RCW 70A.386.010 Findings.
The legislature and the people of the state of Washington find that: (1) In order to solve the problem of high-level radioactive waste disposal, congress established a process for selecting two sites for the safe, permanent, and regionally equitable disposal of such waste. (2) The process of selecting three sites as final candidates, including the Hanford reservation, for a first high-level nuclear waste repository by the United States department of energy violated the intent and the mandate of congress. (3) The United States department of energy has prematurely deferred consideration of numerous potential sites and disposal media that its own research indicates are more appropriate, safer, and less expensive. (4) Placement of a repository at Hanford without methodical and independently verified scientific evaluation will pose a threat to the health and safety of the people and the environment of this state. (5) The selection process is flawed and not credible because it did not include independent experts in the selection of the sites and in the review of that selection, as recommended by the National Academy of Sciences. (6) By postponing indefinitely all site specific work for a second repository, the United States department of energy has not complied with the intent of congress expressed in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, Public Law 97-425, and the fundamental compromise which enabled its enactment.
The legislature and the people of the state of Washington find that:
(1) In order to solve the problem of high-level radioactive waste disposal, congress established a process for selecting two sites for the safe, permanent, and regionally equitable disposal of such waste.
(2) The process of selecting three sites as final candidates, including the Hanford reservation, for a first high-level nuclear waste repository by the United States department of energy violated the intent and the mandate of congress.
(3) The United States department of energy has prematurely deferred consideration of numerous potential sites and disposal media that its own research indicates are more appropriate, safer, and less expensive.
(4) Placement of a repository at Hanford without methodical and independently verified scientific evaluation will pose a threat to the health and safety of the people and the environment of this state.
(5) The selection process is flawed and not credible because it did not include independent experts in the selection of the sites and in the review of that selection, as recommended by the National Academy of Sciences.
(6) By postponing indefinitely all site specific work for a second repository, the United States department of energy has not complied with the intent of congress expressed in the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, Public Law 97-425, and the fundamental compromise which enabled its enactment.