Environmental Vanguard is a quarterly newsletter sharing key insights from McGuireWoods’ leading environmental attorneys and consultants at the forefront of regulatory, litigation and policy developments. This issue covers several energy-related topics including an Interior Department memorandum on wind and solar projects on federal lands; the latest on data center development; a U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) announcement on hurricane response; an update on the EPA reorganization under the Trump administration and the EPA’s webinar on elevated temperature landfills; and the latest in per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) litigation with a summary of a historic settlement between New Jersey and 3M.
Look for new editions every quarter and feel free to reach out to the McGuireWoods team with questions about litigation, regulatory, enforcement or other environmental law issues.
Energy
U.S. Department of the Interior Issues Memo on Wind, Solar Projects on Federal Lands
On July 15, 2025, the U.S. Department of the Interior issued a directive requiring the personal approval of Secretary Doug Burgum for nearly every aspect of new wind and solar projects requiring a federal permit. The directive supports Executive Order 14315 issued by the White House a week earlier. The E.O. and the secretary’s directive will have an immediate effect on wind and solar projects on federal lands, including projects not fully constructed.
The condition to seek Burgum’s personal approval could effectively kill new solar and wind projects on federal land, that touch federal land or require federal approval, even on private land. While the E.O. and the secretary’s directive cannot prevent private parties from enacting solar and wind projects on private land, they can halt the projects by sitting on the approvals needed from the federal government to complete them.
The Interior Department’s directive inserts the secretary into the review process of everything from the initial decision to begin a formal evaluation of a solar or wind project application, to the issuance of a record of decision approving it. For example, personal approval from the Office of the Deputy Secretary and the Office of the Secretary must be sought and received for temporary operation permits, right-of-way grants, financial assurances, and draft and final environmental assessments. The Interior Department decides if it will approve such requests and can bring to a standstill a project that needs a permit issued before it can proceed. This new prerequisite of personal approval creates an additional hurdle to an already arduous governmental permitting process.
Using FILOTs to Make South Carolina Solar Projects Work — Politically and Financially
“I didn’t move to the country to stare at a sea of mirrors.”
“Solar panels will leak toxins into our groundwater — our kids drink that.”
“What good is clean energy if people are going hungry?”
“Nuclear and hydro are the only true green energy options.”
Welcome to the public hearing for a typical solar project in rural America. Despite checking boxes on sustainability, energy resilience, and increased property tax revenues, solar developments can face fierce community opposition. On social media, at town halls, and in midnight emails to county council members, misinformation and concern often collide, turning a clean energy win into a political balancing act.
What commenters often miss is that solar farms can generate more tax revenue than the farmland or timberland they replace. Solar developments also do not bring demands for schools, water or traffic infrastructure. In South Carolina, a fee-in-lieu of ad valorem tax (FILOT) agreement can become part of the solution. Designed to entice development and provide long-term tax certainty, FILOTs are evolving into vehicles to address community concerns, lock in responsible design commitments and help keep projects viable in politically sensitive environments.
McGuireWoods Consulting’s infrastructure & economic development team helps leading solar developers navigate this process, including negotiating and securing FILOT agreements that deliver tax savings and long-term financial predictability while meeting county expectations on decommissioning, land buffers and site adjustments that do not set off local social media commentary.
EPA Extends Coal Combustion Residual Management Unit Deadline
Coal combustion residuals (CCR), also known as coal ash, are the byproducts remaining after power plants burn coal to generate electricity. CCR, which contains heavy metal contaminants such as arsenic and chromium, could impact waterways, groundwater, drinking water and the air.
Faced with significant pressure from environmental groups, the EPA promulgated the first federal CCR regulation in 2015, which imposed requirements on CCR landfills and CCR surface impoundments but exempted certain legacy surface impoundments. A 2018 opinion by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Utility Solid Waste Activities Group, et al v. EPA, overturned this exemption, highlighting that these legacy surface impoundments may be unlined and unmonitored, making them prone to leaks and structural issues.
In 2024, spurred by the 2018 D.C. Circuit opinion, the EPA expanded CCR regulations to capture legacy surface impoundments and CCR management units (CCRMUs). The 2024 rules regulated CCRMUs — which refers to inactive CCR landfills as well as CCR surface impoundments and landfills that closed prior to the effective date of the 2015 CCR rule — for the first time. Owners or operators of CCRMUs must complete a two-part facility evaluation report (FER), with the first part due Feb. 9, 2026, and second part due Feb. 8, 2027.
On July 22, 2025, the EPA published a direct final rule and companion proposal, which allows CCRMU owners or operators to combine FER parts 1 and 2 into a single submission. The rule gives owners an extra year to complete FER part 1, with both parts due Feb. 8, 2027. Additionally, the EPA extended groundwater monitoring provisions for CCRMUs by 15 months, from May 8, 2028, to Aug. 8, 2029.
Data Centers
Data Center Projects Succeed Despite Headwinds
Data centers have received negative press in Georgia around impacts caused by their water use. For example, in Newton County, Georgia, a county of 120,000 people located one-and-a-half hours east of Atlanta, residents grappled with well water quality and quantity due to the presence of a large data center. Newton County now faces nine new applications for data centers, creating friction between the local government, residents and tech companies.
Data centers are essential to the digital economy, but they are increasingly met with local resistance. Communities raise important questions about environmental impact, water and energy use, and whether tax incentives tied to these projects deliver lasting public value.
Environmental concerns are often at the core of community opposition. Common issues include water used for cooling, power demand and grid reliability, land and habitat disruption, and questions about carbon emissions and long-term sustainability.
McGuireWoods and McGuireWoods Consulting assist clients in preparing responses that address topics such as water-efficient cooling technologies and systems, renewable energy procurement, and low-impact site design. The infrastructure and economic development team at McGuireWoods Consulting helps local leaders and residents see the full economic and environmental picture.
Hurricane Response
U.S. Chemical Safety Board Makes Hurricane Preparation Recommendations
In July, the CSB issued a news release emphasizing the importance of reviewing and refining hurricane preparedness materials and guidance over the coming months to prevent accidental chemical releases. These recommendations come ahead of what the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration predicted will be an “above average” hurricane season, which lasts from June 1 to Nov. 30.
CSB published materials it developed using experience from past extreme weather events. Hurricane Harvey provides one salient example in which power outages led to several fires burning over 350,000 pounds of organic peroxide, which combusted when refrigeration systems failed at a facility in Crosby, Texas. This incident forced more than 200 residents to evacuate their homes for a week.
Preparedness resources include a Center for Chemical Process Safety Guidance Document on Planning for Natural Disasters, which states “the likelihood of such natural disasters [such as Hurricanes Katrina and Harvey and Superstorm Sandy] seem to be increasing.” The guidance document encourages facilities to (1) identify potential natural hazards to which the facility might be vulnerable; (2) gather information on the natural hazards to help them devise and assess preparedness; (3) identify which equipment and systems are critical for safe operations — including for flood, wind, seismic and other hazards as may be relevant to the facility; and (4) compare those critical equipment and systems to design criteria to withstand natural disasters, including addressing any gaps between the current system or equipment and what might be needed to maintain safe operations. The report additionally addresses recovery and recommissioning recommendations.
EPA
EPA in Flux — Layoffs and Reorganization
Since the start of the second Trump administration, the EPA has undergone reorganization and consolidation. Starting in March 2025, Administrator Lee Zeldin terminated the Environmental Justice and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion arms of the agency, which resulted in a reduction of approximately 280 employees, with an additional 175 employees transferred to other offices.
The administrator has continued his mission to streamline the EPA with a May 2025 reorganization announcement impacting multiple offices, including the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP). OCSPP, the office tasked with evaluating pesticides and toxic chemicals, plans to hire more than 130 technical staffers. With this influx of staff, OCSPP will work to reduce significant chemical and pesticide review backlogs. The EPA also made changes to the Office of Air and Radiation by creating the Office of State Air Partnerships, which will work with state, local and tribal agencies to provide consistent air permitting guidance across jurisdictions.
The latest reorganizational phase, announced in July 2025, targets more offices, including the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA), which leads the EPA’s civil and criminal enforcement. The first phase of reorganization did not affect OCEA significantly. This marks the first time OECA employees are included in the buyout program, which already resulted in a reduction in the EPA staff by nearly 23%. If the trend continues, enforcement targets and priorities could become more uncertain.
EPA Webinar on Elevated Temperature Landfills
On July 16, 2025, the EPA hosted a webinar on the emerging issue of elevated temperature landfills (ETLFs). Landfill operators and owners should pay attention to the solutions offered by the EPA when monitoring their properties to head off the costs of a solid waste facility becoming an ETLF. There are no universal markers as to what will lead to an ETLF. Each site is unique, but several indicators to monitor include wellhead temperatures exceeding 131 F to 145 F (not just one wellhead but several in a cell or area), diminishing or low primary gas ratio (CH4/CO2), CO and H2 in landfill gas, very low or no oxygen in landfill gas, increased leachate production, high-strength leachate (BOD, COD and/or VOCs), and substantial settlement. A landfill can be classified as an ETLF if it has one or more of the indicators in addition to high wellhead temperatures.
Landfills are one of the most highly regulated industries in the country by federal and state environmental agencies. Solid waste landfills must carry air permits, water permits, solid waste permits, and licenses to operate. Many permits also require periodic testing of stormwater, ground water, leachate, ambient air and landfill gas quality. Despite the extensive regulations and testing, landfills throughout the country have progressed into what the industry terms an ETLF. Monitoring the data is insufficient. An analysis of the collected data through graphs or tables must take place to determine occurring trends.
ETLFs are not fires. While landfill fires generally occur on or near the surface where oxygen is more prevalent, ETLFs occur when the waste mass temperatures exceed 131 F to 145 F, methane production slows, biological activity becomes minimal, chemical reactions occur and the landfill odor profile changes from a healthy decaying smell to that of a chemical reaction. These odors can disturb the local community, making their enjoyment of life problematic and causing them to suspect toxic chemicals are emanating from the landfill, which might cause adverse health effects.
Once a landfill becomes an ETLF, it can take five to 10 years and tens to hundreds of millions of dollars in expenditures to cool the waste mass temperatures to under regulatory thresholds. An ETLF will likely result in state and/or federal consent decrees requiring remediation on a tight timeline, which can also result in large expenditures for construction and legal costs. Legal effects will likely not stop at government-imposed consent decrees but may result in lawsuits claiming public nuisance, private nuisance, negligent mismanagement, adverse health effects, and environmental violations of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Some lawsuits even demanded as a remedy the physical movement of an entire community to another location.
The EPA and state departments of environmental quality will likely delve into monitoring more closely those landfills showing signs of ETLFs.
PFAS
New Jersey Announces Historic Settlement with 3M for PFAS Contamination
On May 13, 2025, New Jersey Attorney General Matthew Platkin and Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Shawn LaTourette announced a settlement with 3M, a Minnesota-based chemical manufacturer, to address contamination of the state’s drinking water and other natural resources with PFAS. The settlement includes payments up to $450 million ($140 million towards damages to and lost value from natural resources, $170 million for PFAS contamination abatement projects, $40 million for claims for direct and indirect costs, and a “New Jersey Leadership Payment” to the state of an amount between $50 and $100 million) to be made over 25 years.
If approved by public comment and the court, the settlement satisfies “3M’s alleged liability with respect to PFAS statewide, including for the specific costs and damages alleged” in the state’s consolidated 2019 lawsuits against 3M and other defendants, and in a statewide PFAS directive “for environmental, consumer protection, and other liabilities (including common-law, cost-recovery, and other claims), as well as for additional costs and damages related to PFAS and alleged PFAS Contamination” and subject to limitations in the settlement.
The consolidated lawsuit alleges that defendant companies are responsible for contaminating the Chambers Works facility, a complex along the Delaware River, that led to PFAS contamination of the state’s drinking water, and the Parlin facility, in Sayreville. The state seeks damages to investigate and rectify PFAS contamination around the area and restore natural resources and punitive damages. DuPont, the prior owner of the Chambers Works facility, and Chemours, the current owner, were not part of the settlement. The trial began in May 2025.
In the settlement agreement, 3M continues “to deny any violation, wrongdoing, or liability with respect to any and all [c]laims” that can or have been levied by the plaintiffs. The state additionally “acknowledge[s] that 3M has taken actions, which other companies have not taken, to cease manufacturing of AFFF and PFAS and to seek to phase out the use of PFAS in its products.” This includes an announcement made on Dec. 20, 2022, that 3M will no longer manufacture PFAS and “will work to discontinue the use of PFAS” in its products by the end of 2025.
Public comment on the settlement, which commenced on July 21, 2025, is open for 60 days until Sept. 19, 2025.
