that nobody 'goofed off'. The evidence suggests that's an unfair, and inaccurate assessment. Here's my read:
1. The US Navy provided charts with bad data.
2. Crew uses the data provided to drive the boat, boat crashes.
3. US Navy brass says: "omfg!!!" then begins working on accountabillity minimalization plan.
4. Result: "Well, we notice that your charts (for your ship, built in 1981) are, uh, missing some Notices to Seamen published in the 1960s that suggest there might be something wrong there. Sure, we gave you bad charts, but... you should really have known somehow."
The only real area where someone messed up is, when they did a sounding earlier and got a return that was shallower then expected. Mayhaps they should have begun not trusting their maps then? Tough call, especially when you're ingrained to so all your troubleshooting based on finding your location, because your maps are a known accuracy.
Finally, the most important:
5. The captain is responsible for everything that happens on his ship.
Just because he didn't MAKE this happen, and most likely could not have prevented it from happening through any reasonable excercise of his command authority doesn't change the fact that a military commander is, in the end, responsible for everything on his ship.
Hence, this situation sucks.