(12) U. S. Navy Report "Disposal of Radioactive Wastes from U. S. Naval J. J. Mangeno and M. E. Miles issued in Radiological Health Data (13) U. S. Navy Report "Environmental Monitoring and Disposal of Radioactive Wastes from U. S. Naval Nuclear-Powered Ships and (14) U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Report "Sources of Tritium and Its Behavior Upon Release to the Environment", by D. G. Jacobs, TID-24635, 1968. (15) U. S. Public Health Service Report "Radioactive Waste Discharges to the Environment from Nuclear Power Facilities", by J. E. Logsdon and R. I. Chissler, BRH/DER 70-2, March 1970. (16) U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Report "Radioactive Waste Discharges to the Environment from Nuclear Power Facilities, (17) Council on Environmental Quality Report to President Nixon "Ocean Dumping: A National Policy", October 1970. (18) U. S. Public Health Service Report "Radiological Survey of Major California Nuclear Ports", by D. F. Cahill, D. C. McCurry and W. D. (19) U. S. Public Health Service Report Roads (Norfolk Newport News), Virginia", by H. D. Harvey, Jr., (20) U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Report "Radiological Surveys or Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and Environs", by D. F. Cahill, H. D. Harvey, Jr., et al., to be issued in Radiation Data and Reports, June 1972. (21) National Academy of Sciences National Research Council, in the Marine Environment", 1971. "Radioactivity (22) International Atomic Energy Agency Symposium, August 1970, "Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power Station", IAEA-SM-146/55, "Review of USA Power Reactor Operating Experience", M. Eisenbud, Vienna, 1971. (23) Oak Ridge National Laboratory Report April 1967. "Clinch River Study" ORNL-4035, (24) Battelle Memorial Institute, Pacific Northwest Laboratory Report "Evaluation of Radiological Conditions in the Vicinity of Hanford for 1959" BNWL-1505, November 1970; and previous periodic reports in conjunction with report by J. L. Nelson, R. W. Perkins, J. M. Nielsen and W. L. Haushild, page 139, IAEA Symposium on the Disposal of Radioactive Wastes into Seas, Oceans and Surface Waters, Vienna, 16-20 May 1966. APPENDIX 3 ANALYSIS OF SOVIET SUBMARINE THREAT: SOVIET SUBMARINE THREAT The total Soviet submarine strength as of April 1, 1972 was officially estimated at 345. During 1971 the Soviets completed and put into operation over 10 nuclear powered submarines. [Deleted] Yankee SSBN Over 10 Total Since March 1970 they removed over 30 submarines, all diesel powered, although they continue to build additional units of their latest design diesel submarine. The Soviet submarine force as of today is as follows: The U.S. submarine force as of today is as follows: 245 345 Eight of the early U.S. nuclear submarines are not considered "first line" ships. A measure of just how modern a submarine fleet the Soviets possess is the fact that they have given away or scrapped diesel submarines of more recent vintage than U.S. units still operating. To date they have sold or given outright 57 diesel submarines to eight countries. They have also provided components, plans and assistance for the production of 30 additional diesel units. One of the factors traditionally used to justify the United States having a submarine force substantially smaller than the Soviets is the numerical lead we have enjoyed in nuclear powered submarines. For years it appeared we had a comfortable lead. Several years ago, however, the Russians embarked on a large-scale nuclear submarine construction program with the intent of achieving preeminence in this field. They began by applying tremendous resources to the expansion and modernization of submarine construction yards. They have the largest and most modern submarine yards in the world and possess at least three times the nuclear submarine construction capacity of the United States. As late as 1966, the Russians had only two new construction yards building nuclear submarines; today they have at least four, and possibly five with this capability. They have expanded their facilities for submarine construction more than [deleted] over the past 5 years. Another [deleted] expansion is currently in progress. [Deleted.] In comparison, there has been essentially no expansion of U.S. nuclear submarine construction facilities in this same period. Even though the tremendous Soviet submarine building capacity has not been fully utilized in the last year, it nevertheless produced over 10 nuclear powered submarines in 1971. In 1971 the Soviets surpassed the United States in total numbers of nuclear submarines. It should be realized that comparisons such as these are difficult since the exact status of work on each of the Soviet submarines is not known with certainty. The numbers being used are based on estimates of those Soviet submarines believed to be operational or nearly so. If the exact total were known, they would probably be even further ahead of us. They have many more nuclear units under construction and for this reason the United States will fall further and further behind in the years to come. For example, even though we credit the Soviets with only about 26 Yankee Class SSBN's operational, there are 16 additional units in various stages of construction. Just how far they are going on this particular class is not known. The same situation exists for some of their other new design classes. In the United States a total of 118 SSN's and SSBN's have been authorized and funded by the Defense Department through fiscal year 1972. Of these, 56 SSN's and 41 SSBN's are operational as of April 1, 1972; 21 SSN's are presently under construction or contracts have been let. By the end of fiscal year 1977, the year the United States should put into operation the last submarine authorized through fiscal year 1972, the total U.S. nuclear submarine inventory will be 118 SSN's and SSBN's. It is estimated [deleted] that the Soviets will, at that time, have from 150-193 nuclear submarines. Thus 5 years from now the Soviets could have an advantage of between 32 to 75 nuclear submarines. Intelligence credits the Soviets with a nuclear submarine production capability of about 20 units a year. This is based on working only a single shift basis. It is estimated that a "crash" program working three shifts a day would allow [deleted] nuclear submarines to be produced annually. This rate could be rapidly achieved since no facility expan sion would be required. At present while the Poseidon conversions are going on, the maximum U.S. capacity to build nuclear submarines is about [deleted] per year. Upon completion of these conversions in about 1977, the best we could do is [deleted] nuclear submarines a year. Of tremendous military significance is the large number of new design submarines being introduced by the Soviets. In 1968 they introduced [deleted] new designs, in 1969 they [deleted] and in 1970 they [deleted]. A brief up-to-date description of each design follows: FLEET BALLISTIC MISSILE SUBMARINE ("YANKEE" CLASS) This is a fleet ballistic missile submarine which looks very much like our latest Ethan Allen class and which is capable of firing 16 submerged-launched ballistic missiles. It is [deleted] feet long, and has a hull diameter of [deleted] feet. A displacement of some [deleted] tons. The first unit became operational early in 1968. The missile these submarines fire is SS-N-6 which has about a 1.300 nautical mile range. [Deleted.] The large Soviet yard at Severodvinsk and the Far Eastern yard at Komsomolsk are constructing this class. So far they have worked [deleted] which gives them a production capability of 12 units a year. To date about 26 of these units are in operation. However, another 16 units are in some phase of construction or in trials and it is clear that the Soviets are giving top priority to construction on this class. It is now estimated that the Soviets will match our fleet of 41 Polaris submarines by late 1973 or early 1974. This submarine is capable of making about [deleted] knots submerged. This compares to about [deleted] knots for our latest SSBN. More important, it compares to the [deleted] knots of our most modern operational attack submarine. CRUISE MISSILE SUBMARINE ("CHARLIE" CLASS) This class consists of a nuclear powered submarine being built [deleted]. It has 8 [deleted] missile tubes in the bow. The submarine is about [deleted] feet in length, [deleted] foot hull diameter [deleted] and tons displacement. It has a highly streamlined hull, a high vertical tail fin and a long wide sail. [Classified matter deleted.] At least [deleted] of these submarines are operational or nearly so. Naval Intelligence estimates that the Soviets are in series production on this model and will have built [deleted] by mid-1977. Top speed is estimated at about [deleted] knots. NUCLEAR POWERED ATTACK ("VICTOR" CLASS) This submarine, considered to be the latest torpedo attack model to replace the early November class, is about [deleted] feet long, has a [deleted] foot hull diameter and a submerged displacement of about [deleted] tons. It is being built [deleted] and is considered capable of making speeds of about [deleted] knots. [Deleted.] It is estimated that [deleted] of the Victor class are operational or nearly so. This model is also in series production. Intelligence estimates that [deleted] of these units will be in operation by mid-1977. [Deleted.] |