The court holds that the district court erred in holding that environmental groups lack standing in their Federal Water Pollution Control Act citizen suit challenging the Department of Energy's (DOE's) proposed reopening of a nuclear reactor at the Savannah River site in South Carolina. The reactor ...

The court denies a suggestion for rehearing en banc of its prior decision in Natural Resources Defense Council v. Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, 22 ELR 21381, which held that the Board's regulation allowing it to close meetings, or portions of meetings, concerning its recommendations relat...

The court holds that the Federal Power Act (FPA) preempts state regulation of a federally licensed hydroelectric power project in a national forest in California. The court first holds that the action is ripe for review even though plaintiff dam operator has not completed the state permitting proces...

The court holds that timber companies and an industry trade association lack standing to bring claims under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and the National Forest Management Act (NFMA) challenging actions by the U.S. Forest Service to protect the red-...

The court holds that environmental groups and private individuals are not entitled to a preliminary injunction prohibiting the U.S. Forest Service from implementing animal damage control (ADC) plans to reduce coyote populations in the Dixie and the Fishlake National Forests in Utah. The ADC programs...

The court holds that an electric power cooperative, metal corporations, and a nonprofit corporation representing consumer-owned electric utilities lack standing to challenge the decision of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and other federal agencies to augment water flow over dams on the...

The court holds that a challenge by the state of Nebraska to the siting of a regional low-level radioactive waste storage facility in Boyd County, Nebraska, is barred by a regional compact's time limits on suits and the doctrines of estoppel and laches. Ruling on a motion for summary judgment by the...

The court holds that the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) does not violate the Free Exercise or Establishment Clauses of the U.S. Constitution and, therefore, affirmed an individual's conviction for possessing eagle feathers without a permit. The BGEPA prohibits the taking or possession ...

The court holds that the take provision of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), as applied to landowners, does not violate the U.S. Commerce Clause. After purchasing property, the landowners sought to develop it, but were prevented from doing so because of the restrictions placed on the land under the ...

The court holds that the Endangered Species Act's (ESA's) application to private lands in order to protect an endangered species that lives entirely within one state does not violate the U.S. Commerce Clause. The court first holds that the regulated activity in question—construction of a housing d...