Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 21, 2016
Document Release Date: 
September 8, 2008
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
May 1, 1970
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP08S01350R000100080001-8.pdf5.86 MB
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