Cl Change and Global Warmi ng - naic.org · Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It adheres to the...

©

© 2017 Nationa

Cl

al Association

limate

Ph

2017 S

of Insurance C

e Cha(C)

hilade

Summer

Commissioners

ange ) Wor

Auguelphia

r Nation

s

and Grking

ust 6, a, Pen

nal Meet

Globg Gro

2017nnsylv

ting

al Waoup

vania

armi

a

ng

© 2017 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

©

D

MDKPJ N

1

2

3

4 5 W

© 2017 Nationa

Date: 7/20/17

Mike KreidlerDave Jones, VKatharine L. WPeter BrickweJeff Barber

NAIC Suppor

1. Consider A

2. Hear a Pre

3. Hear a PreScience an

4. Discuss An

5. Adjournme

W:\National Meetin

al Association

CLIMATE

r, Chair Vice Chair Wade/Georgeedde

rt Staff: Anne

Adoption of its

sentation, “Fin

sentation, “Finnd Policy”—Sa

ny Other Matte

ent

ngs\2017\Summer

of Insurance C

E CHANGE

Philadelp

e Bradner

e Obersteadt

Spring Nation

nancial Impact

nance for Commamantha Medlo

ers Brought Be

r\Agenda\Climate

Commissioners

2017 SummPhiladelp

AND GLOBSunday

2:00phia Marriott—

RO

WashingtoCalifornia ConnecticuMinnesota Montana

A

nal Meeting Mi

of Natural Cat

munity Resilieock (Willis Tow

efore the Work

WG Agenda.docx

s 1

mer National Mphia, Pennsylv

BAL WARMy, August 6, 200 – 3:00 p.m. —Grand Ballr

OLL CALL

on

ut

AGENDA

inutes—Comm

tastrophes”—C

nce: Opportunwers Watson)

king Group—C

x

Meeting vania

MING (C) WO017

room AB—Le

John GMarshTracy TK Ki

missioner Mike

Carl Hedde (M

nities at the Inte

Commissioner M

ORKING GR

evel 5

G. Franchini hal Bozzo y Snow ing

Kreidler (WA)

Munich Re Amer

ersection of Ca

Mike Kreidler (

ROUP

New MeNew YoOhio Oregon

) Att

rica) Att

apital, Att

(WA)

exico ork

tachment A

tachment B

tachment C


Attachment A Consider Adoption of Spring National

Meeting Minutes

Draft Pending Adoption

Attachment Four Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee

4/10/17

© 2017 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 1

Draft: 4/20/17

Climate Change and Global Warming (C) Working Group Denver, Colorado

April 8, 2017 The Climate Change and Global Warming (C) Working Group of the Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee met in Denver, CO, April 8, 2017. The following Working Group members participated: Mike Kreidler, Chair (WA); Dave Jones, Vice Chair, represented by Geoff Margolis (CA); William Arfanis (CT); Peter Brickwedde (MN); Roberta Baca (NM); Marshal Bozzo (NY); Tom Botsko (OH); and Eric Cutler (OR).

1. Adopted its 2016 Fall National Meeting Minutes

Mr. Botsko made a motion, seconded by Mr. Margolis, to adopt the Working Group’s Dec. 10, 2016, minutes (see NAIC Proceedings – Fall 2016, Property and Casualty Insurance (C) Committee, Attachment Seven). The motion passed. 2. Heard a Presentation on NFPA Firewise USA Program – Residents Reducing Wildfire Risks Cathy Prudhomme (National Fire Protection Association—NFPA) stated NFPA is a global nonprofit that delivers information and knowledge through more than 300 consensus codes and standards, research, data analysis, technical training and certification, education, outreach and advocacy. Its mission is to help save lives and reduce loss with information, knowledge and passion. The wildland urban interface (WUI) is a set of conditions that determine the home’s ignition potential. Residents are critical to reducing wildfire disasters in the WUI. If the principal responsibility for mitigation is not taken by property owners, disasters in WUI will continue to occur. The NFPA also administers the Firewise Communities USA/Recognition Program to empower homeowners at the community level to work together in reducing their wildfire risk. The program creates growth in local resiliency by changing behavior through a community’s combined actions. The program is co-sponsored by the U.S. Forest Service, the National Association of State Foresters and the U.S. Department of the Interior. The Firewise Communities/USA Recognition Program has more than 14,000 recognized Firewise communities in 42 states. Firewise emphasizes voluntary resident participation and sets a five-step process for communities to achieve official Firewise Communities USA recognition status, required to be renewed annually. The five steps include: 1) obtain a wildfire risk assessment as a written document from the state forestry agency or fire department; 2) form a board or committee, and create an action plan based on the assessment; 3) conduct a “Firewise Day” event; 4) invest a minimum of $2 per capita in local Firewise actions for the year; and 5) submit an application to the state Firewise liaison. The program has many benefits, including helping communities get organized and find direction for their wildfire safety efforts, teaching communities how to reduce wildfire risks, providing peace of mind, strengthening communities, building citizen pride, providing public recognition and allowing preferential access to funding or assistance. Additionally, to reward USAA members and encourage more residents in wildfire risk areas to take safety steps, USAA provides a discount on the homeowners insurance premium for its members who live in communities recognized by the Firewise Communities USA/Recognition Program. The states in which USAA is approved to offer the discounts include: California; Connecticut; Minnesota; Montana; New Mexico; New York; Ohio; Oregon; and Washington. 3. Heard a Presentation on Wildfire Partners Jim Webster (Wildfire Partners) stated Wildfire Partners is a home certification program for wildfire. Wildfire Partners works at the parcel level, rather than the community level, like the NFPA does with its Firewise program. The program uses comprehensive, science-based mitigation methods, which have proven to accomplish long-term verifiable risk reduction. This was evidenced when all of the mitigated homes survived the July 2016 Cold Spring Fire. The program emphasizes homeowner responsibility, with professional assistance from mitigation specialists, phone advisors and forestry contractors to help homeowners work smarter—not just harder.

http://www.firewise.org/usa-recognition-program/program-criteria/more-about-the-wildfire-risk-assessment.aspx

http://www.firewise.org/usa-recognition-program/program-criteria/more-about-your-local-action-plan.aspx

http://www.firewise.org/usa-recognition-program/program-criteria/more-about-the-firewise-day.aspx

https://www.usaa.com/inet/wc/advice-disaster-protecthomefromwildfires?akredirect=true



4/10/17


This private-public partnership with Boulder County, CO, receives $2.6 million in grants from Colorado and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It adheres to the Boulder County building code, partners with more than 35 organizations and has more than 1,000 participants. The program provides value and a clear path for homeowners through a comprehensive home assessment, a customized report and “to-do” list, phone advising, financial assistance and transferrable certificate and recognition. Homeowners spend an average of 66 hours and $3,000 mitigating their homes through the program. The program charges an assessment fee of $100 annually, which will increase $25 each year. 4. Heard a Presentation on “Beyond Firewise: The USAA Journey” Rob Galbraith (USAA) stated that, in examining wildfire risk, USAA looks at the following factors: slope; aspect; fuels/vegetation; population density; home characteristics; fire protection class; and community mitigation. Fuel represents vegetation surrounding the property, slope is the grade of land on which the property is built, and fire protection class and road access identifies potential barriers for firefighters. On May 1, 2016, a wildfire began southwest of Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada. Dry timber from prolonged drought allowed the fire to spread for more than two months across 1.5 million acres before it was controlled. The fire became the largest and most expensive natural disaster in Canada’s history. On Nov. 26, 2016, a wildland fire on Chimney Top Mountain quickly spread due to high winds and dry conditions onto private property in Gatlinburg, TN. It then grew into one of the largest natural disasters in the history of Tennessee, destroying hundreds of homes and businesses. These two fires resulted in a rethinking of risk. Mitigation researchers noted neighborhoods with FireSmart homes (homes that had adopted a wildfire mitigation program) survived more frequently than other neighborhoods. The reason, they found, was that wind-driven embers, rather than direct flames, ignited homes in the areas where fire made its transition from forest into urban neighborhoods. Hence, the best mitigation is to prevent the migration of wildfires into the WUI, where they transform from burning mostly vegetation to spot fires and, eventually, building-to-building transmission and decimation in the urban core. Doing this means promoting mitigation in communities and among homeowners. To accomplish this, USAA developed the Firewise discount and its partnership with Wildfire Partners. Through these programs and other educational efforts, USAA educates homeowners about mitigation steps to securing a safe space around their home, such as using Class A roofing and tempered windows, creating a fire-resistant landscaping zone, clearing leaves and flammable materials, and keeping gutters clean and trees trimmed. It also educates on disaster recovery planning, such as establishing an emergency fund, safe record storage and home inventory, as well as the applicability of policy deductibles, coverage limits and exclusions. 5. Heard a Roundtable Discussion on the Use of Public-Private Mitigation Programs to Improve Affordability and

Accessibility of Insurance Coverage for the Fire Peril The discussion included Ms. Prudhomme, Mr. Galbraith, Mr. Webster and Amy Bach (United Policyholders). Ms. Bach stated wildfire risks have increased substantially in many of California’s communities due to tree mortality from severe drought and bark beetle infestation. Maps produced by the California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (CAL FIRE) in June 2016 show the number of drought-killed trees has doubled in the past year to more than 66 million in the Sierra Nevada. As a result, a Tree Mortality Task Force—composed of state and federal agencies led by CAL FIRE, the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the California governor’s office—has identified six counties as high hazard zones due to dead and dying trees and the hazards this tree mortality presents. Tree Mortality Task Force committees are working with federal and state agencies on regulations and possible FEMA funds to assist with tree removal and defensible space projects. Wildfires from tree mortality have helped create an affordability/availability crisis in parts of California, with many insurers pulling out of the market. Mitigation has become a focal point in an effort to restore availability and affordability in the market. Mr. Margolis asked for more information on Wildfire Partners’ and the NFPA’s relationship with the insurance industry. Mr. Webster stated insurance companies have become leaders in mitigation. Recognizing this, Wildfire Partners has taken steps to partner with insurers and other stakeholders. Homeowners are much more likely to take action if they hear the same message from multiple sources, rather than just a governmental agency. Ms. Prudhomme stated, in her experience, being able to maintain insurance coverage or receive a premium discount has been the largest mitigation motivators for consumers.



4/10/17


NFPA also has a partnership with State Farm. For four years, State Farm has co-sponsored a Wildfire Community Preparedness Day on the first Saturday of May. The event offers $500 project funding awards to help communities prepare for and reduce their risk of wildfire damage. Often, homeowners who do not have a policy with USAA will say their insurers gave them discounts once they understood the significance of having a Firewise designation. Additionally, the USAA discount is motivating communities near Firewise communities to take steps to also become Firewise-recognized communities. Ms. Bach stated the insurance situation in California parallels that of the states in the Gulf Coast. However, unlike some states in the Gulf Coast, California has not mandated premium credit for mitigation measures. California is experimenting with the possibility of getting a solution where homeowners, insurers, firefighting agencies, Firewise and other governmental bodies and private-public partnerships come together voluntarily to solve the problem. Most property owners are most concerned with just being able to obtain or retain insurance coverage. Mr. Galbraith stated it is important to recognize that Firewise communities range from those that have substantially reduced their risk from their cumulative years of efforts to those that are just learning about their risk. A Lakeland, FL community’s designation had recently expired and was not renewed.The residents, however, still kept up their mitigation efforts and the community was one of the few in the area that did not burn when a fire struck. Having no further business, the Climate Change and Global Warming (C) Working Group adjourned. W:\National Meetings\2017\Spring\Cmte\C\Climate\04-ClimateWGmin.docx


Attachment B Hear a Presentation, “Financial Impact

of Natural Catastrophes”

Carl Hedde (Munich Re America)

8/1/2017

1

National Association of Insurance CommissionersSummer National MeetingClimate Change / Global Warming Working Committee

Carl G. Hedde, CPCU – Head of Risk AccumulationMunich Reinsurance America, Inc.August 6, 2017

NatCatSERVICE

© 2017 Münchener Rückversicherungs-Gesellschaft, Geo Risks Research, NatCatSERVICE – As at July 2017

Loss events in the U.S. 1980 – 2016 Geographical overview

Source: Munich Re, NatCatSERVICE, 2017

Earthquake17 Jan 1994Overall losses: US$ 44bnInsured losses: US$ 15.3bn Fatalities: 61

Meteorological events(Tropical storm, extratropical storm, convective storm, local storm)

Hydrological events(Flood, mass movement)

Climatological events(Extreme temperature, drought, forest fire)

Geophysical events(Earthquake, tsunami, volcanic activity)

Selection of catastrophesOverall losses ≥ US$ 16,000m(in original values)

Loss events

DroughtJun–Sep 2012Overall losses: US$ 25bnInsured losses: US$ 12bn

Floods27 Jun–15 Aug 1993 Overall losses: US$ 21bnInsured losses: US$ 1.3bn Fatalities: 48

Hurricane Ike12–14 Sep 2008 Overall losses: US$ 30bnInsured losses: US$ 18.5bn Fatalities: 86

Hurricane Sandy28–31 Oct 2012 Overall losses: US$ 65bnInsured losses: US$ 29bn Fatalities: 127

Hurricane Charley13–14 Aug 2004 Overall losses: US$ 16bnInsured losses: US$ 7.6bn Fatalities: 31

Hurricane Wilma24 Oct 2005 Overall losses: US$ 16bnInsured losses: US$ 10.7bn Fatalities: 21

Hurricane Katrina25–30 Aug 2005 Overall losses: US$ 125bnInsured losses: US$ 60.5bn Fatalities: 1,720

Hurricane Ivan12–21 Sep 2004 Overall losses: US$ 18bnInsured losses: US$ 10bn Fatalities: 53

Hurricane Andrew24–27 Aug 1992Overall losses: US$ 26.5bnInsured losses: US$ 17bn Fatalities: 62

Hurricane Rita20–24 Sep 2005 Overall losses: US$ 16bnInsured losses: US$ 9.6bn Fatalities: 10

8/1/2017

2

NatCatSERVICE


Loss events in the USA 2017 (Jan– Jun only)Geographical overview


Hailstorm, severe storm8–11 May Overall losses: US$ 2.2bnInsured losses: US$ 1.8bn

Tornado, severe storm28 Feb–2 MarOverall losses: US$ 1.9bnInsured losses: US$ 1.4bn Fatalities: 4

Hailstorm, severe storm25–28 MarOverall losses: US$ 2bnInsured losses: US$ 1.5bn

Severe storm9–12 JunOverall losses: US$ 1.3bnInsured losses: US$ 1bn

Severe storm, tornado28 Apr–3 MayOverall losses: US$ 1bnInsured losses: US$ 0.5bn Fatalities: 20

Severe storm, tornado6–9 Mar Overall losses: US$ 2.2bnInsured losses: US$ 1.6bn

Severe storm12–14 JunOverall losses: US$ 0.8bnInsured losses: US$ 0.6bnFatalities: 1

Severe storm, tornado15–15 May Overall losses: US$ 0.9bnInsured losses: US$ 0.7bn

Tornado, severe storm18–23 JanOverall losses: US$ 0.9bnInsured losses: US$ 0.6bn Fatalities: 21

Severe storm21–22 MarOverall losses: US$ 0.9bnInsured losses: US$ 0.7bn Fatalities: 1





Selection of catastrophesOverall losses ≥ US$ 0.8bn(in original values)

Loss events

NatCatSERVICE


Natural disaster losses in the U.S. 2017 (Jan – Jun only)

As of July 5, 2017Number

of Events FatalitiesEstimated Overall Losses (US $m)

Estimated Insured Losses (US $m)*

Severe Thunderstorm 28 80 18,500 13,500

Winter Storms & Cold Waves 12 26 2,200 600

Flood, Flash Flood 5 2 240 100

Earthquake & Geophysical - - - -

Tropical Cyclone 1 1 Minor Minor

Wildfire, Heat Waves, & Drought (ongoing drought condition without loss estimation for the half year)

3 7 60 Minor

Totals 49 116 21,000 14,200

*Source: Property Claim Services (PCS)

8/1/2017

3

NatCatSERVICE


Loss events in the U.S. 1980 – 2017 (Jan – Jun only) Number of relevant events by peril

Number

Accounted events have caused at least one fatality and/or produced normalized losses ≥ US$ 3m.





38

5

6

First Six Months in 2017 49 Events

NatCatSERVICE


Loss events in the U.S. 1980 – 2016Number of relevant events by peril

Number

Accounted events have caused at least one fatality and/or produced normalized losses ≥ US$ 100k, 300k, 1m, or 3m (depending on the assigned World Bank income group of the affected country).





8/1/2017

4

NatCatSERVICE


Weather-related losses in the U.S. 1980 – 2017 (Jan – Jun) Overall and insured losses

US$ bn

Inflation adjusted via country-specific consumer price index.

Overall losses (in 2016 values)

Insured losses (in 2016 values)

NatCatSERVICE


Loss events in the U.S. 1980 – 2017 (Jan – Jun only)Overall losses: nominal, inflation adjusted, and normalized

Nominal overall losses

Inflation adjusted overall losses

Normalized overall losses


Normalization via local GDP developments measured in US$.

US$ bn

8/1/2017

5

NatCatSERVICE


Convective storm events* in the U.S. 1980 – 2017 Number of relevant events (Jan – Jun only)

Number

Accounted events have caused at least one fatality and/or produced normalized losses ≥ US$ 3m.

Convective storm events*incl. severe storm, hail, tornado, lightning, flash flood

NatCatSERVICE


Convective storm events* in the U.S. 1980 – 2017 Overall and insured losses (Jan – Jun only)

US$ bn


Insured losses (in 2016 values)

5 year mean

*(incl. severe storm, hail, tornado,lightning, flash flood)

8/1/2017

6

NatCatSERVICE


Loss events in the U.S. 1980 – 2016Percentage distribution

Overall losses: US$ 1,400bn Number of relevant events: 2,300

Fatalities: 21,400 Insured losses: US$ 680bn

Inflation adjusted via country-specific consumer price index and consideration of exchange rate fluctuations between local currency and US$.

Accounted events have caused at least one fatality and/or produced normalized losses ≥ US$ 100k, 300k, 1m, or 3m (depending on the assigned World Bank income group of the affected country).





IBHS (Insurance Institute for Building and Home Safety) – What, How, When

Impact on Building Practices

Impact of Building Codes

Impact on Underwriting, Claims

Are we a Weather Ready Nation?Roadmap To Resiliency

Tropical Cyclone Sandy – New Jersey Shore

Photo Credit : G. Hedde

8/1/2017

7

NatCatSERVICE


Steps Toward Increasing Building Resiliency

Incenting Resilience – Why

Life Safety Community Resilience Loss Avoidance Environmental Benefits

Incenting Resilience – How

Education Support Stronger Building

Codes and Building Practices Tax Incentives – Federal,

State, Local Rebate Incentives Insurance Deductible Savings Insurance Premium Savings

9

Significant loss events in the U.S. 1980 – 201610 costliest events ordered by insured losses

Date Event Affected area

Overall lossesin US$ m

original values

Insured lossesin US$ m

original values Fatalities

25-30.8.2005Hurricane Katrina

LA, New Orleans, Slidell, M Biloxi, Pascagoula, Waveland, Gulfport, Bay St, Louis, Hattiesburg

125,000 60,500 1,720

28-31.10.2012Hurricane Sandy

CT, D Washington, DE, MA, MD, Somerset, Wicomico, Ocean City, ME, NC, NH, NJ

65,000 29,000 127

12-14.9.2008Hurricane Ike, storm surge

AR, IL, IN, KY, LA, MO, NY, OH, Cincinnati, PA, TX, Galveston, Houston, Harris, Orange

30,000 18,500 86

24-27.8.1992Hurricane Andrew

FL, Miami Dade County, Homestead, Kendal, Florida City, Everglades, LA

26,500 17,000 62

17.1.1994 EarthquakeCA, Northridge, Los Angeles, San Fernando Valley, Ventura, Orange

44,000 15,300 61

June - September 2012

Drought(Corn Belt), AR, CO, GA, IA, IL, I K KY, MO, M MT, OH, OK, SD, T TX, WI, WY

25,000 12,000

24.10.2005Hurricane Wilma

FL, Keys, Lee, Collier, Naples, Glades, Lake Okeechobee, Miami, Fort Lauderdale

16,000 10,700 21

12-21.9.2004Hurricane Ivan

FL, Perdido Key, Penscola Beach, Destin, AL, Mobile, Gulf Shores, Brewton, DE, GA, LA, MD

18,000 10,000 53

20-24.9.2005Hurricane Rita

FL, Keys, LA, Lake Charles, Holly Beach, Cameron, New Orleans, MS, TX, Houston

16,000 9,600 10

13-14.8.2004Hurricane Charley

FL, Charlotte, Punta Gorda, Lee, Fort Myers, Pine Island, St, Petersburg, St, Pete beach

16,000 7,600 31


8/1/2017

8

NatCatSERVICE


Number statistics are influenced by a constantly improved reporting of small-scale loss events over the time (reporting bias). There is a need to distinguish between registered and relevant loss events.

• Registered loss events are all evens recorded by NatCatSERVICE. The range extends from insignificantto catastrophic loss events expressed in overall losses and/or fatalities. The reporting bias is particularly high for high frequency and low impact events.

• Relevant loss events exceed defined thresholds of normalized overall losses and/or fatalities. These events are considered in number statistics and trend analyses. Threshold values are:

• Fatalities ≥ 1• Normalized overall loss ≥ US$ 100k, 300k, 1m, or 3m (depending on assigned World Bank

income group of each affected country)

• Type of data filtering is helpful for reduction/elimination of reporting bias and for conclusions on changes in frequency of occurred loss events.

Explanation for the interpretation of loss data statisticsNumber statistics and loss thresholds

NatCatSERVICE


Explanation for the interpretation of loss data statisticsInflation adjustment and normalization of NatCat loss data

Three ways of presenting loss data:• Nominal losses: values as they originally occurred• Inflation adjusted losses: accounting for changes in monetary equivalent• Normalized losses: accounting for growth of values and assets

Inflation adjustment: Loss value in local currency is adjusted to inflation via the country’s consumer price index (CPI) under consideration of exchange rate fluctuations between the local currency and the US$.

Normalization: Loss value in US$ is normalized via the development of locally resolved (1°x1°) nominal gross domestic product data in US$ between year of occurrence and today.

Inflation adjusted loss data is helpful for…• How high would a historic loss value be in today’s money?

Normalized loss data is helpful for…• What losses would a historic event cause when exposing today’s values and assets?• Conclusions on loss drivers like changes on the hazard side or effectivity of

prevention measures

8/1/2017

9

Carl G. Hedde, CPCU – Head of Risk AccumulationMunich Reinsurance America, Inc.(609) [email protected]

© Copyright 2017 Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. All rights reserved. "Munich Re" and the Munich Re logo are internationally protected registered trademarks. The material in this presentation is provided for your information only, and is not permitted to be further distributed without the express written permission of Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. or Munich Re. This material is not intended to be legal, underwriting, financial, or any other type of professional advice. Examples given are for illustrative purposes only. Each reader should consult an attorney and other appropriate advisors to determine the applicability of any particular contract language to the reader's specific circumstances.


Attachment C Hear a Presentation, “Finance for

Community Resilience: Opportunities at the Intersection of Capital”

Samantha Medlock (Willis Towers

Watson)

8/4/2017

1

Finance for Community Resilience: Opportunities at the Intersection of Capital, Science & Policy

© 2017 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved.

National Association of Insurance CommissionersClimate Change and Global Warming Working GroupAugust 6, 2017

Samantha Medlock, CFMSenior Vice President, Willis Towers Watson

Uninsured Losses & Disaster Assistance

2© 2017 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only.

Predisaster Mitigation Allocations and Hazard Mitigation Grant ProgramEstimated Awards from Fiscal Years 2011-2014

8/4/2017

2

Risk Modeling Informs Resilience

3

Modeling Severe Weather Impacts

4

8/4/2017

3

6

Willis Research Network

8/4/2017

4

Innovative Risk Transfer Solutions for the Public Sector

• Pays on actual loss• No Basis Risk• HIGH cost of loss adjustment• Payment delays due to loss adjustmentIndemnity

• Payment upon triggering event• Simple, easy to understand• Event trigger defined by independent agency (USGS,

NOAA)• High Basis Risk – smaller event may cause large

losses; large event may cause few losses

Parametric

Indemnity v. Parametric

8/4/2017

5

STANDARD CAT BOND MODEL

9

RESILIENCE BOND MODEL

10

8/4/2017

6

Example of Hybrid

11

FOREST RESILIENCE BOND

12

8/4/2017

7

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BONDS

DC Water EIB Project Overview

• The proceeds from the EIB will provide the upfront capital needed to construct DC Water’s inaugural green infrastructure project in the Rock Creek sewershed (Rock Creek Project A or RC-A).

• RC-A is part of the DC Clean Rivers Project, a $2.6 billion long-term program to control

• CSOs that pollute the Anacostia River, Potomac River and Rock Creek.

• The green infrastructure practices will be installed primarily in the public right-of-way and include permeable pavement and bioretention facilities (e.g., rain gardens).

13

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BONDS - RFP

14http://www.quantifiedventures.com/rockefeller-eib

8/4/2017

8

USGS Streamgage Network

16

8/4/2017

9

NFIP Reauthorization FEMA PA Deductible Tax Treatment of Mitigation Investment Implement EO 13690 – Flood Standard Infrastructure Investment

OPPORTUNITIES FOR FEDERAL ACTION

© 2017 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only. 18

About Willis Towers Watson Willis Towers Watson (NASDAQ: WLTW ) is a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company that helps clients around the world turn risk into a path for growth. With roots dating to 1828, Willis Towers Watson has 39,000 employees in more than 120 countries. We design and deliver solutions that manage risk, optimize benefits, cultivate talent and expand the power of capital to protect and strengthen institutions and individuals. Our unique perspective allows us to see the critical intersections between talent, assets and ideas — the dynamic formula that drives business performance. Together, we unlock potential. Learn more at willistowerswatson.com.

8/4/2017

10

Disclaimers

19© 2017 Willis Towers Watson. All rights reserved. Proprietary and Confidential. For Willis Towers Watson and Willis Towers Watson client use only.

This analysis has been prepared by Willis Limited and/or Willis Re Inc. and/or the “Willis Towers Watson” entity with whom you are dealing (“Willis Towers Watson” is defined as Willis Limited, Willis Re Inc., and each of their respective parent companies, sister companies, subsidiaries, affiliates, Willis Towers Watson PLC, and all member companies thereof) on condition that it shall be treated as strictly confidential and shall not be communicated in whole, in part, or in summary to any third party without written consent from Willis Towers Watson.

Willis Towers Watson has relied upon data from public and/or other sources when preparing this analysis. No attempt has been made to verify independently the accuracy of this data. Willis Towers Watson does not represent or otherwise guarantee the accuracy or completeness of such data nor assume responsibility for the result of any error or omission in the data or other materials gathered from any source in the preparation of this analysis. Willis Towers Watson shall have no liability in connection with any results, including, without limitation, those arising from based upon or in connection with errors, omissions, inaccuracies, or inadequacies associated with the data or arising from, based upon or in connection with any methodologies used or applied by Willis Towers Watson in producing this analysis or any results contained herein. Willis Towers Watson expressly disclaims any and all liability arising from, based upon or in connection with this analysis. Willis Towers Watson assumes no duty in contract, tort or otherwise to any party arising from, based upon or in connection with this analysis, and no party should expect Willis Towers Watson to owe it any such duty.

There are many uncertainties inherent in this analysis including, but not limited to, issues such as limitations in the available data, reliance on client data and outside data sources, the underlying volatility of loss and other random processes, uncertainties that characterize the application of professional judgment in estimates and assumptions, etc. Ultimate losses, liabilities and claims depend upon future contingent events, including but not limited to unanticipated changes in inflation, laws, and regulations. As a result of these uncertainties, the actual outcomes could vary significantly from Willis Towers Watson’s estimates in either direction. Willis Towers Watson makes no representation about and does not guarantee the outcome, results, success, or profitability of any insurance or reinsurance program or venture, whether or not the analyses or conclusions contained herein apply to such program or venture.

Willis Towers Watson does not recommend making decisions based solely on the information contained in this analysis. Rather, this analysis should be viewed as a supplement to other information, including specific business practice, claims experience, and financial situation. Independent professional advisors should be consulted with respect to the issues and conclusions presented herein and their possible application. Willis Towers Watson makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this document and its contents.

This analysis is not intended to be a complete actuarial communication, and as such is not intended to be relied upon. A complete communication can be provided upon request. Willis Towers Watson actuaries are available to answer questions about this analysis.

Willis Towers Watson does not provide legal, accounting, or tax advice. This analysis does not constitute, is not intended to provide, and should not be construed as such advice. Qualified advisers should be consulted in these areas.

Willis Towers Watson makes no representation, does not guarantee and assumes no liability for the accuracy or completeness of, or any results obtained by application of, this analysis and conclusions provided herein.

Where data is supplied by way of CD or other electronic format, Willis Towers Watson accepts no liability for any loss or damage caused to the Recipient directly or indirectly through use of any such CD or other electronic format, even where caused by negligence. Without limitation, Willis Towers Watson shall not be liable for: loss or corruption of data, damage to any computer or communications system, indirect or consequential losses. The Recipient should take proper precautions to prevent loss or damage – including the use of a virus checker.

This limitation of liability does not apply to losses or damage caused by death, personal injury, dishonesty or any other liability which cannot be excluded by law.

This analysis is not intended to be a complete Financial Analysis communication. A complete communication can be provided upon request. Willis Towers Watson analysts are available to answer questions about this analysis.

Willis Towers Watson does not guarantee any specific financial result or outcome, level of profitability, valuation, or rating agency outcome with respect to A.M. Best or any other agency. Willis Towers Watson specifically disclaims any and all liability for any and all damages of any amount or any type, including without limitation, lost profits, unrealized profits, compensatory damages based on any legal theory, punitive, multiple or statutory damages or fines of any type, based upon, arising from, in connection with or in any manner related to the services provided hereunder.

Acceptance of this document shall be deemed agreement to the above.


Any Other Matters


Adjournment

Date post:	10-Sep-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	ngokien
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Cl Change and Global Warmi ng - naic.org · Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). It adheres to the...

Documents