The Nickel Report

On September 30, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued Sierra Club v. FERC, which upheld the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) authorization of a 32-mile pipeline that will supply natural gas to a Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) project at which TVA is replacing a coal-fired power unit with a natural gas turbine. The opinion is significant because the D.C. Circuit recognized, for the first time, that its controversial Sabal Trail opinion was abrogated by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, Colorado.

On October 10, 2025, Governor Newsom signed SB 614, which lifted the ban on carbon dioxide (CO₂) pipelines in California and established the path to the new regulatory framework for CO₂ pipelines in the state.

On Friday, October 10, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) posted for public comment a draft template for reporting Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions pursuant to California SB 253, the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (Act). Along with the draft template, CARB also posted an explanatory memorandum.

On October 1, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a direct final rule inserting a conditional sunset date into certain regulations in response to Executive Order 14270, “Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting to Unleash American Energy.”

On September 29, 2025, the White House Council on Environmental Quality issued key guidance to federal agencies on implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act.

On September 24, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) published a preliminary list of entities that CARB believes may be subject to climate reporting under SB 253 and SB 219 (requiring corporate greenhouse gas reporting) and SB 261 (requiring climate-related financial risk disclosure). CARB had previously announced its intention to release this list in its August workshop on regulation development and additional guidance regarding SB 253/261/219 implementation, of which a recorded video is available here.

On September 18, 2025, the California State Mining and Geology Board (SMGB) voted to initiate pre-rulemaking activities to define the term “critical mineral” under state regulations. According to the Board’s agenda materials, the definition is intended to support California’s clean-energy transition and provide clearer guidance to local agencies and planners engaged in permitting mining projects. 

As participation in Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs continues to grow in the US, the financial burden of developing recycling infrastructure is being transferred to producers of products that fall under the EPR mandates. Since our last update in January, several key developments across multiple jurisdictions have occurred, including the beginning of several state programs.

On September 18, 2025, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the agency will be prioritizing the review of new chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that are intended for use in data center projects, including the infrastructure that powers data centers, or for the manufacturing of covered components, as defined by Executive Order (EO) 14318, “Accelerating Federal Permitting of Data Center Infrastructure.” This prioritization of reviews will start with submissions received on or after September 29, 2025, and could accelerate time to market for chemistries supporting the expansion of US data center capacity. 

On September 10, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) authorized the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) to regulate all underground injection of carbon dioxide for long-term geological sequestration within Arizona’s jurisdiction. The final rule followed a comprehensive technical and legal review to ensure the state’s Underground Injection Control (UIC) program met all requirements under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) section 1422. As discussed in an earlier post, Arizona previously did not have primacy over any UIC well classes, unlike other states that have sought Class VI primacy thus far.