AG Brown intervenes in lawsuit to protect onshore wind energy projects

Attorney General Nick Brown today joined a coalition of 19 attorneys general moving to intervene in a lawsuit challenging the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) for unlawfully freezing routine reviews of land-based wind energy projects, including at least five in Washington state.

Federal law requires DoD to review proposed wind projects for potential national security concerns and work with developers to address any issues. In August 2025, DoD stopped moving projects through this process, blocking wind energy development nationwide. Brown and the coalition are asking the court to set aside DoD's unlawful freeze and order the agency to resume the review process required by federal law.

"The federal government claims we're in an energy emergency and yet unlawfully stands in the way of projects seeking to harness an excellent renewable source of energy-wind," Brown said. "We're determined to fight this administration's obstruction of projects needed to power our economy, increase clean energy supply, and protect Washington's air and water."

The federal freeze on wind energy projects has prevented progress on projects in Washington, including:

• The 450-megawatt Crider Valley Wind Energy Project (Klickitat County)
• The 200-megawatt Riverside Wind Project (Spokane County)
• The 300-megawatt Springboard Wind Project (Mason County)
• The 300-megawatt Great Bend Wind Project (Lincoln County)
• The 378-megawatt Cloudwalker Wind Project (Garfield County)

According to renewable industry groups, more than $2 billion in private investment and 4,500 jobs are at risk as the projects remain on hold. Additionally, the freeze on wind projects jeopardizes Washington state's ability to meet its statutory target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 45% below 1990 levels by 2030.

Under federal law, land-based wind project developers must submit any proposed projects with wind turbines over 200 feet tall to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for review. The FAA then refers these projects to DoD to assess whether they could affect military operations, radar systems, flight paths, or national security. For more than a decade, DoD engaged in a predictable review process and worked with developers to mitigate potential concerns. Mitigation measures often included changes to turbine placement or height, radar upgrades, or agreements to pause generation under certain circumstances.

In August 2025, DoD abruptly stopped following this process. Officials ceased countersigning mitigation agreements, stopped sending completed agreements to developers for signature, and delayed or halted communications with developers about mitigation. As a result, wind projects across the country have been frozen at various stages of the review process, including those that had already completed mitigation negotiations and were awaiting only final DoD approval.

Brown and the coalition argue that DoD's freeze is unlawful, arbitrary and capricious, and violates the Administrative Procedure Act. DoD has not provided a reasonable explanation for its sudden change in policy, accounted for the harm to states, developers, workers, and ratepayers, or considered the major investments made in reliance on its longstanding review process. The coalition also argues that DoD's refusal to act is causing unreasonable delay and undermining Congress' directive that DoD balance national security concerns with the responsible development of renewable energy. They are asking the court to require the agency to resume reviewing and approving land-based wind projects.

The attorneys general are intervening in the lawsuit Renewable Northwest, et al. v. Hegseth, et al., filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, Portland Division.

Joining Brown in intervening in this lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Rhode Island.

A copy of the motion is available here.

A copy of the proposed complaint-in-intervention is available here.