HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobaacgp0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DOCUMENT RESUME
02245 - (A1452446]
Alternative Methods for Funding U.S. Support of Intirnational
Atomic Energy Agency Activities. ID-77-20; B-181963. May 5,
1977. 50 pp.
Report to Sen. John Glenn, Chairman, Senate Committee on
Governmental Affairs: Energy, Nuclear Proliferation and Federal
Services Subcommittee; by Elmer B. Staats, Comptroller General.
Issue Area: International Economic and Military Programs: U.S.
International Security and Arms Control Commitments (601) ;
Energy: International Problems (1606).
Contact: International Div.
Budget Function: International Affairs: Foreign Economic and
Financial Assistance (151); International Affairs: Conduct
of Foreign Affairs (152); General Government: Other General
Government (806).
Orginization Concerned: Energy Research and Development
Administratl.on; Office of Management and Budget; Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Department of Commerce; Department of
the Treasury; Department of State; Agency for International
Development; Export-Import Bank of the United States;
International Atomic Energy Agency.
Congressional Relevance: Senate Committee cn Governmental
Affairs: Energy, Nuclear Proliferation tnd Federal Services
Subcomittee.
Authority: Independent Offices Appn.opiiation ' ct of 1952, title
V (31 U.S.C. 483a). Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(42 U.S.C. 2011).
The various alternative methods that the Government
might use to generate revenues for U.S. financial participation
in the activities of tha International Atomic Energy Agency,
espezially the safeguards program, woald either encounter legal
difficulties or be impractical. The alternative sources of
revenue considered included surcharges on uranium enrichment
services, nuclear equlipment and material, and operations of U.S.
nuclear power reactors. Findings/Conclusions: Although a few of
the alternatives offer some potential, each has disadvantages.
Any change from the present method of funding might set a
precedent and create pressure for the fundiug of other
international organizations through separate revenue-raising
schemes. The current system provides for congressional
oversight, and no additional effort is required to collect the
funds. Under the current method, U.S. support to the Agency is
paid for by the general public. Applying a surcharge to the
price of enrichment services would be the most feasible
alternative. The Agency cannot adequately project its futul.e
funding needs, and may not have the ability to effectively
absorb any future substantial increases in safeguards-related
assistance. Recommendations; GAO is not recommending that the
current method of funding U.S. support of the agency from](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobaacgp0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)