Congress has chosen in the past not to intervene directly in hazardous waste siting, and it is unlikely that they will change that course. The responsibility for siting new or expanded facilities has therefore become either a local one (from a land use perspective, the treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) facility is treated as another conditional use for an industrial zone) or through preemption, a state function. Since Michigan's enactment of Mich. Comp. Laws §299.501-526 in 1978, all major industrial states and most others have passed some form of siting legislation. Each statute describes a number of functions; I have selected several for discussion. All may not be found in a single statute, but they are common to most recent siting legislation.

Many statutes include a planning function to coordinate the need for new sites with those available, and then distribute that need around the state. The appointment of ad hoc siting boards responsible for making the siting decision is also common. At some point in the process, a decision about preemption of local land use authority must be made. A number of states have chosen to preempt local land use authority, while a number have chosen to preserve it. Still others employ subtle variations of preemption to maintain state control over the siting process. In addition to the usual technical assessment, many state statutes provide for enhanced public participation throughout the entire siting process. Non-regulatory approaches, including negotiation, bribes,¹ mediation, and arbitration, have also been adopted.