Air Conditioning & Refrigeration Institute v. Energy Resources Conservation & Development Commission

dissenting:

The statutes at issue, inferentially the result of negotiation and compromise, deliberately spell out what is preempted by federal law. State regulations preempted are those that require “disclosure of information with respect to the energy use, energy efficiency or water use ... other than the information required under section 6294 of this title.” 42 U.S.C. § 6297 (a)(1)(B). Where federal regulations do not require disclosure of such information to the federal government, a state is expressly prohibited from requiring such disclosure to consumers or to a state authority.

The majority opinion holds' that the prohibition applies only to disclosure to consumers. The holding is a radical reduction of the key statutory term. “Disclosure,” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (3d ed.1993) informs us, is “the act or an instance of opening up to view, knowledge or comprehension.” Disclosure to a state agency is as much an opening up to view of the data as disclosure to consumers would be. Congress has chosen a broad term to prevent the imposition by a state of the -burden of disclosure. Just as the meaning of “disclose” is “to expose to view” or “to make known,” so…

AMENDED OPINION

This case presents the question of whether federal law preempts California’s appliance regulations requiring appliance manufacturers to submit data about their appliances to California’s Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission (“Commission”), mark their appliances with basic information such as brand name and energy performance, and be subjected to related compliance and enforcement rules. We conclude that federal law does not preempt California’s regulations. We therefore reverse the district court’s decision finding the regulations *495 preempted and permanently enjoining the Commission from enforcing these regulations, vacate the injunction, and remand.

I

California boasts an extensive and laudable appliance efficiency program. As part of California’s program, the Commission has, since 1977, required manufacturers to submit data to it. The data collected by the Commission pursuant to section 1606 of Title 20 of the California Code of Regulations is maintained in an electronic database, which contains information on over 135,000 appliance models. The Commission’s database provided the foundation of information for the Environmental Protection…

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

AIR CONDITIONING AND 

REFRIGERATION INSTITUTE; GAS

APPLIANCE MANUFACTURERS

ASSOCIATION; ASSOCIATION OF HOME

APPLIANCE MANUFACTURERS;

NATIONAL ELECTRICAL

MANUFACTURERS ASSOCIATION, No. 03-16621 Plaintiffs-Appellees, D.C. No. v.  CV-02-02437-

WBS/PAN

ENERGY RESOURCES

CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT AMENDED

COMMISSION; WILLIAM J. KEESE, OPINION

Chairman; ROBERT PERNELL, Commissioner; AURTHUR H. ROSENFELD, Commissioner; JAMES

D. BOYD, Commissioner; JOHN L.

GEESMAN, Commissioner, Defendants-Appellants.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California William B. Shubb, Chief Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted November 1, 2004—San Francisco, California

Opinion Filed February 3, 2005 Amended June 3, 2005

Before: Betty B. Fletcher, John T. Noonan, and Sidney R. Thomas, Circuit Judges.

6091 6092 AIR CONDITIONING v. ENERGY RESOURCES CONSERVATION Opinion by Judge Thomas; Dissent by Judge Noonan 6094 AIR CONDITIONING v. ENERGY RESOURCES CONSERVATION

COUNSEL

William M. Chamberlain, Jonathan…