2222222222

Environmental Risk

Changes in Energy Regulation

The power of states and individuals to bring action in the case of an environmental event remains intact despite the new administration's proposals.
By: | April 7, 2017 • 5 min read

Even as the Trump administration takes steps to ease environmental regulations and defund the Environmental Protection Agency, insurance and environment experts expect little change in companies’ environmental stewardship or long-term responsibilities.

Advertisement




“I expect companies to stay the course of social and environmental responsibility,” responding to their own corporate cultures, the long-tail nature of environmental claims, tort law and regulations by each state’s Department of Environmental Protection (DEP), said Tom Williams, head, environmental liability, North America, Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty.

“Underwriters will still look for companies to take environmental and health and safety programs seriously,” said Marcel Ricciardelli, lead environmental insurance underwriter, Allied World.
“We look for a history of robust environmental risk management.”

The long-tail nature of environmental liability, said Avram J. Frankel, principal, Integral Consulting Inc., an international science and engineering firm, helps incentivize companies to support strong environmental programs.

“Administrations may end in four years, but environmental liability keeps on going.”

Long policy terms “lock underwriters into risk for the long term,” said Ken Burrell, managing director, Synapse Services LLC. Most of his clients plan accordingly, with 10 to 15 year business plans — exceeding even a two-term administration — that include budgets for environmental controls and risk management.

In addition, he said, “reputational risks are high considerations in business decisions, regardless of regulatory enforcement. Companies don’t want blowback from a blowout.”

What Regulations May Change?

“Expect a focus on the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act,” Burrell wrote in an email. “If budgets are reduced, there will be fewer resources for enforcement, but reduced regulatory enforcement will not necessarily reduce exposure to loss. If enforcement wanes, expect an increase in litigation from private citizen suits in an effort to drive action.”

The EPA takes the lead in some regulatory arenas, Frankel said, and states lead in others. In some cases, the EPA delegates authority. Enforcement varies by state.

Past administrations’ inconsistent environmental track records confound predictions in this one, he said. New restraints are unlikely under President Trump, who declared in February that environmental regulations are “out of control.”

“It appears that much, if not all, pending rulemaking could be suspended under this administration,” Frankel said.

Final rules take years to promulgate, he said, and normally take years to undo. For example, the Stream Protection Rule — which seeks to protect waterways from coal mining residue and which Congress rolled back in February by invoking the seldom-used Congressional Review Act — was the result of eight years of review and analysis by the states and scientific bodies, said Pat Parenteau, senior counsel, professor of law, Vermont Law School in a National Public Radio interview.

The speed at which Congress acted to undo the Stream Protection Rule introduces “a brave new world for environmental regulation at the federal level,” Frankel wrote in an email.

“We appear to be in a new era, and it will be entirely up to the states to regulate these matters.”

Kevin Haas, partner, Clyde & Co.

Also “in peril,” said Kevin Haas, partner at Clyde & Co., an international law firm, are federal regulations pertaining to oil and gas exploration, offshore and ocean drilling, fracking, interstate oil and gas pipelines. Regulations that could curtail those operations in the interest of endangered species and national parks may also face rollback.

The administration’s February freeze on new and pending regulations would halt four very nearly finished Energy Department efficiency standards designed to reduce energy use, consumer bills and greenhouse gas emissions, according to the “Washington Post.”

Even in the absence of federal regulation or slowdown of enforcement — which would trigger significant pushback from the agencies themselves — states would continue to regulate, said Frankel, and tort law will continue to pressure companies toward environmental responsibility.

Federal standards usually represent the minimum, said Ricciardelli. Insurers can expect little change in enforcement in states with strong environmental protections, such as California, Washington, Oregon, Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York.

For example, New Jersey’s air standards, said Larry Hajna, press officer, N.J. Department of Environmental Protection, historically exceed the EPA’s, driven by “the need to achieve federal clean air standards in a densely populated state with a lot of cars and industry.”

Even some oil- and gas-producing states have their own strict regulations that “we don’t see changing soon,” said Kevin Sisk, senior vice president, Lockton.

These include Louisiana, where a closely watched lawsuit against more than 90 oil, gas and pipeline companies alleges degradation of wetlands that form a natural hurricane buffer for New Orleans by drilling and dredging canals along the coast.

Advertisement




Claims related to that case may go back 100 years, said Sisk. “Any changes to federal regulations wouldn’t change potential liabilities associated with that lawsuit or with other common industry exposures.”

Counterintuitively, a reduction in exploration and production can trigger a spike in certain claims, said Sisk, when combined with a financially distressed industry.

After commodity prices collapsed and the moratorium on offshore drilling from the 2010 Mocondo Well blowout in the Gulf of Mexico, some companies laid off staff and deferred preventive maintenance, which contributed to pollution releases.

“Any changes to federal regulations wouldn’t change potential liabilities associated with that lawsuit or with other common industry exposures.” – Kevin Sisk, senior vice president, Lockton

“The oil and gas infrastructure was neglected when companies couldn’t explore for new reserves,” said Williams. He speculates that the inverse will happen in the Trump administration.
“Presumably, the pendulum will swing in the other direction in the next administration,” said Haas.

More drilling, mining, exploration, etc., also creates more opportunities for risk of spills, leaks, effusions, contaminations and damage to endangered species, said Haas, but risk management tools and techniques, including new technology, can help prevent loss of product and claims from spills.

Energy companies and carriers can seek technological risk management and insurance solutions. “The Internet of Things contributes to fewer accidents by monitoring temperature, pressure, flow and leaks in pipelines and drill sites where people can’t see,” Haas said.

“Technology could offset adverse impacts from reduced regulation and EPA personnel on the job.” &

Susannah Levine writes about health care, education and technology. She can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Cyber Resilience

No, Seriously. You Need a Comprehensive Cyber Incident Response Plan Before It’s Too Late.

Awareness of cyber risk is increasing, but some companies may be neglecting to prepare adequate response plans that could save them millions. 
By: | June 1, 2018 • 7 min read

To minimize the financial and reputational damage from a cyber attack, it is absolutely critical that businesses have a cyber incident response plan.

“Sadly, not all yet do,” said David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy.

Advertisement




In the event of a breach, a company must be able to quickly identify and contain the problem, assess the level of impact, communicate internally and externally, recover where possible any lost data or functionality needed to resume business operations and act quickly to manage potential reputational risk.

This can only be achieved with help from the right external experts and the design and practice of a well-honed internal response.

The first step a company must take, said Legassick, is to understand its cyber exposures through asset identification, classification, risk assessment and protection measures, both technological and human.

According to Raf Sanchez, international breach response manager, Beazley, cyber-response plans should be flexible and applicable to a wide range of incidents, “not just a list of consecutive steps.”

They also should bring together key stakeholders and specify end goals.

Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

With bad actors becoming increasingly sophisticated and often acting in groups, attack vectors can hit companies from multiple angles simultaneously, meaning a holistic approach is essential, agreed Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions.

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.”

This means assembling a response team including individuals from IT, legal, operations, risk management, HR, finance and the board — each of whom must be well drilled in their responsibilities in the event of a breach.

“You can’t pick your players on the day of the game,” said Hogg. “Response times are critical, so speed and timing are of the essence. You should also have a very clear communication plan to keep the CEO and board of directors informed of recommended courses of action and timing expectations.”

People on the incident response team must have sufficient technical skills and access to critical third parties to be able to make decisions and move to contain incidents fast. Knowledge of the company’s data and network topology is also key, said Legassick.

“Perhaps most important of all,” he added, “is to capture in detail how, when, where and why an incident occurred so there is a feedback loop that ensures each threat makes the cyber defense stronger.”

Cyber insurance can play a key role by providing a range of experts such as forensic analysts to help manage a cyber breach quickly and effectively (as well as PR and legal help). However, the learning process should begin before a breach occurs.

Practice Makes Perfect

“Any incident response plan is only as strong as the practice that goes into it,” explained Mike Peters, vice president, IT, RIMS — who also conducts stress testing through his firm Sentinel Cyber Defense Advisors.

Advertisement




Unless companies have an ethical hacker or certified information security officer on board who can conduct sophisticated simulated attacks, Peters recommended they hire third-party experts to test their networks for weaknesses, remediate these issues and retest again for vulnerabilities that haven’t been patched or have newly appeared.

“You need to plan for every type of threat that’s out there,” he added.

Hogg agreed that bringing third parties in to conduct tests brings “fresh thinking, best practice and cross-pollination of learnings from testing plans across a multitude of industries and enterprises.”

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.” — Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

Legassick added that companies should test their plans at least annually, updating procedures whenever there is a significant change in business activity, technology or location.

“As companies expand, cyber security is not always front of mind, but new operations and territories all expose a company to new risks.”

For smaller companies that might not have the resources or the expertise to develop an internal cyber response plan from whole cloth, some carriers offer their own cyber risk resources online.

Evan Fenaroli, an underwriting product manager with the Philadelphia Insurance Companies (PHLY), said his company hosts an eRiskHub, which gives PHLY clients a place to start looking for cyber event response answers.

That includes access to a pool of attorneys who can guide company executives in creating a plan.

“It’s something at the highest level that needs to be a priority,” Fenaroli said. For those just getting started, Fenaroli provided a checklist for consideration:

  • Purchase cyber insurance, read the policy and understand its notice requirements.
  • Work with an attorney to develop a cyber event response plan that you can customize to your business.
  • Identify stakeholders within the company who will own the plan and its execution.
  • Find outside forensics experts that the company can call in an emergency.
  • Identify a public relations expert who can be called in the case of an event that could be leaked to the press or otherwise become newsworthy.

“When all of these things fall into place, the outcome is far better in that there isn’t a panic,” said Fenaroli, who, like others, recommends the plan be tested at least annually.

Cyber’s Physical Threat

With the digital and physical worlds converging due to the rise of the Internet of Things, Hogg reminded companies: “You can’t just test in the virtual world — testing physical end-point security is critical too.”

Advertisement




How that testing is communicated to underwriters should also be a key focus, said Rich DePiero, head of cyber, North America, Swiss Re Corporate Solutions.

Don’t just report on what went well; it’s far more believable for an underwriter to hear what didn’t go well, he said.

“If I hear a client say it is perfect and then I look at some of the results of the responses to breaches last year, there is a disconnect. Help us understand what you learned and what you worked out. You want things to fail during these incident response tests, because that is how we learn,” he explained.

“Bringing in these outside firms, detailing what they learned and defining roles and responsibilities in the event of an incident is really the best practice, and we are seeing more and more companies do that.”

Support from the Board

Good cyber protection is built around a combination of process, technology, learning and people. While not every cyber incident needs to be reported to the boardroom, senior management has a key role in creating a culture of planning and risk awareness.

David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy

“Cyber is a boardroom risk. If it is not taken seriously at boardroom level, you are more than likely to suffer a network breach,” Legassick said.

However, getting board buy-in or buy-in from the C-suite is not always easy.

“C-suite executives often put off testing crisis plans as they get in the way of the day job. The irony here is obvious given how disruptive an incident can be,” said Sanchez.

“The C-suite must demonstrate its support for incident response planning and that it expects staff at all levels of the organization to play their part in recovering from serious incidents.”

“What these people need from the board is support,” said Jill Salmon, New York-based vice president, head of cyber/tech/MPL, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance.

“I don’t know that the information security folks are looking for direction from the board as much as they are looking for support from a resources standpoint and a visibility standpoint.

“They’ve got to be aware of what they need and they need to have the money to be able to build it up to that level,” she said.

Without that support, according to Legassick, failure to empower and encourage the IT team to manage cyber threats holistically through integration with the rest of the organization, particularly risk managers, becomes a common mistake.

He also warned that “blame culture” can prevent staff from escalating problems to management in a timely manner.

Collaboration and Communication

Given that cyber incident response truly is a team effort, it is therefore essential that a culture of collaboration, preparation and practice is embedded from the top down.

Advertisement




One of the biggest tripping points for companies — and an area that has done the most damage from a reputational perspective — is in how quickly and effectively the company communicates to the public in the aftermath of a cyber event.

Salmon said of all the cyber incident response plans she has seen, the companies that have impressed her most are those that have written mock press releases and rehearsed how they are going to respond to the media in the aftermath of an event.

“We have seen so many companies trip up in that regard,” she said. “There have been examples of companies taking too long and then not explaining why it took them so long. It’s like any other crisis — the way that you are communicating it to the public is really important.” &

Antony Ireland is a London-based financial journalist. He can be reached at [email protected] Dan Reynolds is editor-in-chief of Risk & Insurance. He can be reached at [email protected]