paper production facility

Recent changes in federal government policies and reduced resources at environmental agencies are reshaping the landscape for environmental lawyers. As agencies struggle with limited capacity and diminished data collection, legal professionals must adapt their strategies to continue effectively advocating for their clients.…

The Penn State Center for Agricultural and Shale Law enjoyed participating in this year’s Ag Progress Days, held from August 12-14, 2025, at the Russell E. Larson Agricultural Research Center. Center staff were involved in several programs throughout the three-day event, while maintaining a presence at their booth located in the Farm Credit building. Staff…

As the January 1, 2026, deadline to make the first required disclosure under California’s landmark climate laws approaches, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has announced that it will host another virtual public workshop on August 21 to discuss its ongoing efforts to develop regulations implementing California Senate Bills (SBs) 253 and 261. SB 253 (updated by SB 219) and SB 261, which are now codified in Sections 38532 and 38533 of the California Health and Safety Code, mandate certain entities to disclose climate-related financial risks by January 1, 2026, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by a date to be determined later in 2026. As CARB announced in its May 29, 2025, workshop, the agency does not intend to issue draft regulations until the end of the year, despite SB 219’s July 1, 2025, deadline. This has left many companies potentially affected by those regulations in the dark regarding whether they will be required to make disclosures. CARB’s August 21 workshop may finally provide clarity on some of the key applicability questions that remain unanswered as these 2026 disclosure deadlines loom.

NY State Capitol Building

On June 30, 2025, California Gov. Newsom approved a bill (SB 131) aimed at increasing housing supply and strategic economic development. The bill has sparked controversy among some groups. Critics view it as a rollback of environmental protections under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which is California’s version of the federal National Environmental Policy…

In a significant victory for the hydropower industry, last week the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon issued an order in Cascadia Wildlands v. EWEB (Case No. 6:25-00446), reaffirming that the U.S. courts of appeals, on review of orders of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), have exclusive jurisdiction over controversies related to fish passage and other environmental measures included in hydropower licenses issued by FERC. This decision adds to precedent making clear that project opponents may not collaterally attack fish passage conditions in FERC licenses via citizen suits filed under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

In a lengthy and highly technical published opinion filed August 5, 2025, the Fifth District Court of Appeal partly reversed and partly affirmed a judgment that had upheld the State Water Resources Control Board’s (“State Water Board” or “SWRCB”) adoption of the “State Policy for Water Quality Control: Toxicity Provisions” (the “Toxicity Provisions”), which policy in relevant part required use of a new “Test of Significant Toxicity” (“TST”) in analyzing a type of pollution known as “whole effluent toxicity.”  Camarillo Sanitary District et al. v. State Water Resources Control Board (2025) 113 Cal.App.5th 407.

We aren’t half way though August yet and already the Summer of ’25 has been a hot one for corporate sustainability disclosures in the EU and UK.

On 31 July 2025, EFRAG launched its 60-day consultation on the Exposure Drafts of the revised and simplified European Sustainability Reporting Standards (“ESRS”) for those reporting under the…