New York (Platts)--28May2008

Two senior members of the US House of Representatives are questioning the
factual basis of the Bush administration's nonproliferation defense of
Russia's nonproliferation record, a key part of the justification for the
administration's decision to sign a nuclear cooperation agreement with Moscow.

The lawmakers, US Representatives John Dingell and Bart Stupak, both
Michigan Democrats, asked the Government Accountability Office to check the
Nuclear Proliferation Assessment Statement, which the Bush administration
submitted to Congress this month along with the text of the cooperation
agreement with Russia.

Such pacts are known as "123 agreements" because section 123 of the US
Atomic Energy Act requires the US to have such agreements with its nuclear
trading partners. Dingell is chairman of the House Energy and Commerce
Committee and Stupak heads the panel's Oversight and Investigations
Subcommittee.

In a letter last week, Dingell and Stupak asked GAO for "assistance in
reviewing the development" of the NPAS. The NPAS, an analysis that US law
requires, concluded that the deal would be "compatible with the
nonproliferation program, policy, and objectives" of the US.

In their letter and accompanying statement, the lawmakers highlighted
questions about Russian nuclear cooperation with Iran. The NPAS says that the
US had concerns about Russia's work on Iran's Bushehr power reactor, but that
the concerns are being addressed by arrangements Russia has made for supplying
the fresh fuel for the reactor and taking back the spent fuel it would
generate.

The unclassified version of the NPAS also says that "additional details
on the proliferation concerns associated with Russia-Iran cooperation and
efforts to mitigate them are presented in the classified annex."

Dingell and Stupak asked GAO, which is the investigative arm of Congress,
to include the classified annex in its review.

One of the issues the lawmakers asked GAO to address is "whether the NPAS
conclusions are fully supported and whether there is contradictory information
that was omitted which could invalidate, modify or impair" the report's
conclusions or the basis for recommending support for the 123 agreement. The
NPAS is prepared for the president by an interagency team, headed by the State
Department.

--Daniel Horner, daniel_horner@platts.com