SHORE (N)
CONFIDENTIAL
From: J.E.D. Street Esq., CMG
N/SHO/917/6/67
MS 77/23/014
Shore Division (N)
70
XXXX
9000
724
8th December, 1967
68
I was very disappointed to see from your letter of 26th November that you do not yet think the time has come to relax the monitoring requirement for visits of the "Savannah" to Hong Kong. But it is of course a decision for you to make.
2. I made the point in my letter of 26th October that, in our view, the issues of future naval nuclear monitoring policy in respect of nuclear-powered sub- marines and the provision of monitoring teams for visits of the "Savannah", though related, are quite sepa ate. The NPWSC has, of course, nothing to do with merchant ships; and we cannot guarantee to make a NNT available for "Savannah" particularly if the requirement conflicts with our own operational needs. Nor are we involved in the provision of emergency arrangements for "Savannah". You will no doubt therefore be considering what arrangements the Board of Trade can make to meet these requirements.
3. We hold to our view that the full consequence of a nuclear accident on the "Savannah" would develop more slowly than can be the case with submarine reactors; and we should be interested to hear what technical arguments your advisers put forward to oppose this thesis.
4. You ask in your letter whether we could give some indication of when a general change of monitoring policy can be expected. As you know, what we first have to do is to satisfy the NPWSC that we can make satisfactory arrangements for coping with any nuclear accident which should occur when a nuclear-powered submarine is at a distant port. Our expert advisers are preparing a paper on this subject but these things take time and it would not be prudent to expect the NPWSC to be able to consider the paper before January. If the Committee then accept that we have answered their questions to their satisfaction, a submission will then have to be made to the Secretary of State for Defence inviting him to approve the new policy. All in all, therefore, it is likely to be some months before we are free to go ahead.
5. In the light of this, and of what you say about the enquiries you are receiving from the United States authorities, it seems to me that the right sourse is to accept Mr. Kahann's offer to come to London to discuss the safety requirements for the "Savannah". He might be able to persuade you more easily then we can apparently do that the safety conditions of "Savannah"'s reactor would, in the event of any acoident, permit the vessel to be towed away in time from a position which endangered population; and in that event we would hope
S.N. Burbridge, Esq.,
Board of Trade,
Surrey House,
20 Lavington Street, London, S.E.1.
LAST
REF.
(69)
NEXT
R..F.
/that