A ‘Critical Week’ For Hanford’s Future Lawmakers Drafting Several Bills To Deal With Nuclear Cleanup

It isn’t only money Congress wants slashed from Hanford cleanup this year.

Some proposals also would gut nuclear cleanup standards and unravel Washington state’s 40-year cleanup pact with the U.S. Department of Energy.

Several politicians are writing bills that could profoundly change the way nuclear cleanups are conducted nationwide.

If they become law, there may be less money to tame Hanford’s leaking tanks and fouled ground water, and the public and the state could have less say about Hanford’s future.

In reaction, state officials and environmental groups are convening emergency meetings and lobbying in Washington, D.C., this week.

“We see this as a very critical week on Hanford issues,” said Dan Silver, Washington state’s assistant director of waste management.

“Our message to Congress is, the problems at Hanford are not due to state and federal regulations. People know something’s got to change with the nuclear cleanup, but we don’t want to jump off a cliff,” Silver said.

But Washington state officials also say they are willing to look anew at regulations to make sure they aren’t hindering the $1.5 billion-a-year cleanup.

Attorney General Christine Gregoire convened a meeting Thursday of attorneys general from 17 states with federal nuclear facilities. State environmental chiefs, including Ecology’s Mary Riveland, also met in Washington, D.C.

“As Hanford goes, so goes nuclear cleanup nationwide,” Gregoire said.

The states are planning a joint statement calling for cost savings and other improvements in nuclear cleanup, Gregoire said.

“We do not support exempting these sites from the nation’s environmental laws, and we will not allow pour (cleanup) agreements to be undermined,” Gregoire said.

Environmental activists agree.

“We are 100 percent insisting that state laws and the Tri-Party Agreement must be followed,” said Lynne Stembridge of the Hanford Education Action League of Spokane.

The Tri-Party Agreement is the pact between state and federal agencies that sets goals for Hanford cleanup.

On Capitol Hill, Tri-Cities freshman Rep. Richard “Doc” Hastings and Sen. Slade Gorton, both Republicans, have introduced bills to turn more Hanford projects over to private contractors. They also want to deregulate the cleanup - possibly exempting Hanford from at least some major environmental laws.

Hastings has talked with California Republican Rep. Duncan Hunter about an addition to the 1996 defense authorization bill exempting Hanford from some environmental laws. The bill will be acted on next week.

“There has been no decision yet on this,” said an aide to the House National Security Committee.

Exempting Hanford from environmental laws is a bad idea, says a Seattle activist.

“Hastings and Gorton are running a deliberate effort to roll back to the ‘good old days’ when Hanford had no meaningful oversight or regulation. This is the ultimate insult to the people of the Northwest,” said Jerry Pollett of Heart of America Northwest.

Hastings denied he wants to return to Hanford’s secret past, or roll back all environmental laws.

“We were in a defense production mode out there, and things were different. We are now acknowledging the federal responsibility to clean it up.”

But Hastings said some regulatory reform is necessary.

“What we are doing now isn’t working, and we have to find different ways,” he said.

Details of Hastings’ deregulation bill are unavailable, but his intentions are clear.

Shortly after his election last November, Hastings began to solicit advice from Hanford contractors on which regulations they’d like to cut.

A December memo to several Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory employees described a twohour meeting with Hastings where he asked the contractors to identify “regulations that drive you nuts.”

“He is confident that one of the major thrusts of this Congress will be to bring some reason to the regulatory arena,” Battelle manager Gerald Sorensen wrote.

Another proposal by a prominent Louisiana Democrat would scrap state cleanup agreements with the federal government, shoving aside state environmental laws.

Sen. J. Bennett Johnston’s bill hasn’t been introduced yet, and may die for lack of sponsors now that he is in the minority. But he is still very influential, Silver said.

Johnston’s proposal also could eliminate the public involvement at Hanford that Energy Secretary Hazel O’Leary has made a top priority.

Last year, O’Leary established a regional Hanford advisory board for cleanup issues.

Hastings and Tri-Cities board members have criticized the board’s budget. They also say members from Seattle, Portland and Spokane have too much influence. Hastings has formed his own advisory group, mostly Hanford contractors and local economic development officials.

Several recent events have forced Hanford into the spotlight in Congress.

“Wasteland,” The Spokesman-Review series published last November, called attention to Hanford mismanagement, Silver said.

Then came Sen. Johnston’s report, “Train Wreck Along the River of Money,” which strongly criticized Hanford for wasting money and not having clear cleanup goals.

DOE cleanup chief Tom Grumbly also painted a grim picture of a budget “train wreck” where costs of the cleanup will outstrip Congress’ ability to pay within a few years.

The November elections increased the pressure.

“All these things set up a scenario for change. The money profile frightens everyone to death,” Silver said.