DOE plan is dangerous. Hanford tanks are not the only high-risk project | Editorial

In what must be one of the most irresponsible proposals ever to be released by the U.S. Department of Energy, some of the most dangerous areas at the Hanford site might not get cleaned up for another decade.

The agency’s recently released 10-year plan, coupled with the Trump administration’s proposed gutting of the Hanford budget, is a combination so egregious it is shocking even the most jaded DOE critics.

Tri-Citians are used to proposals from the White House reducing the Hanford cleanup budget. But the proposed $700 million cut for fiscal 2021 is the largest yet from the Trump administration.

And now DOE has released its report, “Environmental Management Vision 2020-2030: A Time of Transition and Transformation,” which sets priorities for the next 10 years.

DOE’s emphasis appears to be managing 56 million gallons of radioactive waste in underground tanks, which is appreciated. But that laser-like focus on treating nuclear waste in the tanks should not come at the expense of other problem areas at Hanford.

For instance, there is a highly radioactive spill under the 324 Building just a mile north of Richland and near the Columbia River.

DOE officials have said in the past that the radioactive cesium and strontium contamination beneath the building is so radioactive that it would be fatal within a few minutes of human contact.

While work has been done to stabilize the building, the new DOE report says that over the coming decade, the 324 Building will be placed on “minimum surveillance” until remediation can be resumed.

How DOE officials can be so dismissive of the potential for catastrophe is mind-boggling. And the 324 building is just one frightening example of cleanup projects DOE would put on a long-term delay.

There also are 1,936 capsules of strontium and cesium that must be moved. The highly radioactive capsules are in underwater storage, but concerns have been raised about the structural integrity of the concrete walls surrounding the pool where the capsules are kept.

DOE has said in the past it considers the pool the greatest risk in the nationwide DOE complex for a serious accident, and yet it is not putting this project in the same must-do category as the contaminated tanks.

If cooling is lost and the capsules overheat or break, radiation could be released into the ground or air, and the building would be too hazardous for workers to enter.

We have said time and again that the federal government must take a holistic approach to Hanford cleanup, and that funding must be consistent for progress to be made.

Perhaps if the Hanford site were on the East Coast instead of Central Washington, federal officials would not be so patient in their approach to cleaning up the nation’s most toxic nuclear site.

Three years ago a tunnel used to enclose radioactive materials from the Cold War collapsed unexpectedly at Hanford. Fortunately, no airborne radiation was detected and no workers were reported injured or contaminated.

But it was a scare that went nationwide. The close-call should still be fresh on everyone’s minds about what can go wrong at Hanford, but apparently it isn’t.

Rep. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash., told Energy Secretary Dan Brouillet last month that “predictable funding is absolutely critical” and “anything less only prolongs cleanup and dramatically increases costs.”

U.S. Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., pressed Brouillet last week saying, “This has been one of Hanford’s biggest problems all along, is that people look at that number and they go, ‘Oh my gosh it’s so big, what can I do to reduce it?’ When in reality we should be asking the question, “What does it take to clean up the largest nuclear waste site in the entire globe?”

The federal government created this hazardous waste site during World War II and the Cold War, relying on the plutonium produced at Hanford for the nation’s nuclear weapons program. It has a moral obligation to clean it up.

Delays are unacceptable, and stabilization is not good enough. We need DOE to give all high-risk projects equal cleanup priority.

This story was originally published March 13, 2020 at 11:41 AM.