Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-71_omjp.pdf
Page Number: 18.0

Cite as:  586 U. S. ____ (2018) 

15 

Opinion of the Court 

exclude were committed to agency discretion and therefore
unreviewable,  the  Court  of  Appeals  did  not  consider 
whether the Service’s assessment of the costs and benefits 
of  designation  was  flawed  in  a  way  that  rendered  the
resulting  decision  not  to  exclude  Unit  1  arbitrary,  capri-
cious,  or  an  abuse  of  discretion.    Accordingly,  we  remand 
to the Court of Appeals to consider that question, if neces-
sary, in the first instance. 

* 

* 
The  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  for  the  Fifth
Circuit  is  vacated,  and  the  case  is  remanded  for  further 
proceedings consistent with this opinion. 

* 

It is so ordered.
 JUSTICE  KAVANAUGH  took  no  part  in  the  consideration 

or decision of this case.