The op's article starts out:
SPOKANE, Wash. (AP) — The Trump administration wants to reclassify some radioactive waste left from the production of nuclear weapons to lower its threat level and make disposal cheaper and easier.
So the question would be, does some of the waste actually warrant a lower threat level?
And I do realize looking at the proposal sensibly/discussing the possibilities, takes all the fun out of the thread, but it would seem at least one person here would have tried that already. And surely you all know DT didn't come up with this on his own and that it was likely suggested by the people in the know? You know, the same way they might recommend it to any president. and just like any other president might, they/he put it out here to see what people think.
OK, back to the unfounded general flow of one of a hundred hate Donald threads where DT is going to mindlessly throw nuclear waste around to where it ought not be.
There are different parts to the reclassification plan, so I'll only discuss the most controversial part.
At the Hanford site in particular, there are tanks that hold radioactive waste. These tanks are emptied, waste is processed, and then the tanks are closed off. At least in principle. In order to close off a tank, ~99% of the waste needs to be removed. Unfortunately despite best efforts, with current technology this goal isn't achievable. However, about 15 or 17 (can't remember) of the 177 tanks at Hanford are about 96% empty. The proposal to reclassify the waste would let these tanks be closed off at their current levels.
This particular aspect of the reclassification proposal is not dependent on how radioactive the waste is, it's purely for the purpose of closing off tanks.
This is controversial for a few reason. The first is that there's a concern that this would set a precedent for all tanks at Hanford. Instead of attempting to empty additional tanks to 99%, the DOE would instead just lazily apply this standard to all tanks as they reach a certain level of emptiness. (and it does seem to have the freedom to do this)
The second issue is that the Hanford site is itself sensitive. The Columbia River passes nearby and the area is (among other things) in an earthquake zone, so that there's a concern that over the long term this could become an issue. Closing the tanks off at 96% was not a part of the plan for the site.
The third issue is that there's still hope for a technological solution in the future. Although current efforts haven't been able to further empty the tanks, once they're closed off, no further attempts can be made. The high level waste becomes a permanent fixture of the area.
Other parts of the reclassification proposal also have some problems, though there are also parts that seek to reclassify waste that is below the thresholds for low-level waste (as you'd suggested). However, that's outside of the above issue.
The concern that Trump would pursue a cost-saving measure without considering the consequences seems well founded, given some of his past actions. At the moment, I believe the Oregon government and a number of nuclear watchdogs are opposing this change.
*edit, this is well outside of my own field, so take it all with a grain of salt
*double edit, looked it up, 177 tanks