18 U.S.C. § 1366

Destruction of an energy facility

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Whoever knowingly and willfully damages or attempts or conspires to damage the property of an energy facility in an amount that in fact exceeds or would if the attempted offense had been completed, or if the object of the conspiracy had been achieved, have exceeded $100,000, or damages or attempts or conspires to damage the property of an energy facility in any amount and causes or attempts or conspires to cause a significant interruption or impairment of a function of an energy facility, shall be punishable by a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both.(b) Whoever knowingly and willfully damages or attempts to damage the property of an energy facility in an amount that in fact exceeds or would if the attempted offense had been completed have exceeded $5,000 shall be punishable by a fine under this title, or imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.(c) For purposes of this section, the term “energy facility” means a facility that is involved in the production, storage, transmission, or distribution of electricity, fuel, or another form or source of energy, or research, development, or demonstration facilities relating thereto, regardless of whether such facility is still under construction or is otherwise not functioning, except a facility subject to the jurisdiction, administration, or in the custody of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or an interstate gas pipeline facility as defined in section 60101 of title 49.(d) Whoever is convicted of a violation of subsection (a) or (b) that has resulted in the death of any person shall be subject to imprisonment for any term of years or life.(Added Pub. L. 98–473, title II, § 1011(a), Oct. 12, 1984, 98 Stat. 2141, § 1365; renumbered § 1366, Pub. L. 99–646, § 29(a), Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3598; amended Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXV, §§ 3545, 3546, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4926; Pub. L. 103–272, § 5(e)(9), July 5, 1994, 108 Stat. 1374; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXII, § 320903(d)(3), title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(C), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2125, 2148; Pub. L. 107–56, title VIII, § 810(b), Oct. 26, 2001, 115 Stat. 380; Pub. L. 109–177, title IV, § 406(c)(2), Mar. 9, 2006, 120 Stat. 245.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2006—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 109–177 substituted “attempts or conspires” for “attempts” wherever appearing and inserted “, or if the object of the conspiracy had been achieved,” after “the attempted offense had been completed”.

2001—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–56, § 810(b)(1), substituted “20 years” for “ten years”.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 107–56, § 810(b)(2), added subsec. (d).

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–322, § 330016(2)(C), substituted “fine under this title” for “fine of not more than $50,000”.

Pub. L. 103–322, § 320903(d)(3), inserted “or attempts to damage” after “damages” in two places, “or would if the attempted offense had been completed have exceeded” after “exceeds”, and “or attempts to cause” after “causes”.

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 103–322, § 330016(2)(C), substituted “fine under this title” for “fine of not more than $25,000”.

Pub. L. 103–322, § 320903(d)(3)(A), (C), inserted “or attempts to damage” after “damages” and “or would if the attempted offense had been completed have exceeded” after “exceeds”.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103–272 substituted “an interstate gas pipeline facility as defined in section 60101 of title 49” for “interstate transmission facilities, as defined in section 2 of the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968”.

1990—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 101–647, § 3545, substituted “section 2 of the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968” for “49 U.S.C. 1671”.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 101–647, § 3546, struck out subsec. (d) which read as follows: “The table of contents for chapter 65 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new item: ‘1365 Destruction of an energy facility.’ ”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1991–2026 · leading case: United States v. Randy Graham

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Randy Graham (2001) ca6 “§ 1362 (willfully or maliciously injuring or destroying or attempting to destroy government-owned or operated means of communication); (5) 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (knowingly damaging or attempting to damage an energy facility); and (6) 18 U.”

United States v. Reumayr (2008) nmd · cites it 5× “§ 924 (c), Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Crime of Violence; and 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (a), Attempt to Destroy an Energy Facility.”

United States v. Imran Mandhai (2004) ca11 “§ 844 (i), (n) (Count 1), and inducing Jokhan to damage *1247 the property of an energy facility in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (Count 2). He pled guilty to Count 1 in exchange for dismissal of Count 2, and a government agreement to recommend a three-level downward adjustment…”

United States v. Allen Ray Sharp, United States of America v. Danny Howard Fout (1991) ca4 “*173 § 844(i) (property damage by use of explosives); 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (destruction of an energy facility); and 26 U.”

United States v. Jason Woodring (2022) ca8 “Jason Woodring pled guilty to destruction of an energy facility, use of fire to commit a felony, and possession of a firearm/ammunition by an unlawful user of a controlled substance in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (a), 18 U.S.C. § 844 (h), and 18 U.”

United States v. Smith (2021) ca10 · cites it 2× “” 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (b). failed to establish probable cause.”

United States v. McRae (2021) ca10 “2 The FBI later identified McRae as the shooter, and in May 2019 he pleaded guilty to one count of destruction of an energy facility, see 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (a). The district court sentenced McRae to 96-months’ imprisonment and a 36-month term of supervised release.”

United States v. McRae (2022) ca10 “Appellate Case: 21-4092 Document: 010110658713 Date Filed: 03/17/2022 Page: 2 BACKGROUND In 2019, McRae pleaded guilty to one count of destruction of an energy facility in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (a). The district court sentenced him to 96 months’ imprisonment and…”

United States v. Jessica Reznicek (2022) ca8 “She was charged with and pleaded guilty to conspiracy to damage an energy facility, 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (a). Over Reznicek’s objection, the district court 1 applied a terrorism enhancement under U.”

United States v. Donald Hurst, Jr. (2026) ca4 “, pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to an information charging him with destruction of an energy facility, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1366 (a), and possession of child sexual abuse materials involving a prepubescent minor, in violation of 18 U.”

United States v. Tony Boguszewicz (2011) ca5 “Boguszewicz argues that the district court lacked jurisdiction to enter judgment based on a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1366 because it does not apply to moveable equipment that is a component of a drilling rig that is at a location for the purpose of having maintenance and service…”

United States v. Lewis (2006) ca9 “The relevant Guidelines provision is defined broadly enough to encompass both 18 U.S.C. § 1366 and Alaska Stat. § 11.46.”

Show all 13 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.