oregon
waste
systems
environmental
argued
january
decided
april
page
together
columbia
resource
environmental
quality
commission
state
oregon
also
certiorari
oregon
imposes
per
ton
surcharge
disposal
solid
waste
generated
per
ton
fee
disposal
waste
generated
within
oregon
petitioners
sought
review
surcharge
state
appeals
challenging
administrative
rule
establishing
surcharge
enabling
statutes
inter
alia
commerce
clause
upheld
statutes
rule
state
affirmed
despite
oregon
statutes
explicit
reference
waste
geographical
location
reasoned
surcharge
express
nexus
actual
costs
incurred
state
local
government
rendered
facially
constitutional
compensatory
fee
held
oregon
surcharge
facially
invalid
negative
commerce
clause
pp
first
step
analyzing
law
negative
commerce
clause
determine
whether
discriminates
regulates
evenhandedly
incidental
effects
interstate
commerce
restriction
discriminatory
favors
economic
interests
counterparts
virtually
per
se
invalid
contrast
nondiscriminatory
regulations
valid
unless
burden
imposed
interstate
commerce
clearly
page
ii
excessive
relation
putative
local
benefits
pike
bruce
church
oregon
surcharge
obviously
discriminatory
face
subjects
waste
fee
almost
three
times
greater
charge
imposed
waste
statutory
determinant
whether
fee
applies
whether
waste
generated
state
alleged
compensatory
aim
surcharge
bearing
whether
facially
discriminatory
see
chemical
waste
management
hunt
pp
surcharge
discriminatory
virtually
per
se
rule
invalidity
pike
balancing
test
provides
proper
legal
standard
cases
thus
surcharge
must
invalidated
unless
respondents
show
advances
legitimate
local
purpose
adequately
served
reasonable
nondiscriminatory
alternatives
neither
respondents
justifications
passes
strict
scrutiny
surcharge
justified
compensatory
tax
necessary
make
shippers
waste
pay
fair
share
disposal
costs
must
rough
equivalent
identifiable
substantially
similar
surcharge
intrastate
commerce
however
respondents
failed
identify
specific
charge
intrastate
commerce
equal
exceeding
surcharge
per
ton
fee
waste
challenged
surcharge
even
assuming
various
means
general
taxation
state
income
taxes
serve
roughly
equivalent
intrastate
burden
respondents
argument
fails
levies
imposed
substantially
equivalent
events
taxes
earning
income
utilizing
oregon
landfills
entirely
different
kinds
taxes
surcharge
justified
respondents
argument
oregon
valid
interest
spreading
costs
disposal
oregon
waste
waste
oregonians
oregon
scheme
necessarily
results
shippers
waste
bearing
full
costs
disposal
shippers
oregon
waste
bearing
less
full
cost
necessarily
incorporates
illegitimate
protectionist
objective
wyoming
oklahoma
recharacterizing
surcharge
resource
protectionism
discouraging
importation
waste
order
conserve
landfill
space
waste
hardly
advances
respondents
cause
state
may
accord
inhabitants
preferred
right
access
consumers
natural
resources
philadelphia
new
jersey
sporhase
nebraska
distinguished
pp
thomas
delivered
opinion
stevens
scalia
kennedy
souter
ginsburg
joined
rehnquist
filed
dissenting
opinion
blackmun
joined
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
justice
thomas
delivered
opinion
two
terms
ago
chemical
waste
management
hunt
held
negative
commerce
clause
prohibited
alabama
imposing
higher
fee
disposal
alabama
landfills
hazardous
waste
disposal
identical
waste
alabama
reaching
conclusion
however
left
open
possibility
differential
surcharge
might
valid
based
costs
disposing
waste
slip
today
must
decide
whether
oregon
purportedly
surcharge
disposal
solid
waste
generated
violates
commerce
clause
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
like
oregon
comprehensively
regulates
disposal
solid
wastes
within
borders
respondent
oregon
department
environmental
quality
oversees
state
regulatory
scheme
developing
executing
plans
management
reduction
recycling
solid
wastes
fund
related
activities
oregon
levies
wide
range
fees
landfill
operators
see
rev
stat
oregon
legislature
imposed
additional
fee
called
surcharge
every
person
disposes
solid
waste
generated
disposal
site
regional
disposal
site
effective
amount
surcharge
left
respondent
environmental
quality
commission
commission
determine
rulemaking
legislature
require
resulting
surcharge
based
costs
state
oregon
political
subdivisions
disposing
solid
waste
generated
otherwise
paid
specified
statutes
conclusion
rulemaking
process
commission
set
surcharge
waste
per
ton
admin
rule
conjunction
surcharge
legislature
imposed
fee
disposal
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
waste
generated
within
oregon
see
fee
capped
statute
per
ton
originally
per
ton
considerably
lower
fee
imposed
waste
subsequently
legislature
conditionally
extended
per
ton
fee
waste
addition
per
ton
surcharge
proviso
surcharge
survived
judicial
challenge
per
ton
fee
limited
waste
ch
anticipated
challenge
long
coming
petitioners
oregon
waste
systems
oregon
waste
columbia
resource
company
crc
joined
gilliam
county
oregon
sought
expedited
review
surcharge
oregon
appeals
oregon
waste
owns
operates
solid
waste
landfill
gilliam
county
accepts
final
disposal
solid
waste
generated
oregon
crc
pursuant
contract
clark
county
neighboring
washington
state
transports
solid
waste
via
barge
clark
county
landfill
morrow
county
oregon
petitioners
challenged
administrative
rule
establishing
surcharge
enabling
statutes
state
law
commerce
clause
constitution
oregon
appeals
upheld
statutes
rule
gilliam
county
department
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
environmental
quality
state
affirmed
gilliam
county
department
environmental
quality
oregon
commerce
clause
recognized
oregon
surcharge
resembled
alabama
fee
invalidated
chemical
waste
management
hunt
prescribed
higher
fees
disposal
waste
nevertheless
viewed
similarity
superficial
despite
explicit
reference
waste
geographic
origin
reasoned
oregon
surcharge
facially
discriminatory
ecause
express
nexus
actual
costs
incurred
state
local
government
nexus
distinguished
chemical
waste
supra
rendering
surcharge
compensatory
fee
viewed
prima
facie
reasonable
say
facially
constitutional
ibid
read
case
law
invalidating
compensatory
fees
manifestly
disproportionate
services
rendered
ibid
quoting
clark
paul
gray
oregon
law
restricts
scope
judicial
review
expedited
proceedings
deciding
facial
legality
administrative
rules
statutes
underlying
oregon
deemed
precluded
deciding
factual
question
whether
surcharge
waste
disproportionate
granted
certiorari
decision
conflicted
recent
decision
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
appeals
seventh
circuit
reverse
ii
commerce
clause
provides
congress
shall
power
regulate
commerce
among
several
art
cl
though
phrased
grant
regulatory
power
congress
clause
long
understood
negative
aspect
denies
power
unjustifiably
discriminate
burden
interstate
flow
articles
commerce
see
wyoming
oklahoma
slip
welton
missouri
framers
granted
congress
plenary
authority
interstate
commerce
conviction
order
succeed
new
union
avoid
tendencies
toward
economic
balkanization
plagued
relations
among
colonies
later
among
articles
confederation
hughes
oklahoma
see
generally
federalist
madison
principle
economic
unit
nation
alone
gamut
powers
necessary
control
economy
corollary
separable
economic
units
hood
sons
du
mond
consistent
principles
held
first
step
analyzing
law
subject
judicial
scrutiny
negative
commerce
clause
determine
whether
regulates
evenhandedly
incidental
effects
interstate
commerce
discriminates
interstate
commerce
hughes
supra
see
also
chemical
waste
slip
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
use
term
discrimination
simply
means
differential
treatment
economic
interests
benefits
former
burdens
latter
restriction
commerce
discriminatory
virtually
per
se
invalid
slip
see
also
philadelphia
new
jersey
contrast
nondiscriminatory
regulations
incidental
effects
interstate
commerce
valid
unless
burden
imposed
commerce
clearly
excessive
relation
putative
local
benefits
pike
bruce
church
chemical
waste
easily
found
alabama
surcharge
hazardous
waste
facially
discriminatory
imposed
higher
fee
disposal
waste
disposal
identical
waste
slip
deem
equally
obvious
oregon
per
ton
surcharge
discriminatory
face
surcharge
subjects
waste
fee
almost
three
times
greater
per
ton
charge
imposed
solid
waste
statutory
determinant
fee
applies
particular
shipment
solid
waste
oregon
landfill
whether
waste
generated
well
established
however
law
discriminatory
tax
es
transaction
incident
heavily
crosses
state
lines
occurs
entirely
within
state
chemical
waste
supra
slip
quoting
armco
hardesty
see
also
american
trucking
scheiner
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
respondents
argue
oregon
held
statutory
nexus
surcharge
otherwise
uncompensated
costs
state
oregon
political
subdivisions
disposing
solid
waste
generated
necessarily
precludes
finding
surcharge
discriminatory
find
respondents
narrow
focus
oregon
compensatory
aim
foreclosed
precedents
reiterated
chemical
waste
purpose
justification
law
bearing
whether
facially
discriminatory
see
slip
see
also
philadelphia
supra
consequently
even
surcharge
merely
recoups
costs
disposing
waste
oregon
fact
remains
differential
charge
favors
shippers
oregon
waste
counterparts
handling
waste
generated
making
geographic
distinction
surcharge
patently
discriminates
interstate
commerce
iii
oregon
surcharge
discriminatory
virtually
per
se
rule
invalidity
provides
proper
legal
standard
pike
balancing
test
result
surcharge
must
invalidated
unless
respondents
sho
advances
legitimate
local
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
purpose
adequately
served
reasonable
nondiscriminatory
alternatives
new
energy
indiana
limbach
see
also
chemical
waste
supra
slip
cases
require
justifications
discriminatory
restrictions
commerce
pass
strictest
scrutiny
hughes
supra
state
burden
justification
heavy
facial
discrimination
may
fatal
defect
ibid
see
also
westinghouse
elec
tully
maryland
louisiana
outset
note
two
justifications
respondents
presented
claim
made
disposal
waste
imposes
higher
costs
oregon
political
subdivisions
disposal
waste
also
respondents
offered
safety
health
reason
unique
nonhazardous
waste
discouraging
flow
waste
oregon
cf
maine
taylor
upholding
ban
importation
baitfish
maine
baitfish
subject
parasites
completely
foreign
maine
baitfish
consequently
respondents
must
come
forward
legitimate
reasons
subject
waste
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
higher
charge
levied
waste
oregon
respondents
offer
two
reasons
address
respondents
principal
defense
higher
surcharge
waste
compensatory
tax
necessary
make
shippers
waste
pay
fair
share
costs
imposed
oregon
disposal
waste
state
chemical
waste
noted
possibility
argument
might
justify
discriminatory
surcharge
tax
waste
see
slip
making
observation
implicitly
recognized
settled
principle
interstate
commerce
may
made
pay
way
complete
auto
transit
brady
see
also
maryland
supra
purpose
commerce
clause
relieve
engaged
interstate
commerce
share
state
tax
burden
western
live
stock
bureau
revenue
see
also
henneford
silas
mason
nevertheless
one
central
purposes
clause
prevent
exacting
share
interstate
commerce
dept
revenue
washington
association
washington
stevedoring
emphasis
added
see
also
northwestern
portland
cement
minnesota
least
since
decision
hinson
lott
wall
principles
found
expression
compensatory
complementary
tax
doctrine
though
cases
sometimes
discuss
concept
compensatory
tax
doctrine
unto
merely
specific
way
justifying
facially
discriminatory
tax
achieving
legitimate
local
purpose
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
achieved
nondiscriminatory
means
see
chemical
waste
supra
slip
referring
compensatory
tax
doctrine
justif
ication
facially
discriminatory
tax
doctrine
facially
discriminatory
tax
imposes
interstate
commerce
rough
equivalent
identifiable
substantially
similar
tax
intrastate
commerce
offend
negative
commerce
clause
maryland
supra
see
also
tyler
pipe
washington
state
department
revenue
armco
justify
charge
interstate
commerce
compensatory
tax
state
must
threshold
matter
identif
intrastate
tax
burden
state
attempting
compensate
maryland
supra
burden
identified
tax
interstate
commerce
must
shown
roughly
approximate
exceed
amount
tax
intrastate
commerce
see
alaska
arctic
maid
finally
events
interstate
intrastate
taxes
imposed
must
substantially
equivalent
must
sufficiently
similar
substance
serve
mutually
exclusive
prox
ies
armco
supra
justice
cardozo
explained
henneford
truly
compensatory
tax
scheme
stranger
afar
subject
greater
burdens
consequence
ownership
dweller
within
gates
one
pays
upon
one
activity
incident
upon
another
sum
reckoning
closed
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
although
often
mean
feat
determine
whether
challenged
tax
compensatory
tax
little
difficulty
concluding
oregon
surcharge
tax
oregon
impose
specific
charge
least
per
ton
shippers
waste
generated
oregon
surcharge
might
considered
compensatory
fact
analogous
charge
disposal
oregon
waste
per
ton
approximately
amount
imposed
waste
see
respondents
failure
identify
specific
charge
intrastate
commerce
equal
exceeding
surcharge
fatal
claim
see
maryland
respondents
argue
despite
absence
specific
per
ton
charge
waste
intrastate
commerce
pay
share
costs
underlying
surcharge
general
taxation
whether
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
true
difficult
determine
general
tax
payments
received
general
purposes
government
upon
proper
receipt
lost
general
revenues
flast
cohen
harlan
dissenting
even
assuming
however
various
means
general
taxation
income
taxes
serve
identifiable
intrastate
burden
roughly
equivalent
surcharge
respondents
compensatory
tax
argument
fails
levies
imposed
substantially
equivalent
events
prototypical
example
substantially
equivalent
taxable
events
sale
use
articles
trade
see
henneford
supra
fact
use
taxes
products
purchased
state
taxes
upheld
recent
memory
compensatory
tax
doctrine
see
ibid
typifying
recent
reluctance
recognize
new
categories
compensatory
taxes
armco
held
manufacturing
wholesaling
substantially
equivalent
events
view
earning
income
disposing
waste
oregon
landfills
even
less
equivalent
manufacturing
wholesaling
indeed
fact
shippers
waste
oregon
waste
charged
surcharge
even
though
pay
oregon
income
taxes
refutes
respondents
argument
respective
taxable
events
substantially
equivalent
see
ibid
conclude
far
substantially
equivalent
taxes
earning
income
utilizing
oregon
landfills
entirely
different
kind
tax
es
washington
inclined
scheiner
plunge
morass
weighing
comparative
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
tax
burdens
comparing
taxes
dissimilar
events
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
respondents
final
argument
oregon
interest
spreading
costs
disposal
oregon
waste
oregonians
citizens
oregon
benefit
proper
disposal
waste
oregon
respondents
claim
proper
oregon
require
bear
costs
disposing
waste
state
higher
general
tax
burden
time
however
oregon
citizens
required
bear
costs
disposing
waste
respondents
claim
necessary
result
limited
require
shippers
waste
bear
full
costs
disposal
permit
shippers
oregon
waste
bear
less
full
cost
fail
perceive
distinction
respondents
contention
claim
state
interest
reducing
costs
handling
waste
cases
condemn
illegitimate
however
governmental
interest
unrelated
economic
protectionism
wyoming
slip
regulating
interstate
commerce
way
give
handle
domestic
articles
commerce
cost
advantage
competitors
handling
similar
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
items
produced
elsewhere
constitutes
protectionism
see
new
energy
give
controlling
effect
respondents
characterization
oregon
tax
scheme
seemingly
benign
require
us
overlook
fact
scheme
necessarily
incorporates
protectionist
objective
well
cf
bacchus
imports
dias
rejecting
hawaii
attempt
justify
discriminatory
tax
exemption
local
liquor
producers
conferring
benefit
opposed
burdening
liquor
producers
respondents
counter
oregon
engaged
form
protectionism
resource
protectionism
economic
protectionism
true
discouraging
flow
waste
oregon
landfills
higher
surcharge
waste
conserves
space
landfills
waste
generated
oregon
recharacterizing
surcharge
resource
protectionism
hardly
advances
respondents
cause
however
even
assuming
landfill
space
natural
resource
state
may
accord
inhabitants
preferred
right
access
consumers
natural
resources
located
within
borders
philadelphia
held
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
century
ago
state
guise
exerting
police
powers
impose
burden
applicable
solely
articles
commerce
produced
manufactured
courts
find
difficulty
holding
legislation
conflict
constitution
guy
baltimore
decision
sporhase
nebraska
contrary
held
state
may
grant
limited
preference
citizens
utilization
ground
water
holding
premised
several
different
factors
tied
simple
fact
life
water
unlike
natural
resources
essential
human
survival
sporhase
therefore
provides
support
respondents
position
may
erect
financial
barrier
flow
waste
oregon
landfills
see
fort
gratiot
slip
however
serious
shortage
landfill
space
may
post
state
may
attempt
isolate
problem
common
several
raising
barriers
free
flow
interstate
trade
chemical
waste
slip
iv
recognize
broad
discretion
configure
systems
taxation
deem
appropriate
see
commonwealth
edison
montana
boston
stock
exchange
state
tax
intimate
discretion
regard
others
bounded
relevant
limitations
federal
constitution
case
negative
commerce
clause
respondents
offered
legitimate
reason
subject
waste
generated
discriminatory
surcharge
approximately
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
three
times
high
imposed
waste
generated
oregon
surcharge
facially
invalid
negative
commerce
clause
accordingly
judgment
oregon
reversed
cases
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
result
shippers
solid
waste
currently
charged
per
ton
dispose
waste
oregon
landfills
compared
per
ton
fee
charged
dispose
oregon
waste
landfills
refer
hereinafter
surcharge
per
ton
fee
refunded
shippers
waste
surcharge
upheld
ch
challenged
government
suppliers
consolidating
bayh
cert
denied
dissent
argues
per
ton
surcharge
minimal
amount
considered
discriminatory
even
though
surcharge
expressly
applies
waste
generated
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
post
dissent
attempt
reconcile
novel
understanding
discrimination
precedents
clearly
establish
degree
differential
burden
charge
interstate
commerce
measures
extent
discrimination
relevance
determination
whether
state
discriminated
interstate
commerce
wyoming
oklahoma
slip
see
also
maryland
louisiana
need
know
unequal
ax
concluding
discriminates
fact
commission
fixed
per
ton
cost
disposing
solid
waste
oregon
landfills
without
reference
origin
waste
record
oregon
economic
consultant
recognized
per
ton
costs
waste
course
waste
impose
higher
costs
oregon
waste
oregon
recover
increased
cost
differential
charge
waste
reason
apart
origin
solid
waste
coming
outside
state
treated
differently
fort
gratiot
landfill
michigan
dept
natural
resources
slip
cf
mullaney
anderson
toomer
witsell
oregon
though
terming
surcharge
compensatory
fee
relied
legal
standard
user
fee
cases
see
citing
example
airport
authority
dist
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
delta
airlines
clark
paul
gray
compensatory
tax
cases
cited
text
rather
user
fee
cases
controlling
latter
apply
charge
imposed
state
use
transportation
facilities
services
commonwealth
edison
montana
undisputed
chemical
waste
landfills
question
owned
private
entities
including
oregon
waste
surcharge
plainly
user
fee
nevertheless
even
surcharge
somehow
viewed
user
fee
sustained
given
discriminates
interstate
commerce
see
evansville
supra
guy
baltimore
cf
northwest
airlines
county
kent
slip
user
fee
valid
extent
discriminate
interstate
commerce
note
respondents
like
dissent
post
ignore
fact
shippers
waste
likelihood
pay
income
taxes
portion
might
well
used
pay
waste
reduction
activities
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
furthermore
permitting
discriminatory
taxes
interstate
commerce
compensate
charges
purportedly
included
general
forms
intrastate
taxation
allow
state
tax
interstate
commerce
heavily
commerce
anytime
entities
involved
interstate
commerce
happened
use
facilities
supported
general
state
tax
funds
government
suppliers
consolidating
bayh
decline
respondents
invitation
open
expansive
loophole
carefully
confined
compensatory
tax
jurisprudence
recognize
commerce
clause
prohibit
state
action
designed
give
residents
advantage
marketplace
action
description
connection
state
regulation
interstate
commerce
new
energy
indiana
limbach
cf
metropolitan
life
ins
ward
new
energy
confront
patently
discriminatory
law
plainly
connected
regulation
interstate
commerce
therefore
occasion
decide
whether
oregon
validly
accomplish
limited
market
participant
doctrine
hughes
alexandria
scrap
means
unrelated
regulation
interstate
commerce
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
chief
justice
rehnquist
justice
blackmun
joins
dissenting
landfill
space
evaporates
solid
waste
accumulates
state
local
governments
expend
financial
political
capital
develop
trash
control
systems
efficient
lawful
protective
environment
state
oregon
responsibly
attempted
address
solid
waste
disposal
problem
enactment
comprehensive
regulatory
scheme
management
disposal
reduction
recycling
solid
waste
oregon
applauded
regulatory
scheme
included
fee
charged
solid
waste
oregon
legislature
directed
commission
determine
appropriate
surcharge
based
costs
disposing
solid
waste
generated
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
commission
arrived
surcharge
per
ton
compared
per
ton
charged
solid
waste
admin
rule
surcharge
works
increase
per
week
typical
solid
waste
producer
brief
respondent
seems
small
price
pay
right
deposit
garbage
rubbish
refuse
sewage
sludge
septic
tank
cesspool
pumpings
sludge
manure
dead
animals
infectious
waste
neighbors
nearly
years
ago
held
state
ban
waste
disposal
protecting
hazardous
noxious
materials
brought
across
state
borders
philadelphia
new
jersey
two
terms
ago
chemical
waste
management
hunt
striking
state
alabama
per
ton
fee
disposal
hazardous
waste
left
open
possibility
fee
valid
based
costs
disposing
waste
slip
however
philadelphia
chemical
waste
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
management
cranks
dormant
commerce
clause
ratchet
striking
fees
ties
hands
addressing
vexing
national
problem
solid
waste
disposal
dissent
americans
generated
nearly
million
tons
municipal
solid
waste
increase
million
tons
see
environmental
protection
agency
characterization
municipal
solid
waste
update
current
projections
americans
produce
million
tons
garbage
year
ibid
generating
solid
waste
never
problem
finding
environmentally
safe
disposal
sites
estimated
percent
solid
waste
landfills
nation
reached
capacity
nevertheless
stubbornly
refuses
acknowledge
clean
healthy
environment
unthreatened
improper
disposal
solid
waste
commodity
really
issue
cases
see
chemical
waste
management
supra
rehnquist
dissenting
fort
gratiot
sanitary
landfill
michigan
dept
natural
resources
rehnquist
dissenting
notwithstanding
identified
shortage
landfill
space
nation
notes
little
difficulty
ante
concluding
oregon
surcharge
operate
compensatory
tax
designed
offset
loss
available
landfill
space
state
caused
influx
waste
reaches
nonchalant
conclusion
state
failed
identify
specific
charge
intrastate
commerce
equal
exceeding
surcharge
ibid
emphasis
added
myopic
focus
differential
fees
ignores
fact
producers
solid
waste
support
oregon
regulatory
program
state
income
taxes
paying
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
indirectly
numerous
fees
imposed
landfill
operators
dumping
fee
waste
et
seq
confirmed
sporhase
nebraska
ex
rel
douglas
state
may
enact
comprehensive
regulatory
system
address
environmental
problem
threat
natural
resources
within
confines
commerce
clause
context
threatened
ground
water
depletion
stated
bviously
state
imposes
severe
withdrawal
use
restrictions
citizens
discriminating
interstate
commerce
seeks
prevent
uncontrolled
transfer
water
state
point
made
clean
safe
environment
cases
state
imposes
restrictions
ability
citizens
dispose
solid
waste
effort
promote
clean
safe
environment
discriminating
interstate
commerce
preventing
uncontrolled
transfer
solid
waste
state
availability
safe
landfill
disposal
sites
oregon
occur
chance
regulatory
scheme
state
oregon
inspects
landfill
sites
monitors
waste
streams
promotes
recycling
imposes
per
ton
disposal
fee
waste
et
seq
effort
curb
threat
residents
harm
environment
create
health
safety
problems
excessive
unmonitored
solid
waste
disposal
depletion
clean
safe
environment
follow
oregon
must
accept
waste
landfills
without
sharing
disposal
costs
commerce
clause
require
state
abide
outcome
natural
resource
indicia
good
publicly
produced
owned
state
may
favor
citizens
times
shortage
sporhase
supra
shortage
available
landfill
space
upon
us
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
comes
accompanying
health
safety
hazards
flowing
improper
disposal
solid
wastes
long
acknowledged
distinction
economic
protectionism
health
safety
regulation
promulgated
oregon
see
hood
sons
du
mond
far
neutralizing
economic
situation
oregon
producers
producers
analysis
turns
commerce
clause
head
oregon
neighbors
operate
competitive
advantage
oregon
counterparts
produce
solid
waste
reckless
abandon
avoid
paying
concomitant
state
taxes
develop
new
landfills
clean
retired
landfill
sites
understand
solid
waste
article
commerce
philadelphia
commodity
sold
marketplace
rather
disposed
cost
state
petitioners
buy
garbage
put
landfills
solid
waste
producers
pay
petitioners
take
waste
oregon
solid
waste
producers
compete
businesses
sale
solid
waste
thus
fees
alter
price
product
competing
products
common
purchasers
anything
striking
fees
works
disadvantage
oregon
businesses
alone
pay
nondisposal
fees
associated
solid
waste
landfill
siting
landfill
insurance
cover
environmental
accidents
transportation
improvement
costs
associated
waste
shipped
state
recognized
collection
disposal
solid
wastes
continue
primarily
function
state
regional
local
agencies
quoting
ed
today
leaves
two
options
become
dumper
ship
much
waste
possible
less
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
populated
state
become
dumpee
stoically
accept
waste
densely
populated
asserts
state
offered
safety
health
reasons
discouraging
flow
solid
waste
oregon
ante
disagree
availability
environmentally
sound
landfill
space
proper
disposal
solid
waste
strike
justifiable
safety
health
rationales
fee
far
back
turn
century
recognized
control
collection
disposal
solid
waste
legitimate
nonarbitrary
exercise
police
powers
protect
health
safety
see
california
reduction
sanitary
reduction
works
holding
exclusive
privilege
one
company
dispose
garbage
city
county
san
francisco
void
taking
property
householders
public
use
without
compensation
gardner
michigan
holding
property
rights
individuals
must
subordinated
general
good
owner
garbage
suffers
loss
destruction
compensated
therefor
common
benefit
secured
regulation
requiring
garbage
destroyed
exercising
legitimate
police
powers
regulating
solid
waste
disposal
oregon
needlessly
obstruct
ing
interstate
trade
attempt
ing
place
position
economic
isolation
maine
taylor
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
upholding
maine
ban
importation
live
baitfish
ground
serves
legitimate
governmental
interest
protecting
maine
indigenous
fish
population
parasites
prevalent
baitfish
quite
contrary
oregon
accepts
waste
part
comprehensive
solid
waste
regulatory
program
retains
broad
regulatory
authority
protect
health
safety
citizens
integrity
natural
resources
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
ibid
moreover
congress
also
recognized
taxes
effective
method
discouraging
consumption
natural
resources
contexts
cf
supp
iv
tax
chemicals
ed
supp
iv
gas
guzzler
excise
tax
nothing
change
analysis
natural
resource
landfill
space
created
regulated
state
first
place
sweeping
ruling
makes
distinction
publicly
privately
owned
landfills
rejects
argument
user
fee
cases
apply
context
since
landfills
owned
petitioners
private
user
fee
analysis
applies
charge
imposed
state
use
transportation
facilities
services
ante
quoting
commonwealth
edison
montana
rather
stopping
however
majority
goes
note
even
oregon
surcharge
viewed
user
fee
sustained
given
discriminates
interstate
commerce
ante
quoting
airport
authority
dist
delta
airlines
need
make
dubious
assertion
specifically
left
unanswered
question
whether
state
local
government
regulate
disposal
solid
waste
landfills
owned
government
philadelphia
supra
undoubtedly
faced
question
directly
future
roughly
percent
landfills
receiving
municipal
solid
waste
state
locally
owned
environmental
protection
agency
resource
conservation
recovery
act
subtitle
study
phase
report
table
noted
timber
development
wunnicke
state
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
acting
market
participant
rather
market
regulator
dormant
commerce
clause
places
limitation
activities
see
also
wyoming
oklahoma
similarly
state
owned
operated
park
recreational
facility
allowed
charge
differential
fees
users
resource
see
baldwin
fish
game
montana
upholding
montana
higher
nonresident
elk
hunting
license
fees
compensate
state
conservation
expenditures
taxes
residents
pay
recently
upheld
differential
fees
reasonableness
standard
northwest
airlines
county
kent
despite
fact
fees
precisely
tied
costs
services
provided
publicly
owned
airport
relied
commerce
clause
analysis
evansville
supra
stated
evansville
least
long
toll
based
fair
approximation
use
privilege
use
neither
discriminatory
interstate
commerce
excessive
comparison
governmental
benefit
conferred
pass
constitutional
muster
even
though
formula
might
reflect
exactly
relative
use
state
facilities
individual
users
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
begrudgingly
concedes
interstate
commerce
may
made
pay
way
ante
yet
finds
oregon
nominal
surcharge
exact
share
interstate
commerce
ibid
escapes
additional
per
week
cost
average
solid
waste
producer
constitutes
anything
type
incidental
effects
interstate
commerce
endorsed
majority
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
evenhanded
regulations
imposing
incidental
effects
interstate
commerce
must
upheld
unless
burden
imposed
commerce
clearly
excessive
relation
putative
local
benefits
pike
bruce
church
majority
finds
per
week
beyond
pale
one
left
wonder
possibly
contemplated
stated
absence
conflicting
legislation
congress
residuum
power
state
make
laws
governing
matters
local
concern
nevertheless
measure
affect
interstate
commerce
even
extent
regulate
hunt
washington
state
apple
advertising
quoting
southern
pacific
arizona
ex
rel
sullivan
state
oregon
prohibiting
export
solid
waste
neighboring
asking
neighbors
pay
fair
share
use
oregon
landfill
sites
see
nothing
commerce
clause
compels
less
densely
populated
oregon
waste
systems
environmental
serve
dumping
grounds
neighbors
suffering
attendant
risks
solid
waste
landfills
present
deciding
otherwise
limits
dwindling
options
available
contend
environmental
health
safety
political
challenges
posed
problem
solid
waste
disposal
modern
society
foregoing
reasons
respectfully
dissent
surcharge
composed
following
identified
costs
statewide
activities
reducing
environmental
risks
improving
solid
waste
management
reimbursements
state
tax
credits
public
subsidies
solid
waste
reduction
activities
related
review
certification
waste
reduction
recycling
plans
increased
environmental
liability
lost
disposal
capacity
publicly
supported
infrastructure
nuisance
impacts
transportation
pet
cert
per
ton
fee
imposed
waste
exceeds
per
ton
fee
imposed
waste
per
ton
one
ton
equals
pounds
assuming
hypothetical
nonresident
generates
pounds
garbage
per
month
ton
nonresident
garbage
bill
increase
per
month
page