Alaska v. U.S. Department of Agriculture

An electric utility and an electric utility trade group filed a lawsuit in the federal district court challenging the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) January 2023 decision to reinstate the Roadless Area Conservation Final Rule (Roadless Rule) in the Tongass National Forest. The January 2023 action repealed an October 2020 rule that exempted the Tongass National Forest from the Roadless Rule. In the notice of the repeal of the October 2020 rule, USDA stated that it now believed that the “adverse consequences” of exempting the Tongass from the Roadless Rule outweighed the benefits of decreasing federal regulation. USDA also found that restoring the Roadless Rule would advance or be consistent with other policy priorities, including retaining and enhancing carbon storage and enhancing climate resilience. The notice stated that “[t]he Tongass stores more carbon than any other national forest in the United States. Large old-growth trees in the Tongass are important for carbon storage and sequestration, which can play a role in addressing the climate crisis.” The plaintiffs asserted a claim that the reinstatement was ultra vires under the Administrative Procedure Act (citing the Forest Service Organic Act and the Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act) and a claim that the action violated separation of powers. The State of Alaska also filed a <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/alaska-v-us-department-of-agriculture/">lawsuit</a> challenging the repeal of the 2020 rule.

The State of Alaska filed a lawsuit in the federal district court challenging the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) January 2023 decision to reinstate the Roadless Area Conservation Final Rule (Roadless Rule) in the Tongass National Forest. The January 2023 action repealed an October 2020 rule that exempted the Tongass National Forest from the Roadless Rule. In the notice of the repeal of the October 2020 rule, USDA stated that it now believed that the “adverse consequences” of exempting the Tongass from the Roadless Rule outweighed the benefits of decreasing federal regulation. USDA also found that restoring the Roadless Rule would advance or be consistent with other policy priorities, including retaining and enhancing carbon storage and enhancing climate resilience. The notice stated that “[t]he Tongass stores more carbon than any other national forest in the United States. Large old-growth trees in the Tongass are important for carbon storage and sequestration, which can play a role in addressing the climate crisis.” In its lawsuit challenging the reinstatement of the Roadless Rule, Alaska asserted claims under the Administrative Procedure Act; the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act; the Tongass Timber Reform Act; the FY 2015 Defense Authorization Act; the Wilderness Act; the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU); Article I of the Constitution (separation of powers); the Multiple-Use Sustained Yield Act (MUSYA); the Organic Administration Act (Organic Act); the Forest Roads and Trails Act; and the Alaska Statehood Act. An electric utility and electric utility trade group also filed a <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/inside-passage-electric-cooperative-v-us-department-of-agriculture/">lawsuit</a> challenging the rule's reinstatement.