Radioactive waste is generated from the nuclear weapons program, commercial nuclear power, medical applications, and corporate and university-based research programs. Waste is generally categorized as high level waste (HLW) and low-level waste (LLW). LLW contains materials such as irradiated tools, lab clothing, ion exchanger resins, animal carcasses, and trash from defense, commercial nuclear power, medical, and research activities. These materials usually have radioactivity that have short half lives—from ranges of multiple days to several hundred years. In 1990, 1.1 million cubic feet of LLW was produced. By 2011, U.S. reactors generated about 40,000 cubic meters of low-level radioactive waste per year, including contaminated components and materials resulting from reactor decommissioning.
Classes of low level waste The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has LLW broken into three different classes: A, B, and C. These classes are based on the wastes' concentration, half-life, as well as what types of radionuclides it contains. Class A consists of radionuclides with the shortest half-life and lowest concentrations. This class makes up 95% of LLW and its radioactivity levels return to background levels within 100 years. Classes B and C contain greater concentrations of radionuclides with longer half-lives, fading to background levels in less than 500 years. They must meet stricter disposal requirements than Class A waste. Any LLW that exceeds the requirements for class C waste is known as “Greater Than Class C”; this material makes up less than 1 percent of all LLW and is the responsibility of the United States Department of Energy under federal law.
History of low level waste disposal The dispersion or elimination of LLW has varied throughout history. During the 1940s and early 1950s LLW was dumped in the oceans or buried into shallow unlined landfills. Throughout history, the U.S. has dealt with complex policy adjustments pertaining to nuclear waste management.
In 1979 there were only three commercial disposal facilities remaining in operation, with only one of them, the site in South Carolina, located east of the Rocky Mountains. Due to the concentration of nuclear technology and waste products in the East, South Carolina was receiving 80-90 percent of monthly volume of LLW generated commercially in the United States. In the same year, the governors of the states of South Carolina, Nevada, and Washington testified before a subcommittee of the United States Congress, arguing that they could no longer bear the national responsibility for LLW disposal. The governors proposed that Congress establish a national policy governing the disposal of LLW based on two principles: (1) that each state was to be responsible for ensuring burial capacity for the LLW generated within its borders, and (2) that the several states would be encouraged to carry out this responsibility on a regional basis using interstate compacts.
Low level radioactive waste policy The national policy approach proposed by the three governors in 1979 was later endorsed by the President's State Planning Council on Radioactive Waste Management, the National Governors' Association, and the National Conference of State Legislatures. In giving their endorsement, these groups expanded the initial proposal to incorporate three principles: (1) state responsibility for providing LLW disposal capacity; (2) encouragement of interstate compacts for the exercise of this responsibility; and (3) the right of regional compacts to prohibit disposal at their regional facilities of LLW generated in non-compact states.
Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 In response to the complex disposal issue, Congress passed the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-573), which established that each state was responsible for disposing LLRW generated within its boundaries. Congress asserted that LLRW could be most safely and efficiently managed on a regional basis. The Act goes on to say that the states may enter into compacts with their neighbors under Congressional authorization. The law called for the ability of compacts to exclude wastes from other regions after January 1, 1986. The legislation led to the formation of a number of compacts, including the Appalachian, Central Midwest, Central States, Midwest, Northeast, Northwest, Rocky Mountain, Southeast, and Western. Certain states, notably California and Texas, chose to remain independent at the time. Compacts are responsible for deciding what facilities are needed and which state will serve as host and or how long.
Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 It was anticipated that the 1980 Act would resolve the disposal issue, several complications prevented the Act's effectiveness. Negotiations among states to form compacts and start developing disposal sites took longer than expected, making it impossible to meet the 1986 deadline. State compacts planned to begin excluding out-of-compact waste as soon as Congress approved their charters. However, congressional approval was stalled by powerful states outside of the seven regions that were prepared to prevent congressional approval of the compact charters. As a result, compact states did not obtain the authority to exclude, or discriminate against, out of region waste.
Nevada, Washington, and South Carolina threatened to close their sites unless Congress acted to give them greater control. To relieve this problem and at the same time to accelerate action, Congress passed the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (P.L. 99-240). The Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act (LLRWPAA) extended the operation of the three existing disposal sites to December 31, 1992. After that time the three sites could close or exclude waste from outside the compacts in which they were located. The Amendments Act also set up strong incentives to encourage states without sites for disposal facilities to site, license, and construct facilities. Compacts and states without sites when the 1985 Amendments Act was passed faced rising disposal charges for using existing disposal facilities. They also had to meet specific milestones in order to maintain access to the present facilities. Milestones included deadlines on ratifying compacts, selecting host states, developing plans, submitting license applications, and providing disposal. Existing disposal sites are allowed to impose surcharges for disposal of wastes from regions without sites, with rebates to be used by states or compacts for site development. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) keeps track of these arrangements, with authority to assign additional emergency disposal capacity to reactors, while the NRC can authorize emergency access to existing sites. Both agencies are active in providing information and guidance.
Omnibus Low Level Radioactive Waste Interstate Compact Consent Act (Consent Act)
The Consent Act (P. L. 99-240, title II, 99 Stat. 1871) of 1986 granted congressional consent to all of the compacts that had been ratified by the states up to that point. Implicit in the congressional consent to this compact is the expectation by Congress and the party states that the appropriate federal agencies will actively assist the Compact Commission and the individual party states to this compact by:
Expeditious enforcement of federal rules, regulations and laws; Imposing sanctions against those found to be in violation of federal rules, regulations and laws; Timely inspection of their licensees to determine their capability to adhere to such rules, regulations and laws; Timely provision of technical assistance to this compact in carrying out their obligations under the LLRWPAA.
Controversies The LLRWAA contained both positive and negative incentives. The positive incentive was a provision that allowed compacts to restrict access to their regional LLW disposal facility to member states beginning in 1993, thus limiting the amount of waste disposed of in any state hosting a regional disposal facility. The negative incentive required states that failed to provide access to LLW disposal facilities to take title and possession of wastes generated within their borders—the so-called “Take Title” provision. In 1992, in a lawsuit brought by New York State, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the “Take Title” provision thus removing a major incentive for states to develop new disposal facilities.
New York vs. United States New York attempted to negotiate a regional compact with neighboring states in the northeast, but most of the states were alarmed by the volume of LLWs that New York produced. After 55 sites were examined in ten different geographic areas, public protests, demonstrations and civil disobedience from NIMBY members led the governor of New York to suspend further investigation for siting the LLW facility. The state of New York and two counties (Allegany and Cortland) filed a lawsuit against the LLW Policy Act in result of its inconsistency with the Tenth Amendment and the guarantee clause. Including New York and the support of the two counties, seventeen states also joined New York as amici. The three states with the original LLW joined the defendants. The petitioners engaged three sets of incentives made to persuade states in following the LLW Policy Act Amendments. Each involved the responsibility for LLW that is generated within each states borders. They stated that the act and incentives “commandeers the legislative process of the states,” by directly compelling the states to enforce a federal mandate involving the disposal of LLW. Referring to Philadelphia v New Jersey, where the Supreme Court decided a state can not discriminate against another states waste in accepting shipments at an operating disposal site, the majority held the regulation of LLW disposal is within the congress clause authority. After many reviews of the provisions, the third “take title” incentive was found to present states with two unconstitutional alternatives: accepting the “responsibility and ownership of the waste, or regulate according to Congress' instruction”. Therefore, the take title provision was severed from the LLW policy act, leaving the remaining two provisions.
Alabama v. North Carolina
After the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1980 was passed, a number of interstate compacts were formed to collectively dispose of LLRW. These included the Southeast Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management Compact. Following a dispute over North Carolina's duties to host a disposal facility, the other states in the Compact filed a lawsuit against North Carolina.
Entergy Arkansas US v. Nebraska The Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Compact designated Nebraska to be the host state for the Compact's disposal site. In Entergy Arkansas US v. Nebraska, Nebraska was found liable for damages resulting from failure to meet its obligations under the Compact by licensing a disposal site. In 2005, Nebraska paid over $145 million in damages to the Central Interstate Low-Level Radioactive Waste Commission, which then distributed the funds to member states affiliated corporations.Resolutions of the Central Interstate Low Level Radioactive Waste Commission, July 14-15, 2005. https://cillrwcc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/2005-07-14-15_Resolutions.pdf [Accessed January 1, 2026]. The controversy is discussed in the book Nuclear Nebraska.
Current low level radioactive waste regulation