Former Soviet Union: Information on U.S. Bilateral Program Funding
(Letter Report, 12/15/95, GAO/NSIAD-96-37).
Hampered at the outset by a lack of coordination, U.S. aid to the former
Soviet Union is now better managed and is achieving promising, although
mixed, results in a variety of projects ranging from the promotion of
economic reforms to the disposal of nuclear weapons. This report
provides information on U.S. bilateral programs with the newly
independent states of the former Soviet Union from fiscal year 1990
through December 1994 to help them make the transition to democratic
societies with market economies. GAO discusses (1) the amount of funds
obligated and spent; (2) the amount of credits provided, including
subsidy costs; and (3) the appropriation source and budget function for
these funds. This information is categorized by agency, recipient
country, and programmatic sector. GAO summarized this and the following
report in testimony before Congress; see: Former Soviet Union:
Assessment of U.S. Bilateral Programs, by Harold J. Johnson, Associate
Director for International Relations and Trade Issues, before the House
Committee on International Relations. GAO/T-NSIAD-96-78, Dec. 15 (13
pages).
--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------
REPORTNUM: NSIAD-96-37
TITLE: Former Soviet Union: Information on U.S. Bilateral Program
Funding
DATE: 12/15/95
SUBJECT: Federal aid to foreign countries
Budget obligations
Budget functions
Economic development
Technical assistance
Developing countries
International economic relations
Appropriation accounts
Foreign economic assistance
Foreign economic development credit
IDENTIFIER: Commonwealth of Independent States
DOD Cooperative Threat Reduction Program
Russia
Armenia
Georgia (Formerly Soviet Union)
Kyrgyzstan
Ukraine
Belarus
Kazakhstan
Moldova
Tajikistan
Turkmenistan
Azerbaijan
Uzbekistan
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a **
** GAO report. Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved. Major **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters, **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and **
** single lines. The numbers on the right end of these lines **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the **
** document outline. These numbers do NOT correspond with the **
** page numbers of the printed product. **
** **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced. Tables are included, but **
** may not resemble those in the printed version. **
** **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed **
** document's contents. **
** **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO **
** Document Distribution Center. For further details, please **
** send an e-mail message to: **
** **
** **
** **
** with the message 'info' in the body. **
******************************************************************
Cover
================================================================ COVER
Report to Congressional Committees
December 1995
FORMER SOVIET UNION - INFORMATION
ON U.S. BILATERAL PROGRAM FUNDING
GAO/NSIAD-96-37
Former Soviet Union
(711123)
Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV
ACDA - Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
CRS - Congressional Research Service
CTR - Cooperative Threat Reduction
DOD - Department of Defense
DOE - Department of Energy
DOT - Department of Transportation
EPA - Environmental Protection Agency
FSU - former Soviet Union
HHS - Department of Health and Human Services
NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NATO - North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NIS - Newly Independant States
NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission
NSF - National Science Foundation
OMB - Office of Management and Budget
OPIC - Overseas Private Investment Corporation
SEC - Securities and Exchange Commission
TDA - Trade and Development Agency
USAID - U.S. Agency for International Development
USDA - U.S. Department of Agriculture
USIA - U.S. Information Agency
Letter
=============================================================== LETTER
B-265948
December 15, 1995
The Honorable John Kasich
Chairman
The Honorable Martin Sabo
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on the Budget
House of Representatives
The Honorable Benjamin A. Gilman
Chairman
The Honorable Lee H. Hamilton
Ranking Minority Member
Committee on International Relations
House of Representatives
The Honorable Sonny Callahan
Chairman
The Honorable Charles Wilson
Ranking Minority Member
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations,
Export Financing, and Related Programs
Committee on Appropriations
House of Representatives
The Honorable Edward R. Royce
House of Representatives
This report provides financial information on U.S. bilateral
programs with the newly independent states of the former Soviet Union
(FSU) from fiscal year 1990 through December 1994 to help them make
the transition to democratic societies with market economies.\1
Specifically, it provides information on (1) the amount of funds
obligated and expended; (2) the amount of credits provided, including
subsidy costs;\2 and (3) the appropriation source and budget function
for these funds. We have categorized this information by (1) agency,
(2) recipient country, and (3) programmatic sector.
--------------------
\1 The newly independent states of the FSU are Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Russia,
Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan.
\2 The credit subsidy cost is the estimated long-term cost to the
U.S. government of a direct loan or loan guarantee, calculated on a
net present value basis.
BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1
The United States began providing limited assistance to the Soviet
Union in December 1990 to support the reform effort and then
increased assistance after the Soviet Union dissolved in December
1991. In October 1992, the Freedom for Russia and Emerging Eurasian
Democracies and Open Markets Support Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-511),
commonly known as the Freedom Support Act, was enacted. It further
increased assistance to the FSU and established a multiagency
approach for providing assistance.
In 1991, Congress authorized the Department of Defense (DOD) to
establish a Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program to help FSU
states (1) destroy weapons of mass destruction, (2) store and
transport those weapons in connection with their destruction, and (3)
reduce the risk of proliferation. Subsequently, Congress added other
objectives, including promoting defense conversion.
Other agencies, such as the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration (NASA), the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce,
Energy, Health and Human Services, and State, also implement programs
in the FSU with funds not specifically appropriated for the FSU
programs.
RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2
From fiscal year 1990 through December 31, 1994, U.S. departments
and agencies obligated $5.4 billion and expended $3.5 billion for
grant technical assistance, exchange programs, training, food and
commodity donations, mutually beneficial science and technology
projects, and support of joint space efforts. The U.S. government
also provided about $10 billion in credit for bilateral loans, loan
guarantees, and insurance.
During this same period, 23 departments and independent agencies
implemented 215 programs in the FSU.\3 However, three agencies, the
U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of
Agriculture (USDA), and DOD implemented the large majority of
noncredit programs. USDA also funded the largest portion of
credit/insurance programs.
Most of the funding for U.S. programs came from budget accounts in
the international affairs, defense, and agriculture budget functions.
However, funds also came from eight other budget functions.
The U.S. agencies implemented programs in all 12 of the FSU
countries. Nearly half of all U.S. expenditures were for programs
with Russia. However, when measured on a per capita basis, Armenia,
Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan received more than the other countries.
U.S. programs involved a wide diversity of program areas. About
two-thirds of the total obligations were for food aid, private sector
development, emergency humanitarian assistance, disposition of
weapons of mass destruction, and democratic reform. The remaining
funding was in 13 other program areas.
Appendix I presents additional information on the entire U.S.
bilateral program with the FSU. Appendix II provides brief
descriptions of all
215 programs implemented by 23 U.S. departments and independent
agencies.
--------------------
\3 Twenty agencies implemented only noncredit programs, 1 agency
implemented only credit/insurance programs, and 2 agencies
implemented both kinds of programs.
AGENCY COMMENTS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3
All 23 agencies we collected information from were provided an
opportunity to comment on a draft of this report. None of the
agencies disagreed with the report. Some offered minor technical or
editorial corrections, which we have incorporated in the report.
SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4
Our review included all U.S. bilateral programs involving the FSU
for the period fiscal year 1990 through December 1994. Previously,
we reported on program coordination and financial information for
U.S. bilateral grant, donation, and credit programs for fiscal years
1990 through 1993.\4
Using our earlier work, we identified 23 departments and independent
agencies with programs in the FSU. Several departments and agencies
had more than one organization within the department or agency that
implemented these programs.
We used a data collection instrument to collect the financial and
programmatic information for this report and believe that we captured
a large majority of the programs implemented from fiscal year 1990
through December 1994. However some agencies were unable to state
definitively they had identified and provided us information on all
agency programs and projects. We did not verify the accuracy and
completeness of the information provided to us.
Obligation figures in the report represent binding agreements, such
as orders placed or contracts awarded, that will require payment
immediately or in the future. The definitions for expenditures used
by agencies responding to our inquiry varied from agency to agency.
Expenditure was generally used to mean the issuance of checks,
disbursement of cash, or other liquidation of an obligation. For
example, the Defense Nuclear Agency reported expenditures as being
disbursements. However, other agencies, such as the Europe-Newly
Independant States (NIS) Bureau at USAID included accruals--amounts
due to be paid--in its expenditure figures.
Significant amounts of funds were appropriated to one department or
agency but spent by another. To avoid double counting, we asked
agencies not to report obligation and expenditure information for
funds transferred to other agencies. We also cross-checked funding
transfer information from agencies where funds started with
information from agencies that received the funds. In instances
where funds were transferred between agencies, the figures in our
report show obligations and expenditures as reported by the agency
that received the funds.
In some cases, more than one department or agency was responsible for
implementing portions of the same program. In those instances, we
showed how much each agency spent on their portion of the program,
regardless of where the funds were initially appropriated. For
example, DOD funds transferred to the Department of Energy (DOE) for
fissile material storage facility design are reported as DOE
obligations and expenditures. However, DOD funds that DOD spent
itself for the same program are reported as DOD obligations and
expenditures.
To determine the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) budget
function classification for agency programs, we asked agencies to
provide the appropriation source used to finance their programs. We
then assigned OMB budget function classifications to the
appropriation sources, based on our knowledge about the purposes of
each program and budget account descriptions in the U.S. budget.
We captured only program costs. We did not ask agencies to provide
salary and overhead costs involved in implementing programs, except
in those instances where overhead and/or salary costs were billed to
another agency as part of an interagency agreement. We also did not
attempt to capture the cost of official visits related to the conduct
of diplomacy or Gore-Chernomyrdin activities.
Our information does not include U.S. annual contributions to
multinational organizations, such as the World Bank or North Atlantic
Treaty Organization, that subsequently provided financing or funded
programs, such as the multilateral component of the Partnership for
Peace, for the FSU. We did capture U.S. payments to multinational
organizations that specifically supported U.S. bilateral programs.
For example, our data includes USAID funding for the European Bank
for Reconstruction and Development's efforts to rehabilitate gas
production.
We conducted our review from March 1995 through August 1995 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Copies of the databases and spreadsheets used to generate the
financial information in this report are available upon request.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretaries of State,
Defense, and Agriculture; the Administrator, Agency for International
Development; and the Director, OMB. Copies will also be made
available to others on request. Please contact me at (202) 512-4128
if you or your staff have any questions concerning this report.
Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix III.
Harold J. Johnson, Director
International Affairs Issues
--------------------
\4 Former Soviet Union: U.S. Bilateral Program Lacks Effective
Coordination (GAO/NSIAD-95-10, Feb. 7, 1995). Our update of this
report addresses improvements in the executive branch's coordination
of U.S. bilateral programs in the FSU (Former Soviet Union: An
Update on Coordination of U.S. Assistance and Economic Cooperation
Programs (GAO/NSIAD-96-16).
PROGRAMWIDE INFORMATION
=========================================================== Appendix I
U.S. bilateral programs generally can be categorized as noncredit
and credit/insurance programs. Noncredit programs include technical
assistance, exchanges and training, food and commodity donations,
science and technological programs, and support for joint space
efforts. Credit/insurance programs include loan, loan guarantees,
and insurance.
NONCREDIT PROGRAMS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1
From fiscal year 1990 through December 31, 1994, the U.S. government
obligated $5.4 billion and expended $3.5 billion for bilateral,
noncredit programs with the former Soviet Union (FSU). (See figure
I.1.)
Figure I.1: Obligations and
Expenditures for All Agencies,
All Noncredit Programs (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)(Dollars in millions)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Note 1: The totals in figure I.1 include both obligations made
against budget authority specifically appropriated for FSU programs
as well as funds appropriated not specifically for those countries.
Note 2: Obligations represent binding agreements, such as orders
placed or contracts awarded, that will require payment immediately or
in the future. The definitions for expenditure used by agencies
responding to our inquiry varied from agency to agency. Expenditure
was generally used to mean the issuance of checks, disbursement of
cash, or other liquidation of an obligation. For example, the
Defense Nuclear Agency at the Department of Defense (DOD) reported
expenditures as being disbursements. However, other agencies, such
as the Europe-Newly Independant States (NIS) Bureau at the U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID) included
accruals--amounts due to be paid--in their expenditure figures.
Funding for programs with the FSU came from a variety of accounts
within different budget functional classifications.\1 Programs
authorized under the Freedom Support Act were classified in the
international affairs function,\2 whereas the Cooperative Threat
Reduction (CTR) program funding was from the national defense
function.\3 Other programs were classified under other functions, but
generally to a much lesser extent.
Although the funding for noncredit programs came from a wide variety
of sources, about 82 percent of obligations came from the budget
accounts coded against international affairs, defense, or agriculture
budget functions and about 12 percent represents the estimated value
of donated commodities that came from excess U.S. government stock.
Donations, such as medical supplies and agricultural commodities from
domestic price support programs, were originally purchased with funds
from accounts coded against the defense and agriculture budget
functions. The remaining funds were classified under other budget
functions, including general science, energy, and health. (See table
I.1.)
Table I.1
Obligations and Expenditures for All
Agencies, All Noncredit Programs by OMB
Budget Function Classification and
Donations (Fiscal Year 1990 through
December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure
OMB budget function classification\a s s
--------------------------------------------- ---------- -----------
050 Defense $749,124 $374,052
150 International Affairs 2,854,879 1,543,387
250 General Science 249,370 128,263
270 Energy 53,787 28,881
300 Natural Resources 2,602 2,450
350 Agriculture 778,600 687,230
370 Commerce 1,500 64
400 Transportation 9,056 5,957
550 Health 19,763 19,724
750 Justice 119 119
800 General Government 14 14
Value of donated commodities 652,150\b 699,527\b
======================================================================
Total $5,370,964 $3,489,668
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a To determine the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) budget
function classification for agency programs, we asked agencies to
provide the appropriation source used to finance their programs. We
then assigned OMB budget function classifications to the
appropriation sources, based on our knowledge about the purposes of
each program and budget account descriptions in the U.S. budget.
\b For donations, obligations represent the estimated value of signed
donation agreements plus estimated transportation costs.
Expenditures are the estimated values of donated commodities actually
shipped plus the transportation costs incurred. Expenditures are
shown greater than obligations because of increases in commodity
prices between the time the agreements were signed and when the
commodity was actually shipped.
Figure I.2: OMB Budget
Function Classifications and
Donations for Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994,
Obligations for U.S. Bilateral
Noncredit Programs
(See figure in printed
edition.)
We identified 23 departments and independent agencies that had
programs with countries of the FSU; however, the majority of
obligations were implemented by three agencies--USAID, U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), and DOD. These agencies directly
implemented about 83 percent of total obligations for the noncredit
portion of the U.S. program. (See table I.2.)
Table I.2
Obligations and Expenditures by
Implementing Agency for Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990 through
December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Percent of Percent of
total obligations
Agency Obligations obligations Expenditures expended
----------------------- ------------ ------------ ------------- ------------
USAID $1,983,051 36.92 $851,391 42.93
USDA 1,638,660 30.51 1,577,006 96.24
DOD 823,282 15.33 482,772 58.64
National Aeronautics 235,296 4.38 117,830 50.08
and Space
Administration (NASA)
Department of Energy 231,035 4.30 122,535 53.04
(DOE)
U.S. Information Agency 219,326 4.08 162,427 74.06
(USIA)
Department of State 83,751 1.56 70,848 84.59
Peace Corps 33,813 0.63 32,908 97.32
Trade and Development 31,274 0.58 11,447 36.60
Agency (TDA)
Department of Health 23,512 0.44 22,629 96.24
and Human Services
(HHS)
Department of Commerce 22,796 0.42 9,020 39.57
Treasury Department 11,095 0.21 6,006 54.13
Department of Interior 8,397 0.16 2,118 25.22
Nuclear Regulatory 6,950 0.13 4,142 59.60
Commission (NRC)
National Science 6,377 0.12 6,377 100.00
Foundation (NSF)
Environmental 6,145 0.11 5,682 92.47
Protection Agency
(EPA)
Overseas Private 2,814 0.05 1,881 66.84
Investment Corporation
(OPIC)
Department of 1,407 0.03 1,229 87.35
Transportation (DOT)
Arms Control and 814 0.02 598 73.46
Disarmament Agency
(ACDA)
Congressional Research 721 0.01 375 52.01
Service (CRS)
Department of Justice 414 0.01 414 100.00
Securities and Exchange 34 0.00 33 97.06
Commission (SEC)
================================================================================
TOTAL $5,370,964 100.00 $3,489,668 64.97
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: The figures in this table represent which agency expended the
funds. For funds transferred between agencies, we used the recipient
agency's data for obligations and expenditures.
Table I.3 shows the amount of funds implemented by various agencies,
excluding those funds originally appropriated to USAID or DOD. In
most cases, this means that the funds came from the agency's own
appropriation. However, there were some instances of small transfers
between agencies.
Table I.3
Obligations and Expenditures by
Implementing Agency for Noncredit
Programs, Excluding DOD and USAID Funds
(Fiscal Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Percent of
Obligation Expenditure obligation
Agency s s s expended
--------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ----------
ACDA $814 $598 73.46
Department of Commerce 1,500 64 4.27
DOE 100,805 57,863 57.40
Department of Interior 85 85 100.00
Department of Justice 414 414 100.00
DOT 1,377 1,199 87.07
EPA 1,494 1,494 100.00
HHS 19,596 19,239 98.18
NASA 235,048 117,592 50.03
NRC 2,511 1,300 51.77
NSF 6,377 6,377 100.00
Peace Corps 20,346 20,234 99.45
Department of State 21,278 16,101 75.67
TDA 7,012 3,947 56.29
Treasury Department 139 122 87.77
USDA 1,572,105 1,513,313 96.26
USIA 86,770 71,002 81.83
======================================================================
Total $2,077,671 $1,830,944 88.12
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Almost half (48 percent) of noncredit program expenditures to date in
the FSU went directly for programs in Russia. Armenia and Ukraine
were the second and third largest direct recipients of U.S. programs
with about 10 percent and about 7 percent of total expenditures,
respectively. (See table I.4.)
Table I.4
Expenditures by Country, Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990 Through
December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Total Percent of
expenditur total
Country es expenditures
-------------------------------------------- ---------- ------------
Russia $1,661,064 47.60
Armenia 350,897 10.06
FSU-wide 258,330 7.40
Ukraine 253,794 7.27
Georgia 243,301 6.97
Kyrgyzstan 156,012 4.47
Belarus 136,677 3.92
Kazakhstan 128,201 3.67
Moldova 68,772 1.97
Tajikistan 64,235 1.84
Turkmenistan 63,909 1.83
Azerbaijan 52,198 1.50
Uzbekistan 32,608 0.93
Soviet Union 12,527 0.36
Non-Russia FSU\a 4,716 0.14
Nuclear Weapon States\b 2,429 0.07
======================================================================
Total $3,489,668 100.00
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Expenditures for programs where the agency could not provide a
specific country breakout, but knew that nothing was expended for
Russia.
\b Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan.
On a per capita basis, ranking of U.S. expenditures by country
changes dramatically. The United States has expended more per capita
for programs in Armenia, Georgia, and Kyrgyzstan than in the rest of
the FSU. Countries with larger populations, such as Russia and
Ukraine, are much lower in per capita expenditures--8th and 11th,
respectively. (See table I.5.)
Table I.5
Per Capita Expenditures by Country,
Noncredit Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
Population
\a Per capita
(thousands expenditures
Country ) \b
-------------------------------------------- ---------- ------------
Armenia 3,625 $96.80
Georgia 5,429 44.82
Kyrgyzstan 4,476 34.86
Turkmenistan 3,983 16.05
Moldova 4,355 15.79
Belarus 10,300 13.27
Tajikistan 5,704 11.26
Russia 148,200 11.21
Kazakhstan 16,683 7.68
Azerbaijan 7,457 7.00
Ukraine 51,700 4.91
Uzbekistan 22,192 1.47
======================================================================
Total 284,104 $11.30
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Population data are 1994 figures from PlanEcon Review and Outlook
for the Former Soviet Republics (Aug. 1995).
\b Calculations for this table exclude expenditures for FSU-wide,
Non-Russian FSU, Soviet Union, and Nuclear Weapon States.
U.S. programs with the FSU involve a wide diversity of program
areas. Although food aid, private sector development, and emergency
humanitarian assistance accounted for about 54 percent of total
obligations for the U.S. bilateral program, the rest of the program
was spread across another 15 sectors. (See table I.6.)
Table I.6
Obligations and Expenditures by Program
Area, Noncredit Programs (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Percent of Percent of
total total
Program area Obligations obligations Expenditures expenditures
---------------------- ------------ ------------ ------------- -------------
Food Aid $1,548,559 28.83 $1,446,576 41.45
Private Sector 765,735 14.26 307,081 8.80
Development
Emergency Humanitarian 608,910 11.34 574,704 16.47
Assistance
Weapons of Mass 367,655 6.85 88,290 2.53
Destruction
Democratic Reform 306,701 5.71 187,052 5.36
Energy 289,662 5.39 129,337 3.71
Other 269,177 5.01 252,544 7.24
Space Research 227,553 4.24 112,888 3.23
Exchanges and Training 188,324 3.51 109,928 3.15
Environment 187,596 3.49 72,189 2.07
Resettlement for 172,447 3.21 16,008 0.46
Military Officers/
Housing
Food Systems 111,132 2.07 49,381 1.42
Improvement
Economic Restructuring 110,089 2.05 51,473 1.48
& Finance
Health Care 87,537 1.63 41,296 1.18
Improvement
Defense Conversion 72,838 1.36 14,300 0.41
U.S. Export Market 32,314 0.60 12,487 0.36
Development
Scientific Research 21,432 0.40 20,831 0.60
Awards
Military Education and 3,303 0.06 3,303 0.09
Training
================================================================================
Total $5,370,964 100.00 $3,489,668 100.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
\1 The U.S. government's budget is divided into 17 broad functional
areas to provide for analyzing and understanding the budget. The
budget functional classification system is a way of grouping
budgetary resources so that federal spending can be presented
according to the national needs being addressed. The budget
functional classifications are summarized in the U.S. government's
annual budget. For a description of the system see A Glossary of
Terms Used in the Federal Budget Process: Exposure Draft
(GAO/AFMD-2.1.1, Jan., 1993).
\2 During fiscal years 1992 through 1995, Congress appropriated a net
amount of $3.67 billion under the Freedom Support Act authority.
This figure includes a $55-million fiscal year 1994 recision.
\3 The net congressional funding for CTR during fiscal years 1992 to
1995 totaled $1.232 billion. Congress authorized $400 million in
transfer authority for the program in fiscal years 1992 and 1993 and
appropriated $400 million in fiscal years 1994 and 1995. However,
$348 million worth of funds expired or lost transfer authority.
Congress canceled an additional $20 million through a fiscal year
1995 recission.
CREDIT/INSURANCE PROGRAMS
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2
From fiscal year 1990 through December 31, 1994, the U.S. government
signed $10 billion worth of bilateral credit agreements (loans and
loan guarantees) and insurance at a total subsidy cost of $1.8
billion.\4 (See figure I.3.)
Figure I.3: Face Value and
Subsidy Cost for U.S.
Bilateral Credit/Insurance
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in millions)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
The U.S. credit/insurance programs were (1) USDA short-term export
credit guarantees (the General Sales Manager 102 (GSM-102) program)
and long-term title I and Food for Progress concessional loans; (2)
Export-Import Bank (Eximbank) direct loans, loan guarantees, and
insurance; and (3) OPIC insurance and loan guarantees. (See table
I.7.)
The focus of credit/insurance programs has shifted from the USDA
GSM-102 program, which accounted for about 74 percent of all
credit/insurance programs from fiscal years 1991 to 1993, to the OPIC
and Eximbank loan guarantee programs, which accounted for about 68
percent of credit/ insurance programs approved from fiscal year 1994
through December 1994.\5
Table I.7
U.S. Bilateral Credit/Insurance Programs
with the FSU by Agency (Fiscal Year 1991
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Subsidy
Agency Program Face value cost
------------------------------- ------------ ---------- -----------
OPIC Loan $838,300 $36,928
guarantee
OPIC Insurance 983,860 N/A\a
Eximbank Loan 1,757,829 315,469
guarantee
Eximbank Direct loans 88,764 17,295
Eximbank Insurance 586,530 0\b
USDA Food aid 693,900 457,333
loans
USDA GSM-102 loan 5,031,016 254,267
guarantees
======================================================================
Total $9,980,199 $1,081,292
----------------------------------------------------------------------
\a Subsidy cost does not apply to the OPIC insurance program because
it does not fall under Credit Reform requirements.
\b Credit Reform requirements apply to the Eximbank insurance
program. However, Eximbank cannot calculate subsidy figures for its
insurance program on a per country basis, and as such, could not
provide subsidy figures for its insurance program in the FSU.
As shown in table I.8, Russia has been the largest recipient of U.S.
credit/insurance agreements. The large agreements with the Soviet
Union were for the USDA GSM-102 program.
Table I.8
Face Value of Credit/Insurance
Agreements by Country (Fiscal Year 1991
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
1st
Quarter
fiscal
Fiscal Fiscal Fiscal Fiscal year
Country year 1991 year 1992 year 1993 year 1994 1995 Total
-------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ----------
Armenia 0 0 0 0 0 0
Azerbaij 0 0 0 0 0 0
an
Belarus 0 $24,000 $6,230 $33,400 0 $63,630
FSU- 0 0 0 244,000 0 244,000
wide
Georgia 0 0 7,579 0 0 7,579
Kazakhst 0 0 24,855 47,217 $314 72,386
an
Kyrgyzst 0 0 0 87,000 0 87,000
an
Moldova 0 9,900 10,000 20,000 0 39,900
Russia 0 789,997 1,352,373 2,292,146 230,949 4,665,465
Soviet $1,956,298 1,829,920 0 0 0 3,786,218
Union
Tajikist 0 10,000 14,000 0 0 24,000
an
Turkmeni 0 0 10,000 88,531 1,370 99,901
stan
Ukraine 0 109,022 316,919 73,921 32,100 531,962
Uzbekist 0 0 260,055 95,819 2,284 358,158
an
================================================================================
Total $1,956,298 $2,772,839 $2,002,011 $2,982,034 $267,017 $9,980,199
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: There were no credit agreements in fiscal year 1990.
We recorded the face value for these agreements based on the
definitions derived during discussions with the agency administering
the loan, insurance, or the guarantee program. (See table I.9.) Our
subsidy cost figures represent subsidy obligations made at the time
the agreement was signed.
Table I.9
Definition of Face Value by Program
Agency Program Face value definition
---------------------- ---------------------- ----------------------
USDA GSM-102 Registration amount
USDA Food aid loans Total loan amount
Eximbank Loan guarantees Value of final
commitment; actual
disbursement may occur
later
Eximbank Direct loans Value of final
commitment; actual
disbursement may occur
later
Eximbank Insurance Value of goods shipped
under policy
OPIC Loan guarantees Value of commitment
OPIC Insurance Value of policy
committed to project
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------
\4 Starting in fiscal year 1992, the Federal Credit Reform Act of
1990 changed the budget treatment of loans and loan guarantees to
more accurately reflect the cost to the government. The credit
subsidy cost is the estimated long-term cost to the U.S. government
of providing loans or guarantees calculated on a net present value
basis.
\5 As of June 1995, of the $838.3 million worth of signed OPIC loan
guarantee agreements, private lenders had disbursed $142.5 million,
and of the $1.758 billion worth of signed Eximbank loan guarantees,
$13.5 million had been disbursed by private lenders. Eximbank had
also disbursed $83.8 million of the $88.8 million worth of the direct
loans agreements.
AGENCY SPECIFIC INFORMATION
========================================================== Appendix II
This appendix contains financial and programmatic information on the
215 U.S. bilateral programs with the FSU implemented by 23 U.S.
departments or independent agencies. Agencies are listed in order of
total funds obligated for noncredit programs from fiscal years 1990
through the first quarter of fiscal year 1995. The following
information is provided for each agency:
cumulative obligations and expenditures for noncredit programs;
funding sources for noncredit obligations;
OMB budget functions and donations for noncredit obligations;
noncredit obligations, expenditures, and estimated program
completion date by program;
credit and insurance face value and subsidy cost by program; and
program descriptions.
As part of our data collection effort, we asked agencies to provide
information on the programs they were implementing in the FSU. The
descriptions and estimated completion dates are taken from the
agencies' responses. For the purposes of this report, we did not
review or assess the validity of the program descriptions provided.
In some instances, programs had been completed at the time of our
survey.
USAID
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1
Figure II.1: Obligations and
Expenditures for
USAID-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.2: Appropriation
Sources for USAID-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Note: P.L. 480 refers to Public Law 480.
All of the obligations for USAID-implemented noncredit programs came
from the 150 International Affairs budget function classification.
Table II.1
USAID Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditu Program end
Program s res date
-------------------------------------------- ---------- --------- -----------
Central Asian-American Enterprise Fund $30,000 $1,290 6/1/00
Democratic Pluralism 122,636 47,540 12/31/99
Disaster Assistance 6,342 4,532 To be
determined
Economic Restructuring and Financial Sector 72,171 24,121 9/30/98
Reform
Energy Efficiency and Market Reform 184,403 124,651 2/25/99
Environmental Policy and Technology 67,173 16,513 9/30/99
Eurasia Foundation 26,000 21,069 4/30/97
European Bank for Reconstruction and 29,000 4,300 6/1/00
Development Enterprise Fund
Exchanges and Training 99,113 49,863 12/30/99
Farmer-to-Farmer 30,160 21,430 9/95
Food Systems Restructuring 60,837 21,377 9/30/97
Funds for Large Enterprises in Russia 40,000 15,300 6/1/00
Health Care Improvement 83,097 37,259 12/31/98
Housing Sector Reform 207,567 36,949 11/30/96
Humanitarian Assistance for Armenian 9,909 9,868 Completed
Earthquake Victims 9/30/94
Humanitarian Emergency Medical Supply for 10,000 10,000 Completed
the Soviet Union 9/30/93
NIS Special Initiatives 181,700 140,812 9/30/97
Private Sector Initiatives 517,943 248,071 9/30/00
Russian-American Enterprise Fund 70,000 14,921 6/1/00
Russia Energy and Environment Commodities 90,000 0 12/13/95
Import Program
Western NIS Enterprise Fund 45,000 1,525 6/1/00
================================================================================
Total $1,983,051 $851,391
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USAID implemented the following 21 programs:
CENTRAL ASIAN AMERICAN
ENTERPRISE FUND
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.1
This fund is designed to stimulate restructuring and growth of small-
and medium-sized private and privatizing enterprises in Central Asia
through providing loan and equity capital and direct technical
assistance.
DEMOCRATIC PLURALISM
INITIATIVES
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.2
USAID helps the FSU countries foster democratic systems characterized
by decentralized government with strong, capable local governments;
pluralistic civil societies capable of exercising their rights and
responsibilities; and increased respect for individual rights and
rule of law. The components to address these objectives are
political processes, rule of law, public administration and local
government, civil society, independent media, and program design and
management.
DISASTER ASSISTANCE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.3
USAID's Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance coordinates the U.S.
government's aid to victims of disasters in foreign countries. The
program objective is to provide humanitarian assistance that will
save the greatest number of lives, reduce the greatest amount of
human suffering, and reduce the economic and social effects of the
disaster for the greatest number of people within the resources
available.
ECONOMIC RESTRUCTURING AND
FINANCIAL SECTOR REFORM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.4
The project addresses policy, institutional, and technical banking
skill constraints associated with developing a sound system of
government finance and commercial banking. The project also helps
develop the legal and policy environment to support open access to
economic information. The four components of the project are fiscal
reform, financial sector reform, business environment, and program
design and management.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND MARKET
REFORM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.5
USAID seeks to improve the efficiency and performance of energy
production and consumption, support energy privatization and market
reform, and reduce safety risks of nuclear power plants in the FSU.
USAID solely or partially implements efforts to address problems in
pricing and national policy, district heating and energy efficiency,
energy subsector restructuring, trade and international markets, and
program design and management. NRC and DOE implement the nuclear
safety portion of this project.
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY AND
TECHNOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.6
This project encourages environmentally sound approaches to the
economic and social reforms in the FSU, promotes specific
environmental quality improvements, and encourages U.S. private
sector participation in the region's environmental management. This
project has four components: environmental policy and institution
building, health risks, public awareness and environmental
accountability, and the Aral Sea initiative.
EURASIA FOUNDATION
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.7
The Eurasia Foundation primarily provides small grants funded by
public and private resources to a variety of organizations to obtain
rapid response in economic and democratic reform, and education and
training.
EUROPEAN BANK FOR
RECONSTRUCTION AND
DEVELOPMENT ENTERPRISE FUND
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.8
Two investment funds in Russia involve the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (EBRD): (1) the multilateral Russia
Small Business Fund, which funds capital and business advisory
services for micro and small enterprises in Russia and (2) the
U.S.-EBRD Regional Venture Fund, which will provide capital to
recently privatized medium- to large-sized Russian enterprises in the
Lower Volga region.
EXCHANGES AND TRAINING
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:1.9
The project was developed as a flexible means to provide exchanges
and training that support the transition to free market economies and
democratic governance. The project also tries to build sustainable
links between professional associations of the United States and the
FSU to foster continuing education among educational institutions and
strengthen indigenous training capacities.
FARMER-TO-FARMER
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.10
As part of its global Farmer-to-Farmer program, USAID's Office of
Private Voluntary Cooperation sends American agriculturalists to the
FSU to provide direct technical assistance to farmers, food
processors, farmers' associations, and other agricultural
organizations.
FOOD SYSTEMS RESTRUCTURING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.11
USAID helps promote effective and competitive agribusiness systems by
working through U.S. agribusiness associations to support the
involvement of their member companies and cooperatives in developing
long-term business ventures. The project focuses on five components:
storage systems, marketing efficiency, agribusiness partnerships,
privatized farm support for Russia, and program design and
management.
FUND FOR LARGE ENTERPRISES
IN RUSSIA
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.12
The fund is designed to stimulate the restructuring of medium- to
large-sized enterprises that are emerging from the privatization
program in Russia.
HEALTH CARE INITIATIVES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.13
The project addresses three key problems: (1) the declining quality
of health care, (2) the collapse of the pharmaceutical and medical
supply industry, and (3) a financing system lacking incentives for
efficiency and cost control. The project is made up of six
components: medical partnerships, vaccine and pharmaceutical
security, health monitoring, finance and service delivery
alternatives, women's health and family planning, and program design
and management.
HOUSING SECTOR REFORM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.14
The project supports the development of a market-oriented housing
sector in the FSU through legal and institutional reforms, reduced
housing subsidies, promotion of private housing markets, and creation
of pilot housing and urban finance programs. The project also
finances housing for demobilized Russian officers and job-related
training.
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE FOR
ARMENIAN EARTHQUAKE VICTIMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.15
This project provided humanitarian relief, medical treatment,
education, and vocational training for victims of the Armenian
earthquake that occurred on December 7, 1988. This project was
completed in fiscal year 1994.
HUMANITARIAN EMERGENCY
MEDICAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE
SOVIET UNION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.16
This project addressed the medical crisis in the FSU caused by
critical shortages of basic medical supplies. The project supported
private voluntary organizations' efforts to address basic health
needs by distributing donated medical supplies and medicines to
groups most vulnerable to illness and disease. This project was
completed in fiscal year 1993.
NIS SPECIAL INITIATIVES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.17
The NIS\1 special initiatives project supports the transition toward
participatory democracy and economic freedom by funding activities
that deal with problems such as the privatization of functions
previously under state domain. As the special initiatives expand
into broader sectoral programs, they are transferred into separate,
independent projects. Activities in this project focus on emergency
humanitarian assistance, technical support, pilot programs, and cross
sectoral quick responses.
--------------------
\1 NIS is the abbreviation for Newly Independent States. Several
departments use this abbreviation in the title of their projects.
The NIS is the same geographic area as the FSU.
PRIVATE SECTOR INITIATIVES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.18
The project supports the privatization of state-owned enterprises,
fosters the emergence of small indigenous private businesses, and
reduces the barriers to private investment and growth. Project
implementation to date has focused on support for privatization,
trade and investment, and small business. Assistance is also
directed at the development of capital markets and post-privatization
initiatives to contribute to the commercial viability of newly
privatized firms.
RUSSIA AMERICAN ENTERPRISE
FUND
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.19
This fund is designed to stimulate restructuring and market-oriented
operations of small- and medium-sized private and privatizing
enterprises in Russia through the provision of loan and equity
capital and direct technical assistance.
RUSSIA ENERGY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL COMMODITY
IMPORT PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.20
This is a grant program to introduce to Russia U.S. equipment
designed to improve the efficiency of energy use and improve
environmental quality, primarily in the energy sector. The equipment
and related services will be provided to public sector and
privatizing entities.
WESTERN NIS ENTERPRISE FUND
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1.21
This program is designed to stimulate restructuring and
market-oriented operations of small- and medium-sized private and
privatizing enterprises in Ukraine, Belarus, and Moldova by providing
loan and equity capital and direct technical assistance.
USDA
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2
NONCREDIT PROGRAMS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.1
Figure II.3: Obligations and
Expenditures for
USDA-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.4: Appropriation
Sources for USDA-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Note: CCC means Commodity Credit Corporation.
Figure II.5: OMB Budget
Function Classification and
Donations for USDA-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.2
USDA Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditu Program end
Program s res date
------------------------------------------- ---------- --------- ------------
Agricultural Information and Related $111 $111 To be
Services determined
Armenia Extension Project 1,923 1,380 3/96
Cochran Fellowships 4,209 1,602 To be
determined
Donated Food Commodity Costs 1,131,038 1,135,501 To be
determined
Donated Food Transportation Costs 347,210 303,020 To be
determined
Emerging Democracies Program 13,702 3,291 To be
determined
Energy Market Reform 87 15 9/96
International Forestry Operations 1,797 1,021 To be
determined
Peace Corps Associate Director--Armenia 68 12 2/97
Public Law 480 Title I Ocean Freight 75,283 69,133 To be
Differential determined
Scientific Cooperation Program 341 341 To be
determined
Technical Support to USAID Europe-NIS 265 204 To be
Bureau determined
Vulnerable Groups Assistance Program 62,626 61,375 Completed
12/31/94
================================================================================
Total $1,638,660 $1,577,00
6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA implemented the following 13 noncredit programs:
AGRICULTURAL INFORMATION AND
RELATED SERVICES
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.2
With funding from USAID, USDA and its network of worldwide
cooperating institutions seek to provide to USAID personnel research,
analysis, problem-solving literature, data, and advice on all aspects
of sustainable agricultural production, agro-enterprise development,
natural resources management, and environmental protection.
ARMENIA EXTENSION PROJECT
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.3
With funding from USAID, since January 1992, experts from affiliated
land grant universities have worked from 1 month to 1 year with
Armenian Agricultural Ministry and local officials to (1) assist in
establishing an extension service to provide newly privatized farmers
with the knowledge and skills needed to survive in a market economy
and (2) provide short-term technical assistance and leadership with
expatriate nongovernmental organizations to assist Armenian farmers
in overcoming a food production and distribution crisis.
COCHRAN FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.4
Since 1992, senior and mid-level FSU specialists and administrators
have been trained in agricultural trade, agribusiness development,
management, policy, and marketing from the public and private
sectors. The program works closely with USDA agencies, U.S.
agricultural trade and market development associations, U.S.
colleges and universities, and agribusiness to implement training
programs.
DONATED FOOD COMMODITY COSTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.5
Under the section 416(b) program, surplus agricultural commodities
owned by the Commodity Credit Corporation are donated to friendly
countries overseas. Under the Food for Progress program, commodities
are provided on a grant basis to emerging democracies committed to
expanding free enterprise elements in their agricultural economies.
DONATED FOOD TRANSPORTATION
COSTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.6
The costs provided here were incurred in transporting donated food
commodities under the section 416(b) and Food for Progress programs.
EMERGING DEMOCRACIES PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.7
Through this program USDA shares U.S. agricultural and agribusiness
expertise with emerging democratic countries and in turn develops,
maintains, and expands markets for U.S. agricultural exports. USDA
then carries out follow-up activities to enhance the effectiveness of
the countries' food and agricultural systems. The program is funded
up to $10 million per year and combines the dual objectives of market
promotion and development assistance.
ENERGY MARKET REFORM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.8
With funding from USAID, this program provides for a full-time
specialist working in USAID to provide technical assistance in power
and heating restructuring, utility commercialization and management
improvement, and privatization.
INTERNATIONAL FORESTRY
OPERATIONS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:2.9
USDA Forest Service units and the Federal Forest Service in Russia
have three ongoing partnerships. Efforts focus on (1) developing a
long-term partnership in environmental education, ecotourism,
reforestation, and new technology development in Magadan; (2)
fostering the protection and management of Russia's Far East forests;
and (3) cooperating in research and land management planning in two
demonstration projects in central Siberia.
PEACE CORPS ASSOCIATE
DIRECTOR--ARMENIA
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.10
An interagency agreement between the Peace Corps and USDA provides
for recruiting USDA personnel to serve as associate Peace Corps
Directors for projects overseas. In this case, using funds from
Peace Corps, USDA provided an associate Peace Corps Director for
agribusiness projects in Armenia. The incumbent establishes
assignments for volunteers and works with them in the field.
PUBLIC LAW 480 TITLE I OCEAN
FREIGHT DIFFERENTIAL
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.11
The payment of ocean freight differential (the difference between the
cost of shipping on U.S.-flagged and foreign-flagged vessels) on
title I programs is designed to support the shipment of 75 percent of
U.S. food aid on U.S. vessels, assuming the vessels are available
at the time of shipment. The objective is to support the U.S.
maritime industry in maintaining a shipping capability.
SCIENTIFIC COOPERATION
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.12
This program helps scientists from USDA, the university community,
and the private nonprofit research organizations seek new knowledge
and technology beneficial to the U.S. and cooperating counties by
providing access to international research in agriculture and
forestry.
TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO THE
USAID EUROPE-NIS BUREAU
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.13
The program provides technical services to support the development
and implementation of USAID human resource development programs in
the FSU. With funding from USAID, USDA provides three consultants to
USAID to identify (1) training needs, (2) needs for educational and
professional association partnership and linkages, and (3) FSU
participants for training programs.
VULNERABLE GROUPS ASSISTANCE
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.14
With funding from USAID, this program procured food commodities for
use in USAID food assistance activities in Armenia, Azerbaijan,
Georgia, and Tajikistan. The program also provided for cargo survey
contracts for discharge; procurement, inspection, and delivery of
commodities to U.S. ports; and contracting cargo discharge surveys
for delivery of commodities at consignee warehouses.
CREDIT PROGRAMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.15
Table II.3
USDA Credit Programs' Face Value and
Subsidy Cost (Fiscal Year 1990 Through
December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Subsidy Program end
Program Face value cost date
------------------------------------------- ---------- ---------- -----------
Food Aid Commodity Credits $693,900 $457,333 To be
determined
GSM-102 Credit Guarantees 5,031,016 254,267 To be
determined
================================================================================
Total $5,724,916 $711,600
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA implemented the following two credit programs:
FOOD AID COMMODITY CREDITS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.16
Through title I of Public Law 480 and the Food for Progress Program,
USDA provided for government-to-government sales of agricultural
commodities to FSU countries under long-term credit arrangements.
Repayments are in U.S. dollars on credit terms up to 30 years, with
up to a 7-year grace period. The objectives of the program include
providing food to combat hunger, expanding international trade,
expanding U.S. agricultural commodity markets, and fostering the
development of private enterprise in the recipient country.
GSM-102 CREDIT GUARANTEES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2.17
This program provides a guarantee to U.S. exporters or banking
institutions should foreign buyers fail to make payments on goods
purchased. The program provides short-term (up to 3 years) credit to
foreign governments or private sector importers to help increase U.S.
exports of agricultural products, improve the competitive position of
U.S. products, and assist developing countries in meeting their food
and fiber needs.
DOD
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3
Figure II.6: Obligations and
Expenditures for
DOD-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.7: Appropriation
Sources for DOD-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.8: OMB Budget
Function Classifications and
Donations for DOD-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.4
DOD Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditur Program end
Program s es date
------------------------------------------ ---------- ---------- ------------
Arctic Nuclear Waste $23,951 $11,889 To be
determined
Armored Blankets 2,870 2,531 Completed 6/
94
Chemical Weapons Destruction 20,271 4,605 To be
determined
Communication Link 935 159 6/30/96
Defense Demilitarization Enterprise Fund 7,670 7,670 To be
determined
Defense Military Contacts 7,660 1,594 To be
determined
Emergency Response Training/Equipment 2,647 2,223 12/31/95
Environmental Restoration/Project Peace 6,868 711 7/21/97
Export Controls 4,113 163 9/30/97
Fissile Material Storage Containers 45,563 1,157 10/31/96
Fissile Material Storage Facility Design 5,970 5,213 7/31/95
Fissile Material Storage Facility 26,521 1,594 12/31/98
Equipment
FSU Science and Technology Program 72,460 72,460 To be
determined
Humanitarian Assistance 336,528 330,425 To be
determined
International Military Education and 3,303 3,303 To be
Training (IMET) determined
Industrial Partnership/Defense Conversion 62,117 8,041 3/8/98
Joint Contact Teams 184 38 To be
determined
Material Control and Accountability 2,690 194 12/17/98
Other Assessments 8,770 5,651 To be
determined
Science and Technology Centers 21,263 16,073 To be
determined
Strategic Offensive Arms Elimination 160,928 7,078 6/30/02
================================================================================
Total $823,282 $482,772
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOD implemented the following 21 programs:
ARCTIC NUCLEAR WASTE
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.1
Under this program, the Office of Naval Research identifies, studies,
and assesses FSU countries' nuclear waste disposal in the Arctic
regions.
ARMORED BLANKETS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.2
This program provided armored blankets to the Russians to augment the
protective capability of containers and vehicles carrying nuclear
weapons to and within destruction facilities and necessary related
storage facilities. DOE assisted in this program with funding from
DOD.
CHEMICAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.3
This program provides chemical weapons destruction assistance,
including training and related services. Specific program activities
include evaluating the feasibility of a two-step neutralization
process to destroy chemical weapons and developing an analytical
chemical weapons destruction laboratory.
COMMUNICATION LINK
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.4
DOD helps to establish (1) a continuous communications link between
Belarus and the United States and (2) a government-to-government
communications link between the United States and Ukraine and
Kazakhstan. DOD provides equipment and training to all three
countries to help establish the ability to transmit notifications
required by START [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty] and INF
obligations. The State Department assisted in this program with
funding from DOD.
DEFENSE DEMILITARIZATION
ENTERPRISE FUND
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.5
The fund is earmarked for ventures involving Western partners and
former producers of weapons of mass destruction in Russia,
Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Ukraine. The ventures would pursue
commercial, privately owned endeavors. Annual U.S. grants to the
fund would be needed until the loans and equity shares provided
substantive returns on the investment.
DEFENSE AND MILITARY
CONTACTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.6
Defense and military contacts are intended to encourage and assist
the FSU military in restructuring and downsizing its defense
establishment, encourage the FSU's support of demilitarization
activities and democratic reforms, help the military to better
understand civil-military relations, and increase U.S. military
understanding of the FSU. The primary goal of this program is to
establish a network of professional exchanges that gives FSU defense
and military establishments a stake in continued good relations.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
TRAINING/EQUIPMENT
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.7
DOD provides emergency response equipment to Belarus, Kazakhstan,
Ukraine, and Russia to facilitate the safe and secure transportation
and storage of nuclear weapons in connection with their destruction.
DOE assisted in this program with funding from DOD.
ENVIRONMENTAL
RESTORATION/PROJECT PEACE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.8
This program provides equipment, training, and services to facilitate
Belarus' environmental restoration of former strategic rocket forces
facilities.
EXPORT CONTROLS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:3.9
This program provides assistance to Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine
in the development of export control institutions and infrastructure
to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The
assistance encompasses four areas of activity: policy consultations
and project development, export control technical interaction,
training and technical assistance, and equipment. The Department of
Commerce and the Customs Service assisted in this program with
funding from DOD.
FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
CONTAINERS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.10
This program provides the Russians fissile material containers for
the safe and protective transport and storage of fissile material in
connection with the destruction of nuclear weapons. DOE assisted in
this program with funding from DOD.
FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
FACILITY DESIGN
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.11
This program provides technical assistance for the design of a safe,
secure, and ecologically sound storage facility for fissile material
delivered from the destruction of nuclear weapons. DOE assisted in
this program with funding from DOD.
FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
FACILITY EQUIPMENT
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.12
DOD will provide material, services, and training relating to the
construction of a safe, secure, and ecologically sound storage
facility for fissile material derived from the destruction of nuclear
weapons. DOE assisted in this program with funding from DOD.
FSU SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.13
The program is designed to advance understanding of science and
technology by establishing long-term, collaborative relationships
with the nations of the FSU.
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.14
DOD covered the costs for transporting private sector and U.S.
government excess material as humanitarian assistance to the FSU.
The funding levels shown in table II.4 include the value of U.S.
government commodities shipped by DOD from fiscal years 1992 to 1993
plus the transportation costs incurred shipping those goods plus
goods donated by private groups from fiscal year 1992 through the
first quarter of fiscal year 1995. These figures do not include
funds that were allocated to and spent by the State Department during
fiscal year 1994 and the first quarter of fiscal year 1995 for
transporting humanitarian assistance.
IMET
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.15
This program provides military education and training to military and
related civilian personnel of foreign countries. The purpose of this
training is to encourage effective and mutually beneficial relations
and increased understanding between the United States and foreign
countries. The IMET program includes courses in civil-military
relations, military justice and human rights, and defense resources,
which are referred to as Expanded IMET courses.
INDUSTRIAL
PARTNERSHIP/DEFENSE
CONVERSION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.16
DOD provides funding for (1) defense industry conversion and
construction of housing needed for demobilization of strategic rocket
forces officers in Belarus; (2) joint ventures between Western
industries and Ukrainian defense firms converting to production of
civilian goods, and efforts to convert several Ukrainian defense
companies to the production of prefabricated housing for former
military officers; (3) the conversion of Kazakhstani defense
industries to civilian production; and (4) joint ventures between
U.S. firms and Russian firms formerly involved in the production of
weapons of mass destruction.
JOINT CONTACT TEAMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.17
The European Command sends teams to FSU countries to show FSU
military officials how the U.S. military performs specific tasks.
The funding amounts shown in table II.4 do not include amounts
obtained from CTR funding for Joint Contact programs.
MATERIAL CONTROL AND
ACCOUNTABILITY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.18
DOD provides material, training, goods, and services to Ukraine,
Kazakhstan, Belarus, and Russia for the development of systems for
controlling, accounting for, and physical protection of nuclear
materials to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation. DOE and NRC
assist in this program with funding from DOD.
OTHER ASSESSMENTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.19
This program covers the developmental, administrative, and support
costs of the overall CTR effort and of each project in the initial
stages until specific requirements are identified and proposed
obligations are reported to Congress for the projects.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
CENTERS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.20
Funding is provided to support the Science and Technology Center in
Ukraine (STCU) and the International Science and Technology Center in
Russia (ISTC). The STCU develops, approves, finances, and monitors
science and technology projects for peaceful purposes, which are to
be carried out primarily at institutions in Ukraine. The ISTC
attempts to prevent the proliferation of technologies related to
military capabilities, minimize the migration to potential
proliferant nations of people involved in the development of weapons
of mass destruction, and assist in the transition to a market-based
economy. The State Department assisted in this program with funding
from DOD.
STRATEGIC OFFENSIVE ARMS
ELIMINATION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:3.21
DOD provides assistance to (1) Ukraine for dismantling its strategic
nuclear arms and deactivating SS-19 and SS-24 missiles located on
Ukrainian territory; (2) Kazakhstan for destroying SS-18 silos and
launch control facilities, heavy bombers and disposition of liquid
rocket propellant; (3) Russia to accelerate the dismantling of
Russian strategic offensive arms; and (4) Belarus for elimination of
foundations of SS-25 fixed structures.
NASA
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4
Figure II.9: Obligations and
Expenditures for
NASA-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Almost all--99.89 percent--of funding for NASA-implemented programs
in the FSU came from NASA appropriations. The remaining funds were
from DOD appropriations.
Figure II.10: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
NASA-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Obligation and expenditure figures for the following NASA programs
include NASA grants and subgrant to FSU entities; contracts, and
subcontracts to FSU entities; other procurements to FSU entities;
purchase of equipment donated, but not loaned, to FSU entities; and
travel costs incurred by NASA for FSU specialists to travel to the
United States for NASA programs. These figures do not include NASA
costs incurred for cooperative activities with FSU entities that did
not involve the exchange of funds.
Table II.5
NASA Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Aeronautics Research and Technology Base $582 $442 6/95
Functional Energy Block (FGB) 42,100 27,712 5/98
Galilieo S-Band Study 70 70 Completed 2/
93
High Speed Research Program 5,695 4,215 To be
determined
Hypersonics Research and Technology 1,800 489 11/96
International Space Welding Experiment 136 0 6/98
Joint U.S.-Russian Human Space Flight 150,000 61,537 12/31/97
Activities
Laser Sensing Technology Program 10 10 Completed 2/
94
Life and Biomedical Sciences 5 5 Completed 9/
92
Life Sciences Biosatellite Program 6,614 0 7/98
Mars 1994 1,617 1,602 9/98
Microgravity Science and Applications 74 74 9/95
Conference
Miscellaneous Space Access and Technology 1,963 1,519 To be
Projects determined
Miscellaneous Space Science Research 52 52 To be
determined
Mission to Planet Earth 100 50 4/21/96
Orbital Debris Program 6 6 Completed 9/
92
Science Internet 150 150 9/95
Shuttle Support for MIR 1 Docking Module 19,500 15,075 6/95
Soyuz Assured Crew Rescue Vehicle 3,370 3,370 Completed 9/
93
Space Station Engineering Operability 1,000 1,000 Completed 1/
Studies 31/94
Space Station Redesign 340 340 Completed 9/
93
Support for Shuttle Mission at Gagarin 112 112 12/31/96
Cosmonaut
================================================================================
Total $235,296 $117,830
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NASA implemented the following 22 programs:
AERONAUTICS RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY BASE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.1
This program will assess the potential utility and technical
tradeoffs associated with Wing-in-Ground Effect aircraft, commonly
referred to as wingships, to help NASA determine whether to
build/operate such aircraft in the United States.
FGB-FUNCTIONAL ENERGY BLOCK
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.2
The goal of the program is to design, develop, manufacture, test, and
deliver one flight FGB energy block, including spare parts,
simulators, and specialized equipment for the international space
station. The contractor will transport the FGB between the
Khrunichev site and launch complex, support prelaunch preparations,
operate and verify FGB performance in orbit over 15 days from launch,
and provide FBG standards and FGB ground personnel training.
GALILEO S-BAND STUDY
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.3
This program studied the capabilities of Russian deep space
communications network to support the Galileo S-Band mission.
HIGH SPEED RESEARCH
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.4
This program is to modify the Tupolev Tu-144 supersonic transport
aircraft and conduct up to 39 test flights to support development of
new technologies for next-generation supersonic transport aircraft.
HYPERSONICS RESEARCH AND
TECHNOLOGY
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.5
This program is to build and test a scramjet engine at Mach 6.5. The
objective of the program is to help NASA assess hypersonic aircraft
engine technologies.
INTERNATIONAL SPACE WELDING
EXPERIMENT
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.6
The program is to conduct a flight demonstration of the Paton
universal hand tool on the NASA space shuttle to test the
capabilities of the tool to perform contingency repairs of space
station materials and structures.
JOINT U.S.-RUSSIAN HUMAN
SPACE FLIGHT ACTIVITIES
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.7
This program provides hardware and services designed to enhance MIR
operations capabilities; perform joint space flights; and conduct
joint activities to design, operate, and use the space station. The
objectives of the program are to (1) develop, maintain, and enhance
capabilities and operations to allow humans to live and work
continuously in space, (2) enable the reduction of costs of future
U.S. space initiatives, (3) enhance U.S. understanding of
long-duration operations, (4) enable the United States and Russia to
develop common systems and operating procedures, and (5) advance the
U.S. national space programs and aerospace industries.
LASER SENSING TECHNOLOGY
PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.8
The program developed all-solid state laser systems for atmospheric
remote sensing to study climate change.
LIFE AND BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:4.9
The program created a database of manned space life-support systems
developed in the FSU.
LIFE SCIENCES BIOSATELLITE
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.10
The program provides NASA life science experiments on two
Russian-built BION satellite missions in 1996 and 1998.
MARS 1994
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.11
This program is to fly a U.S. Mars oxidant experiment, a soil
reactivity/composition experiment consisting of two instruments, on
the Russian Mars lander to enhance the use of the lander and provide
critical science data not otherwise available.
MICROGRAVITY SCIENCE AND
APPLICATIONS CONFERENCE
SUPPORT
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.12
This program reflects miscellaneous projects in support of the NASA
microgravity sciences and applications program, including the
procurement of data on Russian microgravity science results and
flight apparatus performance, Russian travel costs to support
microgravity projects, and a grant to support a Russian conference.
MISCELLANEOUS SPACE ACCESS
AND TECHNOLOGY PROJECTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.13
The program supports miscellaneous projects to enhance NASA's space
access and technology research.
MISCELLANEOUS SPACE SCIENCE
RESEARCH
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.14
This program supports miscellaneous space science research projects,
such as Russian support in developing a near-global long-duration
balloon capability for mid-latitude applications, and pays for travel
costs of Russian specialists supporting space science projects.
MISSION TO PLANET EARTH
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.15
The program is to procure interface definition documents for the
Russian Meteor-3/3m, GOMS and RESURS spacecraft and preliminary
interface control documents for the SAGE-III instrument and the TOMS
instrument. The objective is to assess the technical feasibility of
flying NASA's Mission to Planet Earth instruments on planned Russian
missions.
ORBITAL DEBRIS PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.16
This program defined the orbital debris environment, including
measuring, modeling, and mitigation.
SCIENCE INTERNET
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.17
This program provides communication of scientific and programmatic
data between NASA and key Russian institutes engaged in space science
cooperation with NASA.
SHUTTLE SUPPORT FOR MIR 1
DOCKING MODULE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.18
Under this program, NASA built a docking mechanism to allow docking
between the NASA space station and the Russian MIR space station to
enable on-orbit joint U.S.-Russian life science investigations,
resupply MIR logistics, and exchange crews.
SOYUZ ASSURED CREW RESCUE
VEHICLE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.19
This program studied the extent Russian space systems and operating
capabilities could be integrated with NASA's space systems and
equipment.
SPACE STATION ENGINEERING
OPERABILITY STUDIES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.20
The program supported a feasibility study to define Russian
participation in the space station.
SPACE STATION REDESIGN
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.21
This program allowed NASA to obtain Russian expertise and input for
the space station transition team's assessment of the viability of
using Russian hardware for the space station redesign.
SUPPORT FOR STS-71 SHUTTLE
MISSION AT GAGARIN COSMONAUT
TRAINING CENTER
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:4.22
This program supports the U.S. Director of Operations at the Gagarin
Cosmonaut Training Center in Star City, Russia, by paying for living
quarters, transportation, training, and office expenses. The
objective of the program is to ensure smooth operations and training
for the U.S. astronauts being trained to fly aboard the Russian MIR
as part of the cooperative Shuttle MIR Program.
DOE
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5
Figure II.11: Obligations and
Expenditures for
DOE-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.12: Appropriation
Sources for DOE-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.13: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
DOE-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.6
DOE Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Armored Blankets $366 $366 Completed 6/
94
Atmospheric Radiation Measurement Program 382 280 4/09
Clean Coal Technology Projects in Ukraine 2,547 82 3/96
Emergency Response Equipment 15,226 12,716 To be
determined
Energy Efficiency Projects in Russia 550 411 12/96
Energy Efficiency and Market Reform 892 741 To be
Conferences and Workshops determined
Environmental Management 10,765 10,763 To be
determined
Export Assistance 3,437 2,382 To be
determined
Fissile Material Storage Facility Design 8,156 7,684 To be
determined
Fissile Material Storage Facility 205 96 To be
Equipment determined
Fissile Material Storage Containers 4,500 3,517 12/95
Fusion Energy Research and Development 998 847 To be
Program determined
Human Genome Program 498 429 To be
determined
International Nuclear Safety Program 62,839 23,258 To be
determined
Joint Coordinating Committee on the 1,775 1,256 7/96
Fundamental Properties of Matter
Lab-to-Lab Collaboration (nonweapons) 9,843 5,530 To be
determined
Limited Ground Radiological Survey-- 150 150 Completed 7/
Semipalatinsk 94
Material Protection, Control, and 9,882 6,370 To be
Accountability determined
Material Protection, Control, and 8,862 3,863 To be
Accountability Lab-to-Lab determined
Moscow and Ukraine Energy Efficiency 467 143 12/95
Centers
NIS Industrial Partnering Program 20,000 1,620 7/97
Nuclear Reactor Simulator 11,000 0 9/97
Oil and Gas Technology Center in Russia 370 410 To be
determined
Purchase of Russian Pu-238 11,777 5,928 12/97
Russian Highly Enriched Uranium 396 338 Completed
Conversion/Blending Facility 10/94
Russian Railcar Surety Study 150 150 To be
determined
Security Enhancement for Railcars 21,485 18,420 9/95
Superconducting Super Collider 14,122 8,069 Completed 2/
95
Support for Bilateral Arms Reduction 475 332 To be
Efforts determined
Support for Project Sapphire 3,862 3,233 To be
determined
Support for Science and Technology 1,683 1,509 5/95
Centers
U.S./FSU Joint Coordinating Committee 3,075 1,544 To be
Civilian Nuclear Reactor Safety determined
U.S./Russia Joint Coordinating Committee 300 98 To be
for Radiation Effects Research determined
================================================================================
Total $231,035 $122,535
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE implemented or supported the following 33 programs:
ARMORED BLANKETS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.1
With funding from DOD, DOE supported DOD efforts to provide armored
blankets to Russia to augment the protective capability of containers
and vehicles carrying nuclear weapons to and within destruction
facilities.
ATMOSPHERIC RADIATION
MEASUREMENT PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.2
The program involves a few Russian scientists researching the effects
of clouds and radiation on the global climate and the earth's energy
balance.
CLEAN COAL TECHNOLOGY
PROJECTS IN UKRAINE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.3
With funding from USAID, DOE is trying to identify cost-effective
technical approaches for upgrading utility power plants burning
low-grade Ukrainian anthracite and provide a conceptual design for
their use. The projects also assists Ukraine in introducing clean
coal technology to upgrade its coal-fired power plants.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.4
This program includes work in Russia on the transportion of
contaminants, technical identification and workshops, and an
international environmental assessment.
EMERGENCY RESPONSE EQUIPMENT
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.5
With funding from DOD, DOE provides emergency response equipment for
the safe, secure transportation of nuclear weapons, protective
clothing, radiation survey instruments, portable radiography
equipment, liquid abrasive cutter, dosimeters, and other radiation
protection equipment.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND MARKET
REFORM CONFERENCES AND
WORKSHOPS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.6
As part of the Gore-Chernomyrdin process,\2 DOE and the Russian
Ministry of Fuels have (1) cosponsored the International Energy and
Law Conference, (2) cooperated through DOE technical assistance, and
(3) worked together in various energy efficiency projects.
--------------------
\2 The Gore-Chernomyrdin Commission is a bilateral effort between
Russia and the U.S. to advance common interests in a variety of
areas, including energy, space, science and technology, environment,
business development, health, and defense diversification. The
Office of the Vice President oversees U.S. activities carried out by
executive agencies for the Commission.
ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECTS
IN RUSSIA
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.7
DOE provides technical assistance and supports research promoting
energy efficiency in Russia. Activities include supporting the
Russian-American Memorandum of Cooperation for Energy Efficiency,
which was signed in October 1993.
EXPORT ASSISTANCE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.8
DOE provides technical assistance, training, and a database to
support and upgrade export controls in Russia and the other states of
the FSU.
FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
CONTAINERS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:5.9
With funding from DOD, DOE provides design assistance and technical
support for the fissile material storage containers for the safe and
secure transportation and storage of nuclear weapons material.
FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
FACILITY DESIGN
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.10
With funding from DOD, DOE provides design assistance for the
construction of a safe, secure, and ecologically sound storage
facility for fissile material derived from the destruction of nuclear
weapons.
FISSILE MATERIAL STORAGE
FACILITY EQUIPMENT
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.11
With funding from DOD, DOE defines specifications for material
control and accountability equipment associated with a fissile
material storage facility.
FUSION ENERGY RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.12
This program funds individual research subcontractors or procurements
initiated by U.S. fusion program contractors and grantees with
fusion research centers in Russia. Each action typically costs
$5,000 to $95,000. Through these actions, the U.S. fusion program
has benefited from Russian technical expertise and specialized
equipment.
HUMAN GENOME PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.13
DOE's Office of Health and Environmental Research provides small
grants directly to Russian molecular biologists to promote the
sharing of research in this area.
INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR SAFETY
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.14
With funding from USAID, DOE is trying to improve the level of safety
in Soviet-designed nuclear power plants by (1) strengthening the
operation and upgrading the physical conditions of plants, (2)
promoting a safety culture, and (3) facilitating development of
safety infrastructure in countries operating Soviet-designed
reactors.
JOINT COORDINATING COMMITTEE
ON THE FUNDAMENTAL
PROPERTIES OF MATTER
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.15
The primary focus of this program is the exchange of scientists and
cooperative research and development activities, experiments, theory,
and accelerator techniques in high energy and nuclear physics. Funds
were used to purchase Russian magnets and detector components in
support of U.S. high energy physics experiments, and are being used
in support of the Continuous Electron Beam Accelerator Facility and
the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider experiments in nuclear physics.
LAB-TO-LAB COLLABORATIONS
(NONWEAPONS)
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.16
DOE participates in scientific collaboration with Russian scientists
on nonweapons-related topics such as defense conversion,
nonproliferation, technology transfer, and other commercial
interests.
LIMITED GROUND RADIOLOGICAL
SURVEY AT SEMIPALANTINSK
NUCLEAR TEST SITE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.17
DOE conducted a radiation survey to assess the level and extent of
contamination caused by Soviet nuclear testing at the test site in
Kazakhstan.
MATERIAL PROTECTION,
CONTROL, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.18
With partial funding from DOD, DOE provides material protection,
control, and accountability assistance to the FSU, thereby enhancing
their safeguards culture, thus increasing accountability, and
deterring thefts of direct use nuclear material.
MATERIAL PROTECTION,
CONTROL, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
LAB-TO-LAB PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.19
With partial funding from DOD, DOE provides material protection,
control, and accountability assistance to Russian labs, thereby
enhancing their safeguards culture, thus increasing accountability,
and deterring thefts of direct use nuclear material.
MOSCOW AND UKRAINE ENERGY
EFFICIENCY CENTERS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.20
With funding from USAID, Energy supports the ongoing efforts of the
Moscow Center for Energy Efficiency. It also helps support an energy
efficiency center in Ukraine.
NIS INDUSTRIAL PARTNERING
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.21
With funding from USAID, this program prevents proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction through cooperative projects between the
United States and defense-related industries in the FSU. The goal of
these cooperative projects is to redirect technologies, materials,
resources, and people in the FSU toward nonmilitary scientific and
commercial research and development.
NUCLEAR REACTOR SIMULATOR
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.22
With funding from DOD, the program will provide Ukraine a nuclear
reactor simulator for training nuclear power plant operators,
engineers, inspectors, and other regulatory personnel. The program
will provide simulator-specific development, proposal evaluation,
contractor selection, and ongoing support for 3 years.
OIL AND GAS TECHNOLOGY
CENTER IN RUSSIA
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.23
The goal of this program is to establish an oil and gas technology
center in a producing region of the Russian Federation to address
technical, economic, and institutional issues associated with the
decline in Russian oil and gas production.
PURCHASE OF RUSSIAN
PLUTONIUM-238 (PU-238)
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.24
Under terms of an agreement between DOE and Minatom, the United
States purchases Pu-238, a nonweapons grade isotope of plutonium,
from the Mayak Production Association in Russia. The United States
uses Pu-238 for civilian space power applications and Russia uses the
hard currency from the sales for environmental remediation and social
rehabilitation of the Chelyabinsk region.
RUSSIAN RAILCAR SURETY STUDY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.25
This project, in conjunction with a larger project for design and
procurement of railcar modification kits, studies mechanisms for
improving the safety of Russian rail transportation of dismantled
nuclear weapons.
RUSSIAN HIGHLY ENRICHED
URANIUM CONVERSION/BLENDING
FACILITY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.26
This program supports Russian design, development, and implementation
of nuclear material protection, control, and accountability systems
at facilities in Russia associated with the U.S.-Russian highly
enriched uranium purchase.
SECURITY ENHANCEMENT FOR
RAILCARS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.27
With funding from DOD, DOE provides kits and spares for cargo cars
and guard cars to ensure the safe and secure transportation of
nuclear weapons and nuclear weapons material.
SUPERCONDUCTING SUPER
COLLIDER
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.28
Expenditures during fiscal years 1994 and 1995 were settlements with
Russian laboratories as a result of termination of the program. The
program is now closed.
SUPPORT FOR BILATERAL ARMS
REDUCTION EFFORTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.29
DOE supports laboratory activities directed toward verification of
fissile material production, implementation of agreements to increase
transparency of warhead dismantlement, and construction of facilities
to store components and materials from dismantled nuclear weapons.
SUPPORT FOR PROJECT SAPPHIRE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.30
This project provided logistic support and salaries for scientists
involved in the movement of highly enriched uranium from Kazakhstan
to the United States; relocation of repackaging equipment; on-site
support of the repackaging team; and conveying the material by safe,
secure transport in the United States.
SUPPORT FOR SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY CENTERS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.31
DOE provides technical staff members to work at ISTC in Moscow and
assist in the establishment of STCU.
U.S./FSU JOINT COORDINATING
COMMITTEE FOR CIVILIAN
NUCLEAR REACTOR SAFETY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.32
DOE works with Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus to address civilian
nuclear reactor safety issues. Recent work emphasizes health
impacts, including thyroid disease in children and leukemia in
cleanup workers.
U.S./RUSSIAN JOINT
COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR
RADIATION EFFECTS RESEARCH
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:5.33
DOE supports a bilateral agreement calling for support and
facilitation of cooperative research on (1) health and environmental
effects of nuclear contamination in Russia and (2) long-term effects
of low-level chronic exposure to radiation.
USIA
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6
Figure II.14: Obligations and
Expenditures for
USIA-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.15: Appropriation
Sources for USIA-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
All of the obligations for the U.S. Information Agency
(USIA)-implemented noncredit programs came from the 150 International
Affairs budget function classification.
Table II.7
USIA Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
1,000/1,000 Program $21,620 $16,019 To be
determined
Academic Specialists 329 286 To be
determined
America House 2,228 2,228 9/95
Book Translations 60 60 Completed 3/
94
Business Exchanges 3,414 1,865 6/96
Diplomatic Training 205 187 Completed 3/
94
Fulbright Scholars and Students 11,412 9,930 To be
determined
Graduate and Undergraduate Top-up 11,830 7,938 8/97
Graduate Student Exchange Program 22,219 15,326 9/96
Humphrey Fellowship Program 590 429 To be
determined
International Visitor Program 10,500 7,982 To be
determined
Local and Regional Government 2,602 2,363 9/95
Muskie Fellowship Program 22,735 18,592 To be
determined
NIS Media Assistance 2,123 1,202 To be
determined
NIS Program Administration Costs 378 378 7/96
NIS Training 5,616 4,904 To be
determined
NIS Youth Secondary Exchange 56,900 38,062 7/96
Parliamentary Exchange 1,918 1,918 To be
determined
Program Evaluation and Administration 33 17 To be
determined
Public Administration Training 1,020 1,020 Completed 3/
94
Public Policy Advisers 390 350 Completed 3/
94
Regional Scholar Program 11,187 8,826 To be
determined
Russian Junior Faculty Program 2,474 1,547 6/96
Samantha Smith Academic Exchanges 2,521 2,364 To be
determined
Samantha Smith Youth Exchanges 2,575 2,397 To be
determined
Social Science and Civics Education 691 417 To be
programs determined
Teacher Exchange Program 2,365 1,568 To be
determined
Technical Assistance for Public Policy 75 77 Completed 3/
94
Undergrad Student Exchange Program 8,979 6,362 8/96
University Linkages and NIS University 10,337 7,813 To be
Partnership determined
================================================================================
Total $219,326 $162,427
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
USIA implemented the following 30 programs:
1,000/1,000 PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.1
The President's University Student Exchange (1,000/1,000 student
exchange) provides grants to U.S. educational, cultural, and other
nonprofit institutions to support undergraduate exchanges between the
United States and the FSU to promote mutual understanding.
ACADEMIC SPECIALISTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.2
With the use of 2- to 6-week single-country grants, American experts
consult with academics and professionals at foreign educational or
other key institutions about specific issues, such as curriculum or
institutional development, or conduct academic or professional
seminars/workshops for foreign audiences.
AMERICA HOUSE PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.3
This program plans for the opening and initial operation of an
America House in Kiev, Ukraine; Alma Ata, Kazakhstan; and
Vladivostok, Russia. America House facilities will function as a
base for visiting American technical advisers, teachers, government
experts, and volunteers carrying out both U.S. government and
private sector assistance programs.
BOOK TRANSLATIONS PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.4
With funding from USAID, USIA helped translate books in six FSU
countries.
BUSINESS EXCHANGES
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.5
The Business for Russia Program arranges 1 month U.S.-based
internships to provide Russian entrepreneurs with practical knowledge
of a market economy and to promote a supportive business environment
for the participants upon their return to Russia. Russians are
hosted by groups in local American communities and stay with host
families.
DIPLOMATIC TRAINING PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.6
This program provided training for 30 officials representing the
foreign ministers of Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan in the
establishment of a diplomatic service. Two 2-week workshops were
held in Salzburg, Austria.
FULBRIGHT SCHOLARS AND
STUDENTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.7
The Fulbright program exchanges U.S. and foreign faculty lecturers,
researchers, and graduate students for one semester to one academic
year.
GRADUATE AND UNDERGRADUATE
TOP-UP PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.8
Under this program, USIA awards grants to undergraduate and graduate
students from the FSU who are admitted to U.S. universities but need
partial financial assistance. Maximum grants of $10,000 per student
are awarded to defray transportation and living expenses. The U.S.
institution is expected to provide full tuition for the recipient.
GRADUATE STUDENT EXCHANGE
PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:6.9
Under this program, fellowships for graduate-level study in the
United States are granted in the fields of public administration,
economics, business, educational administration, public policy, and
law for students and professionals from the FSU.
HUMPHREY FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.10
The Hubert H. Humphrey Fellowship Program awards grants to
mid-career professionals for a 1-year program of nondegree study and
practical experience. Fellows are selected based on their potential
for national leadership.
INTERNATIONAL VISITOR
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.11
Foreign leaders and potential leaders in a broad variety of
professional fields meet with their counterparts in the United States
for approximately 30 days and experience U.S. culture and society.
The European Branch programs include individual visitors,
single-country projects, subregional projects in the FSU and Baltic,
European regional projects, and Freedom Support and technical
assistance grants.
LOCAL AND REGIONAL
GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.12
The program provides opportunities for FSU participants to examine
the relationship among federal, regional, and local levels of
government. Individual projects include internship programs, study
tours, and short-term nontechnical training workshops.
MUSKIE FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.13
The Edmund S. Muskie Fellowship Program provides scholarships to
young and mid-career citizens from the FSU for graduate study in the
United States in the fields of business administration, economics,
law, and public administration. The fellowship also provides 3- to
6-month internships for participants to make professional contacts
for businesses, law firms, international organizations, university
research centers, and other private sector institutions. The
objective of the program is to promote democratic and economic
reform.
NIS MEDIA ASSISTANCE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.14
With funds from the Freedom Support Act, USIA conducts a variety of
media programs in Russia and Kyrgyzstan, including media workshops
and seminars on journalistic techniques, the role of the free press
in a democratic society, the business of media, and information
gathering in specific fields; media equipment donations;
establishment of a media resource clearing house at the Russian
American Press Center in Moscow; and news media internships and
in-country training sessions for journalists.
NIS PROGRAM ADMINISTRATIVE
COSTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.15
The figures in table II.6 for this program are administrative and
travel costs billed to USAID through an interagency agreement as part
of USIA's implementation of programs funded through transfer from
USAID.
NIS TRAINING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.16
The NIS Training Program focuses on local government and public
administration, business, and media. Programs can include "train the
trainers" models; support to indigenous training centers; and
seminars, workshops, and observation study tours in the United States
and the FSU.
NIS YOUTH SECONDARY EXCHANGE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.17
Grants are awarded to U.S. institutions to bring FSU high school
students to the United States and send Americans to the FSU on
short-term and long-term exchanges. The program supports four areas:
(1) the Academic Year Program, (2) the Semester Inbound/Academic Year
Outbound, (3) the Short-Term Thematic Program, and (4) the School
Linkage Program.
PARLIAMENTARY EXCHANGE
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.18
This program introduces parliamentarians from the FSU to the U.S.
legislative system by providing an opportunity to observe the
day-to-day work of U.S. Members of Congress in Washington and their
home districts.
PROGRAM EVALUATION AND
ADMINISTRATION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.19
Freedom Support Act funds are provided for salaries of temporary
personnel hired to administer programs, travel to program sites,
development and administration of evaluation instruments for program
participants, and monitoring efforts by program staff.
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
TRAINING PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.20
Under this program, national and local leaders are trained in the
principles and practices of democratic governance. The emphasis is
on managing governmental structures at the local, regional, and
national levels. Citizen participation, sister cities'
relationships, long-term links, and training programs are featured.
PUBLIC POLICY ADVISERS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.21
Public policy advisers work with FSU host governments to help set up
democratic forms of governance. They help resolve issues related to
personnel management; budget; local and regional government;
education; constitutional structure; economic development; public
awareness programs; and relations among the executive branch,
national legislatures, and local government.
REGIONAL SCHOLAR PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.22
The Regional Scholar Exchange Program provides grants to doctoral and
post-doctoral scholars in the FSU for research in the United States
and for Americans to conduct research in the FSU in the humanities
and the social sciences. The objectives are to promote international
advanced scholarly cooperation and allow an exchange of access to
research sources.
RUSSIAN JUNIOR FACULTY
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.23
This program is designed to complement the Fulbright Scholarship
Program by offering 1 year fellowships to Russian professors to
conduct research, attend classes, and work with a mentor to develop
revised curricula in the fields of business administration, public
administration, law, economics, library science, library
administration, and university administration.
SAMANTHA SMITH ACADEMIC
EXCHANGES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.24
The Samantha Smith Memorial Exchange Program provides grants to U.S.
educational, cultural, and other nonprofit institutions to support
undergraduate exchanges between the United States and the FSU, the
Baltic countries, and Eastern Europe. The purpose of the program is
to promote mutual understanding through educational and cultural
exchange.
SAMANTHA SMITH YOUTH
EXCHANGES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.25
This program provides for exchanges of high school students in the
FSU and the United States. One objective of the program is to
promote democratic reform by exposing youth directly to American
political, economic, and social systems.
SOCIAL SCIENCE AND CIVICS
EDUCATION PROGRAMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.26
USIA programs for reforming social sciences curricula provide
semester or academic year fellowships at major U.S. research or
teaching institutions for Russian junior faculty teachers of the
social sciences or law.
TEACHER EXCHANGE PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.27
This program supports one- and two-way exchange programs for
educators at the secondary and post-secondary levels with a focus on
English, social sciences, and curriculum reform. The program
includes a project for teaching assistants that brings young Russian
teachers and recent graduates of pedagogical institutes in the fields
of social sciences and English to 2- and 4-year colleges and
universities in the United States.
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR
PUBLIC POLICY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.28
The USIA Information Office at the American Embassy in Moscow and the
USIA Television Service, Foreign Broadcast Support Office provided
opportunities for Russian television documentary and news
producers/journalists to make TV documentaries on topics within the
context of rule of law for broadcast on prime time national
television in Russia and the FSU.
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT
EXCHANGE PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.29
Fellowships for undergraduate study in the United States are granted
in the fields of agriculture, computer science, business, economics,
public policy/government, and education. Undergraduate candidates
are recruited in the FSU through a cooperative effort administered by
the American Council of Teachers of Russian and the American
Collegiate Consortium.
UNIVERSITY LINKAGES AND THE
NIS UNIVERSITY PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:6.30
The University Affiliations Program's objective is to support
institutional linkages between U.S. and foreign colleges and
universities with a demonstrated commitment to internationalizing
their academic programs in a variety of fields, including social
sciences, humanities, arts, law, and business. This program targets
partnerships that support development of curricula and teaching
methodologies and that seek to modernize administrative structures at
higher education institutions in the FSU.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:7
Figure II.16: Obligations and
Expenditures for
State-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.17: Appropriation
Sources for State-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.18: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
State-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.8
State Department Noncredit Program
Obligations and Expenditures by Program
(Fiscal Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Communications Link $345 $323 6/30/96
Foreign Diplomat Training 365 336 Completed 6/
27/94
Humanitarian Assistance 49,935 47,302 1/1/00
Miscellaneous State Department Assistance 90 45 Completed
Efforts
NIS Rule of Law 429 301 To be
determined
NIS Telecom Technical Assistance Program 455 455 9/98
Program for the Study of Eastern Europe 29,182 20,080 8/31/96
and the NIS (Title VIII)
Russian Fissile Material Storage Facility 244 244 Completed
Design
Science and Technology Centers 767 765 12/03
Science and Technology Cooperation 1,677 945 9/30/95
Travel Costs and Translation Services 262 52 Completed
================================================================================
Total $83,751 $70,848
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The State Department implemented or supported the following 11
programs:
COMMUNICATIONS LINK
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.1
With partial funding from DOD, the program established the U.S.
terminals for communications links with Belarus, Ukraine, and
Kazakhstan.
FOREIGN DIPLOMAT TRAINING
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.2
With funding from USAID, State trained many of the new and
inexperienced diplomats from former Soviet states who had been
brought on board to staff newly created or significantly revamped
foreign ministries.
HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.3
State transports private sector and U.S. government excess materials
(food, medicines, hospitals, and medical and farm equipment and
supplies) to the FSU. Distribution is made directly to the needy by
nongovernmental organizations and local administrations. These
figures only include transportation costs incurred during fiscal year
1994 and the first quarter of fiscal year 1995.
MISCELLANEOUS STATE
DEPARTMENT ASSISTANCE
EFFORTS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.4
This program represents small funding transfers from USAID to State
to support the overall U.S. assistance effort.
NIS RULE OF LAW
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.5
With funding from USAID, this program promotes changes in the roles
and attitudes of players in the FSU legal system, thereby elevating
the functions and stature of judges and subordinating prosecutors'
roles to legal constraints and judicial power.
NIS TELECOM TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.6
With funding from USAID, the program strives to enhance private
sector development of telecommunications in the FSU by (1) funding
multilateral and bilateral telecommunication technical assistance
programs and (2) developing policy seminars and workshops on
telecommunication regulatory issues, policy matters, technical
coordination, charging/tariff policies, and competition/privatization
of telecommunication.
PROGRAM FOR THE STUDY OF
EASTERN EUROPE AND THE NIS
(TITLE VIII)
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.7
The intent of the program is to redress the diminishing supply of
experts on this region by providing stable, long-term financing on a
national level for advanced research, graduate and language training;
public dissemination of research data, methods, and findings; and
contact and collaboration among government and private specialists.
State awards grants to national organizations, which then make awards
to individual scholars or other institutions.
RUSSIAN FISSILE MATERIAL
STORAGE FACILITY-DESIGN
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.8
This program represents DOD funding transfers to the State Department
to support the DOD CTR program in fissile material storage facility
design.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
CENTERS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:7.9
With funding from DOD, State provided support for the DOD-managed
science and technology center in Russia. The center is designed to
be a clearinghouse for developing, selecting, funding, and monitoring
projects that will be carried out primarily at institutions and
facilities in the FSU. The program will be transferred to the State
Department in fiscal year 1996.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
COOPERATION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:7.10
State's Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs provides funding to (1) develop multilateral
cooperation and negotiate international agreements; (2) expand
international science, technology, and health cooperation; (3)
negotiate agreements and support programs to advance U.S. fishing
and marine conservation goals; and (4) integrate sustainable
development into economic and social activities.
TRAVEL COSTS AND TRANSLATION
SERVICES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:7.11
This program represents funding transfers from DOD to the State
Department for travel costs and translation services that supported
the CTR program.
PEACE CORPS
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:8
Figure II.19: Obligations and
Expenditures for Peace
Corps-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.20: Appropriation
Sources for Peace
Corps-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
All of the obligations for Peace Corps-implemented noncredit programs
came from the 150 International Affairs budget function
classification.
Table II.9
Peace Corps Noncredit Program
Obligations and Expenditures by Program
(Fiscal Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Education $19,469 $18,842 To be
determined
Small Business Development 14,344 14,066 To be
determined
================================================================================
Total $33,813 $32,908
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Peace Corps implemented the following two programs:
EDUCATION
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:8.1
Peace Corps volunteers teach English in secondary schools throughout
the FSU and work closely with Ministries of Education to develop
teaching methods and curricula for students and educators.
Volunteers also provide more advanced levels of English programs for
business entrepreneurs and government officials as they seek to
expand their contact with the international community.
SMALL BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:8.2
To support the transition to free market economies, volunteers are
working in business centers throughout the FSU, providing information
and advice to individual entrepreneurs and newly privatized
businesses. Specific activities include helping banking industries
structure commercial credit services, teaching business and
entrepreneurial development, and working as municipal advisers to
local governments.
TDA
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:9
Figure II.21: Obligations and
Expenditures for
TDA-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.22: Appropriation
Sources for TDA-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
All of the obligations for TDA-implemented noncredit programs came
from the 150 International Affairs budget function classification.
Table II.10
TDA Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Trade and Development Opportunities $31,274 $11,447 To be
determined
================================================================================
Total $31,274 $11,447
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TDA implemented the following program:
TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITIES IN THE NIS
------------------------------------------------------ Appendix II:9.1
With partial funding from USAID, TDA has helped U.S. companies
pursue overseas business opportunities in developing and
middle-income countries since early 1992. By funding feasibility
studies, orientation visits, specialized training grants, and various
forms of technical assistance, TDA enables American businesses to
become involved in the planning stages of major infrastructure and
industrial projects. Projects have involved oil and gas,
telecommunications, aviation, electric power, mixed residential and
commercial development, minerals development, and manufacturing.
HHS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10
Figure II.23: Obligations and
Expenditures for
HHS-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.24: Appropriation
Sources for HHS-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.25: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
HHS-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.11
HHS Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Centers for Disease Control Programs in $1,126 $1,126 To be
Technical Assistance and Exchanges determined
Emergency Public Health Information 1,394 1,117 8/96
Surveillance System
Food and Drug Administration Activities 116 116 Completed 9/
with the USSR 94
Food and Drug Administration Vaccine and 1,333 1,255 9/96
Related Assistance
Miscellaneous Cooperative Science and 1,451 1,326 To be
Technology Activities determined
National Cancer Institute Projects 2,646 2,646 To be
determined
National Institutes for Health Biomedical 14,355 1 4,005 To be
and Behavioral Research determined
Scientific Exchanges of Cardiopulmonary 1,091 1,038 To be
Scientists determined
================================================================================
Total $23,512 $22,629
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HHS implemented the following eight programs:
CDC PROGRAMS IN TECHNICAL
ASSISTANCE AND PROFESSIONAL
EXCHANGES/TRAINING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.1
These programs provide technical assistance in polio eradication and
diphtheria control and support for professional exchanges and
training of health professionals. The majority of the activities are
collaborative and result from shared professional and scientific
interests; they are not part of any explicit CDC program conducted
exclusively in the FSU.
EMERGENCY PUBLIC HEALTH
INFORMATION SURVEILLANCE
SYSTEM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.2
With funding from USAID, CDC pursues a number of programs in nine FSU
countries. In the Caucasus, CDC works to refine, strengthen, and
incorporate an emergency public health information surveillance
system into the Armenian and Georgian Ministries of Health. In
Central Asia, CDC assists the republics in using public health data
in policy formation and the production of monthly public health
bulletins. CDC also provides technical assistance in a variety of
areas to ensure progress and account for specific public health
emergencies. Training accounts for a significant portion of all CDC
project activities in the FSU.
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
ACTIVITIES WITH THE USSR
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.3
This program represents the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
activities under the aegis of the HHS-USSR Ministry of Health
Bilateral Health Agreement. The agency provided funding for
in-country and per diem expenses for Soviet courtesy visits,
orientations, scientific exchanges, and guest researchers.
FDA VACCINE AND RELATED
ASSISTANCE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.4
With funding from USAID, FDA assists FSU authorities address (1) the
quality and quantity of pharmaceutical biological products and
medical products and (2) food safety during the transition from a
command to market economy. Activities include helping to streamline
the registration of FDA regulated products and providing technical
assistance, training, and information.
MISCELLANEOUS COOPERATIVE
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
ACTIVITIES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.5
This program represents a variety of conferences, studies, workshops,
and exchanges involving U.S. and FSU researchers in a number of
health-related fields, including Primatology, alcohol abuse, and
HIV-AIDS.
NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE
PROJECTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.6
In the FSU, the National Cancer Institute is (1) designing studies of
leukemia and thyroid cancer following the Chernobyl accident, (2)
determining whether new procedures can be used to measure the effects
of radiation on humans, (3) supporting outstanding young FSU cancer
researchers, (4) training physicists formerly engaged in military
applications, and (5) engaging in a short-term scientist exchange
program.
NATIONAL INSTITUTES FOR
HEALTH BIOMEDICAL AND
BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.7
The National Institutes for Health is working with the FSU to
strengthen biomedical research in FSU countries and apply that
research to improve the health of humans and reduce the burdens of
disease and disability.
SCIENTIFIC EXCHANGES OF
CARDIOPULMONARY SCIENTISTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:10.8
This program, underway since 1972, supports exchanges of scientists
from the United States and the FSU to advance their knowledge and
understanding of cardiopulmonary diseases and their treatment through
biomedical research of mutual interest and benefit. Cooperating
foreign scientists participate on a cost-sharing basis and with the
support of their research institute. Research projects build on the
scientific priorities mandated by Congress for the National Heart,
Lung, and Blood Institute.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11
Figure II.26: Obligations and
Expenditures for
Commerce-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.27: Appropriation
Sources for
Commerce-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.28: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
Commerce-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.12
Commerce Noncredit Program Obligations
and Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousand)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
American Business Centers $8,545 $3,039 9/97
Assistance to Russia and Ukraine on GATT/ 123 49 12/95
WTO Accession
BISNIS (Business Information Service for 1,932 1,879 To be
the NIS) determined
CABNIS (Consortium of American Businesses 5,925 1,921 To be
in NIS) determined
Export Control Development Cooperation 420 338 To be
determined
SABIT (Special American Business 5,122 1,424 To be
Internship Program) determined
UHIPP (U.S. Health Industry Partnership 729 370 6/96
Program)
================================================================================
Total $22,796 $9,020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department of Commerce implemented the following seven programs:
AMERICAN BUSINESS CENTER
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11.1
With funding from USAID, this program, mandated by section 301 of the
Freedom Support Act, promotes the rapid expansion of U.S. trade and
investment in the FSU, with emphasis on small- and medium-sized U.S.
firms. The Centers provide American companies with a broad range of
business development and facilitation services.
ASSISTANCE TO RUSSIA AND
UKRAINE ON GENERAL AGREEMENT
ON TRADE AND TARIFFS/WORLD
TRADE ORGANIZATION ACCESSION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11.2
With funding from USAID, this program helps Russia and Ukraine accede
to the World Trade Organization. The General Agreement on Trade and
Tariffs--Uruguay round agreements contain a number of obligations in
many trade-related fields that Russia and Ukraine must assume in
order to join the World Trade Organization. Commerce has a resident
adviser in each country to help the governments respond to the
international trade community and develop ways to implement
obligatory requirements.
BUSINESS INFORMATION SERVICE
FOR THE NIS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11.3
With funding primarily from USAID, this program provides information,
counseling, contacts, and trade leads to U.S. companies interested
in doing business in the FSU through an information hotline,
publications, the Internet, and other services. The program also
assists FSU companies find U.S. partners.
CONSORTIUM OF AMERICAN
BUSINESSES IN THE NIS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11.4
With funding from USAID, this program is designed to help U.S. firms
establish a commercial presence in markets and enhance privatization
in the FSU. Nonprofit grantees form consortia of for-profit U.S.
firms interested in trading with the FSU and the program provides
funds to these grantees to help cover the costs of establishing
offices in the FSU.
EXPORT CONTROL DEVELOPMENT
COOPERATION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11.5
With funding from DOD, this program (1) assists in developing
effective, multipurpose export control systems in the FSU and (2)
helps obtain the countries' adherence to multilateral regimes that
seek to control the transfer of weapons of mass destruction, related
technologies, and other sensitive goods and technologies. The
program is divided into four areas of activity: project development,
export control community technical interaction, training and
technical assistance, and equipment and facilities.
SPECIAL AMERICAN BUSINESS
INTERNSHIP TRAINING PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11.6
With funding from USAID, this program supports the FSU transition to
a market economy while fostering long-term commercial ties between
them and the United States. Under this program, Commerce provides
grants to American companies to help defray the costs of hosting FSU
managers and scientists for 3 to 6 months of hands-on training.
U.S. HEALTH INDUSTRY
PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:11.7
With funding from USAID, this program assists American medical
device, health-care service, and pharmaceutical companies pursuing
business opportunities in the FSU by collecting and disseminating
market data, organizing business development and reverse trade
missions, and sharing the high costs of exploring these emerging
markets.
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:12
Figure II.29: Obligations and
Expenditures for
Treasury-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.30: Appropriation
Sources for
Treasury-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.31: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
Treasury-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.13
Treasury Noncredit Program Obligations
and Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Export Controls--Belarus $127 $122 12/95
Export Controls--Ukraine 22 17 9/95
Financial Adviser Program 6,215 4,813 To be
determined
Financial Management Training 2,000 140 5/97
G-7 Support Implementation Group (SIG) 2,592 792 12/31/95
Internal Revenue Service Eastern Europe/ 14 14 To be
NIS Program determined
International Narcotics and Law 125 108 9/30/95
Enforcement Matters
================================================================================
Total $11,095 $6,006
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Treasury implemented the following seven programs:
EXPORT CONTROLS: BELARUS
AND UKRAINE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:12.1
With funding from DOD, this U.S. Customs Service program assists the
recipient countries in efforts to control their borders. Under this
program, Belarus Customs officials receive training in the United
States on how to use various U.S. Customs enforcement equipment.
Customs officials have worked with the Customs Service of Kazakhstan
and are developing training and assistance programs geared
specifically to Ukraine's Customs needs.
FINANCIAL ADVISER PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:12.2
With funding from USAID, this program focuses on topics that are the
province of finance ministries in most countries. The program places
resident advisers in government institutions, supplemented by more
specialized experts who visit on short-term missions, to deal with
specific problems related to policy reforms that are key to economic
transition.
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
TRAINING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:12.3
With funding from USAID, the Financial Management Service of Treasury
is developing computer-assisted training materials for the State Tax
Service of the Russian Federation to improve the administration of
Russian fiscal policy. This program is being carried out through a
cooperative agreement with the Soros Business and Management
Foundation, which is providing matching grant financing.
G-7 SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION
GROUP
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:12.4
The Support Implementation Group was established as a result of
Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin Vancouver summit in April 1993 to
address obstacles to the effective provision of assistance on the
side of Russian government or of the G-7 donors. Group members
agreed that the Group should not be a policy body, but rather should
discuss operational issues that affect the delivery of assistance.
USAID provided the funds for this program.
INTERNAL REVENUE
SERVICE-EASTERN EUROPE/NIS
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:12.5
The Internal Revenue Service provides instructors on long- and
short-term temporary duty assignments to support the Moscow training
center.
INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT MATTERS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:12.6
With funding from the State Department, the U.S. Customs Service
provides a wide array of anticrime officer development courses on law
enforcement team operations, management skills, and
infrastructure-building for the law enforcement agencies of the
recipient countries. The purpose is to provide selected law
enforcement officers and others with appropriate skills and knowledge
for antismuggling operations, basic contraband team operations, and
drug identification and field testing.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:13
Figure II.32: Obligations and
Expenditures for
Interior-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.33: Appropriation
Sources for
Interior-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
All of the obligations for Department of the Interior-implemented
noncredit programs came from the 150 International Affairs budget
function classification.
Table II.14
Interior Noncredit Program Obligations
and Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Improved Public Sector Environmental $7,404 $1,660 9/97
Sciences Program
Mineral Management Service Activities in 993 458 9/30/96
Russia
================================================================================
Total $8,397 $2,118
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department of the Interior implemented the following two
programs:
IMPROVED PUBLIC SECTOR
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:13.1
With funding from USAID, the U.S. Geological Survey is conducting
oil and gas resource assessment programs in Russia and Ukraine. The
goals of these efforts are to (1) improve technical communication
between petroleum geologists from the United States and the FSU, (2)
make petroleum geology data on FSU countries available to the U.S.
private sector, and (3) facilitate investment by the U.S. petroleum
industry. The Survey is also conducting a coal resource assessment
and exploration program in Armenia and a coal resource assessment
program in Kyrgyzstan.
MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE
ACTIVITIES IN RUSSIA
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:13.2
With funding from the State Department, the Minerals Management
Service undertook a risk analysis of resources development activities
in the Russian Far East. With funding from USAID through the U.S.
Geological Survey, the Service provides training in the United States
and Russia for Russia's oil and gas regulators and environmental
agencies. The training is designed to help establish a regulatory
program to work with the private sector in developing Russian oil and
gas resources in an environmentally sound manner.
NRC
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:14
Figure II.34: Obligations and
Expenditures for
NRC-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.35: Appropriation
Sources for NRC-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.36: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
NRC-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.15
NRC Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Joint Coordinating Committee for Civilian $503 $365 To be
Nuclear Reactor Safety determined
Material Control, Accountability, and 6 6 12/98
Protection--Kazakhstan
Material Control, Accountability, and 80 20 9/98
Protection--Russia
Material Control, Accountability, and 94 18 12/98
Protection--Ukraine
NRC-Sponsored Research at Russian 2,008 935 To be
Research Center determined
Nuclear Regulatory Assistance 4,259 2,798 12/96
================================================================================
Total $6,950 $4,142
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NRC implemented the following six programs:
JOINT COORDINATING COMMITTEE
FOR CIVILIAN NUCLEAR REACTOR
SAFETY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:14.1
Activities under the Committee include the exchange of scientists and
technical information and contract support in the following areas of
safety research: vessel integrity, aging, severe accidents, and
epidemiological studies and assistance.
MATERIAL CONTROLS,
ACCOUNTABILITY, AND
PROTECTION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:14.2
With funding from DOD, NRC provides equipment, property, supplies,
training, and services to enhance nuclear material control and
accounting and physical protection in Kazakhstan, Ukraine, and
Russia. At the national level, efforts address the development or
enhancement of (1) regulatory functions, (2) a national information
system, and (3) technical support infrastructure. At selected
facilities, pilot safeguards programs are being established.
NRC-SPONSORED RESEARCH AT
THE RUSSIAN RESEARCH CENTER
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:14.3
NRC is sponsoring research at the Russian Research Center (Kurachatov
Institute) and Russian Academy of Sciences aimed at preventing severe
accidents at nuclear power plants.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
ASSISTANCE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:14.4
With funding from USAID, NRC is implementing a series of activities
designed to assist Russian and Ukrainian regulators in training and
in developing safety standards and procedures. The intent is to
increase the regulatory authorities' ability and stature within their
respective countries to effectively provide and ensure the safety of
operational nuclear reactors.
NSF
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:15
Figure II.37: Obligations and
Expenditures for
NSF-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.38: Appropriation
Sources for NSF-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.39: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
NSF-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.16
NSF Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Cooperative Research Programs $6,377 $6,377 To be
determined
======================================================================
Total $6,377 $6,377
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The NSF implemented the following program:
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH
PROGRAMS WITH NIS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:15.1
The National Science Foundation awards grants to U.S. researchers
for collaborative research activities with the FSU in basic science
and engineering. The objectives are to advance basic science and
engineering by enabling leading experts from the United States and
FSU to combine complementary talents and pool research resources in
areas of strong mutual competence and interest.
EPA
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16
Figure II.40: Obligations and
Expenditures for
EPA-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.41: Appropriation
Sources for EPA-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.42: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
EPA-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.17
EPA Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Air Pollution Control Technology $560 $550 9/97
Arctic Contaminants Research Program 10 10 Completed 9/
94
Drinking Water Quality in the Moscow 756 756 9/97
Region
Environmental Management Training 522 522 9/97
Integrated Resource Planning 285 285 6/96
Kaniv Reservoir Water Quality Project 10 10 9/97
Nizhnii Tagil Environment Project 1,040 592 9/97
Recovering of Fugitive Methane Emissions 294 294 6/96
Russia Air Management Program 1,185 1,180 9/97
Scientific and Technological Cooperative 1,483 1,483 Completed
Program
================================================================================
Total $6,145 $5,682
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA implemented the following 10 programs:
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL
TECHNOLOGY
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.1
With funding from USAID, this program will demonstrate new,
innovative, and low-cost air pollution control technology at a
coal-fired heating plant in Dorogobuzh, Russia.
ARCTIC CONTAMINANTS RESEARCH
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.2
This program provided travel and living support for two Russian
scientists who worked collaboratively with Office of Research and
Development scientists. The group interpreted data from a scientific
expedition conducted in the summer of 1993. The goal of the entire
Arctic Contaminants Research Program, the bulk of which is conducted
outside the FSU, focuses on assessing the extent of contamination of
arctic ecosystems by atmospherically transported pollutants.
DRINKING WATER QUALITY IN
THE MOSCOW REGION
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.3
With funding from USAID, this program concerns point-source pollution
from inadequate wastewater treatment, protection of small watersheds
from polluted agricultural runoff, and upgrades to laboratory and
monitoring capacity. The objective is to improve drinking water
quality and reduce health risks associated with water pollution and
microbial contamination of the Moscow drinking water supply.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
TRAINING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.4
With funding from USAID, this program provides training in
environmental management for mid-career professionals in various
branches of the Ukrainian government, business and industry, and the
environmental nongovernmental organization community.
INTEGRATED RESOURCE PLANNING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.5
With funding from USAID, this program introduces integrated resource
planning tools and concepts to promote energy efficiency and
emissions reductions at power plants Mosenergo in Moscow and
Yuzhenergo in the north Caucasus region.
KANIV RESERVOIR WATER
QUALITY PROJECT
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.6
With funding from USAID, the program will help improve water quality
management of the Dnipro river system by introducing useful
management, modeling, and monitoring approaches to protect and
improve public health and aquatic resources.
NIZHNII TAGIL ENVIRONMENT
PROJECT
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.7
With funding from USAID, the program will (1) provide environmental
audits and pollution prevention at industrial enterprises, (2)
strengthen the management capacity in local environmental agencies,
(3) develop environmental education, (4) help establish
community-based planning and priority, and (5) create an
environmental training and information center in Ekaterinburg. The
objective is to improve environmental management and reduce pollution
in Nizhnii Tagil and to disseminate information on this experience to
other cities in the Urals region and elsewhere in Russia.
RECOVERY OF FUGITIVE METHANE
EMISSIONS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.8
With funding from USAID, this program will recover fugitive methane
emissions from gas pipelines and coal mines in Russia by (1)
introducing methane recovery technologies and practices by
establishing a methane recovery center and pre-feasibility studies at
individual coal mines in the Kuznetsk basin and (2) reducing leakage
at compressor stations and welds in the Gazprom gas pipeline system
through field demonstrations of methane recovery technologies and
practices.
RUSSIA AIR MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.9
With funding from USAID, the program will upgrade air quality
management tools and programs in Volgagrad to develop a control
strategy and reduce emissions at selected sites; it will also
introduce changes, where appropriate, into Russian national air
policy. The objective is to improve air quality management in
Russia, initially at Volgagrad and subsequently throughout the
country.
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL
COOPERATIVE PROGRAM
---------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:16.10
This program represents various EPA activities conducted under the
aegis of the U.S.-U.S.S.R. Environmental Agreement. Examples
include demonstrating utility boiler emission control and exchanging
technologies and ideas for controlling degradation of marine port
environments.
OPIC
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:17
NONCREDIT PROGRAMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:17.1
Figure II.43: Obligations and
Expenditures for
OPIC-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
All of the funding for OPIC-implemented noncredit obligations came
from USAID Economic Support Funds. All of the obligations for
OPIC-implemented noncredit programs came from the 150 International
Affairs budget function classification.
Table II.18
OPIC Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Health Sector Initiative $612 $501 9/95
Private Sector Initiative 2,202 1,380 9/30/95
======================================================================
Total $2,814 $1,881
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OPIC implemented the following two noncredit programs:
HEALTH SECTOR INITIATIVES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:17.2
With funding from USAID, OPIC encourages U.S. investment in
developing an efficient productive capacity for vaccines,
pharmaceuticals, and basic medical supplies in targeted FSU
countries. This effort includes investment missions conducted by
OPIC, sponsorship of seminars and/or conferences for companies in the
health sector on investment opportunities in the FSU, and
preinvestment services.
PRIVATE SECTOR INITIATIVES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:17.3
With funding from USAID, OPIC provides assistance to targeted FSU
countries to encourage private sector development and the conversion
of defense-related production in the FSU. This program includes
investment missions, roundtables for selected business people in
specific sectors and countries, and seminars and conferences for U.S.
companies about investment opportunities in the FSU.
CREDIT PROGRAMS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:17.4
Table II.19
OPIC Credit/Insurance Programs' Face
Value and Subsidy Cost by Program
(Fiscal Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Subsidy Program end
Program Face value cost date
------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Insurance $983,860 $0 To be
determined
Loan guarantees 838,300 36,928 To be
determined
======================================================================
Total $1,822,160 $36,928
----------------------------------------------------------------------
OPIC implemented the following two credit/insurance programs:
INSURANCE PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:17.5
OPIC insures U.S. investors against currency inconvertibility,
expropriation, and political violence in new ventures and the
expansion of existing enterprises overseas.
LOAN GUARANTEE PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:17.6
OPIC seeks to strengthen the U.S. economy by providing support to
American companies that want to expand into new markets overseas.
The program provides medium- to long-term financing for sound
overseas investment ventures involving significant equity or
management participation by U.S. businesses. Financing generally
ranges from $2 million to $200 million, with OPIC contributing up to
50 percent for new ventures and up to 75 percent for expansion of
existing successful operations.
DOT
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:18
Figure II.44: Obligations and
Expenditures for
DOT-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.45: Appropriation
Sources for DOT-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.46: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
DOT-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.20
DOT Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Federal Aviation Administration $849 $849 To be
Assistance determined
Federal Highway Administration Russia 528 350 To be
Program determined
Travel-Cooperative Threat Reduction 30 30 Completed
================================================================================
Total $1,407 $1,229
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Department of Transportation implemented the following three
programs:
FEDERAL AVIATION
ADMINISTRATION ASSISTANCE TO
NIS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:18.1
The Federal Aviation Administration activities in the FSU include (1)
opening new and expanding shorter international air routes through
the Russian Far East and Chinese airspace; (2) modernizing Russia's
air traffic control system; (3) improving air safety and security in
Russia; (4) signing a reciprocal aircraft certification agreement
permitting Federal Aviation Administration certification of
"westernized" Russian aircraft; (5) using signals from U.S. and
Russian navigation satellite systems to speed operational
introduction of the global navigation system; and (6) establishing
the regulatory, policy, economic, and other steps necessary to
successfully convert Russia's national aviation system to a free
market model with improved ties to U.S. counterparts.
FEDERAL HIGHWAY
ADMINISTRATION RUSSIA
PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:18.2
This program provides assistance implementing the $300-million World
Bank Highway Rehabilitation and Maintenance Program loan to Russia.
The Administration agreed to provide the Russian Federal Highway
Department with technical expertise related to institutional reform
as well as contract administration and materials quality control for
Highway Rehabilitation and Maintenance Program projects. The
Russians have requested the Administration's continuing participation
in this process and expressed a strong desire to pattern their
infrastructure program along the federal-state design used in the
United States.
TRAVEL-CTR
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:18.3
This program represents travel costs incurred in support of DOD's CTR
program. Funding came from DOD.
ACDA
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:19
Figure II.47: Obligations and
Expenditures for
ACDA-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.48: Appropriation
Sources for ACDA-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.49: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
ACDA-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.21
ACDA Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Communications Network $359 $223 12/96
Entrepreneurial Workshop 455 375 7/95
======================================================================
Total $814 $598
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ACDA implemented the following two programs:
COMMUNICATIONS NETWORK
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:19.1
The states participating in the Organization on Security and
Cooperation in Europe have established a communication network for
members to enable the exchange of information and timely notification
of inspections and evaluations. This program assists the countries
of the FSU by procuring the necessary station equipment and
communication services for them.
ENTREPRENEURIAL WORKSHOP
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:19.2
In entrepreneurial workshops, U.S. business experts and industry
representatives help scientists from Russia's main nuclear weapons
laboratories to find viable, nonmilitary applications in the
commercial sector for their skills and technologies and develop
effective business plans that can be presented to potential
investors.
CRS
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:20
Figure II.50: Obligations and
Expenditures for
CRS-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
All of the funding for CRS-implemented programs came from USAID
Freedom Support Act funds. All of the obligations for
CRS-implemented noncredit programs came from the 150 International
Affairs budget function classification.
Table II.22
CRS Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Assistance to Federal Assembly of Russia $175 $55 12/96
Assistance to the Supreme Rada of Ukraine 546 320 9/96
================================================================================
Total $721 $375
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CRS implemented the following two programs:
ASSISTANCE TO THE FEDERAL
ASSEMBLY OF RUSSIA
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:20.1
With funding from USAID, the program provides (1) basic office
equipment, an automated system, and the necessary training and
support to the Federal Assembly; (2) assistance for the development
of parliamentary libraries; and (3) technical assistance to improve
the organization's ability to support the parliament and serve the
members' needs for information and research.
ASSISTANCE TO THE SUPREME
RADA OF UKRAINE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:20.2
With funding from USAID, the program provides (1) basic office
equipment, an automated system, and the necessary training and
support to the Supreme Rada; (2) assistance for the development of
parliamentary libraries; and (3) technical assistance to improve the
organization's ability to support the parliament and serve the
members' needs for information and research.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:21
Figure II.51: Obligations and
Expenditures for
Justice-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.52: Appropriation
Sources for Justice-Implemented
Noncredit Obligations (Fiscal
Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Figure II.53: OMB Budget
Function Classifications for
Justice-Implemented Noncredit
Obligations (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
Table II.23
Justice Noncredit Program Obligations
and Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
Obligation Expenditure Program end
Program s s date
----------------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ------------
Anti-Drug Training $231 $231 To be
determined
Crime Assistance Training 159 159 To be
determined
Needs Assessment for Rule of Law Projects 24 24 Completed
================================================================================
Total $414 $414
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justice implemented the following three programs:
ANTI-DRUG TRAINING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:21.1
The Drug Enforcement Administration provides training to FSU
participants in basic drug law enforcement, international narcotic
enforcement, and asset forfeiture.
CRIME ASSISTANCE TRAINING
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:21.2
The Federal Bureau of Investigation provides training and technical
assistance to FSU participants in the areas of white collar
crime/financial crimes, mid-level management, organized crime, law
enforcement training, and law enforcement executive development.
NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR
RULE-OF-LAW PROJECTS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:21.3
This program represents Justice costs incurred for a trip to Russia
to conduct a needs assessment for potential rule-of-law projects.
SEC
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:22
Figure II.54: Obligations and
Expenditures for
SEC-Implemented Noncredit
Programs (Fiscal Year 1990
Through December 31, 1994)
(Dollars in thousands)
(See figure in printed
edition.)
All funding for SEC-implemented noncredit programs in the FSU came
from USAID Freedom Support Act funds. All of the obligations for
SEC-implemented noncredit programs came from the 150 International
Affairs budget function classification.
Table II.24
SEC Noncredit Program Obligations and
Expenditures by Program (Fiscal Year
1990 Through December 31, 1994)
((Dollars in thousands))
Program Obligations Expenditures Program end date
---------- -------------------- -------------------- -- --------------------
Technical $34 $33 9/30/96
Assistance
Program
================================================================================
Total $34 $33
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SEC implemented the following program:
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:22.1
With funding from USAID, the program attempts to facilitate the
development of a securities market regulatory function within the
FSU.
EXIMBANK
------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:23
Table II.25
Eximbank Credit/Insurance Programs' Face
Value and Subsidy Cost by Program
(Fiscal Year 1990 Through December 31,
1994)
((Dollars in thousands))
Program Face value Subsidy cost Program end date
---------- -------------------- -------------------- -- --------------------
Direct $88,764 $17,295 To be determined
loans
Loan 1,757,829 315,469 To be determined
guarantees
Short- 586,530 0 To be determined
term
Insurance
================================================================================
Total $ 2,433,123 $ 332,764
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: Credit reform requirements apply to the Eximbank insurance
program. However, Eximbank cannot calculate subsidy figures for its
insurance program on a per country basis, and as such, could not
provide subsidy figures for its insurance program in the FSU.
Eximbank implemented the following three credit/insurance programs:
DIRECT LOANS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:23.1
This program provides direct loans to finance the sale of U.S.
exports to foreign countries to encourage U.S. exports and create
U.S. jobs.
LOAN GUARANTEES
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:23.2
This program provides loan guarantees to finance the sale of U.S.
exports to foreign countries to encourage U.S. exports and create
U.S. jobs.
SHORT-TERM INSURANCE
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:23.3
This program provides short-term insurance for shipments of U.S.
goods to foreign countries.
MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
========================================================= Appendix III
NATIONAL SECURITY AND
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS DIVISION,
WASHINGTON, D.C.
Louis Zanardi
David Maurer
Stanley Kostyla
Julie Hirshen
RESOURCES, COMMUNITY, AND ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT DIVISION, WASHINGTON,
D.C.
Sarah Veale
Isidro Gomez
RELATED GAO PRODUCTS
============================================================ Chapter 0
Weapons of Mass Destruction: DOD Reporting on Cooperative Threat
Reduction Assistance Can Be Improved (GAO/NSIAD-95-191, Sept. 29,
1995)
Foreign Assistance: Assessment of Selected USAID Projects in Russia
(GAO/NSIAD-95-156, Aug. 3, 1995).
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Reducing the Threat From the Former
Soviet Union: An Update (GAO/NSIAD-95-165, June 9, 1995).
Budget Function Classification: Agency Spending by Subfunction and
Object Category, Fiscal Year 1994 (GAO/AIMD-95-116FS, May 10, 1995).
Former Soviet Union: Creditworthiness of Successor States and U.S.
Export Credit Guarantees (GAO/GGD-95-60, Feb. 24, 1995).
Former Soviet Union: U.S. Bilateral Program Lacks Effective
Coordination (GAO/NSIAD-95-10, Feb. 7, 1995).
Weapons of Mass Destruction: Reducing the Threat From the Former
Soviet Union (GAO/NSIAD-95-7, Oct. 7, 1994).
Nuclear Safety: International Assistance Efforts to Make
Soviet-Designed Reactors Safer (GAO/RCED-94-234, Sept. 29, 1994).
Space Station: Update on the Impact of the Expanded Russian Role
(GAO/NSIAD-94-248, July 29, 1994).
Space Station: Impact of Expanded Russian Role in Funding and
Research (GAO/NSIAD-94-220, June 21, 1994).
International Trade: Kazakhstan Unlikely to Be Major Source of Oil
for the United States (GAO/GGD-94-74, Mar. 4, 1994).
Former Soviet Union: Agricultural Reform and Food Situation in Its
Successor States (GAO/GGD-94-17, Nov. 19, 1993).
*** End of document. ***