I. |
Ameren’s ash disposal practices expose the company to significant financial and regulatory risks.
|
II. |
Ameren’s public disclosure on this issue is insufficient. While the Company has posted limited information regarding its ash ponds, including some groundwater contamination data required by EPA regulations, it has not provided the information requested in the proposal:
|
· |
The company claims “We have decades of experience managing coal ash in a safe and environmentally responsible way.” In fact, Ameren has decades of experience disposing of coal ash in leaking, unlined ash ponds, alongside the Missouri and Mississippi rivers, and failing to conduct groundwater monitoring. The page in the 2017CSR devoted to “Water Conservation and quality” continues to provide similar generalizations and outdated links to government data with no specific information regarding Ameren’s water impacts. (#1 below)
|
· |
The 2017CSR claims as a “success” for water conservation and quality “developing an effective plan of action in response to the EPA’S revised effluent guidelines for the steam electric power sector.” In fact, as the Company again fails to note, Ameren’s “effective plan” is suing the EPA to seek a rollback of these regulations limiting its power plants’ discharge of coal waste pollution. (UE Company (d/b/a Ameren MO) and Utility Water Act Group v EPA, No. 15-3658, November 19, 2015 8th Circuit, and No. 15-60821, 5th Circuit)
|
· |
Substantive inadequacies in Ameren’s CDP WATER 2017: (NUMBER REFERENCES are FROM CDP WATER 2017):
|
· |
2.3, 2.6 Water Risk Assessments. Ameren belongs to the Missouri River Recovery Implementation Committee Advisory Group, but does not disclose its specific role or how it has influenced progress in abating Missouri River pollution and aid for endangered species. The answers are essentially the same as 2016.
|
· |
8.1b Describe water qualitative goals. There are no goals listed for improving water quality; “recent changes in environmental regulations enable Ameren to reduce water intensity.” Intensity does not refer to quality.
|
· |
2.6, 3.2 The Company continues to list only the Powder River Basin, a water-scarce area, as its major supplier of coal; coal mining in itself consumes 1% of all global fresh water as of 2014. Natural gas is also a supplier which carries water contamination risks but natural gas is ignored. (Coal is 70.1% of Ameren’s energy supply and natural gas 29.2% according to Bloomberg Intelligence ESG Industry Primer, 2017).
|
· |
1.3a Two of Its peer companies who received A Ratings from CDP Water reported 40 environmental criteria for supply chain, including natural gas; one company was also specific in listing Tier One and Tier Two suppliers.
|
· |
1.3a Ameren does not recognize other supply chain items such as poles, wires, steel, metals, IT equipment and how these items are also dependent on global water quantity and quality. All companies belong to the Electric Utility Sustainability Supply Chain Alliance, A companies report further efforts beyond the capacity of this Alliance.
|
· |
6.3a Ameren’s Water Policy, instituted in 2013, is as follows: “Ameren is committed to protecting all natural resources, including water. Though our facilities are geographically situated in an area of ample water supply, all divisions with Ameren Corporation will take in to consideration the impact of our operations on both water quality and use.” There is no data or information on HOW this Policy will actually affect their ‘consideration,’ decisions or their impacts on quality of water. While the company emphasizes the abundance of water and how water beneficially impacts the Company, it provides nothing on how the Company impacts the quality of waters of the Great Mississippi Basin.
|
· |
Ameren is indeed located in an area of ample water supply but has not produced evidence it is planning for floods/droughts that will intensify with climate change. Ameren did not provide scenarios to CDP WATER2017 on impacts of flooding/droughts although it consistently lists these risks in its “Forward Looking Statements.” (10k 2015, 2016, 2017) It is notable that in 2018 10k, floods and droughts are not specifically mentioned; only “the impact of weather conditions and other natural phenomena……”
|
· |
CDP Water 3.2c: “If facilities would need to be closed due to lack of water availability, stranded costs issues for shareholders would arise and require regulatory approval for continued cost recovery.”
|
· |
In December 2015, Ameren might have had to close its Meramec plant, due to unusual winter flooding. (Impact News, Mehlville, MO 01/06/16) This is not mentioned in its CDP Water2017 report.
|
· |
Comparison/Contrasts with Ameren’s A-rated CDPWATER Peers; two utility corporations which were rated A are listed first, Ameren second:
|
· |
2.5 A companies evaluate water risks through WBCSD/WRI, local groups, Electric Power Research Institute, specific data tools, environmental studies; Ameren adds only EPRI and DEG Water Risk Filter to WBCSD/WRI source. MSCI continues to list Powder River Basin as a High Water Stress source. (MSCI Utilities Industry Report, 03, 2017)
|
· |
2.6c A companies disclose Stakeholder conflicts, compliance issues, verification, transparent scenario analyses; Ameren lists only compliance issues, no conflicts (despite 6 years of conflicts regarding Labadie Land Fill) and no scenario analyses or data on stakeholder meetings.
|
· |
6.2a How has water positively impacted business strategy?: A Companies report active flood/drought task forces, working with DOE task force, a climate resilience task force, and $ spend. Ameren reports money spent on developing and implementing energy efficiency programs which reduced generation and associated water use. It also reports that beneficial use of 168,094 tons of fly ash in 2017 resulted in substantial savings of water used to convey ash to ponds.
|
· |
2.6 – 2.7, 3.2.c Peer corporations listed specific Estimates and Scenarios of future water risks. Ameren provides no Scenarios; but elsewhere admits that if facilities would need to close due to lack of water availability, “stranded costs for shareholders would arise and require regulatory approval for continued cost recovery.” (3.2c) “the impact of weather conditions and other natural phenomena on us and our customers, including the impact of system outages, etc.” are material risks.…..) (10k, p. 5, 02/16/18)
|
· |
3.2a A companies reported substantial change in Business due to Water and Climate Change: Environmental Impact, reliance on barge delivery, water reserves; Ameren listed NPDES, EPA and CWA regulations, and capital expenditures that may be required for new regulations.
|
· |
3.2f A companies agreed there are risks in their Supply Chain, especially if from non-domestic sources; Ameren has taken preliminary steps to identify benchmarks in their supply chain: USA (and non-USA procurement?), improved metrics, and tracking progress. This is commendable.
|
· |
6.2a- 6.2b A companies listed specifics on the Influence of water on business strategy. A companies listed 47 studies in re-licensing beyond compliance, coding 7% of supplier evaluation on water use; A companies disclosed spending on water.
|
· |
7.1 List penalties, fines, enforcement orders for breaches of abstraction licenses, discharge consents, or other water and wastewater related regulations.
|
· |
8.1b Describe qualitative goals and your progress in reaching these. A companies listed data such as a subsidiary that sells solar with free offers of water-saving devices, specific donations for rehabilitating grasses, specific contributions to fish, pollinator gardens, etc.; Ameren presented “no coherent measure of success, completion, or when Goal is expected to be achieved,” but did add a general goal to reduce water intensity (CDP Water Interview, MCRI/ICCR, October 2016; No additional specificity in 2017) Ameren belongs to Missouri River Recovery and other environmental groups, but reports no specific contributions or successes in CDP.
|
· |
9.1a Describe the linkages or trade-offs and the related management policy or action. A companies disclosed several linkages and trade-offs to environmental Issues such as increased expense of water permit conditions related to closed-cycle cooling towers, increased energy required at coal/gas/oil power production facilities (except nuclear) to comply with CCR/Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELG).
|
· |
MSCI Data Metrics Report, October 25, 2017 lists Ameren as Average 51st percentile in Water Stress, with minimum capacity to manage its risks. “Overall, the company’s programs to manage and reduce water consumption appear to be minimal.” The Biodiversity and Land Use (relevant to Water Quality and legacy Coal Combustion Residuals) score is 2.2, the bottom quartile. “Ameren’s exposure to litigation costs, loss of license due to negative impact on eco-systems is determined to be moderate. The company has minimal capacity to manage these relevant risks.” (MSCI, 10/25/17, IVA; MSCI Utilities Industry Report, 03/2017)
|
1. |
- Labadie Historic Leakage (from 1992 through at least 2011): MO State Opening Permit MO 0004812 (effective August 1, 2015, modified Nov. 24, 2015) available at https://dnr.mo.gov/env/wpp/permits/issued/docs/004812.pdf
|