By Bourke Thomas, Vice President at Atwell
Over the past several months, the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) has issued two key policy memoranda that directly affect the development and operation of wind and solar facilities—both on public and private lands.
Additionally, in April 2025, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) proposed rescinding the current regulatory definition of “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The public comment period closed on May 19, 2025, with over 357,000 comments submitted.
These three issues are timely and of significant importance to many different audiences throughout the United States. Our environmental experts here at Atwell are closely watching the regulations and actively working to support our clients and the full industry as we collectively navigate the likely outcomes and implications on continued project development within the renewable energy space.
Understanding the changes
Permit delays – DOI Wind & Solar memo
The Department of Interior (DOI) now requires federal review of 69 different types of wind and solar activities. This includes environmental studies, permits, wildlife consultations, and coordination with Native American tribes.
This affects projects on federal land and while projects on private land will generally not be impacted, some private land projects that need federal permits would fall in this category.
What are the likely outcomes based on these changes:
- Impacted projects will take longer to get approved
- The federal government will be more thorough in reviewing projects
- Rules are unclear, creating uncertainty for developers
- Companies should start talking with agencies early to avoid delays
Wind owners and eagle permits – DOI Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) memo
The federal government is auditing all permits that could disturb and impact eagles, particularly during nesting season. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has been instructed to review and refer potential violations for legal enforcement.
What wind project leaders should do now:
- Review all wind projects that might impact eagles
- Check if permits are up-to-date and properly followed in all instances
- Gather all documentation on pre- and post-construction studies, resource reports, agency correspondence, and work with environmental/wildlife planning professionals now, prior to initiating work on any future projects

Proposed ESA “Harm” definition change
The proposed changes would remove the definition of “harm” which currently includes habit modification. Actions that impactor degrade habitat would not automatically be considered a violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
While this proposed change is not limited to renewable development, it could significantly reduce ESA-related permitting risk for solar projects, particularly in cases involving tree clearing and impacts to potentially suitable habitat for federally listed bat species.
State-level protections still apply and may vary widely, requiring local expertise and understanding to navigate appropriate options. In addition, regulatory inconsistency may lead to permitting uncertainty or litigation as enforcement implications are determined in real-world situations. Based on these factors, companies may consider reassessing assumptions around permitting thresholds and impact analyses.
Steps you can take now:
- Conduct state-by-state ESA risk assessments
- Maintain strong habitat and wildlife documentation as a best practice
- Monitor the final rulemaking outcome and potential legal challenges
How to navigate the path forward in these evolving times
These policy shifts represent a notable change in how federal agencies regulate renewable energy development. While the full impact remains uncertain, what is clear is that greater regulatory complexity and delay are likely in the near term.
These changes create uncertainty. We understand that uncertainty creates risk. Our goal is to help clients, of all sizes and business needs, to navigate the change and create the personalized strategies that you will need to continue to move forward.
Right now, for example, the USFWS IPaC project planning tool to help in the environmental review process is no longer available to satisfy formal consultation requirements with federal agencies and may impact review during project financing without a significant level of environmental due diligence documentation. It’s a challenge that is forcing developers to alter how they might approach their planning process. However, for many private land projects, the impact may actually be negligible as not all development efforts will be impacted by the changes.
Our team can be a resource to help clients create the right strategy for navigating the new rules. If IPaC was often used to demonstrate a lack of risk for endangered species for federal, state, and local agencies as well as financing partners, this means we need to approach it differently but it’s not a barrier. Let’s spend our efforts de-risking the projects from a wildlife perspective and let our technical experts create the data needed to move forward.
We are committed to supporting our clients through proactive guidance, permitting strategy, and technical expertise across the country to ensure your long-term project viability.









