Environmental

Compliance & Litigation

CMBG3’s Comprehensive

Environmental Services

Meeting Compliance

Identify legislation that will impact your business and recommend action steps to avoid disruption of business

Help clients develop comprehensive compliance programs to lower risk and reduce costs

65

Specialists in California’s Proposition 65, which regulates over 900 chemicals and requires detailed compliance steps from companies that sell, distribute, or manufacture
products in California

Suzanne Englot, former Environmental Health and Safety Consultant, provides unique
expertise to ensure regulatory compliance

Health & Safety

Develop ways to integrate regulatory compliance systems with environmental
monitoring and measuring

Help clients achieve compliance objectives with health and safety training and
implementation

Create policies and procedures that encompass employee health and safety

Help companies with workplace violations achieve quick compliance

Environmental Litigation

Examples of environmental litigation cases that we have handled include:

Z

Post-fire contamination cases

Z

Hazardous waste site cleanup cases

Z

Transportation of hazardous waste cases

Z

Underground oil tank and boiler release cases

Z

Land, property, and water contamination, including CERCLA claims

Z

PFAS contamination

Z

Prop 65 litigation cases

Strength

in Numbers

PFAS TRI List Expands…Perhaps Begrudgingly

We have previously reported on EPA’s PFAS TRI efforts, which during the Biden administration saw a significant expansion in the number of PFAS...

EPA’s New Regulatory Agenda: Large Changes Coming to PFAS, Waste Management, Water, and Climate Regulations

On September 4, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced over 100 actions as part of its upcoming regulatory agenda. These plans...

Maine Continues to Lay the Groundwork for One of the Nation’s Strongest PFAS Consumer Product Bans

On August 21, 2025, the Maine Board of Environmental Protection held its public hearing on its first wave of currently unavoidable use (CUU)...

Supreme Court Ruling Will Result In Less NEPA Requirements For Projects

On May 29, 2025 the Supreme Court issued its decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County. The case addressed a proposal...

John Gardella Interviewed On Phthalates By Home & Gardens Magazine

Attorney John Gardella  was recently interviewed by Home & Gardens magazine for an article the magazine published regarding phthalates in items...

EPA Funding In Crosshairs of Administration

On May 2, 2025, the White House issued its so-called "skinny budget" (essentially a summary version of the complete budget proposal, which will...

Ethylene Oxide Verdict in Georgia – $20 Million

Ethylene Oxide (EtO) is an industrial solvent widely used as a sterilizing agent for medical and other equipment that cannot otherwise be sterilized...

States Step In On PFAS Drinking Water Regulations

Since taking office In January 2025, the Trump Administration has been swift in its mission to rollback regulations across the federal government....

April NEPA Roundup

April 2025 has been a turbulent time for NEPA. It started with the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) circulating a draft template...

Appellate Court TSCA Decision Pauses Litigation Challenging TSCA Procedures

Right on the heels of Administrator Lee Zeldin’s announcement of the EPA’s plan of action to combat PFAS contamination under the Toxic Substance...

Regulated chemicals for which we counsel clients

Team members specializing in environmental issues

States in which we represent clients for environmental issues

Experts in California’s Prop 65 regulations

Overturning Massachusetts DEP’s Decision to Levy Fines

Our client was a light industrial company that, due to the nature of its work, stored several types of liquid and chemical waste on its property for later disposal. A fire damaged a large portion of the company building where the chemicals were stored. It was determined to be an accidental fire; however, the fire caused several containers of chemicals to explode, leading to contamination of the company’s land. The Massachusetts DEP investigated the chemical runoff from the fire and alleged that the chemicals had permeated public land and waterways at levels above allowable concentrations. Our investigation of surrounding industrial sources of pollution, our site inspections, and soil and water samples performed by an expert LSP enabled us to write a comprehensive response report to the DEP showing that the chemical pollution was confined to the company’s property and had likely never contaminated public soil or waterways. With our report and negotiations with the DEP, the agency dismissed the Notice of Responsibility against our client, thereby saving our client thousands of dollars in fines.

California Team

Christine D. Calareso

Partner

New England Team

John P. Gardella

Shareholder

Bryna Rosen Misiura

Shareholder

How We Can Help You

While all of our attorneys litigate environmental cases, should you need help with an issue in a specific state in which we regularly handle environmental legal matters, please contact

Speak to Your Environmental Law Advocate