Case Explained: YUROK TRIBE, ET AL. V. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Filed: 2026-07-07

The Ninth Circuit granted the petition for review of a 2024 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule concerning Decabromodiphenyl Ether (decaBDE) and remanded the matter to the EPA without vacatur for renewed rulemaking. The court held that the EPA’s decisions not to further regulate decaBDE exposures in recyclable articles, disposal, wastewater, and sewage sludge were not supported by substantial evidence as required by 15 U.S.C. § 2618(c)(1)(B)(i)(I). The court applied the “substantial evidence” standard mandated by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) § 6(h), which requires a searching review of agency rationales and prohibits decisions unsupported by the record. The court reasoned that under TSCA § 6(h), EPA cannot justify a decision not to regulate based on “low levels” of exposure, as this statute does not require risk evaluations and presumes any level of exposure warrants consideration for regulation. Specifically, the court found EPA’s rationales insufficient because: (1) cost estimates regarding recyclable articles relied on studies unrelated to decaBDE and ignored less restrictive alternatives; (2) the decision not to regulate disposal improperly deferred to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act without addressing regulatory gaps or contrary evidence on separation costs; (3) the determination that wastewater regulation was impracticable ignored contradictory data on discharges and available treatment technologies; and (4) the refusal to regulate sewage sludge relied on an impermissible factor of low exposure levels. The court further rejected EPA’s argument that it could regulate in stages, noting that TSCA § 6(h) mandates expedited action without permitting tiered rulemaking. As a practical consequence, the 2024 Rule remains in effect to avoid immediate health and environmental harm, but the EPA must conduct renewed proceedings to either promulgate regulations for the identified areas or provide substantial evidence supporting any decision not to regulate them.

Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.