Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

The Energy Policy and Conservation Act – Still – Preempts Berkeley’s Ban on New Natural Gas Connections

By Seth Jaffe on January 9, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

Last week, the 9th Circuit voted against rehearing en banc its decision from last April finding the City of Berkeley’s ban on natural gas connections in new construction to be preempted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.  Judge Friedland, joined by seven other judges (and three senior judges!) dissented from the denial, writing a lengthy opinion fairly explicitly directed at judges from other Courts of Appeal that might hear cases addressing similar bans. 

Here’s the crux of the disagreement.  Judge Bumatay, writing for the majority, stated that:

States and localities can’t skirt the text of broad preemption provisions by doing indirectly what Congress says they can’t do directly. EPCA would no doubt preempt an ordinance that directly prohibits the use of covered natural gas appliances in new buildings. So Berkeley can’t evade preemption by merely moving up one step in the energy chain and banning natural gas piping within those buildings. Otherwise, the ability to use covered products is “meaningless” if consumers can’t access the natural gas available at the meter on the premises.

Judge Friedland disagreed:

EPCA would not preempt a direct prohibition on natural gas appliances enacted for the reasons Berkeley had here. Even such a direct prohibition would not affect the “energy use” of any appliance.

The basis for Judge Friedland’s decision is difficult to summarize in a short blog post, but at its heart is the proposition that “energy use” is a technical term that fundamentally measures the theoretical efficiency of an appliance, without regard to how much energy the appliance in fact consumes.  Thus, Judge Friedland concludes that EPCA does not preempt Berkeley’s ban, because the ban does not regulate the “energy use” of appliances.

Now that is throwing down the gauntlet.  However, putting my personal views aside and focusing purely on whether most appellate judges, and particularly most Supreme Court judges, would agree, consider me skeptical.  Is prohibiting consumers from using gas appliances really not regulating the energy use of those appliances?

The post The Energy Policy and Conservation Act – Still – Preempts Berkeley’s Ban on New Natural Gas Connections first appeared on Law and the Environment.

  • Posted in:
    Environmental
  • Blog:
    Law & The Environment
  • Organization:
    Foley Hoag LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Tennessee Insurance Litigation Blog
  • Claims & Sustains
  • New Jersey Restraining Order Lawyers
  • New Jersey Gun Lawyers
  • Blog of Reason
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo