Tri-City Herald
Mon, Jun 9, 2003
http://www.hanfordnews.com/2003/0609-1.html
HAB rebukes waste study
By John Stang
Herald staff writer
The Hanford Advisory Board believes improvements are needed
in a massive Hanford environmental impact study on dealing
with solid wastes.
Meanwhile, the watchdog organization, Heart of America
Northwest, has charged that Battelle has a conflict of
interest in helping prepare that study, and wants a
Department of Energy inspector general's investigation into
the matter.
Both stances emerged late last week at HAB's meeting in
Richland.
Hanford's solid waste environmental impact study covers the
effects of various options to deal with the site's low-level
radioactive wastes, transuranic wastes, mixed chemical and
radioactive wastes, glassified or otherwise treated
low-activity radioactive tank wastes, radioactive used
melters, and contaminated ground water.
DOE unveiled a draft study in April 2002, which was
universally criticized for being too skimpy.
A second revision was released two months ago, with
Hanford's various interests studying it since.
Thursday, the HAB considered requesting that DOE withdraw
the entire study and do it a third time, believing the
second revision left out lots of factors. Meanwhile,
Washington's Department of Ecology and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency said Thursday that they did
not want to reject the second revision, although they wanted
to see it improved.
On Friday, the HAB adopted the state's and EPA's lead --
withdrawing a call to reject the study, but also listed many
items to add to the existing study report.
"This makes it clear that the board doesn't want to be an
obstructionist," said HAB member Susan Leckband,
representing Hanford's nonunion members.
The board sent a memo to DOE on Friday that said the HAB
believes the revised environmental impact study needs more
analyses on residual wastes to be left in Hanford's tanks,
leaked tank wastes, chemical and transuranic wastes in the
low-level radioactive waste burial grounds, the
K Basins' sludges and the treated nonglassified low-activity
tank wastes that will be buried at Hanford.
The memo also contended the revised environmental impact
study shortchanged the state's authority on ground water and
chemical contaminants.
A third revision of the environmental impact study's report
is expected about the third week of July, with DOE's
recommendations on which options to pursue on each type of
wastes. DOE hopes to adopt those recommendations by late
August.
Meanwhile, Gerald Pollet, director of Heart of America
Northwest, told board members about a letter his
organization sent last week to DOE's Inspector General's
office.
The letter charges that Battelle, which did the majority of
the preparation and analytical work for DOE's environmental
impact study, has a conflict of interest because it is
shipping transuranic wastes from its site near Columbus,
Ohio, to Hanford.
"This goes to the credibility of everything we've talked
about (regarding the solid waste environmental impact
study)," Pollet said.
That Battelle waste is the subject of three lawsuits the
state, DOE, Heart of America and other environmental groups
have filed against each other in federal court. All three
suits address whether the state or DOE should have the final
authority over Battelle's and other transuranic wastes
arriving, leaving or currently buried at Hanford.
However, DOE and Battelle officials disagree with Heart of
America's charge of a conflict of interest.
They said the transuranic wastes being shipped from
Battelle's Columbus site are federal wastes, not Battelle
wastes, and that Battelle gains nothing financially from
those shipments. And they said that DOE, not Battelle, makes
the final decisions regarding the environmental impact
study.
Pollet contended that Battelle lied in signing a statement
in the study's report, saying it did not have a conflict of
interest on this matter. DOE and Battelle contended Battelle
properly filled out all the appropriate potential
conflict-of-interest documentation.