In July 2005, the National Academies released the report Strengthening Long-term Nuclear Security: Protecting Weapon-Usable Material in Russia. The report highlighted several obstacles in the transition from a U.S.-Russian cooperative program to a Russian-directed and Russian-funded fully indigenized program that will ensure the security of 600 tons of weapon-usable nuclear material at a level of international acceptability. Overcoming these obstacles requires an increased political commitment at a number of levels of the Russian Government to modern material protection, control, and accounting systems (MPC&A). Adequate resources must be provided to facilities where weapon-usable material is located for upgrading and maintaining MPC&A systems. Additionally, the technical security systems that are being installed through the cooperative program need to be fully embraced by Russian managers and specialists. The report recommends the establishment of a ten-year indigenization fund of about $500 million provided by Russia and its G-8 partners as a new mechanism for gradually shifting the financial burden of MPC&A to the Russian Government.

Safeguarding nuclear warheads & materials that can be used to make nuclear weapons is a primary nat. security concern of the U.S. Since 1993, the DoE & DoD have worked to improve security at sites housing weapons-usable nuclear material & warheads in Russia & other countries. In 1995, DoE established the Materials Protection, Control, & Accounting program to implement these efforts. The author examined the: (1) progress DoE has made in improving security at nuclear-material sites in Russia & other countries; (2) progress DoE & DoD have made in improving security at Russian nuclear warhead sites; & (3) efforts DoE & DoD have undertaken to ensure the continued effective use of U.S.-funded security upgrades. Illustrations.

A congressionally mandated study carried out in 2013-2014 led to the November 2014 report A New Foundation for the Nuclear Enterprise. That report summarizes the panel's findings on the current health of the enterprise, examines the root causes of its governance challenges, and offers the panel's recommendations to address the identified problems. It concludes that the existing governance structures and many of the practices of the enterprise are inefficient and ineffective, thereby putting the entire enterprise at risk over the long term. It offers recommendations to put the entire nuclear security enterprise on a stronger footing. Recognizing the persistence of governance and management concerns, this report serves as an initial assessment of the implementation plan developed by the National Nuclear Security Administration and the Department Of Energy for addressing the recommendations from A New Foundation for the Nuclear Enterprise. There will be seven semi-annual interim reports to evaluate progress in implementing the plan. A final report will be issued at the end of the study to document the overall progress in executing the implementation plan, assess the effectiveness of the reform efforts under that plan, and recommend whether further action is needed.

IAEA plays a crucial role in supporting U.S. nuclear nonproliferation goals through its safeguards and nuclear security programs. The Department of State coordinates the United States' financial and policy relationship with IAEA. IAEA's safeguards program is designed to detect and deter the diversion of nuclear material for non-peaceful purposes, while the agency's nuclear security program assists countries in improving the physical protection of their nuclear material and facilities. IAEA plans to create an international fuel bank to guarantee the supply of fuel for civilian nuclear power programs. GAO was asked to examine (1) any challenges that IAEA faces in carrying out its safeguards program, (2) any limitations regarding the nuclear security program, and (3) the status of IAEA's planned nuclear fuel bank. GAO reviewed relevant documents and interviewed officials from IAEA and U.S. federal agencies, 15 nuclear nonproliferation experts, and representatives from 16 countries. GAO recommends, among other things, that State work with IAEA to (1) clearly define and communicate how IAEA will implement the state-level concept, (2) evaluate the nuclear security program's long-term resource needs, and (3) prepare a plan for the long-term operation and funding of IAEA's fuel bank. State agreed with several of the recommendations and disagreed with two, including the one on the nuclear security program's long-term resource needs. GAO continues to believe that implementing all of these recommendations would enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of IAEA's programs.

The congressionally mandated report A New Foundation for the Nuclear Enterprise (the "Augustine-Mies" report), released in November 2014, concluded that "the existing governance structures and many of the practices of the [nuclear security] enterprise are inefficient and ineffective, thereby putting the entire enterprise at risk over the long term." Following the release of the Augustine-Mies report, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2016 called for DOE to develop an implementation plan for responding to the recommendations in that and similar reports. The NDAA also called for a 4 1â"2-year study, joint between the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the National Academy of Public Administration, to evaluate the implementation plan, to track the actions proposed in that plan, and to assess progress. This report is the second in a series of reports to be issued over 2017â€"2020 as part of that study.

This report finds that multilateral initiatives from the 2012 Nuclear Security Summit are improving targeted areas of nuclear security, but more ambitious initiatives are needed to address the lack of transparency and regime cohesion in the global nuclear security system. Countries must begin to put short-term projects like those described in these joint statements into the broader context of a long-term effort to improve the nuclear security system. The joint statement model should be carried forward into the 2014 and 2016 summits, but future joint statements should have at least one clear deliverable and incorporate time for follow-up by participants and reporting to the international community. Broad international cooperation is still needed in a number of areas to address significant remaining global nuclear security challenges. While these joint statements helped clarify states' goals and focus efforts to improve nuclear security, limited multilateral actions will not contribute to the overall strengthening of the global nuclear security system. Looking forward to the 2016 summit, NSS participants should push for a more cohesive, transparent, and effective nuclear security regime that includes more standardized reporting mechanisms and review measures to earn the confidence of the global community.