Tarague Beach on the island of Guam, a site known for its white sand, marine life, and cultural significance, is at the center of a legal dispute before the U.S. Supreme Court. The case concerns the U.S. Air Force’s longstanding practice of disposing of expired munitions, including rockets and bombs, on the beach, which is located within Andersen Air Force Base near the island’s northern tip.
The Air Force has used Tarague Beach as an open detonation site for hazardous military waste since 1982, citing the need to safely destroy unexploded ordinance and comply with environmental permitting requirements. Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, the military is required to renew permits for hazardous waste disposal every three years. The Air Force maintains that this renewal process ensures compliance with environmental regulations and does not introduce new restrictions.
However, a local nonprofit organization, Prutehi Guahan, has challenged this practice, arguing that the Air Force did not conduct adequate environmental reviews nor properly consider public comments when it sought its latest permit renewal from the Guam Environmental Protection Agency in 2021. Prutehi Guahan contends that the bomb detonations pose significant risks to the fragile marine ecosystem, nearby archaeological sites linked to the Chamorro people, traditional fishing areas, and the island’s water supply. Members of the group emphasize that federal environmental laws provide one of the few channels for Guam residents, who are U.S. citizens but do not have presidential voting rights, to oppose federal military projects impacting their land.
The group filed suit in January 2022, claiming the Air Force violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), a law requiring federal agencies to take a “hard look” at the environmental consequences of their actions and consider alternative approaches. They argue that the detonation activity harms cultural resources, recreational use of the beach, and ongoing scientific research, including studies of sea turtles nesting nearby.
The case reached the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, where a divided three-judge panel sided with Prutehi Guahan in February 2025. The majority found that the Air Force had failed to meet NEPA’s requirements for environmental review and public engagement. The dissenting judge argued that the military should be allowed to continue its detonation operations given the long-standing nature of the practice. The Air Force, supported by lawyers from the previous administration, criticized the ruling as inconsistent with key principles of environmental and administrative law.
At the Supreme Court hearing last week, justices expressed concerns on both sides of the issue. Some questioned whether denying the group standing to sue could bar any future legal challenges, thereby limiting accountability for federal projects on Guam. Others warned that allowing such claims might open the door to many similar lawsuits across the country.
A decision on the case is expected by the end of June 2027. The ruling will have significant implications not only for environmental management on Guam but also for how federal military activities are reviewed and challenged by local communities in U.S. territories.