U.S.S.R. MINERALS AND METALS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 68
• Document Creation Date: December 21, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 8, 2008
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: May 1, 1970
• Content Type: REPORT

Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
NIS 26 SEC. 63 (REV)
ICI i\\
~~ L=
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
Iq
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Denied
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Section 63 supersedes the one dated Decem-
ber 1964, copies of which should be destroyed.
Page
A. General .......................................................... 1
1. Significance .................................................... 1
2. Mineral resources ............................................... 1
3. Level of technology ............................................ 2
B. Ferrous metallurgical industry ..................................... 2
1. General ........................................................ 2
a. Supply position .............................................. 2
b. Nature of the industry ........................................ 3
c. History and development ..................................... 3
2. Iron and steel industry .......................................... 5
a. Pig iron and scrap ............................................ 5
b. Crude steel .................................................. 6
c. Finished steel ................................................ 7
d. Alloy and stainless steels ...................................... 9
e. Superalloys, refractory metals, and powder metallurgical products . 9
f. Special metals and alloys ... ................................. 10
g. Iron and steel castings ....................................... 10
3. Basic raw materials ............................................. 11
a. Limestone ................................................... 11
b. Metallurgical coke ........................................... 11
c. Iron ore ..................................................... 11
d. Manganese ore .............................................. 13
4. Alloying materials .............................................. 13
a. Chromite ................................................... 14
b. Tungsten ................................................... 14
c. Molybdenum ................................................ 15
d. Vanadium ................................................... 15
e. Nickel .............................?......................... 15
f. Cobalt ...................................................... 16
g. Ferroalloys .................................................. 16
C. Nonferrous metals and minerals .................................... 17
1. General ........................................................ 17
2. Light metals ................................................... 19
a. Aluminum ................................................... 19
b. Magnesium ................................................. 21
c. Titanium .................................................... 22
d. Beryllium .................. ................................ 22
3. Basic nonferrous metals ......................................... 22
a. Copper ..................................................... 22
b. Lead ....................................................... 25
c. Zinc ........................................................ 26
d. Tin ......................................................... 27
SECRET 25X1
i
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
Page
4. Miscellaneous metals ............................................ 28
a. Antimony ................................................... 28
b. Boron ....................................................... 29
c. Cadmium ................................................... 29
d. Germanium and silicon ....................................... 30
e. Gold ........................................................ 30
f. Mercury ..................................................... 30
g. Niobium and tantalum ........... ............................ 31
h. Platinum group metals and silver .............................. 31
i. Selenium and tellurium ....................................... 32
j. Uranium .................................................... 32
k. Zirconium ................................................... 33
5. Nonmetallic minerals ............................................ 33
a. Abrasives ................................................... 33
b. Asbestos .................................................... 33
c. Fluorspar ................................................... 34
d. Graphite .................................................... 34
e. Industrial diamonds .......................................... 34
f. Mica ....................................................... 35
g. Mineral fertilizer raw materials ................................ 35
h. Quartz crystals .............................................. 36
i. Sulfur ....................................................... 36
1. General ........................................................ 37
2. Cement ........................................................ 38
3. Concrete products .........................:.................... 39
4. Construction glass .............................................. 40
5. Brick, tile, and ceramic pipe ...................................... 41
6. Lime .......................................................... 42
7. Gypsum and plaster ............................................. 42
8. Stone, sand and gravel, and aggregate ............................. 42
9. Asphalt products ............................................... 42
F. Comments on principal sources ...................................... 61
Page
Fig. 1
World position of Soviet minerals and metals output (table) ......
2
Fig. 2
Production and trade in selected minerals and metals (table) ...
2
Fig. 3
Production of the ferrous metallurgical industry (table) ..........
5
Fig. 4
Coefficients of furnace utilization (table) .......................
6
Fig. 5
Exports of iron ore (table) ....................................
12
Fig. 6
Proved reserves of iron ore by region (table) ....................
12
Fig. 7
Exports of manganese ore and concentrates (table) ..............
13
Fig. 8
Estimated production of alloying materials (table) ..............
14
Fig. 9
Foreign trade value of nonferrous metals and minerals (table) .....
18
Fig. 10
Aluminum metal production and exports (table) ................
19
Fig. 11
Aluminum industry (map) ....................................
20
Fig. 12
Titanium resources and producing facilities (map) ...............
23
Fig. 13
Estimated supply of copper (table) ............................
23
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
Fig. 14
Copper resources and producing facilities (map)
................
Page
24
Fig. 15
Estimated supply of lead (table) ..............................
25
Fig. 16
Principal lead and zinc facilities (map) .........................
26
Fig. 17
Estimated supply of zinc (table) ...............................
27
Fig. 18
Estimated supply of tin (table) ................................
28
Fig. 19
Estimated supply of antimony (table) ..........................
29
Fig. 20
Estimated supply of cadmium (table) ..........................
29
Fig. 21
Exports of mineral fertilizer raw materials (table) ...............
35
Fig. 22
Trade in sulfur (table) .......................................
36
Fig. 23
Imports and exports of pig iron (table) .........................
43
Fig. 24
Ferrous metallurgical facilities and production (table) ...........
44
Fig. 25
Production of finished steel products (table) ....................
45
Fig. 26
Exports of finished steel (table) ...............................
46
Fig. 27
Imports of finished steel (table) ...............................
47
Fig. 28
Principal manganese ore deposits and mines (table) .............
48
Fig. 29
Principal tungsten and molybdenum deposits (table) ............
49
Fig. 30
Principal nickel and cobalt deposits and facilities (table) .........
50
Fig. 31
Electric furnace ferroalloy plants (table) .......................
51
Fig. 32
Aluminum reduction plants (table) ............................
52
Fig. 33
Principal tin mines and concentrating plants (table) .............
53
Fig. 34
Cement plants (table) .......................................
54
Fig. 35
Major construction glass plants (table) .........................
59
Fig. 36
Coke, iron, and steel plants (map) ................. follows
62
Fig. 37
Principal iron ore and coking coal deposits (map) ...............
do
Fig. 38
Cement and major reinforced concrete plants (map) .............
do
Fig. 39
Glass plants (map) ..........................................
do
Fig. 40
Major brick plants (map) .....................................
do
This section was prepared for the NIS by the
Central Intelligence Agency.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
Minerals and Metals
A. General
1. Significance
The metallurgical and construction materials industries
of the U.S.S.R. are ranked among the largest in the
world, leading all countries in production of such basic
commodities as iron ore, manganese ore, chromite, tungsten,
asbestos, cement and precast concrete products, and ranking
second in output of pig iron, crude steel, aluminum,
magnesium, nickel, and others. The Soviet Union contributed
the major share of the Communist countries' production
of the most important minerals and metals in 1968,
and a significant portion of the world output in that
year. Estimated production of selected minerals, metals
and construction materials in the U.S.S.R. in 1968, in
metric tons 1 and expressed as a percent of the production
of the world, the Communist countries, and the United
States is shown in Figure 1.
Soviet trade in minerals and metals2 represents a relatively
insignificant portion of world trade in these commodities
in terms of monetary value, but is of considerable importance
to the U.S.S.R. as a source of foreign exchange. In 1968,
Soviet trade in mineral and metal products and construction
materials amounted to 2.6 billion rubles, 314.2 % of total
trade, and was a net earner of approximately 1.1 billion
rubles.
Soviet exports of minerals, metals, and construction
materials were valued at nearly 1.8 billion rubles, or
19 % of total Soviet exports in 1968. The bulk of these
exports, about 79 %, was directed to other Communist
countries, and the large share of the remainder, some
17 % went to the industrialized non-Communist countries.
About 4 % was exported to the developing non-Communist
countries. Among the U.S.S.R.'s principal mineral and
metal exports are finished steel, pig iron, ferroalloys,
aluminum, copper, and iron ore. Soviet imports of minerals,
metals, and construction materials were valued at more
than 750 million rubles, or 9 % of the worth of all Soviet
imports in 1968. Ores and concentrates and finished
steel, including tubular products, accounted for 80%
of all metals and minerals imported. Estimated Soviet
production and trade in selected minerals and metals
in 1968 are shown in Figure 2.
The minerals and metals and construction materials
industries rank among the leading employers in Soviet
industry, employing in 1968 an estimated 3.2 million
1 All tons referred to in this section are metric tons.
2 Gold has not been included as a traded commodity.
3 At the official rate of exchange, one ruble equals US$1.11.
workers or 13 % of all industrial workers. These industries
contribute substantially to the gross value of Soviet indus25X1
production, and account for an important share of sia<
investment.
During the Seven Year Plan (1959-65), estimated investment
in the ferrous, nonferrous, and construction materials
industries was 20.6 billion rubles, or about 20% of the
total productive4 investment for Soviet industry. In 1966-
67, the first two years of the current Five Year Plan
(1966-70), estimated investment in these industries was
about 7.1 billion rubles, or about 19% of total industrial
investment. These sums were divided as follows, in billions
of rubles:
1959-65
1966-67
Ferrous metallurgy ...............
9.3
3.1
Nonferrous metallurgy ............
5.0
2.1
Construction materials ............
6.3
1.9
Soviet resources of minerals and metals are both extensive
and varied, providing the U.S.S.R. with probably the
largest raw material base of any country in the world.
The U.S.S.R. claims deposits of most minerals and metals
essential to a modern economy and a leading position
in world reserves of iron and manganese ores, of the
principal alloying metals, and of many important nonferrous
metals, including copper, lead, and zinc. However, reserves
of high-grade ores, particularly nonferrous metals, are
limited and declining and drops have been reported
in the average metal content of ore of several metals,
including iron, lead, zinc, copper, molybdenum, and
tungsten. Considerable portions of the plentiful ore reserves
cannot be processed economically. Low metal content
or poor composition frequently requires the use of complicated
and expensive extractive technology and the location
of many deposits in remote areas, far from established
transportation routes and cheap sources of power, and
sometimes subject to severe climatic conditions, makes
the cost of exploitation prohibitively high. In the current
Five Year Plan the U.S.S.R. is intensifying geological
exploration and surveying programs in order to expand
reserves of good quality ores in favorable locations.
The raw materials base of the mineral construction-
materials industry does not appear to suffer from these
deficiencies and is considered adequate to permit great
expansion of present production.
4 Excludes investment in housing, social welfare facilities, and similar
projects not related directly to production facilities.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
FIGURE 1. ESTIMATED PRODUCTION OF SELECTED
MINERALS AND METALS IN THE U.S.S.R.
COMPARED WITH PRODUCTION OF THE
WORLD, THE COMMUNIST COUNTRIES,
AND THE UNITED STATES, 1968
(Production in thousands of metric tons
unless otherwise indicated)
PRODUCTION IN U.S.S.R.
EXPRESSED AS PERCENT
OF PRODUCTION OF:
COMMODITY
PRODUC-
TION IN
U.S.S.R.
World
Com-
munist
coun-
tries*
United
States
Crude steel...........
106,500
20
68
89
Iron ore ...............
176,600
26
77
203
Manganese ore.........
6,564
39
89
**
Chromite ..............
2,000
37
82
**
Nickel ................
124
24
82
**
Aluminum .............
1 ,435
18
80
49
Magnesium............
84
38
100
93
Copper ................
992
15
79
59
Lead ..................
528
15
59
125
Zinc ..................
678
14
58
69
Tin ...................
18
7
64
**
Mercury***...........
66,700
24
98
231
Platinum group metals!
2,000
59
100
**
Cement ...............
87,500
17
61
129
*Including Chba, Yugoslavia, and North Korea but excluding
Communist China, for which production data are not always
available; however, estimates of Communist Chinese production
have been included for crude steel, iron ore, manganese ore,
aluminum, tin, and cement.
**United States is almost wholly dependent on imports.
***In thousands of flasks, each of which weighs 34.5 kilograms.
tIn thousands of troy ounces.
3. Level of technology88
The general level of technology in the Soviet metallurgical
and construction materials industries compares favorably
with that of the United States and other advanced industrial
countries. The U.S.S.R. has demonstrated its ability to
develop special techniques and equipment for production
of metallurgical and construction materials essential to
the attainment of its military goals, although the general
trend has been more toward improving technology for
quantity than for quality production. In recent years
greater attention has been devoted to programs for improving
the quality of production, but results have not been
satisfactory. In ferrous metallurgy, for example, development
of finishing equipment essential to production of high
quality rolled products continues to lag, whereas advances
made in perfecting large-capacity ironmaking equipment
and techniques are among the best in the world. The
U.S.S.R. also gained recognition as a world leader in
open hearth furnace steelmaking technology at a time,
however, when this process was being supplanted in
international practice by the oxygen converter steelmaking
process. Soviet progress in adopting this new process
has been slow.
Although the level of technology is very high, even
outstanding in certain of the newest plants of the nonferrous
FIGURE 2. ESTIMATED PRODUCTION, IMPORTS AND
EXPORTS OF SELECTED MINERALS AND
METALS, 1968
Pig iron ...............
78,000
63.4
4,522.1
Finished steel ..........
85,300
2,175.0
5,909.7
Iron ore ...............
176,600
*560.0
32,201.0
Manganese ore.........
6,564
...
1,150.0
Chromite**............
2,000
...
1,048.0
Aluminum .............
1,435
2.2
367.1
Copper ................
992
13.7
109.3
Lead ..................
***623
39.1
90.9
Zinc ..................
***811
36.4
78.7
Tin ...................
***22
7.1
Asbestos ..............
2,400
...
303.6
Cement ...............
87,500
296.0
2,641.0
... Not pertinent.
*1967.
**Chrome ore and concentrates.
***Includes primary and secondary.
metallurgical industry, in the older installations of the
industry the general level of technology is lower than
that found in similar industries abroad. Soviet technology
and equipment for mining and concentrating ores traditionally
have lagged behind world standards. Advances have
been made in processing polymetallic ores which constitute
much of the resource base for the copper, lead, and
zinc industries, but recovery rates still compare unfavorably
with those in the U.S. and elsewhere in the non-Communist
world. New technologies have been developed for the
processing of aluminous raw materials, but progress in
making industrial-scale use of these innovations has been
disappointingly slow.
B. Ferrous metallurgical industry
1. General
a. SUPPLY POSITION-The U.S.S.R. has the second
largest ferrous metallurgical industry in the world. In
1968 it produced 176.6 million tons of iron ore, 78.8
million tons of pig iron, 106.5 million tons of crude
steel, and 85.3 million tons of rolled steel. Production
of crude steel in that year represented about 20% of
world production, 68 % of that in the Communist countries,
and was equal to 89% of production in the United
States. The U.S.S.R. has created only a small reserve
steelmaking capacity and is less capable of achieving
a rapid expansion in production than is the United States
where capacity in recent years has been maintained
at an estimated average level of about one-third above
production. Soviet steelmaking capacity at the beginning
of 1969, estimated at about 115 million tons, was 70%
of estimated capacity in the United States.
The U.S.S.R. is an important source of supply of raw
materials and steel for the Warsaw Pact countries. Soviet
exports to these countries in 1968 included 28.7 million
tons of iron ore, 603,000 tons of manganese ore, 172,000
tons of chromite, 2.9 million tons of pig iron, and net
exports of 2.2 million tons of coke and 3.5 million tons
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
of finished steel. The quantities exported to the Warsaw
Pact countries from the U.S.S.R. in 1968 represented
about 86 % of the iron ore, 73 % of the manganese ore,
more than half of the chromite, 49 % of the coke, nearly
all of the pig iron, and 61 % of the finished steel imports
of these countries. The U.S.S.R. also contributed a large
share of the alloying materials required by these countries.
Soviet exports to other Communist countries in 1.968
went principally to Cuba and Yugoslavia. The U.S.S.R.
shipped only relatively small quantities of raw materials
and steel to the Communist countries of Asia in 1.968.
In addition to raw materials and steel products, the
U.S.S.R. furnishes equipment and technical assistance
to the steel industries of the Warsaw Pact countries.
At the same time, the U.S.S.R. obtains part of its own
equipment requirements from some of these countries.
Imports of rolling mill equipment from East Germany
and Czechoslovakia during 1964-68 totaled 181,100 tons,
which equaled 28 % of Soviet production of this equipment
in those years.
Soviet exports to non-Communist countries during 1964-
68 averaged 737,000 tons of chrome ore, 424,000 tons
of manganese ore, 948,000 tons of coke, 102,000 tons
of ferroalloys, 1,707,000 tons of pig iron and 769,000
tons of finished steel per year. These exports represented
about 84 % of the chrome ore, 38 % of the manganese
ore, 41% of the ferroalloys, 25% of the coke, 42% of
the pig iron, and 15 % of the finished steel exported
by the U.S.S.R. in total during that period. These commodities,
with the exception of finished steel, were marketed mainly
in Western Europe and Japan. The main non-Communist
recipients of Soviet finished steel in recent years were
Finland and Turkey, but, in all, no less than 40 countries,
principally the developing countries of Asia and Africa,
received Soviet steel. Several developing countries also
have received Soviet technical and financial aid, and
equipment for the establishment of steel plants. The
outstanding example is the Bhilai steel plant designed
and built by the U.S.S.R. for India. This plant began
production in 1959 with an initial crude steel capacity
of one million tons and was subsequently enlarged to
2.5 million tons. The capacity of the plant currently
is being expanded again to 3.2 million tons. The U.S.S.R.
also contracted in 1965 to build an even larger plant
for India at Bokaro with an eventual capacity of 5.5
million tons. Progress has been slow, however, and the
first stage of the plant with a capacity of 1.7 million
tons is not scheduled for completion until 1971. In addition,
the U.S.S.R. is helping the U.A.R. to construct a steel
plant at Helwan near Cairo and is committed to help
build steel plants in Algeria, Iran, and Turkey.
b. NATURE OF THE INDUSTRY-With the growth of
the Soviet steel industry the degree of concentration
of production has increased steadily, reflecting Soviet
conformity with the worldwide trend toward construction
of large plants. In 1968 a dozen plants accounted for
more than half of the total steel output of the U.S.S.R.
and another dozen accounted for nearly an additional
one-fifth of total steel output. Most of these are wholly
integrated plants-those having facilities for converting
raw materials into coke, pig iron, crude steel and finished
steel products. Among the remaining major plants several
lack only coking facilities and several others, being the
leading specialty steel producers, are devoted only to
the production of steel and steel products. A sharp contrast
with these leading plants is provided by the industry's
large number of small, relatively uneconomic plants,
many of which date back to the pre-Soviet regime.
For the most part, iron and steelmaking technology
in the U.S.S.R. is comparable to that practiced by leading
non-Communist steel-producing countries. The size and
productivity of modern Soviet blast furnaces and open
hearth furnaces equal, and in many instances, exceed,
those of other major steel-producing countries. The U.S.S.R.,
however, lags in electric furnace technology and in steelmaking
by the basic oxygen converter method. In fact, construction
of new open hearth furnaces was continued well into
the 1960's at a time when major steel producers in non-
Communist countries already had ceased such construction
and were investing heavily in oxygen converters.
Soviet rolling mill and finishing line technology, while
vastly improved in recent years, generally has remained
inferior to that in the United States and Western Europe.
While having a capability to manufacture modern blooming,
slabbing and billet mills, heavy structural mills, and
hot rolled sheet mills, the U.S.S.R. is relatively deficient
in capability to produce finishing line equipment-cold
rolling mills, pickling and annealing lines, and other
equipment for further processing. With respect to the
general level of mechanization and automation in the
steel industry, including ancillary operations such as repair
work, materials, and preparation of products for shipping,
the U.S.S.R. also compares unfavorably with the United
States and Western Europe.
The ferrous metallurgical industry of the U.S.S.R. is
supported by indigenous raw material resources that surpass
in extent and variety, if not always in quality, those
of any other country. Continuing large investments are
being channeled into the construction of facilities for
the preparation of raw materials, particularly iron ore,
to satisfy the increasing demand of the domestic iron
and steel industry as well as foreign customers for higher
quality raw materials.
c. HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT
(1) The Five Year Plans (1928-58)-When the
first Five Year Plan began, the annual rate of production
of crude steel was only 4.3 million tons-about the same
as in 1913. Hampered by technical incompetence, the
Soviets were able to expand. output only to 5.9 million
tons by 1932. However, equipment and technology obtained
from the United States during this period formed the
base of notable progress in ensuing years. By 1940 output
was expanded to 18.3 million tons; it dropped to 6.5
million tons in 1942 as a result of the German invasion
in 1941. Despite tremendous efforts to evacuate essential
equipment, the U.S.S.R. lost by 1942, 75% of its coking
coal capacity, over 60% of the iron ore mining capacity,
68% of the blast furnace and 65% of its steelmaking
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
capacity-primarily in the Ukraine. That the Soviet Union
was able to obtain sufficient steel to conduct its war
effort reflected the drastic restrictions placed on steel
allocations, a considerable steel plant construction program
in the Urals, and the receipt of 2.5 million tons of
finished steel and thousands of tons of war material
from the United States.
The principal postwar objectives of the Soviet iron
and steel industry were to restore war-damaged facilities
and expand production by 1950 to 25.4 million tons
of crude steel, 17.8 million tons of finished steel, 19.5
million tons of pig iron and 40 million tons of iron
ore. With a productive investment of about 1.75 billion
rubles during 1946-50 and with the aid of equipment
taken as reparations, chiefly from East Germany and
Manchuria, most of the plants in the Ukraine were
rebuilt. Output goals for crude steel and finished steel
in 1950 were exceeded and production of pig iron and
usable iron ore fell only slightly below plan.
The industry continued to develop at a rapid pace
during the fifth Five Year Plan, 1951-55, and output
goals for 1955 were substantially exceeded in the case
of crude steel and finished steel. The industry's capital
construction program, however, was not fulfilled, the
largest shortfall occurring in new iron ore mining capacity;
only 41 million tons of the 67 million tons capacity
planned for the five-year period were completed. The
shortfall in steelmaking capacity amounted to 3.5 million
tons and in capacity for rolled steel, 4.8 million tons.
The sixth Five Year Plan (1956-60) envisaged a larger
expansion of production and capacity than the industry
had achieved in any comparable period. By 1960, about
84 million tons of iron ore capacity, 16.8 million tons
of blast furnace capacity, 15.8 million tons of steelmaking
capacity and 16.3 million tons of rolled steel capacity
were to be added. Production was to reach 114.3 million
tons of iron ore, 53 million tons of pig iron, 68.3 million
tons of crude steel, and 52.7 million tons of rolled steel.
However, the effect of the fifth Five Year Plan failures
was felt as early as 1956 and by mid-1957, the sixth
Five Year Plan had been scrapped.
In 1958, the relatively modest production increases
of a revised plan were met or exceeded and construction
performance improved substantially, although there was
a significant shortfall in installing new rolled steel capacity.
The industry added 14.5 million tons of essential iron
ore mining capacity-90% of the amount planned for
the year.
(2) The Seven Year Plan (1959-65)-The ferrous
metallurgical industry attained the original 1965 goals
for production of major commodities, but its performance
was less than impressive with respect to other important
objectives of the Seven Year Plan. Construction of new
productive capacity fell considerably below planned levels,
not only delaying the introduction of new steel industry
technology but setting back indefinitely schedules for
retirement of old, outmoded facilities. Also, programs
to improve the quality and broaden the assortment of
steel products, undertaken to meet the increasingly
sophisticated needs of the Soviet economy, were only
partially successful.
Early in the plan period, in 1959 and 1960, production
increases ran ahead of schedule and, in 1961, Soviet
planners publicized the possibility of an attainment of
production levels significantly higher than the original
1965 goals. As the capital construction program began
to falter, however, the steel industry lost its momentum
and late in 1963 the planners announced production
goals for 1965 within the range set forth in the original
directives of the Seven Year Plan. These versions of the
plans for 1965, as well as the actual production levels
attained, are summarized as follows, in millions of tons:
ORIGINAL
1965
1961
1963
ACTUAL
OUTPUT-
GOAL
VERSION
REVISION
1965
Iron ore.......
150-160
165-170
153.9
153.4
Pig iron.......
65-70
72-73
65.7
66.2
Crude steel....
86-91
95-97
89.3
91.0
Rolled steel....
65-70
73-74
70.0
70.9
The extent of the difficulties encountered in the capital
construction program for ferrous metallurgy during 1959-
65 is indicated by the fact that plans for construction
of new capacity were considerably underfulfilled in every
sector of the industry. Construction of 218 million tons
of iron ore mining capacity was planned but actual
completions amounted to only 172 million tons. Planned
construction of blast furnace capacity was 24-30 million
tons, and actual construction, only 18.8 million tons.
In the case of steelmaking capacity, planned construction
was 28-36 million tons and steel construction, 23 million
tons. In the rolled steel sector, planned construction
was 23-29 million tons and actual construction, 17.2
million tons.
A variety of factors helped account for the shortfalls
in capital construction. The U.S.S.R. had allocated 10
billion rubles for investment in ferrous metallurgy during
the Seven Year Plan but actually expended only 9.3
billion rubles. Moreover, considerably less than optimum
results were obtained from the expended funds because
they were dispersed over a large number of projects,
increasing the volume of uncompleted construction and
tying up substantial sums over unduly protracted periods
of time. Another decisive factor helping to explain the
poor performance in capital construction was the neglect
by the U.S.S.R. of that sector of the machine building
industry responsible for the production of metallurgical
equipment, particularly rolling mills and finishing
equipment.
(3) The Five Year Plan (1966-70)-In spite of
the construction shortfalls of the preceding plan period,
the current Five Year Plan established ambitious goals
for the production of iron and steel. The planned rates
of increase in production were much the same as those
attained during 1961-65, but, because of the larger size
of the industry, the actual, or absolute, increases were
to be considerably higher than those in the earlier period.
By 1970 production of iron ore was to reach 224 million
tons; pig iron, 94-97 million tons; crude steel, 124-129
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
million tons; and rolled steel, 95-99 million tons. In
addition, programs for qualitative improvements in steel
products, which met with indifferent success in the Seven
Year Plan, were to be pursued more vigorously.
During the first three years of the 1966-70 plan, the
Soviet steel industry increased production significantly
and, in fact, drew closer to the United States rate of
production. Nevertheless, the industry fell behind its
planned pace of development. The rate of growth of
crude steel production slowed considerably, making
attainment of the 1970 goal problematical and the upgrading
of Soviet steel products proceeded slowly.
Planned investment in the industry during 1966-70
was originally set at about 11.8 billion rubles and
subsequently, in 1967, was reduced to about 10.8 billion
rubles. Actual investment during 1966-68, however, is
estimated at only 5.0 billion rubles. The lagging pace
of investment has been reflected in shortfalls in the
capital construction program. Construction of new steelmaking
capacity during 1966-70, originally set at 29 million
tons, was reduced to about 24 million tons, but actual
construction in the first three years of the plan amounted
to only 7.9 million tons. Similarly, the original goal
of constructing 25 million tons of new rolled steel capacity
was reduced to about 21 million tons, but actual construction
during 1966-68 was only 8.2 million tons. In the case
of blast furnace capacity, the original goal of 18 million
tons has apparently not been changed, but actual completions
during 1966-68 totaled only 5.4 million tons. New capacity
of at least 150 million tons was planned for the mining
of iron ore but actual construction in 1966-68 was only
65.6 million tons.
2. Iron and steel industry
a. PIG IRON AND SCRAP u
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R. is the second
largest producer of pig iron in the world. Production
in 1968, including blast furnace ferroalloys, was 78.8
million tons-only 3% less than production in the United
States. About 85 % of the pig iron produced by the
U.S.S.R. during 1964-67 was for steelmaking and about
15% for iron castings. The share for iron castings was
relatively large compared to the corresponding shares
in non-Communist countries-5% in the United States,
8% in West Germany, and 9% in the United Kingdom.
The production of pig iron in selected years is shown
in Figure 3.
The U.S.S.R. consumes most of the pig iron it produces,
but exports are substantial. Exports of pig iron increased
from 1.8 million tons in 1960 to about 4.5 million tons
in 1968. Communist countries, principally East Germany,
Poland, and Romania, received more than 68% of total
Soviet exports in 1968. Among non-Communist countries,
Japan was the largest importer of Soviet pig iron, receiving
nearly 750,000 tons or more than half of total shipments
to these countries. The U.S.S.R. imports only relatively
small amounts of pig iron. In 1968, such imports, which
came entirely from North Korea, amounted to 63,400
tons. Soviet exports and imports of pig iron, 1960-68,
are shown in Figure 23.
The substantial surplus of pig iron available for export
reflects, in part, the relatively greater success achieved
by the blast furnace sector compared with the other
sectors of the Soviet iron and steel industry. By the
same token, however, domestic demand for pig iron
has not increased as rapidly as expected because of the
lag in adopting the oxygen converter method of steelmaking.
The oxygen converter requires a relatively larger input
of hot metal (pig iron) than is normally used in the
open hearth furnace because its exothermic process limits
the amount of scrap that can be consumed.
Scrap supplies in the U.S.S.R. appear adec25X1for
essential requirements. Exports of scrap have increased
steadily from 170,000 tons in 1960 to 664,000 tons in
1968 and there were no imports during this period. There
is evidence, however, of regional. shortages of scrap and
even of tightness in overall supplies. Special efforts have
been made to improve methods of scrap collection and
processing to assure adequate deliveries to steel plants.
25X1
FIGURE 3. PRODUCTION OF THE FERROUS METALLURGICAL INDUSTRY
(Millions of metric tons)
MANGANESE
ORE
USABLE
IRON ORE
1913 ..............
1.2
9.2
4.4
4.2
4.3
3.6
1928 ..............
0.7
6.1
4.2
3.3
4.3
3.4
1940 ..............
2.6
29.9
21.1
14.9
18.3
13.1
1945 ..............
1.5
15.9
13.6
8.8
12.3
8.5
1950 ..............
3.4
39.7
27.7
19.2
27.3
20.9
1955 ..............
4.7
71.9
43.6
33.3
45.3
35.3
1958 ..............
5.4
88.8
50.9
39.6
54.9
43.1
1959 ..............
5.5
94.0
53.4
43.0
60.0
47.0
1960 ..............
5.9
105.9
56.2
46.8
65.3
51.0
1961 ..............
6.0
117.6
58.6
50.9
70.8
55.3
1962 ..............
6.4
128.1
60.9
55.3
76.3
59.2
1963 ..............
6.7
137.5
63.9
58.7
80.2
62.5
1964 ..............
7.1
145.9
66.3
62.4
85.0
66.7
1965 ..............
7.6
153.4
67.5.
66.2
91.0
70.9
1966 ..............
7.7
160.3
68.5
70.3
96.9
76.7
1967 ..............
7.2
168.2
69.9
74.8
102.2
81.7
1968 ..............
6.6
176.6
71.5
78.8
106.5
85.3
1970 plan..........
7.7
209.0
78.0
94.0
124.0
95.0
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
(2) Blast furnace facilities Estimated Soviet blast
furnace capacity at the beginning of 1969 was 85 million
tons. In 1968, the U.S.S.R. had 131 blast furnaces in
operation in 37 plants of which 20, with 99 of the
blast furnaces, produced more than 1 million tons each
and accounted for more than 90% of the nation's total
output of pig iron. These major pig iron producers are
listed in Figure 24 and their locations are shown on
Figure 36.
Most of the Soviet blast furnace capacity is located
in the two major metallurgical centers in the Ukraine
and in the Urals. Most of the remainder is located in
the central European part of the U.S.S.R. and in Kazakhstan
and West Siberia.
(3) Technology The level of blast furnace technology
in the U.S.S.R. compares favorably with that of other
major steel producing countries. High production rates
have been achieved by the application of modern technology.
Improvements in ancillary facilities of blast furnace plants,
however, have not kept pace with the rapid progress
in furnace and raw materials improvements. Output
per worker consequently is lower in Soviet blast furnace
plants than the average in the United States.
One of the most important factors in the high productivity
of Soviet blast furnaces is the thorough treatment of
raw materials, particularly iron ore, prior to charging.
Because of its declining quality, an increased proportion
of the available iron ore must be beneficiated.5 This
practice and the growing use of agglomerates have contributed
significantly to increased production rates. The share
of agglomerates in the total ore charge in Soviet blast
furnaces, has grown from 73 % in 1960 to 91 % in 1968.
The U.S.S.R. produced over 128 million tons of sinter
in 1968 of which all but a few million tons was self-
fluxing to some degree. While a leader in sintering,
the U.S.S.R. has lagged behind other countries, including
the United States, in the development of pelletizing.
About 7 million tons of pellets were produced in 1968
compared to about 45 million tons produced commercially
in the United States.
Other important developments adopted by the U.S.S.R.
to improve blast furnace performance are the conversion
of furnaces to high top pressure, the use of natural gas
as blast furnace fuel, and the injection of oxygen in
the blast. By the end of 1968, 106 blast furnaces were
operating with high top pressure compared to 79 furnaces
in 1960. A total of 102 blast furnaces were operated
with the use of natural gas in 1968. These furnaces
accounted for 66.9 million tons or 85% of total pig
iron produced that year. In 1958, natural gas was used
in only 13 furnaces which produced 3.1 million tons
or 8 % of the total pig iron. Production of pig iron with
the use of oxygen reached 34.2 million tons in 1968
compared with only a few million tons in 1960.
Blast furnace productivity also has been increased through
the construction of large-scale furnaces. During 1959-
68 the U.S.S.R. constructed 22 new blast furnaces: 2
Beneficiation or concentration describes processes for bringing a
low iron ore content ore up to 55 %-65 % iron by elimination of undesirable
material. Agglomeration refers to the sintering, pelletizing, or briqueting
of fine ore into lumps suitable for blast furnace feed.
with a useful working volume of 1,513 cubic meters,
7 of 1,719 cubic meters, 12 of 2,000 cubic meters, and
1 of 2,700 cubic meters. An even larger furnace with
a working volume of 3,000 cubic meters is under construction
and designs are being prepared for a 3,200 cubic meter
furnace. Soviet blast furnaces rank among the largest
in the world.
The effectiveness of Soviet programs to increase blast
furnace efficiency is reflected in a steady improvement
in the coefficient of furnace utilization, shown for selected
years in Figure 4.
b. CRUDE STEEL
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R. produced 106.5
million tons of crude steel in 1968-the equivalent of
90% of production in the United States. The goal for
1970 is 124-129 million tons which appears to be out
of reach. If the U.S.S.R. achieves its plans to produce
112.6 million tons of steel in 1969, about 6 million
tons more than in 1968, it would still be 11.4 million
tons short of the lower limit of the goal for 1970. Average
annual increases during 1966-68 were only 5.2 million
tons. Production of crude steel in selected years is shown
in Figure 3. Crude steel rarely enters into Soviet foreign
trade since steel normally is traded in semifinished and
finished form.
(2) Steelmaking facilities-At the beginning of
1969, the steelmaking capacity of the U.S.S.R. was estimated
at about 115 million tons or 70% of estimated capacity
in the United States. In 1968, more than 90% of all
steel produced in the U.S.S.R. was made in about 70
plants of the iron and steel industry. The remainder
was produced in plants assigned to other industries, mainly
machine building plants. About 70% of the total production
of crude steel was accounted for by 23 plants, all with
individual capacities in excess of one million tons. The
principal steel-producing centers in the U.S.S.R. are in
the Ukraine and the Urals. The Ukraine accounted for
about 42 % of total steel production and the Urals only
several percent less.
Most of the steel produced in the U.S.S.R. is made
by the open hearth process, chiefly in basic refractory
lined furnaces. Although only a few new open hearth
furnaces have been constructed in the current plan period,
production of steel by this method has continued to
FURNACE COEFFICIENTS OF UTILIZATION
YEAR
BLAST FURNACE*
OPEN HEARTH
FURNACE**
1940
..................
1.19
4.24
1950
..................
0.977
5.36
1955
..................
0.803
6.55
1960
..................
0.741
7.69
1965
..................
0.662
8.55
1966
..................
0.646
8.74
1967
..................
0.629
8.94
1968
..................
0.614
9.09
*Cubic meters of usable blast furnace volume per ton of basic
pig iron produced per 24 hours.
**Tons of crude steel per square meter of hearth area per 24
hours.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO135OR000100080001-8 _
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
expand, reflecting Soviet efforts to intensify operations
at existing open hearth shops to compensate for the
lag in adoption of the oxygen converter steelmaking
process. In contrast, production of open hearth steel
has declined markedly in the United States since 1964
as rapid gains have been made in production of steel
by the oxygen converter.
Soviet open hearth furnaces produced over 83 million
tons of steel or 78 % of the total output of steel in 1968,
electric furnaces accounted for nearly 10 million tons
of 9 %, basic (top blown) oxygen converters 11.4 million
tons or 11 %, and Bessemer converters 1.8 million tons
or slightly less than 2 %. Of total steel production in
the United States in 1968, open hearth furnaces accounted
for 50 %, electric furnaces nearly 13 %, basic oxygen converters
37 %, and Bessemer converters less than 1 %.
(3) Technology Attainments in Soviet open hearth
technology compare favorably with those in the United
States. The U.S.S.R. has built the largest open hearth
furnaces in the world, including 600-ton units and even
some 900-ton units. A comprehensive program has been
conducted for many years to rebuild and enlarge older
furnaces. The use of oxygen injection to speed the open
hearth process has been steadily increased. In 1968, the
production of open hearth steel with the use of oxygen
amounted to 47 million tons compared to 14.6 million
tons in 1960. Greater use also has been made of natural
gas in place of mixed gases as fuel for the open hearth.
This has made possible the simplification of furnace
designs and, in turn, a reduction in building costs and
an enlargement of the hearth area to accommodate larger
charges. In addition, the use of improved refractories
for furnace linings has lengthened the time of furnace
operations and thereby reduced downtime for repairs.
All of these factors have contributed to steady improvements
in the coefficient of utilization of open hearth furnaces,
as shown in Figure 4.
Results have been considerably less satisfactory with
respect to the oxygen converter steelmaking process. In
the early 1960's, when the principal steel producers of
North America, Western Europe, and Japan were making
steady headway in adopting the new process, the U.S.S.R.
was experiencing various technical and planning difficulties
in its converter program. In 1962, the U.S.S.R. contracted
with Austria for the construction at the Novo Lipetsk
Metallurgical Plant of a complete L-D converter shop
with three 100-ton converters. This shop was put into
operation in 1966. Converters of Soviet design and
manufacture have also been put into operation in recent
years but by 1968 Soviet production of steel by the
basic oxygen converter process had only reached 11.4
million tons in comparison with 44.3 million tons in
the United States and 45.7 million tons in Japan. The
largest Soviet-built converters are 130-ton units whereas
300-ton units are in operation in Western Europe, Japan,
and the United States. The U.S.S.R., however, is currently
constructing a shop with 250-ton converters.
The U.S.S.R. also has encountered difficulties in its
efforts to build large electric furnaces. An electric furnace
with a capacity of 180 tons was in the design stage
more than a decade ago but has still not been manufactured
and put into operation. The largest electric furnaces
currently in operation in the U.S.S.R. are 100-ton units.
In the United States electric furnaces are in use with
capacities over 200 tons.
The U.S.S.R. has several programs designed to improve
steel quality and to develop new alloys for aircraft and
missiles. One, in emulation of western developments,
involves the use of large scale vacuum processing techniques.
Vacuum induction furnaces and consumable electrode
vacuum arc furnaces have been installed in special steel
plants, including the Dnepr Special Steels Plant, the
Chelyabinsk Metallurgical Plant, the Zlatoust Metallurgical
Plant and the Elektrostal' Plant. Vacuum ladle and stream
degassing have been used extensively to improve the
quality of bearing, aircraft, electrical, and large forged
rotor steels. In another area of vacuum metallurgy, electron
beam remelting, the U.S.S.R. has made considerable
progress, using some domestically manufactured equipment
as well as a large number of electron beam furnaces
imported from East Germany. In addition to vacuum
processing the U.S.S.R. has devoted considerable attention
to electroslag remelting, a less costly method of improving
metal quality. Although not fully equal to vacuum processing,
particularly in applications where the highest purity is
desired, electroslag remelting has gained acceptance in
a variety of other applications. The U.S.S.R. ranks as
a world leader in development and industrial use of
the process and has licensed its process for use in Japan
and Western Europe. Electroslag remelting also is being
developed, on an independent basis, in the United States
and Western Europe.
c. FINISHED STEEL
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R. produced 85.3
million tons of finished steels in 1968.. Production in
1970 is planned at 95-99 million tons, requiring an average
annual growth rate during 1969-70 of 4.9 million tons
as compared with an average of 4.8 million tons during
1966-68. Production of finished steel in selected years
is shown in Figure 3.
The Soviet product mix for rolled steel differs markedly
from that in the United States. For example, the output
of light flat rolled products, largely used in automobiles
and consumer goods, accounted for about 26% of total
output of rolled products in the U.S.S.R. as against
54% in the United States during 1967. Similarly, the
proportion of cold-rolled sheet and strip, galvanized sheet
and tinplate in the total output of finished light flat
rolled products is much lower in the U.S.S.R. than in
the United States. In the past decade the U.S.S.R. has
sought to increase production of these types of steel
but progress has been slow. The production of the more
important types of Soviet steel mill products is shown
in Figure 25.
Soviet exports of steel mill products have increased
from 3.0 million tons in 1960 to 5.9 million tons in
6 Includes all rolled steel, pipe from ingots, forgings from ingots
and blanks for rerolling but excludes steel castings.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
1968. Imports have fluctuated, increasing from 1.5 million
tons in 1960 to 2.0 million tons in 1962, declining to
1.2 million tons by 1966, and then increasing again
to 2.2 million tons in 1968. Net exports of steel increased
from 1.5 million tons in 1960 to 4.1 million tons in
1967 but declined to 3.7 million tons in 1968. For the
entire period, 1960-68, net exports represented about
4 % of domestic production of finished steel.
Shipments to Communist countries accounted for 85 %
of the finished steel exported by the U.S.S.R. in 1960-
68. East Germany received by far the largest single share
of the exports to Communist countries. Shipments to
non-Communist countries in recent years were distributed
among 40 countries throughout the world. Exports of
finished steel during 1960-68 are shown in Figure 26.
During 1960-67 the U.S.S.R. imported about the same
amount of steel from non-Communist countries as it
did from Communist countries. Imports of finished steel
from non-Communist countries averaged about one million
tons per year during 1960-62 but declined during 1963-
66, reflecting, to a considerable extent, the influence
of foreign exchange shortages. Imports from these countries
rose again in 1968 to 988,700 tons from 379,000 tons
in 1966. Most of the finished steel imported from non-
Communist countries in recent years has been in the
form of pipe and tube, cold-rolled sheet, and light structural
shapes. Soviet imports of finished steel and the major
suppliers during 1960-68 are shown in Figure 27.
(2) Production facilities Finished steel is produced
in approximately 500 plants of which 350 to 375, making
only steel castings, are essentially captive foundries of
other industries. Of an estimated 140 plants which roll
steel, about 20 to 25 are small sheet mills which do
not produce ingot steel but process slabs and sheet-
bars from other plants. In 1968, 19 plants, each having
an annual capacity of over one million tons of finished
steel, accounted for an estimated two-thirds of total
production. The principal plants producing finished steel
and the type of product produced at each plant are
shown in Figure 24. The location of the plants is shown
on Figure 36, map.
The industry in 1958 reportedly had a total of 298
rolling mills producing hot-rolled steel products of which
only 32 were classed as modern mills. The Seven Year
Plan called for an increase in the total number of modern
mills to 74 and a reduction in the total number of
mills to 253, reflecting Soviet intentions to retire 91
obsolete mills, including 52 plate and sheet mills. These
plans were not fulfilled. Only 31 rolling mills, including
relatively few cold-rolling mills, were installed during
1959-65; construction of new steel rolling capacity amounted
to 17.2 million tons, considerably short of the planned
total of 23-29 million tons; and many obsolete mills
were kept in service to compensate for shortfalls in construction
of new capacity.
(3) Technology-Soviet rolling and finishing
technology is less advanced than that in the United
States. The lag in the rolling and finishing sector stems
from a greater emphasis given in past years to iron
and steelmaking technology and from long lead times
in the design, manufacture and installation of the more
complicated types of rolling mill equipment.
The production of rolling mill equipment during 1959-
65 amounted to 782,000 tons, significantly below the
planned amount which, according to one source, was
1,000,000 tons, and, according to a second source, was
as much as 1,144,000 tons. Annual output reached 111,000
tons in 1965, only about half of the goal of 200,000
to 220,000 tons for that year. Under the current Five
Year Plan production in 1970 is to reach 190,000 to
210,000 tons, somewhat less than the unattained goal
for 1965. In 1968 production of rolling mill equipment
reached a new high of 153,200 tons but Soviet officials
acknowledged early in the year that construction was
lagging on machine building facilities needed to achieve
planned increases in production of rolling mills and finishing
equipment.
The U.S.S.R. has the technical capability to design
and construct practically any types of rolling mill, given
adequate time and priority. It is relatively adept in
the manufacture of blooming, slab, billet, rail-structural,
bar, rod, plate, and butt and lap-weld pipe mills and
has shown a growing capability to build continuous
hot-rolled sheet mills such as the 6 stand, 2,500 millimeter
and 1,700 millimeter mills; continuous cold rolling mills
including 4 stand, 1,700 millimeter and 2,000 millimeter
mills, and seamless and electroweld pipe mills including
electroweld mills capable of producing pipe up to 1,220
millimeters in diameter. Special purpose mills also have
been built and installed, including those with multiple
back-up" rolls to produce narrow strip. The first Soviet
20 roll, 1,200 millimeter "Sendzimir-type" mill was installed
at the Novo Lipetsk Plant in 1963.
The U.S.S.R. has lagged considerably in the application
of automated techniques to the rolling mill process and
in the development of many types of finishing line equipment
important to achieving high quality products. The first
Soviet full-scale electrolytic tinning line was not installed
until early 1964 at the Magnitogorsk Plant (a small
semicommercial line has been in operation for a number
of years at Zaporozh'ye) and the first Soviet continuous
annealing furnaces were not installed until 1962-64. No
additional units of these types are known to have been
installed since then. Development of continuous. galvanizing
and pickling lines also has lagged.
H The U.S.S.R. has pioneered in the commercial adaptation
of the continuous casting process. by 1968, 85 continuous
casting strands had been installed with a total rated
capacity of 9.1 million tons, representing nearly one-
fourth of known world capacity. Only slow progress
has been made, however, in expanding production. The
original Soviet goal for 1965 was 10 million tons, but
by 1968 annual output from continuous casting installations
in the U.S.S.R. had only reached 3.34 million tons.
(4) Distribution and consumption-Finished steel
in the U.S.S.R. is shipped primarily by rail. Inadequate
highways and high haulage costs make it generally impractical
to ship steel by truck for other than short hauls. Waterborne
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
shipments are charged relatively low freight rates, but
generally it is necessary to transfer cargo to rail facilities
en route to the destination, in part because the north-
south orientation of most waterways in the Soviet Union
is not appropriate to the predominantly east-west movement
of steel.
Disparate trends in regional production and consumption
of finished steel have made for considerable cross-hauling
of products. Between 1960 and 1967 this was reflected
in an increase in the length of the average haul for
ferrous metals (finished steel plus pig iron, ferroalloys,
and scrap) from 1,037 kilometers to 1,201 kilometers.
The Soviet Union has consistently refrained from disclosing
data on the usage of steel mill products by consuming
industries. However, various studies in Soviet economic
and technical journals provide some general indications
of the consumption pattern. The largest share, some
55% to 60%, goes to machine building and metalworking
industries. Another 20 % to 25 % is consumed in construction.
Of the remainder, significant shares go.for the maintenance
and repair of capital goods and for the construction
and maintenance of railroads and oil and natural gas
pipeline systems.
d. ALLOY AND STAINLESS STEELS 7-For the most part,
data are not available on the quantity of alloy and
stainless steels produced in the U.S.S.R. It is clear, however,
that production of these steels has been increasing, although
most of the impetus for such production has been provided
by strategic and other high priority programs. Efforts
during the past decade to develop broader uses have
met with some success, but, in general, Soviet industrial
applications of stainless and alloy steels lag behind non-
Communist countries.
In recent years the U.S.S.R. has given increased attention
to the substitution of low alloy steel, where feasible,
for more highly alloyed types and some carbon grades.
Thus far, the largest application of low alloy steels has
been in construction steels but other low alloy types
of steel have been developed for tool and engineering
steel. Production of low alloy steel was increased from
1.3 million tons in 1958 to 4.6 million tons in 1965,
but was short of the target of 6.0 million tons.
The principal steel plants producing low alloy construction,
engineering alloy, bearing, and tool steels in the U.S.S.R.
are the Dneprospetsstal' Plant in Zaporozh'ye, the Chelyabinsk
Metallurgical Plant, the Serp i Molot and Elektrostal'
Plants in the Moscow area, the Krasnyy Oktyabr' Plant
in Volgograd, the Serov Steel Plant, the Zlatoust Metallurgical
Plant, and the Pervoural'sk Novo Trubnyy Pipe Mill.
In response to its needs for materials for aircraft structures
and solid propellant rocket motor cases the U.S.S.R.
has developed a variety of high strength, low alloy steels.
Early steels in this group include grades 3OKhGSNA
and E1643, the latter being one of a number of Soviet
steels which include tungsten as a major alloying element
'Includes low alloy and alloy constructional and engineering
steels, bearing steels, tool steels, stainless steels, and steels resistant
to heat (up to 120?F.) and corrosion.
to achieve an increase in toughness. The tensile strengths
of these two steels are 250,000 p.s.i. and 285,000 p.s.i.,
respectively. A special series of steels designated SP (ultra
high strength or Sverkh Prochnaya) also has been developed
with at least six carbon grades. Available information
indicates that the steel with the best properties in this
series is the 33Kh3SNVFMA grade with a tensile strength
of 250,000 to 260,000 p.s.i. Still other steels have been
developed which have been subjected to thermal mechanical
treatment to yield tensile strengths of 300,000 p.s.i. and
over. One example is the 40KhSNVF grade with an
ultimate tensile strength of 390,000 p.s.i. and a yield
strength of 320,000 p.s.i.
The U.S.S.R. conducts much of its research on maraging
steels at a nondefense facility, the Central Scientific
Research Institute of Ferrous Metallurgy. The primary
purpose of the effort, however, probably is to develop
steels for aerospace applications. The U.S.S.R. announced
in February 1967 that it had produced tonnage quantities
of a maraging steel but, on balance, it is believed to
lag considerably behind the United States in this field.
The U.S.S.R. also has conducted research since 1954
to develop precipitation hardening stainless steels. The
VNS series, which has been discussed extensively in Soviet
technical literature, provides a measure of Soviet progress
in this field. The series is being developed by the All-
Union Scientific Research Institute primarily for the aerospace
industry. VNS-5 appears to have the best combined properties
with a tensile strength up to 220,000 p.s.i. and good
notch toughness and elongation qualities. VNS-9 has
shown a tensile strength of 285,000 p.s.i. but apparently
is susceptible to stress corrosion.
Some of the stainless steels originally developed for
aerospace programs have found applications in the chemical
and power generating industries and others have been
developed to provide a full range of stainless steels for
industrial applications. A considerable effort has been
made to develop a series of new and cheaper steels
to replace such types as Kh18N10T and Kh17N13HZT
which have a high nickel content. The principal producing
facilities for stainless steels are the Dneprospetsstal' and
the Chelyabinsk Plants; other important producers are
the Krasnyy Oktyabr', Serp i Molot, Elektrostal', the
Zlatoust and Kuznetsk Metallurgical Plants, and the
Yuzhnotrubnyy Tube Mill (Nikopol').
e. SUPERALLOYS, REFRACTORY METALS, AND POWDER
METALLURGICAL PRODUCTS-Quantitative data are not
available on Soviet output of superalloys, but the Soviet
program for development of these alloys ranks generally
on a par with such programs in industrially advanced
non-Communist countries. Because of the relatively limited
supply of cobalt in the U.S.S.R., however, Soviet research
on cobalt-base alloys is less advanced than on nickel-
base alloys. In addition, there is evidence that the Soviets
have experienced difficulties in developing nickel-base
alloys combining relatively high strength levels with desired
corrosion-resistant qualities.
Soviet superalloys were developed primarily for use
in the production of components for jet aircraft. Much
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
of the development work on superalloys has been carried
out at research institutes in Moscow, particularly those
associated with the aviation industry. In recent years,
however, notable research also has been conducted in
the Leningrad area, principally at the Central Boiler
and Turbine Institute. Production is carried out mainly
at the Elektrostal' plant, the principal producer of superalloys
in the U.S.S.R.
Soviet melting practice for superalloys is based, in
large part, on the use of the electroslag remelting technique.
In contrast, the normal practice in non-Communist countries
is to use the consumable-electrode, vacuum arc process.
Soviet practice reflects both the position of the U.S.S.R.
as a leader in development of electroslag remelting and
the Soviet lag in building capabilities for vacuum processing.
These latter capabilities are believed to have been sufficiently
developed in recent years, however, to permit production
of superalloys needed in exacting applications. Some
use also has been made of electron beam melting for
the production of nickel-base alloys.
Preparation of molybdenum and tungsten metals and
alloys by powder metallurgy is employed in the U.S.S.R.
using substantially the same techniques as in non-Communist
countries. Plants engaged in the production of powder
for power metallurgy are located at Moscow, Tula, Brovary,
and Kiev. In addition, specialized sections have been
established at various machine building plants to manufacture
articles and parts by power metallurgical methods. A
large number of institutes have participated in basic
and applied research on power metallurgy. The Institute
of Problems of Materials Science, Kiev, has played a
leading role in research on sintered carbides and powder
rolling. The Central Scientific Research Institute of Ferrous
Metallurgy has conducted extensive research to develop
new powder-metallurgical alloys as well as industrial
methods suitable for the production of sintered billets.
The U.S.S.R. is the world's second largest producer
of metalloceramic and fused hard alloys for cutting and
drilling tools, drawing dies, facing materials, and in
some instances, for armor piercing shells. The principal
Soviet hard alloys are tungsten and tungsten-titanium
carbides with cobalt or nickel binders and the fused
cobalt-tungsten carbides (stellites).
The need for optimum properties in aerospace and
advanced weapon applications has fostered work in the
U.S.S.R. as in the United States on developing composites
of metals and silicides, nitrides, carbides, and borides.
Materials are required that will give extreme heat protection,
possess far higher strength of weight ratios than any
thus far achieved, resist corrosion, oxidation, and
environmental effects such as radiation, and also be
amenable to forming and joining.
f. SPECIAL METALS AND ALLOYS8-Little information
is available on Soviet production of types of materials
in the special metals category other than electrical steels.
s Includes magnetic core materials, permanent magnet materials,
and other alloys with special electrical properties.
The U.S.S.R. is a major producer of all grades of electrical
sheet.9 Production of electrical sheet in the U.S.S.R.
has increased steadily from 494,000 tons in 1960 to 921,000
tons in 1968. As early as 1963 Soviet production exceeded
U.S. production of electrical steel. The U.S. produced
668,000 tons of electrical steel in 1967 and only 631,000
tons in 1968. The quality of Soviet electrical steel has
often been criticized, however. Soviet officials blame
the poor quality of electrical sheet for high energy losses
in the electric power industry. In the past several years
the Soviets installed modern equipment for hydrogen
annealing and coating of transformer strip, but the results
have not been entirely satisfactory.
The most important plants for the processing of electrical
sheet are the Novo Lipetsk Metallurgical Plant, the
Magnitogorsk Combine, and the Verkh-Isetskiy plant.
The latter plant is undergoing reconstruction and
modernization. Other processing facilities are located
at the Zaporozh'ye and Novosibirsk Metallurgical Plants
and the Leningrad Steel Rolling Mill. Plants which produce
only slabs for further processing include the Dneprospetsstal',
Elektrostal', Chelyabinsk, Kuznetsk, and Nizhny Tagil
plants.
Magnetic core materials based on iron, primarily Armco
grade, are produced at Serp i Molot in Moscow and
at the Krasny Sulin Metallurgical Plant in the Lower
Don area. Serp i Molot is the largest producer of Armco
iron in the Soviet Union. The principal use of Armco
iron in the U.S.S.R. is probably as a starting material
for the production of carbonyl iron. Electrolytic and
carbonyl iron are produced in unknown amounts, probably
at the Krasny Sulin Works. In addition to the iron-
silicon and iron magnetic core materials mentioned above,
the Soviets appear to have a full range of iron nickel
(permalloy), modified iron nickel (molybdenum permalloy),
and iron-cobalt alloys.
The U.S.S.R. is a major producer of cast and pressed
powder permanent magnet materials in the majority
of alloy systems currently found useful. The bulk of
the output, as in other countries, is in the cast, iron-
nickel-aluminum grades, primarily Alnico types. The
quality (as measured by the energy level, coercivity,
and resistivity) is below that found in the United States
and Western Europe. In recent years the Soviets have
devoted considerable attention to the development of
ferrites as magnetic materials.
g. IRON AND STEEL CASTINGS-The Soviet iron and
steel foundry industry is in general highly fragmented
and captive to other industrial operations. Of more than
2,000 iron foundries and 500 steel foundries in the U.S.S.R.
only a few are centralized plants producing a wide variety
of castings on a jobbing basis. Soviet foundries range
in size from the large facilities at the Urals Heavy Machine
Building Plant (Uralmash) with a capacity of over 200,000
tons of iron castings, to small operations producing less
than 1,000 tons yearly.
9Armature, electrical, dynamo, motor, transformer, and grain-oriented
transformer sheet.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
The U.S.S.R. is the world's leading producer of iron
and steel castings, a reflection, in part, of the Soviet
tendency to use relatively more cast components than
in the United States, despite the comparatively higher
cost and weight of the equipment and machinery that
results in many cases. In 1968 the U.S.S.R. is estimated
to have produced about 4 million tons of steel castings
and 18 million tons of iron castings.
a. LIMESTONE-Limestone is used as a flux in Soviet
blast furnaces and steelmaking units and in the production
of self-fluxing sinter. Dolomitic limestone is used primarily
in the output of low manganese pig iron, and as a
constituent of refractory materials in open hearth bottoms
and oxygen converters. Limestone is plentiful in the
U.S.S.R. and quarries generally can be developed within
200 miles of a steel plant. Reserves on 1 January 1959
were as follows, in millions of tons:
INDICATED
AND
PROVEN INFERRED
RESERVES RESERVES
Limestone ..................... 1,686 2,999
Dolomitic limestone ............ 88 166
There are no known imports or exports of limestone
by the U.S.S.R.
b. METALLURGICAL COKE-The U.S.S.R. produced
71.5 million tons of metallurgical coke in 1968 and
plans to produce 78.0 million tons in 1970. Production
in selected years is shown in Figure 3.
The U.S.S.R. is a net exporter of coke. Exports have
increased from 2.6 million tons in 1960 to 3.8 million
tons in 1968. Exports during 1964-68 ranged between
3.7 and 4.0 million tons. The chief recipients of Soviet
coke in recent years have been East Germany, Hungary,
Romania, and Finland. These four countries received
83% of total Soviet coke exports in 1968. Most of the
remainder was shipped to Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, North
Korea, Cuba, Austria, Denmark, and Sweden. The Soviet
trade handbook reports imports of coke from Poland
but this is believed to be a continuation of an earlier
arrangement providing for direct shipment on Soviet
account of Polish coke to East Germany.
Reserves of coking coal in the U.S.S.R. amount to
about 2.48 trillion tons, based on official estimates, which
include measured, indicated, and inferred categories of
reserves. A considerable part of these huge reserves, however,
is not suitable for coking purposes because of high ash
content, high sulfur content, or other undesirable qualities.
Coking coal reserves of the four main supply basins
for ferrous metallurgy, the Donetsk, Kuznetsk, Karaganda,
and Pechora basins as of 1957 were as follows, in billions
of tons:
Donetsk ............ 31.3
Kuznetsk ........... 300.0
Karaganda ......... 51.0
Pechora ............ 114.6
The location of these and other sources of coking coal
are shown on Figure 37. For further information on
coking coal reserves, see Section 62F.
The Ukraine in 1968 accounted for about.51 % of
total production of coke, most of the remainder was
produced in the Urals and in West Siberia. Coke plants
in the Ukraine obtain coal from the Donetsk Basin while
those in the Urals operate on a blend of Kuznetsk and
Karaganda coals. Pechora coals are supplied mainly to25X1
the Cherepovets Metallurgical Plant in the north but,
in the future, are to be supplied to the Urals, partially
supplanting coals from Kuznetsk, which are to serve
as the principal fuel source for the plants in West Siberia.
Technological improvements have been directed primarily
toward maintaining the quality of coking coal, blending
poorer grades with higher quality types, and toward
the development of substitute fuels. By investing heavily
in coal preparation plants, the Soviet -coal industry has
been able to maintain a fairly constant quality for the
coal charged to the coke ovens. The increasing use of
natural gas injections in blast furnace tuyeres and some
concurrent use of oxygen and natural gas have contributed
to significant economies in the consumption of coke.
These and other measures enabled the U.S.S.R. to reduce
its coke consumption per ton of pig iron produced from
724 kilograms in 1960 to 601 kilograms in 1967.
C. IRON ORE
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R. is the largest
producer of iron ore in the world. It provides completely
for its own needs and furnishes over 50% of the usable
ore 10 requirements of the Eastern European Communist
countries. In 1968, the U.S.S.R. produced 177 million
tons of usable ore. The goal for 1970 was originally
announced to be 224 million tons but was later reduced
to 209 million tons. Production of usable iron ore in
selected years is shown in Figure 3, and Soviet exports
during 1960-68 are shown in Figure 5.
Declining ore quality in the U.S.S.R. has necessitated
large-scale construction of concentrating and sintering
plants. During the Seven Year Plan period, 218 million
tons of new mining and beneficiating capacity were
planned, of which about 172 million tons were commissioned.
For the current plan period (1966-70), at least 150 million
tons of new mining and beneficiating capacity are scheduled
to be put into operation, but during the first three years
only 66 million tons were actually commissioned. The
U.S.S.R. also has been slow in adopting the new pelletizing
process, the first facilities for which were commissioned
at Sokolov-Sarbay in 1965 and Krivoy Rog in 1967.
The output of pellets grew to about 3.7 million tons
in 1968. In the case of sinter, production has been increasing
steadily, reaching an estimated 128 million tons in 1968.
10 The term usable iron ore as used in the U.S.S.R. includes shipping
grade ore (that labeled as usable in blast furnaces and open hearth
furnaces without further processing) and beneficiated ore (concentrates,
sinter, pellets). Production of usable ore, however, is not equal to
the sum of the output of shipping grade and beneficiated ore because
increasing quantities of shipping grade ore are being processed further
after leaving the mine.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
FIGURE 5. EXPORTS OF IRON ORE
(Thousands of metric tons)
Austria ..........................
341
293
316
434
401
400
355
314
334
Bulgaria .........................
0
40
25
211
346
842
908
954
764
Czechoslovakia ...................
5,066
5,078
5,988
6,914
7,638 7,
966
7,662
8,665
9,533
East Germany ...................
2,003
2,046
2,521
2,445
2,565 2,
610
2,594
2,460
2,603
Hungary ........................
1,683
1,725
1,999
2,032
2,339 2,
267
2,572
2,645
2,709
Italy ............................
0
3
0
0
0
0
10
329
620
Japan ...........................
0
0
0
0
0
28
251
382
957
Poland ..........................
5,238
5,993
6,432
6,769
7,154 7
,353
7,850
8,584
9,990
Romania ........................
851
1,068
1,386
1,633
1,667 1
,714
2,428
2,670
3,138
United Kingdom .................
0
0
0
0
25
511
956
1,426
1,515
West Germany ...................
0
29
268
339
465
447
532
256
36
FIGURE 6. PROVED RESERVES 0
REGION, 1 JANUARY 1962
(Billions of metric tons and P
RESERVES
PERCENT
OF
TOTAL
AVERAGE
IRON
CONTENT
North and Northwest........
1.7
3.6
32
Ukraine ....................
11.8
25.0
44
Central ....................
11.8
25.0
51
Urals ......................
7.5
15.9
25
West Siberia ................
0.9
1.9
39
East Siberia ................
3.8
8.1
39
Southern ...................
1.7
3.6
32
Kazakhstan .................
7.8
16.5
40
Transcaucasus ..............
0.2
0.4
40
Steady progress also has been made in increasing
average iron content of Soviet usable ore from
in 1960 to 58.4% in 1968, only slightly short
1970 goal of 58.6 %.
the
54.3%
of the
(2) Reserves--As of 1 January 1962 proved (measured
and indicated) reserves of iron ore were estimated at
47.2 billion tons. The regional distribution of these reserves
and the average iron content of the ore in each region
are shown in Figure 6. In 1968 the U.S.S.R. announced
that the volume of its proved reserves of iron ore exceeded
58 billion tons, the largest in the world. Details concerning
the geographical distribution of these additional reserves
are not available. Total iron ore resources at the beginning
of 1968 were estimated at more than 100 billion tons,
including inferred and currently uneconomic ores. The
quality of the huge Soviet reserves, as measured by the
(3) Mines and concentrating plants-The most
important iron ore producing area of the U.S.S.R. is
the Krivoy Rog Basin which accounted for over 50%
of the total usable ore output in 1968. Other important
producing deposits include the Kursk Magnetic Anomaly,
the Sokolov-Sarbay deposits near Kustanay, the Gorniya
Shoriya area south of Novo Kuznetsk, the Olenegorsk
and Kovdorsk deposits in the northwest, the Magnitogorsk
and Kachkanar deposits in the Urals, the Abadan, Kerch',
and Dashkesan deposits. The locations of major deposits
are shown on Figure 37.
The Krivoy Rog Basin, about 60 miles long by one-
half to 3 miles wide and centered on the city of Krivoy
Rog, contains over 50 separate mining operations. Production
of usable ore in 1968 was about 90 million tons. The
bulk of the rich ore at Krivoy Rog extends in pockets
to depths of over 5,000 feet, while low grade iron quartzites
are obtained by strip or open pit operations. In 1967,
there were ten underground mines and five open pits
with a total capacity of 100 million tons of usable ore.
The Gigant iron ore mine at Krivoy Rog, the largest
in the U.S.S.R., will have a capacity of 7 million tons
of crude ore annually when completed.
The Kursk Magnetic Anomaly (KMA), said to be
the world's largest reserve of rich ore, is a heterogeneous
collection of ore bodies covering 46,000 square miles
between Orel and Kharkov. As of 1 January 1968, the
KMA was reported to contain 40.4 billion tons of reserves,
but a substantial part of this is at great depth and
requires costly underground operations under difficult
mining conditions. In 1968, enterprises of the KMA
produced about 15 million tons of enriched ore and
quartzites, and if current plans are successful, output
is to reach 30 million tons in 1970 and 100 million
iron content of the ore, is below that of reserves in to 1976._ The Soviets are hopeful that t is evel
the United States, Sweden, or India, but is substantially ( of output will cover ore requirements for the central
higher than those in Western Europe. In 1965 the U.S.S.R.
estimated the average iron content of its proved reserves
at 38.4 %. Reserves reportedly included 10.3 billion tons
of direct shipping grade ore with an iron content of
over 55 % and 34.8 billion tons of ore requiring only
simple concentration.
region of the U.S.S.R., permit shipment to plants in
the Ukraine, and eventually serve as an important source
of exports to the Eastern European Communist
countries.
The large Kustanay iron ore basin in northwest Kazakhstan
was developed both to ease the gradual drain on resources
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
of ore in the Urals and to supplement the ore supplies
of the Karaganda Metallurgical Plant in Kazakhstan.
Proven reserves in the Kustanay region exceed 6 billion
tons, of which 2 billion tons are in the Sokolov-Sarbay
deposits which are currently in production. The other
major deposits are at Lisakovsk, where production began
in late 1968, and at Kacharsk, where production is expected
to begin in 1970. In 1968, production of crude ore at
Sokolov-Sarbay reached 20 million tons and the concentrating
complex produced about 10 million tons of concentrate
with an iron content of 65 %. The planned production
of pellets at Sokolov-Sarbay in 1969 is 5.3 million tons.
The Urals are dotted with producing iron ore deposits,
two of which generally characterize the ore supplies
of this region, the largest at Magnitogorsk, and the newest
at Kachkanar. Magnitogorsk has been mined intensively
since 1932 and is expected to be virtually worked out
by 1980. Output began to decline during the Seven
Year Plan period, and increasing amounts of ore were
brought in from Sokolov-Sarbay to supplement the ore
supply to the Magnitogorsk blast furnaces. The decrease
in the supplies of high-grade ore in the Urals also is
reflected, in part, by the start of operations at the Kachkanar
deposits in 1963. The titanomagnetites composing the
Kachkanar deposits have an iron content of only 16-
17%, thus this is the largest low-grade iron ore project
in the U.S.S.R. and probably in the world. The fact
that the deposit is exposed at the surface and contains
vanadium pentoxide, however, reportedly will make the
resultant concentrate competitive with concentrates from
Krivoy Rog. The concentrating combine at Kachkanar
has an annual capacity to convert 8.3 million tons of
raw ore into 1.5 million tons of concentrates averaging
54%.
d. MANGANESE ORE
(1) Supply position -Among the major steel-producing
nations only the U.S.S.R. is fully self-sufficient in manganese.
With reserves in excess of 2 billion tons, the U.S.S.R.
is assured of an adequate supply for well over a century.
FIGURE 7. EXPORTS OF MANGANESE ORE AND CONCENTRATES
(Thousands of metric tons)
The U.S.S.R. produced about 6.6 million tons of manganese
ores and concentrates in 1968 and plans to produce
about 7.7 million tons in 1970. Production in selected
years is shown in Figure 3. Production of manganese
exceeds domestic requirements, leaving a sizable surplus
for export. In 1968, Soviet exports of manganese amounted
to 1,150,000 tons, slightly more than 17 % of production.
Exports satisfy virtually all of the requirements of East
Germany and Poland, and a substantial portion of those
of Czechoslovakia. Shipments to non-Communist countries
in 1968-412,000 tons-represented about one-third of
total exports of manganese. The major recipients were
the United Kingdom, France, and Japan. Exports of
manganese ores and concentrates are shown in Figure
(2) Mines and deposits-The bulk of Soviet reserves
of manganese is located in three deposits Chiatura,
Nikopol', and Bolshoy Tokmak. Production from mines
in Chiatura amounted to about 3.4 million tons in 1968,
and should increase to about 4.0 million tons by 1970.
Output at Nikopol' was over 3.1 million tons in 1968,
and is scheduled to reach about 3.7 million tons by
1970. Both Chiatura and Nikopol' have been expanded
in recent years, but there is no evidence to indicate
that production has started as yet at the Bolshoy Tokmak
deposits.
Minor producing mines are located at Polunochnoye
and other deposits in the Urals, at Marganets in Kazakhstan,
and at Mazul' in Eastern Siberia. Additional deposits
of manganese are found in central Kazakhstan (one
in the western Karazhal iron ore deposit and another,
near Dzhezkazgan) and in the central Urals. Soviet deposits
of manganese ore are described in Figure 28.
4. Alloying materials El
The U.S.S.R. claims abundant resources of the principal
alloying metals and a leading place in world reserves
of chromite, nickel, vanadium, molybdenum, and tungsten.
Only cobalt resources are comparatively limited. Information
Austria ..........................
19
12
12
0
0
0
0
0
0
Belgium .........................
0
0
0
0
0
0
42
63
2
Canada .........................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
16
Czechoslovakia ...................
'80
90
107
104
130
141
149
186
177
East Germany ...................
158
179
216
209
174
171
198
216
108
France ..........................
116
108
99
106
103
90
116
65
99
Italy ............................
18
14
16
24
10
8
7
19
21
Japan ...........................
13
21
74
71
72
92
106
100
107
North Korea .....................
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
19
Norway .........................
35
48
10
15
30
37
45
37
41
Poland ..........................
286
192
236
242
252
249
317
304
318
Sweden ..........................
8
21
10
25
37
27
26
30
26
United Kingdom .................
149
129
99
100
138
122
134
104
71
West Germany ...................
79
78
66
65
0
27
21
0
29
Yugoslavia ......................
12
4
3
2
0
0
0
37
22
Unidentified shipments............
0
0
15
23
33
56
57
67
94
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
concerning the actual reserves of most of these alloying
materials is not available. With the exception of the
rich chromite ores, most Soviet alloying metal ores are
lean, complex, difficult to process, and often located
in remote regions with severe climatic conditions. As
a result, production costs are high and the domestic
prices of alloying materials are many times the prices
of other materials used by the steel industry.
Soviet production of alloying metals covers, in most
cases, essential domestic industrial requirements and a
substantial portion of the needs of other Communist
countries. Some of the alloying metals also are exported
to non-Communist countries.
a. CHROMITE
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R. is the world's
largest producer of chromite, having mined in 1968 about
2.0 million tons of metallurgical and refractory grade
chrome ore containing an estimated 867,000 tons of
chromite (Cr203). Soviet exports of chrome ore and
concentrates in 1968 amounted to 1,048,000 tons, of
which 866,000 tons were shipped to non-Communist
countries, including the United States (the largest importer
with 326,000 tons). The remaining 182,000 tons were
sent to Eastern European Communist countries, chiefly
Poland, Czechoslovakia, and East Germany. Soviet production
of chromite is shown in Figure 8.
Refractory, chemical, and metallurgical grade ores have
been produced in the past in the U.S.S.R., both in Kazakhstan
and in the Urals. At present, production apparently is
largely confined to Kazakhstan which, according to Soviet
claims, meets all requirements for chromite for domestic
use and for export.
(2) Deposits and mines-The U.S.S.R. claims the
world's largest explored reserves of chromite. Although
details to support this claim are lacking, Soviet reserves
undoubtedly are extensive. About 90 % of Soviet chromite
reserves are located in the Kazakh S.S.R. The remainder
are found in the Ukraine, in the Urals (Sarany,
Verbluzh'yagora, Alapayevsk, Monetnayadacha, Khalilovo,
Akkarginsk, Serov), in Azerbaijan (Shorzhinskiy), and
in the Far East (Koryakskiy Khrebet).
By far the largest and most significant chromite deposits
in the Soviet Union are the Kempirsay deposits which
FIGURE 8. ESTIMATED PRODOF ALLOYING
MATERIALS
(Metric tons
YEAR
CHRO-
MITE*
TUNG-
STEN
MOLYB-
DENUM N
ICKEL COBALT
1960
..........
519,500
11,400
4,800
72,000
1,640
1961
..........
544,800
12,000
5,200
82,000
1,840
1962
..........
588,000
12,600
5,300
90,000
2,155
1963
..........
658,000
13,100
6,370
93,000
2,520
1964
..........
690,000
13,600
6,700
97,000
2,600
1965
..........
735,000
14,000
7,300 1
00,000
3,400
1966
..........
800,000
14,000
7,600 1
07,000
3,800
1967
..........
830,000
14,000
8,000 1
15,000
4,000
1968
..........
867,000
14,000
8,500 1
24,000
4,200
*Estimated Cr203 content of ore.
cover an area of approximately 1,000 square kilometers
in northern Kazakhstan, and contain about 70 individual
deposits. The higher grade metallurgical ores occur in
the southern district, chiefly in the Donskoye group,
near Khrom-Tau. These ores are of excellent quality,
containing 30%-60% Cr203, with low silica and a chrome-
to-iron ratio as high as 4 to 1. Commercial ores, sold
as fines, friable, and hard lump, contain at least 45%-
50% Cr2O3, depending upon type, and have a chrome-
to-iron ratio of more than 3 to 1. Under the current
Five Year Plan, output of chromite in the U.S.S.R. is
to reach 950,000 tons in 1.970. Virtually all of the planned
increases in production are to come from the mines
in the Donskoye group in Kazakhstan. Further expansion
probably will continue in this area until at least 1.980.
b. TUNGSTEN
(1) Supply position-Annual production of tungsten
concentrate (60% W03) in the U.S.S.R. is estimated
to have remained at approximately the same level-
14,000 tons-since 1964. This represents about 22% of
estimated world production in 1968, and about one-
sixth more than the estimated Chinese Communist output.
Soviet imports of tungsten ores and concentrates from
Communist China have declined sharply in recent years,
from 12,000 tons in 1963 to nothing in 1968. Soviet
exports of tungsten ores and concentrates, chiefly to
Western European countries, have fallen off gradually
from 4,300 tons in 1963 to something less than 2,000
tons in 1967. Exports apparently were discontinued in
1968. Soviet production of tungsten in selected years
is given in Figure 8.
The supply of tungsten available to the Soviet Union
is adequate to permit a high rate of consumption. Tungsten
is regularly substituted, where possible, for less abundant
molybdenum. The U.S.S.R. also has devoted considerable
attention to the development of alloy steels containing
tungsten.
(2) Deposits and mines-In 1967, the U.S.S.R.
claimed first place in the world in explored reserves
of tungsten. The metal occurs chiefly in the form of
scheelite or wolframite in combination with molybdenum,
tin, manganese, gold, and other minerals. A large share
of Soviet tungsten comes from skarn tungsten-molybdenum
ores, which are found in the Caucasus (Tyrny-Auz) and
Central Asia (Chorukh-Dayron, Tadzhik S.S.R. and Ingichka,
Uzbek S.S.R.). The- rest is derived from quartz veins,
chiefly those in East Siberia (Dzhida deposit in the Buryat
A.S.S.R. and lesser deposits in Chita Oblast'), the Far
East (Iul'tin in eastern Chukotka and Vostok in Primorskiy
Kray) and the Gorniy Altay (Belukha, Bukuka, Khirlovaya
Gora). Soviet tungsten deposits are described in Figure
29.
(3) Producing facilities-The largest and most
modern facilities for the recovery of tungsten in the
U.S.S.R. are located at Tyrny-Adz and Nal'chik in the
Kabardo-Balkar A.S.S.R. in the northern Caucasus. Ore
is carried from the underground mines of the Tyrny
Auz deposit by cableway to the Tyrny-Auz concentrating
plant, where it is processed in concentrate form, then
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
shipped to the hydrometallurgical plant at Nal'chik.
Here the tungsten and molybdenum are completely separated,
without furnaces, by use of chemical reagents. The Nal'chik
plant, which began operations in 1962, is reportedly
highly mechanized.
Additional major facilities for the production of tungsten
concentrates are known to exist at Dzhida and at Iul'tin,
but comparatively little information is available on their
operations. The Vostok tungsten mining and concentrating
combine-located in northern Primorskiy Kray-is under
construction with the first phase of the combine to be
completed in 1971. The deposits here reportedly contain
a high percentage of copper, bismuth and gold.
C. MOLYBDENUM
(1) Supply position-Although the supply of
molybdenum available to the U.S.S.R. appears to satisfy
its priority requirements and to permit some exports
of concentrates and of ferromolybdenum, the metal is
often referred to in Soviet literature as "deficit" -that
is, in short supply. There is, in fact, ample evidence
that molybdenum has been used sparingly and that
tungsten frequently has been used as a substitute. Total
estimated Soviet production, 1963-67, was slightly more
than one-third of U.S. consumption during the same
period. Estimated production of molybdenum (expressed
in terms of molybdenum content of concentrate) rose
from 6,700 tons in 1964 to about 8,500 tons in 1968.
Prior to 1964, the supply of molybdenum was augmented
by imports of ores, concentrates, and ferromolybdenum
from Communist China. From 1964 to 1968, however,
the U.S.S.R. reported no imports of Chinese molybdenum
in any form. Soviet exports of molybdenum, mostly in
the form of ferromolybdenum, fell from 3,500 tons in
1964 to something less than 500 tons in 1967. In 1968
the U.S.S.R. apparently stopped exporting molybdenum.
About three-quarters of the exports during 1964-67 went
to non-Communist countries. Estimated production of
molybdenum for selected years is shown in Figure 8.
(2) Deposits and mines-The U.S.S.R. claims first
place in the world in explored reserves of molybdenum.
Described in 1947 as "adequate for decades," reserves
have been increasing steadily since that time. The quality
of reserves is low, however, and efforts are continuing
to locate higher quality ores. The 1966-70 plan calls
for the explored reserves of molybdenum to be increased
30 times in comparison with the amount to be mined
during the same period.
Molybdenum is widely distributed throughout the U.S.S.R.,
with major deposits in the Caucasus (Tyrny-Auz), the
Kazakh S.S.R. (Vostochno-Kounrad), and East Siberia
(Sora and Dzhida). The ores are generally lean and
difficult and expensive to process. Rich vein ores, which
in 1945 accounted for almost 80 % of production, now
contribute only a small share, and other deposits, requiring
heavy capital investments, account for most of the current
production. The principal molybdenum deposits are described
in Figure 29.
(3) Producing facilities-Plans for a substantial
increase in the production of molybdenum during 1959-
65 apparently were not fulfilled. The Seven Year Plan
called for expansion of plants at Tyrny-Auz, Kadzharan
(Armenian S.S.R.), Almalyk (Uzbek S.S.R), and Chita
Oblast' (East Siberia), but new facilities were completed
slowly, usually three to four years behind schedule. There
is no evidence that construction has yet begun at the
Chita Oblast' site.
The U. S. S. R's most important molybdenum-processing
installation is the Tyrny-Auz-Nal'chik complex (see B,
4, b, (3), Producing Facilities) which may account for
as much as 15%-20% of the current Soviet production
of molybdenum. The principal Soviet facilities for processing
molybdenum ores are listed in Figure 29.
d. VANADIUM
(1) Supply position-Soviet vanadium production,
estimated at 1,050 tons (expressed in metallic content
of 40% ferrovanadium) in 1958, probably declined
considerably during the early 1960's, due to rapid depletion
of traditional sources of raw materials and long delays
in completing concentrating facilities. Actual production
of vanadium in the U.S.S.R. during the 1960's is not
known, but new mining and concentrating facilities opened
at Kachkanar in the Urals in 1963 apparently provided
enough raw materials to assure continued operation of
the Chusovoy ferrovanadium plant and to permit export
of ferrovanadium as well as vanadium slags for processing
in Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Construction of additional
facilities at Kachkanar was not completed on schedule
in 1966, however, and it became necessary to supplement
domestic supplies with imports. During 1966 and 1967
the U.S.S.R. imported about 1,000 tons of vanadium
pentoxide from Finland.
Completion of the Kachkanar facilities was planned
for sometime in 1969. Kachkanar is a potential source
for 2,000 to 6,000 tons of vanadium annually. In addition,
according to Soviet claims, 4,000 to 6,000 tons of vanadium
could be obtained by exploiting the ores of Ayat and
Lisakovsk (Kazakh S.S.R.) but no information is available
on the development of this region.
(2) Reserves-Soviet reserves of vanadium are estimated
at about six million tons of recoverable vanadium contained
in titanomagnetite and limonite ores distributed throughout
the country from the Kola Peninsula and the Crimea
to Eastern Siberia. The major deposits are those of Kachkanar
(titanomagnetites) and Ayat and Lisakovsk (limonites).
Other important deposits are located at Kerch in the
Ukraine and Pudozhgora (62?17'N., 35?54'E.) in Karelia.
The Urals titanomagnetite deposits at Kusa and Pervoural'sk,
the only Soviet sources of vanadium which had been
exploited for industrial purposes until the opening of
Kachkanar, are virtually exhausted.
e. NICKEL
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R. is the second
largest nickel producer in the world. Its production in
1968 is estimated to have been about 124,000 tons,
slightly less than half of Canada's output. Domestic
supplies were augmented in 1968 by imports, almost
entirely from Cuba in the form of sinter, oxide, or slurry,
amounting to about 18,000 tons (contained nickel). The
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
U.S.S.R. also has exported nickel in recent years. The
U.K. received 12,700 tons in 1966 and 6,600 tons in
1967. Communist China received 1,500 tons in 1966.
By 1970, the output of nickel may reach nearly 150,000
tons. Estimated Soviet production of nickel for selected
years is given in Figure 8.
(2) Resources-The U.S.S.R. claims the world's
largest explored reserves of nickel. About four-fifths of
these reserves are located in the copper-nickel sulfide
deposits of the Soviet North (Pechenga, Monchegorsk,
Noril'sk, Tal'nakh);, slightly less than one-fiTtli occur
in t1 e_ lateritic deposits of the Urals (Yelizaveta, Cheremshan,
Buruktal) and Kazakhstan (Aktyubinsk Oblast'); and
the remainder in the nickel-cobalt arsenides of Tannu
Tuva. Soviet ores are generally low-grade, the sulfides
having an average nickel content of 0.3% to 0.6%, the
laterites averaging about 1.5 %.
The Soviet Union has devoted considerable attention
to the expansion of the ore base of its nickel industry,
through intensified development of known deposits and
by extensive prospecting for new resources. Open pit
mines began producing at Kaula and Alajiki (near Nikel'
on the Kola Peninsula) in 1962 and at the Kimpersay
deposits in Kazakhstan in 1963. Output began in late
1967 at the Tal'nakh deposits, which are deemed adequate
to provide an entire new ore base for the Noril'sk combine.
In the Urals, the discovery of extensive new deposits
at Buruktal, 100 miles southeast of Orsk, has spurred
plant construction in the area to process ore. The principal
deposits of nickel are described in Figure 30.
(3) Processing facilities The major nickel producing
facilities of the U.S.S.R. are located above the Arctic
Circle at Monchegorsk and Pechenga (Kola Peninsula)
and Noril'sk (East Siberia). Together these plants account
for about 85 % of Soviet nickel output. The Noril'sk
combine, the U.S.S.R's largest nickel producer, has been
expanded in recent years and now consists of four mines,
one central concentrator, and a large nickel smelter and
refinery. Much of the Noril'sk expansion is based on
the rich Tal'nakh deposits, as the high-grade deposits
at Noril'sk are gradually being exhausted. It is estimated
that Noril'sk accounts for nearly half of Soviet nickel
output. The ores at Pechenga are mined by both underground
and open pit methods; the largest and most important
of the operations is the new Zhdanovsk open pit, which
reportedly accounts for most of the area's nickel output.
At Pechenga, the bulk of the ore is direct-smelted, with
only a minor portion undergoing concentration and sintering
prior to smelting. The Monchegorsk complex is composed
of various mining operations, a smelter similar to that
at Pechenga, and a refinery.
Other important nickel-producing facilities are located
in the Central Urals, at Rezh and Ufaley, and in the
Southern Urals at Orsk (Yuzhuralnikel'). These plants
employ shaft furnace smelting to process the lateritic
ores from the Urals and Kazakhstan. Nickel output from
this area is expected to increase once the construction
of new facilities at Buruktal is completed.
f. COBALT
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R.'s production
of cobalt in 1968 is estimated at 4,200 tons, equivalent
to about one-fourth of production in non-Communist
countries, and to slightly more than 63% of the amount
consumed in the United States in 1967. Of this total,
the U.S.S.R. exported 100 tons. It is estimated that Soviet
output of cobalt will increase to about 4,600 tons in
1970. Estimated production of cobalt in recent years
is listed in Figure 8.
(2) Deposits and mines-The U.S.S.R. claims first
place in the world in explored reserves of cobalt. In
1955, reserves were estimated at 50,000 tons, and by
the end of 1958 they were reported to have reached
73,000 tons. Potential cobalt reserves have been deemed
adequate for many decades.
In the U.S.S.R. cobalt occurs chiefly in combination
with nickel in the sulfide ores of the Kola Peninsula
and the northwest part of the Siberian Plateau; in the
laterite ores of the Urals, Kazakhstan, and the Ukraine;
and in the arsenide ores of Tannu Tuva. It occurs also
in polymetallic ores which contain, besides cobalt, iron,
manganese, copper, zinc, and other elements. These ores
are found in the Urals, the Transcaucasus, Eastern Siberia,
and the Far East. The principal deposits are described
in Figure 30.
(3) Processing facilities-Cobalt is recovered mainly
as a byproduct of nickel production at refineries associated
with the nickel combines at Monchegorsk, Noril'sk, Orsk,
and Verkhniy Ufaley. Cobalt-containing matte from the
smelters at Pechenga and Rezh are processed at Monchegorsk
and Verkhniy Ufaley, respectively. Concentrates from
Dashkesan and the Far East are refined at Verkhniy
Ufaley. The Tannu Tuva cobalt enterprises-`Tuvakobalt"-
is planned for completion and initial output the last
quarter of 1969. Cobalt-containing ores of the South
Ural Buruktal mines probably will be processed at Orsk.
Some cobalt production, probably in relatively insignificant
quantities, can be attributed to the Pyshminsk concentrating
plant, which produces a cobalt-pyrite concentrate from
the sulfide-magnetite ore of the Pyshma-Klyuchevsk
deposits.
Production of high-purity metallic cobalt began in
the early 1960's at Noril'sk, where a semiautomatic installation
for quantity production was completed in 1962. High-
purity metallic cobalt reportedly was also produced at
Yuzhuralnikel' in 1963.
g. FERROALLOYS-Soviet production of ferroalloys
in 1968 is estimated at 3.9 million tons, approximately
1.5 million tons of which were produced in blast furnaces.
Spiegeleisen, standard-grade ferromanganese, and low-
grade ferrosilicon form the large part of blast furnace
ferroalloy output. Of the electric furnace ferroalloys,
ferrosilicon, ferrochrome, and ferromanganese represent
the bulk of production; ferrovanadium, ferromolybdenum,
ferrotungsten, ferrotitanium, and other ferroalloys are
produced in much smaller quantities. Planned production
of ferroalloys in 1970 is not known but output is being
increased to promote expansion of low-alloy steel production.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
To maintain their position as a leading exporter of ferroalloys,
the Soviets are seeking to improve the quality of their
ferroalloys.
Soviet exports of ferroalloys in 1968 amounted to 312,000
tons. About two-thirds of this total was sent to other
Communist countries to meet, in large part, the import
requirements of their steel industries for ferroalloys; the
remainder was shipped principally to Western European
countries. Soviet imports of ferroalloys were insignificant-
about 8,600 tons, in part ferrosilicon from North Korea.
In the near future the Soviets plan to discontinue
production of ferroalloys in blast furnaces and expand
use of the electric furnace method. During 1966-70 two
new electric furnace ferroalloys plants are to be constructed
at Nikopol' in the Ukraine and Yermak in the Kazakh
S.S.R. and existing ferroalloys plants are being reequipped
with electric furnaces. Electric furnace ferroalloy plants
are listed in Figure 31.
(1) Ferrosilicon-Ferrosilicon is produced in the
U.S.S.R. in grades ranging from 9 % to 99 % purity. The
two principal ferrosilicon producers are located at
Novokuznetsk in Western Siberia and Zaporozh'ye in
the Ukraine. The Novokuznetsk plant provides for the
bulk of the requirements for ferrosilicon in eastern regions
of the U.S.S.R. and the Zaporozh'ye plant satisfies most
of the demands of the western regions. Currently, most
of the lower grades of ferrosilicon are electrothermally
produced, and production technology has been improved
by the introduction of mechanized charging of furnaces
and the installation of closed and rotary furnaces.
(2) Ferrochrome -Soviet production of ferrochrome
apparently is adequate to cover domestic requirements
and to permit substantial exports. In 1968, Soviet exports
of ferrochrome were 33,300 tons compared to 14,100
tons in 1963. Production of ferrochrome is centered mostly
in the Aktyubinsk Ferroalloy Plant, located in the Kazakh
S.S.R. close to the Donskoye chromite deposits. There
is additional, but much less significant production at
the ferroalloys plants in Chelyabinsk and Zaporozh'ye.
An increasing share of Soviet ferrochrome production
comes from furnaces with rotating and tilting hearths
and from converters employing oxygen, as opposed to
the less advanced practice of producing ferrochrome in
stationary electric furnaces by the silicothermic method.
In recent years the Soviets also have devoted considerable
attention to perfecting technology for vacuum processing
of ferrochrome and for the production of electrolytic
chrome.
(3) Ferromanganese-The considerable demand
of the Soviet metallurgical industry for ferromanganese
is being met increasingly by electric furnace rather than
blast furnace production. Electric furnace facilities for
the production of ferromanganese, silicomanganese, and
metallic manganese are being installed at the existing
plants at Zestafoni and Zaporozh'ye, and at the new
plant at Nikopol'. ,
Further development of the Soviet ferromanganese
industry is planned for the eastern regions of the country
to serve the expanding steel industry in that area. To
this end, technology has developed to process the high-
phosphorous carbonate ores which form a large part
of the Soviet manganese reserves and which abound
in the Usa River Basin.
C. Nonferrous metals and minerals
1. General
a. SUPPLY POSITION-The U.S.S.R. is self-sufficient
in most nonferrous metals and minerals. Some commodities-
copper, lead, zinc, aluminum, magnesium, antimony,
cadmium, asbestos, graphite, and apatite ore and
concentrates-are produced in large enough quantities
to permit substantial exports. There are shortages, however,
in tin, fluorspar, piezoquartz, mica, and uranium ore
and concentrate.
In 1956 the U.S.S.R. emerged as a net exporter of
nonferrous metals and minerals, a position which the
country has maintained in subsequent years. Net exports
rose from the equivalent of approximately US$28 million
in 1956 to over US$400 million in 1968, reflecting both
the steady increase in exports since 1955 and the decline
in imports since 1960. Similarly, the total volume of
Soviet trade in nonferrous metals and minerals rose
substantially from the equivalent of less than US$300
million in 1955 to nearly US$600 million in 1968. The
value of Soviet trade in nonferrous commodities for the
years 1955-68, as reported by official Soviet trade statistics,
is shown in Figure 9.
The bulk of Soviet trade in nonferrous commodities
with non-Communist countries since 1955 has been with
industrialized countries, principally the United Kingdom,
the Netherlands, and West Germany, and has consisted
largely of primary metal rather than raw material. With
the exception of large imports of copper prior to 1964
and imports of tin in recent years, the trade has been
composed mainly of Soviet exports. Trade with the developing
non-Communist countries has been characterized by exports
to some two dozen countries and imports from only
a few countries. In 1966 and 1967, for example, Soviet
imports of nonferrous commodities were limited to mica
from India, tin from Indonesia, and lead and zinc concentrates
from Iran. Exports to the developing countries have
consisted primarily of metal and metal products and
asbestos.
Soviet trade with Communist countries has been principally
with Eastern Europe and has consisted mainly of exports
of aluminum, copper, lead, asbestos, graphite, mineral
fertilizer raw materials and several other commodities.
The U.S.S.R. also has supplied Cuba with sulfur, asbestos,
and various nonferrous metals and metal products in
exchange for nickel and copper ores and concentrates.
Trade with the Communist countries of the Far East
has been relatively small in recent years. In the 1950's
Communist China had been an important supplier to
the U.S.S.R. of such commodities as mercury, antimony,
and tin but since the early 1960's shipments of these
metals have been reduced to almost negligible levels.
The U.S.S.R. is now dependent on non-Communist countries
for a significant share of its tin requirements.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
MINERALS
YEAR
Nonferrous
metals
Nonmetallic
minerals
Total
1955......
110.6
19.6
130.2
1956......
157.2
23.1
180.3
1957......
202.7
22.0
224.7
1958......
197.4
23.2
220.6
1959......
195.7
25.8
221.5
1960......
194.7
29.5
224.2
1961......
210.9
33.3
244.2
1962 ......
217.3
33.5
250.8
1963......
218.5
32.0
250.5
1964 ......
292.0
38.7
330.7
1965......
331.4
39.7
371.1
1966 ......
379.7
42.9
422.6
1967 ......
364.2
53.6
417.8
1968......
435.3
54.3
489.6
Nonferrous Nonmetallic
metals minerals Total Exports Imports
133.0 4.6 137.6 0 7.4
143.0 9.1 152.1 28.2 0
127.5 12.0 139.5 85.2 0
133.0 10.6 143.6 77.0 0
169.7 10.8 180.5 41.0 0
171.9 10.3 182.2 42.0 0
145.7 9.2 154.9 89.3 0
136.3 9.7 146.0 104.8 0
124.9 11.0 135.9 114.6 0
80.0 14.5 94.5 236.2 0
75.1 11.0 86.1 285.0 0
58.3 11.1 69.4 353.2 0
59.9 13.4 73.3 344.5 0
74.8 12.7 87.5 402.1 0
b. POST-WORLD WAR II DEVELOPMENT-By 1938
the U.S.S.R. with the aid of foreign capital and technology,
had developed a substantial nonferrous metallurgical
industry, particularly in such basic metals as copper,
lead, and zinc. Since 1938, information on the U.S.S.R.'s
nonferrous industry has been limited; data on most nonferrous
metals and minerals are highly classified. Announcements
about plan goals and achievements, improvement of
work, and the construction and rehabilitation of mines
and plants have been in generalizations. Information
about increases in the production of nonferrous commodities
has been expressed only in percentages.
Although it did not. fulfill all nonferrous metallurgical
goals during the fourth Five Year Plan (1946-50), the
U.S.S.R. generally succeeded in recovering from the
disruptions and dislocations suffered during World War
II and in establishing a firm basis for accelerated expansion
during the fifth Five Year Plan (1951-55). During the
latter plan period the U.S.S.R. substantially increased
its output of the major nonferrous metals-copper, lead,
zinc, and tin-but did not fulfill its plan goals for any
of them; the plan for production of aluminum was
overfulfilled.
The directives of the sixth Five Year Plan (1956-60)
and comments made by Soviet officials in connection
with the implementation of the plan provided not only
the usual production goals, in percentages, for a few
nonferrous materials, but also an indication of the reasons
for failing to achieve previous goals. For example, the
scarcity of high-grade ore reserves and the difficulties
encountered in processing available ores have been among
the principal limitations to increased output of metal
in the U.S.S.R. The sixth Five Year Plan placed considerable
emphasis on augmenting reserves, particularly of higher
grade ores, and increasing recovery rates, particularly
in mining and concentrating, two sectors that traditionally
lag technologically behind the metallurgical sector in
the Soviet nonferrous industry. Nevertheless, the Soviet
planners did not overlook the metallurgical sector; the
plan, in general, stressed the application of technological
advances to a far greater degree than any previous plan.
Production performance during the early part of the
sixth Five Year Plan was poor. A major difficulty was
the inability to expand the raw material base enough
to produce the quantities of metals that had been planned.
In mid-1957 the administration of the national economy
was reorganized, with regional economic councils replacing
central ministries in the administration of industry. Following
the reorganization, the U.S.S.R. announced the decision
to draft a new long-range economic plan covering the
period 1959-65. One of the major reasons cited for abandoning
the sixth Five Year Plan was the discovery of "new
resources" and the allegation that the time remaining
was too short to bring these discoveries to fruition.
During the Seven Year Plan (1959-65) the U.S.S.R.
substantially increased production of nonferrous metals,
but did not achieve all of the assigned goals. Investment
in the nonferrous industries during 1959-65 amounted
to about 5 billion rubles compared with planned investment
of 5.5 billion rubles. The gross output of nonferrous
metals was increased by 80%, compared with a planned
increase of 100%. Probably most of this shortfall was
accounted for by the failure to achieve the ambitious,
if not unrealistic, planned increase for aluminum of
180% to 200%. The actual increase achieved by the
aluminum was 100%, a notable accomplishment. Planned
increases for the basic nonferrous metals, copper, lead,
and zinc-90%, 50%, and 60%, respectively-are estimated
to have been achieved. Production increases of varying
magnitudes were achieved for most of the other nonferrous
metals; planned increases were not announced.
During 1959-65 the technical level of nonferrous metallurgy
was raised, primarily by the construction of new plants.
For the most part, only slight progress was made in
modernizing older plants. Although mining and concentrating
technology improved as the scale of operations expanded,
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO135OR000100080001-8 -
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
Soviet officials still complained about the low technical
standards for Soviet mining, crushing, and concentrating
equipment and about the poor quality of chemical reagents,
a factor contributing to the low recovery rates for some
metals and the high level of impurities in some
concentrates.
C. CURRENT DEVELOPMENT-During the Five Year
Plan (1966-70), gross output of nonferrous metals is to
increase by 66 %. Production of aluminum is to increase
over the period by 90% to 110% and copper and zinc
by 60 % to 70 %. Other nonferrous metals such as lead,
magnesium, tin, nickel, titanium, precious metals, and
semiconductor materials are to be produced in considerably
larger quantities, but rates of growth have not been
specified.
To achieve the production goals for nonferrous metals
under the Five Year Plan, large capital investments amounting
to 6 billion rubles-about 50% more than the amount
invested in the preceding five years-are to be made.
The main share of investments is to be made in the
aluminum, copper, and nickel-cobalt industries. Important
shares of planned investment also are earmarked for
the lead and zinc industry and for the development
of the tin, diamond, and gold industries in Siberia and
the Northeast. Funds also have been allocated for
modernization programs to raise the productivity and
efficiency of the industry and to upgrade the quality
and enlarge the assortment of metal products.
During the first three years (1966-68) of the Five Year
Plan the U.S.S.R. claimed to have fulfilled its production
plans for nonferrous metals. The gross volume of production
increased by 34 % and the production of aluminum increased
by 44 %, the production of zinc by 35 %, nickel by 24 %,
copper by 28%, and titanium by 63%. In all, more
than 100,000 tons of nonferrous metals were produced
above plan.
Notwithstanding these gains, achievement of the goals
of the Five Year Plan is by no means assured, as the
U.S.S.R. has acknowledged. The plan for total volume
of investment during 1966-68 was fulfilled, but construction
lagged on various key projects, including both primary
metal facilities and fabrication plants. In some cases
facilities were completed and in operation for lengthy
periods of time but designed capacities were not attained.
Difficulties also were encountered in reequipping existing
plants and improving operating practices. Finally,
development of the raw materials base of the nonferrous
metals industries continued to be a source of concern
to Soviet planners. The supply of alumina was not expanded
as planned because of the failure to overcome technical
problems in the processing of new aluminous raw materials,
namely, nepheline and alunite ores. Increased priority
is being given to programs for geological exploration
to discover new reserves of high quality bauxite and
other important ores and minerals.
2. Light metals
a. ALUMINUM
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R. is the second
largest producer of aluminum in the world, although
Soviet output of over 1.4 million tons in 1968 was only
half of that in the United States, the world's largest
producer. In the past decade Soviet production of aluminum
has nearly tripled and considerably exceeded the growth
in domestic use of the light metal. In spite of the gains
made in some applications, particularly as a substitute
for copper in long distance transmission lines, the Soviet
economy has not put aluminum to the many and varied
uses found in Western Europe and North America. The
resulting surplus has enabled the U.S.S.R. to become
a major exporter of aluminum. Soviet exports of aluminum
in 1968, amounting to 367,100 tons, were nearly five
times greater than in 1960. The larger share of the exports
has gone to the Communist countries of Eastern Europe
with East Germany being the principal recipient. Western
Europe and Japan have received most of the aluminum
exported to non-Communist countries. Estimated Soviet
production and exports of aluminum metal, 1960-68,
are shown in Figure 10.
The Soviet Union has a wide variety of raw materials
for the production of aluminum, but exploitation of
FIGURE 10. ESTIMATED ALUMINUM METAL PRODUCTION AND EXPORTS*
1960
................
630,000
77,100
1961
................
700,000
99,500
1962
................
770,000
137,100
1963
................
855,000
.147,800
1964
................
945,000
209,300
1965
................
1 ,025 ,000
271,100
1966
................
1,160,000
310,500
1967
................
1,295,000
313,500
1968
................
1,435,000
367,100
Non-
Communist
Communist
APPARENT
Countries
Countries
Unidentified
SUPPLY**
16,903
57,134
3,063
552,900
16,503
79,455
3,542
600,500
39,921
89,661
7,518
632,900
38,933
96,573
12,294
707,200
55,381
128,764
25,155
735,700
70,494
161,961
38,645
753,900
108,038
182,675
19,787
849,500
86,673
208,832
17,995
981,500
76,377
265,547
25,176
1
,067 ,900
*Production of primary aluminum and exports of primary and rolled aluminum.
**Slightly understated because the U.S.S.R. annually imports small amounts of rolled aluminum. In 1965,
such imports reached their highest level-7,300 tons-during the 1960's.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
these resources has not kept pace with the growth of
the industry. As a result, both bauxite and aluminum
have been imported to supplement domestic supplies.
Greece and Yugoslavia have been the major suppliers
of bauxite. Imports from Greece have averaged over
400,000 tons per year since 1958. Imports from Yugoslavia
were not initiated until 1965, but by 1968 had reached
721,000 tons. The Soviet Union also imported 55,000
tons of bauxite from Guinea in 1968. In addition, imports
of alumina have become significant in recent years, reaching
387,000 tons in 1968. In that year Hungary supplied
148,000 tons of alumina to the U.S.S.R. and, under
the terms of a long-term agreement, such shipments
are to reach more than 300,000 tons annually by 1980.
The U.S.S.R. also began importing alumina from the
United States in 1967. Imports that year amounted to
53,200 tons and increased to 194,000 tons in 1968.
(2) Producing facilities-Enterprises of the Soviet
aluminum industry include nepheline and alunite mines
as well as bauxite mines, facilities for the production
of the intermediate product alumina, and reduction plants
for the production of aluminum metal. The most important
of these are located in the Urals, the Kazakh S.S.R.,
and in Siberia. The locations of aluminum reduction
plants and other facilities are shown on Figure 11.
(a) ALUMINUM -Present Soviet capacity for the
production of aluminum includes 13 reduction plants
described in Figure 32. Four of these, located in Bratsk,
Krasnoyarsk, Irkutsk, and Volgograd, are of recent construction
and rank among the most modern and efficient plants
in the world. Although already contributing an important
share of current production, these plants are undergoing
further expansion. Another new plant is under construction
in Regar, Uzbek S.S.R., but it probably will not be
put into operation until 1970 at the earliest. Earlier
plans called for construction of new plants at Kirovabad
and Pavlodar but the absence of information about them
in recent years may indicate that these plans have been
abandoned, at least for the immediate future. Older
reduction plants in the industry are being reequipped
and renovated.
(b) ALUMINA-Production of alumina has not
kept pace with the steadily mounting requirements of
the aluminum industry. The supply problem has been
aggravated by the fact that, in many cases, reduction
plants are located thousands of miles from the sources
of available alumina. The high transportation costs for
these long hauls have been the subject of much criticism
in the Soviet press but they became unavoidable when
the industry failed to meet schedules for the introduction
of new technology for the processing of nepheline ores
being mined in Siberia. The new technology was to
be employed at an alumina plant in Achinsk which
has been under construction for more than a decade
and after repeated delays was scheduled for completion
in 1969.
Alumina producing facilities include 8 plants: the Urals
Aluminum plant at Kamensk-Ural'skiy; the Bogoslovsk
Aluminum plant at Krasnotur'insk in Sverdlovskaya Oblast';
the Dnepr Aluminum plant at Zaporozh'ye in the Ukrainian
20
40
80 120 160 180
vnrrrrr ///444\ ~ ~ l
?
~
\
``~ \
I?
SO
fr~
r'P
tier
:x
ri~, 0C
ova
and.
ha
e
Vo
lkhov N
{~\.r
Hokst rsk
B Ikalev
\
c/
1
1
D^ePpe
M
^
ol's
eas
Kha['kov
'
00r'kiy
Gr.,n
0
Zayo
ye
verour C~k
4
[asnotu nsk
p
cE
~
'%
o(pa
Verkhn e a s
~ ,r,
)
tt~0
olgogr d
Yuatmoaral'skly
Sukhoy g
-
0
,
e sk-
'
^
nQ
40
a1
skiy
2
Aohlna
C Q
an
Can
Mr abed
k
'11
B1rgay
rats
N {rash ask
!o knl
a1 BOVOkI etsk g r
p
Sum t
9v
Pavlodar
o"k
,[
}
r
40
y
Y
3
E
TING
TYPE OF PLANT NEER C
ONSTRUCTION
A,
XIS
Alumina
0
0
F
t
.
'
Aluminum reduction
A
s
B~
Integrated alumina?aluminum
pP
~Regar
..~,.ti??.
^
Secondary aluminum
nonferrous metallur
ical
Secondar
y
g
DEPOSITS
77052 10.6?
A Alunite B Bauxite N Nepheline
U
80
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO135OR000100080001-8 -
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
S.S.R.; the Pikalevo, Tikhvin, and Volkhov plants in
the Leningradskaya Oblast'; the Pavlodar Alumina plant
in the Kazakh S.S.R.; and the Kirovabad Alumina plant
in the Azerbaijan S.S.R. The Urals and Bogoslovsk plants
are presently the largest alumina producers in the U.S.S.R.;
they accounted for about two-thirds of total alumina
output in 1968. The Pavlodar plant is to be one of
the largest in the U.S.S.R. but it is now only half completed.
All of the plants, with the exception of the Pikalevo,
Volkhov, and Kirovabad plants, use bauxite as a raw
material. The Pikalevo and Volkhov plants use nephelines
as a raw material and the Kirovabad plant uses alunite.
The latter plant has been unable to reach full scale
production because of the failure to perfect the complex
process required to break down the alunite ore and separate
the aluminum oxide content.
Plans for further increases in the production of alumina
are based on completion of the plant at Achinsk and
enlargement of the existing Urals, Bogoslovsk, Pavlodar,
and Kirovabad plants. Although planned construction
of additional alumina plants at Belogorsk, Akhtinsk and
Asino has been announced, it is not known whether
these plans are being carried out.
(c) BAUXITE-The principal bauxite mines of
the U.S.S.R. are located in the Ural Mountains near
Severoural'sk and Yuzhnoural'sk (both in the Sverdlovskaya
Oblast'). Next in importance are the mines located in
the Turgay regions of the Kazakh S.S.R. The only other
bauxite mines of industrial significance presently being
exploited are located at Boksitogorsk near Leningrad.
The deposits in the North Urals are of high quality
with an average content of 54 % alumina and only 3.5 %
silicon. The other bauxite deposits in the Urals to the
south contain 50 % to 55 % alumina, but they have a
silicon content of 6 % to 12 %, which reduces the processing
efficiency and increases the cost of aluminum made
from them. The Turgay mines have an alumina content
of 39 % to 48 % and a silicon content of 8 % to 12 %.
The deposits at Boksitogorsk have an alumina content
of 40 % to 52 % and a silicon content of up to 18 %.
(3) Resources-The U.S.S.R. claims to have the
world's largest prospected reserves of bauxite. However,
the economic significance of these reserves is reduced
by the generally low alumina and high silicon contents
of the ores and by the unfavorable locations of some
deposits. Most of the reserves are located in deposits
already under exploitation in the Urals, in the Kazakh
S.S.R., and in Leningradskaya Oblast'. Among the most
important prospected but undeveloped deposits of bauxite
are those located at Salair (Kuznetskiy Alatau), Priangarya
(Krasnoyarsk), and Yuzhno-Timan (Komi A.S.S.R.).
Reserves of other aluminous raw materials are very,
large and consist principally of alunite and nepheline
ores. The principal alunite deposit is located at Zaglik
in the Azerbaijan S.S.R. and is the second largest in
the world. Reserves of nepheline are particularly important
and represent a seemingly inexhaustible source of alumina.
Technical advances in processing of nephelines and the
recovery of valuable byproducts, including fertilizers,
cement, and soda, have helped to compensate for the
relatively low alumina and high silicon contents of these
ores. The principal reserves of nepheline are located
at Kiya Shalter in the Kemerovo Oblast' and on the
Kola Peninsula. The mines on the Kola Peninsula are
worked primarily for apatite. The Kiya Shalter deposits
supply the alumina plant at Achinsk. When in full-
scale operation the Achinsk plant will be able to produce
800,000 tons of alumina per annum and will ease the
supply pinch experienced by the new reduction plants
in East Siberia. It is noteworthy, however, that the U.S.S.R.
is seeking to locate and develop deposits of high quality
bauxite for satisfaction of the long range alumina needs
of reduction plants in East Siberia.
b. MAGNESIUM
(1) Supply position-The U.S.S.R., the second
largest producer of magnesium in the world after the
United States, produces magnesium for its domestic needs
as well as modest quantities for export. During the period
1963-68, Soviet output of magnesium more than doubled,
increasing from an estimated 39,000 tons in 1963 to
84,000 tons in 1968. Soviet exports of magnesium, which
averaged about 2,000 tons annually in the late 1950's
and early 1960's, increased to 8,600 tons in 1967 and
14,500 tons in 1968. Most of these exports went to other
Communist countries.
(2) Producing facilities and technology The U.S.S.R.
produces magnesium at four plants, three of which also
produce titanium. The newest and largest plant is the
Ust'-Kamenogorsk Titanium-Magnesium Combine in
Kazakhstan, which began production in early 1965. The
other two titanium-magnesium plants, Dneprovsk at
Zaporozh'ye in the Ukraine, and Berezniki in the Urals,
began producing magnesium in 1956 and 1962, respectively.
The fourth plant, Solikamsk, is located in the Urals.
Plans have been announced for the construction in East
Siberia of additional facilities for the production of
magnesium, but there is no evidence that such construction
has been started.
Most of the Soviet output of magnesium is produced
electrolytically either by electrolysis of molten magnesium
chlorides or by the electrolysis of magnesium oxides dissolved
in molten salts. A small amount of magnesium may
be produced by the silicothermic method, which is reported
to yield a purer product than that obtained by electrolysis.
High purity magnesium is essential in making strategic
magnesium-base alloys, such as those containing zirconium,
thorium, and rare earth metals.
(3) Resources-The U.S.S.R. has abundant reserves
of the principal magnesium-bearing raw materials, magnesite,
dolomite, carnallite, and sea water and lake brine. At
present, the U.S.S.R., which is not known to use dolomite
in its production of magnesium metal, relies primarily
on carnallite as the raw material for its magnesium industry.
The Verkhnekamsk deposit of carnallite in the Urals
is claimed to be the largest single deposit in the world.
The most important industrial occurrences of magnesite
are in the Urals at Satkinskiy and Khalilovo. Recently
the Soviets announced the discovery of the "world's
largest magnesite deposit" in Irkutsk Oblast' near the
village of Savinskoye, claiming that reserves at this deposit
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
amount to 2 billion tons. The best known deposits of
dolomite are in the Donbass (Zhigulevsk, Nikitinsk), the
Urals (Satinskiy), Leningradskaya Oblast' (Izvarov), and
Moscovskaya Oblast' (Shchelkovo and Podol'sk). The
Crimean lakes are the major sources of lake brine, and
the Kara-Bogaz-Gol Gulf of the Caspian Sea is an important
source of highly salty sea water.
c. TITANIUM
(1) Supply position The U.S.S.R. has the capacity
to produce large quantities of titanium sponge metal,
the crude metal that requires further processing into
ingot metal from which titanium mill products are made.
The Soviet titanium industry has grown rapidly since
the mid-1950's, and the output of titanium sponge in
1968 is estimated at 15,000 tons, about the same as
that produced in the United States.
According to Soviet plan figures, the production of
titanium sponge in the U.S.S.R. should reach about
17,000 tons in 1969 and 20,000 tons in 1970. At one
time the Soviets discussed the construction of new titanium
facilities in East Siberia which would raise production
to 50,000 tons of titanium sponge by 1980. No recent
information is available, however, on these or other long
range plans for the Soviet titanium industry.
Beginning in late 1965, the U.S.S.R. began to export
titanium sponge, chiefly to the U.S. By early 1968 the
Soviets had exported a total of about 2,000 tons of
titanium sponge to the U.S. These exports stopped in
mid-1968, however, with the imposition by the U.S.
of a punitive tariff as a result of a decision by the
U.S. Tariff Commission that the Soviets were selling
titanium sponge in the U.S. at less than fair value and
that these sales were therefore injuring U.S. domestic
producers.
(2) Producing facilities and technology-Since 1954,
when the Soviets first began to produce titanium sponge
on a commercial scale, three large titanium sponge-
making facilities have been constructed. The Dneprovskiy
Titanium-Magnesium Combine at Zaporozh'ye, in the
Ukraine, was completed in 1960 and the Berezniki Titanium-
Magnesium Combine in the Urals in 1962. In late 1965,
after several years of lagging construction, the Ust-
Kamenogorsk Titanium-Magnesium Combine in the Kazakh
S.S.R., the largest of the three facilities, began
operations.
Nearly all Soviet output of titanium sponge is produced
by the standard Kroll process using magnesium as the
reductant of the intermediate product, titanium tetrachloride.
The basic material used in the preparation of the titanium
tetrachloride is either ilmenite concentrate or slag melted
from ilmenite concentrate. Ingots of titanium metal and
alloys are produced from sponge in consumable electrode
vacuum-arc furnaces or electroslag melting furnaces.
(3) Resources-Soviet reserves of raw materials
for the production of titanium -i ample to support a
large-scale titanium industry. Although deposits of rutile-
the principal low-cost mineral used for making titanium
in the West-are limited, the Soviets claim "inexhaustible"
reserves of other titanium bearing ores, principally ilmenite.
The chief raw material base for titanium raw materials
in the Soviet Union is the Verkhne-Dneprovsk Titanium
Mining and Metallurgical Combine in the Ukraine. Titanium
resources and producing facilities are shown on Figure
d. BERYLLIUM-The U.S.S.R. has ample reserves
of beryllium, but, for the most part, the Soviet ores
are complex and, as a result, are difficult and costly
to process. Identified deposits are in Chitinskaya,
Murmanskay, and Sverdlovskaya Oblast's, the Altayskiy
Kray, and the Kazakh, Kirgiz, Tadzhik, and Uzbek S.S.R.'s.
Only since 1962 has the U.S.S.R. made a significant
effort to develop these deposits, because, in earlier years,
Communist China supplied most of the Soviet needs
for beryllium raw materials. A small amount of beryllium
is obtained in the U.S.S.R. as a byproduct in the processing
of other metals.
The U.S.S.R. produces beryllium oxide and beryllium
metal in amounts adequate to satisfy priority domestic
needs and leave a small surplus for export. The U.S.S.R.
allocates most of its available beryllium to nuclear and
space applications. Beryllium-copper and beryllium-aluminum
alloys have been developed, but they have been put
to only limited use, particularly in civilian applications.
Such uses probably will increase, however, because the
U.S.S.R. plans to increase the production of beryllium
and beryllium alloys and is increasing its research effort
in metal processing and in applications technology.
3. Basic nonferrous metals
a. COPPER
(1) Supply position-Although the U.S.S.R. became
a net exporter of copper in 1964, it still regards copper
as a "deficit" metal. The high cost of production, reflecting
both the generally low quality of domestic copper reserves
and the lag in modernizing the copper industry, has
led the Soviet government to encourage the substitution
of other more abundant and cheaper metals, particularly
aluminum. The estimated supply position of copper in
the U.S.S.R. in 1960-68 is shown in Figure 13.
The U.S.S.R., the second largest copper producer in
the world after the U.S., has increased its output of
the metal substantially since World War II. Refined
copper production reached an estimated 992,000 tons
in 1968, an increase of 28% since 1965 and a doubling
of output since 1960. The planned production for 1970
is estimated at 1.2 million tons.
Actual Soviet consumption of copper probably exceeded
apparent consumption in most years during the 1950's
and early 1960's. The gap between apparent and actual
consumption probably was met by withdrawals from
stocks, which because of large lend-lease shipments from
the U.S. are believed to have been extensive at the
end of World War II. In recent years, however, domestic
requirements probably have been met from current output
of primary and secondary copper. Nevertheless, efforts
to conserve on the use of copper have not been relaxed
and, in fact, have helped ease the drain on stocks. Estimated
consumption of copper in 1967 was about 1 million
tons, just over a quarter of the consumption of copper
and copper-base products in the U.S. Some 50% of total
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
20 40 80
120 160
180
-Rrm
q~r'
F A
l
~
t
..,, a
Trc
o r
s
1
/
C3
441
hlt
' aya
'
/
blast
Oblast
? D,,wr?
\4
j
a
Bamotkan' RI r
Zaporoz Berezniki
p - - -
_ - - Lp'Q
04
Gore
chkanar
0~
5~
V lqa
d
Tobol'sk
40
^ '4
eq
Guberlya RI
r
Ozero
Kumdykol'?
t
Irgiz Ve o
er
TUr
a
Ri
?
?
g
y
v
`iUlyzhilanshik River
Qa kal
B~
on'
Ust' ISam ~e sk r
Jam' ~ ~`
1
L '~aY
n
s J'
40
~.,...
I
~
0 T?^0
\
G
f
Areas of major deposits
StA
a
o
i
J
pP
~
~ ~
~'
""~
J
~A
L
?^"
~`
!/
~ Metallurgical plant
?n~x a
"~.ti
69 xor xe
csss..~...,arxo r.r~.s
60
80
FIGURE 12. Titanium resources and producing facilities,UNCODED
FIGURE 13. ESTIMATED SUPPLY OF COPPER
(Thousands of metric tons)
YEAR
TION
IMPORTS
EXPORTS SUP
PLY*
1960
............
490
106.0
67.9 5
28.1
1961
............
530
82.2
67.7 5
44.5
1962
............
590
106.4
76.8 6
19.6
1963
............
640
88.0
77.7 6
50.3
1964
............
700
15.3
94.5 6
20.8
1965
............
772
4.9
98.6 6
78.3
1966
............
828
11.5
125.4 7
14.1
1967
............
915
5.4
99.8 8
20.6
1968
............
992
13j/
117.2 8
88.5
*Apparent supply equals production plus imports of metal minus
exports of metal.
Soviet consumption is accounted for by electrical applications
such as cable, wire, busbars, contacts, and collectors.
Prior to 1964 the U.S.S.R. was a net importer of copper.
During the five year period, 1959-63, for example, Soviet
imports, nearly all of which came from non-Communist
countries, averaged 100,000 tons per year whereas exports
of copper, shipped almost exclusively to other Communist
countries, averaged 70,000 tons per year. In the subsequent
years, however, the Soviet balance of trade in copper
was sharply reversed. During 1964-68 Soviet imports
of copper averaged only 10,200 tons per year compared
with exports of over 100,000 tons per year. Other Communist
countries, principally East Germany and Czechoslovakia,
continue to be the principal recipients of Soviet copper
but West Germany and the U.K. also have receive 25X1
significant quantities.
(2) Resources-The U.S.S.R. claims to have the
largest copper reserves in the world and, in fact, no
country is known to have larger reserves. The most recent
official Soviet estimate of copper reserves was for 1939
when they were stated to total 19.5 million tons of
contained metal. Available data indicate that Soviet
copper reserves were increased to 35.2 million tons by
the end of 1958 and to nearly 53 million tons by the
end of 1965.
About one-third of Soviet reserves of copper are contained
in cupriferous sandstones. Copper pyrites, copper porphyries,
and copper nickel ores account for roughly equal shares
of total reserves-some 16% to 18% each. Another 8%
is found in polymetallic (copper, lead, zinc) ores. Soviet
reserves of copper also include relatively small quantities
of quartz-chalcopyrite ores, copper-iron-vandium ores,
and silicate gangue.
The general quality of Soviet copper reserves is low.
From 1940 to 1958 the average copper content of domestic
ores reportedly declined from 1.8% to 1.36%. In the
past decade the gradual decline in the quality of ores
probably has continued. The important Kounrad deposit,
for example, now has an average copper content of
only 0.5%. The chalcopyrite ores of the Urals, with
an average copper content of perhaps 2%, probably
are the best, but these deposits are relatively small. The
larger deposits in the U.S.S.R. contain generally leaner
ores. These include the Dzhezkazgan deposit in the Kazakh
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
S.S.R. and the newly prospected Udokan deposit in the
Transbaikal, which together are estimated to contain
about 35 % of total Soviet copper reserves.
(3) Producing facilities
(a) MINING AND CONCENTRATING-About half
of the Soviet output of copper ore is mined in the Kazakh
S.S.R., mainly in the Karagandinskaya Oblast' at Kounradskiy
and at Dzhezkazgan and in the Rudnyy Altay area
of Vostochno-Kazakhstanskaya Oblast'. About 10% to
12 % of the total output is mined at Noril'sk in Krasnoyarskiy
Kray in the R. S. F. S. R. About 15 % is mined in Sverdlovskaya,
Chelyabinskaya, and Orenburgskaya Oblast's and the
Bashkirskaya A. S. S. R. in the Urals, the oldest copper
producing region in the U.S.S.R. The Degtyarsk mine
in Sverdlovskaya Oblast' probably is the largest producer
of copper ore in the Urals. The remaining 20% of total
Soviet output is mined in the Armenian and Uzbek
S.S.R.'s and on the Kola Peninsula, Murmanskay Oblast'.
Most of the Soviet ore is concentrated locally by variations
of the flotation method. Available data indicate that
the technical level of the mining and concentrating sector
of the Soviet copper industry lags behind that of the
smelting and refining sector. The principal Soviet copper
mines, concentrating plants, and producing facilities are
shown on Figure 14.
(b) SMELTING AND REFINING-Copper smelting
facilities in the U.S.S.R. traditionally have been located
near the domestic resources of copper. About half of
the blister (crude) copper is produced in the Kazakh
S.S.R. which possesses the largest share of Soviet reserves
of copper. The Urals rank next in importance as a copper-
smelting region. In contrast, copper refining facilities
in the U.S.S.R. generally have been located closer to
the consuming industries, particularly in the Urals. This
pattern is being changed, however, by the recent and
current construction of new refining capacity in areas
east of the Urals-particularly in the Kazakh S.S.R.-
near the sources of raw materials.
At present the U.S.S.R. has in operation 13 copper
smelters processing ore and concentrate and 1 smelter,
the Moscow Copper Smelting and Electrolytic Plant
imeni Molotovo (55?45'N., 37?35'E.), processing copper
scrap. Although the Kazakh S.S.R. is the largest producer
of blister copper in the U.S.S.R, it has only 3 smelters
in operation: the Balkhash Mining and Metallurgical
Combine (46?49'N., 75000'E.), the Karsakpay Copper
Smelter (47?50'N., 66?45'E.), and the Irtysh Polymetallic
Combine at Glubokoye (50?06'N., 82?19'E.). However,
a fourth smelter is under construction at Dzhezkazgan.
The smelter at Balkhash may produce as much as 30%
of the total Soviet output of blister copper. Six small,
relatively old smelters are located in the Urals: the Bashkir
Copper-Sulfur Combine at Baymak (52?36'N., 5849'E.),
the Karabash Mining-Metallurgical Combine (55?29'N.,
60014'E.), the Mednogorsk Copper-Sulfur Combine (51?24'N.,
57?37'E. ), the Kirovgrad Copper-Smelting Combine (57?26'N.,
60004'E.), the Krasnoural'sk Copper Smelting Plant (58?21'N.,
60003'E.), and the Srednoural'sk Copper Smelting Plant
at Revda (56?48'N., 59?57'E.). Copper also is smelted
in Murmanskaya Oblast' at the Monchegorsk Nickel-
20
40 80 120 160
180
v[itrB e
\
/
``l~\
0 C,
Q
?po
r le Monchegorsk
/ \
0
pnizPer
Mosco
~ 17 Norl]'sk
Klrovgra K otur' A
5E P 0
?~,'
of9a Rev ? A Kr
ura
.0
\C~
Degtyars Verk yaya
40
K htym
ak17
Q
Al e
~ y
rdl Mednogors I/~ Karaba h
1
A le
ava
ay
pp
y V
8 .lug
C
Da takert
X.
a
her.
Luk?
B
nb'
?'
Dzhezkazgan*
Ka sakpay Glubok
28
khstan
~
40
KounradsklY
~,~-..,
? Obl~~~'.'?'
i
J.
~?
F
190
v~
e Balkh 8h 0 n..,,J
0
It
~ Mine and concentrating plant
F, n
Alma) k ~
A Smelter
t'D
..
,P
Refinery
*A amet[er and .eAne.v are vnae. conat.uce[on at Dzhezkz
zp?n.
77084 1069 ?o ??en.:ei~ Aar v i nve -.. t
FIGURE 14. Copper resources and producing facilities, 1968
24
11
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO135OR000100080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
Copper Combine (67?56'N., 32058'E.), in the Armenian
S.S.R. at the Alaverdi Copper-Chemical Combine (41?08'N.,
44?39'E.), in Krasnoyarskiy Kray at the Noril'sk Mining
and Metallurgical Combine (69?20'N., 88?06'E.), and
in the Uzbek S.S.R. at the Almalyk Copper Smelting
Plant (40o5O'N., 69?35'E. ). In addition to the smelter
at Dzhezkazgan, other new smelters are to be constructed
during the current five year plan in Rudnyy Altai in
East Kazakhstan and in Amurskaya Oblast'.
The Soviet output of blister copper is refined electrolytically
at seven locations. The two largest refineries are the
Balkhash Mining and Metallurgical Combine in the
Kazakh S.S.R. and the Pyshma Electrolytic Copper Plant Z
at Verkhnyaya Pyshma (56?55'N., 60037E.). The remaining
refineries are the Alaverdi Copper-Chemical Combine
in the Armenian SRthe Moscow Copper Smelting
and Electrolytic Plant imeni Molotovo, the Kyshtyn
Electrolytic Copper Plant in the Urals, the Almalyk Copper G
Refinery in the Uzbek S.S.R., and the Noril'sk Mining
and Metallurgical Combine. New construction underway
at Noril'sk may double the capacity of this refinery
by the end of 1970. The U.S.S.R also plans to construct
two entirely new refineries, each of which is to be the
equal of the Balkhash refinery, the largest in the Soviet
copper industry. One is already started at Dzhezkazgan 't
and the other will soon be started at the East Kazakh
Combine.
b. LEAD
(1) Supply position -The U. S. S. R, the largest producer
and consumer of lead among the Communist countries,
has experienced a shortage of lead raw materials for
a number of years. Although estimated production of
primary and secondary lead has exceeded estimated domestic
consumption since 1955, the Soviet Union is partially
dependent on imports to augment domestic supplies of
ores and concentrates. Soviet consumption of lead, estimated
at 530,000 tons in 1968, is about 42% of that of the
United States. The principal uses of lead in the U.S.S.R.
are in the manufacture of batteries, cable coverings,
and solder. At present, there is considerable emphasis
on the substitution of more abundant metals-steel,
aluminum, and zinc-and plastics for lead.
In 1968, the U.S.S.R. produced an estimated 623,000
tons of lead. Of this, 528,000 tons consisted of primary
lead, representing more than half of the output in Communist
countries, and 95,000 tons was secondary lead. During
1966-68, production of primary lead increased at an
average annual rate of some 7 %, about the rate required
to achieve the goal of 610,000 tons of primary production
planned for 1970. Since 1960, the U.S.S.R. has been
a net exporter of lead, although for the period 1955-
62, the lead content of imported ores, concentrates, and
metal exceeded that of export metal by more than 150,000
tons. Most Soviet imports of lead originate in other
Communist countries, chiefly Bulgaria, North Korea
and Yugoslavia. About 65 % of Soviet exports of lead
ve een to Eastern Europe, primarily East Germany
and Czechoslovakia. The estimated supply position of
lead for the U.S.S.R., 1960-68, is shown in Figure 15.
LEAD
PRODUC- (_k-)
TION IMPORTS
1960 ............ 324
1961 ............ 326
1962............ 346
1963 ............ 385
1964 ............ 408
1965 ............ 433
1966 ............ 463
1967 ............ 495
1968 528
S
*Apparent supply equals
minus exports of metal.
378.4
406.2
440.4
476.2
c
o74metal
6,6
(2) Producing facilities and technology
(a) MINING AND CONCENTRATING-The bulk of
lead ore mined in the U.S.S.R is obtained from low-
grade polymetallic lead-zinc deposits, which, for the
most part, are worked inefficiently and at considerable
cost by underground methods. The number of highly
mechanized and economic open pit operations has increased
gradually, however, and by 1970, 30% of the ore is
to come from open pits. Lead-bearing ores are mined
in East Siberia, the Central Asian republics, and in the
Kazakh S.S.R., which alone accounts for more than 50%
of Soviet lead ore production, most of it from the Rudnyy
Altay mining district in Vostochno-Kazakhstanskaya
Oblast'.
Soviet processing of poor-quality lead-zinc ores by
simple techniques, chiefly flotation, results in a low metal
recovery rate for lead and poor recovery of byproducts
contained in the ore. In addition, Soviet concentrates
contain considerably less lead than the 68% to 70%
in concentrates of Western producers. The Soviets, however,
are introducing new and improved concentrating techniques,
including heavy media separation and cyanide free flotation.
In the Ust-Kamenogorsk area, lead recovery rates were
raised to 92% to 97% from 70% in 1955. Efforts also
are underway to improve recovery of byproduct elements,
which in some ores may number as many as 19. The
principal Soviet lead mines and concentrating plants
are located on Figure 16.
(b) SMELTING AND REFINING-About 75% of the
Soviet output of primary refined lead is produced in
two plants, at Chimkent (48?18'N., 69?36'E.) and Ust-
Kamenogorsk (49?58'N., 82?40'E.), both in the Kazakh
S.S.R. The remainder is produced at the Elektrotsink
Plant at Ordzhonikidze (43?02'N., 44?41'E.) in the Severo-
Osetinskaya A.S.S. R. in the Caucasus and at the Tetyukhe
Plant at Tetyukhe-Pristran' (44?21'N., 135?49'E.) in Primorskiy
Kray in the Far East. The Altyn-Topkan Lead-Zinc Plant,
which was to be put into operation during the Seven
Year Plan, is still under construction. All the lead-producing
plants were expanded considerably during the Seven
Year Plan, particularly the Ust-Kamenogorsk Plant.
The Ukrtsink Plant in Konstantinovka in the Ukrainian
S.S.R. is considered to be the major Soviet producer
A" 0QA0 l{t,.~vvu,.` C.avh;6 i,n.A, cvl- r;~
,owe R%KYk_
Cz,OA.&l l Jeo ,
39.7
39.5
26.1
38.8
49.9
APPARENT
EXPORTS SUPPLY*
69.8-30.1 293.9
102.3. a,9 263.2
94.4-65, 277.7
110.2-('f 313.6
96.1 -` 6,L- 361.8
47.9 102.5_.54.(
31.1 87.9 S6, 9
32.3 86.9 Sz? i,
39.1 90.9 51.9
,?v,Q 97.9 is.(
'g
pro uc Ion plus imports
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
20
40 80 120 160 180
vnkr!!
\
/
~h \
4
P%/
IWO"
_-
- - M y? ? o ? c
3? 3 3 ? 0 d o 3 C x
H f~i H W H H H W W H H V1 Pr, F U1 f~ Co
a G o 0 0 y a o a o ?? a o
d . U 3 3 a~ a? ` 0 a a o o
'~ E E E a"~ .~ a y y
a v a
q 00
0 "0
c E E fl a -" x m E c o o c ?
m
y O ? o N .0 as O G M O E m V x y a O
m M
o ~ O
?fl d X ~ ~', H v M dip O M o C~ d CL go
p eo E v o o C'6 c N ? o q c~
O 0 N 61 N W G1 U
c y m y G 0. For M O O ?4 F "' w% 0
y 3 _m o a ? m a o b o
y "~^,^~ " d a> d E m O " F c. C C +?' E ?7 m
ND w
q E- E'er E y a oo o c? o 03 0
= 0 00 00 fit- ~ a? Eon' .> w a~ I
c. ~ v g O G M W x N o o O o y V7 U
00
U X N c. M a)
cd N ? l~ QI ti
N
X a U m N M E cO E E v D w ,'.
03
4 Pi v o w w a ?~ a ei n o y y
-. -14 d u-.
C a7 O 10 0
a a ? E a
m ? N E b
cd ? cd Q} 'a+ to
b L7 0
0 o ?' o 0
Ua Ua mU
0 0 0 0
0 0 00
0 0 0 0
I
00 0
d~ ~J to 00 N
0 C
0 o O d 0
o o C 0
O O O
O O O
? N
. 01
I.S
C O
O
O
0
? O O
a y
.D N
N 0
as U
: . -o cO E
O] V
a ? ?C a
0 m ,; c
~ U yN
d 0 o U N d
is m
0 F a~ 'O
d 0 a d
a ca
0 o E
o
a a 55 C a
00 00 0 00 Oo 00
o h O 0 n
O M 0 -
N
O
N
0
M
c%
.
L
^C
O
.0
C
d
0
0
cd
Z
;11
C
4)
p
E
c
a
p
'"
E
x
m
d
?
N
E
y
E
C
N
0 .,C.,
N
`~
N
o
0
C
o
- o
p
H
U
Z
,
V y
y C
0
m
N
L
o o
E c
,C C
a
a
0
a
N
x? o x
o c
C O
N N
EN .0
: U
O0
U 0 d
-o E
Fr U
'~ ~. a1 U
:n w E
N ^~ m
a ?cr ~ m
E?00a
U ~ d
?n a 'e a
0 0 0 0
P~ Po ,
CD C)
0 0
00 0
UJ n O h
00 .0 CC CO
O O C O 0
S R S S
CC
0. O
c'co O
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
MAP PLANT NAME**
REF. TOWN
NO.* ADM. DIV.
1 Jarvakandi ..........................
Estonian S.S.R.
5 Sarkandaugava .........................
Riga
Latvian S.S.R.
7 Radvilishkis .........................
Lithuanian S.S.R.
8 Panevezys ...........................
Lithuanian S.S.R.
9 Polotsk .............................
Vitebskaya Oblast' (Obl.)
18 L'vov ...............................
L'vovskaya Obl.
23 Chagoda ............................
Vologodskaya Obl.
31 Velikiy Oktyabr' ...................... .
Firovo
Kalininskaya Obl.
34 Leninskiy .............................
Moscow
Moskovskaya Obl.
38 Pioner ................................
Misheronskiy
Moskovskaya Obl.
39 Kaluga ..............................
Kaluzhskaya Obl.
42 Bytosh ..............................
Bryanskaya Obl.
43 Ivot ................................
Bryanskaya Obl.
48 Skopin ..............................
Ryazanskaya Obl.
49 Lomonosov ............................
Kostyukovka
Gomel'skaya Obl.
55 Proletariy .............................
Lisichansk
Luganskaya Obl.
58 Oktyabr'skaya Revolyutsiya .............
Konstantinovka
Donetskaya Obl.
63 Krasnodar ...........................
Krasnodarskiy Kray
66 Bor .................................
Gor'kovskaya Obl.
74 D zerzhinskiy ...........................
Gus'-Khrustal'nyy
Vladimirskaya Obl.
79 Kurlovskiy ..........................
Vladimirskaya Obl.
ESTIMATED
WINDOW-GLASS
PRODUCTION,
1967
Millions of
square meters
2.0 Other products: electric insulators and technical glass.
Other products: plate glass, glass blocks, and electric insulators.
Shop with a production capacity of 3.2 million glass blocks per
year is in operation.
Largest fiberglass plant in the Soviet Union. Pilot plant in
U.S.S.R. for the production of glass concrete fittings.
Other products: electric insulators, technical glass, and glassware.
Third largest U.S.S.R. window-glass plant. Also produces foam
glass.
Also produces glass pipes.
Produces construction glass.
Do.
Do.
Produces glass blocks.
Fourth largest U.S.S.R. window-glass plant. Pilot plant for the
production of foam glass and glass pipes. Other products:
plate glass and hardened glass. Plans to produce glass blocks.
3,200 workers.
Largest U.S.S.R. window-glass plant. Other products: plate
glass, automobile glass, glass blocks, glass tiles, plastic glass,
and glass wool. Planned to produce 3.4 million glass blocks in
1967. Polished glass production capacity of 400,000 square
meters per year to be attained in near future. Avtosteklo
Glass Plant, also in Lisichansk, is the pilot plant for the
production of automobile glass. Other products: window glass,
polished glass, triplex laminated safety glass, technical glass,
and optical glass. Expansion planned by 1970.
Second largest U.S.S.R. window-glass plant. Also produces
construction glass, glass pipes, silicate tiles, and packing glass.
Other products: plate glass, profile glass, automobile glass, and
technical glass.
Other products: plate glass, polished glass, profile glass, automo-
bile glass, triplex laminated safety glass, hardened glass,
technical glass, and packing glass. Expansion planned by 1970.
Glass research institute at plant.
Also produces plate glass and colored glass.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
MAP PLANT NAME**
REF. TOWN
NO.* ADM. DIV.
ESTIMATED
WINDOW-GLASS
PRODUCTION,
1967
86 Saratov .............................
Saratovskaya O bl.
93 Dagestanskiye Ogni ...................
Dagestanskaya A.S.S.R.
95 Sumgait .............................
Azerbaijan S.S.R.
96A Sylva ...............................
Permskaya Obl.
102 Krasnousol'skiy ......................
Bashkirskaya A.S.S.R.
103 Magnitogorsk ........................
Chelyabinskaya Obl.
104 Salavat .............................
Bashkirskaya A.S.S.R.
105 Ashkhabad ..........................
Turkmen S.S.R.
106 Irbit ................................
Sverdlovskaya O bl.
111 Chirchik .............................
Tashkentskaya Obl.
115 Anzhero-Sudzhensk ...................
Kemerovskaya Obl.
119 Tulun ...............................
Irkutskaya Obl.
120 Ulan-Ude ............................
Buryatskaya A.S.S.R.
122 Raychikhinsk ........................
Amurskaya Obl.
124 Stekol'nyy. ...........................
Magadanskaya Obl.
125 Khabarovsk .........................
Khabarovskiy Kray
no Data not available.
*Identifying reference number on Figure 39, map.
**Plant name not given where same as town name.
Millions of
square meters
4.2
Largest construction and technical glass plant, produces 15% of
total glass output in the U.S.S.R. Principal producer of polished
glass, shopwindow glass, and electrical insulators. Other prod-
ucts: plate glass, automobile glass, glass blocks, and plastic
glass. 6,000 workers. Glass research institute at plant.
Also produces glass tiles and foam glass.
Also produces electrical insulators, technical glass, and glassware.
Fifth largest U.S.S.R. window-glass plant. Other products: plate
glass, automobile glass, triplex laminated safety glass, glass
blocks, and technical glass. The plate glass shop has a produc-
tion capacity of 3 million square meters per year.
Other products: electric insulators, packing glass, and glassware.
Also produces plate glass.
Do.
Other products: glass blocks and packing glass.
Also produces plate glass. Plans to produce technical glass, glass
blocks, and glass wool.
Other products: foam glass and bottles.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
Next 1 Page(s) In Document Denied
Iq
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08SO1 350R0001 00080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
03
_T
C
CD
C)
o.
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
 Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8
SECRET
NO FOREIGN DISSEM
Approved For Release 2008/09/08: CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8