AOH :: DOEBILLS.TXT
Status of various DOE bills
|
Status of DOE-Related Bills - December 6, 1989
by David Culp
The Administration releases its budget on January 22 and
Congress convenes on January 23. Little Congressional activity
is expected until February except for the Stello nomination. The
Department of Energy (DOE) will release its new "2010" or
modernization report on April 2.
An analysis of the Department of Energy (DOE) budget for the
nuclear weapons complex will be prepared in early February. The
next bill status report will be available on March 1. Comments
and suggestions are encouraged.
Plutonium Production Ban. As a consequence of the surplus of
plutonium and numerous reactor safety problems, DOE has stopped
producing plutonium at the Savannah River Site (South Carolina)
and Hanford Site (Washington state). These reactors will not
produce plutonium for several years at best. This temporary halt
in U.S. plutonium production could be converted into a permanent
ban that would also end Soviet plutonium production.
House: Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) and Dante Fascell (D-Fla.) introduced
the International Plutonium Control Act, H.R. 2403. It would
withhold funds for plutonium production unless the President
certifies that the Soviet Union continues to produce plutonium or
refuses to negotiate a production halt. The bill has been
referred to the DOE Panel of the Armed Services Committee,
chaired by John Spratt (D-S.C.), and the Foreign Affairs
Subcommittee on Arms Control, International Security and Science,
chaired by Rep. Fascell. Both held hearings in June.
Cosponsors: 181.
A modified version of the bill was adopted 284-138 (Dem.
236-13, Rep. 48-125) as a floor amendment to the defense
authorization bill in July. The amendment called for a U.S.-
Soviet halt in plutonium production and required an
Administration study of the issue, but did not provide
restrictions on plutonium production.
Senate: Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), Tim Wirth (D-Colo.) and Mark
Hatfield (R-Ore.) introduced the Senate bill, S. 1047, now in the
Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by Claiborne Pell (D-R.I.).
Cosponsors: 14.
Final Action: The House-passed provision was not adopted in
conference committee. The final defense bill calls for a report
by the Administration on the national security and verification
implication of such a production ban by July 15, 1990.
Contact for More Information: David Albright, Federation of
American Scientists, (202) 675-1016 and Michelle Robinson,
Council for a Livable World, (202) 543-4100.
Copyright (c) 1989 by the Plutonium Challenge, 1350 New York
Avenue, Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20003, (202) 624-9352. All
rights reserved. Prior permission is given to citizens groups to
reproduce and use this report. Proper credit is appreciated.
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 2
New Production Reactors. DOE is proposing to build two new
production reactors (NPR). One is slated for the Savannah River
Site and the other for the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.
Both would produce tritium and plutonium for nuclear weapons.
DOE estimates the total cost to be $7.7 billion. Arms control
and environmental groups believe there is no need to rush to
construct the reactors until the outcome of the START talks--and
the resulting need for warhead materials--can be assessed.
Final Action: The Armed Services and Appropriations Committees
in the House and Senate provided full funding for research and
design of the new production reactors.
Contact for More Information: Debby Holland, Nuclear Control
Institute, (202) 822-8444.
Cleanup Budget. Government reports have estimated DOE's cleanup
costs could be over $100 billion. In August, the DOE released
its Five-Year Cleanup Plan for handling the toxic and radioactive
waste at the nuclear weapons complex and DOE's civilian sites.
The plan will be the subject of hearings early next year.
Final Action: Congress responded by significantly increasing
waste cleanup funds over the Administration's budget request.
The defense authorization and energy and water appropriations
bills adopted the budget numbers in the following table.
Contact for More Information: Jim Beard, Environmental Policy
Institute/Friends of the Earth, (202) 544-2600 and David Culp,
Plutonium Challenge, (202) 624-9352.
DOE DEFENSE WASTE & ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION
(In millions of dollars)
Bush Final
1989 Budget 1990
----- ------ -----
Environmental restoration 159 401 572
Waste operations and projects 726 735 867
Waste research and development 58 90 115
Haz. waste and compliance tech. 8 10 40
Other accounts 66 65 65
----- ----- -----
Total, Defense Waste & Envir. Rest. 1,018 1,302 1,659
Increase over 1989 +284 +641
Increase over Bush Budget +357
Special Isotope Separation (SIS) Plant. The Special Isotope
Separation (SIS) plant in Idaho would refine plutonium for use in
nuclear weapons. DOE projects the plant will cost at least
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 3
$3 billion to develop, construct and operate. If the U.S. is
currently "awash in plutonium" as former Energy Secretary
Herrington testified before Congress in 1988, then the retirement
of warheads under the INF and START arms control agreements will
create a plutonium flood. DOE recycles plutonium from retired
warheads to produce new ones. National arms control and
environment groups, with support from citizen groups in Idaho,
are urging a halt to the plant. DOE and Idaho's Senators Jim
McClure (R) and Steve Symms (R), argue that the nation needs to
increase its plutonium stockpile to meet a future arms race.
House: The DOE Panel of the Armed Services Committee cut
construction funds for the SIS plant by $75 million from the
requested $115 million, leaving $40 million. The Panel
prohibited site preparation, actual construction and equipment
procurement for next year. (Final design is allowed.) Research
and development were fully funded.
Senate: The Armed Services Committee adopted the House funding
levels, but adopted an amendment which would allow site
preparation. In addition, the Committee adopted language which
would block more construction funds after fiscal year 1990 unless
the Secretary of Energy certifies that the SIS technology is
proven and that environmental requirements for the program have
been met. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), John Glenn (D-Ohio) and Tim
Wirth (D-Colo.) offered a floor amendment to bar site preparation
work during fiscal year 1990. However, the measure failed on a
49-50 vote (Dem. 46-8, Rep. 3-42).
Final Action: The final SIS compromise states:
No funds may be obligated for site preparation for
such [SIS] project until the Secretary of Energy has
certified . . . that obligation of funds for site
preparation is a) essential for the national security
of the United States, and b) necessary to meet
plutonium requirements.
No additional funds [beyond the $40 million in the
defense bill] may be obligated for construction,
including site preparation, in connection with such
project until the Secretary has certified . . . that
the technology for the special isotope separation
project has been proven and that all environmental
requirements provided in applicable laws have been met.
Secretary Watkins has yet to state whether he will make the
certification for site preparation and thus the project remains
on hold while the Administration sorts through its SIS position.
Contact for More Information: Dan Reicher, Natural Resources
Defense Council, (202) 783-7800 and Liz Paul, Snake River
Alliance, Ketchum, Idaho, (208) 726-7271.
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 4
Independent Oversight. The on-going revelations of serious
problems at DOE sites have renewed calls for independent
environment, health and safety oversight. In 1988, Congress
established the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, also
known as the Glenn Board. The members of this new five-person
advisory board have been appointed and confirmed.
In May, Energy Secretary Watkins announced a controversial
reorganization of the Office of Environment, Safety and Health,
transferring safety responsibilities to production officials and
eliminating independent staff oversight. In September, he
announced another staffing change: a new Office of Nuclear Safety
that will report directly to the Secretary.
House: David Skaggs (D-Colo.) will introduce a revised version
of his earlier bill (H.R. 1643) which would change the Defense
Nuclear Facilities Safety Board from an advisory to an oversight
body and define a new permanent DOE Office for Environment,
Safety and Health. The bill would be referred to the Energy and
Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power, chaired by Phil Sharp
(D-Ind.), and the DOE Panel of the Armed Services Committee,
chaired by John Spratt (D-S.C.). Prospects for oversight
legislation in the House depend on having the strong support of
one of these two panel chairs.
Senate: Title I of the DOE Nuclear Safety and Environment Act,
S. 1304, introduced by John Glenn (D-Ohio), would remove
exemptions for several plants in the nuclear weapons complex from
coverage by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. Title V
would create and define a DOE Office for Environment, Safety and
Health. Cosponsors: 10.
Title I of the Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities Act
of 1989, S. 1802, introduced by Bennett Johnston (D-La.) and
James McClure (R-Idaho), would create a DOE Office of
Environment, Safety and Health and a DOE Office of Waste
Management and Environmental Restoration. Cosponsors: 2.
Both bills have been referred to the full Energy and Natural
Resources Committee, chaired by Sen. Johnston.
Contact for More Information: David Culp, Plutonium Challenge,
(202) 624-9352.
Radiation Research Program. After years of study, there remain
questions about the health effects of radiation exposure.
Currently, radiation research is performed by DOE. However, the
agency's responsibility for production of nuclear weapons has
created doubt as to the integrity of such health impact studies.
As a solution, some advocate transfer of these activities to the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).
Secretary Watkins responded to Congressional concerns by
proposing the release of some data and establishing a special DOE
panel to review the program. The panel will make recommendations
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 5
on the possible transfer of the radiation research program from
DOE to another agency. Watkins has pledged to implement the
panel's recommendations. However at this point, the program
remains under DOE control. The panel will issue its final report
in March and may recommend program transfer.
House: The Radiation Research Reorganization Act of 1989,
H.R. 3212, introduced by Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), is based on earlier
legislation introduced by Sen. Tim Wirth, but expands the HHS
Secretary's mandate to include toxic as well as radioactive
substances. The bill has been referred to the Energy and
Commerce Subcommittee on Health and the Environment, chaired by
Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), and the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee
on Energy and Power, chaired by Phil Sharp (D-Ind.). Hearings
probably will occur this Spring. Cosponsors: 34.
Senate: The Radiation Research Reorganization Act of 1989,
S. 972, was introduced by Tim Wirth (D-Colo.). The bill
transfers radiation health effects research from DOE to HHS.
Cosponsors: 5.
Title IV of the DOE Nuclear Safety and Environment Act,
S. 1304, introduced by John Glenn (D-Ohio), would create an
independent advisory board on radiation research, but would leave
the program within DOE. Cosponsors: 10.
Another approach is Title II of S. 1802, the Department of
Energy Nuclear Facilities Act of 1989, introduced by Bennett
Johnston (D-La.) and James McClure (R-Idaho). The Johnston-
McClure bill would make into law the recently-created DOE review
panel and establish a health data repository. Cosponsors: 2.
All three bills have been referred to the full Energy and
Natural Committee, chaired by Sen. Johnston, which held a hearing
in November on the issue.
Contact for More Information: David Lewis and Todd Perry,
Physicians for Social Responsibility, (202) 785-3777.
Federal Facilities Enforcement. With encouragement from the
Justice Department, DOE argues that the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) and states lack the authority to enforce the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), a critical federal
hazardous waste law. Environmentalists believe that DOE
facilities should be subject to the same standards as businesses
and local governments.
House: H.R. 1056, introduced by Dennis Eckart (D-Ohio), would
allow EPA and states to issue enforceable orders concerning the
management, storage and disposal of hazardous waste. The bill
passed the House 380-39 (Dem. 241-10, Rep. 139-29) in July.
Senate: George Mitchell (D-Maine) introduced the Senate version
of the bill, S. 1140, which has been referred to the Environment
and Public Work Subcommittee on Environmental Protection, chaired
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 6
by Max Baucus (D-Mont.). The subcommittee is expected to hold a
hearing in February. Cosponsors: 7.
John Glenn (D-Ohio) has proposed requiring cleanup
compliance agreements between DOE, EPA and each state where there
is a nuclear weapon facility in Title VI of his DOE Nuclear
Safety and Environment Act, S. 1304. Cosponsors: 10.
A competing approach is Title VIII of S. 1802, introduced by
Bennett Johnston (D-La.) and James McClure (R-Idaho). It
requires cleanup agreements between DOE, EPA and each affected
state, but would supersede federal and state environment laws.
Contact for More Information: Shira Flax, Sierra Club,
(202) 547-1141.
Cleanup Trust Fund. Frustrated with depending on the annual
budget for funding waste cleanup at DOE nuclear sites, some
environmental groups have looked for a long-term solution. One
idea is to create a trust fund, similar to Superfund, to finance
the expected 20- to 30-year cleanup program.
House: Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) sponsored the House version of the
Federal Nuclear Facilities Environmental Response Act, H.R. 3065
(see description below). It has been referred to five
subcommittees in four committees: the Science, Space and
Technology Subcommittee on Natural Resources, Agriculture
Research and Environment, chaired by Jim Scheuer (D-N.Y.), the
Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power, chaired by
Phil Sharp (D-Ind.), the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on
Transportation and Hazardous Materials, chaired by Tom Luken (D-
Ohio), the Interior and Insular Affairs Subcommittee on Energy
and the Environment, chaired by Mo Udall (D-Ariz.), and the DOE
Panel of the Armed Services Committee, chaired by John Spratt (D-
S.C.). To reach the floor, it must be reported out by the four
committees. Cosponsors: 5.
Senate: Brock Adams (D-Wash.) introduced the Federal Nuclear
Facilities Environmental Response Act, S. 1462. The bill would
establish a dedicated federal trust fund to finance waste cleanup
at DOE sites. Revenues would come primarily from DOE's defense
budget. Additional sources would be DOE's civilian nuclear
budget; commercial users of DOE nuclear services, such as uranium
enrichment for nuclear utilities; and environmental fines. The
bill creates a DOE Office of Environmental Management and
Remedial Action, requires DOE to prepare five-year cleanup plans,
creates a grant program for state enforcement, and establishes a
joint DOE/EPA cleanup research program. The bill has been
referred to the full Environment and Public Works Committee.
Cosponsors: 15.
Contact for More Information: Gerry Pollet, Heart of America
Northwest, Seattle, Washington, (206) 382-1014 and Leon Lowery,
Environmental Action, (202) 745-4870.
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 7
Stello Nomination. While not a "bill", the nomination of Victor
Stello as DOE Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs requires
Senate confirmation. Mr. Stello was formerly the Executive
Director for Operations at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC), where his performance has drawn sharp criticism by several
key members of Congress and national environmental groups.
Senate: Mr. Stello's nomination was submitted to the Armed
Services Committee in July. In November the Committee held two
days of hearings, but decided to conduct additional hearings
during the recess and vote on the nomination when the Senate
convenes in late January. After Congress recessed in November,
Stello resigned from the NRC and was named the Principal Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs, the second ranking
position for the nuclear weapons complex and a position which
does not require confirmation. The Armed Services Committee has
scheduled a December 19 hearing on the nomination. A vote is
expected the week of January 22 with the possibility of a Senate
floor vote the week of January 29.
Contact for More Information: Steve Schwartz, Greenpeace (202)
319-2507.
Savannah River Restart. The nuclear reactors at the Savannah
River Site (SRS) in South Carolina have been closed since August
1988 due to numerous safety problems. At the time of their
closure, the plants were DOE's sole source of tritium, a
radioactive form of hydrogen that is used in nuclear warheads.
The first of the three plants is now scheduled to reopen
July 1991. Several national environmental and local South
Carolina groups have expressed strong concern about the safety of
these reactors, which have been described by Energy Secretary
Watkins as "antiques".
The cost of restart has escalated sharply. In an unusual
move, the Administration requested and Congress transferred
$135 million from the Pentagon to DOE for SRS restart in the
defense appropriation bill in September. Congress is also being
asked to approve a $98 million reprogramming request from other
DOE funds for SRS restart. The request requires the approval of
the chair and the ranking Republican of the House and Senate
Energy and Water Appropriations Subcommittees and two
subcommittees of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.
House: John Spratt (D-S.C.) is one of the Congressional leaders
whose approval is need for the SRS reprogramming request. The
DOE Panel of the Armed Services Committee, which he chairs, is
expected to hold a hearing on SRS restart and the related
reprogramming request soon after Congress returns.
Senate: No hearings are scheduled.
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 8
Contact for More Information: Frances Hart and Brian Costner,
Energy Research Foundation, Columbia, South Carolina, (803)
256-7298 and David Culp, Plutonium Challenge, (202) 624-9352.
Commercial Reactor Conversion. DOE is considering using
commercial nuclear power plants for warhead tritium production,
as its own reactors will remain closed until at least June 1991
(see "Savannah River Restart"). Tritium production in commercial
plants would breach the U.S.'s long-standing non-proliferation
policy of separating military from commercial uses of nuclear
energy. Congress has barred the military production of plutonium
and highly-enriched uranium in commercial plants, except in a
Congressionally-declared national emergency. However, the so-
called Hart-Simpson-Mitchell amendment has an unintended loophole
that allows the conversion of plants for tritium production.
House: Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Mo Udall (D-Ariz.) introduced
H.R. 2502 which would close the tritium loophole in the Hart-
Simpson-Mitchell amendment. The bill has been referred to the
Interior Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment, chaired by
Rep. Udall. Cosponsors: 24.
A version of the bill was adopted as an amendment to the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission authorization bill, H.R. 1549, in
the Energy and Commerce Committee. For parliamentary reasons the
amendment would require another vote on the House floor at the
time the bill is being considered. However because of unrelated
controversies, the bill is not expected to reach the floor.
Senate: No similar bill has been introduced.
Contact for More Information: Debby Holland, Nuclear Control
Institute, (202) 822-8444.
Economic Conversion. Peace groups and labor unions have long
advocated a national program for converting military facilities
to civilian use. Given the projected cuts in defense spending
and the prospects of future layoffs at defense plants, the idea
has moved up the Congressional agenda. Some believe that
economic conversion and economic diversification legislation
would reduce the political pressure to keep unneeded DOE
facilities operating.
House: Ted Weiss (D-N.Y.) introduced the Defense Economic
Adjustment Act, H.R. 101. The bill requires mandated alternative
use committees, provides income support for laid-off employees,
and provides economic adjustment funds to communities. The bill
has been referred to five committees. Cosponsors: 58.
A competing bill was introduced by Sam Gejdenson (D-Conn.)
and Nick Mavroules (D-Mass.), the Economic Diversification and
Defense Adjustment Act of 1989, H.R. 2852. The bill provides
grants for economic diversification to communities that are
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 9
heavily impacted by defense contracts or military installations.
However, the bill does not include DOE weapons facilities in some
provisions. The bill has been referred to three committees.
Cosponsors: 25.
Majority Leader Dick Gephardt (D-Mo.) has shown a strong
interest in the issue and is expected to play a leadership role
in forging a consensus position in the House.
Senate: No similar bill has been introduced.
Contact for More Information: Mark Harrison, SANE/FREEZE,
(202) 862-9740.
Glenn Bill. John Glenn (D-Ohio), who has been a leader in
forcing DOE to begin cleanup of the weapons complex, has
introduced the DOE Nuclear Safety and Environment Act, S. 1304.
This eight-title bill has been referred to the full Energy and
Natural Resources Committee, chaired by Bennett Johnston (D-
La.). As Sen. Johnston has introduced a competing DOE bill (see
below), the Glenn bill is unlikely to be taken up by the
Committee. However, parts of the bill may serve as amendments to
the Johnston-McClure bill (see below) or to other legislation.
Titles I and V are described above under "Independent Oversight".
Title II applies the Occupational Safety and Health Act to DOE
nuclear facilities. Title III affirms that hazardous waste mixed
with radioactive material ("mixed waste") is subject to EPA
regulation. Title IV is described above under "Radiation
Research Program". Title VI is described above under "Federal
Facilities Enforcement". Title VII repeals a section of the 1987
defense authorization act that prohibits DOE from paying
environmental fines. Title VIII requires cleanup plans when a
DOE plant is closed. Cosponsors: 10.
Johnston-McClure Bill. Another eight-title bill was introduced
in late October by Bennett Johnston (D-La.) and James McClure (R-
Idaho), the chair and the ranking Republican of the Energy and
Natural Resources Committee. The Department of Energy Nuclear
Facilities Act of 1989, or S. 1802, had two days of hearings in
November and additional hearings are planned next year.
Sen. Johnston has expressed his intent to use this bill as a
committee markup vehicle and move the bill to the Senate floor.
Other committees may gain 30-day sequential jurisdiction over
certain titles of the bill, but cannot block floor consideration
of the bill. Title I is described above under "Independent
Oversight". Title II applies OSHA to DOE nuclear defense
facilities over five years. Title III is described above under
"Radiation Research Program". Title IV creates a DOE research
program on "mixed waste" and requires the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to develop model standards and regulations for "mixed
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 10
waste" disposal. Title V concerns the people of the Marshal
Islands exposed to nuclear test fallout in 1954. Title VI
extends whistleblower protection to DOE contractors and their
employees. Title VII exempts the Yucca Mountain and WIPP waste
repositories from the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA). Title VIII is described above under "Federal Facilities
Enforcement". Cosponsors: 2.
Other Bills. These bills may not yet be dead, but their pulse
rates are very slow.
o H.R. 765, introduced by Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.), would
establish a short-term DOE waste cleanup study commission. The
bill passed the House Energy and Commerce Committee, but died
along with a similar bill, S. 1369, in a House-Senate conference
committee. Cosponsors: 42.
o H.R. 991, Waste Isolation Pilot Plant Land Withdrawal Act of
1989, introduced by Rep. Joe Skeen (R-N.M.). Cosponsors: 2.
o H.R. 1102, Price-Anderson Financial Accountability Amendments
of 1989, introduced by Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.).
Rep. Miller has focused his legislative efforts on dealing with
the Alaskan oil spill, which occurred after this bill was
introduced. Cosponsors: 51.
o H.R. 1643, Nuclear Weapons Production Health and Safety Act of
1989, introduced by Rep. David Skaggs (D-Colo.). This bill has
been overtaken by the Radiation Research Reorganization Act of
1989, H.R. 3212, and by the expected, revised independent
oversight bill by Rep. Skaggs. Cosponsors: 19.
o H.R. 1836, Department of Energy Nuclear Facilities Amendments
Act, introduced by Rep. Phil Sharp (D-Ind.). The bill would
expand the coverage of the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety
Board to include DOE civilian facilities and the exempted plants
of nuclear weapons complex. Cosponsors: 6.
o H.R. 2662, Department of Energy Nuclear Contractors
Accountability and Award System Act of 1989, introduced by Rep.
David Skaggs (D-Colo.). Much of this bill has been adopted by
Secretary of Energy Watkins. Cosponsors: 2.
o H.R. 3246, introduced by Rep. Hank Brown (R-Colo.). The bill
requires DOE to give states the authority to monitor
environmental compliance at the nuclear weapons complex.
Cosponsors: 1.
o H.R. 3527, introduced by Rep. Jim Scheuer (D-N.Y.), creates a
DOE Office for Environment, Safety, and Health. Cosponsors: 8.
o S. 446, Price-Anderson Financial Accountability Amendments of
1989, introduced by Sen. Howard Metzenbaum (D-Ohio), is the
Senate version of H.R. 1102. Cosponsors: 2.
o S. 1369, introduced by Sen. Sam Nunn (D-Ga.) to establish a
blue ribbon task group on DOE waste cleanup. The was attached to
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 11
the defense authorization bill, but died in conference committee.
Cosponsors: 1.
Notes. The original bill sponsor is included in the number of
cosponsors, which is not the standard practice. Budget numbers
have been rounded to the nearest million dollars and may not
total because of independent rounding.
Status of DOE-Related Bills
December 6, 1989
Page 12
Congressional Calendar for 1990
Monday, January 22 President's Budget Submitted
Tuesday, January 23 House and Senate Convene
Thursday, January 25 State of the Union Address (tentative)
Friday, January 26 Senate Recess Day
Saturday, February 10- Lincoln/Washington Recess (House
Monday, February 19 adjourns one day earlier)
Saturday, March 12- Senate Recess
Monday, March 19
Monday, April 2 New DOE "2010" Report Released
Saturday, April 7- Easter Recess (House adjourns one day
Tuesday, April 17 earlier)
Friday, May 25- Memorial Day Recess
Monday, June 4
Monday, July 2- July 4th Recess
Monday, July 9
Monday, August 6- August Recess
Tuesday, September 4
Friday, October 5 Target Adjournment
Tuesday, November 6 Election Day
Make REAL money with your website!
The entire AOH site is optimized to look best in Firefox® 2.0 on a widescreen monitor (1440x900 or better).
Site design & layout copyright © 1986-2008 AOH
We do not send spam. If you have received spam bearing an artofhacking.com email address, please forward it with full headers to abuse@artofhacking.com.