(Slip Opinion)              OCTOBER TERM, 2019                                       1

                                       Syllabus

         NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
       being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
       The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
       prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
       See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 

, 337.


SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

                                       Syllabus

   UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE ET AL. v.
COWPASTURE RIVER PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION
                  ET AL.

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
                 THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

   No. 18–1584. Argued February 24, 2020—Decided June 15, 2020*
Petitioner Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC (Atlantic), sought to construct an
  approximately 604-mile natural gas pipeline from West Virginia to
  North Carolina along a route that traversed 16 miles of land within
  the George Washington National Forest. As relevant here, Atlantic
  secured a special use permit from the United States Forest Service,
  obtaining a right-of-way for a 0.1-mile segment of pipe some 600 feet
  below a portion of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail (Appalachian
  Trail or Trail), which also crosses the National Forest. Respondents
  filed a petition for review in the Fourth Circuit, contending, inter alia,
  that the issuance of the special use permit for the right-of-way under
  the Trail violated the Mineral Leasing Act (Leasing Act). Atlantic in-
  tervened. The Fourth Circuit vacated the permit, holding that the
  Leasing Act did not empower the Forest Service to grant the right-of-
  way because the Trail became part of the National Park System when
  the Secretary of the Interior delegated its authority over the Trail’s
  administration to the National Park Service, and that the Leasing Act
  prohibits pipeline rights-of-way through lands in the National Park
  System.
Held: Because the Department of the Interior’s decision to assign respon-
 sibility over the Appalachian Trail to the National Park Service did
 not transform the land over which the Trail passes into land within
——————
  * Together with No. 18–1587, Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC v. Cowpas-
ture River Preservation Association et al., also on certiorari to the same
court.
2        UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE v. COWPASTURE
                  RIVER PRESERVATION ASSN.
                           Syllabus

    the National Park System, the Forest Service had the authority to is-
    sue the special use permit. Pp. 3–18.
       (a) These cases involve the interaction of multiple federal laws. The
    Weeks Act provided for the acquisition of lands for inclusion in the Na-
    tional Forest System, stating that such lands “shall be permanently
    reserved, held, and administered as national forest lands.” 

.
    §521. The Forest Service, with authority granted by the Secretary of
    Agriculture, has jurisdiction over the National Forest System, includ-
    ing the George Washington National Forest. The National Trails Sys-
    tem Act (Trails Act) establishes national scenic and national historic
    trails, 

. §1244(a), including the Appalachian Trail,
    §1244(a)(1). It also empowers the Secretary of the Interior to establish
    the Trail’s location and width by entering into “rights-of-way” agree-
    ments with other federal agencies, States, local governments, and pri-
    vate landowners. §§1246(a)(2), (d), (e). The Leasing Act enables any
    “appropriate agency head” to grant “[r]ights-of-way through any Fed-
    eral lands . . . for pipeline purposes,” 

. §185(a), defining “Fed-
    eral lands” as “all lands owned by the United States,” except (as rele-
    vant) lands in the National Park System, §185(b). The National Park