Marten Law LLP

The Canadian government announced plans this month to phase out PFAS chemicals from the Canadian economy. Environment and Climate Change Canada (“ECCC”) and Health Canada proposed, first, to list PFAS chemicals -- as a class -- as toxic substances under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (“CEPA”), SC 1999, c 33, s 46.?The agencies further proposed phasing out PFAS use wherever feasible: first in firefighting foams and then across a range of industries where PFAS can be replaced, including in textiles, food packaging, cosmetics, and medical devices. In the final phase of regulation, Canada will evaluate prohibiting PFAS use in industries where alternatives are not available. Please contact members of Marten’s?Consumer Products?Practice, including?James Pollack?and?Isabel Carey?if you have any questions about complying with federal, state, or Canadian PFAS regulations. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/gsq4_Dit

This past week, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin unveiled plans to revisit roughly two dozen environmental regulations, including significant climate change-related actions.?The proposed changes were framed in both environmental and economic terms.?Announcing the plans, Mr. Zeldin said EPA is “committed to fulfilling President Trump’s promise to unleash American energy, lower?cost of living for Americans, revitalize the American auto industry, restore the rule of law, and give power back to states to make their own decisions.” The historic mission of EPA is to “protect human health and the environment.”?Adding a heavier focus on the costs of regulation will be seen by some as necessary. Others will object. One thing that seems clear is that it will lead to a lot of litigation. For more information regarding these proposals or their potential impact, please contact?Scott Fulton,?Brad Marten,?Jack Lyman, or?Aidan Freeman. Read the full article here: https://lnkd.in/gs8PgtK9

Next Thursday, Isabel Carey is moderating this month's PFAS briefing webinar hosted by the Environmental Law Institute. The topic of discussion for March is PFAS and Agriculture. We're excited to be joined by panelists Scott Faber, Linda S Lee, and Nancy McBrady. Some may not realize that PFAS litigation and activism began in 1999, after cattle ranchers in Parkersburg, West Virginia, sued DuPont for damage to their livestock and property that stemmed from contaminated water. This led to a $16.5 million settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. More than 20 years later, biosolid application in agricultural areas has been linked to PFAS contamination of soil and groundwater, as well as even the uptake of PFAS into crops. This has been identified as a growing problem nationwide, with particularly robust responses occurring in Iowa, Maine, and Michigan. Want to learn about the risks posed by PFAS to U.S. agriculture and the state efforts to limit livestock and farmland exposure to these chemicals? Sign up using the link below! Topic: PFAS and Agriculture Date: Thursday, March 20th, 9:00-10:00 am (PT) Where: Webinar Register now: https://lnkd.in/gFSJTbBh Note: This event is open to ELI members and to non-members who pay a $25 fee. Registration is required by March 17th. #EnvironmentalLaw #PFAS #Agriculture #ELI

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must establish specific numeric and narrative effluent limits in NPDES permits to achieve compliance with applicable water quality standards. The Court invalidated what it described as an “end-result” narrative effluent limit prohibiting a discharge from causing a violation of water quality independent of the specific compliance conditions in a permit. In so doing, the Court made clear that an agency may not enforce permit requirements that fail to “spell out what a permittee must do or refrain from doing.”? Read more here: https://lnkd.in/ghaaMvSp Please contact authors Chris Locke, James Tupper, Jack Lyman, Kameron Schroeder, or others in Marten Law's?Water Quality?practice group for more information.

Kicking off Managing Stormwater in Washington with Vince McGowan, Washington State Department of Ecology and Jeff Kray, Marten Law LLP Sponsored by Hazen and Sawyer

A number of states, including Washington, New York, California, and Massachusetts are weighing the adoption of new disclosure and other compliance obligations on apparel and footwear manufacturers. These laws target the manufacturers, importers, retailers, and—in some cases—online marketplaces. These proposals would functionally regulate the global apparel industry, valued in 2023 at over $1.7 trillion. The bills, directed at “fashion producers,” are not aimed simply at “fast fashion” brands. Instead, they target apparel more generally, including all footwear and clothing made, imported, or sold in the subject states. If passed, these bills would require brands and retailers to disclose to regulators and the public the chemicals in their clothing, the supply chain involved in production, the climate impacts of making and selling the clothing, the working conditions at factories, and a host of other information about production and sales. State laws like these create a quandary for manufacturers and retailers of covered products because most cannot sell different products in different markets and the changes they must make to accommodate a single state’s fashion products may force global change. Taken together, these bills attempt state regulation of the global operations of apparel brands. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/ghaaMvSp Please contact members of Marten’s?Consumer Products?Practice, including? James Pollack?and?Zachary Zahner?if you have questions regarding state or federal laws on environmental disclosures.?

Recent revisions to Canada’s Competition Act impose liability for unsupported environmental claims made by brand owners or retailers. Covered businesses are required to substantiate any claims made that promote the environmental benefits of their products or business activities?through testing or an internationally recognized methodology. These new requirements are broadly aimed at curbing “greenwashing.” Separate amendments add a private right of action provision to the Competition Act, requiring companies to respond to both governmental and “citizen” claims. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/gcvKDdEm Please contact members of Marten’s?Consumer Products?Practice, including?James Pollack?and?Isabel Carey?if you have any questions about crafting and supporting marketing environmental product claims.

Despite rollbacks by EPA, New York and Vermont are pressing ahead to expand their climate programs by enacting “Climate Superfund Acts.” Legislatures in California, Maryland, Massachusetts, and Oregon are currently considering similar legislation. State Superfund Climate Acts impose liability on the fossil fuel industry to address carbon pollution, and do so retroactively, like more traditional cleanup laws. Legal challenges are pending in federal court, sometimes based on the same arguments made after Congress enacted CERCLA, some 45 years ago. Whether those challenges succeed or fail feels to some long-time practitioners like “déjà vu all over again,” but this time around, there are a number of new twists. Read more here: https://lnkd.in/gPrHHyqq For more information on Climate Superfund laws, or environmental regulation or litigation in New York, please contact?Dan Mulvihill?or?Victor Xu.

Marten is hiring a Controller! The successful candidate will be a member of the firm’s management team, reporting to its equity owners and senior management team. The Controller will interface with the Executive Management Team and manage other professionals in the department. The successful applicant will be expected to work in the Seattle office five days per week and to occasionally travel. Learn more and apply here: https://lnkd.in/g3a46PDV

Marten Law is excited to share that Steve Odell is speaking at the 2025 Northwest Hydroelectric Association (NWHA) Annual Conference in Seattle. Steve's panel will discuss how energy and environmental regulations are increasingly changing alongside federal and state administrations.?They'll explore the role politics plays in shaping the regulatory framework, and how we can navigate the uncertainty created by the changing framework.?The panel will examine the role of the courts in interpreting and applying laws and regulations, and how their role has changed in recent years. Attend this panel to gain a better understanding of how politics and litigation can impact hydropower operations, both directly and indirectly, and how to factor those considerations into licensing and compliance strategies.?Sign up now using the link below! Topic: Politics and Litigation When: Monday, February 24th; 2:00 - 3:30pm Where: Hyatt Regency, Downtown Seattle Learn more and register here: https://lnkd.in/ekGjamYS