PORTLAND -- More money is needed for Hanford cleanup in fiscal 2009 and 2010 than proposed in budget documents if the Columbia River and public health are to be adequately protected, according to the Hanford Advisory Board.

At a meeting Thursday and Friday, the board added its voice to those of Hanford regulators and Washington's congressional delegation in calling for more cleanup money for Hanford.

Congress is considering a proposal from the Bush administration for the 2009 budget, and Hanford Department of Energy officials are preparing to submit a 2010 budget request to DOE headquarters this month, an early step in the budget process.

For 2009, the Hanford Advisory Board wants $200 million added to the budget request proposed by the Bush administration to bring it slightly above $2 billion. The administration request would cut spending at Hanford by $58 million from this year's spending.

Particularly troubling is the history of Hanford budget shortfalls from 2005 through 2008, according to advice sent by the board Friday to Jim Rispoli, DOE assistant secretary for environmental management. The administration request for 2009 is $250 million less than the 2005 budget level, the board said.

Hanford supporters had expected budgets to begin to increase under a DOE plan to focus on cleaning up and closing smaller sites and then shifting money to large sites such as Hanford. If DOE had followed through on that plan for accelerated cleanup, the administration's 2009 budget proposal for Hanford would have included $650 million in additional money, the board said.

But recognizing that Hanford is unlikely to receive a $650 million increase, the board settled on an amount it considered achievable, then listed its priorities for spending it.

The result was an 11-page document prepared by the board that includes details of a patchwork of projects that board members favor, ranging from more money for the board's operations to evaluating specific technical issues at the vitrification plant.

One of the largest portions of the $200 million increase the board proposed adding to the administration's budget request would be used for cleanup along the Columbia River being done by Washington Closure Hanford. The board called for adding $50 million to the river corridor budget to restore most of the money cut from the project under the administration proposal and save the jobs of workers with experience in demolishing contaminated buildings and digging up burial sites with radioactive waste.

"Maintaining the continuity of this unique work force has saved DOE significant money over the years," the board said. "Laying off a large number of these skilled employees sets the stage for having to rehire and retrain them in the future."

For the proposed 2010 budget, the board provided more general direction. Rather than giving a dollar amount, it recommended that at a minimum the budget meet the legally binding requirements of the Tri-Party Agreement.

The state of Washington, in its comments following a look at a preliminary budget proposal totaling about $2.1 billion for Hanford in 2010, said it would fall more than $1 billion short of what's required. That figure was based in part on the cumulative impact of DOE's failure to propose enough money for cleanup in 2009, according to the state.

Among the board's specific requests is that DOE empty radioactive waste from four to five of its 149 oldest underground tanks each year.

The 2010 preliminary budget proposal calls for removing radioactive waste from one of those tanks a year, and the state has recommended that rate be increased to two tanks a year. DOE has slowed tank retrieval in part because the 28 newer, double-shell tanks that will hold waste until it can be treated are near capacity.

The board called for making every effort to start treating low-activity waste at the vitrification plant before the entire plant is opened in 2019. It said adding a third melter to turn low-activity radioactive waste into glass at the plant also could have significant benefits.

However, Steve Wiegman, representing DOE at the meeting, warned during a discussion of the cost of adding a third melter that it would be "a challenge to the facility."

The facility to treat low-activity waste would be able to open sooner because design and construction is further along than at the facilities that will handle high-level waste and will not be ready until 2019.

But the current construction at the plant is not designed with a feed system and other elements needed to accommodate a third melter, said board member Keith Smith.

The board's advice on the 2010 budget also calls for stepping up cleanup work in central Hanford. The board is concerned that digging up waste contaminated with plutonium that was buried before policies changed in 1970 will require a significant increase in the budget. It also is concerned that DOE's funding assumptions call for building covers to keep out water over at least 43 miles of disposal trenches rather than retrieving and treating the waste for disposal.