This represents a significant foreign policy and technology transfer decision with constitutional implications around separation of powers (executive authority over sensitive military technology sharing, potential treaty/congressional oversight issues) and rule of law (adherence to nuclear non-proliferation frameworks and technology export controls). However, the A-score of 11.15 falls well below the 25 threshold. The separation_of_powers score reflects potential congressional oversight concerns around sensitive nuclear technology transfers, though this likely falls within executive foreign policy authority. Rule_of_law captures questions about compliance with existing nuclear technology sharing frameworks and export control regimes. The policy_change mechanism warrants a 1.3 modifier as it represents a shift in longstanding nuclear submarine technology policy (historically shared only with UK under AUKUS framework). International scope adds 1.2 modifier. Severity multipliers reflect moderate durability (can be reversed by future administration), high reversibility (no permanent transfer yet), and notable precedent (expands nuclear submarine technology sharing beyond traditional allies). B-score of 8.98 reflects moderate novelty (nuclear submarine technology sharing is rare and newsworthy) and media friendliness (clear geopolitical angle, Trump announcement), but limited outrage potential and meme-ability. Strategic layer shows some mismatch and narrative pivot potential but not strongly coordinated. With both scores below 25 and clear policy mechanism within executive authority, this classifies as Noise - a legitimate policy announcement that generates headlines but lacks constitutional crisis dimensions.