Todd Jacobson
NS&D Monitor
3/07/2014
A National Nuclear Security Administration pilot project to strengthen physical security at radiological facilities in Mexico City and Peru is being criticized by the Government Accountability Office for not involving several key agencies that could have helped the project. In a report released this week, the GAO said the “radiological security zone (RSZ) pilot project” should have involved the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Department of State and the International Atomic Energy Agency early in the planning stages of the projects. “By not following the professional practice of early engagement of key stakeholders, NNSA may have missed opportunities to obtain and leverage the expertise, perspectives, and resources of these agencies,” the GAO said.
According to the report, the NNSA established the RSZ projects in Mexico and Peru in 2012 because the Partnership for Global Security suggested the projects could be showcased at the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit as an example of a successful nonproliferation project. The combined cost of the projects is about $10 million, the report said. The quick turnaround time of the projects and NNSA’s experience with existing international security assistance efforts caused the agency to not seek out the NRC, State or IAEA for input on the project. “Early stakeholder engagement in pilot projects can ensure that multiple perspectives are considered; build ownership; and help generate political commitment, including support for any potential expansion of project activities,” the GAO said. “Activities to engage stakeholders early include, for example, seeking stakeholder input on the design of the project and obtaining stakeholder feedback on the implementation process.”
IAEA, NRC Involvement Could Have Been Key
The IAEA in particular could have helped in the planning of the RSZ project because of its involvement in regional collaborations on radiological security and the NRC has experience in helping foreign countries build up their regulatory framework. The NRC’s advice could have been particularly valuable in regards to sustainability issues in poor countries that could struggle to afford to sustain high technology security upgrades, the GAO said. “NRC officials told us that they believed that NNSA’s reliance upon an approach requiring high-technology security upgrades, such as biometric access controls and advanced remote monitoring systems, may create unsustainable costs and that a less high-technology approach is more appropriate and sustainable for less prosperous countries,” the GAO said.
The NNSA told the GAO that it will evaluate the pilot projects after they are completed this year, but the GAO also said the NNSA’s evaluation plan was lacking and didn’t include some of the essential attributes of a well-developed plan. “For example, such a plan would include well-defined, clear, and measurable project objectives that would demonstrate the success of the project,” the GAO said. “Having a specific and well-developed evaluation plan could help NNSA enhance the credibility and effectiveness of future RSZ projects, if NNSA decides to continue beyond its current pilot project.”
