• Projects from Apex, Invenergy, ENGIE and others could benefit if the ruling results in a preliminary injunction
• Government reply due July 6, live hearing set for August 4

Some of the largest wind developers in the US have joined a lawsuit against the US Department of Defense (DOD) filed in the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts regarding what is being described as a “stealth freeze” of national security reviews.

The plaintiffs allege the DOD has completely halted national security reviews for wind projects, resulting in a de-facto ban on onshore wind projects on both public and private land in a lawsuit that originated at the top of the month with clean energy organizations like ACE NY, Renewable Northwest and Advanced Power Alliance and has since been joined by a number of wind developers.

Wind developers that have joined the case as plaintiffs include AES Clean Energy, Apex Clean Energy, BORDAS Renewable Energy, EDPR, ENGIE, Invenergy, and Nova Clean Energy. In this case, the developers outline a number of their projects that have been affected by the DOD’s review freeze including the following:

AES Clean Energy

• 500 MW Big River Wind in Gilliam County, Oregon from AES Clean Energy

Apex Clean Energy

• 800 MW Lariat Wind in Bailey and Parmer Counties, Texas
• 200 MW Goldrush Apple Energy in Peoria Conty, Illinois
• 200 MW Windswept Plain Wind in Shelby County, Illinois
• 375 MW Siete Wind in Webb County, Texas
• 255 MW Homestead Wind in Williams County, North Dakota
• 1.5 GW Pecos Flats Wind in Pecos County, Texas

BORDAS Renewable Energy

• 400-800 MW Las Crestas Wind in Zapata and Hogg Counties, Texas from BORDAS Renewable Energy

EDP Renewables

• 102 MW Meadow Lake II Wind in White and Benton Counties, Indiana
• 200 MW Blackstone Wind II in Livingston County, Illinois
• 432 MW Blue Canyon Wind in Caddo, Comanche and Kiowa Counties, Oklahoma

ENGIE

• 180 MW North Hills Wind in Howard County, Iowa
• 297 MW Prairie Phoenix Wind in McLennon County, Texas
• 650 MW Horse Thief Wind in Finney, Gray, Hodgeman and Ford Counties, Kansas

Invenergy

• 250 MW Deuel Harvest Wind South in Deuel County, South Dakota
• 300 MW Lazbuddie Wind II in Parmer County, Texas
• 1.2 GW Thresher Wind in Meade, Seward and Gray Counties, Texas
• 500 MW Towner Wind in Kiowa County, Colorado
• 67 MW Whitetail Wind in Grant County, Wisconsin
• 450 MW Crider Valley Wind in Klickitat County, Washington
• 290 MW Canisteo Wind in Steuben County, New York
• 1.5 GW Hammerhead Wind in Stevens County, Kansas

Nova Clean Energy

• 1.5 GW Triton Wind in Finney, Haskell and Gray Counties, Kansas
• 180 MW Ramble Wind in Logan County, Illinois
• 194 MW Pecos County Phase II in Pecos County, Texas

Plaintiffs allege the DOD’s freeze on project reviews has been underway since last September correlating with a new agency head, Dale Marks, installed at that time. The lawsuit lays out a timeline starting with a stoppage of near-final mitigation agreements that same month.

By December 2025, the DOD stopped providing draft mitigation agreements. On April 13, it completely froze all steps of the process by instructing staff working on wind reviews to half of all work indefinitely and stopping all correspondence with wind developers.

One plaintiff in the case that spoke with NPM argued the freeze was stealthy because there was no publicized document to point to and, given the already relatively slow pace of the FAA review process, it took developers months to realize something was wrong.

However, the plaintiff says shortly after American Clean Power reached out to the DOD in April inquiring why they had stopped responding to wind requests, they ceased all activity impacting all wind projects in the country, which are required by law to receive an FAA determination that can only occur after the DOD completes an initial review.

The lawsuit against the DOD claims at least 125 utility-scale wind projects across 25 states have been impacted “resulting in billions of dollars in sunk costs.”

More broadly, NPM Interconnection queue data identified 310 wind projects or just over 58 GW of wind capacity that were withdrawn from the queue from September 2025 to June 2026, with projects withdrawn from by likes of Invenergy, Enel, Orsted and many others.

A plaintiff in the case told NPM the impact on the wind sector has been huge and says they are aware firsthand of “a bunch of projects that have been cancelled outright” as a direct result of the DOD’s review freeze due to issues including landowner agreement, interconnection agreement, and PPA expirations. Others, the plaintiff says, have been delayed for years because they lost their queue positions and had to move to the back of the line.

The plaintiff said the involvement of wind developers as direct plaintiffs in the case is significant for several reasons. On the one hand, the plaintiff says it demonstrates a growing momentum behind wind-related lawsuits against the Trump Administration following several favorable rulings in other cases over the last several months including in a case against Trump’s memorandum seeking to half federal approvals from January 2025 and another against the Department of Interior following its memorandums from Summer 2025 seeking to obstruct project development.

The plaintiff also notes the need is more urgent in this case compared to prior ones because the DOD freeze impacts all wind projects, which they note have been moving forward at a greater pace over the last year as developers seek to safe harbor projects in order to lock in federal tax credits before they start to expire next week.

Finally, the plaintiff says the developers have been incentivized to join this lawsuit because if a judge does grant a preliminary injunction, those projects named in the case would get first relief as the DOD is forced to ramp project reviews back up. The plaintiff says this suggests the projects named “are the ones in absolute panic that their projects are going to die outright if they don’t get help soon.”

“What has become clear over the past year and a half is that keeping our heads down and hoping for the best is not a winning strategy,” the plaintiff said. “The only way to survive is to fight back.”

A government reply is due in the case against the DOD on July 6 with a plaintiff counter-reply due by July 18. An in-person hearing is scheduled for Aug. 4 in federal court after which a plaintiff in the case told NPM it is likely a judge would take “several months” to review before determining next steps.