In 1993, DOE and the Russian government began working together to secure sites housing weapons-usable nuclear material and, in 1995, DOE established the MPC&A program, which is now administered by NNSA. DOE’s Office of International Material Protection and Cooperation, within NNSA, consists of five offices whose collective efforts contribute to enhancing the security of nuclear material and warheads in countries of concern and to improving the ability to detect illicit smuggling of those materials (see fig. 1). Four of these offices implement DOE’s MPC&A program, which, among other things, provides security upgrades at nuclear sites in Russia and other countries, and the fifth office, the Office of the Second Line of Defense, works to improve detection of illegal nuclear trafficking activities at border crossings and seaports. The Office of Nuclear Warhead Protection works with the Russian Ministry of Defense, including the 12th Main Directorate—the Russian Defense Ministry’s organization for nuclear munitions, the Strategic Rocket Forces, and the Navy to install security upgrades at nuclear warhead storage sites. The Office of Nuclear Warhead Protection also oversees DOE’s security upgrades work at naval nuclear fuel sites. The Office of Weapons Material Protection upgrades MPC&A systems at sites within the Rosatom nuclear weapons complex and also oversees DOE efforts to sustain U.S.-funded security upgrades at nuclear sites within the former Soviet Union that are not in Russia, such as facilities in Ukraine and Uzbekistan. The Office of Material Consolidation and Civilian Sites works to install MPC&A upgrades at nonmilitary nuclear facilities throughout Russia and oversees efforts to consolidate nuclear material into fewer buildings and to convert excess weapons-usable nuclear material into less attractive forms. The Office of Material Consolidation and Civilian Sites also manages DOE’s efforts to provide nuclear security assistance to countries outside of the former Soviet Union. The Office of National Infrastructure and Sustainability manages a variety of crosscutting programs, including transportation and protective forces assistance, and oversaw the development of guidelines for DOE’s efforts to help ensure that Russia can sustain the operation of U.S.-funded security systems at its nuclear sites after U.S. assistance ends. DOD has also assisted Russia in securing nuclear warhead storage sites, both temporary sites, such as rail transfer points, and permanent sites containing storage bunkers. In 1995, DOD began assisting the Russian Ministry of Defense with enhancing transportation security for nuclear warheads and security at nuclear warhead sites. DOD’s efforts to help Russia secure its nuclear warhead storage sites and to improve the security of warheads in transit are implemented by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency. Oversight and policy guidance for this work is provided by DOD’s Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. Additional information on the history of U.S. efforts to help Russia and other countries secure nuclear material and warheads can be found in appendix II. DOE spent about $1.3 billion between fiscal year 1993 and fiscal year 2006 to provide security upgrades and other related assistance to facilities that house weapons-usable nuclear material in Russia and other countries and reports to have “secured” 175 buildings containing about 300 metric tons of weapons-usable nuclear material in Russia and the former Soviet Union. The number of buildings that DOE reports as secured, however, does not recognize that additional upgrades remain to be completed at some buildings because DOE considers a building to be “secure” after it has received only limited MPC&A upgrades (rapid upgrades), even when additional comprehensive upgrades have yet to be completed. Further, in response to terrorist actions and rising threat levels in Russia, DOE is examining the impact of an increased design basis threat it uses to measure the adequacy of security upgrades provided to Russian nuclear facilities and providing additional assistance to protective forces at Russian nuclear sites. Finally, DOE and Rosatom have developed a Joint Action Plan that includes 20 civilian and nuclear weapons complex sites housing buildings with weapons-usable nuclear material. While the plan details the remaining scope of work to be accomplished by 2008, it does not include two key sites involved in manufacturing of Russian nuclear warheads that contain many buildings with hundreds of metric tons of weapons-usable nuclear material where DOE has been denied access. From fiscal year 1993 to fiscal year 2006, DOE spent about $1.3 billion to enhance security at buildings that house weapons-usable nuclear materials in foreign countries. The majority of these buildings are located in Russia and fall into three categories: Rosatom weapons complex sites, civilian sites, and naval fuel sites. DOE has also helped to secure buildings with weapons-usable nuclear material in nine other countries. Figure 2 shows a breakdown of DOE’s spending on MPC&A efforts. As figure 2 shows, DOE spent about $684.7 million to provide security upgrades to civilian, naval fuel, and Rosatom weapons complex sites with weapons-usable nuclear material in Russia and an additional $131.5 million to provide security upgrades to sites located outside of Russia. DOE also spent about $493.9 million on additional and related MPC&A efforts in Russia, such as assistance for transportation security, providing equipment for protective forces at nuclear facilities, and efforts to consolidate nuclear material into fewer buildings and sites. According to DOE officials, these efforts are important to increasing the overall security of nuclear materials in Russia and other countries, and they support DOE’s goal of enhancing the security of vulnerable stockpiles of weapons-usable nuclear material. For example, because DOE believes that nuclear materials are most vulnerable while they are in transit, the department has provided Russia with specialized secure trucks, armored escort vehicles, and secure containers—called overpacks—to improve the security of nuclear material transported within and between nuclear sites in Russia. Further, DOE’s assistance to protective forces at Russian nuclear sites, which includes such items as bulletproof vests, helmets, and response vehicles, helps ensure that guards at those sites are properly equipped and trained so that they can quickly respond to alarms. Additional information on other DOE efforts to improve security at sites with weapons-usable nuclear materials can be found in appendix IV. At the end of fiscal year 2006, DOE reported to have “secured” 175 buildings containing about 300 metric tons of weapons-usable nuclear material in Russia and the former Soviet Union, but 51 of the 175 buildings DOE reported to have “secured” as of the end of fiscal year 2006 do not have completed MPC&A upgrades. These 51 buildings are located at sites in the Rosatom weapons complex. In its program metrics, DOE defined a building to be “secure” after it has received only limited MPC&A upgrades (called rapid upgrades), even when additional comprehensive upgrades, which would further improve security, have yet to be completed. The buildings with weapons-usable nuclear material where DOE is working to improve security fall into four categories: Rosatom weapons complex, civilian, naval fuel, and sites outside of Russia. As table 1 shows, all planned upgrades have been completed at naval fuel sites and sites outside of Russia. The vast majority of remaining buildings that have not yet received security upgrades are in the Rosatom weapons complex, where DOE has historically had access difficulties, including being denied access to key sites and buildings housing weapons-usable nuclear material. While DOE officials told us that rapid upgrades offer a limited measure of risk reduction against some threats, they also noted that rapid upgrades fall short of meeting all of DOE’s risk reduction goals for buildings with weapons-usable nuclear material. For example, rapid upgrades generally include only limited measures designed to address the insider threat of theft, such as establishing a two-person rule and providing certain types of tamper indication devices that would set off alarms at guard stations in the case of an unauthorized attempt to access nuclear materials. According to NNSA, which implements the MPC&A program at DOE, the greatest threat DOE faces in its effort to help Russia secure nuclear materials is the threat of insider theft. However, the majority of measures to address the insider threat at Russian nuclear material sites, such as computerized nuclear material inventory databases and barcoding of nuclear material containers, are provided in the comprehensive upgrades phase. In response to terrorist actions and rising threat levels in Russia, DOE recently analyzed the implications of an increased design basis threat it uses to measure the adequacy of security upgrades provided to Russian nuclear facilities. The design basis threat is defined as the attributes and characteristics of potential adversaries (a group or groups of armed attackers) against which a facility’s physical protection systems are designed and evaluated. According to DOE, the design basis threat is critical to determining an MPC&A system’s effectiveness. In 2005, DOE began examining the impact of increasing the number of adversaries against which Russian sites with U.S.-funded security upgrades should be able to defend themselves. DOE is currently reassessing the effectiveness of the security upgrades it has provided through the MPC&A program and has increased its emphasis on providing assistance to the protective forces at Russian nuclear material sites. Specifically, DOE is currently working with a number of sites to relocate guard forces closer to the target nuclear material to improve their response times to an incident. For example, at all four of the nuclear material sites we visited in Russia, Russian officials told us that they were working with DOE to relocate guard forces closer to buildings that contain weapons-usable nuclear material at their sites. However, DOE is limited in the scope of assistance it can provide to protective forces at nuclear facilities in Russia and other countries. For example, DOE is neither allowed to provide weapons or ammunition to these forces, nor is it allowed to pay the salaries of protective forces at these sites.