THE KAMA-VYCHEGDA-PECHORA RIVER REVERSAL SCHEME

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: U
• Document Page Count: 12
• Document Creation Date: November 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 1, 1999
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: January 1, 1973
• Content Type: IR

Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
Official Use Only
DIRECTORATE OF
INTELLIGENCE
Intelligence Report
The Kama - Vycbegda-Pecbora
River Reversal Scheme
Official Use Only
CIA/BGI GR 73-2
January 1973
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 2000/OI rk8 G R,3Pft&Or0825R000300030001-7
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
Directorate of Intelligence
January 1973
THE KAMA-VYCHEGDA-PECHORA RIVER REVERSAL SCHEME
In an attempt to alleviate the acute and growing water shortages that afflict the
lower Volga and Caspian basins, Soviet water management specialists have long
sought relief in the European north. Much of this effort has been directed toward the
development of plans designed to divert parts of the north-flowing Pechora and
Vychegda rivers into the south-flowing Kama. The first of these Kama-Vychegda-
Pechora (KVP) plans appeared in the middle 1930's; although accepted by the State
Planning Committee (Gosplan) at that time, the advent of World War II brought work
on the plan to a close.
A second KVP plan evolved from research completed by the Water Management
Institute (Gidroproekt) of the Ministry of Power Stations in the period 1950-55.
Following several years of subsequent discussion in official circles, it was finally
published in the Soviet press in 1961. This version of the plan was widely criticized,
largely because of its social, economic, and ecologic costs, and objections to it
prompted the formulation of yet another proposal, which was submitted to Gosplan in
1968 and accepted as a plan by that body in the following year. It proposes the
completion of the KVP project in stages, with a portion of one of the key canals being
excavated by nuclear power. Nevertheless this version of the plan has also been
subjected to criticism, and Soviet news media now suggest that it may have been put in
abeyance pending consideration of other major reversal alternatives.
In the meantime the relationship of water supply to demand in the Volga-Caspian
area grows more tenuous. The current deficit in that area, calculated to be 15-20 cubic
kilometers a year, is expected to increase to about 50 cubic kilometers annually by
1985 and to 80-90 cubic kilometers by the year 2000. Completion of the KVP project
would satisfy all current requirements and provide a surplus for some future increase in
demand. Beyond 1985, however, the diversion of a number of additional streams
would probably be necessary.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY I
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
s : Volga-Caspian Drainage Basin
Mezen'
Limit of drainage basin
Lif of r
Kar 10gaz
prat
`-.Sea
501275 1-73 pprove or Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
Sverdlovsk 122
 Approved For Release 2000/1418.F - I L W4E00825R000300030001-7
THE KAMA-VYCHEGDA-PECHORA RIVER REVERSAL SCHEME
1. Although many of the grandiose transformation-
of-nature proposals conceived during the Stalin era
have met a justly deserved death, Soviet informational
media continue to report on a number of them,
including the Kama-Vychegda-Pechora (KVP) river
diversion scheme. The latest version of the scheme,
like those that preceded it, is designed to provide the
Volga and Caspian basins with a large supplemental
supply of water. Interest in this proposal is motivated
by concern about the water balance of the lower Volga
and Caspian lowlands; the water supply, precariously
marginal at best, appears to be worsening.
Intake/evaporation ratios have been generally adverse
for decades, and the demand for water in the Volga
economic region-where centers of population,
industry, and agriculture are expanding-is increasing
at an alarming pace. Although it encompasses only 3
percent of the nation's territory, the region accounts
for better than 7 percent of the gross industrial output
and about 15 percent of the harvest of spring grains in
the USSR. Support of the economy in the Volga area,
however, has not been without costs, particularly for
the Caspian Sea, the level of which has dropped 2.6
meters in the 35-year period ending in 1970; worse yet,
a further drop of 1.6 meters is expected by the year
2000. Should this come to pass, already serious
problems-the shallowing of port areas, pollution, and
the deterioration of the fishing economy-will
appreciably worsen.
2. Available data indicate that there is now a
shortage of some 15-20 cubic kilometers of water a
NOTE-This report was prepared by the Office of Basic and
Geographic intelligence and coordinated within CIA.
year along the lower Volga and in the Caspian Basin.'
Given the continuation of prevailing climatic
conditions and current consumption trends, the deficit
could reach 50 cubic kilometers by 1985, and by the
end of the century it could approach 80-90 cubic
kilometers of water annually. Preliminary surveys
suggest that deficits of these magnitudes could be
largely alleviated through the completion of the KVP
project and the further diversion of other streams in
the north of the European USSR.
3. Survey work on the upper Pechora and Kolva
Rivers began as early as 1927, and this led to the
completion and submission of the first KVP plan in the
middle thirties. The State Planning Committee
(Gosplan) approved the plan, recommending that
work on it be continued. World War II interfered,
however, and further consideration of the proposal
was necessarily postponed until 1950. During the
period 1950-55, the Water Management Institute
(Gidroproekt) of the Ministry of Power Stations
resumed the KVP planning effort, culminating its
work with a proposal for the gravity-flow diversion of
parts of the Pechora and Vychegda rivers into the
Kama. The proposal was carefully scrutinized along
with a number of variants, and the newspaper Vodnyy
Transport announced the approval of the scheme by
the Technical Council of the Ministry of Construction
of Power Stations on 26 January 1961. The 1961 KVP
'One cubic kilometer of water is equal to 810,713 acre-feet. A
deficit of 15 cubic kilometers (12,160,695 acre-feet) would be equal
to about three times the amount of water normally impounded
behind California's Shasta Dam.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 3
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
USSR: 1961 KYP River Reversal Plan
Ust'-Izhma
I Dam -
Pechora-,
Vychegda
M: Canal
l
Southern
Canal
?
Murashl
Area of proposed reservoir Q Oil and gas producing area
Agricultural area Proposed canal
~~inroved For Release OOUIO4I 8 :?~'IA-RDR 1
50 00
I - - _ _ Arctict Circle
 Approved For Release 2000/ %ICI,4 U4~00825R000300030001-7
FIGURE 1. Proposed Structures: 1961 KVP Plan
Dams:
Ust'-Voya ...........
Height: 80 meters; Length: 12-14 kilometers; Head: about 70 meters;
Type: earthen; Water release: none.
Ust'-Kulom..........
Height: 34 meters; Length: 2 kilometers; Head: about 30 meters; Type:
Borovsk .............
earthen; Water release: 2.6 cubic kilometers annually; Passage
around: Yes; Power installation: 46,500 kilowatts.
Height: 30 meters; Length: 4.8 kilometers; Head: about 18 meters;
Ust'-Izhma ..........
Dike:
Type: earthen; Water release: 38-40 cubic kilometers annually;
Passage around: navigation lock; Power installation: 700,000 kilo-
watts.
Height: 80 meters; Power: 1 million kilowatts.
Nibel'-Izhma Divide. . Height: 9-11 meters; Length: 16 kilometers; Type: earthen; Water
release: none.
Canals:
Pechora-Vychegda.... Location: along course of Northern and Southern Mylva Rivers; Length:
about 60 kilometers; Width: 250 meters; Depth: 18-30 meters.
Vychegda-Kama ..... Location: along course of Northern and Southern Kel'tma Rivers; Length:
about 100 kilometers; Width: 250 meters; Depth: 21-30 meters.
Plan (see Figure 1 and Map 2) proposed the
construction of dams at or near Ust'-Voya on the
Pechora, Ust'-Kulom on the Vychegda, and Borovsk
on the Kama, as well as a substantial dike on the
Nibel'-Izhma drainage divide. An additional dam, to
be constructed at a later date, was also proposed; it
was to be placed downstream from Ust'-Voya, below
the Pechora-Izhma confluence.
Benefits of the 1961 KVP Plan
4. Benefits to be derived from the proposed 1961
KVP Plan were tied to the filling of the three major
reservoirs. Totaling 15,550 square kilometers in area
(see Figure 2), these reservoirs were to contain enough
water to provide for a sustained outflow of 38 cubic
kitometcrs a year.2 A diversion of this magnitude
would have satisfied downstream requirements until
about 1980, stabilizing the level of the Caspian Sea
and improving the water balance in the lower Volga-
Caspian area and sanitary conditions on the Volga,
which is acutely polluted in the vicinity of large cities.
It would have also permitted the production of an
'The amount of water to be diverted is subject to question. Radio
reports in January 1961 spoke of the diversion of up to 40 cubic
kilometers a year. At about that time a Soviet geographer, N. I.
Shiskin, claimed that 40 to 42 billion cubic meters (40 to 42 cubic
kilometers) a year could be diverted. Another Soviet geographer, S.
L. Vendrov, making allowances for certain expected losses, stated in
1963 that the flow would be about 38 cubic kilometers a year. This
figure was subsequently accepted by Philip M. Micklin, an
American who has studied the problem extensively.
additional 11 billion kilowatt-hours annually at
existing and proposed power stations and reduced the
seasonal fluctuation in power production (the period
of maximum flow on the Pechora and minimum flow
on the Volga coincide). Completion of the power
phase alone, some Soviet economists claimed, would
justify the whole KVP proposal economically. Other
benefits were also cited. The canals and reservoirs were
to provide a new deep-water route into the
northeastern part of the European USSR. This route
was expected to stimulate economic activity,
especially forestry, and encourage the shipment of coal
from the Pechora fields to the Volga. Finally, the
projected reservoirs were deemed ideal sites for the
future development of a local fishing industry.
Criticism of the Plan
5. Despite the benefits that were to be derived from
the completion of the 1961 proposal, many criticisms
were directed against it. Geographers in particular, but
also other natural scientists and economists, noted that
completion of the project would be costly in terms of
Komi ASSR resources. The most criticized feature was
the proposal to flood much of the best agricultural
land in the Komi ASSR. Only a small proportion of the
total available land in this area is suitable for
agriculture, and most of this is located along the
Pechora and Vychegda rivers, where the bulk of the
population is situated. The flooding of these lands,
therefore, would require resettlement of thousands of
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 5
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 20po(fAglA I -F r~84-00825R000300030001-7
FIGURE 2. Some Characteristics of the Combined KVP Reservoir (1961 Plan)*
Reservoir Sections
Pechora
Vychegda
Upper
Kama
Reservoir area ...................
km.2
15,550
9,950
2,910
2,690
%
100
64
18.7
17.3
Total capacity ...................
km.3
235
184.5
34.5
16.0
%
100
78.5
14.7
6.8
Usable capacity ..................
km.3
56.5
33.7
11.4
11.4
%
100
59.6
20.2
20.2
Ratio of usable to total capacity.....
%
24
18.3
33.0
71.2
Mean annual flow at dam sites......
km.3
70. I
34.1
8.3
27.7
Ratio of total capacity to flow .....
%
335.2
541
416
57.8
Ratio of usable capacity to flow.. .
%
81
99
137
41
Population to be resettled .....................
60, 000
20,000
13,000
27,000
Land to be flooded:
Cropland ......................
ha.
13,500
1,400
4,300
7,800
Flay meadows ..................
ha.
35,300
5,300
15,600
14,400
Pastures .......................
ha.
4,400
1,000
1,000
2,400
Timber reserves to be flooded......
million m.3
79
52
18.5
8.5
*Vendrov, S. L., "Geographical Aspects of the Problem of Diverting Part of the Flow of the
Pechora and Volga rivers to the Volga Basin," Izvestiya Akademi Nauk SSSR, seriya geografiche-
skaya, 1963, No. 2, pp. 35 45. (Arithmetical errors in source corrected.)
people. Those interested in preserving the agricultural
assets of the Komi ASSR also looked with alarm on the
low ratio of usable reservoir capacity to total reservoir
capacity (see Figure 2). This ratio, a mere 24 percent,
could be substantially improved, it was claimed, by
redesigning the plan and including therein provisions
for more and lower dams, dikes, and pumping
stations.
6. Critics stated that completion of the 1961. plan
would be unnecessarily wasteful of timber and mineral
resources. Eighty-seven percent of the area proposed
for inundation is covered by timber and brush, and
much of the former is of commercial value; its removal
prior to flooding would he essential in order to prevent
the subsequent vegetative pollution of the water. The
flooding of a portion of the Timan-Pechora gas and oil
region would also present some problems. While it
would not make the extraction of gas and oil in the
area impossible, inundation would increase the cost of
production and render the reservoirs subject to the
danger of pollution through leakage and spillage.
7. It was also claimed that the impoundment of
water might have an adverse affect on the area's
climate, soil, vegetation, fish, and wildlife. Filling the
reservoirs as planned, some Soviet researchers
speculated, could cause the modification of climate
over an area of some 60,000 square kilometers. It was
assumed that winters would then tend to be less
continental, that is, warmer and more humid than
formerly, and summers would be cooler, thus
exercising a negative influence on plant growth.
8. The rise of the groundwater level around and
near the reservoirs was viewed with a certain amount
of apprehension. The expected rise in the water table
could waterlog soils over a wide area and play havoc
with the existing vegetation. Areas located on or near
the Pechora were considered particularly susceptible to
this danger. According to one estimate, the area thus
threatened was equal in size to the reservoirs
themselves.
9. The character of the proposed Ust'-Voya dam
also raised a number of objections. Designed to
completely contain the Pechora upstream from that
point, it would adversely influence water life.
Ecologists expressed concern about anadromous fish
species such as the Atlantic salmon and the whitefish,
which spawn on the middle and upper Pechora and its
tributaries. With the construction of the Ust'-Voya
and Ust'-Izhma dams, the catch of these fish would be
reduced by 90 percent. Plan proponents countered this
6 Approved For Release 200 ? )W &Q-Mb YP-84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 2000/Q J 8jrJAtjtWO4t00825R000300030001-7
argument by stating that such a loss, while real, would
be compensated by the introduction of non-migratory
fish into the reservoirs. Critics also claimed that the
inundation of the area would destroy a prime wildlife
range in which there is a diversity of tundra and taiga
fauna, including moose, brown bear, European sable,
ermine, and lynx.
10. It was further charged that the Ust'-Voya dam,
if constructdd to specifications, would have serious
repercussions on downstream areas. The reduction of
the flow of the Pechora at its mouth by 25 percent
could cause an increase in the salt content and
temperatures of the Arctic estuarian waters, thus
upsetting the feeding and spawning habits of fish. The
dam would also complicate transport on the lower
Pechora, which would be destined to become only a
trickle between Ust'-Voya and the confluence of the
Pechora and Usa rivers. While an Ust'-Izhma dam
would rectify this situation by creating a deep-water
reservoir back to Ust'-Voya, there has never been any
suggestion that a dam at this location would be built
simultaneously with other elements of the KVP
complex. More importantly, there was no assurance
that a dam at Ust'-Izhma would be provided with a
lock or a series of locks, required for the preservation of
navigation around the dam.
11. One final criticism of the plan held that the
reduction of the northward flow of fresh water could
influence the icecap in the Arctic Basin unfavorably.
Only a very delicate balance of nature keeps the
icecap alive, and to this end the continued inflow of
fresh water is essential. The fundamental concern, of
course, is with the potential diminution or elimination
of the icecap, either of which might cause catastrophic
modifications of weather systems and shorelines
around the world. The proposed diversion of Pechora
water, however, does not seem to be of sufficient
magnitude, of and by itself, to materially influence
the melting of the icecap.
Modification of the Plan
12. As objections to the 1961 KVP Plan were being
registered, a number of modifications emerged, some
appearing as early as 1963. These modifications
generally involved the construction of a somewhat
lower dam at Ust'-Voya; a second dam upstream on
the Pechora, in the vicinity of Troitsk-Pechorsk or
Pokcha; the reduction of the inundated area; and the
sequential completion of various parts of the plan,
rather than simultaneous construction.
13. Gidroproekt submitted revised KVP plans to
Gosplan in 1968. In this revision two options were
suggested (see Map 3); one of these envisioned the
simultaneous construction of the several sectors of the
entire KVP project, sending waters, as in the 1961
plan, from the Pechora to the reservoir of the
Vychegda and then by canal to the Kama. The other
option, adopted by Gosplan in 1969, made the
Pechora and Vychegda sectors of the overall plan
independent of each other. In effect, this decision
relegated the construction of the Vychegda reservoir
and its structures, along with dams near Ust'-Izhma
and Solikamsk, to the indefinite future. It also
eliminated the need for the Pechora-Vychegda Canal.
14. The tapping of the Pechora, according to the
revised plan, is to be accomplished in two stages. The
first stage involves the construction of the Pokcha
Dam, the Pechora-Kolva Canal, and the Bobyk Dam.
The reservoir behind the Pokcha Dam is to have a
capacity of 53 cubic kilometers. Completion of this
stage of the project will provide the Volga with an
additional 13 cubic kilometers of water each year. The
second stage is to concentrate on the construction of
the Ust'-Voya Dam. When complete, it will impound
about 40 cubic kilometers of water. Pumping facilities
near the Pokcha end of the reservoir are supposed to
lift the water from one reservoir to the other, thus
allowing a lower dam at Ust'-Voya and a considerably
smaller reservoir. Completion of this phase of the
project will provide the Volga with an additional 18
cubic kilometers of water each year.
15. Should the Vychegda phase of the revised plan
ever be implemented, the Volga would benefit by the
receipt of another 5 cubic kilometers of water
annually. This would depend on the construction of
the Ust'-Kulom Dam and power facility, however,
and the digging of the Southern (Vychegda-Kama)
Canal. This phase of the plan also includes the
formation of a Kama reservoir behind the proposed
Upper Kama Dam. Given the completion of all these
structures (see Figure 3) and reservoirs, the KVP
complex would have the capacity to divert 36 cubic
kilometers of water a year, an amount only slightly less
than that projected by the 1961 plan.
16. In announcing Gosplan's approval of the first
stage of the revised plan, Vodnyy Transport
optimistically claimed that the resulting transfer of 13
cubic kilometers of water a year was "enough to stop
the catastrophic drop in the level of the Caspian Sea,
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY 7
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Dam
Canal
Reservoir
Upper Kama
Dam
100 200 Miles
2 Kilometers
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 2000 ta1t8RICMkAD99400825R000300030001-7
FIGURE 3. Proposed Structures: 1969 KVP Plan
Dams:
Phase 1 ...... Pokcha ............... Height: 50 meters; Head: 40 meters; Type: earth
filled with reinforced concrete spillway; Spillway
capacity: 2,000 cubic meters of water per second.
Bobysk ............... Height: 17 meters; Type: earth filled with reinforced
concrete spillway; Spillway capacity: 3,000 cubic
meters of water per second; Lock.
Phase 2 ...... Ust'-Voya ............ Height: 60 meters; Head: 50 meters; Type: earth
filled with reinforced concrete spillway; Spillway
capacity: 1,300 cubic meters per second; Pumping
station: near Pokcha (720 cubic meters per second).
Phase 3 ...... Ust'-Kulom ........... Height: 40 meters; Type: earth filled; Power: 36,000-
kilowatts.
(Ust'-Izhma . . . . . . . . . . . Data not available.
Verkhnye Kamskiy .... Do.
Canals:
Phase 1 ...... Pechora-Kolva ........ Length: 117 kilometers; Type: gravity flow.
Phase 3 ...... Vychegda-Kama....... Length: 110 kilometers.
to provide needed water for irrigation and urban water
supply, as well as to improve navigation conditions on
the rivers of the Volga basin." This optimism is
scarcely justified when the benefits are considered in
terms of previous assessments of need (current shortage
approximates 15-20 cubic kilometers a year). It was
also claimed that the passage of water through the
turbines of three Kama and three Volga power stations
would generate an additional 3 billion kilowatt hours
of electricity annually. Other sources, in discussing the
latest proposal, have been less enthusiastic, observing
that although the revised plans may reduce the area to
be inundated under the 1961 plan by about a third,
they do not significantly lower the amount of lost
agricultural land or reduce the number of people to be
resettled. G. I. Granik, a Russian authority on the
European north, is one who apparently remains
unconvinced of the project's merit. In 1971 he claimed
that Gosplan, in approving the revision, recognized
the need for continued research on a number of
pressing issues-including the relationship of the KVP
complex to other national systems, the determination
of its overall cost, and its impact on area resources and
established productive forces. Such comments indicate
that most of the objections raised against the 1961
KVP Plan are also being leveled against the 1969
revision.
17. There is no evidence to suggest that work will
begin on the KVP complex in the immediate future,
no obvious effort having been made thus far to
assemble the necessary manpower and equipment. A
1971 explosion of what is presumed to have been a
small nuclear device in the general vicinity of the
proposed Pechora-Kolva Canal, however, may
indicate continued Soviet interest in the project. For
some time USSR scientists have been speaking of the
use of nuclear energy to construct a 65-kilometer
section of the Pechora-Kolva Canal, suggesting that
about 250 charges, totaling 36 megatons, would be
used to open up an area in which construction is
hampered by complex masses of rock. The 1971
explosion, measuring 4.7 to 5.0 on the Richter scale,
may therefore have constituted a test that is essential
to the eventual construction of a part of the canal by
this method. If so, work on the first stage of the long-
delayed KVP complex, which promises a modest
contribution of 13 cubic kilometers of water a year to
the Volga, could begin at almost any time.
Proposed Alternatives
18. Within the past year a number of Soviet
specialists have spoken favorably of the possible
diversion of streams in other parts of the European
north, west of the KVP area. One of these, I. A.
Gerardi, chief technical manager of survey work being
done to prepare for the diversion of rivers in the
European North and Siberia, recently observed that
the diversion of water from the Pechora would still
require the flooding of large territories and the
destruction of extensive tracts of forest in the Pe-
chora and Kama basins. Therefore, he claimed,
"parallel variants" including the diversion of water
into the upper Volga from Lakes Kubenskoye, Lacha,
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 2P Q/8A/, AtLgo Pr84-00825R000300030001-7
and Vozhe, and from the upper Sukhona, were being
drafted. Ile also stated that proposals to divert water
from Lake Onega into the Volga were being
examined, and he suggested that eventually the
potential of several other sources-including the
northern Dvina, lower Vychegda, Pinega, Mezen',
and Yug Rivers, as well as the basin of Lake
Ladoga-would be determined. Expeditions are now
known to be working in the northwest. One group is
investigating a series of hydroengineering complexes in
the region of Ust'-Vologodskoyc (59?18'N., 40?09'E.).
Another is surveying a site for a similar complex on the
Sukhona River near Tot'ma. Geologists and
topographers, furthermore, are surveying the courses
of future canals, along which water from Lakes Vozhe
and Lacha could flow into lake Kubenskoye and then
along the Porozovitsa River (59?50'N., 39'05'E.), the
Severo-Dvinsk Canal, and the Volga-Baltic Canal into
the Rybinsk Reservoir.
Outlook
19. As water supply and pollution problems
proliferate along the Volga River and the Caspian Sea,
the possibility of inter-regional water transfers
becomes more intriguing. Clearly the need for
additional water in this sector of the USSR is great,
and the potential of-the proposed source is more than
adequate, at least for the present. Still the USSR
appears to be on the horns of a dilemma: unless it
proceeds with the KVP or some other comparable river-
diversion scheme, the growth of industry and
agriculture along the lower Volga could be seriously
hampered; opting for this course, however, would
inevitably involve economic and ecologic burdens for
source areas in the European north. Nevertheless, the
advantages to be realized in the continued
development of an area that has been called the new
Soviet heartland suggest that stream diversion could
well be attempted within the forsecable future.
10 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
 Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7
Official Use Only
Official Use Only
Approved For Release 2000/04/18 : CIA-RDP84-00825R000300030001-7