108 F.4th 144
3d Cir.2024Background
- Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company (Transco) sought to construct and expand an interstate natural gas pipeline, requiring permits from both federal (FERC) and Pennsylvania state environmental agencies.
- Transco obtained the necessary state permits, including a Water Quality Certification and three "Sub-Permits" from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP).
- Several environmental advocacy groups administratively appealed PADEP’s issuance of these permits to the Environmental Hearing Board (EHB), as permitted by Pennsylvania law; their appeal did not automatically stay the project.
- Transco initiated a federal lawsuit, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to block the administrative appeal, asserting that the Natural Gas Act preempts Pennsylvania's administrative appeal process.
- The District Court denied Transco’s preliminary injunction motion, finding no likely success on the merits and no irreparable harm.
- On expedited appeal, the Third Circuit affirmed the denial, holding state administrative appeal processes are not preempted by the Natural Gas Act in this context.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Natural Gas Act expressly preempts PA’s administrative appeals of pipeline permits | Natural Gas Act gives exclusive federal jurisdiction; state appeals are preempted. | State appeals are not "civil actions" within the preempted scope. | No express preemption; EHB proceedings are not civil actions. |
| Whether field preemption applies to all state regulation of interstate pipelines | Natural Gas Act occupies the field, barring all state administrative review. | Natural Gas Act contains an anti-preemption clause preserving certain state powers. | No field preemption due to explicit anti-preemption clause. |
| Whether obstacle preemption applies due to potential delay or interference with federal pipeline approval | State appeals hinder the Act’s purpose of streamlined federal review. | State appeals fit within the regulatory structure allowed by federal law. | No obstacle preemption; state review processes are allowable. |
| Whether federal courts can review EHB decisions regarding permits | Federal courts lack jurisdiction over EHB’s administrative outcomes. | EHB decisions are reviewable as conditioned, approved, or denied permits under federal law. | EHB rulings are reviewable by federal appellate courts. |
Key Cases Cited
- Schneidewind v. ANR Pipeline Co., 485 U.S. 293 (field preemption analysis of Natural Gas Act; field not entirely preempted here due to anti-preemption provision)
- Borough of Bordentown v. FERC, 903 F.3d 234 (3d Cir. 2018) (administrative appeals of state permitting decisions are not preempted by the Natural Gas Act)
- Munaf v. Geren, 553 U.S. 674 (scope of preliminary injunction review and discretion in federal courts)
- Amoco Prod. Co. v. Village of Gambell, 480 U.S. 531 (preliminary injunction standard)
- Winter v. NRDC, 555 U.S. 7 (articulation of the standards for preliminary injunctive relief)