ELR Citation: 51 ELR 20138
No(s). 19-1023 (D.C. Cir. Jul 16, 2021)

The D.C. Circuit granted in part environmental groups' petition to review EPA's 2019 rule setting annual renewable fuel volume levels under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program. The groups argued that EPA's "aggregate compliance approach" for determining whether biofuel qualifies as renewable fuel contravened the text and purpose of the CAA; that the Agency's conclusion that the rule would have no effect on endangered species or their critical habitat, and its consequent failure to consult with FWS, was arbitrary and capricious; and that its decision not to reduce applicable volumes pursuant to its general waiver authority to prevent severe environmental harm was flawed. The court found the challenge to EPA's aggregate compliance approach untimely, but concluded that the Agency's effects determination was arbitrary and capricious because its own triennial report undermined the determination that there was no relationship between the RFS program, biofuel feedstock production, and land use changes that might harm listed species or critical habitat. Because the effects determination was defective, its decision regarding severe environmental harm, which relied on the same faulty analysis, was also arbitrary and capricious. The court granted in part the environmental groups' petition for review and remanded without vacatur the 2019 rule for EPA to reassess in relevant part.