Description: Pipeline operator's challenge to coastal city's local law prohibiting the loading of oil on tankers.
-
Portland Pipe Line Corp. v. City of South Portland
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 07/15/2021 Judgment Download Appeal voluntarily dismissed. 07/15/2021 Stipulation Download Stipulation of voluntary dismissal filed. Pipeline Company Voluntarily Dismissed Appeal in Case Challenging South Portland Ordinance. On July 15, 2021, a company that operates a crude oil pipeline system running from South Portland, Maine, to oil refineries in Quebec filed a stipulation of voluntary dismissal in the First Circuit Court of Appeals to voluntarily dismiss its appeal of a district court decision upholding a South Portland ordinance that prohibited bulk loading of crude oil onto marine tank vessels. The Portland Press Herald reported that the pipeline company said its parent company decided to dismiss the appeal because the company did not have current plans to reverse the flow in the pipeline to bring crude oil from Canada to South Portland for export. 06/28/2021 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by the United States as amicus curiae in support of appellees. 01/10/2020 Opinion Download Questions concerning state law preemption certified to Maine Law Court. First Circuit Certified State Law Preemption Questions in Case Challenging Local Ordinance Prohibiting Crude Oil Loading at Harbor. In a pipeline operator’s appeal of a district court’s rejection of its challenge to a City of South Portland ordinance prohibiting bulk loading of crude oil onto vessels in the City’s harbor, the First Circuit Court of Appeals certified three questions to Maine’s high court concerning potential preemption of the ordinance by state law. The First Circuit said it would “sidestep the federal quagmire for the moment” in accordance with “well-settled constitutional avoidance doctrine.” Therefore, instead of addressing the domestic and foreign Commerce Clause and federal preemption claims raised by the operator, the First Circuit asked the Maine Law Court to weigh in on whether the Maine Department of Environmental Protection’s 2010 renewal license for the pipeline operator’s oil terminal facility was an “order” with preemptive effect under the Maine Coastal Conveyance Act (CCA), a statute that imposes a licensure requirement for oil transfers in and around state waters. If the renewal license was an order, the First Circuit asked the state court to address whether the CCA expressly preempted the ordinance challenged in this case. In addition, the First Circuit asked the Maine Law Court also to address whether the CCA impliedly preempted the local ordinance. 09/23/2019 Order Download Order issued directing filing of supplemental briefs. 04/26/2019 Reply Download Reply brief filed by appellants. 04/22/2019 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by 13 states and the District of Columbia as amici curiae in support of appellees. 04/22/2019 Amicus Brief Download Amicus brief filed by International Municipal Lawyers Association, and legal scholars, in support of defendants-appellees and affirmance. 04/12/2019 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amici curiae Conservation Law Foundation et al. in support of defendants-appellees and affirmance. 04/05/2019 Brief Download Brief filed by appellees. 03/13/2019 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers et al. as amici curiae in support of appellants and reversal. 03/13/2019 Amicus Brief Download Brief filed by amici curiae Portland Pilots, Inc. et al. in support of plaintiffs-appellants. 03/13/2019 Amicus Brief Download Amicus brief filed by Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America in support of plaintiffs-appellants. 02/12/2019 Brief Download Brief filed by appellants. -
Portland Pipe Line Corp. v. City of South Portland
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 08/24/2018 Order Download Judgment granted in favor of City of South Portland. Federal Court in Maine Rejected Pipeline Operator’s Challenge to Local Law Prohibiting Crude Oil Loading at South Portland Harbor. The federal district court for the District of Maine ruled that the City of South Portland’s ordinance prohibiting the loading of crude oil onto tankers and related activities and structures did not violate the dormant Commerce Clause or the Foreign Commerce Clause. The ordinance, known as the “Clean Skies Ordinance,” was adopted after a pipeline operator (the plaintiff in this case) made plans to reverse the flow in a pipeline that extended from the harbor in South Portland to refineries in Quebec so that instead of transporting crude oil from the harbor to the refineries, the pipeline could transport crude oil from Canada to the harbor for shipment. Concerns regarding local pollution and other local impacts were raised in response to these plans, as well as concerns regarding climate change. The Clear Skies Ordinance’s stated purposes are to “encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the municipality”; “to protect citizens and visitors from harmful effects caused by air pollutants”; “to promote a wholesome home environment”; and “to conserve natural resources.” The district court found that the ordinance did not regulate extraterritorially even if it had effects on the functions of the pipeline company’s infrastructure outside the city. The court was not persuaded by the pipeline operator’s arguments that the ordinance had an “extraterritorial purpose,” including arguments that members of the public had cited the pipeline’s potential impacts outside the city, including concerns about continued reliance on fossil fuels causing global climate change. The court said the “vast majority” of evidence regarding support of the ordinance focused on local impacts and that “[c]ourts have upheld other statutes more clearly motivated by extraterritorial concerns, as long as the regulatory effect did not control out-of-state transactions.” The court also found that the ordinance did not discriminate against interstate or foreign commerce on its face or in practical effect and that the operator had not shown that the primary purpose of the ordinance was to discriminate against such commerce. In making this finding, the court noted that while several members of the City Council had “expressed their desire to see reduced reliance on fossil fuels in the economy in general through more renewables,” they “also disclaimed an ability to accomplish that goal with an ordinance … and focused their comments on the developmental impacts within South Portland.” The court also found that the ordinance did not impose burdens on foreign or interstate commerce that were clearly excessive in relation to the putative local benefit. Finally, the court found that the ordinance did not impermissibly interfere with the federal government’s ability to speak with “one voice” when regulating commerce with foreign governments. 12/29/2017 Order Download City's motion for summary judgment granted in part and denied in part and plaintiff's motion for summary judgment denied. Maine Federal Court Rejected Most Claims in Pipeline Operator’s Challenge to City’s Ban on Loading Crude Oil on Tankers; Dormant Commerce Claim Can Proceed. A federal district court in Maine ruled for the City of South Portland on all but one claim brought by a pipeline operator to challenge the City’s “Clear Skies” ordinance, which prohibits loading crude oil on tankers in South Portland harbor. The pipeline operator currently pumps oil from South Portland to Montreal to bring the oil to refineries but asserted that it had plans to reverse the flow of oil. The pipeline operator said the City’s prohibition on loading crude oil on tankers would prevent it from implementing those plans. While the Clear Skies ordinance’s legislative findings focused on local air quality and land use impacts, City Council members also cited the need to take local action to address climate change and the ordinance’s potential effects on “the health and safety of other global residents.” The court ruled that the prohibition on loading crude oil was not preempted by the Pipeline Safety Act (because the prohibition was not a safety standard), by the Port and Waterways Safety Act, or by maritime law. The court also found that the prohibition did not impermissibly intrude on the federal government’s federal affairs power. In addition, the court rejected a class-of-one equal protection claim and a claim that the ordinance violated the Due Process clause based on the void-for-vagueness doctrine. The court also concluded that the City could rationally have concluded that the ordinance was consistent with its comprehensive plan and ruled that Maine’s Oil Discharge Prevention Law did not preempt the ordinance. The court concluded, however, that genuine disputes of material fact regarding the ordinance’s purpose and practical effects on interstate and foreign commerce prevented summary judgment on the plaintiffs’ dormant Commerce Clause claim. -
Portland Pipe Line Corp. v. City of South Portland
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 10/29/2020 Opinion Download Certified questions answered. Maine High Court Said State Law Would Not Preempt Local Ordinance Prohibiting Crude Oil Loading. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court answered certified questions from the First Circuit concerning state law preemption of a City of South Portland ordinance that prohibited bulk loading of crude oil onto vessels in the City’s harbor. A federal district court rejected a challenge to the ordinance in 2018. The Maine high court said a license issued by the Maine Department of Environmental Protection for a marine oil terminal facility was not an “order” within the meaning of the Maine Coastal Conveyance Act that could have preemptive effect and, moreover, that the license was not in conflict with the ordinance, even if it could be considered an order. The court also concluded that the Coastal Conveyance Act as a whole did not preempt the City’s ordinance by implication.