A coalition of nine renewable energy trade associations, including the Alliance for Clean Energy New York, recently filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon over recent federal government actions blocking the development of onshore wind energy projects across the United States.
The May 31, 2026, lawsuit – Renewable Northwest v. Hegseth – alleges the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has violated its statutory mandate to assess the national security impacts of wind energy projects, preventing the issuance of necessary permits that must be obtained before construction is allowed to proceed. According to the complaint, these actions have resulted in a complete halt to onshore commercial wind development since approximately August 2025, stalling the permitting of at least 125 utility-scale projects across 25 states.
The approval process at issue concerns the DoD Siting Clearinghouse review process established by 10 USC § 183a and set out in the implementing regulations at 32 CFR Part 21. Because of their height, utility-scale wind turbines must obtain a Determination of No Hazard (DNH) from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) before construction can proceed. The FAA, however, cannot complete its review until the DoD completes its own assessment of a project’s potential impact on military readiness and operations, and then communicates its findings to the FAA. That review is coordinated through the DoD Military Aviation and Installation Assurance Siting Clearinghouse, which serves as the single point of coordination among the military branches and other federal agencies.
Wind projects can affect military operations in two principal ways. First, because the rotation of turbine blades can generate electromagnetic fields, turbines may interfere with military radar systems. Second, the physical structures themselves may affect military flight routes, training patterns, and operations around military facilities. Where a potential impact is identified, the project developer enters into negotiations with the DoD to discuss mitigation measures the developer will undertake. In exchange for the developer’s agreement to implement the agreed-upon mitigation, the DoD typically issues a notice of no objection to the FAA, clearing the way for the FAA to issue the DNH.
Lawsuit Contends de facto Moratorium on Wind Projects
It is this mitigation agreement process that lies at the heart of the lawsuit. The complaint alleges that, beginning in August 2025, the DoD stopped engaging in the process, principally by declining to countersign near-final mitigation agreements that developers had already executed, ceasing to issue draft agreements, canceling mitigation discussions, and ultimately freezing all review activity. Because the FAA cannot act without the DoD’s findings, the plaintiffs allege the practical result has been a de facto moratorium on the approval of every wind project requiring DoD review.
The complaint asserts the DoD’s review freeze violates the federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA), as well as the statute and regulations governing the DoD’s own review process. Under Section 706 (2) of the APA, the plaintiffs contend the freeze is arbitrary, capricious, contrary to law, and was adopted without the notice-and-comment procedures the APA requires. Under Section 706 (1), they argue the DoD has unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed action it is legally obligated to take, including by failing to meet the statutory 75-day deadline for preliminary review and the corresponding regulatory deadlines for completing reviews and mitigation discussions.
Complaint Alleges Broader Pattern
The complaint situates the DoD’s conduct within a broader pattern of federal efforts to halt wind development. Among the actions highlighted by the complaint are the January 2025 presidential memorandum directing federal agencies to suspend wind energy approvals (the Wind Memorandum) and a series of actions at the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) that suspended the delegations of authority allowing DOI officials to issue the approvals required for wind projects and instead required secretarial-level sign-off on permitting decisions for wind and solar projects.
Many of those actions did not survive judicial review. Implementation of the Wind Memorandum was vacated in New York v. Trump, 811 F Supp 3d 215 (D Mass 2025), and the DOI actions were preliminarily enjoined in RENEW Northeast v. U.S. Department of the Interior, No. 25-cv-13961-DJC, 2026 WL 1078282 (D Mass. Apr. 21, 2026. The reasoning in those decisions may have significant relevance for how the court addresses the issues presented in Renewable Northwest v Hegseth.
For example, in New York v. Trump, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts held that the indefinite, government-wide suspension of wind energy permitting was an unlawful government action. The court explained that the APA imposes a duty on agencies to “proceed to conclude a matter presented to [them]” within a reasonable time. Separately, APA § 558 (c) requires that, when a license application is pending (with the term “license” interpreted broadly to include any “approvals”), an agency must set and complete the required proceedings and make its decision within a reasonable time. The court emphasized that the word shall in the provision reflects an obligation that is not discretionary. Applying those standards, the court held that an indefinite halt on issuing or denying authorizations, with no timeline and no anticipated end date, violates the APA. As the court put it, “[n]ot acting at all is not a lawful option.”
The outcome of Renewable Northwest v. Hegseth will carry major implications for wind energy projects across the United States and their ability to obtain federal permits required to begin construction. More broadly, it will affect the interests of the businesses and investors whose capital, contracts, and financing arrangements depend on a predictable and timely federal approval process.
Harris Beach Murtha has represented clients whose business interests have been implicated by the DoD’s lack of action. Our experienced Energy Industry Team regularly assists wind and other energy developers across every phase of project development, including siting and permitting, regulatory compliance, environmental and land use due diligence, contract drafting and negotiation, public finance and other funding, and tax matters.
If you are a developer or investor and need assistance with a wind or other energy-related project, please reach out to attorneys John T. McManus at (518) 701-2734 and jmcmanus@harrisbeachmurtha.com or Jeffrey D. Kuhn at (518) 701-2746 and jkuhn@harrisbeachmurtha.com, or to the Harris Beach Murtha attorney with whom you most frequently work.
This alert is not a substitute for advice of counsel on specific legal issues.
Harris Beach Murtha’s lawyers and consultants practice from offices throughout Connecticut in Bantam, Hartford, New Haven and Stamford; New York State in Albany, Binghamton, Buffalo, Ithaca, New York City, Niagara Falls, Rochester, Saratoga Springs, Syracuse, Long Island and White Plains, as well as in Boston, Massachusetts, and Newark, New Jersey.