YAKIMA, Washington — Supporters call an
initiative on the Washington state ballot a no-brainer: bar the federal
government from shipping nuclear waste to the Hanford nuclear site until all the
existing waste there is cleaned up.
But opponents of Initiative 297 argue that interfering with the Energy
Department's national plan for nuclear waste disposal could spell doom,
especially if other states follow Washington's lead and ban Hanford waste.
The 586-square-mile facility in south-central Washington, which was created
decades ago as part of the top-secret Manhattan Project to build the atomic
bomb, remains the most contaminated site in the nation.
At issue is the federal government's plans for disposing of waste from Cold
War–era nuclear weapons production nationwide. The Energy Department chose
Hanford to dispose of some mildly radioactive waste and mixed low-level waste.
Initiative 297 would block the Energy Department from sending more waste to
Hanford until the existing waste at the site is cleaned up. A citizens' petition
sent the initiative to the Legislature early this year. Lawmakers declined to
act on it, sending the measure to the ballot.
Gerald Pollet, executive director of the Hanford watchdog group Heart of America
Northwest and sponsor of the initiative, said voters would be foolhardy not to
adopt a standard to protect themselves from more contamination at Hanford.
"Don't add more waste to a site that has leaking landfills or hazardous
waste that isn't stored in compliance with existing standards," Pollet
said.
The Energy Department (DOE) has taken no position on the initiative.
Hanford already is home to 53 million gallons of highly radioactive liquid,
sludge, and saltcake stored in 177 underground tanks. The Energy Department aims
to bury much of that waste in a nuclear waste repository in Nevada. Another
75,000 55-gallon drums of less hazardous waste also are buried at Hanford.
"It's clear that Hanford has a role to play in accepting a small volume of
waste so that other DOE sites can close, but at the same time, Hanford stands to
benefit tenfold by shipping all of its high-level waste, spent fuel, and
plutonium waste to other repositories," said Colleen French, spokeswoman
for the Energy Department's Richland office.
Heart of America Northwest has argued that the Energy Department's waste
disposal plan will amount to 70,000 truckloads of waste entering the state. The
Energy Department estimated about 5,800 truckloads of waste would enter the
state.
The Energy Department also has pledged to cap the amount of additional low-level
and mixed low-level waste that could be brought into the state and disposed of
at Hanford at about 107,000 cubic yards.
Opponents argue the waste shipments to Hanford amount to rolling dirty bombs. On
a recent sunny morning, two initiative supporters argued against the Energy
Department's plans beside a bright-yellow, 15-foot balloon meant to represent
the barrels of radioactive waste that could travel cross-country by truck.
"We're not saying not in my backyard," said Robert Pregulman,
executive director of the Washington Public Interest Research Group. "We're
just saying not in my backyard until you clean my backyard first."
Other states have battled the federal government's program for disposing of
nuclear waste.
For years, Nevada has been fighting plans to build a national waste repository
90 miles northwest of Las Vegas that would hold all the nation's high-level
waste. And in New Mexico, where the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad
will take Hanford's hazardous trash, the federal government agreed at the urging
of state officials not to send high-level waste there.
Source: Associated Press