Belt-tightening and uncertainty continue to grip Pacific Northwest National Laboratory as research programs hang in the balance between a swing in federal policy toward clean energy and congressional deadlock over a federal budget.

“A limited number” of employees were furloughed on Oct. 1, according to a PNNL spokesperson. Others connected to the Richland-based lab said close to 60 personnel were furloughed.

The furloughs came the first day of the federal government shutdown, though the lab said that was not the impetus behind them.

“As the contractor managing PNNL, these personnel decisions were made by Battelle, not the Department of Energy,” the PNNL spokesperson said. Battelle operates and manages the lab for the U.S.  Department of Energy.

The recent furloughs followed voluntary and involuntary layoffs in September, including nearly two dozen roles involved with radiation and nuclear projects as part of national security missions. And before that, an undetermined number of staff furloughed earlier in the year were laid off.

Those staffing decisions and other actions were necessary to “rightsize operations and position the Laboratory for the future,” according to a Sept. 17 memo to staff from Steven Ashby, then director of PNNL. He has since stepped into a new role with Battelle and Deborah “Deb” Gracio took on the lab’s top leadership role Oct. 1.

Ashby said in his memo that there were encouraging signs for that future, including support from nonfederal sponsors that “will sustain most staff into next spring while we wait for Congress to pass the FY2026 budget.”

Days before taking on her new role, Gracio sent a message to those working in PNNL’s National Security Directorate, which she had led, thanking staff and managers for their efforts.

“Your dedication has been invaluable in helping us navigate the funding situation and evaluating staffing impacts during this challenging period,” her memo read.

However, those connected to efforts to advocate for the lab say that those messages have done little to improve morale. “Have heard that there is a lot of uncertainty and concern among staff about future layoffs, as you would expect,” the Friends of PNNL group said in an Oct. 7 email to the Tri-Cities Area of Business.

PNNL began bracing for reductions in early June after the White House released its proposed federal budget which included billions of dollars in cuts to three DOE programs with a large presence at the lab. 

The lab began asking in mid-August for up to 90 staff to participate in voluntary layoffs as the Tri-Cities’ largest employer sought to make cuts in response to anticipated federal spending reductions. That didn’t include previously furloughed staff who were laid off. 

A late August staff memo from Ashby obtained by the Journal indicated that not enough workers volunteered for the layoffs, meaning more involuntary layoffs would be necessary, even though the lab was on track to meet its revised financial targets for the 2025 fiscal year. 

In mid-September, staff within PNNL’s National Security Directorate received an email from the directorate’s leadership indicating that there remain “notable challenges” regarding its budget outlook.

That led lab leaders to seek 20 of the 230 staff in those programs to participate in the PNNL’s Self-Select Voluntary Separation program. The programs targeted for voluntary layoffs included the Global Material Security and U.S. High Performance Research Reactor programs under the National Nuclear Security Administration, and the Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction program under the Department of Homeland Security. 

On Sept 18, the Friends of PNNL said it heard about workers being laid off being given 30 minutes to gather up their belongings and leave the premises.

Yet, in Ashby’s memo from the prior day, he wrote that the lab’s overall situation was firming up.

“Looking ahead, while we still do not know the FY2026 federal budget, the outlook is improving,” Ashby wrote. “PNNL is well aligned with the administration’s priorities, and we are poised to compete for exciting new programs across many areas.”

But the lab was still anticipating lower research expenditures over the next year due to fewer individuals to conduct research.

“While some of the decline ... is a result of the planned reductions in force, some also reflects an overall lack of hiring by the research directorates in areas where we still need talent,” Ashby wrote. “This reluctance is understandable given the uncertainty of the past few months, but now that we have a clearer idea of the administration’s priorities, we need to focus on hiring in select areas and for specific skills. The key, of course, is striking the right balance, which we are striving to do.”

A drawn-out federal shutdown could affect that outlook. Republicans and Democrats remained at loggerheads on a potential continuing resolution of 2025 fiscal year budget or the next fiscal year’s full slate of funding bills on Oct. 9, the Journal’s print deadline.