Kirsten L. Nathanson
Overview
When companies face environmental regulatory enforcement—whether from the U.S. EPA, the DOJ, other government agencies, citizen activist groups, or other private parties—they turn to Kirsten Nathanson as a strategic and pragmatic legal advisor to navigate the myriad risks and drive toward efficient and positive outcomes. In addition to handling litigation encompassing citizen suit defenses; National Environmental Policy Act challenges; CERCLA remediation cost recoveries and defenses; Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act actions; and EPA enforcement, Kirsten’s practice includes a focus on consensus-based dispute resolution and multilateral negotiations and mediation.
Career & Education
- University of Pennsylvania, B.A., cum laude, 1992
- The George Washington University Law School, J.D., with high honors, The Order of the Coif, 1998
- District of Columbia
- Maryland
- Supreme Court of the United States
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
- U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado
- U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
- U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Professional Activities and Memberships
- Fellow, American College of Environmental Lawyers (ACOEL)
- Leadership Council, Environmental Law Institute
- Past President, Women's Energy Network, Washington, D.C. Chapter
- Past President, Energy & Mineral Law Foundation
- Member, American Bar Association, Section on Environment, Energy & Resources
Kirsten's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.16.25
On September 11, 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asked the D.C. Circuit to vacate regulations for four types of polyfluoroalkyls (known collectively as “PFAS”) in drinking water. The motion for partial vacatur marks a significant reversal in the agency’s policy, as the EPA had previously vigorously defended legal challenges to the first-of-their-kind standards in federal court for the past two years. See American Water Works Association, et al. v. EPA, case no. 24-1188 and consolidated cases (D.C. Cir. filed June 7, 2024). Just this month, the case was given the green light to proceed, after being held in abeyance (at the request of both parties) so that the Trump administration could determine how it wished to proceed. The change signals a willingness on the part of the administration to act on previously issued non-legally binding announcements of forthcoming changes to Biden-era rules and may also serve as a harbinger for how the new administration will tackle PFAS under other statutes, such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Firm News | 9 min read | 08.21.25
Client Alert | 16 min read | 07.25.25
Representative Matters
Current representative matters include:
- Serving as federal environmental counsel to several corporations across multiple facilities and CERCLA sites, including significant landfill and contaminated sediment waterway sites and allocation mediation proceedings.
- Representing leading crop protection companies and national trade associations across a docket of litigation challenging product registrations under FIFRA; the Endangered Species Act; and the California Environmental Quality Act in California and D.C. federal district, state, and appellate courts.
- Representing a major transportation company in defending a CERCLA cost recovery claim by the United States.
- Representing a Fortune 50 company in the strategic management of legacy environmental liabilities.
- Representing multiple clients in CERCLA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act enforcement actions at the state and federal levels, including vapor intrusion, groundwater plumes, and ethanol production waste.
- Serving as federal environmental regulatory and litigation counsel to multiple national trade associations.
- Representing a Fortune 10 energy company in CERCLA contribution litigation against the United States.
Prior matters of note include:
- Provided strategic counseling on Sustainability Accounting Standards Board standards for ESG disclosures, particularly with regard to endangered species.
- Defended a large natural gas producer against threatened Clean Water Act citizen suits related to hydraulic fracturing operations in the Marcellus Shale.
- Litigated the first Endangered Species Act citizen suit against a wind energy project.
- Provided strategic and compliance counseling to a major power-generating facility on federal environmental regulatory requirements, such as EPA’s Coal Combustion Residuals Rule, including enforcement schemes and related litigation risk.
- Represented a major mining company in multiple citizen suit litigation matters under NEPA and other federal laws challenging federal leasing and mine plan approval actions.
- Defended a Fortune 50 company in a citizen group challenge to the company’s environmental remediation activities at a historic industrial facility.
- Represented a coal company in a citizen suit brought under the RCRA and the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act related to the company’s handling and disposal of coal ash.
- Defended a Clean Water Act criminal enforcement action against a private wastewater treatment corporation.
- Litigated through trial a Clean Water Act citizen suit for a major animal agriculture corporation.
- Served as national coordinating counsel to a Fortune 10 company in its toxic tort litigation.
- Conducted an internal Clean Water Act investigation for a corporation related to historical development activities in wetlands.
- Conducted regulatory litigation for the National Mining Association under the SMCRA and for agricultural trade associations under the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act.
- Conducted an internal investigation and a risk assessment for a Fortune 100 corporation related to the company’s remediation activities.
- Defended EPA enforcement actions under CERCLA, including defense of unilateral administrative orders.
- Conducted NEPA litigation for a land developer needing public lands access for a planned resort development.
Kirsten's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.16.25
On September 11, 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asked the D.C. Circuit to vacate regulations for four types of polyfluoroalkyls (known collectively as “PFAS”) in drinking water. The motion for partial vacatur marks a significant reversal in the agency’s policy, as the EPA had previously vigorously defended legal challenges to the first-of-their-kind standards in federal court for the past two years. See American Water Works Association, et al. v. EPA, case no. 24-1188 and consolidated cases (D.C. Cir. filed June 7, 2024). Just this month, the case was given the green light to proceed, after being held in abeyance (at the request of both parties) so that the Trump administration could determine how it wished to proceed. The change signals a willingness on the part of the administration to act on previously issued non-legally binding announcements of forthcoming changes to Biden-era rules and may also serve as a harbinger for how the new administration will tackle PFAS under other statutes, such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Firm News | 9 min read | 08.21.25
Client Alert | 16 min read | 07.25.25
Recognition
- Chambers USA, Environment – District of Columbia, 2013—Present
- The Best Lawyer's in America: Litigation - Environmental, 2024 & 2026
Kirsten's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.16.25
On September 11, 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asked the D.C. Circuit to vacate regulations for four types of polyfluoroalkyls (known collectively as “PFAS”) in drinking water. The motion for partial vacatur marks a significant reversal in the agency’s policy, as the EPA had previously vigorously defended legal challenges to the first-of-their-kind standards in federal court for the past two years. See American Water Works Association, et al. v. EPA, case no. 24-1188 and consolidated cases (D.C. Cir. filed June 7, 2024). Just this month, the case was given the green light to proceed, after being held in abeyance (at the request of both parties) so that the Trump administration could determine how it wished to proceed. The change signals a willingness on the part of the administration to act on previously issued non-legally binding announcements of forthcoming changes to Biden-era rules and may also serve as a harbinger for how the new administration will tackle PFAS under other statutes, such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Firm News | 9 min read | 08.21.25
Client Alert | 16 min read | 07.25.25
Insights
Environmental – Regulatory Rollback—And Pushback
|01.09.18
Crowell & Moring's Litigation Forecast 2018
Practitioner Insights: Citizen Suit Enforcement—What to Expect and How to Prepare
|03.15.17
Bloomberg BNA Daily Environment Report
- |
01.01.16
Trends, Vol. 47, No. 3
Developments in ESA Citizen Suits and Citizen Enforcement of Wildlife Laws
|01.09.15
ABA Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources, Vol. 29, No. 3
- |
11.19.14
DRI Toxic Torts and Environmental Law Blog
- |
03.29.17
Westlaw Journal Environmental
- |
08.01.25
Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Legal Forum
Practices
- Environment and Natural Resources Litigation
- Environmental Contamination
- Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)
- Endangered Species and Wildlife Protection
- Environment and Natural Resources
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Contaminated Lands and Hazardous Waste
- Environmental Justice
- Litigation and Trial
- Administrative Law
- Chemicals
- Climate Change, Environmental Markets and ESG
- Federal Lands and NEPA
- Infrastructure
- Pesticides
- Regulatory Litigation
- Energy
Industries
Kirsten's Insights
Client Alert | 4 min read | 09.16.25
On September 11, 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) asked the D.C. Circuit to vacate regulations for four types of polyfluoroalkyls (known collectively as “PFAS”) in drinking water. The motion for partial vacatur marks a significant reversal in the agency’s policy, as the EPA had previously vigorously defended legal challenges to the first-of-their-kind standards in federal court for the past two years. See American Water Works Association, et al. v. EPA, case no. 24-1188 and consolidated cases (D.C. Cir. filed June 7, 2024). Just this month, the case was given the green light to proceed, after being held in abeyance (at the request of both parties) so that the Trump administration could determine how it wished to proceed. The change signals a willingness on the part of the administration to act on previously issued non-legally binding announcements of forthcoming changes to Biden-era rules and may also serve as a harbinger for how the new administration will tackle PFAS under other statutes, such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
Firm News | 9 min read | 08.21.25
Client Alert | 16 min read | 07.25.25
