Two recent state-level actions highlight the ongoing spread of regulations aimed at holding property owners responsible for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination and cleanup costs across the country.  On the East Coast, a New Hampshire law went into effect on January 1, 2025, that requires sellers to provide notice to prospective buyers about the possible presence of PFAS on properties ( HB 398 (2023)).  While the law does not directly impose cleanup liability or threshold reporting levels, it highlights the public’s emphasis on these substances and their importance in property  transactions.  Similarly, on the West Coast, a  proposal in Oregon ( PFAS 2025 ) would expand the definition of “hazardous substance” to include PFAS under the state cleanup law.  For background, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) amended the definition of hazardous substance under the Comprehensive Environmental Response and Cleanup Act (CERCLA, commonly known as the “Superfund” law) in May 2024 to include two of the most common PFAS: perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS).  EPA has indicated they intend to add more PFAS in the future. CERCLA is the main federal law that regulates the identification, remediation and liability for contaminated  properties. The definition of hazardous substances is a fundamental part of the contaminated sites cleanup program because the release of a listed hazardous substance is the primary trigger that gives regulators authority to require investigation, removal, and remedial actions when listed hazardous substances are discovered on a property. Since PFAS were added to the federal definition, state regulators have begun updating their regulations to align with the federal standard.  Cleanup actions can be very costly and have significant impacts on commercial property transactions due to the risks and liability associated with cleanup actions.

Published on November 20, 2024, and adopted by the European Council,  Regulation (EU) 2024/2865 amends Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008 on the classification, labelling, and packaging (CLP) of substances and mixtures (known as the  CLP Regulation) which applies directly to all European Union (EU) member states. The updates are significant, with the addition of new hazard classes, including endocrine-disrupting chemicals for human health (category 1 or 2); endocrine-disrupting chemicals for the environment (category 1 or 2); persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic substances; very persistent and very bioaccumulative substances; persistent, mobile and toxic substances; and very persistent and very mobile substances. Other amendments allow the digital labelling of chemical products, providing they comply with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS). Changes have also been made specifying font sizes based on container capacity, and modifying fold-out label requirements, which previously only applied to small packages. While this amending Regulation entered into force on 10 December 2024, some new provisions on labelling (applicable to updating label information, fold-out/reduced labelling, digital labelling) and provisions related to public information of the Classification & Labeling (C&L) inventory, and marketing will be phased in on July 1, 2026. Others, applicable to font size, label dimensions, line spacing, font type, and color, will be effective on January 1, 2027. These transitional provisions are detailed in Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 1272/2008. Additional  Guidance on CLP requirements are available through the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA).

 On October 22, 2024, in what has now become a global regulatory trend, the Ministry of Employment and Labor issued  Act No. 20522  (Partial Revision of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)), which adds working long hours during a heat wave, or a cold wave as recognized causes of an occupational illness/health disorder. Citing climate change as a serious risk factor for workers, these amendments require employers to take the necessary measures to prevent health disorders caused by working long hours in extreme temperatures. This amendment comes into effect on June 1, 2025. As an International Labour  Organization (ILO) member state, this S. Korean amendment was notably published just months after the July 2024 ILO publication entitled “ Heat at Work: Implications for Safety and Health, A Global Review of the Science Policy and Practice,” which includes information on the national policy responses of member states (section 3.2) and guidance in Chapter 4 on Workplace heat stress prevention and control practices, with detailed descriptions of protective measures which can be applied according to a “hierarchy of controls.” 

Recent changes in Ontario (ON) and Alberta (AB) highlight a growing focus on workplace violence and harassment in Canada.  The amendments require employers to review and potentially update their workplace harassment and violence policies and programs to ensure compliance. On October 28, 2024, ON Bill 190,  Working for Workers Five Act, 2024, amending the Occupational Health & Safety Act (OHSA), received Royal Assent and brought into force two revised definitions, “workplace harassment” and “workplace sexual harassment,” effectively expanding the scope of existing protections for both types of harassment to cover such behavior occurring “virtually through the use of information and communications technology.” Under the OSHA, ON employers must prepare a policy concerning workplace harassment and review the policy as often as necessary (at least annually). A written program to implement the policy is also required; therefore, employers with policies and programs that have not been recently updated and/or reviewed should review these documents as soon as possible to ensure compliance.

More recent amendments to Part 27 of Alberta’s  Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Code on Violence and Harassment, issued under  AB Regulation 202/2024, became effective on December 4, 2024. Key amendments repealed and replaced the separate violence prevention plan and harassment prevention plan requirements, consolidating these requirements into one consolidated and prescribed violence and harassment prevention plan. These new integrated plans continue to have a 3-year minimum review schedule. Still, they must also be reviewed when an incident of violence or harassment indicates a review is required (not necessarily after every incident as previously required), when a change may affect the potential for such an incident, and upon the Joint H&S Committee or representative’s request. Other related amendments on preventative training and the investigation and reporting of incidents are largely unchanged but provide clarifications.

On October 1, 2024, California became the second state with a  Direct Potable Reuse Program. Direct potable reuse (DPR) introduces reclaimed water, without environmental buffers and treated using advanced methods, directly into a potable water distribution system. Namibia has operated the only full-scale DPR facility since 2002, despite many attempts from jurisdictions around the world to get approval for more. It appears that is about to change. The nation’s first DPR program, in Colorado, became effective just two years ago. Arizona and Florida have published proposed rules, and twelve states have DPR guidelines.

Agencies cite increasing water demand and diminishing supply as primary drivers for these programs; more affordable and proven methods make them practicable. Recycled water has many secondary benefits for business, including better development planning assurance due to stable water supplies and answering ESG considerations since recycled or reclaimed water is considered a form of water reduction. The effects of DPR extend beyond the cities they serve too. It has the smallest carbon footprint of any community water source because it is produced close to where it is used and provides relief for sensitive aquatic ecosystems from reduced withdrawal pressure and contaminated effluent. However, the  progress of DPR as a regulatory movement belies the stalled status of bringing advanced water treatment facilities into production. Public concerns have stymied permitting efforts despite demonstrating safe test methods from pilot facilities.

Florida may help break the logjam. It has been recognized as the national leader in water recycling for a generation. Highly treated reclaimed water augments surface water through its indirect potable reuse (IPR) program and helps Florida recycle nearly half of its wastewater. IPR differs from DPR in that it retains an environmental buffer, but with wastewater involved, IPR also faces strong public resistance. Utilities and agencies in Florida have a track record of IPR implementation they could emulate in promoting the safety and benefits of DPR to end users already acclimatized to water reuse. Florida’s water conservation success makes its recent rulemaking,  Advanced Potable Water Reuse System, January 7, 2025, worth watching. It proposes a comprehensive DPR framework, establishing procedures to obtain a permit, construct, modify, operate, and maintain an advanced water purification facility. It includes the requirements for monitoring and reporting once a permit is issued and requirements for the proper operation of advanced potable water reuse systems. In concert with the DPR proposed rule, the agency has also proposed expanding its IPR program to allow groundwater replenishment.

•