Over the last year there has been a difference of opinion in Minnesota about who has the authority to regulate radiological discharges from nu­clear power plants, in this case the Monticello nuclear generating plant. The matter is now in the courts for a determination based on the legalities involved. Briefly, the two points of view in the case are that, first, the state of Minnesota, through the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, avers that it has the power to regulate the minute radioactive waste discharges which will emanate from the Monticello plant as well as those discharges which it traditionally regulates, such as waste heat. Second, the electric utility, Northern States Power Company, contends that the Atomic Ener­gy Act “preempted” to the federal government the authority to regulate such radiological hazards, and that therefore a state may not lawfully act in this area.

In lay terms, the doctrine of preemption is a legal concept which arose after the colonies adopted the Constitution and became the United States of America. Under the Constitution certain powers were granted to the national government and provision was made that the national law be supreme. Thus, where there is a federal statute and policy, a conflicting state law and policy normally must yield. Similarly, where the federal law regulating a particular field is so pervasive as to evidence a congressional intent to “occupy the field” to the exclusion of state regulation, the courts will strike down state action attempting to regulate within that field.

The question, then, is largely one of congressional intent. In this pa­per I shall show that there is ample evidence that Congress meant to have

the important field of atomic energy regulated not by each individual state, but by the national government, except only to the limited extent that the Atomic Energy Commission might, under federal-state agree­ments, relinquish certain of its exclusive regulatory authority to interested and qualified states.