A chapter report issued by the General Accounting Office with an abstract that begins "Each year, the Department of Defense (DOD) makes about 200,000 decisions to grant, deny, or revoke security clearances for its civilian, military, and contractor personnel. Through a process called adjudication, DOD personnel security specialists review the results of employees' background investigations and determine whether the individual is eligible for a clearance. This report (1) assesses whether DOD's adjudicators consistently document all significant adverse security conditions when determining individuals' eligibility for top secret security clearances and (2) identifies factors that hinder the effectiveness of DOD's adjudicative process. GAO found that DOD adjudicators have not consistently documented all significant adverse security conditions present in investigative case files when determining individuals' eligibility for top secret security clearances. DOD has been unable to demonstrate that it fully considered all significant adverse conditions often not documented, including financial matters. Several factors have hindered the effectiveness of DOD's adjudicative process. The Assistant Secretary has not (1) used common explanatory guidance, such as that contained in the Adjudicative Desk Reference he developed, or issued any other clarifying guidance to promote consistency in applying the federal guidelines; (2) required adjudicators to take DOD adjudicative …

None

This report provides background on the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance program (LIHEAP), originally established in 1981 by Title XXVI of P.L. 97-35 and reauthorized several times. It is a block grant program under which the federal government gives states, the District of Columbia, U.S. territories and commonwealths, and Indian tribal organizations (referred to as grantees) annual grants to operate multi-component home energy assistance programs for needy households.

There are differing, yet strongly held views among the various ''stakeholders'' in the advanced fuel/propulsion system debate. In order for the introduction of advanced technology vehicles and their associated fuels to be successful, it seems clear that four important stakeholders must view their introduction as a ''win'': Society, Automobile manufacturers and their key suppliers, Fuel providers and their key suppliers, and Auto and energy company customers. If all four of these stakeholders, from their own perspectives, are not positive regarding the need for and value of these advanced fuels/vehicles, the vehicle introductions will fail. This study was conducted to help inform public and private decision makers regarding the impact of the introduction of such advanced fuel/propulsion system pathways from a societal point of view. The study estimates two key performance criteria of advanced fuel/propulsion systems on a total system basis, that is, ''well'' (production source of energy) to ''wheel'' (vehicle). These criteria are energy use and greenhouse gas emissions per unit of distance traveled. The study focuses on the U.S. light-duty vehicle market in 2005 and beyond, when it is expected that advanced fuels and propulsion systems could begin to be incorporated in a significant percentage of new vehicles. Given …

Over one million gallons of high-level-waste with more than a million curies of {sup 137}Cs have leaked from Hanford tank farms to the sediments beneath the tanks. Early on, it was assumed that cesium migration would be limited because laboratory experiments had shown that cesium strongly sorbs to phyllosilicate minerals common in soils [1-5]. Additionally, minimal cesium desorption has been observed in contaminated Hanford sediments [6]. However, recent observations beneath the Hanford tank farms show that cesium has migrated to greater depths than expected [7]. Various explanations for enhanced cesium migration include (1) physical processes such as fast flow pathways or bypassing of exchange sites in immobile zones, and (2) chemical processes associated with the very high salt contents and high pH of the tank fluids. Ion exchange processes are clearly indicated in the depth profiles of {sup 137}Cs, and potassium, sodium, calcium, and nitrate (acting as a tracer) from the bore holes beneath tank SX-108 and tank SX-115. Below both tanks, cesium concentration peaks are retarded with respect to potassium and sodium concentration peaks. The importance of cation concentration on ion exchange is illustrated by comparing the sodium and tracer profiles beneath the tanks. Pore water with high sodium …

None

The African Development Bank Group, including the Bank itself (AfDB) and its “soft-loan” affiliate, the African Development Fund (AfDF), is a development finance institution based in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire. The Bank has 53 African members, as well as 24 non-regional members, including the United States. In the mid-1990s, the Bank faced management problems and difficulties arising from non-performing loans, but reforms launched in 1995 by a new Bank president, Omar Kabbaj, brought new pledges of support from the non-regionals. U.S. contributions to the Fund resumed in FY1998 and to the Bank in FY2000. This report will be updated as events warrant.