CIVIL DEFENSE SHELTERS IN MOSCOW AND TBILISI

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80T00246A058300530001-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 17
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 26, 2011
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: April 7, 1961
• Content Type: REPORT

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/04/26: CIA-RDP80T00246A058300530001-6
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY
This material contains information affecting the National Defense of the United States within the meaning of the Espionage Laws, Title
18, U.S.C. Secs. 793 and 794, the transmission or revelation of which in any manner to an unauthorized person is prohibited by law.
Civil Defense Shelters in Moscow
and Tbilisi
DATE DISTR. I April 1961
NO. PAGES 1
REFERENCES
DATE OF
INFO.
PLACE &
DATE ACQ.
The following reports on air raid shelters in the USSR
a. Atomic shelters at the Krasnyy Proletariy Machine Plant
in Moscow. Description and sketches of two basement shelters.
b. Civil defense construction in Moscow. Description of shelters
being constructed under buildings which exceeded six stories.
A sketch of a shelter is provided. A few details on the suitability
of the Moscow Metro as a shelter. The Metro was not suitable for gas
or radiation attacks, since it was not equipped with hermetically
sealed doors.
STATE ARMY X I NAVY AIR , NSA X FI
Y I NIC X OCR x
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/04/26: CIA-RDP80T00246A058300530001-6
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/04/26: CIA-RDP80T00246AO58300530001-6
azt)
COUNTRY: USSR (Moscow Oblast) REPORT NO.:
SUBJECT: Civil Defense COnStruCtiOfljATE OF INFO:
in Moscow
PLACE ACQUIREDI DATE OF REPORT: 29 September L9 60
CIVIL DEFENSE CONSTRUCTION IN MOSCOW
1. There was in existence a governmental decree which required that
all buildings which exceeded six storie had to have civil de-
fense shelters. The personnel sections
of the construction enterprises would receive -plans or e
shelters from the liaison officer of the MVO (MPVO?), and the
engineers responsible for the construction of the shelters could
take notes. However,the engineers could never retain the plans.
2. The shelters were constructed on a foundation of prefabricated
concrete blocks, and were about 3-5 meters deep. The walls were
of brick and varied in thickness from 90 to 100 centimeters. Be-
tween the external walls and the walls of the compartments, there
was a 120 to 150 centimeter wide passageway which followed the
interior perimeter of the basement wall. This passageway was
intended to counteract the effects of an explosive blast. Another
passageway, an emergency exit, about as long as the building was
b-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A L
50X1-HUM
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/04/26: CIA-RDP80T00246AO58300530001-6
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/04/26: CIA-RDP80T00246AO58300530001-6
C-O-N-F-I-D-E-N-T-I-A-L
high, led off from this circumferential passage. It was lined
with concrete and-had an exit either into the central courtyard
of the building or at the rear of the building. The exit con-
sisted of a vertical well equipped with a ladder and covered with
a metal top similar to those used for manhole covers.
3. The individual compartments of the shelters measured about 6 x 6
meters. The interior walls, which made up the various compart-
ments)were constructed of brick some 50 centimeters thick. Each
compartment had an entrance which gave access to the circumferential
passage. This entrance had a set of two steel doors which had an
intervening 2 x 2-meter air space. These doors: closed hermetical-
ly, were composed of one thickness of steel, and had rubber gas-
kets. They had no windows or peepholes. There was a steel door
between the circumferential passageway and the emergency exit
which was exactly like the doors of the individual compartments
except that it did not close hermetically or have rubber gaskets.
4. The ceilings of the shelters were constructed of octagonal-shaped
'MMft roof
f th se roof
5?
er
o
ticular housing unit. -tere were no interconnecting
it
s par
for
tunnels except for the emergency exit which led to the outside,
and this was to be used only when the basement and shelter stairs
were out of commission.
6. During the construction of the shelters there was no way of de-
terming the ultimate use of any of the individual compartments.
toilet facilities and air conditioning equip-
v two .n ii =A n each compartment. The air purification
_~t ..,..