Voice of the Mid-Columbia | Kennewick, Pasco and Richland, Wash. |
Print
E-Mail
tool name
closeNo question, the state's decision to sue the Department of Energy over Hanford cleanup is an unwelcome turn of events.
It's bound to make the job of securing federal money for Hanford even more difficult for our congressional delegation.
But allowing the federal government to run roughshod over Washington state's interests isn't an acceptable alternative either.
About the best anyone can hope for now is that talks between the state and federal governments will resume soon and lead to a quick settlement.
If a resolution depends on a federal judge's decision, the status of the Tri-Party Agreement -- the document governing deadlines and other details of Hanford cleanup -- could be in limbo for months or years.
Gov. Chris Gregoire and state Attorney General Rob McKenna filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court last week, seeking to force speedier treatment of Hanford's radioactive tank wastes.
Let's hope it doesn't have the opposite effect and cause additional delays.
Almost as soon as the lawsuit was announced, Sen. Patty Murray and Rep. Doc Hastings issued a joint statement, calling on the state and federal governments to return to the negotiations.
"Congress is moving forward on funding for Fiscal Year 2009, and we are actively involved in that process. Our goal is to achieve productive change for the Hanford budget and an agreement now, would, without question, make that process easier," they wrote.
"We have always defended our state's interests under the Tri-Party Agreement and we will continue to do so, but we can't afford to put everything on hold and wait for the outcome of a lawsuit."
It's a legitimate concern.
The motives driving Gregoire and McKenna to the courthouse are easy to grasp. It's the timing that's questionable.
One irony -- and there's surely more than one -- is that DOE and the state agree on the key issues covering the scope and timing of major cleanup efforts.
Gregoire went so far as to tell reporters last week that if negotiations were left to the Energy Department, there wouldn't be a lawsuit.
But the Justice Department insists that changes to the cleanup pact include language that weakens the state's hand in enforcing deadlines.
Our governor and attorney general rejected the deal, and they're right. Unless it's legally binding, the Tri-Party Agreement is useless.
DOE proved long ago that the absence of independent oversight is a recipe for environmental disaster.
The state has proved it's willing to make reasonable accommodations when necessary, agreeing to more than 400 changes in the TPA over the years.
That history, which no one in the Northwest is likely to forget, shows that language limiting the state's enforcement powers unnecessary and unacceptable.
Even so, a lawsuit seems premature.
Yes, talks with the current administration are at an impasse, but it's likely the Obama administration will be more receptive to the state's point of view than Bush's team.
At least it should have the chance to prove otherwise.
It hardly matters now. Gregoire and McKenna can't unring the bell.
But a lawsuit doesn't preclude negotiations. In fact, most suits are settled in talks that occur outside the courtroom.
It's in everyone's interest to pursue a settlement as aggressively as possible, especially since so little separates the two sides.
Editorials are the consensus of the Tri-City Herald editorial board.
Editorial board members are Rufus Friday, publisher; Chris Sivula, editorial page editor; Ken Robertson, executive editor; Matt Taylor, contributing editor; Lori Lancaster, editorial writer; Shelly Norman, editorial writer and Jack Briggs, retired publisher
@Nyx.CommentBody@