ELR Citation: 56 ELR 20095
No(s). 24-1500 (9th Cir. Jul 16, 2026)

The Ninth Circuit, 2-1, reversed summary judgment for the Forest Service in a challenge to the Service's decision that the Healthy Forest Restoration Act (HFRA) exempted a logging project in Idaho Panhandle National Forest from NEPA review. An environmental group sued to enjoin the project, arguing it did not fall within the "wildland-urban interface" as defined by HFRA and thus was not exempt from NEPA review. A district court granted summary judgment for the Service based on issue exhaustion, finding the group failed to challenge the applicability of the Service's asserted exemption. The appellate court held that nothing about the scoping process under HFRA, or how the Service implemented the process for the project specifically, resembled an adversarial proceeding that warranted a judicially imposed issue exhaustion requirement. It further held the Service's failure to apply the governing definition of "wildland-urban interface" was not the kind of challenge that must normally be exhausted before the agency. It reversed summary judgment for the Service and remanded for the district court to address the merits.