Federal and State Authority to Regulate Radioactive Waste Disposal and Transportation

There appears to be a growing controversy concerning whether a state has the authority to prevent the federal government from disposing of nuclear wastes within it and transporting nuclear wastes through it. Several states have statutes purporting to veto the federal government's action in these areas. This report investigates whether these state statutes may be unconstitutional and preempted by federal statutes and regulations.

Report No. 82-52 A 766/112a FEDERAL f N D STATE AUTHORITY TO REGULATE RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL AND TRANSPORTATION by Michael V. Seitzinger Legislative Attorney American Law Division COMPLIMENTS O F Gene Snyder m y 21, 1980 Undated ?.lay 11, 1982 T h e Congressional Research Service works exclusively for the Congress, conducting research, analyzing legislation, and providing information at the request of committees, Mernbers, and their staffs. The Service makes such research available, without partisan bias, in many forms including studies, reports, compilations, digests, and background briefings. Upon request, CRS assists committees in analyzing legdative proposals and issues, and in assessing the possible effects of these proposals and their alternatives. T h e Service's senior specialists and subject analysts are also available for personal consultations in their respective fields of expertise. ABSTRACT There a p p e a r s t o be a growing c o n t r o v e r s y concerning whether a s t a t e has t h e a u t h o r i t y t o prevent t h e f e d e r a l government from d i s p o s i n g of n u c l e a r w a s t e s w i t h i n i t and t r a n s p o r t i n g n u c l e a r w a s t e s through i t . S e v e r a l s t a t e s have s t a t u t e s p u r p o r t i n g t o v e t o t h e f e d e r a l government's action i n these areas. This r e p o r t i n v e s t i g a t e s whether t h e s e s t a t e s t a t u t e s may be u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l and p r e e m p t e d by f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s and regulations. CONTENTS .............................. DOCTRINEOFPRE-EMPTION ......... ..... ..... . CONSTITUTIONAL B A S I S FOR ATOMIC ENERGY L E G I S L A T I O N . . . . . ..... INTRODUCTION.. FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING R B I O A C T I V E WASTE D I S P O S A L . 1 2 6 FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING RADIOACTIVE WASTE T R A N S P O R T A T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . 10 .. 11 FEDERAL PRE-EMPTION O F STATE REGULATION O F RADIOACTIVE WASTE D I S P O S A L AND TPWJSPORTATION .. SUPREME COURT CASES CONCERNING PRE-EMPTION RADIOACI'IVEWASTE . . . a e . . . . . . . . . ......... . .. I N AREAS OTHER THAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 SUMMARIES OF SELECTED S T A T E LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE P R O H I B I T I O N O F RADIOACTIVE WASTE D I S P O S A L OR TRANSPORTATION 31 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 39 ..... .. .. ................. ...... FEDERAL AND STATE AUTYORITY TO REGULATE RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL AND TRANSPORTATION INTRODUCTION The Manhattan P r o j e c t , c r e a t e d t o d e v e l o p a t o m i c bombs f o r u s e i n World War 11, was t h e b e g i n n i n g of t h e n u c l e a r e n e r g y program i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s . During t h i s i n i t i a l p e r i o d , t h e f i e l d of a t o m i c e n e r g y was h i g h l y s e c r e t and 1/ was monopo1izc.d by t h e f e d e r a l government. The Atomic Energy Act o f 1946continued t h e f e d e r a l mnopoly over atomic energy. It c r e a t e d t h e Atomic Energy Commission i n o r d e r t o d e v e l o p a t o m i c e n e r g y , and i t r e s t r i c t e d p r i v a t e a c t i v i t y t o c o n t r a c t u a l o p e r a t i o n s f o r t h e f e d e r a l government. I n t h e 1 9 5 0 ' s t h e f e d e r a l government began e n c o u r a g i n g p r i v a t e i n d u s t r y and s t a t e s t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n t h e development of p e a c e t i m e u s e s of a t o m i c 2/ e n e r g y . The Atomic Energy Act of 1954- opened t h e d o o r t o p a r t i c i p a t i o n by p r i v a t e i n d u s t r y by c r e a t i n g a comprehensive s t a t u t o r y program of f e d e r a l 3/ l i c e n s i n g and r e g u l a t i o n . A 1959 s t a t u t e - r e c o g n i z e d t h e " i n t e r e s t s of t h e -4/ s t a t e s i n t h e p e a c e f u l u s e s of a t o m i c energy" and e s t a b l i s h e d a program which g i v e s t h e s t a t e s l i m i t e d a u t h o r i t y o v e r c e r t a i n t y p e s of n u c l e a r materials. However, a t a b o u t t h e t i m e t h a t t h e f e d e r a l government a p p e a r e d w i l l i n g t o r e l i n q u i s h i t s monopoly o v e r n u c l e a r e n e r g y , s t a t e governments and 1/ 60 S t a t . 755. 2/ - 68 S t a t . 9 1 9 , a s amended, 42 U.S.C. § § 2011 e t seq. 3/ - 7 3 S t a t . 688, a s amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2021. 4/ - 42 U.S.C. § 2021 ( a ) ( l ) . e n v i r o n m e n t a l g r o u p s became i n c r e a s i n g l y c o n c e r n e d w i t h t h e r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r s , r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e d i s p o s a l , and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of r a d i o a c t i v e wastes. A s a r e s u l t , many s t a t e s have c h a l l e n g e d t h e t r a d i t i o n a l n o t i o n of t h e f e d e r a l government's j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e n u c l e a r energy program, o f t e n by a t t e m p t i n g t o v e t o f e d e r a l d e c i s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g d i s p o s a l o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . F o r example, a c c o r d i n g t o t h e Nucl-ear R e g u l a t o r y Commission's O f f i c e of S t a t e Programs, a m a j o r i t y of s t a t e s have passed laws o r r e s o l u t i o n s conc e r n i n g t h e p r o h i b i t i o n of h i g h - l e v e l boundaries. -51 radioactive waste disposal within t h e i r A p p l i c a b l e f e d e r a l s t a t t l t e s do n o t s p e l l o u t what, i f a n y , r o l e t h a t t h e s t a t e s h a v e i n r e g u l a t i n g n u c l e a r w a s t e d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Both t h e 0 6 t h and 9 7 t h C o n g r e s s e s have c o n s i d e r e d e n a c t i n g l e g i s l a t i o n t o s e t up a f e d e r a l n u c l e a r w a s t e program and t o c l a r i f y t h e f e d e r a l and s t a t e r o l e s , b u t t h e C o n g r e s s h a s n o t y e t p a s s e d a comprehensive b i l l t o d e a l w i t h n u c l e a r waste. Although House and S e n a t e committees have approved b i l l s c o n c e r n i n g t h i s i s s u e , much work remains b e f o r e a program i s e n a c t e d . This r e p o r t analyzes l e g a l a u t h o r i t y o f f e d e r a l and s t a t e governments t o r e g u l a t e t h e d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of n u c l e a r w a s t e s . DOCTRINE OF PRE-EMPTION Much of t h e problem c o n c e r n i n g w h e t h e r a s t a t e h a s t h e power t o v e t o t h e f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t ' s d e c i s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g d i s p o s a l o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of r a d i o Prea c t i v e w a s t e s i n v o l v e s t h e a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e d o c t r i n e of pre-emption. 61 emption r e s t s upon t h e Supremacy c l a u s e of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , which s t a t e s t h a t T h i s C o n s t i t u t i o n , and t h e laws of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s which s h a l l b e made i n p u r s u a n c e t h e r e o f ; and a l l 5/ - S e e Appendix f o r summaries of t h e s t a t u t e s and r e s o l u t i o n s . 6/ - U.S. Const. a r t . V I , c l . 2. T r e a t i e s made, o r which s h a l l be made, u n d e r t h e A u t h o r i t y of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , s h a l l be t h e supreme Law of t h e Land; and t h e J u d g e s i n e v e r y S t a t e s h a l l be hound t h e r e b y , any Thing i n t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o r Laws of any S t a t e t o t h e c o n t r a r y n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g . F r e q u e n t l y , Congress d o e s n o t e x p r e s s l y d e l i n e a t e i n a s t a t u t e t h e i n t e n d e d e x t e n t of pre-emption. c o u r t s f a c e d w i t h pre-emption implied. I n t h e a b s e n c e of s u c h c o n g r e s s i o n a l g u i d a n c e , i s s u e s must d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r pre-emption J u s t i c e Black d i s c u s s e d t h e d o c t r i n e of i m p l i e d pre-emption is when h e s t a t e d t h a t , i f t h e f e d e r a l government i n e x e r c i s i n g i t s d e l e g a t e d powers "has e n a c t e d a c o m p l e t e scheme of r e g u l a t i o n . . ., s t a t e s c a n n o t , incon- s i s t e n t l y w i t h t h e p u r p o s e of Congress, c o n f l i c t o r i n t e r f e r e w i t h , c u r t a i l o r complement, t h e f e d e r a l law, o r e n f o r c e a d d i t i o n a l o r a u x i l i a r y r e g u l a 7. ,/ tions." I f t h e r e is not complete f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n over a p a r t i c u l a r a r e a , a c o u r t may have a somewhat more d i f f i c u l t problem i n d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n i s i m p l i e d l y pre-empted. There i s not--and from t h e v e r y n a t u r e of t h e problem t h e r e cannot be--any r i g i d formula o r r u l e which c a n be u s e d as a u n i v e r s a l p a t t e r n t o d e t e r m i n e t h e rneani n g and p u r p o s e of e v e r y a c t of Congress. This Court, i n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e v a l i d i t y of s t a t e l a w s i n t h e l i g h t of t r e a t i e s o r f e d e r a l laws t o u c h i n g t h e same s u b j e c t , h a s made u s e of t h e f o l l o w i n g e x p r e s s i o n s : conflicting; c o n t r a r y t o ; occupying t h e f i e l d ; repugnance; d i f f e r e n c e ; irreconcilability; inconsistency; violation; curtailment; and i n t e r f e r e n c e . Eut none of t h e s e e x p r e s s i o n s p r o v i d e s an i n f a l l i b l e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l t e s t o r exclusive constitutional yardstick. In t h e f i n a l a n a l y s i s , t h e r e can be no o n e c r y s t a l c l e a r d i s t i n c t l y marked f o r m u l a . Our primary f u n c t i o n i s t o d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r , u n d e r t h e c i r cumstances of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r c a s e , P e n n s y l v a n i a ' s l a w s t a n d s a s a n o b s t a c l e t o t h e accomplishment and e x e c u t i o n of t h e f u l l p u r p o s e s and o b j e c t i v e s of C o n g r e s s . 8/ 7/ - Hines v. - 8/ - I d . , 67. - Davidowitz, 3 1 2 U.S. 5 2 , 66-67 (1941). CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS FOR ATOMIC ENERGY LEGISLATION Because t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n e s t a b l i s h e s a f e d e r a l government of enumerated powers, a f a c t r e f l e c t e d i n t h e Tenth Amendment, which r e s e r v e s t o t h e s t a t e s o r t h e people t h e powers n o t d e l e g a t e d t o t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s by t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n n o r p r o h i b i t e d by i t t o t h e s t a t e s , Congress must have a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b a s i s f o r r e g u l a t i n g t h e d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of n u c l e a r w a s t e s i n o r d e r t o pre-empt s t a t e laws i n t h e s e a r e a s . Congress a p p e a r s t o have r e - l i e d on s e v e r a l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l grounds when i t e n a c t e d t h e Atomic Energy Act 91 o f 1954. These grounds i n c l u d e i t s war powers, i t s power t o r e g u l a t e i n t e r 101 s t a t e and f o r e i g n commerce, and i t s power t o make " a l l n e e d f u l R u l e s and - - Regulations" concerning United S t a t e s property. 111 In t h e Act's statement of c o n g r e s s i o n a l f i n d i n g s , Congress r e f e r r e d t o i t s spending powers when i t s t a t e d t h a t "Funds of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s may be p r o v i d e d f o r t h e development and u s e of a t o m i c energy under c o n d i t i o n s which w i l l p r o v i d e f o r t h e common 121 d e f e n s e and s e c u r i t y and promote t h e g e n e r a l w e l f a r e . nWhen Congress l a t e r abandoned mandatory government ownership of s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l , i t a p p e a r e d t o e l i m i n a t e i t s " p r o p e r t y power" a s a b a s i s f o r f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n . 131 - However, a t t h e same time, Congress a s s e r t e d i t s b e l i e f t h a t i t s war powers and i t s power t o r e g u l a t e i n t e r s t a t e and f o r e i g n commerce provided an a d e q u a t e 91 U.S. Const. a r t . I , § 8 , c l s . 11-14. 101 - I d . , c l . 3. - 111 Id., a r t . - I V , § 3, c l . 2. 1 2 1 42 U.S.C. § 2012(g). See Murphy and L a p i e r r e , "Nuclear Moratorium ~ e ~ i x a t i oi nn t h e S t a t e s and t h e Supremacy Clause: A Case of Express Preemption," 76 Colum. L. Rev. 392, 434 (1976). 131 76 stat. P r i v a t e Ownership of S p e c i a l Nuclear M a t e r i a l s Act, Pub. L. 88-491, 602. CRS- 5 141 b a s i s f o r r e g u l a t i o n of n u c l e a r e n e r g y . I n t h e 1954 A c t , Congress s t a t e d t h ~ t r h e p r o c e s s i n g and u t i l i z a t i o n of s o u r c e , by-product, and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l a f f e c t i n t e r s t a t e and f o r e i g n commerce and must b e r e g u l a t e d i n t h e n a t i o n a l interest. The p r o c e s s i n g and u t i l i z a t i o n of s o u r c e , by-product, and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l must be r e g u l a t e d i n t h e n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t and i n o r d e r t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e comnon d e f e n s e and s e c u r i t y and t o p r o t e c t t h e h e a l t h and s a f e t y of t h e p u b l i c . Soubye and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l p r o d u c t i o n f a c i l i t i e s , and u t i l i z a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s a r e a f f e c t e d w i t h t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t , and r e g u l a t i n g by t h e United S t a t e s of t h e p r o d u c t i o n and u t i l i z a t i o n of a t o m i c e n e r g y and of t h e f a c i l i t i e s u s e d i n conneccion therewith i s necessary i n t h e n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t t o a s s u r e t h e common d e f e n s e and s e c u r i t y and t o p r o t e c t t h e h e a l t h and s a f e t y of t h e p u b l i c . The n e c e s s i t y f o r p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t p o s s i b l e i n t e r s t a t e damage o c c u r r i n g from t h e o p e r a t i o n of f a c i l i t i e s f o r t h e p r o d u c t i o n o r u t i l i z a t i o n of s o u r c e o r s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l p l a c e s t h e o p e r a t i o n of t h o s e f a c i l i t i e s i n i n t e r s t a t e commerce. 151 ... Thus, it i s a r g u a b l e t h a t C o n g r e s s h a s s e v e r a l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b a s e s f o r t h e r e g u l a t i o n of t h e n u c l e a r e n e r g y f i e l d . Only one c a s e , P a u l i n g v. McElroy, 161 - q u e s t i o n i n g t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of t h e Act h a s been f o u n d , and i n i t t h e United S t a t e s D i s t r i c t Court f o r t h e D i s t r i c t of Columbia s t a t e d t h a t "The Act i s a v a l i d e x e r c i s e of t h e a u t h o r i t y of C o n g r e s s t o promote and p r o t e c t t h e n a t i o n a l d e f e n s e and s a f e t y under t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l war power." --5 4 2 U.S.C. Pauling, § 2012 ( c ) - ( f ) . 161 1 6 b F. Supp. 3 9 0 (D.D.C. cert. d e n , 364 U.S. 835 ( 1 9 6 0 ) . l 9 5 8 ) , a f f 'd 278 F.2d 2 5 2 (D.C. C i r . l96O), FEDERAL STATUTES APJD REGULATIONS CONCERNING RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL The Atomic Energy Act of 1954 p r o v i d e s t h a t a l i c e n s e i s s u e d by t h e AEC (now NRC) i s r e q u i r e d f o r t h e p o s s e s s i o n , t r a n s f e r , o r u s e of s p e c i a l n u c l e a r 171 18/ 19/ material, source material, and byproduct m a t e r i a l . The a c t a l s o r e q u i r e s a l i c e n s e f o r any p e r s o n t o t r a n s f e r o r r e c e i v e i n i n t e r s t a t e commerce, manuf a c t u r e , p r o d u c e , t r a n s f e r , a c q u i r e , p o s s e s s , u s e , i m p o r t , o r e x p o r t any u t i l i 20 / z a t i o n o r p r o d u c t i o n f a c i l i t y w i t h o u t a l i c e n s e i s s u e d by t h e omm mission^ a u t h o r i z e s t h e Commission t o i s s u e l i c e n s e s f o r commercial u t i l i z a t i o n 2 1/ facilities; t o d i s t r i b u t e special nuclear material f o r use i n these f a c i l i 221 ties; and t o conduct r e s e a r c h i n t h e u t i l i z a t i o n of a t o m i c energy f o r t h e 231 g e n e r a t i o n of u s a b l e energy. The 1954 Act makes no mention of s t a t e a u t h o r i t y - t o r e g u l a t e b y p r o d u c t , s o u r c e , and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s ; i n s t e a d , Congress 171 42 U.S.C. 5 s 2073 and 2077(a). "Special nuclear material" i s defined a s ( l ~ p l u t o n i u m ,uranium e n r i c h e d i n t h e i s o t o p e 233 o r i n t h e i s o t o p e 235, and any o t h e r m a t e r i a l which t h e Commission, p u r s u a n t t o 42 U.S.C. 5 2071, determines t o be s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l , but does not i n c l u d e s o u r c e m a t e r i a l ; o r ( 2 ) a n y m a t e r i a l a r t i f i c i a l l y e n r i c h e d by any of t h e f o r e g o i n g , b u t does n o t include source material. 42 U.S.C. 5 2014(aa). 18/ 42 U.S.C. § § 2092 and 2093. "Source m a t e r i a l " i s d e f i n e d a s ( 1 ) uranium, t h o r i u m , o r any o t h e r m a t e r i a l which i s d e t e r m i n e d by t h e Commission p u r s u a n t t o 42 U.S.C. 5 2091 t o b e s o u r c e m a t e r i a l ; o r ( 2 ) o r e s c o n t a i n i n g o n e o r more o f t h e f o r e g o i n g m a t e r i a l s , i n such c o n c e n t r a t i o n a s t h e Commission 42 U.S.C. 5 2 0 1 4 ( z ) . may by r e g u l a t i o n d e t e r m i n e from time t o time. 1 9 / 42 U.S.C. 5 2111. "Byproduct m a t e r i a l " i s d e f i n e d a s any r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l (except s p e c i a l nuclear m a t e r i a l ) y i e l d e d i n o r m d e r a d i o a c t i v e by e x p o s u r e t o t h e r a d i a t i o n i n c i d e n t t o t h e p r o c e s s of p r o d u c i n g o r u t i l i z i n g s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l and ( 2 ) t h e t a i l i n g s o r w a s t e s produced by t h e e x t r a c t i o n o r c o n c e n t r a t i o n of uranium o r thorium from any o r e p r o c e s s e d p r i m a r i l y 42 U.S.C. 5 2 0 1 4 ( e ) . f o r i t s source m a t e r i a l content. 201 42 U.S.C. - § 2131. 21/ - 42 U.S.C. §s 22/ - 42 U.S.C. 5 2073(a)(3). 23/ - 42 U.S.C. 5 2051(a)(4). 2132, 2133, 2 1 3 4 ( b ) . CRS- 7 a p p e a r e d more c o n c e r n e d w i t h d e f i n i n g t h e l i m i t s of p r i v a t e i n d u s t r y i n t h e development of a t o m i c energy. 42 U.S.C. 5 2021, e n a c t e d i n 1959 a s $ 274 of t h e Atomic Energy Act, a p p e a r s t o p r o v i d e a r a t h e r c a r e f u l d e l i n e a t i o n of f e d e r a l and s t a t e a u t h o r i t y o v e r n u c l e a r energy development. S u b s e c t i o n ( b ) of t h i s s t a t u - t o r y p r o v i s i o n a u t h o r i z e s t h e Commission t o e n t e r i n t o a g r e e m e n t s w i t h t h e g o v e r n o r of any s t a t e f o r d i s c o n t i n u a n c e of t h e Commission's r e g u l a t o r y a u t h o r i t y w i t ' , r e s p e c t t o byproduct m a t e r i a l s , s o u r c e m a t e r i a l s , a n d / o r s p e c i a l n u c l e a r materials i n q u a n t i t i e s n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o form a c r i t i c a l mass. During t h e e f f e c t i v e p e r i o d of a g r e e m e n t , t h e s t a t e h a s a u t h o r i t y t o r e g u l a t e t h e m . t e r i a l s c o v e r e d by t h e agreement f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n of t h e p u b l i c h e a l t h and s a f e t y from r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s . S u b s e c t i o n ( c ) of t h e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n r e s e r v e s c e r t a i n a r e a s of r e g u l a t i o n e x c l u s i v e l y f o r t h e Commission. These i n c l u d e : t h e d i s p o s a l i n t o t h e o c e a n o r s e a of h y p r o d u c t , s o u r c e o r s p e c i a l nuclear waste m a t e r i a l s a s defined i n regulat i o n s o r o r d e r s of t h e Commission; t h e d i s p o s a l of such o t h e r b y p r o d u c t , s o u r c e , o r s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l a s t h e Commission d e t e r m i n e s by r e g u l a t i o n o r o r d e r s h o u l d , b e c a u s e of t h e h a z a r d s o r p o t e n t i a l h a z a r d s t h e r e o f , n o t be s o d i s p o s e d of w i t h o u t a l i c e n s e from t h e Commission. 241 S t a t e s t a n d a r d s f o r p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s s h o u l d be " c o o r d i n a t e d 251 and c o m p a t i b l e " w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d s of t h e Commission. The Commission c a n t e r m i n a t e o r suspend i t s agreement w i t h t h e s t a t e and r e a s s e r t i t s l i c e n s i n g and r e g u l a t o r y a u t h o r i t y i f i t f i n d s t h a t t e r m i n a t i o n o r s u s p e n s i o n i s r e q u i r e d 241 - 42 U.S.C. 3 2021(c)(3)-(4). CRS- 8 t o p r o t e c t t h e p u b l i c h e a l t h and s a f e t y o r i f a n emergency s i t u a t i o n e x i s t s c r e a t i n g d a n g e r which r e q u i r e s immediate a c t i o n t o p r o t e c t t h e h e a l t h o r s a f e t y of p e r s o n s w i t h i n o r o u t s i d e t h e s t a t e and t h e s t a t e h a s f a i l e d t o t a k e s t e p s n e c e s s a r y t o c o n t a i n o r e l i m i n a t e t h e c a u s e of t h e d a n g e r w i t h i n 26 / a reasonable time a f t e r t h e s i t u a t i o n arose. - Pursuant t o s t a t u t o r y provisions concerning t h e l i c e n s i n g requirements 271 28/ 291 f o r source material, byproduct m a t e r i a l s , and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s , t h e Commission h a s a d o p t e d r e g u l a t i o n s g o v e r n i n g w a s t e d i s p o s a l . With l i m i t e d e x c e p t i o n s , t h e r e g u l a t i o n s p r o v i d e t h a t t h e Commission must approve t h e pro301 311 posed d i s p o s a l p r o c e d u r e s f o r l i c e n s e d m a t e r i a l . High-level wastesshall be t r a n s f e r r e d t o a f e d e r a l r e p o s i t o r y no l a t e r t h a n t e n y e a r s f o l l o w i n g s e p a r a t i o n of f i s s i o n p r o d u c t s from t h e i r r a d i a t e d f u e l . Upon r e c e i p t , t h e f e d e r a l r e p o s i t o r y w i l l assume permanent c u s t o d y of t h e s e r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e m a t e r i a l s , and NRC w i l l t a k e t i t l e t o t h e r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e m a t e r i a l upon 321 t r a n s f e r t o a federal repository. D i s p o s a l of h i g h - l e v e l r a d i o a c t i v e f i s s i o n - p r o d u c t w a s t e m a t e r i a l w i l l b e p e r m i t t e d o n l y on l a n d owned and c o n t r o l l e d by 261 - 42 U.S.C. S 271 - 42 U.S.C. 55 281 - 42 U.S.C. S 291 - 42U.S.C. 3s 2021(j)* 2092 and 2093. 2111. 2073 and 2 0 7 7 ( a ) L i c e n s e d m a t e r i a l a p p e a r s t o mean s o u r c e , by301 10C.F.R. S 20.301. p r o d u x , and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l f o r which t h e Commission r e g u l a t i o n s require a license. 1 0 C.F.R. S 20.3(8). 311 H i g h - l e v e l l i q u i d , r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e s a r e aqueous w a s t e s r e s u l t i n g from t h e o p e r a t i o n of t h e f i r s t c y c l e s o l v e n t e x t r a c t i o n s y s t e m , o r e q u i v a l e n t , and t h e c o n c e n t r a t e d w a s t e s from s u b s e q u e n t e x t r a c t i o n c y c l e s , o r e q u i v a l e n t , i n a f a c i l i t y f o r r e p r o c e s s i n g i r r a d i a t e d r e a c t o r f u e l s . 10 C.F.R. P t . 50. t h e f e d e r a l government. 331 In 341 - g e n e r a l , low-level wastes s h o u l d be d i s p o s e d 35/ Further, o f on l a n d owned by t h e f e d e r a l government o r a s t a t e government. t h e Commission i s empowered by 4 2 U.S.C. § 2201(b) a n d ( p ) t o i s s u e r e g u l a - t i o r t s ' w h i c h i t deems n e c e s s a r y t o " p r o t e c t h e a l t h o r t o m i n i m i z e d a n g e r t o l i f e o r p r o p e r t y " and " a s may be n e c e s s a r y t o c a r r y o u t t h e p u r p o s e s of t h i s Act ." The N u c l e a r R e g u l a t o r y Commission h a s a l s o i s s u e d r e g u l a t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o a r e a s which c a n n o t be s u b j e c t s of t u r n - o v e r a g r e e m e n t s and must r e m a i n 361 w i t h i n t h e a u t h o r i t y of t h e Comission. These a r e a s i n c l u d e s p e c i a l n u c l e a r - m a t e r i a l s u f f i c i e n t t o form a c r i t i c a l mass and n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l which i s s o h a z a r d o u s t h a t i t s h o u l d n o t be d i s p o s e d of w i t h o u t a l i c e n s e . Since t h e Program a p p e a r s t o p e r m i t s t a t e s t o r e g u l a t e s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m t t e r i a l s n o t s u f f i c i e n t t o form a c r i t i c a l mass, t h e Commission d e f i n e s s u c h n u c l e a r 371 materials. 331 - 10 C.F.R. P t . 5 0 , App. F(3). 3 4 1 Low-level w a s t e s a r e , i n layman's t e r m s , w a s t e s which have a r a d i o a c t i v e c o n t e n t s u f f i c i e n t l y low t o p e r m i t d i s c h a r g e t o t h e environment w i t h reasonable d i l u t i o n o r a f t e r r e l a t i v e l y simple processing. See 1 S o u t h e r n I n t e r s t a t e Nuclear Board, R a d i o a c t i v e Waste Management 37 ( 1 9 7 4 ) . B e s i d e s h i g h - l e v e l and l o w - l e v e l w a s t e s , t h e o t h e r m a j o r c a t e g o r y of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e i s s p e n t f u e l . We a r e informed by NRC t h a t s p e n t n u c l e a r f u e l i s viewed a s a c a t e g o r y s e p a r a t e from h i g h - l e v e l w a s t e s b e c a u s e t h e agency h a s n o t y e t d e t e r m i n e d whether t h e commercial v a l u e of s p e n t f u e l p r e c l u d e s i t s being considered a s waste. Spent f u e l c o n t a i n s b o t h byproduct m a t e r i a l ( f i s s i o n p r o d u c t s ) and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l ( p l u t o n i u m ) . § 20.302(b). 351 S e e 1 0 C.F.R. 361 - 10 C.F.R. P a r t 150. 37/ - 10 C.F.R. $ 150.11. FEDERAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS CONCERNING RADIOACTIVE WASTE TRANSPORTATION Although f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s and r e g u l a t i o n s concerning t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of r a d i o a c t i v e wastes appear t o be l e s s e x t e n s i v e than i n t h e a r e a of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e d i s p o s a l , Congress h a s l e g i s l a t e d i n t h i s a r e a . NRC has t h e a u t h o r i t y t o c o n t r o l t h e " t r a n s f e r " and "possession" of s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l , s o u r c e m a t e r i a l , and byproduct m a t e r i a l . 381 The Commission h a s t h e g e n e r a l duty t o e s t a b l i s h s t a n d a r d s and i n s t r u c t i o n s with r e s p e c t t o t h e s e t h r e e t y p e s of n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s which i t deems necessary t o "promote t h e comaon d e f e n s e and 39/ s e c u r i t y o r p r o t e c t h e a l t h o r minimize danger t o l i f e o r property"and " a s 40/ may be n e c e s s a r y t o c a r r y o u t purposes of t h i s act."Under t h e Energy Re411 o r g a n i z a t i o n Act of 1 9 7 4 , NRC i s d i r e c t e d t o e v a l u a t e ways of a o n i t o r i n g , t e s t i n g , and recommending upgrading of s y s t e m designed t o prevent s u b s t a n t i a l h e a l t h o r s a f e t y hazards and methods of t r a n s p o r t i n g s p e c i a l n u c l e a r and o t h e r n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s and of t r a n s p o r t i n g and s t o r i n g high-level r a d i o a c t i v e wastes 421 t o prevent r a d i a t i o n hazards t o employees and t h e g e n e r a l public. NRC has - adopted r e g u l a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e requirements f o r t r a n s p o r t i n g and 431 packaging l i c e n s e d m a t e r i a l . Other f e d e r a l bodies, such a s t h e Department - of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , have adopted r e g u l a t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o t r a n s p o r t i n g and 44 I packaging n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l . - 38/ - 42 U.S.C. $5 39/ - 42 U.S.C. 5 2201(b). 401 - 42 U.S.C. 5 2201(p). 41/ - 42 U.S.C. 55 42/ - 42 U.S. C. § 5843(b) (2) ( A ) - ( B ) . 43/ - 10 C.F.R. 44/ See 49 - 2077(a), 2092, and 2111. 5801 e t seq. P a r t s 71 and 73. C.F.R. P a r t s 171-179 and 397. From t h e above d i s c u s s i o n , i t a p p e a r s t h a t t h e r e i s no f e d e r a l s t a t u t e o r r e g u l a t i o n e x p r e s s l y pre-empting d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . s t a t e laws concerning r a d i o a c t i v e waste Mowever, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o a r g u e t h a t t h e s t a t u t e s and r e g u l a t i o n s a r e s u f f i c i e n t l y c o m p l e t e t h a t t h e y i m p l i e d l y p r e empt s t a t e laws i n t h e s e a r e a s . According t o 42 U.S.C. § 2021, s t a t e s which have a g r e e d w i t h t h e Com- m i s s i o n t o assume some of NRC1s r e g u l a t o r y power c a n n o t r e g u l a t e s p e c i a l 45/ n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s u f f i c i e n t t o form a c r i t i c a l mass. A facility for the s t o r a g e and d i s p o s a l of h i g h - l e v e l n u c l e a r w a s t e c o u l d p o s s i b l y be deemed t o i n v o l v e q u a n t i t i e s of s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s u f f i c i e n t t o form a c r i t i c a l mass and t h u s n o t be a p e r m i s s i b l e s u b j e c t of a t u r n - o v e r a g r e e ment. F u r t h e r , t h e Commission c a n n o t r e l i n q u i s h i t s a u t h o r i t y o v e r n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l which i s s o h a z a r d o u s t h a t i t s h o u l d n o t be d i s p o s e d of w i t h o u t a license. We a r e informed by NRC t h a t h i g h - l e v e l nuclear wastes w i l l l i k e l y be d e t e r m i n e d by t h e agency t o b e m a t e r i a l s t h a t s h o u l d n o t be d i s p o s e d of w i t h o u t a l i c e n s e from t h e Commission. I f s o , w h a t o v e r a u t h o r i t y NRC p o s s e s s e s o v e r t h e r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s of h i g h - l e v e l n u c l e a r w a s t e s c o u l d not be d e l e g a t e d t o t h e s t a t e s . Since spent f u e l c o n t a i n s both byproduct m a t e r i a l ( f i s s i o n products) and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l (plutonium), i t , t o o , would l i k e l y h e a n i m p e r m i s s i b l e s u b j e c t f o r s t a t e t u r n - o v e r agreements. T h e r e f o r e , i t c a n be a r g u e d t h a t s t a t e s may n o t l e g a l l y e x e r c i s e l i c e n s i n g 45/ A s t o s t a t e s which a r e n o t members of t h e Agreement S t a t e s Program, i t m a y b e a r g u e d t h a t t h e y h a v e none of NRC1s r e g u l a t o r y power, h u t a t any r a t e i t seems a p p a r e n t t h a t t h e y have no more a u t h o r i t y t h a n s t a t e s which a r e members of t h e Program. o r o t h e r v e t o a u t h o r i t y o v e r f e d e r a l long-term s t o r a g e and d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t i e s f o r high-level n u c l e a r w a s t e s and s p e n t n u c l e a r f u e l on t h e b a s i s of r a d i a t i o n hazards. S t a t e e f f o r t s t o p r e v e n t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of h i g h - l e v e l w a s t e s and s p e n t f u e l may f a i l by a p p l i c a t i o n of t h e same p r i n c i p l e s u n d e r which s t a t e e f f o r t s a t r e g u l a t i n g d i s p o s a l of h i g h - l e v e l w a s t e s and s p e n t f u e l may be s t r u c k down. T h e r e d o n o t a p p e a r t o b e any d e c i d e d c a s e s on t h i s i s s u e , b u t a Department of 46 / T r a n s p o r t a t i o n notice' s t a t e s t h a t a s e c t i o n of t h e N e w York C i t y H e a l t h Code f o r b i d d i n g t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of most commercial s h i p m e n t s of r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s i n o r through t h e c i t y i s n o t i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e Hazardous M a t e r i a l s T r a n s p o r t a t i o n Act which DOT a d m i n i s t e r s . However, t h e n o t i c e g o e s on t o s t a t e that The l e g a l v a l i d i t y of § 175.111 i s s t i l l s u b j e c t t o s e r i o u s d o u b t . T h i s o p i n i o n d e a l s o n l y w i t h highAir, r a i l , and w a t e r c a r r i a g e way c a r r i a g e . a r e more t h o r o u g h l y imbued w i t h a F e d e r a l i n t e r e s t and t h i s o p i n i o n d o e s n o t a p p l y t o t r a n s p o r t a t i o n by t h o s e modes. New York C i t y and any o t h e r j u r i s d i c t i o n s which have, o r a r e c o n t e m p l a t i n g s i m i l a r o r d i n a n c e s , s h o u l d a l s o b e a r i n mind t h e f a c t t h a t § 175.111 may be preempted by t h e Commerce C l a u s e of t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n , o r by t h e Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and r e g u l a t i o n s i s s u e d t h e r e u n d e r . 471 ... - I t may b e a r g u e d t h a t s t a t e s have l i m i t e d a u t h o r i t y o v e r d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of l o w - l e v e l w a s t e s , which i s t h e o t h e r m a j o r t y p e of r a d i o a c t i v e wastes. F e d e r a l p o l i c y c o n c e r n i n g low-level w a s t e s i s t h a t each s t a t e i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o v i d i n g f o r t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of c a p a c i t y e i t h e r w i t h i n o r o u t s i d e t h e s t a t e f o r t h e d i s p o s a l of low-level 46/ - 4 3 Fed. Reg. 1 6 , 954 (1978). 47/ - Id., - a t 1 6 , 958. r a d i o a c t i v e waste generated w i t h i n i t s b o r d e r s e x c e p t f o r w a s t e g e n e r a t e d a s a r e s u l t of d e f e n s e a c t i v i ties. 481 -, - However, s t a t e s t a n d a r d s f o r p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s 491 - s h o u l d b e " c o o r d i n a t e d and c o m p a t i b l e " w i t h t h e s t a n d a r d s of t h e Commission. F u r t h e r , u n d e r t h e Agreanent S t a t e s Program, t h e Commission c a n suspend o r terminate t h e s t a t e ' s a u t h o r i t y i f i t f i n d s t h a t t h i s w i l l be i n t h e i n t e r e s t 50 I o f p u b l i c h e a l t h and s a f e t y . Thus, t h e o v e r a l l e f f e c t of t h e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s and r e g u l a t i o n s a p p e a r s t o be t o a u t h o r i z e a p e r v a s i v e f e d e r a l p r e s e n c e i n r e g u l a t i n g much n u c l e a r w a s t e d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . pre-empting Even w i t h o u t a p r o v i s i o n e x p r e s s l y s t a t e laws i n t h e s e a r e a s , t h e f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s and r e g u l a t i o n s a r g u a b l y a r e s u f f i c i e n t l y c o m p l e t e t h a t t h e y i m p l i e d l y preempt s t a t e laws i n A s i n d i c a t e d , t h e r e s o l u t i o n of a n i m p l i e d pre-emption q u e s t i o n the areas. t y p i c a l l y i n v o l v e s t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of s e v e r a l f a c t o r s . Among t h e s e f a c t o r s , t h e f o l l o w i n g may h a v e p a r t i c u l a r r e l e v a n c e t o t h e i s s u e s of n u c l e a r w a s t e d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . 1. P e r v a s i v e n e s s of t h e f e d e r a l scheme of r e g u l a t i o n . A scheme of f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n may be s o c o m p l e t e a s t o make r e a s o n a b l e t h e i n f e r e n c e t h a t C o n g r e s s l e f t no room f o r t h e s t a t e s t o supplement i t . T h e r e would seem t o be sound b a s i s f o r a r g u i n g t h a t s u c h a degree of pervasiveness i s present i n nuclear waste d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . 2. I m p o r t a n c e of t h e f e d e r a l i n t e r e s t . Ample e v i d e n c e of t h e i m p o r t a n c e of n u c l e a r power p r o m o t i o n i n f e d e r a l p o l i c y a p p e a r s i n t h e Atomic Energy Act and i t s l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y . 481 - Pub. L. No. 96-573, 491 - 42 U.S.C. § 2021(g). 501 - 42 U.S.C. § 2021(j). § 4(a)(l)(A), 9 4 S t a t . 3348. 3. P o s s i b i l i t y t h a t a s t a t e law might t h w a r t t h e r e a l i z a t i o n of a f e d e r a l o b j e c t i v e . Allowing s t a t e s t o v e t o t h e s i t i n g of a d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t y w i t h i n t h e i r b o r d e r s o r t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of n u c l e a r w a s t e s t h r o u g h them would a r g u a b l y cons t i t u t e a t h w a r t i n g of f e d e r a l p o l i c y f a v o r i n g development of n u c l e a r power. 51/ - o v e r n u c l e a r waste d i s p o s a l 52/ and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n might d e r i v e from Northern S t a t e s Power Co. v. Minnesota. Some f u r t h e r s u p p o r t f o r f e d e r a l pre-emption - T h i s c a s e h e l d t h a t t h e f e d e r a l government h a s e x c l u s i v e a u t h o r i t y u n d e r t h e Atomic Energy Act t o r e g u l a t e r a d i o a c t i v e e f f l u e n t d i s c h a r g e d from n u c l e a r powerplants. Although t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t s found e x p r e s s pre-emption, E i g h t h C i r c u i t found i m p l i e d pre-emption. the A t any e v e n t , t h e pre-emption argu- m e n t s a c c e p t e d a s v a l i d i n t h a t c a s e would l i k e l y be r a i s e d i n c h a l l e n g i n g a s t a t e v e t o o f a f e d e r a l l y approved d i s p o s a l s i t e o r of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of n u c l e a r wastes. Minnesota had a s s e r t e d t h a t § 274(c) o f t h e Atomic Energy Act p r o h i b i t e d o n l y t h e t o t a l r e l i n q u i s h m e n t of f e d e r a l power o v e r n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s b u t d i d n o t b a r t h e c o n c u r r e n t e x e r c i s e of s t a t e c o n t r o l . The E i g h t h C i r c u i t r e j e c t e d t h i s argument, s t a t i n g t h a t While t h e 1959 amendment d o e s n o t u s e t h e terms " e x c l u s i v e " o r " s o l e " i n d e s c r i b i n g e x i s t i n g regul a t o r y r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of t h e Commission, we t h i n k i t a b u n d a n t l y c l e a r t h a t t h e whole t o n e o f t h e 1959 amendment, upon e x a m i n a t i o n of s t a t u t o r y l a n g u a g e a l o n e , d e m o n s t r a t e s C o n g r e s s i o n a l recogn i t i o n t h a t t h e AEC a t t h a t time p o s s e s s e d t h e s o l e a u t h o r i t y t o r e g u l a t e hazards a s s o c i a t e d with by-product, s o u r c e , and s p e c i a l n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s and w i t h p r o d u c t i o n and u t i l i z a t i o n f a c i l i t i e s . =/ 51/ T h e Supreme C o u r t h a s f r e q u e n t l y r e l i e d on t h e p r e s u m p t i v e i n d i c e s of c o n g r e s s i o n a l i n t e n t in o r d e r t o e x c l u d e s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n of a f i e l d . e.g. , Burbank v . Lockheed A i r T e r m i n a l , I n c . , 4 11 U.S. 6 2 4 ( l 9 7 3 ) , and H i n e s v . Davidowitz. 312 U.S. 52 (1941). See, - 52/ 320 F. Supp. 1 7 2 (D. Minn. 1 9 7 0 ) , a f f ' d 447 F.2d a f f ' d y e r c u r i a m 405 U.S. 1035 (1972). --53/ - 447 F.2d 1143, 1149 ( 8 t h C i r . 1971). 1143 ( 8 t h C i r . 1 9 7 1 ) , CRS- 15 The c o u r t went on t o f i n d i n t h e Atomic Energy Act a " c o n g r e s s i o n a l r e c o g n i t i o n and i n t e n t i o n t h a t t h e s t a t e s p o s s e s s no a u t h o r i t y t o r e g u l a t e r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s u n l e s s p u r s u a n t t o t h e e x e c u t i o n of a n agreement s u r r e n d e r i n g f e d e r a l 54 / c o n t r o l o v e r t h e t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s a u t h o r i z e d u n d e r s e c t i o n 2021(b)." However, t h e u s e f u l n e s s of N o r t h e r n S t a t e s may have been somewhat d i l u t e d by t h e Clean A i r Amendments o f 1977 (P.L. 95-95, l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y of t h e s e amendments. 9 5 t h Cong., 1st S e s s . ) and t h e S e c t i o n 116 of t h e Act, a s amended, states: ... [ N l o t h i n g i n t h i s Act s h a l l p r e c l u d e o r deny t h e r i g h t of a n y S t a t e o r p o l i t i c a l s u b d i v i s i o n t h e r e o f t o a d o p t o r e n f o r c e ( 1 ) any s t a n d a r d o r l i m i t a t i o n r e s p e c t i n g e m i s s i o n s of a i r p o l l u t a n t s o r ( 2 ) any r e q u i r e m e n t r e s p e c t i n g c o n t r o l o r a b a t e m e n t of a i r pollution ... House C o n f e r e n c e R e p o r t No. 95-564 a t page 143 s t a t e s : [ R l a d i o a c t i v e p o l l u t a n t s , i n c l u d i n g s o u r c e mat e r i a l , s p e c i a l n u c l e a r ma t e r i a l , and by p r o d u c t m a t e r i a l , a r e c o v e r e d by S e c t i o n 116 of t h e Clean A i r Act. Thus, any S t a t e , o r p o l i t i c a l s u b d i v i s i o n t h e r e o f may e s t a b l i s h s t a n d a r d s more s t r i n g e n t t h a n F e d e r a l , o r where 2 F e d e r a l s t a n d a r d h a s n o t been e s t a b l i s h e d , may e s t a b l i s h any s t a n d a r d s t h e y deem appropriate. Thus t h e p r o v i s i o n would n o t preempt S t a t e s and l o c a l i t i e s from s e t t i n g and e n f o r c i n g s t r i c t e r a i r p o l l u t i o n standards f o r r a d i a t i o n than t h e F e d e r a l s t a n d a r d s , and would n o t f o l l o w t h e h o l d i n g of N o r t h e r n S t a t e s Power Co. v. S t a t e of Minnesota [ c i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d ] i n t h e c o n t e x t of radioactive a i r pollution. T h e r e f o r e , a s t a t e may be a b l e t o p r o h i b i t c e r t a i n t y p e s of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e d i s p o s a l , s u c h a s ground b u r i a l , on t h e b a s i s t h a t t h e w a s t e w i l l e m i t a i r p o l l u t a n t s i n v i o l a t i o n of i t s e m i s s i o n s t a n d a r d s . 54/ - I d . , a t 1149-1.150. - Although t h e u s e f u l n e s s of N o r t h e r n S t a t e s a s s u p p o r t f o r f e d e r a l p r e emption m y have been d i m i n i s h e d by t h e C l e a n A i r Amendments of 1977, two r e l a t i v e l y r e c e n t c a s e s would seem t o p r o v i d e a d d i t i o n a l s u p p o r t f o r f e d e r a l pre-emption i n t h e a t o m i c energy a r e a . The U.S. D i s t r i c t Court f o r t h e 55/ S o u t h e r n D i s t r i c t o f New York h e l d i n United S t a t e s v. C i t y of New ~ o r k t h a t a New York C i t y o r d i n a n c e r e q u i r i n g l i c e n s i n g of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r s is pre-empted by t h e Atomic Energy Act. I n 1967 Columhia U n i v e r s i t y a p p l i e d f o r a p e r m i t from t h e Atomic Energy Commission t o b u i l d and o p e r a t e a research nuclear reactor. A f t e r complying w i t h t h e f e d e r a l two-step p r o c e d u r e , Columhia was i s s u e d a f e d e r a l o p e r a t i n g l i c e n s e i n 1977. licensing During t h e s e f e d e r a l l i c e n s i n g p r o c e e d i n g s , New York i n 1976 amended i t s H e a l t h Code t o r e q u i r e c i t y l i c e n s i n g i n a d d i t i o n t o f e d e r a l l i c e n s i n g of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r s . A c t i n g on t h i s amended o r d i n a n c e , t h e c i t y ' s Commissioner of H e a l t h d e n i e d Columbia's a p p l i c a t i o n f o r a c i t y l i c e n s e on t h e b a s i s of p o t e n t i a l i n j u r y t o p u b l i c h e a l t h and s a f e t y r e s u l t i n g from a c c i d e n t a l r e l e a s e and r a d i a t i o n . The U n i t e d S t a t e s and Columbia t h e n b r o u g h t s u i t t o d e c l a r e t h e l o c a l o r d i n a n c e v o i d u n d e r t h e f e d e r a l pre-emption C l a u s e of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . d o c t r i n e embodied i n t h e Supremacy D i s c u s s i n g e a r l i e r j u d i c i a l a p p l i c a t i o n of f e d e r a l pre-emption i n t h e a r e a of n u c l e a r e n e r g y , t h e c o u r t s e t f o r t h g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s t o be a p p l i e d i n any c a s e c o n c e r n i n g c o n c u r r e n t l o c a l nuclear regulation. According t o t h e c o u r t , t h e Atomic Energy Act o f 1954 i s i n t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e f e d e r a l r e g u l a t o r y occupancy of t h e f i e l d of r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s e x c e p t where j u r i s d i c t i o n i s e x p r e s s l y ceded t o t h e s t a t e s . Further, t h e Act p r o h i b i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e l e g a t i o n of c e r t a i n a c t i v i t i e s t o s t a t e r e g u l a t o r y a u t h o r i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g r e g u l a t i o n of c o n s t r u c t i o n o r o p e r a t i o n of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r s . 55/ - 4 6 3 F . Supp. 6 0 4 (S.D. N.Y. 1978). New York a r g u e d t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y of s e c t i o n 2 7 4 of t h e Act showed t h a t C o n g r e s s i n t e n d e d t o l e a v e a "gray a r e a " of r e g u l a t i o n which c o u l d n o t be pre-empted by f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n . According t o t h e c i t y , t h a t g r a y a r e a i n c l u d e s s i t i n g r e g u l a t i o n s , and i t s o u g h t t o c h a r a c t e r i z e i t s l i c e n s i n g o r d i n a n c e a s a s i t i n g r e g u l a t i o n based upon r a d i o l o g i c a l s a f e t y criteria. A f t e r examining t h e l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y of t h e A c t , t h e c o u r t disagreed with t h e c i t y . I t found "an u n m i s t a k a b l e c o n g r e s s i o n a l i n t e n t t h a t r a d i o l o g i c a l r e g u l a t i o n of t h e o p e r a t i o n of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r s b e p r e empted from c o n c u r r e n t s t a t e and l o c a l r e g u l a t i o n . " I n response t o t h e c i t y ' s argument t h a t , a s a s i t i n g r e g u l a t i o n , t h e o r d i n a n c e c o n s t i t u t e d a . l e g i t i m a t e e x e r c i s e of i t s p o l i c e power, t h e c o u r t s a i d t h a t f e d e r a l lic e n s i n g c r i t e r i a s h o u l d i n c l u d e e x a m i n a t i o n of t h e r i s k s of p r o p o s e d s i t e s and t h a t , i n t h e c a s e o f t h e Columbia r e a c t o r , t h e Atomic Energy Commission c o n s i d e r e d and e n t e r e d s p e c i f i c f i n d i n g s of f a c t c o n c e r n i n g t h e l o c a t i o n of the reactor. The c o u r t b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e c i t y c o u l d n o t a r g u e t h a t t h e s c o p e of f e d e r a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y d o e s n o t i n c l u d e l o c a l s i t i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . I n c o n c l u s i o n , t h e c o u r t s t a t e d t h a t "Congress d i d n o t l e a v e room f o r d u a l f e d e r a l - s t a t e r e g u l z t i o n of r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e o p e r a t i o n of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r s . " Washington S t a t e B u i l d i n g and C o n s t r u c t i o n T r a d e s C o u n c i l v. spellman- 56 / concerned a s u i t b r o u g h t t o c h a l l e n g e t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of a Washington s t a t e i n i t i a t i v e a t t e m p t i n g t o ban s t o r a g e and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n t o any s t o r a g e s i t e i n Washington of a l l nonmedical r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e g e n e r a t e d o u t s i d e of the state. The c o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e i n i t i a t i v e was u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l b e c a u s e i t v i o l a t e d both t h e Supremacy C l a u s e and t h e Commerce C l a u s e of t h e C o n s t i - tution. 56/ - A s f o r t h e Supremacy C l a u s e v i o l a t i o n , t h e c o u r t found t h a t t h e 518 F . Supp. 928 (E.D. Wash. 1 9 8 1 ) . i n i t i a t i v e a t t e m p t e d t o r e g u l a t e l e g i t i m a t e f e d e r a l a c t i v i t y and t h a t i t was pre-empted b e c a u s e C o n g r e s s d i d n o t e x p r e s s l y c e d e r e g u l a t i o n of e i t h e r high- l e v e l o r low-level radioactive wastes t o t h e s t a t e s . On t h e l a t t e r p o i n t , t h e c o u r t s t a t e d a t 931: By r e v i e w i n g t h e p e r v a s i v e f e d e r a l s t a t u t o r y schemes f o r t h e r e g u l a t i o n of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e , t h e Atomic Energy Act, t h e Low-Level R a d i o a c t i v e Waste P o l i c y Act and t h e Hazardous M a t e r i a l s Transp o r t a t i o n A c t , and a p p l y i n g e s t a b l i s h e d j u d i c i a l r e a s o n i n g , I am convinced t h a t Congress i n t e n d e d t h a t t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and s t o r a g e of a l l m a t e r i a l s which p o s e r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s would h e r e g u l a t e d by t h e f e d e r a l government e x c e p t where j u r i s d i c t i o n was e x p r e s s l y ceded t o t h e s t a t e s . With r e s p e c t t o t h e Commerce C l a u s e v i o l a t i o n , t h e c o u r t found t h a t t h e r e was n o v a l i d j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h e i n i t i a t i v e ' s d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a g a i n s t i n t e r s t a t e commerce. Thus e v e n i n t h e a b s e n c e of f e d e r a l p'reemption, t h e s t a t e law would u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y burden i n t e r s t a t e commerce. However, a l t h o u g h 42 U.S.C. § 2021(c) s t a t e s t h a t t h e Commission s h a l l n o t r e l i n q u i s h c e r t a i n a r e a s of a u t h o r i t y and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o t h e s t a t e s p u r s u a n t t o t h e Agreement S t a t e s Program, 42 U.S.C. 5 2021(k) p r o v i d e s t h a t "Nothing i n t h e s e c t i o n s h a l l be c o n s t r u e d t o a f f e c t t h e a u t h o r i t y of a n y S t a t e o r l o c a l agency t o r e g u l a t e a c t i v i t i e s f o r p u r p o s e s o t h e r t h a n p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n hazards." Where s t a t e s p r o h i b i t n u c l e a r v a s t e d i s - p o s a l on t h e g e n e r a l b a s i s of r a d i o l o g i c a l s a f e t y , t h i s p r o v i s i o n may be unimportant. However, i f a s t a t e t r i e s t o r e g u l a t e n u c l e a r w a s t e d i s p o s a l f o r a p u r p o s e o t h e r t h a n p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s , i t m y be i m p o r t a n t t o d e t e r m i n e t h e a c t u a l p u r p o s e of t h e s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n and t h e p e r m i s s i b l e s c o p e of i t s e f f e c t s on f e d e r a l p l a n s c o n c e r n i n g n u c l e a r w a s t e disposal. T r a d i t i o n a l z o n i n g ma% be o n e a r e a i n which s t a t e s o r l o c a l governments c a n e x e r c i s e some c o n t r o l o v e r p o w e r p l a n t s . An example of an a c c e p t a b l e s t a t e o r l o c a l a t t e m p t a t such r e g u l a t i o n might be t h e p r o h i b i t i o n of a n u c l e a r w a s t e d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t y i n a z o n e which e x c l u d e s a l l i n d u s t r i a l p l a n t s from a r e a s n o t zoned f o r i n d u s t r i a l u s e . Another might b e a s t a t e ' s i r r q u i q i n t o s a f e t y q u e s t i o n s , a p a r t from r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s , c o n c e r n i n g 571 t h e l o c a t i o n of a n u c l e a r r e a c t o r . However, i f a l o c a l government exc l u d e d a n u c l e a r w a s t e d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t y on t h e ground t h a t t h e f a c i l i t y 581 thus lowering t h e l o c a l e ' s required a l a r g e s i t e f o r an "exclusion area," - d e s i r e d d e n s i t y of i n d u s t r i a l development, t h i s r e g u l a t i o n might b e d e t e r - mined t o b e based on a c o n c e r n a b o u t r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s . S i m i l a r l y , i f a s t a t e w e r e t o impose t h e r m a l d i s c h a r g e s t a n d a r d s more s t r i n g e n t t h a n e n v i r o n m e n t a l l y n e c e s s a r y p u r s u a n t t o s e c t i o n 3 1 6 ( a ) of t h e C l e a n Water Act and t h i s a c t i o n e f f e c t i v e l y p r o h i b i t e d t h e d i s c h a r g e of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e s , t h i s s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n might b e s t r u c k down as i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h t h e f e d e r a l g o a l s i n t h e Atomic Energy Act. The d e c i s i o n i n t h e N o r t h e r n S t a t e s c a s e would a p p e a r t o p r o v i d e f u r t h e r s u p p o r t f o r f e d e r a l pre-emption o v e r a s t a t e a c t i o n of t h i s t y p e . A r e c e n t c a s e , P a c i f i c Legal F o u n d a t i o n v. S t a t e Energy R e s o u r c e s 591 C o n s e r v a t i o n and Development Commission, s e t s f o r t h a s i t u a t i o n i n which - i t h a s been h e l d t h a t a s t a t e may r e g u l a t e n u c l e a r a c t i v i t i e s f o r p u r p o s e s o t h e r than protection against r a d i a t i o n hazards. t h e c o n t r o v e r s y c o n c e r n i n g pre-emption It a l s o i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t i n t h e n u c l e a r a r e a c o n t i n u e s and 571 S e e , e.g. , N o r t h e r n C a l i f o r n i a A s s o c i a t i o n t o P r e s e r v e Bodega Head and ~ a r b o rv. P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s Commission, 37 Cal. 432, 390 P. 2d 200 ( 1 9 6 4 ) . -- 581 " E x c l u s i o n a r e a " means t h a t a r e a s u r r o u n d i n g t h e r e a c t o r i n which t h e r e a c t o r l i c e n s e e has t h e a u t h o r i t y t o determine a l l a c t i v i t i e s including e x c l u s i o n o r removal of p e r s o n n e l and p r o p e r t y from t h e a r e a . 10 C.F.R. S 100.3(a). 591 - 659 F.2d 9 0 3 ( 9 t h C i r . 1981). t h a t t h e c o u r t s a p p e a r n o t t o have e s t a b l i s h e d e x a c t l y what i n t h e n u c l e a r a r e a i s pre-empted and what r e m a i n s w i t h i n a s t a t e ' s j u r i s d i c t i o n . This c a s e was a c o n s o l i d a t i o n of two lower f e d e r a l c o u r t d e c i s i o n s , P a c i f i c Legal 60 / Foundat i o n v. S t a t e Energy R e s o u r c e s C o n s e r v a t i o n and Development commissionand P a c i f i c Gas and E l e c t r i c Company v . S t a t e Energy R e s o u r c e s C o n s e r v a t i o n 611 and Development Commission, b o t h of which h e l d t h a t c e r t a i n p r o v i s i o n s of t h e C a l i f o r n i a P u b l i c R e s o u r c e s Code invaded a f i e l d of r e g u l a t i o n pre-empted by t h e Atomic Energy Act of 1954. I n t h e l o w e r c o u r t c a s e of P a c i f i c Legal F o u n d a t i o n p l a i n t i f f s c h a l l e n g e d t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f t h r e e p r o v i s i o n s of t h e Code: s e c t i o n s 25524.1, 25524.2, and 25524.3. S e c t i o n 25524.1 p r o v i d e s t h a t no new n u c l e a r f i s s i o n t h e r m a l p o w e r p l a n t r e q u i r i n g t h e r e p r o c e s s i n g of f u e l r o d s s h a l l be p e r m i t t e d l a n d u s e i n t h e s t a t e o r c e r t i f i e d by t h e S t a t e Energy R e s o u r c e s C o n s e r v a t i o n and Development Commission u n t i l t h e Energy Commission f i n d s t h a t t h e approp r i a t e U n i t e d S t a t e s agency h a s approved a t e c h n o l o g y f o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n o f n u c l e a r f u e l r o d r e p r o c e s s i n g p l a n t s and t h e Commission h a s r e p o r t e d i t s f i n d i n g s t o t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e , which h a s t h e power t o d i s a f f i r m them. case-by-case The p r o v i s i o n a l s o r e q u i r e s t h e s t a t e commission t o make a determination t h a t adequate f u e l rod reprocessing capacity o r waste s t o r a g e c a p a c i t y w i l l b e a v a i l a b l e by t h e t i m e a p a r t i c u l a r f a c i l i t y requires reprocessing o r waste storage. S e c t i o n 25524.2 p r o v i d e s t h a t no new n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s h a l l be c e r t i f i e d by t h e s t a t e commission u n t i l i t f i n d s t h a t t h e a u t h o r i z e d U n i t e d S t a t e s agency h a s approved a technology 60/ - 472 F. Supp. 1 9 1 (S.D. 61/ - 489 F. Supp. 699 (E.D. Cal. 1980). Cal. 1 9 7 9 ) . f o r d i s p o s a l of h i g h - l e v e l n u c l e a r w a s t e s and t h e commission h a s r e p o r t e d i t s f i n d i n g s t o t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e , which h a s t h e power t o d i s a f f i r m them. S e c t i o n 25524.3 a p p l i e s t o n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s f o r which n o t i c e s of i n t e n t a r e f i l e d w i t h and a c c e p t e d by t h e s t a t e commission a f t e r J a n u a r y 1 , 1980. The commission c a n n o t c e r t i f y t h e s e p l a n t s u n t i l i t c o m p l e t e s a s t u d y of t h e n e c e s s i t y , e f f e c t i v e n e s s , and economic f e a s i b i l i t y of berm c o n t a i n m e n t and l o c a t i n g r e a c t o r s underground and t h e l e g i s l a t u r e e v a l u a t e s t h e s t u d y . A s a p r e l i m i n a r y m a t t e r , t h e c o u r t n o t e d t h a t s e c t i o n s 25524.1 and 25524.3 were r e n d e r e d moot by t h e d e c i s i o n s of t h e C a l i f o r n i a Energy Commission. The commission d e t e r m i n e d t h a t s e c t i o n 25524.1(a) does not a p p l y t o any r e a c t o r s proposed f o r C a l i f o r n i a and t h a t s e c t i o n 25524.1(b) r e q u i r e s a case-by-case reactor sites. e v a l u a t i o n of f u e l s t o r a g e c a p a c i t y a t i n d i v i d u a l S e c t i o n 25524.3 i s n o t i m p l i c a t e d i n t h e p r e s e n t c o n t r o - v e r s y b e c a u s e by i t s terms i t a p p l i e s o n l y t o p o w e r p l a n t s f o r which a n o t i c e o f i n t e n t i s a c c e p t e d a f t e r J a n u a r y 1, 1980. c l u d e d t h a t o n l y s e c t i o n 25524.2, Thus, t h e c o u r t con- r e q u i r i n g t h e e x i s t e n c e and a p p r o v a l of a h i g h - l e v e l w a s t e d i s p o s a l t e c h n o l o g y which t h e Energy Commission h a s d e t e r m i n e d n o t t o e x i s t , impeded c e r t i f i c a t i o n of n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s i n California. A f t e r a f i n d i n g of t h e e x i s t e n c e of s t a n d h g t o s u e and r i p e n e s s , t h e c o u r t d i s c u s s e d t h e m e r i t s of t h e c a s e . 25524.2 was pre-empted The c o u r t h e l d t h a t s e c t i o n b o t h b e c a u s e Congress h a s i m p l i e d l y f o r e c l o s e d s t a t e l e g i s l a t i o n on t h e s u b j e c t of n u c l e a r w a s t e d i s p o s a l and b e c a u s e t h e s t a t u t e s t a n d s a s a n o b s t a c l e t o t h e p u r p o s e s and o b j e c t i v e s which C o n g r e s s s t a t e d i n t h e Atomic Energy Act o f 1954. ment h a s pre-empted I n r u l i n g on w h e t h e r t h e f e d e r a l govern- t h e s p h e r e of r a d i o l o g i c a l h a z a r d r e g u l a t i o n , t h e c o u r t c i t e d N o r t h e r n S t a t e s and C i t y of New York, d i s c u s s e d s u p r a . D e f e n d a n t s s u g g e s t e d t h a t 25524.2 i s v a l i d b e c a u s e i t was e n a c t e d f o r t h e economic p u r p o s e of i n s u r i n g t h a t C a l i f o r n i a n s w i l l n o t have t o b e a r t h e f i n a n c i a l r i s k o f f u n d i n g n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s which may l a t e r be s h u t down b e c a u s e of i n a d e q u a t e permanent w a s t e d i s p o s a l a c t i v i t i e s and n o t f o r t h e p r o h i b i t e d p u r p o s e of r a d i a t i o n c o n t r o l . The c o u r t found t h a t t h e s u g g e s t i o n t h a t t h e p r o v i s i o n was p r e d i c a t e d upon a n economic p u r p o s e was n o t a s u f f i c i e n t c o n d i t i o n f o r a f i n d i n g of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y . f o c u s i n g n a r r o w l y on t h e i s s u e of C a l i f o r n i a ' s I n s t e a d of l e g i s l a t i v e purpose, the c o u r t examined w h e t h e r t h e p r o v i s i o n impinged upon t h e s p h e r e of e x c l u s i v e r e g u l a t o r y j u r i s d i c t i o n r e s e r v e d t o NRC. The c o u r t found t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n of w h e t h e r n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s may be c o n s t r u c t e d and o p e r a t e d i n t h e a b s e n c e of a d e m o n s t r a t e d t e c h n o l o g y f o r t h e permanent d i s p o s a l of n u c l e a r w a s t e i s e x c l u s i v e l y r e s e r v e d t o NRC by 42 U.S.C. on t h i s s u b j e c t i s i m p l i e d l y pre-empted. § 2 0 2 1 ( c ) and t h a t s t a t e r e g u l a t i o n The c o u r t s t a t e d a t 200: "There seems l i t t l e p o i n t i n e n a c t i n g a n Atomic Energy Act and e s t a b l i s h i n g a f e d e r a l agency t o p r o m u l g a t e e x t e n s i v e and p e r v a s i v e r e g u l a t i o n s on t h e s u b j e c t of c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n of n u c l e a r r e a c t o r s and t h e d i s p o s a l of n u c l e a r w a s t e i f i t i s w i t h i n t h e p r e r o g a t i v e of t h e s t a t e s t o o u t l a w t h e u s e of atomic energy w i t h i n t h e i s borders." I n t h e P a c i f i c Gas and E l e c t r i c Company c a s e , p l a i n t i f f s b r o u g h t s u i t t o a s k t h a t t h e C a l i f o r n i a s t a t u t o r y scheme r e g u l a t i n g t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n and o p e r a t i o n of n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s be h e l d u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . A t i s s u e were t h e f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n s of t h e C a l i f o r n i a P u b l i c Resources Code: 25524.2; 25524.3; 25524.1; 25528 i n s o f a r a s i t a p p l i e s t o n u c l e a r f i s s i o n t h e r m a l p o w e r p l a n t s ; 25500, 25502, 25504, 25511, 25512, 25514, 25516, 25517, 25519, 25520, 25523, and 25532 i n s o f a r a s t h e y a u t h o r i z e o r r e q u i r e d e f e n d a n t s t o r e g u l a t e o r m o n i t o r t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o r o p e r a t i o n of any n u c l e a r powerplant o r t o deny c o n s t r u c t i o n of any n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t on t h e b a s i s of d e t e r m i n a t i o n s f a l l i n g w i t h i n t h e r e g u l a t o r y j u r i s d i c t i o n of NRC; and 25503, 25504, and 25516 i n s o f a r a s they ( a ) r e q u i r e an applicant t o provide information t o defendants c o n c e r n i n g any n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s i t e n o t p r o p o s e d by t h e a p p l i c a n t t o N R C o r ( b ) r e q u i r e d e f e n d a n t s t o c o n d u c t p r o c e e d i n g s o r make d e t e r m i n a t i o n s c o n c e r n i n g the site. P l a i n t i f f s ' s u i t was based on t h e c l a i m t h a t t h e s e n u c l e a r power s t a t u t e s a r e pre-empted u n d e r t h e Supremacy C l a u s e of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n by cong r e s s i o n a l enactment of t h e Atomic Energy Act. A f t e r d e c i d i n g t h e i s s u e of s t a n d i n g , t h e c o u r t a d d r e s s e d t h e m e r i t s o f t h e case. It h e l d t h a t t h e p r o v i s i o n s i n q u e s t i o n of C a l i f o r n i a ' s n u c l e a r r e g u l a t o r y scheme a r e " e i t h e r i n c o n f l i c t w i t h o r s u b s t a n t i a l l y impede t h e r e g u l a t i o n of n u c l e a r e n e r g y r e s e r v e d t o t h e f e d e r a l government by t h e Atomic Energy Act o f 1946, i t s v a r i o u s amendments and t h e power t o r e g u l a t e d e l e g a t e d 62 1 pursuant t o t h a t l e g i s l a t i o n . " According t o t h e c o u r t , n u c l e a r power and i t s e x p l o i t a t i o n h a v e been a u n i q u e l y n a t i o n a l c o n c e r n s i n c e t h e enactment of t h e f i r s t Atomic Energy Act i n 1946. The c o u r t a l s o r e l i e d on t h e d e c i s i o n i n Northern S t a t e s i n determining t h a t t h e C a l i f o r n i a s t a t u t e s i n q u e s t i o n a r e p r e-emp t ed by f e d e r a l law. However, a f t e r c o n s o l i d a t i o n t h e N i n t h C i r c u i t C o u r t of Appeals r e v e r s e d t h e lower c o u r t s ' d e c i s i o n s . The c o u r t h e l d t h a t t h e s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s i n q u e s t i o n were d i r e c t e d toward p u r p o s e s o t h e r t h a n p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s and were t h e r e f o r e n o t pre-empted by f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s . 621 - 489 F . Supp. a t 704. The c o u r t summarized: A s t h e c o m m i t t e e r e p o r t makes c l e a r , s e c t i o n 2 5 5 2 4 . 2 [ t h e m o r a t o r i u m on new n u c l e a r p l a n t s ] i s d i r e c t e d toward purposes o t h e r than p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n hazards U n t i l a method of w a s t e d i s p o s a l i s approved by t h e f e d e r a l government, C a l i f o r n i a h a s r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e t h a t u n c e r t a i n t i e s i n t h e n u c l e a r f u e l c y c l e make n u c l e a r power a n uneconomical and u n c e r t a i n s o u r c e of energy. The l e g i s l a t u r e h a s c h o s e n t o mandate r e l i a n c e upon o t h e r energy sources u n t i l t h e s e u n c e r t a i n t i e s a s s o c i a t e d with n u c l e a r power a r e r e s o l v e d . We f i n d t h a t such a c h o i c e i s e x p r e s s l y a u t h o r i z e d u n d e r s e c t i o n s 2 7 1 and 2 7 4 ( k ) o f t h e Atomic Energy Act of 1954. .... The r e q u i r e n e n t t h a t u t i l i t i e s submit t h r e e a l t e r n a t e is a l s o unrelated t o p r o t e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n hazards. The r e q u i r e m e n t It a p p l i e s t o a l l power p l a n t s , n u c l e a r and non-nuclear. p r o v i d e s C a l i f o r n i a w i t h a n e f f i c i e n t means of d e c i d i n g where a proposed power p l a n t s h o u l d be l o c a t e d . Such d e c i s i o n s have b e e n r e g a r d e d a s w i t h i n t h e s t a t e s ' a u t h o r During i t y , f o r n u c l e a r a s w e l l as o t h e r power p l a n t s . h e a r i n g s on s e c t i o n 2 7 4 of t h e Atomic Energy Act, i t was a g r e e d t h a t s t a t e and m u n i c i p a l z o n i n g r e g u l a t i o n s ( e s t a b l i s h i n g , f o r example, r e s i d e n t i a l , commercial, o r i n d u s t r i a l z o n e s ) would a p p l y t o n u c l e a r p l a n t s . The AEC's g e n e r a l manager p o i n t e d o u t t h a t s e c t i o n 2 7 4 ( k ) would p e r m i t t h e c o u r t s l a t i t u d e i n s u s t a i n i n g " c e r t a i n t y p e s of z o n i n g r e q u i r m e n t s which have p u r p o s e s o t h e r t h a n c o n t r o l o f r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s , even though such r e q u i r e m e n t s might have a n i n c i d e n t a l e f f e c t upon t h e n u c l e a r m a t e r i a l s l i c e n s e s [ s i c ] by t h e u s e of Commission." More r e c e n t l y , Congress p a s s e d l e g i s l a t i o n e x p l i c i t l y recognizing t h e s t a t e s ' a u t h o r i t y t o impose " r e q u i r e n e n t [ s ] r e l a t i n g t o l a n d u s e o r res p e c t i n g t h e s i t i n g " of n u c l e a r p l a n t s . 63/ s i t e s f o r t h e i r proposed p l a n t s ... ... ...... SUPREME COURT CASES CONCERNING PRE-EMPTIOK I K AREAS OTHER THAN PADIOACTIVE WASTE S i n c e i t i s n o t p o s s i b l e t o be c e r t a i n a s t o a c o u r t ' s f i n d i n g f e d e r a l pre-emption i n t h e a r e a s of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e d i s p o s a l and t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , t h e Supreme C o u r t ' s views o v e r t h e p a s t t e n y e a r s of pre-emption a r e a s may be i n s t r u c t i v e . i n other 641 Askew v. American Waterways O p e r a t i o n s , held i n a n o p i n i o n by J u s t i c e Douglas t h a t F l o r i d a ' s l i a b i l i t y scheme imposing c l e a n u p c o s t s and n o - f a u l t l i a b i l i t y on s h o r e f a c i l i t i e s and s h i p s f o r any o i l s p i l l damage complemented a f e d e r a l law c o n c e r n e d s o l e l y w i t h r e c o v e r y of a c t u a l c l e a n u p c o s t s i n c u r r e d by t h e f e d e r a l government and which t e x t u a l l y p r e supposed f e d e r a l - s t a t e c o o p e r a t i o n . The C o u r t s t a t e d a t 328 t h a t "We f i n d no c o n s t i t u t i o n a l o r s t a t u t o r y impediment t o p e r m i t t i n g F l o r i d a , i n t h e p r e s e n t s e t t i n g of t h i s c a s e , t o e s t a b l i s h any " r e q u i r e m e n t o r l i a b i l i t y " c o n c e r n i n g t h e i m p a c t o f o i l s p i l l a g e s on F l o r i d a ' s i n t e r e s t s o r c o n c e r n s " and a t 329 t h a t "It i s c l e a r a t t h e o u t s e t t h a t t h e F e d e r a l Act d o e s n o t preclude, but i n f a c t allows, s t a t e regulation." Also i n 1973 t h e Supreme C o u r t i n C i t y of Burbank v . Lockheed A i r Terminal, 65/ struck down a c i t y o r d i n a n c e p l a c i n g a n 11 p.m. t o 7 a.m. c u r f e w on j e t f l i g h t s from t h e c i t y a i r p o r t where f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n o f a i r c r a f t n o i s e was of such p e r v a s i v e n a t u r e a s t o l e a v e no room f o r s t a t e or local regulation. deep-seated The Court h e l d t h a t , a l t h o u g h c o n t r o l of n o i s e i s i n t h e p o l i c e power of t h e s t a t e s , t h e N o i s e C o n t r o l Act of 1972 l e a v e s no room f o r l o c a l c u r f e w s o r o t h e r l o c a l c o n t r o l s a n d , t h e r e f o r e , pre-empts s t a t e o r l o c a l laws i n t h i s a r e a . 641 - 4 2 2 U.S. 325 ( 1 9 7 3 ) . 651 - 4 1 1 v.S. 624 ( 1 9 7 3 ) . The C o u r t a t 640 s t a t e d t h a t "We a r e n o t a t l i b e r t y t o d i f f u s e t h e powers g i v e n by Congress t o FAA and EPA by l e t t i n g t h e S t a t e s o r m u n i c i p a l i t i e s i n on t h e p l a n n i n g . If t h a t c h a n g e i s t o b e made, Congress a l o n e must do i t . " 66/ Farmer v . c a r p e n t e r s concerned a n a c t i o n f o r damages a g a i n s t u n i o n s and u n i o n o f f i c i a l s b r o u g h t i n a s t a t e c o u r t by a p l a i n t i f f who a l l e g e d t h a t , b e c a u s e of a d i s a g r e e m e n t between him and t h e u n i o n o f f i c i a l s o v e r i n t e r n a l u n i o n p o l i c i e s , d e f e n d a n t s had i n t e n t i o n a l l y engaged i n o u t r a g e o u s c o n d u c t , t h r e a t s , and i n t i m i d a t i o n and had c a u s e d him t o s u f f e r e m o t i o n a l d i s t r e s s which r e s u l t e d i n b o d i l y i n j u r y . The C a l i f o r n i a Court of Appeal h e l d t h a t s t a t e c o u r t s had n o j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r t h e c o m p l a i n t b e c a u s e t h e c r u x of t h e a c t i o n c o n c e r n e d employment r e l a t i o n s and i n v o l v e d conduct a r g u a b l y s u b j e c t t o t h e N a t i o n a l Labor R e l a t i o n s Board's j u r i s d i c t i o n . However, t h e Supreme Court r e v e r s e d and h e l d t h a t t h e N a t i o n a l Labor R e l a t i o n s Act d i d n o t p r e empt p l a i n t i f f ' s a c t i o n . The C o u r t s t a t e d a t 296-297 t h a t We h a v e r e f u s e d t o a p p l y t h e pre-emption d o c t r i n e t o a c t i v i t y t h a t o t h e r w i s e would f a l l w i t h i n t h e s c o p e o f Garmon i f t h a t a c t i v i t y "was a m e r e l y p e r i p h e r a l c o n c e r n of t h e L a b o r Management P e l a t i o n s Act [ o r ] touched i n t e r e s t s s o deeply rooted i n l o c a l f e e l i n g and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a t , i n t h e a b s e n c e of comp e l l i n g c o n g r e s s i o n a l d i r e c t i o n , we c o u l d n o t i n f e r t h a t C o n g r e s s had d e p r i v e d t h e S t a t e s of t h e power t o act. ... S i n c e t h e C o u r t found t h a t n o p r o v i s i o n of t h e NLRA p r o t e c t s t h e o u t r a g e o u s c o n d u c t of which t h e p l a i n t i f f complained and t h a t t h e s t a t e h a s a s u b s t a n t i a l i n t e r e s t i n p r o t e c t i n g i t s c i t i z e n s from t h e t y p e of a b u s e a l l e g e d , t h e Court c o n c l u d e d t h a t Congress d i d n o t i n t e n d t o o u s t s t a t e c o u r t j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e r a c t i o n s f o r t o r t i o u s a c t i v i t i e s of t h i s t y p e . 661 - 430 U.S. 290 ( 1 9 7 7 ) . Jones v. Rath Packing Co. 671 - concerned a c o n f l i c t between a C a l i f o r n i a s t a t u t e and a f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n r e l a t i n g t o commodity packaging weights. The f e d e r a l r e g u l a t i o n permitted reasonable v a r i a t i o n s i n t h e packaging weight caused by l o s s o r g a i n of moisture during t h e c o u r s e of good d i s t r i b u t i o n p r a c t i c e s o r by unavoidable d e v i a t i o n i n good nranuf a c t u r i n g p r a c t i c e . The C a l i f o r n i a s t a t u t e d i d not a l l o w t h i s t y p e of v a r i a t i o n i n commodity packaging weights, and, a s a r e s u l t , t h e p l a i n t i f f ordered removed from s a l e bacon and f l o u r packaged by defendant packing companies. The Supreme Court held t h a t , because t h e C a l i f o r n i a s t a t u t e i s d i f f e r e n t from t h e f e d e r a l requirement and p r e v e n t s t h e accomplishment and execution of t h e f u l l purposes and o b j e c t i v e s of Congress, t h e s t a t e law must y i e l d t o t h e f e d e r a l . 681 Ray v. A t l a n t i c R i c h f i e l d Co. i s a n important pre-emption case. - I n t h i s c a s e a p p e l l e e s challenged t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of t h e Washington S t a t e Tanker Law, which r e g u l a t e s t h e design, s i z e , and movement of e n r o l l e d (engaged i n domestic o r c o a s t w i s e t r a d e ) and r e g i s t e r e d (engaged i n f o r e i g n t r a d e ) o i l t a n k e r s i n Puget Sound. Three p r o v i s i o n s of t h e s t a t e law were involved i n t h e case: ( 1 ) a requirement ( § 88.16.180) t h a t e n r o l l e d and r e g i s t e r e d o i l t a n k e r s of a t l e a s t 50,000 deadweight t o n s c a r r y a Washingtonl i c e n s e d p i l o t w h i l e n a v i g a t i n g t h e Sound; ( 2 ) a requirement ( § 88.16.190(2)) t h a t e n r o l l e d and r e g i s t e r e d o i l t a n k e r s of from 40,000 t o 125,000 DWT s a t i s f y c e r t a i n design o r s a f e t y standards or use tug e s c o r t s while operating i n t h e Sound; and (3) a ban on t h e o p e r a t i o n i n t h e Sound of any t a n k e r exceeding 125,000 DWT ( § 88.16.190(1)). 671 - 430 U.S. 519 (1977). 68/ - 435 U.S. 151 (1978). The Supreme Court h e l d t h a t t h e F e d e r a l P o r t s and Waterways S a f e t y Act of 1972 (PwSA) pre-empted c e r t a i n p r o v i s i o n s of t h e Washington law: s t a t e i s p r e c l u d e d by 46 U.S.C. ( 1 ) The §§ 215 and 364 from imposing i t s own p i l o t a g e r e q u i r e m e n t s on e n r o l l e d t a n k e r s . S e c t i o n 88.16.180 of t h e s t a t e law i s , t h u s , i n v a l i d a s t o i t s requirement t h a t e n r o l l e d tankers c a r r y s t a t e - l i c e n s e d pilots. § 215 and t h e PWSA p e r m i t t h e s t a t e t o impose However, b o t h 46 U.S.C. p i l o t a g e r e q u i r e m e n t s on r e g i s t e r e d v e s s e l s e n t e r i n g and l e a v i n g i t s p o r t s . ( 2 ) I n T i t l e I1 o f t h e PWSA, Congress i n t e n d e d u n i f o r m n a t i o n a l s t a n d a r d s f o r d e s i g n and c o n s t r u c t i o n of t a n k e r s , t h u s f o r e c l o s i n g t h e i m p o s i t i o n of d i f f e r e n t o r more s t r i n g e n t s t a t e r e q u i r e m e n t s . t h e same g o a l a s § 88.16.190(2) S i n c e t h e f e d e r a l scheme h a s of t h e s t a t e law, t h e d i f f e r e n t and h i g h e r d e s i g n r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h a t p r o v i s i o n a r e i n v a l i d u n d e r t h e Supremacy Clause. ( 3 ) The a l t e r n a t i v e t u g r e q u i r e m e n t of $ 88.16.190(2) does not c o n f l i c t with t h e PWSA, b e c a u s e , u n t i l t h e S e c r e t a r y of T r a n s p o r t a t i o n p r o m u l g a t e s h i s own t u g r e q u i r e m e n t f o r P u g e t Sound t a n k e r n a v i g a t i o n o r d e c i d e s t h a t t h e r e s h o u l d be no s u c h r e q u i r a n e n t , t h e s t a t e ' s t u g e s c o r t r e q u i r e m e n t i s n o t pre-empted by t h e f e d e r a l scheme. ( 4 ) T i t l e I of t h e PWSA and t h e S e c r e t a r y ' s a c t i o n s u n d e r i t , as w e l l a s t h e l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y showing t h a t Congress intended t h a t t h e r e b e a s i n g l e f e d e r a l decision-maker t o promulgate l i m i t a t i o n s on t a n k e r s i z e , i n v a l i d a t e t h e e x c l u s i o n from Puget Sound of any t a n k e r e x c e e d i n g 125,000 DWT p u r s u a n t t o $ 88.16.190(1) of t h e s t a t e law. ( 5 ) Because t h e t u g e s c o r t r e q u i r e m e n t d o e s n o t demand a u n i f o r m n a t i o n a l r u l e n o r impede t h e f r e e f l o w o f i n t e r s t a t e and f o r e i g n commerce, i t does n o t v i o l a t e t h e Commerce C l a u s e . ( 6 ) Because t h e t u g e s c o r t p r o v i s i o n d o e s n o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e g o v e r n m e n t ' s a t t e m p t t o a c h i e v e i n t e r n a t i o n a l agreement on t h e r e g u l a t i o n of t a n k e r d e s i g n , i t d o e s n o t i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e government's a u t h o r i t y t o conduct f o r e i g n a f f a i r s . 691 K a s s e l v. C o n s o l i d a t e d F r e i g h t w a y s ~ o r ~ o r a t i o n ~Commerce -a C l a u s e and n o t a pre-emption case--was a s u i t b r o u g h t t o c h a l l e n g e a n Iowa s t a t u t e pro- h i b i t i n g t h e u s e of s i x t y - f i v e - f o o t double-trailer trucks within i t s borders. No o t h e r Western o r Midwestern s t a t e h a s such a s t a t u t e . The a p p e l l e e a l l e g e d t h a t t h e Iowa s t a t u t e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y burdened i n t e r s t a t e commerce b e c a u s e a t r u c k i n g company, i n o r d e r t o move goods t h r o u g h Iowa, must e i t h e r u s e s h o r t e r t r u c k u n i t s , d e t a c h t h e t r a i l e r s of a s i x t y - f i v e - f o o t d o u b l e and s h u t t l e each through Iowa s e p a r a t e l y , o r d i v e r t s i x t y - f i v e - f o o t around Iowa. doubles Iowa defended t h e s t a t u t e a s a r e a s o n a b l e s a f e t y measure. The Court a f f i r m e d t h e lower c o u r t s ' d e c i s i o n s t h a t t h e s t a t e law i m p e r m i s s i b l y burdened i n t e r s t a t e commerce, s t a t i n g a t 671 of t h e o p i n i o n : - I n Raymond Motor T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , I n c . v . R i c e , t h e Court h e l d t h a t a Wisconsin s t a t u t e t h a t p r e c l u d e d t h e u s e of 65-foot d o u b l e s v i o l a t e d t h e Commerce C l a u s e . T h i s c a s e i s Raymond r e v i s i t e d . Here, a s i n P.aymond, t h e S t a t e f a i l e d t o p r e s e n t any p e r s u a s i v e e v i d e n c e t h a t 65-foot d o u b l e s a r e l e s s s a f e t h a n 55-foot s i n g l e s . Moreover, I o w a ' s l a w i s now o u t of s t e p w i t h t h e laws of a l l o t h e r Midwestern and Western S t a t e s . Iowa t h u s subs t a n t i a l l y b u r d e n s t h e i n t e r s t a t e f l o w of goods by truck. I n t h e a b s e n c e of c o n g r e s s i o n a l a c t i o n t o s e t u n i f o r m s t a n d a r d s , some b u r d e n s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h s t a t e s a f e t y r e g u l a t i o n s must be t o l e r a t e d . Eut where, a s h e r e , t h e S t a t e ' s s a f e t y i n t e r e s t h a s been found t o be i l l u s o r y , and i t s r e g u l a t i o n s i m p a i r significantly the federal interest i n efficient and s a f e i n t e r s t a t e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , t h e s t a t e law c a n n o t b e harmonized w i t h t h e Commerce C l a u s e . - 691 - 450 U.S. 662 ( 1 9 8 1 ) . CONCLUSION The e x t e n t t o which a s t a t e c a n block f e d e r a l government d e c i s i o n s a u t h o r i z i n g n u c l e a r w a s t e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n w i t h i n i t s borders i s not w e l l settled. S e v e r a l s t a t e s have s t a t u t e s p u r p o r t i n g t o v e t o a d e c i s i o n by t h e f e d e r a l government t o e s t a b l i s h a n u c l e a r w a s t e r e p o s i t o r y w i t h i n t h e i r borders. It i s a r g u a b l e t h a t many of t h e s e s t a t e s t a t u t e s a r e u n c o n s t i t u - t i o n a l b e c a u s e o f b e i n g pre-empted by f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s and r e g u l a t i o n s . These s t a t e s t a t u t e s m y c o n t r a v e n e t h e Supremacy C l a u s e of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n and i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e l e g i t i m a t e e x e r c i s e by Congress of i t s war powers and i t s a u t h o r i t y t o r e g u l a t e i n t e r s t a t e commerce. The Atomic Energy Act and t h e L o r L e v e l R a d i o a c t i v e Waste D i s p o s a l Act, a s w e l l a s o t h e r f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s , s p e c i f i c a l l y d e l i n e a t e t h e r a t h e r narrow r o l e t h a t t h e s t a t e s h a v e i n t h e a r e a of a t o m i c e n e r g y . Although e x p r e s s pre-emption language i s a b s e n t from t h e s t a t u t e s , i t i s a r g u a b l e t h a t t h e seemingly p e r v a s i v e r o l e t h a t t h e f e d e r a l government h a s i n t h e a r e a of a t o m i c e n e r g y i m p l i e d l y pre-empts portation. s t a t e s t a t u t e s p r o h i b i t i n g r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e d i s p o s a l and t r a n s N e v e r t h e l e s s , c a s e s i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e d o c t r i n e of pre-emptisn i n t h i s a r e a have h e l d some s t a t e and l o c a l laws t o be pre-empted and o t h e r s t a t e and l o c a l laws t o b e n o t i n c o n f l i c t w i t h f e d e r a l laws and t h e r e f o r e n o t pre-empted. It i s n o t e a s y t o d e t e r m i n e i n many i n s t a n c e s which s t a t e and l o c a l l a w s do i n f a c t c o n f l i c t w i t h f e d e r a l laws. For example, t h e p r o v i s i o n i n s e c t i o n 2 7 4 ( k ) of t h e Atomic Energy Act, p e r m i t t i n g a s t a t e o r l o c a l i t y t o r e g u l a t e n u c l e a r a c t i v i t i e s f o r p u r p o s e s o t h e r t h a n prot e c t i o n a g a i n s t r a d i a t i o n h a z a r d s , h a s been i n t e r p r e t e d by a t l e a s t one f e d e r a l c o u r t i n a broad manner. The c o n t r o v e r s y i s l i k e l y t o c o n t i n u e u n t i l C o n g r e s s e n a c t s l e g i s l a t i o n s e t t i n g more d e f i n i t i v e g u i d e l i n e s f o r s t a t e and l o c a l p a r t i c i p a t i o n . SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATION ALABAMA Code of Alabama, s e c t i o n 22-14-16 b a r s d i s p o s a l of any s p e n t f u e l o r o t h e r radioactive waste generated o u t s i d e t h e s t a t e . Also p r o h i b i t s s t o r i n g o r dumping of any n u c l e a r s p e n t f u e l t h a t i s n o t g e n e r a t e d o r used i n t h e state. ALASKA S-45 p r o h i b i t s c o n s t r u c t i o n of a n u c l e a r f u e l p r o d u c t i o n f a c i l i t y , u t i l i z a t i o n f a c i l i t y , reprocessing f a c i l i t y , o r nuclear waste d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t y i n t h e s t a t e u n l e s s a p e r m i t i s o b t a i n e d from t h e Department of Environmental Conservation. No p e r m i t c a n b e i s s u e d u n l e s s t h e l e g i s l a - t u r e , l o c a l government, and g o v e r n o r have approved t h e p e r m i t . Enacted 7-17-81. ARKANSAS Arkansas S t a t u t e s A n n o t a t e d , s e c t l o n 82-4222 empowers t h e Department of P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l and Ecology t o p r o m u l g a t e r u l e s and r e g u l a t i o n s governing hazardous waste treatment, s t o r a g e and d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t i e s , and t o e n t e r i n t o a g r e e m e n t s w i t h t h e f e d e r a l government o r one o r more s t a t e s t o p r o v i d e a b a l a n c e of f a c i l i t i e s among t h e s t a t e s . Makes i t u n l a w f u l t o t r a n s p o r t hazardous waste, defined t o i n c l u d e r a d i o a c t i v e waste, i n t o t h e i U?' s t a t e f o r t h e p u r p o s e of d i s p o s a l , e x c e p t a s p r o v i d e d by i n t e r s t a t e a g r e e ment, o r t o t r a n s p o r t h a z a r d o u s w a s t e i n t o o r o u t of t h e s t a t e w i t h o u t f i r s t r e p o r t i n g t o t h e Department of P o l l u t i o n C o n t r o l i n a manner t o be e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e Department. SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE (continued) PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATIOK COLORADO C o l o r a d o R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s , s e c t i o n 25-1 1-203 p r o h i b i t s t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a f a c i l i t y o r s i t e f o r t h e d i s p o s a l of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e u n l e s s t h e g o v e r n o r and l e g i s l a t u r e a p p r o v e i t . C o l o r a d o R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s , s e c t i o n 25-8-505 p r o h i b i t s anyone from s t o r i n g o r d i s p o s i n g of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e s underground u n l e s s a s t a t e comm i s s i o n h a s found beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt t h a t no p o l l u t i o n w i l l r e s u l t from t h e a c t i o n o r t h a t t h e p o l l u t i o n w i l l be l i m i t e d t o w a t e r s i n a l i m i t e d a r e a and t h a t p u b l i c need j u s t i f i e s t h e a c t i v i t y . CONNECTICUT C o n n e c t i c u t G e n e r a l S t a t u t e s A n n o t a t e d , s e c t f o n 22a-137 b a n s t h e d i s p o s a l of n u c l e a r w a s t e i n t h e s t a t e u n l e s s t h e G e n e r a l Assembly a p p r o v e s i t . Low-level m e d i c a l and u n i v e r s i t y w a s t e s a r e exempted. C o n n e c t i c u t G e n e r a l S t a t u t e s A n n o t a t e d , s e c t i o n 19-409d r e q u i r e s t h a t p e r m i t s be o b t a i n e d f o r t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e s through the state. ILLINOIS Smith-Hurd I l l i n o i s Annotated S t a t u t e s , 111-112 ¶ 230.22 p r o h i b i t s t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n t o t h e s t a t e of any s p e n t n u c l e a r f u e l f o r s t o r a g e o r d i s p o s a l which was used i n a n o u t - o f - s t a t e power g e n e r a t i n g f a c i l i t y u n l e s s t h e g e n e r a t i n g s t a t e h a s a r e c i p r o c i t y agreement w i t h I l l i n o i s . SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATION ( c o n t i n u e d ) KANSAS S-532, enacted 5-14-80, p r o h i b i t s any g e o l o g i c i n v e s t i g a t i o n t o d e t e r - mine t h e s u i t a b i l i t y of any s i t e i n t h e s t a t e f o r d i s p o s a l o r s t o r a g e of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e r m t e r i a l s from being u n d e r t a k e n u n t i l t h e governor and t h e l e g i s l a t u r e have f i r s t been n o t i f i e d of a l l d e t a i l s of t h e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . KENTUCKY Kentucky Revised S t a t u t e s Annotated, s e c t i o n 138.820 l e v i e s a n e x c i s e t a x of t e n c e n t s p e r pound t o be paid by t h e p r o c e s s o r on a l l r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e m a t e r i a l d e l i v e r e d t o Kentucky f o r p r o c e s s i n g , packaging, s t o r a g e , disposal, o r burial. H-98, enacted 3-3-80, s e t s t h e f i n a l a u t h o r i t y f o r approving o r d i s - approving t h e l o c a t i o n , opening, c l o s i n g , o r reopening of a low-level r a d i o a c t i v e waste disposal s i t e o r f a c i l i t y with t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e . LOUISIANA L o u i s i a n a Revised S t a t u t e s 51:1071 p r o h i b i t s t h e u s e of s a l t domes a s a temporary o r permanent d i s p o s a l s i t e f o r r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e o r o t h e r radioactive material. No one s h a l l u n d e r t a k e any t e s t s t o d e t e r m i n e t h e s u i t a b i l i t y of g e o l o g i c s t r u c t u r e s f o r d i s p o s a l of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e s u n l e s s t h e l o c a l government i n which t h e t e s t s a r e t o o c c u r , t h e n a t u r a l r e s o u r c e s committees o r both houses of t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e , and t h e s e c r e t a r y of t h e Department of N a t u r a l Resources have been n o t i f i e d and have not o b j e c t e d i n w r i t i n g t o t h e t e s t s . L o u i s i a n a Revised S t a t u t e s 51:1072 p r o h i b i t s t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i n t o t h e s t a t e of any h i g h - l e v e l r a d i o a c t i v e wastes f o r disposal o r storage. SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATION ( c o n t i n u e d ) MAINE T i t l e 1 0 of t h e Maine R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s A n n o t a t e d , s e c t i o n s 251 e t seq. p r o h i b i t t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t u n t i l t h e P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s Commission f i n d s t h a t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s h a s d e m o n s t r a t e d a n a c c e p t a b l e t e c h n o l o g y f o r t h e d i s p o s a l of h i g h - l e v e l n u c l e a r w a s t e . 1 Maine R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s Annotated s e c t i o n 15-A and 38 s e c t i o n 361-D ban t h e s t o r a g e , d e p o s i t , o r t r e a t m e n t of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e u n l e s s t h e l e g i s l a t u r e a p p r o v e s i t and d i r e c t t h a t a s t u d y be performed on t h e e f f e c t s of t h e a c t , w a s t e d i s p o s a l methods p r e p a r e d f o r Maine, and t h e amount of w a s t e g e n e r a t e d , t r e a t e d , s t o r e d , o r d i s p o s e d of i n Maine. MARYLAND A r t i c l e 43, s e c t i o n 689C of t h e A n n o t a t e d Code of Maryland p r o h i b i t s a f a c i l i t y f o r t h e permanent s t o r a g e o r d i s p o s a l of h i g h - l e v e l nuclear w a s t e s o r t r a n s u r a n i c w a s t e s i n t h e s t a t e e x c e p t a s o t h e r w i s e r e q u i r e d by f e d e r a l law. S-572, e n a c t e d 5-19-81, p r o v i d e s f o r t h e l i c e n s i n g and r e g u l a t i o n of l o w - l e v e l n u c l e a r w a s t e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , t r e a t m e n t , s t o r a g e , and d i s p o s a l i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e Department of H e a l t h and Mental Hygiene. t h e i s s u a n c e o f a p e r m i t f o r t h e d i s p o s a l of c e r t a i n low-level w a s t e on a n i n t e r s t a t e compact w i t h s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n s . Conditions nuclear Also p r o v i d e s f o r t h e s i t i n g of l o w - l e v e l w a s t e d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t i e s . S-573, e n a c t e d 5-19-81, p r o h i b i t s a p e r s o n from engaging i n t h e genera- t i o n of l o w - l e v e l w a s t e u n l e s s t h e Department of H e a l t h and Mental Hygiene a d o p t s a r u l e c e r t i f y i n g t h a t c e r t a i n c r i t e r i a have been s a t i s f i e d . SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATION ( c o n t i n u e d ) MICHIGAN S e c t i o n s 3.201, 3.301, 3.321, and 3.341 of t h e Michigan Compiled Laws Annotated p r o h i b i t s a c q u i s i t i o n hy t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s of any l a n d o r b u i l d i n g f o r t h e u s e of s t o r i n g , d e p o s i t i n g , o r dumping any r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l . S e c t i o n 325.491 of t h e Michigan Compiled Laws Annotated d i r e c t s t h a t r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e may n o t b e d e p o s i t e d o r s t o r e d i n t h e s t a t e . The ban does not apply t o f a c i l i t i e s a t educational i n s t i t u t i o n s , spent f u e l s t o r a g e p o o l s a t n u c l e a r p o w e r p l a n t s , m i l l t a i l i n g s from uranium m i n i n g w i t h i n t h e s t a t e , m e d i c a l u s e s of r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l , t e m p o r a r y s t o r a g e of lowl e v e l w a s t e f o r n o t more t h a n s i x months, o r w a s t e which was b e i n g s t o r e d b e f o r e J a n u a r y 1, 1970. MINNESOTA Minnesota S t a t u t e s Annotated s e c t i o n s 116C.72 and 116C.73 p r o h i b i t t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o r o p e r a t i o n of a r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e management f a c i l i t y w i t h i n M i n n e s o t a u n l e s s a u t h o r i z e d by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e and t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of w a s t e s i n t o t h e s t a t e f o r d i s p o s a l o r s t o r a g e u n l e s s a u t h o r i z e d by t h e l e g i s l a t u r e , e x c e p t t h a t r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e s may be t r a n s p o r t e d i n t o t h e s t a t e f o r temporary s t o r a g e f o r up t o t w e l v e months pending t r a n s p o r t a t i o n o u t of s t a t e . NONTANA Montana Code A n n o t a t e d s e c t i o n 75-3-302 p r o h i b i t s t h e d i s p o s a l of l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s of r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s produced i n o t h e r s t a t e s . SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATION ( c o n t i n u e d ) NEVADA S-86, e n a c t e d 4-21-81, p r o v i d e s t h e r e g u l a t i o n s f o r t r a n s p o r t i n g and d i s p o s i n g r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l s and r e q u i r e s l e g i s l a t i v e a p p r o v a l of c e r t a i n c o n t r a c t s and l i c e n s e s r e s p e c t i n g a r e a s f o r w a s t e d i s p o s a l . Prohibits s t a t e a g e n c i e s from c o n t r a c t i n g w i t h anyone t o o p e r a t e state-owned areas f o r waste d i s p o s a l and c r e a t e s a t r u s t f u n d f o r s i t e m a i n t e n a n c e of w a s t e d i s p o s a l facilities. S-87, e n a c t e d 6-2-81, d e t a i l s r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r o w n e r s h i p of w a s t e d i s p o s a l s i t e s ; a s s u r e s t h a t e f f o r t s w i l l be made t o p r o v i d e f o r t h e s a f e d i s p o s a l of uranium t a i l i n g s , m i n i m i z i n g d i f f u s i o n of radon, and r e d u c i n g t h e need f o r long-term t r e a t m e n t and s u r v e i l l a n c e of uranium t a i l i n g s . NEW HAMPSHIRE New Hampshire R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s A n n o t a t e d s e c t i o n s 125:77a e t seq. proh i b i t t h e s t o r a g e o r d i s p o s a l of r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e i n t h e s t a t e u n l e s s a p p r o p r i a t e approval i s given. Spent f u e l from o t h e r p l a n t s o r f a c i l i t i e s c a n n o t u n d e r a n y c i r c u m s t a n c e s be s t o r e d i n t h e s t a t e . NEW YORK McKinneyls C o n s o l i d a t e d Laws of N e w York Annotated, P u b l i c A u t h o r i t i e s Law, s e c t i o n 1854-a p r o v i d e s t h a t no r e p o s i t o r y f o r t h e t e r m i n a l s t o r a g e o f n u c l e a r w a s t e c a n be s i t e d i n t h e s t a t e u n l e s s t h e g o v e r n o r and l e g i s l a t u r e a p p r o v e i t by s t a t u t e . P r i o r t o a p p r o v a l , t h e New York S t a t e ERDA s h a l l con- d u c t a c o m p l e t e s t u d y on i s s u e s of w a s t e d i s p o s a l , p r e p a r e a n e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c t s t a t e m e n t , c e r t i f y t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r s i t e i s s u i t a b l e and a proven t e c h n o l o g y e x i s t s , conduct p u b l i c h e a r i n g s , and p r e p a r e a d e t a i l e d e s t i m a t e on t h e costs. SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATION ( c o n t i n u e d ) NORTH DAKOTA North Dakota Century Code, s e c t i o n 23-20.2-09 b a n s t h e d i s p o s a l of r a d i o a c t i v e waste i n t h e s t a t e unless t h e l e g i s l a t u r e g r a n t s approval. OREGON Oregon R e v i s e d S t a t u t e s , s e c t i o n 469.525 b a n s t h e e s t a b l i s h m e n t o r o p e r a t i o n of r a d i o a c t i v e m a t e r i a l w a s t e d i s p o s a l f a c i l i t i e s w i t h i n t h e state. S-108, e n a c t e d 8-17-81, p r o v i d e s t h a t m e d i c a l , i n d u s t r i a l , and r e s e a r c h w a s t e s c o n t a i n e d i n s m a l l , s e a l e d c o n t a i n e r s i n which t h e r a d i o a c t i v e mat e r i a l i s dissolved i n an organic solvent f o r l i q u i d s c i n t i l l a t i o n counting and e x p e r i m e n t a l a n i m a l c a r c a s s e s be d i s p o s e d of a t a h a z a r d o u s w a s t e facility. The f a c i l i t y must be l i c e n s e d by t h e Department of E n v i r o n m e n t a l Quality. SOUTH DAKOTA S o u t h Dakota C o d i f i e d Laws, s e c t i o n 34-21-1.1 bans t h e containment, d i s p o s a l , o r d e p o s i t of h i g h - l e v e l n u c l e a r w a s t e s , r a d i o a c t i v e s u b s t a n c e s , o r r a d i o a c t i v e l y c o n t a m i n a t e d m t e r i a l s and b a n s t h e p r o c e s s i n g of highl e v e l n u c l e a r w a s t e s w i t h i n t h e s t a t e u n l e s s p r i o r a p p r o v a l i s g r a n t e d by the legislature. Exempts uranium o r e and m i l l t a i l i n g s from t h e s e pro- visions. TEXAS HCR-21, a d o p t e d 3-4-81, d i r e c t s t h e Texas Department of H e a l t h t o suspend t h e l i c e n s i n g o n l y of new commercial r a d i o a c t i v e w a s t e management s i t e s u n t i l new l e g i s l a t i o n i s p a s s e d . SUMMARIES OF SELECTED STATE LAWS AND RESOLUTIONS CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL OR TRANSPORTATION (continued) UTAH S-18, enacted 3-26-81, p r o h i b i t s t h e placement of high-level n u c l e a r waste i n Utah u n l e s s t h e governor, a f t e r c o n s u l t a t i o n with t h e county comm i s s i o n e r of t h e a f f e c t e d county and w i t h concurrence of t h e l e g i s l a t u r e , a u t h o r i z e s t h e placement. WEST V I R G I N I A West V i r g i n i a Code, s e c t i o n 16-27-2 bans t h e s t o r a g e o r d i s p o s a l of r a d i o a c t i v e waste w i t h i n t h e s t a t e except medical, e d u c a t i o n a l , r e s e a r c h , o r i n d u s t r i a l waste. The i n d u s t r i a l waste may not i n c l u d e any m a t e r i a l s produced i n c o n j u n c t i o n with t h e o p e r a t i o n of a power r e a c t o r o r reprocessing f a c i l i t y . SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Ausman, "High-Level R a d i o a c t i v e Waste Management: 1979 W i s . L. Rev. 707. The N u c l e a r Dilemma, " Baram, " R a d i a t i o n from Nuclear Power P l a n t s : The Need f o r C o n g r e s s i o n a l D i r e c t i v e s , " 14 Harv. J. Legis. 905 (1977). Bauman, "May a S t a t e Say 'No' t o N u c l e a r Power: P a c i f i c Legal Foundation Gives a D i s a p p o i n t i n g Answer," 10 Env. L. Rev. 189 (1979). Bischof f , "Nuclear Power R e g u l a t i o n : 18 Ariz. L. Rev. 987 (1976). Defining t h e Scope of S t a t e A u t h o r i t y , " B r o n s t e i n , " S t a t e R e g u l a t i o n of Power P l a n t S i t i n g , " 3 Env. L. Rev. 273 (1973). Comment, " A p p l i c a t i o n of t h e Preemption D o c t r i n e t o S t a t e Laws A f f e c t i n g Nuclear Power P l a n t s , " 62 Va. L. Rev. 738 (1976). Comment, " F e d e r a l Preemption of S t a t e Laws C o n t r o l l i n g N u c l e a r Power," 64 Geo. L. J. 1 3 2 3 (1976). Comment, "Nuclear Power and Preemption: 27 Clev. S t . L.R. 117 (1978). Opportunities f o r S t a t e Regulation," Comment, "Preemption D o c t r i n e i n t h e Environmental Context: of A n a l y s i s , " 127 U. Pa. L. Rev. 197 (1978). A U n i f i e d Method H e i s e r , " F e d e r a l and S t a t e R e g u l a t i o n of R a d i o a c t i v e Waste D i s p o s a l : Emerging C o n f l i c t , " 1 Stan. Env. L. Ann. 80 (1978). The J a k s e t i c , "Legal A s p e c t s of R a d i o a c t i v e High-Level Waste Management, " 9 Env. L. Rev. 347 (1979). J a k s e t i c , " C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Dimens i o n s of S t a t e E f f o r t s t o R e g u l a t e Nuclear Waste," 32 S.C.L. Rev. 789 (1981). Lash, "Comment on N u c l e a r Waste D i s p o s a l , " 4 J. Contemp. L. 267 (1978). Linker, " R a d i o a c t i v e Waste: 1 (1979). Gaps i n t h e R e g u l a t o r y System," 56 Den. L. J. Lucas, "Nuclear Waste Management: 917 (1979). A Challenge t o F e d e r a l i s m , " 7 Ecology L. J. Meeks, "Nuclear Power and S t a t e R a d i a t i o n P r o t e c t i o n Measures: o f Preemption," 10 Env. L. Rev. 1 (1979). The Impotence Murphy - - and L a p i e r r e , "Nuclear Moratorium L e-g i s l a t i o n i n t h e S t a t e s and t h e Supremacy Clause: A Case of Express Preemption," 76 Colum. L. Rev. 392 (1976). Rogers, "Nuclear Waste Disposal: 917 (1976). A F e d e r a l and S t a t e Problem," 6 5 Ky. L. J. S w i n d e l l , "The T r a n s p o r t of R a d i o a c t i v e M a t e r i a l s , " 20 I n t '1 Atomic Energy Agency Bul. 17 (1978). T r i b e , " C a l i f o r n i a D e c l l n e s t h e N u c l e a r Gamble: Preempted," 7 Ecology L. J. 679 (1979). Is Such a S t a t e Choice T o r o s t e n and Ancarraw, "Federal-State-Local R e l a t i o n s h i p s i n T r a n s p o r t i n g R a d i o a c t i v e M a t e r i a l s : R u l e s of t h e Nuclear Road," 68 Ky. L. J. 251 ( 19 79-80) . Y a v i t z , " F e d e r a l , S t a t e , and Common Carrier E f f o r t s t o Safeguard t h e Transp o r t a t i o n of R a d i o a c t i v e M a t e r i a l s , " 1 Stan. Env. L. Ann. 202 (1978).