ELR Citation: ELR 21339
No(s). 90 C 1319 (N.D. Ill. Mar 15, 1990)

The court holds that a chemical company is not entitled to a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction to enjoin a city from preventing construction of an on-site nuclear waste disposal structure that would violate a local ordinance. The company has not shown a likelihood that it will succeed on the merits. The court need not decide whether the local ordinance is preempted by the Atomic Energy Act, because the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in the proper exercise of its function under the Act issued a license amendment requiring the company to adhere to a plan for construction of the facility in compliance with the ordinance. The company has not shown the inadequacy of legal remedies, because money damages are adequate to compensate it for costs incurred pending resolution of the dispute. The company has not shown that it will suffer irreparable harm if the injunction is not issued, because it has already waited over a decade for permission to dispose of its nuclear waste on site and can continue to wait to be compensated for its costs until resolution of the case on the merits. The public interest would not be served by an injunction if the company is entitled to assert that compliance with the ordinance is unnecessary after the NRC has issued a license amendment based on the company's representations that it will comply with the ordinance.

Counsel for Plaintiff
Thomas P. Healy Jr.
Mayer, Brown & Platt
190 S. LaSalle, Chicago IL 60603-3441
(312) 782-0600

Richard A. Meserve, Peter J. Nickles
Covington & Burling
1201 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, P.O. Box 7566, Washington DC 20044
(202) 662-6000

Counsel for Defendants
Joseph V. Karaganis, James D. Brusslan
Karaganis & White
414 N. Orleans St., Ste. 810, Chicago IL 60610
(312) 836-1177