Previous month:
June 2016
Next month:
August 2016

July 2016

California Proposes MCL for TCP

GraysonBy E. Lynn Grayson


Water testingThe State Water Resources Control Board has proposed a new maximum contaminant level (MCL) for 1,2,3-trichloropropane (TCP) of five parts per trillion (ppt).TCP is a manmade chemical found at industrial and hazardous waste sites. It has been used as a cleaning and degreasing solvent and also is associated with pesticide products.

California recognizes TCP as a carcinogen, and it has been found in numerous drinking water sources in the state. In August 2009, a public health goal (PHG) for TCP was developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) for use by the State Water Board to establish an MCL. The PHG represents the level of TCP in drinking water that OEHHA believes does not pose a significant risk to health over a lifetime of exposure (70 years). The PHG for TCP is 0.0007 µg/L, or 0.7 ppt.

A drinking water standard, or MCL, establishes a limit on the allowable concentration of a contaminant in drinking water that is provided by a public water system. The State Water Resources Control Board is proposing 5 ppt as the MCL for TCP. Formal rulemaking is expected later this year, and if approved, the MCL would become effective July 1, 2017.

EPA published a technical fact sheet about TCP in 2014. More background information and guidance on the proposed MCL action for TCP also is available from the California State Water Resources Control Board.

TCP is yet another emerging chemical that has been the subject of ongoing federal and state regulatory review and discussion for several years. It also is a chemical being analyzed and assessed at the lower threshold level of ppt versus more traditional parts per billion (ppb). As is often the case, it appears that the State of California is initiating regulatory action addressing TCP concerns, and it is likely that other states will follow.

2016 Democratic Party Platform: Combat Climate Change, Build a Clean Energy Economy, and Secure Environmental Justice

Torrence_Allison_COLOR

By Allison Torrence

 Last week, we examined the key environmental issues raised in the 2016 Republican platform. Now that the political focus has shifted from Cleveland to Philadelphia, where Democrats are holding their convention, we will examine what the Democratic Party has to say about its environmental priorities in the 2016 Democratic Party Platform. One of the Democratic Party platform’s 13 main sections is entitled “Combat Climate Change, Build a Clean Energy Economy, and Secure Environmental Justice.” Environmental issues are also raised in the section titled “Confront Global Threats”, which discusses “Global Climate Leadership.”

In the platform’s preamble, the Democrats state that:

Democrats believe that climate change poses a real and urgent threat to our economy, our national security, and our children’s health and futures, and that Americans deserve the jobs and security that come from becoming the clean energy superpower of the 21st century.

Other key positions from the Democratic environmental platform include: 

Continue reading "2016 Democratic Party Platform: Combat Climate Change, Build a Clean Energy Economy, and Secure Environmental Justice" »

U.S. EPA’s New eDisclosure System—Six Month Snapshot

SirosBy Steven M. Siros

US EPA logoRolled out in December 2015, U.S. EPA’s eDisclosure system has received mixed reviews. Although self-disclosures for “New Owners” or for criminal violations continue to be required to be submitted under the old system, most other self-disclosures must be submitted through U.S. EPA’s new eDisclosure portal. Self-disclosures made through this system are placed into one of two categories. Broadly, Category 1 disclosures are EPCRA violations that meet all of the Audit Policy or Small Business Compliance Policy conditions, while Category 2 disclosures are all other violations. For Category 1 violations, the eDisclosure system will automatically generate an “eNotice of Determination” which confirms that no penalty will be assessed conditioned on the accuracy and completeness of the eDisclosure (and assuming that the violation is corrected within the requisite 60- or 90-day time period). For Category 2 disclosures, the eDisclosure system will automatically generate an “Acknowledgement Letter” acknowledging receipt of the disclosure and notifying the entity that U.S. EPA will make a determination as to eligibility for penalty mitigation if and when it considers taking enforcement action.  The self-disclosed violation must still be corrected within the requisite time frame.  The new eDisclosure system did not modify any of the underlying eligibility requirements of U.S. EPA’s Audit Policy or Small Business Compliance Policy.

Although the regulated community has acknowledged that the eDisclosure system has streamlined self-disclosures, there has been some concern regarding U.S. EPA’s recent pronouncement that disclosures submitted under the new system would generally be released in response to FOIA requests, notwithstanding the potentially unresolved nature of the alleged violations. These released disclosures would then be made available on a publicly searchable FOIA website. Companies considering whether to self-report under the eDisclosure system must evaluate whether the benefits of civil penalty immunity or mitigation are outweighed by the risks of adverse publicity and/or potential citizen suit claims. System glitches such as website time-outs have also been reported and some have complained that there is inadequate space for narrative responses on the website portal.  Time will tell whether the eDisclosure system accomplishes its objective of minimizing U.S. EPA resources while encouraging self-disclosure and the subsequent correction of reported violations. 

2016 Republican Platform – A Focus on American Natural Resources

Torrence_Allison_COLOR

By Allison Torrence

On Monday, Republicans gathered in Cleveland to kick off the Republican National Convention and adopt the official 2016 platform of the Republican Party. One of the platform’s six main sections is titled “American Natural Resources: Agriculture, Energy, and the Environment.” Republicans summarize their environmental platform by stating:

“We firmly believe environmental problems are best solved by giving incentives for human ingenuity and the development of new technologies, not through top-down, command-and-control regulations that stifle economic growth and cost thousands of jobs.”

Key positions from the Republican environmental platform include: 

Continue reading "2016 Republican Platform – A Focus on American Natural Resources" »

SEC Disclosure Project—ESG/Sustainability Update

GraysonBy E. Lynn Grayson

The latest Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) disclosure effectiveness project outreach seeks input on sustainability metrics important to investor decisions. In the SEC’s 340-page Business and Financial Disclosure Required by Regulation S-K: Concept Release (Concept Release), the Commission seeks input from the public about which sustainability metrics are important to investor decisions and why companies often choose to provide sustainability information outside of their public filing. See 81 Fed. Reg. 23,916 (April 22, 2016).

Since the launch of the disclosure effectiveness project in 2013, the SEC has received numerous communications from socially responsible investor groups urging it to use the review of corporate risk disclosures to look at material environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures. One of the leading independent organizations that issues sustainability accounting standards, the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), already issued extensive comments on July 1, 2016 regarding the SEC’s Concept Release.

The key comments provided to the SEC by SASB are as follows:

  1. Today’s reasonable investors use sustainability disclosures;
  1. While Regulation S-K already requires disclosure of material sustainability information, the resulting disclosures are insufficient;
  1. Line-item disclosure requirements are not appropriate for sustainability issues;
  1. To evaluate sustainability performance, an industry lens is needed;
  1. Effective sustainability disclosure requires a market standard; and
  1. The Commission should acknowledge SASB standards as an acceptable disclosure framework for use by companies preparing their SEC filings.

The Concept Release is one of several outreach efforts as part of the SEC’s disclosure effectiveness project. At the heart of the initiative is how to make increasingly lengthy, complicated  financial reports more effective, understandable and user-friendly. The Concept Release reviews the Regulation S-K disclosure requirements seeking input on what should be kept, modified, eliminated, or added as well as if the current requirements provide the most efficient and effective means of disclosing this information.

As to ESG issues including sustainability considerations, the SASB comments provide a good historical overview and update on environmental disclosures and the growing trend to provide more detailed ESG and sustainability disclosures to investors and the public at large. In its comments, SASB advocates for the SEC to acknowledge its standards as an acceptable framework for companies to use in their mandatory filings to comply with Regulation S-K in a cost-effective and decision-useful manner. SASB's comments include a quote from former SEC Chair and SASB Board member Elisse Walter, noting “…Disclosure is the foundation of securities laws in the United States and many other nations, and transparency is the engine that propels our capital markets forward. But as the world continues to evolve—and its economies along with it—our disclosure requirements and reporting standards have not always kept pace.”

While the SASB framework would provide more transparency, along with much needed structure and guidance on these disclosures, it seems highly unlikely the SEC will embrace the SASB’s recommendation at this time.

Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Financing

By Donald I. Resnick, Kristen M. Boike and Lynn S. Fradkin

Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) financing is an innovative program designed to incentivize commercial businesses to undertake green efforts.  By utilizing PACE financing, governmental bodies encourage commercial entities to invest in improvements or technologies that will save energy, produce renewable energy, and/or, in some states, conserve water.  This concept is growing in popularity because it is a creative method to efficiently and effectively provide capital for sustainability projects.

How Does Commercial PACE Financing Work?

A potential borrower interested in securing commercial PACE financing must first determine whether the state in which the project is located has passed commercial PACE financing enabling legislation and, if so, whether the applicable municipality or county has established a program for which the project qualifies.  A state must pass authorizing legislation to enable a governmental entity or other inter-jurisdictional authority to form a special tax district or special assessment district to operate a commercial PACE program.  This is a key feature of the PACE financing model because the model requires the imposition of assessments or special taxes against the property that benefits from such improvements.

PACE enabling legislation has already been adopted in 32 states,1 including Illinois, California, and New York, as well as the District of Columbia.  Once the state legislation has been passed, a program sponsor (a state, consortium of governmental entities, or a single local governmental body) must design and implement a commercial PACE program to achieve its objectives, which may include economic and workforce development and greenhouse gas reduction targets.  Accordingly, there may be numerous programs within a particular state, each with its own customized parameters.  For example, in California there are 11 different commercial PACE programs2 and, as a result, PACE financing is available in most California municipalities.3

Continue reading "Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Financing" »

New Focus on Health and Safety of Infill Associated With Synthetic Turf Fields

SirosBy Steven M. Siros

NTPThe National Toxicology Program (“NTP”) recently announced that it intends to join the crowded playing field (pun intended) of state, federal, and international agencies that are evaluating the potential human health risks associated with synthetic turf fields. Synthetic turf fields have been the subject of ongoing assessment by U.S. EPA, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, and the European Union’s chemicals agency. However, the NTP intends to focus specifically on the tire crumb rubber used in those turf fields and to conduct short-term in vivo and in vitro toxicology studies on the crumb rubber. 

As more schools and other public facilities install synthetic turf fields, the potential health effects of the infill is an issue that is attracting increased attention. The NTP believes that its proposed study will help to fill what it views to be an important data gap. Although existing health study have not identified an elevated health risk from playing on artificial turf fields, these studies have generally focused on the potential health effects of exposure to lead other materials released from the artificial grass blades and/or exposure to possible emissions associated with the turf field in its entirety.   NTP and U.S. EPA have noted that there are limited studies on the effects of exposure to the tire crumb materials specifically which will be the focus of the NTP study.     

Please click here to go the NTP press release concerning its study.

Companies Publishing More Sustainability Reports

GraysonBy E. Lynn Grayson

G&A logoAccording to the Governance & Accountability Institute (G&A), 81% of S&P 500 Index companies published a sustainability or corporate responsibility report in 2015. The S&P Index is one of the most widely-followed barometers of the U.S. economy and conditions for large-cap public companies in the capital markets.

The G&A Institute has analyzed the index company components’ sustainability reporting activities for the past five years. There has been a rapid and significant uptake in corporate sustainability reporting among the 500 companies. Over the years, sustainability reporting rose from just 20% of the companies reporting in 2011 to 81% in 2015. According to the G&A Institute, this increased corporate reporting underscores the importance of setting strategies, measuring and managing environmental, social, and governance issues in response to growing stakeholder and shareholder expectations, and in some cases, demands for such reporting from major customers.

The growth in sustainability reporting tracked by the G&A Institute is as follows:

  • In 2011, just under 20% of S&P 500 companies had reported;
  • In 2012, 53% (for the first time a majority) of S&P 500 companies were reporting;
  • By 2013, 72% were reporting—that is 7-out-of-10 of all companies in the popular benchmark; and
  • In 2014, 75% of the S&P 500 were publishing reports.

The G&A Institute has joined forces with the Trust Across America/Trust Around the World (TAA/TAW) program to explore potential relationships of the trustworthiness of companies that do and do not report. The companies have charted and are analyzing the 99 index companies in 2015 that did not report on their sustainability opportunities, risks, strategies, actions, programs and achievements. More information about the work of the G&A Institute and this new initiative with TAA/TAW is available at http://www.ga-institute.com/.

While not yet mandatory in the U.S., sustainability and corporate social responsibility reporting is a growing trend and becoming somewhat of an expectation among the largest public and private companies. It appears that the new focus and scrutiny will not be on the companies reporting but those that have decided not to do so.