Admiral: Sub Commander Not Criminally Negligent

The captain of a nuclear submarine that crashed into a Japanese fishing boat is not criminally negligent in the accident, which killed nine and caused international outrage, the chief Navy investigator into the incident said Thursday.

Even though Cmdr. Scott Waddle, skipper of the Greeneville when it struck the Ehime Maru, bears ultimate responsibility for his crew’s actions, that does “not necessarily equate” with criminal liability, said Rear Adm. Charles H. Griffiths Jr. on the fourth day of the Navy’s unusual inquiry into the crash.

“In my opinion, he was not criminally negligent,” Griffiths said during cross-examination by Waddle’s attorney.

Regardless of Griffiths’ strong pronouncement, Waddle’s behavior, his command of the Greeneville and his accountability came under intense scrutiny Thursday by the three-admiral panel probing the Feb. 9 crash. Griffiths, who led the Navy’s three-day preliminary investigation, was the first witness to testify.

Rear Adm. David M. Stone on Thursday recapped a catalog of missteps leading to the crash: An important piece of sonar equipment was on the blink, an unqualified trainee was manning one sonar station, and many crew members normally on board were not on the voyage, among other problems.

Then Stone turned to Griffiths, who at this point was visibly uncomfortable on the witness stand, and asked: “This was a self-imposed additional risk factor. . . . In your opinion, do you agree that the events of 9 Feb. are reflective of a command that increased its risks while conducting these underway operations rather than minimize them?”

Griffiths paused for a moment before replying. After such a brief investigation, he said, “I am not confident that I really know the truth.

“I only have an inkling,” Griffiths said. “To some degree, some areas you cite require more investigation to say the ship did something wrong. In other areas, I do agree that the ship made some mistakes, mistakes in judgment.”

At the end of the inquiry, which is expected to take several weeks, Stone and two other admirals will recommend whether criminal charges, or other punitive actions, should be filed against Waddle and two other officers.

After Thursday’s court session, Waddle offered a long-awaited apology to the families of some of the nine victims who are in Hawaii to watch the inquiry.

“I can’t ask for forgiveness. This is a burden I will carry to the grave,” he told them tearfully, according to a Japanese official who was present.

Ryosuke Terata, whose 17-year-old son died, said later, “Now I feel kind of sorry for Waddle too.”

Some family members had complained that Waddle refused to make eye contact with them during the inquiry. Last month, he issued a statement expressing “sincere regret” for the crash.

During the court session Thursday, Waddle cried while Griffiths described rescue efforts. One of his attorneys passed him a tissue. Waddle’s wife, sitting in the front row, also wept, as did the father of one of the Japanese victims.

Griffiths praised the Greeneville crew for their response to the accident, calling their efforts “remarkably professional.” A brief video showed the choppy waves at the time of the rescue.

Terata leaned forward and stared at the video monitor looking for any sign of his son.

Although Stone insisted Thursday that he is “not yet able to fix responsibility and accountability” in the collision, his comments in court and the way he questioned Griffiths suggested that he viewed Waddle as responsible.

Stone noted that Waddle’s attorney said the submarine captain used his best judgment as a commanding officer while making decisions leading up to the crash. Then he asked Griffiths whether a commanding officer “is fully responsible for ship and crew.” Griffiths agreed.

Then Stone, who has commanded naval warships but not submarines, launched into a paean to the preciousness--and grave seriousness--of command.

“Because lives are at stake, we hold our commanding officers to a very high standard,” he declared. “A commanding officer’s best judgment does not necessarily mean an action conducted by him was prudent . . . safe . . . satisfactory . . . or correct.

“I make these points,” he continued, “because the profession we’re in in commanding warships, the commander’s best judgment is not the metric” by which success is measured.

“It is the outcomes based on prudent, safe and correct actions that serve as the basis by which our commanding officers are judged and held accountable. That is why command at sea is so precious, why those who have had command cherish the responsibility.”

As a former commanding officer, Stone then told Griffiths he would welcome any comments the rear admiral would have on the responsibility and accountability of command.

“I’ve laid awake for a month now, thinking about this issue, thinking about Cmdr. Waddle who is, no doubt, doing the same thing,” Griffiths said. “He had a bad day where some mistakes were made. That I can tell so far. Accountability is an issue to examine.”

Yes, Griffiths continued, the Greeneville and the 105 men on board went through several steps under Waddle’s guidance in the hour leading up to the crash “that attempted to meet requirements and maintain safety operations.”

There were no real steps missing, he said, but the safety measures taken just didn’t go far enough. The crash was a result of “an accretion of these small deficiencies,” Griffiths said, that “add up in the very worst way.”

“That’s what’s so challenging about this case,” he said. “You have a ship that works well, clearly well-qualified and excellent people. And yet you have this tragedy perhaps because of this accretion of subtle measures not completely taken.”

Under scrutiny is a measure that was not taken by the Greeneville’s fire control technician, who analyzes sonar data and provides information to the submarine’s captain.

According to testimony, around the time the Greeneville was going to rise to periscope depth to make sure the ocean was clear before diving deep and then rocketing to the surface, this technician saw that a vessel had come within 4,000 yards of the submarine. It was the Ehime Maru.

Instead of alerting Waddle or other officers, the technician said nothing. Earlier in the inquiry, Griffiths testified that the technician thought it would be too difficult to speak up, in part because of the crowd of civilian visitors in the control room.

The Navy has not released the identity of the technician. But lawyers at the court of inquiry Thursday identified him as Petty Officer Patrick Thomas Seacrest, 34, a veteran technician who joined the Greeneville two years ago.

Charles Gittins, Waddle’s attorney, asked Griffiths whether the collision could have been avoided had Seacrest only spoken up.

Said Griffiths: “That’s one of the things that could have changed history.”

*

Associated Press contributed to this story.