Sub officers objected to closing base in Groton

WASHINGTON -- The Navy's top submarine officers disagreed with the study used to justify closing the base in Groton, Conn., raising questions about the Pentagon's military rationale for shuttering Naval Submarine Base New London, according to previously undisclosed documents.

Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Vernon Clark, who is set to step down from his post today, said in a July 18 response to congressional inquiries that the submarine division at Navy headquarters did not sign off on the findings of the Navy's 2004 Force Structure Assessment. That evaluation of future needs was used as a key foundation for the Pentagon plan to close or realign dozens of bases across the country, including Groton -- the largest base in New England that is set to close.

The Navy study concluded that the service will need from 37 to 41 attack submarines over the next two decades -- versus the current 51 -- despite the concerns expressed by the submarine community that those numbers would not be enough to meet the growing demands for submarines both in peacetime and during conflicts, according to Clark's letter and interviews with others knowledgeable about the internal Navy deliberations.

''In the course of this study, [the submarine division] expressed concerns regarding operational availability assumptions and factors used in modeling the analysis, and made recommendations concerning these assumptions and factors," Clark told Representative Rob Simmons, a Connecticut Republican who represents Groton. Clark added that while some of those concerns were resolved, ''others were not."

Connecticut officials yesterday seized on Clark's letter as further evidence that the Pentagon relied on faulty analysis in recommending which bases to close. They said it strengthens their argument to the Base Realignment and Closure Commission that the decision to shutter Groton and slash 8,600 jobs would not only cause significant economic hardship for the region but also does not make military sense.

''It is increasingly clear that the Defense Department miscalculated the submarine force the Navy needs to safeguard our nation," Governor M. Jodi Rell said in a statement issued by her office. ''There is disagreement at the highest levels about the number of subs we need to perform critical missions around the world."

A top Navy officer confirmed that the submarine division did not agree with the 2004 analysis, but he emphasized that ''the submariners' view of the world" did not fully appreciate that other forces could fulfill similar missions. Speaking on condition that he not be named, the officer said ''the top leadership was pretty comfortable" with the study's findings.

Under the Pentagon plan, the submarines stationed at the Groton base would be transferred to ports in Virginia and Georgia as part of an overall consolidation of Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps units around the country.

The recommendation, if adopted, would be an especially hard blow to New England, which is slated to lose a large share of its remaining military facilities, including bases in Massachusetts and Maine. The Groton base not only accounts for thousands of jobs, but pumps billions of dollars into the region's economy, which is still heavily dependent on shipbuilding and the overhaul of submarines and warships. Portsmouth Naval Shipyard in Kittery, Maine, is on the chopping block for many of the same reasons as Groton.

The loss of the Groton base could also have a domino effect on the nearby Electric Boat Division of General Dynamics and its more than 8,000 employees, a major manufacturing center, local officials say.

Groton was recommended for closure based primarily on the findings of the 2004 Navy study; specifically, that the submarine fleet is shrinking and the base is therefore no longer needed, according to Pentagon officials and BRAC staff members.

But according to officials knowledgeable about the Navy's internal deliberations, submarine officers disagreed with several assumptions upon which the analysis was based.

Among them was the assumption that the Navy will be able to station nine attack submarines on the US territory of Guam in the Western Pacific, even though the island is now capable of accommodating only three. The submarine division at Navy headquarters concluded that upgrading the Guam base would require massive investments and would also be risky because tropical storms frequently strike the island.

A larger concern, however, was that a submarine force level of between 37 and 41 attack submarines would require the Navy to rely too heavily on the remaining subs and their crews to meet all required missions.

Vice Admiral Charles L. Munns, commander of Naval Submarine Forces, recently testified to Congress that 54 attack submarines were needed well into the future to meet the heavy demands placed on the fleet, including conducting intelligence missions, protecting critical sea lanes around the world, and being at the ready in the event of hostilities.

Fleet commanders have also objected to closing Groton. In fact, getting rid of the base was the only closure recommendation opposed by the Navy's Fleet Forces Command, which is responsible for coordinating and training the Atlantic and Pacific fleets.

The commands' two most recent leaders, Admiral William J. Fallon and Admiral John B. Nathman, argued for keeping Groton, according to Navy and BRAC officials and congressional aides.

Meanwhile, the command's deputy, Vice Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, told Simmons in a conversation last month that closure of the base would undermine the overall readiness of the fleet, negatively impact day-to-day maintenance of the nation's submarines, and require substantial investments in the base at Kings Bay, Ga., to replace the Naval Submarine School now located at the Groton facility.

Connecticut's congressional delegation and the governor's office yesterday provided a copy of Clark's letter to BRAC chairman Anthony Principi, noting that the military's plans for its force structure over the next 20 years was one of the most important criteria for base closing decisions.

''The Department of Defense's failure to correctly assess our nation's required [attack submarine] force levels is a substantial deviation from the BRAC criteria that undermine the recommendation to close Naval Submarine Base New London," they told Principi.

The independent panel, which has visited Groton as part of its review, will make its recommendations to President Bush and Congress in September. ''As the information comes in we are reviewing it and finding the supporting documents," said Robert McCreary, a commission spokesman.

Clark's July 18 letter was the latest example of the rift between the civilian leadership of the Pentagon and at least some members of the uniformed military over the base closure plan. For example, the state adjutants general from the Air National Guard are scheduled to meet with the BRAC commission today over their opposition to the Pentagon's recommendations to ground more than two dozen Air Guard units around the country, including the 102d Fighter Wing at Otis Air Guard Base on Cape Cod.

Bryan Bender can be reached at bender@globe.com.