I think there was some confusion within the agency as to whether they're cyclical reviews. The 15-year reviews would be an adequate substitute for a special review.
Many of the pesticides they decided not to conduct special reviews on were either planned to be or in the process of being subjected to that thorough a 15-year cyclical review. The courts ruled that this review did not substitute for a special review and the order was to proceed with special reviews, which are more narrowly focused on specific issues than the broader review.