Background
The South Coast Air Quality Management District adopted an amended rule to phase in zero nitrous oxide emission standards for certain appliances. The District determined this was necessary to comply with federal ozone standards in a region with the worst smog in the country. Industry groups challenged the rule, arguing it was preempted by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.
The court’s reasoning
The court found that the Energy Policy and Conservation Act was designed to create uniform energy efficiency standards, not to interfere with states’ ability to regulate emissions under the Clean Air Act. The text of the Act contains no mention of emissions regulations. The court distinguished the California Restaurant Association decision, noting that the plaintiff in that case had conceded that nitrogen oxide emissions regulations do not concern energy use. Additionally, the facial challenge failed because the rule applies to process heaters, which are not listed as covered products under the Act.
The dissent
Just like in California Restaurant Ass’n v. City of Berkeley, EPCA preempts the District’s rule on nitrous oxide emissions because it similarly regulates energy use of a covered product.
Judge Kenneth K. Lee
What it means going forward
The ruling allows the South Coast Air Quality Management District and other jurisdictions to enforce zero-emissions standards for appliances as part of their strategies to meet federal air quality goals without fear of preemption by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act.