23 Sep 2020

Military.com | By Gina Harkins

Nearly six decades after a Navy submarine plummeted tothe bottom of the sea during a deep-dive test, families of those lost in thetragedy are finally getting a look at hundreds of documents about the accidentthe service has long kept under wraps.

The Navy on Wednesday released the first 300 pages of acourt of inquiry on the catastrophic 1963 loss of the nuclear-powered submarineThresher. The documents provide details into the Navy's worst underseaaccident, which claimed the lives of 129 men onboard.

While Navy leaders say they're committed to beingtransparent with the families and the public about what caused the Thresher --the first sub in its class -- to sink, it took a court order to reach thispoint.

Capt. Jim Bryant, a retired Navy submarine officer, suedhis former service in 2019 to get it to release the full 1,700-page report onthe Thresher accident. A federal judge ordered the Navy in February to beginreleasing portions of that report monthly to the public.

"I think I'm doing the Navy a favor," Bryanttold Military.com this week. "This is a significant historic event ... andthe reactions were very sound. It's a really good story here for theNavy."

Rear Adm. Bill Houston, director of the Undersea WarfareDivision at the Pentagon, told reporters Tuesday that Navy leaders don'tbelieve the newly released Thresher documents "will shed any additionallight on her loss." Still, he added, the Navy is committed to releasingadditional portions of the report monthly, despite much of it remaining classified.

"This process requires coordination between manyorganizations, and takes time to be done correctly," Houston said."But the Navy knows this is the right thing to do."

He declined to comment on Bryant's lawsuit prompting thedocuments' release.

The first batch of documents released this week includeswitness and exhibits lists, findings of facts, opinions, recommendations andinitial testimony. Families were notified in a letter sent last month from ViceAdm. Daryl Caudle, commander of Naval Submarine Forces, that the Navy wasworking to declassify the documents and make them public.

Joy MacMillan and her brother Tim Noonis lost theirfather, Walter "Jack" Noonis, to the Thresher accident. Both creditedBryant for the time he put into pushing the Navy to release the documents. Thedecision to do so "should have been automatic," MacMillan said.

"We would definitely want to know," she said."We know it won't bring them back, but it does help to understand howsomething like that could have happened to our family."

MacMillan's mother, who passed away in 2016, had fourchildren under the age of 10 when the Thresher sank.

"It was intense, but I think my mom did a fabulousjob picking her boots up and marching forward, but I would never say that itwas easy," MacMillan said. "I feel that it would've been an honor toall the moms to get this information."

Bryant said the families -- along with the rest of thepublic -- deserve access to the answers.

"Naval history is important," he said."And when the technology is no longer of danger to national security --well, I think we should know about it."

How Tragedy Led to Change

The Thresher had just completed a months-long overhaulperiod when -- on April 10, 1963 -- the sub began dive tests off the coast ofMassachusetts.

It was accompanied by the submarine rescue ship Skylark,which received garbled communications about the Thresher experiencing minordifficulties.

The court of inquiry determined that the Thresher sankdue to a piping failure that resulted in a loss of power and the inability toblow ballast tanks quickly enough to avoid sinking. Houston said this week thatthe Navy stands by those initial determinations.

Bryant wanted to know more, though, and was unsatisfiedwith the Navy's original decision to publicly release just 19 of the 1,700pages of documents from the court of inquiry. It was only after a Freedom ofInformation Act request failed to shake loose the documents that he took theNavy to court.

The families and the public have a right to know moreabout the decisions that led up to the accident, he said. In 2018, Bryant wrotea piece for the U.S. Naval Institute's Proceedings magazine arguing that data showed the Thresher "very likely had alreadysunk below her 1,300-foot test depth limit when she reported minordifficulties."

"The result," he wrote, "was a hullcollapse that could have been avoided with more testing and betterplanning."

Noonis, who said he's read everything he could findpublicly on the Thresher, said he'd like the Navy to further analyze acousticalrecordings of the Thresher accident that were picked up by the Navy's SoundSurveillance System, known as SOSUS.

Bryant described an analysis Navy Reserve Lt. Bruce Ruleprovided during 1963 testimony about what the SOSUS picked up on the Thresher'ssinking. According to Bryant's April 2020 Proceedings article titled "USSThresher (SSN-593) Disaster: Ten Questions Our FOIA Lawsuit Hopes to Answer implosion.

While Noonis said he'd like to see the Navy take anotherlook at that claim, he isn't holding out much hope -- especially since theservice isn't releasing the documents by choice.

"They were forced to release it," he said."I don't have a lot of faith in the government coming out and changingtheir conclusion. ... Bureaucracies aren't fond of finding fault withthemselves."

People who study technology need access to anyinformation available about major accidents to understand the decisions leadingup to them, so they don't repeat the same mistakes, Bryant said this week.

Despite the battle over the documents, though, Bryant creditsthe Navy with taking important steps in the aftermath of the Thresher tragedyto help prevent other undersea mishaps. That's why he said he wants to see theservice share any documents it has that can help others understand what wentwrong.

Houston said the Thresher remains a defining event forthe submarine service. Every new Navy submariner learns about the vessel.

"From day one, every new submariner checking onboarddiscusses the impact of Thresher to the submarine force, and the significantimprovements that transpired as a result of her loss," he said.

The Navy's Submarine Safety program, known as SUBSAFE,was born out of the Thresher accident. SUBSAFE has "drastically improvedquality control and assurance in the fabrication, construction and maintenanceof submarines," Houston said.

"Since the program's inception, no SUBSAFE-certifiedsubmarines have been lost at sea," he said.

MacMillan said she's grateful the accident led to change,but said without the Navy releasing the full probe, no one can be certain allpossible steps have been taken to prevent something similar from happeningagain.

"Was it the main coolant pump? Was it just a pushtoo fast for a deeper dive in the Cold War?" she said. "It reallydoes feel like it's been [more than enough] time to know what reallyoccurred."

Now, as the Navy begins releasing never-before-seendocuments on the accident that prompted those changes, Houston said the servicemust balance being transparent while still protecting information relating tonational security.

Bryant said he and his attorney feel the Navy's plan torelease about 300 pages connected to the Thresher probe every month isreasonable, but noted they'll be closely monitoring what is held back orredacted.

If the Navy refuses to declassify information they feelshould be made public, Bryant said, "We're going to fight them overit."

MacMillan said she hopes the documents being releasedprove to the public that it's possible to take on powerful organizations thatmight be reluctant to release information. Bryant didn't have a stake in theThresher accident, she said, but fought to do the right thing.

"If you work long and hard enough, you can get tothe truth," she said. "... As a 6-year-old child kind of still frozenin that time period, I think it's high time that they come up withsomething."