- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States of America
- /
- District of Columbia
- /
- Appalachian Voices v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Appalachian Voices v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
Geography
Year
2026
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2026
Status
Amended joint petition for review.
Geography
Docket number
26-1100
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Cir.)
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → NEPA (US)Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Other Statutes and Regulations (US)
Principal law
United States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)United States → Natural Gas Act
At issue
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
07/02/2026
Amended joint petition for review.
Petition
06/05/2026
Motion for stay denied.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied a motion by Appalachian Voices and three other environmental organizations for a stay pending review of a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) order authorizing construction and operation of the Southeast Supply Enhancement Project, a gas pipeline project involving installation of 55.3 miles of pipeline in Virginia and North Carolina. The organizations’ stay motion argued that they were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that FERC violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to take a hard look at aquatic impacts, including cumulative impacts from a co-located pipeline project. (The organizations’ non-binding statement of issues indicated that they also would argue that FERC violated NEPA and the Natural Gas Act by failing to adequately consider the project’s greenhouse gas emissions and their impacts.) In its order denying the stay motion, the D.C. Circuit found that the petitioners did not demonstrate that they would likely succeed in showing that FERC’s consideration of the project’s environmental effects fell outside a “broad zone of reasonableness.” The court also found that harm to the public and other parties of stopping the project midway outweighed any irreparable harm to the environmental organizations.
Decision
05/29/2026
Petitioners filed non-binding statement of issues to be raised.
Statement
05/05/2026
Motion for stay pending review filed by petitioners.
Motion
04/28/2026
Joint petition for review filed.
Petition
Summary
Challenge to an order authorizing construction and operation of the Southeast Supply Enhancement Project, a gas pipeline project involving installation of 55.3 miles of pipeline in Virginia and North Carolina.
Topics mentioned most in this case Beta
See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more
Group
Topics
Target
Policy instrument
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Renewable energy
Fossil fuel
Greenhouse gas
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance