The Department of Energy plans in fiscal 2020 to cut funding for cleanup at the Hanford Site in Washington state in part because of progress made and projects completed, according to detailed budget documents released Monday.
In total, funding for the two DOE offices at Hanford would drop by more than $400 million from current levels, to roughly $2.1 billion, if Congress approves the Trump administration proposal.
Members of Congress and other stakeholders pointed out that the Energy Department proposal is just a starting point in the appropriations process.
“These budget request numbers would fall short of fulfilling the federal government’s obligation to clean up the Hanford Site,” Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), whose congressional district covers Hanford, said in response to the detailed DOE budget justification. “As we have seen in budgets offered by President Obama and in previous budgets of the current administration, the presidential budget is a statement of priorities.”
Newhouse said he would work across the aisle as a member of the House Appropriations Committee and with the state’s Democratic senators to boost the 2020 appropriation.
The budget for the Richland Operations Office, which oversees most environmental remediation programs and general operations at the former plutonium production site, would be cut from about $954 million to $718 million for the federal fiscal year beginning Oct. 1.
Budget documents said a $46 million decrease is associated with the expected completion of demolition of the Plutonium Finishing Plant this year. Demolition has been suspended since the spread of radioactive particles from the project in December 2017. The restart of teardown was delayed by an unusually snowy winter, but is expected next month.
The two PUREX radioactive waste storage tunnels will also soon be stabilized, eliminating the need for $39 million included in the fiscal 2019 budget for that work, according to the budget. Both tunnels are to be filled with grout after the shorter tunnel partially collapsed in May 2017. The grouting project could wrap up in early April.
Completing the transfer this fiscal year of radioactive sludge from the K West Basin to dry storage in central Hanford would eliminate the need for about $14 million, DOE said.
New budget documents attributed some other decreases in the Richland Operations Office budget to factors that include the availability of prior-year funding and “a shift in priorities within the Environmental Management Program.”
The overall budget for Hanford’s Office of River Protection would drop from about $1.6 billion to roughly $1.4 billion. The office is responsible for management and treatment of 56 million gallons of radioactive tank waste.
Budget details released for the Office of River Protection show the construction budget for the Waste Treatment Plant is proposed to return to $690 million in fiscal 2020, the traditional level of annual funding for the facility. It was bumped to $833 million in fiscal 2018 and $786 million in the current fiscal year.
The focus for the Office of River Protection would be on preparing to treat low-activity waste at the plant by a 2023 milestone set in federal court. The budget also includes $10 million to continue the Test Bed Initiative, which would grout some low-activity tank waste and send it off-site for disposal rather than vitrifying it at the Waste Treatment Plant and disposing of it at Hanford.
The tank farm budget, along with related work, would drop from about $828 million in this fiscal year to $677 million under the administration’s request. The decrease is consistent with the Energy Department’s focus on low-activity waste treatment, the budget document said. Some carry-over funds from fiscal 2018 are available for the tank farms, it said.
“What the community wants is for meaningful progress to be made and Hanford, and we’re concerned that the budget request doesn’t get us there,” said David Reeploeg, vice president for federal programs at the Tri-City, Wash., Development Council.
The Richland Operations Office would have little money beyond the amount needed to maintain and operate the site, or “minimum safe” operations, Reeploeg said. There would also not be enough work at the Waste Treatment Plant and tank farms, he added. The request also does not address the increasing maintenance and operations costs of keeping the 76-year-old site running or do enough to mitigate risk, he said.
The Trump administration proposed a budget cut of about $230 million at Hanford for the current fiscal 2019, but the Washington state congressional delegation succeeded in getting $342 million more. That made the budget about $15 million higher than in fiscal 2018.
Hanford Work Will be Frugal but Effective, Perry Says
Newhouse said the skinny Hanford budget request seemed odd given release of a recent Energy Department report about the rising cost estimate for addressing the site.
“On one hand the department is telling us the mission is going to become exponentially more expensive,” even as it cuts the remediation budget at the former plutonium production complex, Newhouse said during a hearing of the House Appropriations energy and water development subcommittee Tuesday.
Energy Secretary Rick Perry was appearing before the panel to discuss DOE’s $31.7 billion budget proposal for fiscal 2020, in the first of several trips this week to Capitol Hill.
A Jan. 31 Energy Department report placed the full cost of Hanford remediation anywhere from $323 billion to roughly $677 billion, under best-to-worst cases. That is a quantum leap from the last agency estimate in 2016, which estimated the cost at $103 billion to $107 billion. Much of the increase is tied to continued costs of holding Hanford’s 56 million gallons of radioactive tank waste.
“It’s a pretty shocking number,” Perry agreed, saying he supported the DOE Office of Environmental Management issuing the updated and more realistic estimate.
At the same time, Perry said past spending at Hanford had not been sufficiently efficient. “I couldn’t understand why aren’t we making any better progress,” he said. “Why is this not moving along the way we would think it ought to move along?”
“There are several cleanup projects underway that stand to be significantly harmed by the cuts you are proposing,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) told Perry during a Wednesday hearing of the Senate Appropriations’ energy and water development subcommittee. She also asked if the cuts would weaken worker safety. Perry replied that worker safety is paramount, and remediation is progressing.
“I think that we are making the progress that we need to make,” Perry said. “I think the funding is sufficient” to meet necessary Hanford goals under the Tri-Party Agreement on cleanup between the state, DOE, and the Environmental Protection Agency, he added.
