Nuclear Nonproliferation

Department of Energy Needs Tighter Controls Over Reprocessing Information Gao ID: RCED-87-150 August 17, 1987

In response to a congressional request, GAO examined Department of Energy (DOE) activities that may assist foreign countries in the development of nuclear weapons material, focusing on DOE controls over: (1) dissemination of information related to the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel; (2) cooperative research activities it conducts with foreign countries; and (3) involvement of foreign nationals in sensitive nuclear activities and research.

GAO found that: (1) in 1984 and 1985, DOE produced 258 documents related to the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel that were available to anyone who wanted them; (2) countries posing a proliferation or security risk obtained copies of these documents, some of which contained information on improved methods of purifying plutonium to weapons-useable levels; (3) DOE has not applied for a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption for applied technology related to reprocessing, since its position is that it should honor such requests; and (4) the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act of 1978 (NNPA) does not support the DOE method of determining when to conduct sensitive nuclear technology transfers with other countries. GAO also found that: (1) foreign nationals comprised 30 percent of masters program enrollments and 50 percent of doctoral program enrollments in U.S. university nuclear engineering programs in 1985; and (2) DOE does not have effective administrative control over the 15,000 to 20,000 foreign nationals who visit or work at its facilities each year.

Recommendations

Our recommendations from this work are listed below with a Contact for more information. Status will change from "In process" to "Open," "Closed - implemented," or "Closed - not implemented" based on our follow up work.

Director: Team: Phone:


The Justia Government Accountability Office site republishes public reports retrieved from the U.S. GAO These reports should not be considered official, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Justia.