1. Piggybacking: Providing Donor Assistance Through U.S. Programs

2. The Concept Instead of providing assistance directly to the recipient government, the donor channels that assistance through the U.S. government using an existing implementing agreement between the U.S. and recipient governments.

3. The Steps Donor negotiates MOU with Department of Energy specifying how its funds will be spent, as well as other parametersDonor negotiates MOU with Department of Energy specifying how its funds will be spent, as well as other parameters Donor provides funds to U.S. TreasuryDonor provides funds to U.S. Treasury DOE channels funds to donor-designated assistance project through existing implementing agreement between DOE and recipient countryDOE channels funds to donor-designated assistance project through existing implementing agreement between DOE and recipient country

4. Advantages of Piggybacking Saves donor the extensive time and effort needed to negotiate its own implementing agreement with recipient governmentSaves donor the extensive time and effort needed to negotiate its own implementing agreement with recipient government –MOU with DOE can be done very quickly Ensures close cooperation with ongoing DOE assistance programsEnsures close cooperation with ongoing DOE assistance programs –Expands options for supporting elements of projects –Enhances efficiency of project implementation Protections of DOE implementing agreement with recipient government apply to donor assistanceProtections of DOE implementing agreement with recipient government apply to donor assistance

5. EWGPP Experience U.S. sought partners to help fund fossil fuel plant to replace weapon-grade plutonium production reactor in RussiaU.S. sought partners to help fund fossil fuel plant to replace weapon-grade plutonium production reactor in Russia Six countries chose to contribute to project – all through piggybacking: UK, Canada, Netherlands, Finland, Korea, New ZealandSix countries chose to contribute to project – all through piggybacking: UK, Canada, Netherlands, Finland, Korea, New Zealand Partners are regularly updated on progress of implementation; all seem very pleased with experiencePartners are regularly updated on progress of implementation; all seem very pleased with experience

6. Application to Nuclear Smuggling Assistance U.S. Congress has authorized:U.S. Congress has authorized: –DOE Global Threat Reduction Initiative to accept funds for assistance related to securing radioactive sources –DOE Second Line of Defense program to accept funds for assistance related to border monitoring Some partners have already done piggybacking MOUs – Canada, New ZealandSome partners have already done piggybacking MOUs – Canada, New Zealand

7. Canada’s Experience Canada’s Global Partnership Program (GPP) is spending over $200 million to implement GICNT Principles 1-5.Canada’s Global Partnership Program (GPP) is spending over $200 million to implement GICNT Principles 1-5. Canada’s GPP efforts to combat nuclear terrorism focus on working bilaterally to help to secure nuclear facilities and weapons-grade nuclear materials.Canada’s GPP efforts to combat nuclear terrorism focus on working bilaterally to help to secure nuclear facilities and weapons-grade nuclear materials. There are numerous other components, however, that are critical and need to be addressed, such as securing highly radioactive sources and upgrading border security to prevent the illicit trafficking of nuclear materials.There are numerous other components, however, that are critical and need to be addressed, such as securing highly radioactive sources and upgrading border security to prevent the illicit trafficking of nuclear materials.

8. Canada’s Experience In order to make a contribution to these key components and to ensure a holistic approach to preventing nuclear terrorism, Canada’s GPP sought to work through established programs and to take advantage of existing mechanisms.In order to make a contribution to these key components and to ensure a holistic approach to preventing nuclear terrorism, Canada’s GPP sought to work through established programs and to take advantage of existing mechanisms. This approach affords Canada several advantages:This approach affords Canada several advantages:

9. Canada’s Experience 1.MOVE QUICKLY: Projects could be implemented quickly, as piggybacking dispensed with the need to negotiate bilateral treaties with recipient countries, negotiate agreements with individual organisations/facilities within recipient states, and establish a monitoring framework and contracts for related technical expertise. 2.FULL CONFIDENCE: Canada could delegate project management and monitoring to the US, based on their track-record of successfully implementing projects. 3.COST SAVINGS: Reduced operational expenses, leaving more funding available for assistance.

10. Canada’s Experience To date, Canada has provided CAD $16 million through US programs to help prevent nuclear terrorism:To date, Canada has provided CAD $16 million through US programs to help prevent nuclear terrorism: –$9 million to EWGPP (2004) –$5 million to Second Line of Defence (2007) –$2 million to GTRI (2007)

11. Canada’s Experience Canada negotiated separate Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) for each contribution.Canada negotiated separate Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) for each contribution. Negotiations were swift: MOUs were signed and money transferred within 2 months of the first negotiation session.Negotiations were swift: MOUs were signed and money transferred within 2 months of the first negotiation session.

12. Canada’s Experience Specific projects listed in the MOU were decided upon jointly by Canada’s GPP and the US DOE NNSA, in consultation with the recipient country.Specific projects listed in the MOU were decided upon jointly by Canada’s GPP and the US DOE NNSA, in consultation with the recipient country. Each MOU delineates terms of reference for how Canada’s contribution will be spent. For example:Each MOU delineates terms of reference for how Canada’s contribution will be spent. For example: –the recipient country –the specific port of entry or border crossing where detection equipment was to be installed

13. Canada’s Experience The MOUs delineate specific reporting measures on project progress – both substantive and financial (monthly reports).The MOUs delineate specific reporting measures on project progress – both substantive and financial (monthly reports). The MOUs also include audit and evaluation provisions.The MOUs also include audit and evaluation provisions. Canada relies upon robust US monitoring and project management strategies, and Canada does not directly monitor these projects. Canada holds meetings with responsible US project managers 3-4 times per year.Canada relies upon robust US monitoring and project management strategies, and Canada does not directly monitor these projects. Canada holds meetings with responsible US project managers 3-4 times per year.

14. Canada’s Experience For Canada’s GPP, “piggybacking” has been a success and has made an important contribution to Canadian efforts to help prevent nuclear terrorism.For Canada’s GPP, “piggybacking” has been a success and has made an important contribution to Canadian efforts to help prevent nuclear terrorism.