Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375 (2026)

Required findings for radioactive waste disposal facility certificate

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

469.375 Required findings for radioactive waste disposal facility certificate. The Energy Facility Siting Council shall not issue a site certificate for a waste disposal facility for uranium mine overburden or uranium mill tailings, mill wastes or mill by-product or for radioactive waste or radioactively contaminated containers or receptacles used in the transportation, storage, use or application of radioactive material, unless, accompanying its decision it finds:

(1) The site is:

(a) Suitable for disposal of such wastes, and the amount of the wastes, intended for disposal at the site;

(b) Not located in or adjacent to:

(A) An area determined to be potentially subject to river or creek erosion within the lifetime of the facility;

(B) Within the 500-year floodplain of a river, taking into consideration the area determined to be potentially subject to river or creek erosion within the lifetime of the facility;

(D) An area of ancient, recent or active mass movement including land sliding, flow or creep;

(E) An area subject to ocean erosion; or

(F) An area having experienced volcanic activity within the last two million years.

(2) There is no available disposal technology and no available alternative site for disposal of such wastes that would better protect the health, safety and welfare of the public and the environment;

(3) The disposal of such wastes and the amount of the wastes, at the site will be compatible with the regulatory programs of federal government for disposal of such wastes;

(4) The disposal of such wastes, and the amount of the wastes, at the site will be coordinated with the regulatory programs of adjacent states for disposal of such wastes;

(5) That following closure of the site, there will be no release of radioactive materials or radiation from the waste;

(6) That suitable deed restrictions have been placed on the site recognizing the hazard of the material; and

(7) That, where federal funding for remedial actions is not available, a surety bond in the name of the state has been provided in an amount determined by the State Department of Energy to be sufficient to cover any costs of closing the site and monitoring it or providing for its security after closure and to secure performance of any site certificate conditions. The bond may be withdrawn when the council finds that:

(a) The radioactive waste has been disposed of at a waste disposal facility for which a site certificate has been issued; and

(b) A fee has been paid to the State of Oregon sufficient for monitoring the site after closure.

(8) If any section, portion, clause or phrase of this section is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional the remaining sections, portions, clauses and phrases shall not be affected but shall remain in full force or effect, and to this end the provisions of this section are severable. [Formerly 459.625; 1979 c.283 §3; 1981 c.587 §3; 1985 c.4]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2023 · leading case: Fremont Lumber Co. v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 16 P.3d 1147 (Or. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Fremont Lumber Co. v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 16 P.3d 1147 (Or. 2001). · cites it 21× “It is the purpose of-t These rules to implement the requirements of ORS 469.375, 469.470 and 469.501 to 469.559 469.”

Fremont Lumber Co. v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 936 P.2d 968 (Or. 1997). · cites it 10× “This rule amendment will not result in cleanup costs greater than those that might be incurred considering the existing ORS 469.375. * * % * “Cost of Compliance on Business: Unknown.”

Teledyne Indus., Inc. v. Paulus, 687 P.2d 1077 (Or. 1984). · cites it 3× “First, that the explanation sets out the broad statutory definition of “radioactive waste” found in ORS 469.375, which includes many kinds of prohibited waste, rather than using the narrower definition set out in ORS 469.”

Stop B2H Coalition v. Dept. of Energy, 525 P.3d 864 (Or. 2023). “We explained that “[t]his [statutory] standard does not permit the Council to reject a proposed site because it believes another location is 19 McAllister cited ORS 469.370(13) in the contested case proceedings but did not cite the statute in advocating for the Glass Hill route…”

Teledyne Wah Chang Albany v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 692 P.2d 86 (Or. 1985). · cites it 10× “*258 ORS 469.375 states: “The council shall not issue a site certificate for a waste disposal facility for * * * radioactive waste * * * unless accompanying its decision, it finds: “(1) The site is suitable for disposal of such wastes, and the amount thereof * * This standard…”

Forelaws on Bd. v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 760 P.2d 212 (Or. 1988). “525(1) for “[w]astes generated before June 1,1981, through industrial or manufacturing processes which contain only naturally occurring radioactive isotopes which are disposed of at sites approved by the council [EFSC] in accordance with ORS 469.375.” 2 A “millirem” is…”

Teledyne Wah Chang Albany v. Paulus, 670 P.2d 1021 (Or. 1983). · cites it 5× “*764 PER CURIAM We are called upon to review a ballot title for a proposed initiative measure to amend Oregon’s Energy Facility Siting Council’s certification requirements as provided in ORS 469.375. 1 Pursuant to ORS 250.035 and 250.”

Forelaws on Bd. v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 811 P.2d 636 (Or. 1991). “No additional rulemaking procedures will be instituted to incorporate changes to ORS 469.375 into the administrative rules.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(1) — 2 cases

Fremont Lumber Co. v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 16 P.3d 1147 (Or. 2001). “It is the purpose of-t These rules to implement the requirements of ORS 469.375, 469.470 and 469.501 to 469.559 469.”

Teledyne Wah Chang Albany v. Paulus, 670 P.2d 1021 (Or. 1983). “*764 PER CURIAM We are called upon to review a ballot title for a proposed initiative measure to amend Oregon’s Energy Facility Siting Council’s certification requirements as provided in ORS 469.375. 1 Pursuant to ORS 250.035 and 250.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(2) — 2 cases

Teledyne Wah Chang Albany v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 692 P.2d 86 (Or. 1985). “*258 ORS 469.375 states: “The council shall not issue a site certificate for a waste disposal facility for * * * radioactive waste * * * unless accompanying its decision, it finds: “(1) The site is suitable for disposal of such wastes, and the amount thereof * * This standard…”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(3) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(4) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(6) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(7) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(l) — 1 case

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(l)(a) — 2 cases

Fremont Lumber Co. v. Energy Facility Siting Council, 936 P.2d 968 (Or. 1997). “This rule amendment will not result in cleanup costs greater than those that might be incurred considering the existing ORS 469.375. * * % * “Cost of Compliance on Business: Unknown.”

— Or. Rev. Stat. § 469.375(l)(b)(B) — 2 cases

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.