Sustainability, Resiliency and Risk Mitigation

September 18, 2023October 11, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

California Jumps the Line ahead of the SEC and enacts two significant Climate Disclosure Bills

Last week, the California legislature passed and, over the weekend (on October 9, 2023) Governor Newsom signed, two climate disclosure bills which focus on the financial risk of greenhouse gas emissions. Full text of the bills can be found at SB 261 and SB 253.

The bills will require that companies doing business in California will be required to state and certify their scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas emissions and to state and certify their climate related financial risks.

Given that many US companies and many EU and UK companies that do business in the US also transact in California, these laws will have a meaningful impact on many public and non-public companies alike irrespective of the pace or lack thereof from the SEC on its own set of federal climate disclosure obligations.

Bill 261 – Under SB 261, companies with annual revenues of more than $500 Million Dollars that do business in California will now be required to compile and issue a biennial climate-related financial risk report, with the first due date being January 1, 2026.

Bill Text – SB-261 Greenhouse gases: climate-related financial risk. (ca.gov)

“Climate related financial risk” under SB 261 is defined as a “material risk of harm to immediate and long-term financial outcomes due to physical and transaction risks, including but not limited to, risks to corporate operations, provision of goods and services, supply chain, employee health and safety, capital and financial investments, institutional investments, financial standing of loan receipts and borrowers, shareholder value, consumer demand and financial markets and economic health.” Wow, that is a pretty wide ambit of what risks will fall within the definition of climate related financial risks!

SB 261 requires that the reports required under the Bill must be prepared in accordance with the Task Force on Climate Related Financial Disclosures (also referred to as TCFD) reporting framework. Reports that are prepared under the International Financial Reporting Standards -Sustainability Disclosure Standards (or ISSB) will also be acceptable. Failure to report under the Bill will be subject to an annual fine of up to $50,000 per year.

Bill 253 – SB 253, also known as the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act, applies to companies that do business in California and have total annual revenues in excess of $1 Billion. The reporting requirements will not be applicable until January 2026, once the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has adopted implementing regulations, which must occur by January 1, 2025.
CARB’s implementing regulations will likely provide the key details of the reporting process, including the following:
Bill Text – SB-253 Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act. (ca.gov)

Scope 1 and Scope 2 Emissions. Beginning in January 2026, reporting entities must annually publicly disclose their scope 1 and scope 2 GHG emissions for the prior fiscal year. The bill defines Scope 1 emissions as “all direct greenhouse gas emissions that stem from sources that a reporting entity owns or directly controls, regardless of location, including, but not limited to, fuel combustion activities.” Scope 2 emissions are defined as “indirect greenhouse gas emissions from consumed electricity, steam, heating, or cooling purchased or acquired by a reporting entity, regardless of location.” Most publicly traded companies have begun some level if not a very detailed level of Scope 1 and 2 tracking, with many actually already reporting these metrics.

Scope 3 Emissions. Beginning in 2027, reporting entities will also be required to annually disclose their scope 3 emissions for the prior fiscal year. Scope 3 emissions include “indirect upstream and downstream greenhouse gas emissions, other than scope 2 emissions, from sources that the reporting entity does not own or directly control,” which may include “purchased goods and services, business travel, employee commutes, and process and use of sold products.” Many in the industry are concerned about how they are going to get their supply chain to measure and report in a meaningful way data that will become the reporting entities’ Scope 3 emissions.

Annual Fees. Reporting entities will be required to pay an annual fee to CARB upon filing their annual disclosures. These fees are supposed to be used to fund CARB’s oversight of the program.

Administrative Penalties. Reporting entities that fail to timely file their annual disclosures will be subject to administrative penalties of up to $500,000 per reporting year.

Reporting Standards. Reporting entities must measure and report their GHG emissions in conformance with the Greenhouse Gas Protocol, a set of reporting standards developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBC). Reporting entities must also engage an independent third-party assurance provider to audit their scope 1 and 2 emissions beginning in 2026, and their scope 3 emissions beginning in 2030.

Green Sprouts – SB 253 and SB 261 make California the first state to require GHG emissions and climate risk reporting from large companies. The bills, which are now law, jump the SEC’s proposed climate disclosure rules which have not yet been finalized or released after two publicly disclosed delays in implementation.

Given the number of companies that “do business in California”, irrespective of when and how the SEC makes its climate disclosure rules final and if it does this fall, California has once again cemented its place of relevance in the climate change arena and has mandated movement in this space by larger companies doing business in California. It remains to be seen if other states follow their lead but surely New York, Washington, D.C., Massachusetts and others will take a very hard look at proceeding down this path.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Joseph West, Sharon Caffrey, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

August 24, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

HUD – over $4B in lending capacity and $840M in grant funds under its Green and Resilient Retrofit Program

The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has announced more than $4 Billion in loan capacity and $840 Million in grant funding availability for investments in clean energy at multifamily properties that receive HUD assistance.

The funding is designed to encourage investment in a variety of clean energy projects with a stated goal to improve the quality and the resilience of those properties.

The Green and Resilient Retrofit Program (“GRRP”) was created as a part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 to incentivize investments that reduce energy and utility costs and hope to reduce greenhouse gas emissions at the applicable properties.

HUD put forth 3 key goals for the GRRP:

1. to reduce energy and water use in HUD-assisted multifamily properties;

2. to make HUD-assisted multifamily properties more resilient to extreme weather events and natural disasters, and

3. to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from HUD-assisted multifamily properties.

HUD’s view is that by achieving the stated goals the properties will reduce utility bills and costs of operations, which in turn benefit their tenants. By reducing consumption, a natural outcome will be to also reduce greenhouse gas emissions HUD’s goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% across all participating properties and to reduce modeled energy consumption by at least 25% in each property.

Eligible properties are those receiving HUD assistance through Sections 8, 202, 811 and 236.

Awards are available for the following categories of properties:

Element Awards are for properties that are materially advanced in a recapitalization transaction that includes targeted utility efficiency, carbon emissions, reduction, renewable energy and/or climate resilience measures.

Leading Edge Awards are for properties with a significant capacity to execute a rehabilitation that will achieve an advanced green certification.

Comprehensive Awards are for properties, including those not yet developed, where the property owner is interested in improving the utility efficiency and resilience to climate hazards.

Green Sprouts – The Inflation Reduction Act is a rather amazing cluster of potential benefits and incentive programs for the built environment. HUD has taken the baton and has proceeded to incentivize energy efficiency investments where they are lending money. $4 Billion in lending capacity and $840M in grants are now available. Worthy of checking it out.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

August 17, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

Plastic Bag Bans – A New Jersey Update

By way of an update to our April 27, 2023 Blog post regarding plastic bag and straw bans, we thought it a good time to circle back to what is going in New Jersey (other state updates will follow).

The relevant NJ plastic bag ban bill can be found at https://dep.nj.gov/wp-content/uploads/plastic-ban-law/docs/plastic-bag-law-c117.pdf

Per a press release issued earlier this week, the New Jersey Business Action Center is reminding small restaurants and stores of their need to comply with the recent plastic and paper carryout bag ban before local health departments conduct inspections of their facilities.

Under state law, retail stores, grocery stores and food service businesses may NOT provide or sell single-use plastic carryout bags and polystyrene foam food service products (i.e., styrofoam). Single-use paper carryout bags are allowed to be provided or sold, except by grocery stores equal to or larger than 2,500 SF, which may only provide or sell reusable carryout bags.

The state maintains an online vendor list where businesses affected by the ban can find alternative carryout products.

According to the New Jersey Plastics Council’s annual report, released in May 2023, approximately 5.5 billion single-use plastic bags and 110 million single-use paper bags were eliminated from entering the waste stream and environment by the supermarket sector alone from May 2022, the effective date of the law through the end of 2022.

Parting Shot – While there was the normal outrage at the ban being enacted in the first place, and that the plastic bag ban would cause massive inconvenience and potential loss of jobs, the reality on the ground is that other than minor inconvenience, constituents quickly learned to bring bags with them and that they could and would survive in a non-styrofoam providing environment. While 5.5 billion single use bags might not seem like much to some, in this author’s view, it is a big step in positive direction where people take greater interest in where their waste is going and whether the waste can be reused for another purpose.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

August 10, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

Seattle – Not Just for Starbucks These Days – Mayor Proposes Greenhouse Gas Reduction Legislation

Seattle Mayor Bruce Harrell recently proposed legislation that would require the city’s large commercial and multifamily buildings to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (“GhG”) over the next several decades and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

Per the City’s press release, the standards were nearly 2 years in the making, are expected to reduce annual commercial building greenhouse gas emissions by 27% compared with 2008 levels,

According to the EPA and multiple studies, the built environment (i.e., buildings) are a large contributor to GhG emissions nationwide, and in Seattle, contributes more than 33% of the city’s total GhG emissions.

Seattle is one of a growing list of cities (including Boston who announced this policy 2 weeks ago) — and more recently, some states (e.g., Washington) — that require many new buildings to be all-electric. While these policies will likely reduce consumption of fossil fuels in many cases, they do not address existing buildings that use gas, oil and fossil fuels to provide heat, hot water and chiller water.

During 2023, more and more states and municipalities are developing building performance standards that aim to reduce buildings’ carbon footprint by requiring them to meet certain standards. These more recent standards focus on greenhouse gas emissions rather than just energy usage.

Seattle’s proposed new standard is, per Construction Dive, the product of nearly 2 years of meetings, open houses, webinars, advisory group and specialized task force sessions. Not surprisingly, not all constituents were happy with pushback during the development of these standards coming from environmental groups that want more and faster emission reductions and from real estate and business groups that believe that standards are far too reaching.

All told, according to the Seattle Office of Sustainability and Environment, the new standards will cover approximately 4,100 buildings in Seattle, including about 1,885 multifamily buildings and 1,650 nonresidential buildings that are mostly downtown and in dense neighborhoods. Like many of the other cities adopting these type of GhG emissions based standards (see, e.g., New York City with Local Law 97), the proposal offers several pathways for buildings to comply with the standards; owners who do not comply would be fined.

It is believe by the City Administration that the new standard will help Seattle secure federal funding and incentives. Seattle City Council is expected to review and likely implement the legislation in their fall session.

Parting Shot – Seattle is part of a growing list of cities and States that are looking to reduce energy consumption in its building stock by way of focusing on fossil fuel consumption and GhG emissions by requiring monitoring, measuring and reporting by larger buildings, and, if standards set by the applicable governing body have been exceeded, the owner of the building (and thereafter, likely the tenants under their leases) will be subject to a fine until they correct their exceedance. Carrots have been offered in the past as incentives, these types of ordinances are much more of the stick approach.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

July 19, 2023 by Drew D. Salvest

ISSB issues global sustainability and climate-related standards

In June 2023, the International Sustainability Standards Board (the ISSB) published its first set of global sustainability and climate-related disclosure standards for investors[1]. The ISSB was established in November 2021 at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) as a sister board to the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and is responsible for developing IFRS sustainability standards to better inform investment decisions and meet the needs of the capital markets.

Although IFRS is not used in the US, the standards are likely to influence the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) sustainability reporting requirements that are currently being developed. IFRS S1 General Requirements for Disclosure of Sustainability-related Financial Information (IFRS S1) and IFRS S2 Climate-related Disclosures (IFRS S2) have been drafted in response to users of financial reports calling for information to be presented in a comparable, verifiable and consistent way.

Overview:

IFRS S1 is a set of sustainability-related financial disclosures that prescribe how companies should report information about their sustainability-related risks and opportunities in a way that is useful to users of financial reports in making investment decisions. The standards require companies to disclose and report on sustainability-related risks and opportunities over the short, medium and long term to investors. IFRS S1 requires companies to disclosure information regarding sustainability targets, governance, strategy and risk management.

IFRS S2 is a set of climate-related disclosures that have been developed to provide information to investors about a company’s climate-related risks and opportunities. IFRS S2 incorporates recommendations provided by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). IFRS S2 requires a company to disclose its Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions.

Next Steps:

IFRS S1 and IFRS S2 are effective for annual reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2024. The standards are not mandatory and it is up to individual countries to decide whether listed companies are required to apply them. It is expected that the standards will be voluntarily adopted as non-financial reporting on sustainability becomes market standard. The UK has indicated its intent to incorporate the ISSB standards, however the EU and US plan to introduce their own separate disclosure requirements. European companies are subject to disclosure requirements with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) and the SEC’s climate-related disclosure rules were proposed in 2022 and are due to be issued later this year. It remains to be seen how the different reporting obligations will work together to avoid duplication and inconsistency. The ISSB has been working with EFRAG (European Financial Reporting Advisory Group) on the specific reporting requirements of the CSRD to ensure there is a level of consistency between the standards. Guidance is expected to be issued by the ISSB in order to avoid duplication between the different standards in the EU. The ISSB has also established the Transition Implementation Group to work with stakeholders to facilitate implementation of the standards and address concerns. The International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) also intends to independently review the ISSB standards.

If you have any questions about this post, please contact Drew D. Salvest, Natalie A. Stewart or Rebecca Green.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

[1] https://www.ifrs.org/news-and-events/news/2023/06/issb-issues-ifrs-s1-ifrs-s2/

May 19, 2023May 19, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

The General Services Administration and the National Deep Energy Retrofit Program – Electrification of over 41 Buildings – $300M of Investment Value!

Last week, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) issued its largest ever notice of opportunity under its “National Deep Energy Retrofit” program, announcing their intent to leverage funding from the Inflation Reduction Act for projects in four (4) states and the District of Columbia. The projects are intended to accelerate the agency’s efforts to achieve President Biden’s goal to achieve net-zero emissions in the federal buildings portfolio by 2045, and are part of his “Investing In America” agenda to attempt to rebuild the economy, create good-paying jobs, and accelerate the deployment of clean energy.

Through “Energy Savings Performance Contracts (ESPCs)”, the GSA stated that it intends to use Inflation Reduction Act funding to bring energy and cost-saving improvements to 41 facilities, including 17 in the DC area and 24 across Illinois, Indiana, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. The projects, with an estimated value of more than $300 million, are looking to convert facilities to all-electric, rather than relying on onsite fossil fuels equipment, and promote opportunities to achieve net zero operations.

According to the GSA, “this historic call for proposals is another example of how GSA is making meaningful progress towards decarbonization and net zero buildings – while delivering savings to taxpayers and a healthier future for the next generation,” said GSA Administrator Robin Carnahan. “We’re excited to partner with innovative energy service companies to rapidly accelerate our progress toward achieving a net zero federal footprint – and create good-paying jobs along the way.”

As part of the White House’s Climate Smart Buildings Initiative, GSA’s National Deep Energy Retrofit program in intended to help modernize federal buildings to cut greenhouse gas emissions and reduce site energy consumption by renovating buildings to maximize reductions in onsite energy use. These projects will also help support GSA’s efforts to meet the recently released “Federal Building Performance Standard” and convert buildings to all-electric buildings in which none of the equipment will use onsite fossil fuel combustion.

Per the GSA, GSA provides centralized procurement and shared services for the federal government, managing a nationwide real estate portfolio of nearly 370 million rentable square feet, overseeing approximately $75 billion in annual contracts, and delivering technology services that serve millions of people across dozens of federal agencies.

Take Aways – it appears pretty clear that the Biden Administration is moving to solidify its positions regarding climate change and action to reduce green house gas emissions by having the GSA push forward with their National Deep Energy Retrofit Program. This is a furthering of the Administration’s prior climate comments and commitments regarding greenhouse gas reduction and doing what it views as being within its preview without having to obtain Congressional approval or authorization. Given the GSA’s broad impact on its own portfolio and on landlords where it leases space, this will indeed cause more than a ripple and is likely to significantly affect much of its inventory of hundreds of millions of square feet of space nationally.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information or if you have any questions about this post, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

April 27, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

Plastic Bag Bans – Do They Work?

According to an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer per a report issued by the City of Philadelphia (the “City”), the City’s 2019 plastic bag ban has resulted in a significant reduction in the use of plastic bags – i.e., the equivalent of filling Philadelphia City Hall with plastic bags every 8 months which would be approximately 200 Million less plastic bags. The City’s report – “Evaluating the Ban: Philadelphia’s Plastic Bag Ban and Changes in Bag Usage in the City” (the “Report”) focused on 2021 to 2022, was conducted by the University of Pittsburgh and Swarthmore College and, concluded that the ban significantly reduced plastic bag use in the City.

Click on this link for a copy of the Report. extension://elhekieabhbkpmcefcoobjddigjcaadp/https://www.phila.gov/media/20230426164234/PlasticBagBanReport-1.pdf#:~:text=We%20used%20a%20difference-in-difference%20approach%20to%20estimate%20the,clear%20boundary%20between%20the%20regulated%20and%20unregulated%20areas.

The City’s ban was passed by City Council in 2019 and took effect on July 1, 2021. It prohibits retailer from providing single use plastic bags and paper bags not made of at least 40% recycled material.

Per the Inquirer, 16 other municipalities in Pennsylvania have some sort of plastic bag ban, including Cheltenham, Radnor, Haverford, Media and Pittsburgh. Cheltenham’s ordinance was recently adopted earlier this week and regulates single use plastic bags, including restaurants’ use of such bags.

The Report concluded that in each category improvement was shown in both the City and the suburbs by way of reusable bag use and reduction of plastic bag use (i.e., proportion using any plastic bag (down), proportion using any paper bag (up) , proportion using any recycled bag (up), proportion using no bag (up), number of plastic bags used per customer (down), number of paper bags used per customer (up) and number of reusable bags used per customer (up)).

As hoped for, the ban resulted in a 53% reduction in the likelihood of a consumer using a plastic bag.

Across the bridge in New Jersey, the State enacted the Single Use Waste Reduction Act in May, 2022 which banned plastic bags and foam food containers and built off of an earlier plastic straw ban which went into effect in 2021. Bags in NJ used to wrap uncooked meat, fish or poultry; bags used to package loose items; and bags used to carry live animals are all exempt from the ban. Residents continue to be frustrated, per recent polling, with the inclusion of a ban on paper bags which are not permitted to be handed out or sold at big box stores and grocery stores larger than 2,500 feet in size. The NJ ban also includes carry out and to go styrofoam cups, plates and to go containers .

Take Aways – it appears pretty clear that behavior can be changed via regulation and that the ban on the use of single use plastic bags and similar products is, in fact, reducing the among of these bags in the waste stream and in common usage without a real negative effect other than some convenience by consumers. Like many things these days, not all municipalities or States will pursue this avenue as a means to reduce dependence on plastics which tend to find their way into our water ways and waste streams, but those that do pass such bans are seeing a marked decrease in the use of these products.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information or if you have any questions about this post, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

April 17, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

The SEC and its continued focus and enforcement of “Greenwashing” by Alek Smolij

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has positioned itself as one of the United States’ leading government regulators on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues and in 2023 has continued a pattern of active enforcement actions focusing on their perceived view of ESG misconduct.

The underpinning of these actions has its roots in various places, including those that occurred on March 4, 2021, when the SEC announced the creation of a “Climate and ESG Task Force” in its Division of Enforcement, to focus on ESG-related gaps and misstatements in disclosures by publicly-traded companies, mutual funds, and other investment vehicles.

One of the SEC’s main enforcement focuses is “greenwashing,” a term that describes when a publicly-traded company, mutual fund, or other public investment vehicle makes a misleading claim about its ESG policies or credentials. For instance, some mutual funds may market themselves as an “environmentally-friendly” energy fund but have a relatively small amount of investor funds invested in renewable energy sources. Critics of the current regulation regime have asserted that many investment vehicles mislead investors with terms like “green,” “carbon-neutral,” and “environmentally-friendly.” These broad terms, critics say, are not adequately defined and may convince investors to direct their money to funds that the investors believe align with ESG values when the funds themselves are not actually evaluating whether their investments are in line with such values.

In late March 2022, the SEC’s Division of Examinations used the term “greenwashing” in its 2022 Examination Priorities to describe certain activities that the SEC would be paying particular attention to in the coming months The SEC noted that it would focus on whether public investment vehicles are “overstating or misrepresenting the ESG factors considered or incorporated into portfolio selection (e.g., greenwashing), such as in their performance advertising and marketing.”

The SEC proposed new greenwashing-focused rules in 2022 that would strengthen the Division of Enforcement’s ability to fight against misleading ESG disclosures. In August 2022, after a public comment period, the SEC’s commissioners voted 3-to-1 to move forward with proposed climate disclosure ESG-focused rules. These rules focus on both publicly-traded companies and investment advisors and funds. Under these climate disclosure rules (expected to be made final in April, 2023), publicly-traded companies are required to include certain climate-related disclosures in their public filings. Further, these rules will require investment advisors and funds who associate their investments with ESG to provide specific disclosures about how they pursue ESG strategies in their investments.

While these rules are still pending and have not yet been finalized, the Division of Enforcement has continued its focus on greenwashing enforcement efforts without even having the benefit of these proposed rules.

The SEC has publicly announced various settlements in the banking space and in the manufacturing space involving tens of millions of dollars in agreed-upon penalties in multiple enforcement actions focused on greenwashing. These actions have focused on SEC investigations of internal policies governing mutual funds and investment strategies branded as ESG investments.

The ESG task force has also investigated and charged companies whom the SEC found were not adequately disclosing environmental-related risks. The SEC has, for instance, settled a charge with a mining company related to failure to disclose the financial risks of mercury contamination of a river located near a Brazilian mine.

Through these actions, the SEC has indicated that it will target companies whose policies do not adequately ensure that these investment products align with stated goals of investing in ESG-focused products. Further, the SEC is keeping a close eye on required disclosures by public companies as these disclosures relate to ESG risks and issues that companies may be required to communicate to investors. The SEC undertook these enforcement efforts under existing securities laws and regulations without final passage of the proposed ESG-focused climate disclosure rules mentioned above.

Clearly, the SEC is not waiting for final climate disclosure rules to hone in on greenwashing practices, and the proposed climate disclosure rules will only strengthen the SEC’s ability to engage in similar investigations and enforcement actions.

The Division of Examination’s 2023 Examination Priorities do not explicitly use the term “greenwashing,” but they indicate that the SEC will continue to focus on enforcement actions against companies that engage in this practice. The 2023 Priorities state that the SEC will examine “whether ESG products are appropriately labeled and whether recommendations of such products for retail investors are made in investors’ best interests.” This language indicates that greenwashing-focused enforcement is clearly still a priority for the SEC, especially when paired with the SEC’s proposed new rules requiring ESG climate disclosures.

The SEC’s focus on greenwashing means that organizations associating themselves or their investments with ESG objectives should assess whether their actions line up with their stated ESG efforts and whether their disclosure matches what their records show and whether they are measurable, verifiable and provable statistics and data. Regular auditing of ESG programs, company disclosure, ESG reporting and comprehensive ESG strategy planning could help avoid a costly SEC enforcement action.

Note, we have also published on the Federal Drug Administrations renewed focus on “Greenwashing” in an early post on our blog where we documented the renewed FDA focus in the area of cosmetics and other products and issued additional guidance on greenwashing in the context of utilization of words such as “natural”, “free (of)”, “eco-friendly”, “Cruelty Free”, “renewable” and “sustainable”.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG planning and initiatives. For more information or if you have any questions about this post, please contact Alek Smolij (the author), Brad A. Molotsky, David Amerikaner, Sheila Rafferty-Wiggins, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Joel Ephross, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley, or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.

April 12, 2023 by Duane Morris

Two Proposed EPA Rules Could Dramatically Increase Electric Vehicle Sales

On April 12, 2023, the EPA announced two proposed vehicle emission rules aimed to accelerate the transition to electric passenger and commercial vehicles.

The proposed standards do not require that manufacturers produce a certain number of electric vehicles, but instead set forth limits on greenhouse gas emissions that manufacturers must comply with for particular vehicle fleets. The EPA predicts such standards will result in a dramatic increase in new electric vehicle sales.

Read the full story on the Duane Morris LLP website.

April 12, 2023 by Brad A. Molotsky

NJ Legislature Passes Flood Warning Requirements for Leases and the Sales of Real Property – Applies to both Commercial and Residential Property

Earlier this week, New Jersey lawmakers passed SB 3110, a bill (the “Bill”) that would require Landlords and Seller of commercial and residential Real Estate to warn prospective tenants and buyers about previous flooding on various types of properties.

SB 3110 has been sent to NJ Governor Murphy for review and execution and will need implementing regulations from the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (NJDCA) that are anticipated within 90 days of passage of the Bill.

SB 3110 requires that both Sellers and Landlords disclose whether a property is located in a 100-year floodplain or 500-year floodplain, as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

The Bill mandates that NJ Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) create a user-friendly website where landlords, owners, tenants and buyers can check whether a property is in a flood zone or at risk of flooding in the future.

NJDCA will also be charged with developing a standard notice for landlords and owners to fill out to disclose whether a flood risks exist.

Note, that, under SB 3110, a tenant who experiences “substantial flood damage” but whom wasn’t properly notified by a landlord of the risk of such a flood, could terminate a lease and sue to recover damages,. “Substantial Flood Damage” is defined as damages of at least 5 months rent worth of damage.

Some of the questions the disclosure form will likely address include:

Is any or all of the property located wholly or partially in the Special Flood Hazard Area (“100-year floodplain”) according to FEMA’s current flood insurance rate maps for your area?
Is any or all of the property located wholly or partially in a Moderate Risk Flood Hazard Area (“500-year floodplain”) according to FEMA’s current flood insurance rate maps for your area?
Is the property subject to any requirement under federal law to obtain and maintain flood insurance on the property?
Have you ever received assistance, or are you aware of any previous owners receiving assistance, from FEMA, the U.S. Small Business Administration, or any other federal disaster flood assistance for flood damage to the property?
Is there flood insurance on the property?
Is there a FEMA elevation certificate available for the property? If so, the elevation certificate must be shared with the buyer.
Have you ever filed a claim for flood damage to the property with any insurance provider, including the National Flood Insurance Program? If the claim was approved, what was the amount received?
Is any or all of the property located in a designated wetland?
Has the property experienced any flood damage, water seepage, or pooled water due to a natural flood event, such as heavy rainfall, costal storm surge, tidal inundation, or river overflow? If so, how many times?

Some of these questions are contained within the Bill and others are likely the subject of DCA’s form creation to address the disclosure obligation if SB 3110 is signed into law.

Parting Thoughts – Given New Jersey’s past history in the last decade with hurricanes and increasing flooding and given that New Jersey has been assigned a grade of an F by the NRDC in connection with its flood disclosure policies, it should come as no real surprise that the legislature is moving to attempt to address this type of tenant and buyer of real property risk and provide for a more informed purchase/leasing process.

Duane Morris has an active ESG and Sustainability Team to help organizations and individuals plan, respond to, and execute on your Sustainability and ESG questions, planning and initiatives. We would be happy to discussion your proposed project and how this DOE funding prize might apply to you. For more information or if you have any questions about this post, please contact Brad A. Molotsky, Alice Shanahan, Jeff Hamera, Nanette Heide, Jolie-Anne Ansley, Robert Montejo, Seth Cooley or David Amerikaner or the attorney in the firm with whom you in regular contact or the attorney in the firm with whom you are regularly in contact.