Environmental Risk and Insurance Management- Performing Due Diligence in the Era of Climate Change - presented by RTM Communications.

Public and private pressure to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is beginning to have a material effect on deals and developments. Building owners as well as buyers and sellers involved in M & A transactions are witnessing the effects of climate change and its associated risks. Shareholders and stakeholders are pressuring companies to calculate and disclose their GHG footprint. Shareholders believe that greener companies bring more value to the marketplace, to their employees and to the bottom-line. This thinking translates to the world of M & A transactions and divestitures and the due diligence undertaken to measure the costs/benefits and potential liabilities.

This site assists those who have questions regarding the types of environmental insurance
coverage available and applicable to specific cleanups and real estate transactions. The site
assists Users by forwarding their inquiries to environmental insurance industry advisors for
an objective, initial consultation, at no charge to the User.

The article below called, “The Brownfield Toolbox” is an oldie but goodie. It was written by some smart folks over at Barg Coffin Lewis & Trapp, LLP in San Francisco.

The article touches on many different issues, including risk-based corrective action, the details of and difference between Phase I and Phase II investigations, Voluntary Cleanup Program, Prospective Purchaser Agreements (locking in agency protection prior to purchasing), de minimis landowner settlements (I didn”t create the contamination, I just own it….), environmental insurance, etc.The issue of risk-based analysis is interesting because it details how previously there was a zero-tolerance policy with regards to contamination, which mostly lead to alot of boarded up and fenced off sites. Subsequently, the regulators moved to the risk-based system which focused less on the qualitative analysis of whether a site was contaminated and focused more o on the quantitative approach of determining how risky that contamination actually is to humans or the environment. In summary, that provided a more common-sense and solution oriented approach to redevelopment.

Question: Did anyone else find this article interesting?
Question: Any experts out there want to comment on what, if anything, has changed since this was written in June of 1999?

The attached publication from 10/02 was by Kristen Yount - BIO (Northern Kentucky University) and Peter Meyer - BIO (University of Louisville).

While written in very understandable format, the subject is very complex and the work that has gone into this must have been tremendous.

I imagine government folks and those in the insurance industry will be most interested, but the nature of the subject requires the publication to provide some of the best explanations of environmental insurance that you can find.

One major theme appears to be finding ways to combine one policy over a number of properties or owners, that otherwise would not be valuable enough to justify an environmental insurance policy on an individual basis.

Keep this document to review the next time you forget the details about a particular type of policy.