The D.C. Circuit vacated a 2022 EPA order requiring chemical manufacturers/processors to test the chronic toxicity of 1,1,2-trichloroethane pursuant to TSCA. A trade organization representing seven entities challenged the order, arguing EPA failed to comply with several statutory requirements. The court found that to the extent EPA relied on non-public portions of the administrative record, the Agency failed to provide substantial evidence that met its statutory mandate. The court vacated the order and remanded to EPA to satisfy the mandate with "substantial evidence in the record taken as a whole."

The D.C. Circuit dismissed petitions to review EPA actions applying and enforcing regulations that govern disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCRs). Owners and operators of coal-fired power plants argued EPA's actions amended existing legislative rules governing disposal of CCRs and that the Agency was required to promulgate the amendments according to the APA's notice-and-comment procedures. The court found it lacked jurisdiction under RCRA because the challenged documents straightforwardly applied existing regulations and did not amount to reviewable agency action. It dismissed the petitions for lack of jurisdiction.

The Third Circuit affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction motion in a lawsuit concerning an administrative appeal of permits for a pipeline expansion in Pennsylvania. A state agency had issued required permits to the company to begin construction, but environmental groups administratively appealed the issuance of three of the permits to another state agency, as allowed by state law. The company sued, arguing the Natural Gas Act preempted state law allowing an administrative appeal, expressly as well as impliedly through field and obstacle preemption, and moved for preliminary injunction. The district court rejected the preemption arguments and denied the company's motion. The appellate court found none of the theories of preemption advanced by the company or the state agency that issued the permits applied here, and affirmed denial of the motion.

A district court granted 16 states' motion to preliminarily enjoin the Biden Administration's temporary pause of pending decisions on liquefied natural gas exports. The states argued the pause violated the Natural Gas Act and exceeded statutory authority, and sought to stay or enjoin it. The court found the pause had irreparably harmed the states by way of loss of revenues, market share, and deprivation of a procedural right. It granted the motion for preliminary injunction and ordered the pause be stayed in its entirety, effective immediately.

A district court denied summary judgment for environmental groups in a challenge to BLM's management plan for a recreation area in Montana. The groups argued BLM violated NEPA, FLPMA, and the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) when it developed the plan, and sought a preliminary injunction. The court found BLM assessed environmental impacts and recreational usage as required by NEPA, complied with the Butte resource management plan's management directives as required by FLPMA, and adhered to FACA because the recreationalists and homeowners surveyed did not constitute an advisory committee. It denied summary judgment for the groups and granted BLM's cross-motion.

A district court adopted in part, modified in part, and rejected in part a magistrate judge's findings and recommendations in a challenge to FWS' biological opinion (BiOp) for Flathead National Forest's 2018 revised land management plan. Environmental groups argued FWS and the Forest Service violated the ESA by failing to consider threats to grizzly bears and bull trout. The magistrate judge recommended that summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part for the groups, and that the revised BiOp be remanded without vacatur for further consideration. The court found the groups were entitled to summary judgment on their claims regarding grizzly bears insofar as FWS failed to address the exclusion of unauthorized motor use from road density calculations and offered an explanation for its decision to exclude impassable roads from total motorized route density that ran counter to the evidence before it, and on their claims regarding bull trout insofar as FWS failed to address its decision to abandon the culvert removal requirement with respect to impassable roads. It further found the groups were entitled to summary judgment insofar as the Forest Service relied on the flawed provisions of the revised BiOp. The court remanded the revised BiOp without vacatur to the agencies for further consideration.

The D.C. Circuit dismissed a petition to review DOE's decision to remove a free-trade restriction on liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. An environmental group challenged the removal, arguing a Texas LNG terminal's increased flexibility to select export countries will cause its actual exports to increase, thus causing increased shipping traffic and harm to the aesthetic and recreational interests of a group member that lives near the facility. The court found the group failed to offer evidence that the decision was substantially likely to increase export volumes, and dismissed the petition for lack of standing.

The D.C. Circuit affirmed a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) order licensing a new satellite system. An environmental group argued the FCC's decision not to perform an environmental review of light pollution and atmospheric effects of the system violated NEPA. The court found the license fell within a categorical exclusion, and that an EA was required only if the Commission found the license could have a significant environmental impact. It held the FCC reasonably concluded that no significant environmental impact was present, so an EA was not required. It affirmed the order licensing the satellite system.

The D.C. Circuit granted in part and denied in part petitions to review FERC's authorization of construction and operation of liquefied natural gas facilities in southwestern Louisiana. Environmental groups argued FERC did not properly address NEPA and Natural Gas Act requirements. The court found FERC inadequately explained its failure to determine the environmental significance of greenhouse gas emissions and failed to adequately assess cumulative effects of nitrogen dioxide emissions, but that it satisfied its obligation to consider alternatives. The court granted the petitions in part, denied them in part, and remanded to FERC for further consideration.

The Ninth Circuit denied a motion for rehearing or reconsideration en banc of its mandamus order in a climate liability suit brought by 21 young people against the U.S. government.