U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 88— URANIUM MILL TAILINGS RADIATION CONTROL

42 U.S.C. § 7901

Congressional findings and purposes

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) The Congress finds that uranium mill tailings located at active and inactive mill operations may pose a potential and significant radiation health hazard to the public, and that the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare and the regulation of interstate commerce require that every reasonable effort be made to provide for the stabilization, disposal, and control in a safe and environmentally sound manner of such tailings in order to prevent or minimize radon diffusion into the environment and to prevent or minimize other environmental hazards from such tailings.(b) The purposes of this chapter are to provide—(1) in cooperation with the interested States, Indian tribes, and the persons who own or control inactive mill tailings sites, a program of assessment and remedial action at such sites, including, where appropriate, the reprocessing of tailings to extract residual uranium and other mineral values where practicable, in order to stabilize and control such tailings in a safe and environmentally sound manner and to minimize or eliminate radiation health hazards to the public, and(2) a program to regulate mill tailings during uranium or thorium ore processing at active mill operations and after termination of such operations in order to stabilize and control such tailings in a safe and environmentally sound manner and to minimize or eliminate radiation health hazards to the public.(Pub. L. 95–604, § 2, Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3021.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (b), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 95–604, Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3021, known as the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note below and Tables.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title of 1988 Amendment

Pub. L. 100–616, § 1, Nov. 5, 1988, 102 Stat. 3192, provided: “That this Act [amending sections 7916 and 7922 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Amendments Act of 1988’.”

Short Title

Pub. L. 95–604, § 1, Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3021, provided that: “This Act [enacting this chapter and sections 2022, 2113, and 2114 of this title, amending sections 2014, 2021, 2111, and 2201 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 2014, 2021, and 2113 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978’.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1985–2025 · leading case: El Paso Nat. Gas Co. v. United States, 750 F.3d 863 (D.C. Cir. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
El Paso Nat. Gas Co. v. United States, 750 F.3d 863 (D.C. Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 7901 (b)(2). The Act provides for a program to assess and remediate inactive mills sites.”
State, Dep't of Health v. Mill, 887 P.2d 993 (Colo. 1994). · cites it 4× “The Language of the Federal Statute Turning first to the plain language of the statute, the stated purpose of UMTRCA is to clean up and stabilize uranium processing sites to alleviate the danger to the public posed by radiation emitted from mill tailings and other radioactive…”
El Paso Nat. Gas Co. v. United States, 774 F. Supp. 2d 40 (D.D.C. 2011). · cites it 4× “, the Uranium Mill Tailing Radiation Control Act (“UMTR-CA”), 42 U.S.C. § 7901 , et seq., the Ameri *43 can Indian Agriculture Resources Management Act (“AIARMA”), 25 U.”
Mill v. State, Dep't of Health, 868 P.2d 1099 (Colo. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 4× “As to this latter appeal (91CA0770), we reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand the cause for further proceedings.”
Stand up for California v. State of Cal., 6 Cal. App. 5th 686 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). “) Similarly, under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 ( 42 U.S.C. § 7901 et seq.), the Secretary of Energy is allowed to acquire land for radioactive materials disposal but in certain states must obtain “the consent of the Governor of such State” ( 42 U.”
Dep't of Health v. Hecla Mining Co., 781 P.2d 122 (Colo. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Acquisition was in accordance with the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (Radiation Control Act) 42 U.S.C. §§ 7901 to 7942 (1978) and pursuant to § 25-11-301, et seq.”
El Paso Nat. Gas Co. v. United States, 605 F. Supp. 2d 224 (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 2× “3021, codified at 42 U.S.C. §§ 7901 , et seq., in 1978 in an effort to “stabilize and control” the radioactive waste generated by the uranium mill operations that supported the United States’ Cold War effort.”
Atlas Corp. v. United States, 895 F.2d 745 (Fed. Cir. 1990). “See 42 U.S.C. § 7901 . Congress set forth explicit findings regarding the need for tailings stabilization and control, and it made clear its specific purpose in enacting the UMTRCA.”
State, Dep't of Health v. the Mill, 809 P.2d 434 (Colo. 1991). “42 U.S.C. § 7901 . Under UMTRCA the entire property owned by The Mill was designated as *436 a “processing site” and was eligible for remedial action.”
Am. Mining Cong. v. Thomas, 772 F.2d 617 (10th Cir. 1985). · cites it 3× “” 42 U.S.C. § 7901 (a). In the UMTRCA, Congress gave the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) responsibility for implementing a remedial program to clean up and dispose of the mill tailings.”
Navajo Tribe of Indians v. United States, 9 Cl. Ct. 227 (Ct. Cl. 1985). “42 U.S.C. § 7901 . The court concludes that the relief sought by plaintiff is forthcoming through this statute and thus, if the court had jurisdiction over this claim, it would be inappropriate to grant plaintiff’s requested relief in that such an award could give rise to a…”
Atlas Corp. v. United States, 15 Cl. Ct. 681 (Ct. Cl. 1988). “8, 1978), codified at 42 U.S.C. § 7901 , et seq. Under Title I of the Act, the federal government has responsibility for the stabilization and decommissioning of all inactive mill sites which were not licensed on January 1, 1978.”
Show all 21 citing 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.