|
|
Beacon Hill Associates, Inc. is a wholesale insurance broker and program administrator, specializing in the placement of environmental insurance and other specialty insurance coverages for agents nationwide.
Beacon Hill Blog
Archive for the ‘Environmental Insurance’ Category
Wednesday, May 4th, 2011
As the United States recovers from the economic crisis over the last few years, we are once again seeing growth in the acquisition and transfer of properties. The issues that arise from the sale or purchase of these properties at times can be a Pandora’s Box. The options to either borrow money to finance the purchase of a property, or to use your own money to do so, does not change the driving need in today’s marketplace to have environmental liability insurance in place to protect the investment.
There are many issues that must be addressed when thinking about Site Pollution coverage for these types of risks:
- What has the property previously been used for?
- What will the property be used for in the future?
- What policy limit of insurance will cover your contractual needs or make you feel safe in the event of a loss?
- Are you concerned with first party triggers or will third party be enough?
- Will you want pre-existing coverage, new conditions only, or both?
With answers to all the questions above, your wholesale broker will be able to advise you on the specific coverage you may need and the number of insurance carriers that are willing to write this type of coverage. Each insurance company has its own unique form, so it is crucial to carefully review them to make sure there is a complete understanding of what it does—and doesn’t—cover. It is important that most properties have Site Pollution Liability insurance, which is designed to cover claims arising from pollution releases at, on, or emanating from a specific scheduled location. Securing Site Pollution Liability insurance is a key coverage to have since claims arising from a pollution condition from a property may not be covered under the General liability or Property coverage form.
Who buys Site Pollution Liability?
- Property Owners, Operators, and Managers.
- Industrial facilities, including recyclers, storage sites, landfills, warehouses, manufacturers, etc.
- Any purchasers or sellers of properties.
The minimum premiums can start in the $5,000 to $10,000 range with deductibles as low as $10,000; but, on average, coverage ranges between $25,000 and $50,000. Both price and deductible can go as high as the risk demands.
The EPA continues to set regulations on how businesses operate so that they are held accountable for their actions and any issues resulting from them. An insurance claim on an uninsured property can have devastating repercussions. Take this opportunity to help your clients protect themselves from a potentially disastrous financial loss and secure the future of their businesses and workforces.
Site Pollution Claim Scenarios
- A property owner had his drinking water well tested prior to selling his land. Testing revealed that the well contained an alarmingly high concentration of total petroleum hydrocarbons. Further investigation revealed that the source of contamination was several dozen drums of waste oil and maintenance fluids buried on a neighboring farm. Though the previous farm owner buried the drums, the current owner was nevertheless responsible for disposal of the drums, soil and groundwater cleanup, and bodily injury and property damage claims submitted by the neighboring property owner. Total costs exceeded $1,000,000 and caused the farmer’s bankruptcy.
- A large college disposed of its science lab wastes in a 53-year-old, 20,000-gallon underground storage tank. The underground tank ruptured and contaminated the soil, the private wells and the groundwater that flowed into a nearby reservoir. Several third parties sued the university, with claims totaling $450,000. In addition, costs to clean up the reservoir amounted to $1.1 million.
- A maintenance garage that used solvents for parts washing performed the work over a drain leading to an on-site septic system. Over time, the septic system leach fields migrated into the surrounding soils and groundwater. At the time of the septic system closure and conversion to a public sewer system, the contamination was discovered. Site remediation involved soil removal and the installation of a groundwater recovery system. The costs exceeded $720,000.
- A strip mall owner upgraded the heating system for all of his tenants. While working in one of the stores, the contractor failed to vent the system properly, causing a release of carbon monoxide. Store employees and customers complaining of headaches and nausea were rushed to the local hospital. As a result, several bodily injury suits were filed against the strip mall owner.
- A warehouse utilizing an on-site septic system experienced periodic chemical and contaminant spills when floors were hosed down and the washwater entered the system. After some time, samples from neighboring residential wells showed that contamination originated at the warehouse location. Soil and groundwater cleanup costs exceeded $365,000.
  
Tags: Insuring a Property, Premises Pollution, Site Pollution
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Monday, April 11th, 2011
Access to the environmental insurance marketplace. Simply put, this is one of the main reasons why agents from around the country work with environmental wholesale brokers to find environmental coverage for their clients.
Having options is a great way to demonstrate your expertise and commitment to your clients. Clearly, this is a good approach with new business opportunities, but marketing a renewal and encouraging your client to switch carriers on an existing account need to be carefully considered. In today’s market, many accounts are marketed to try to achieve a better price. While that is certainly a worthwhile goal, changing carriers on a renewal account may cause real problems.
Here are a few issues to consider:
- The agent needs to be fully aware of the specific coverage differences between the expiring policy and the new policy. Although both forms may be appropriate for the insured’s needs, there may be discrepancies between them that could potentially create gaps in coverage.
- There will always be differences in the carrier offering the coverage. Where one may have a solid A.M. Best rating and a history of handling claims effectively, another may have a lower rating and not have a successful claim track record. Service and stability add a great deal of value.
- If the agent is aware that there are enhancements on the expiring policy that may not seem too significant; yet they are not offered on the newer form—and a claim is filed—the agency may be held liable and have an E&O issue.
- Aggressively marketing a risk every year gives the insured a reputation in the marketplace. Many accounts do not get reviewed by companies because they see them every year and never write them. Unfortunately, there may be a time where the insured really needs to switch carriers and the carrier declines to quote.
Here are some steps that brokers will want to take if you are considering marketing an account at renewal:
1 – Review the account 90 days before expiration.
2 – Discuss the coverage options that may exist in the market to assess if there is a better product being offered.
3 – Assuming the insured is happy with the coverage and carrier on the risk, it is important to determine the target price or rate goals for the renewal.
4 – Confirm with the insured that if that premium or rate goal can be achieved with the incumbent carrier, they will renew.
5 – If the carrier cannot accommodate the requests, there is still time to go to other carriers and try to achieve the insured’s coverage and cost goals elsewhere.
This allows you to give the insured what they are looking for without running the risk of reducing their coverage or any of the other pitfalls of moving coverage to a different carrier. Even if alternative proposals from other carriers are requested, agents are still encouraged to send renewal information to the incumbent carrier. The insured should not move the program elsewhere without comparing any new proposals to the expiring policy.
For more information, please call us at 1-800-596-2156 or email us.
Tags: Advice for Agents, Renewals, Tools for Agents
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Thursday, March 10th, 2011
by Allison McGreal
Assistant Vice President, Underwriting Division
A typical Commercial General Liability Policy will exclude contractual liability which “indemnifies a railroad for bodily injury or property damage arising out of construction or demolition operations within 50 feet of any railroad property and which affects any railroad bridge or trestle, tracks, roadbeds, tunnel, underpass or crossing”. You may notice that the work doesn’t have to be performed within 50 feet of the tracks. If your client is performing these contracting operations within 50 feet of any railroad property, this is a significant exclusion and should be addressed via endorsement to the CGL policy.
Most carriers using an ISO GL form will offer a CG 24 17 Contractual Liability-Railroads endorsement to “buy back” some of this excluded coverage. It replaces the definition of “Insured Contract” and removes the above language from the exclusion. Carriers prefer to limit the endorsement to a scheduled railroad and a designated job site, as this endorsement is usually driven by a specific contract. However, many will consider using blanket verbiage. The cost for this coverage will vary based on the scope of services, limits required, and size of the project, but because this limit is typically a shared limit within the CGL liability limit, there can be some flexibility in pricing.
Agents sometimes confuse the addition of the CG 24 17 endorsement to the Insured’s policy with a separate Railroad Protective Liability Policy (RPL). ISO offers “Railroad Protective Liability Coverage Form” (CG 00 35) and many carriers use this form as well. The RPL policy is provided to insure the railroad, not the contractor performing the work. The railroad may require a policy in their name for any work done by a specific contractor at a specific jobsite on or near the railroad property. The contractor will be listed on the declarations page, however, no coverage exists within this policy for the contractor. The contractor is not the insured under a RPL policy. The “catch” is that the contractor is the one responsible for purchasing the RPL policy on behalf of the railroad. Contractors may build this premium into their initial bids to offset the extra expense. The CG 24 17 endorsement and CG 00 35 form are compatible, but are not interchangeable.
Railroad Protective Liability polices are usually required for a contract prior to the commencement of work. The railroad may have specific limits they need, typically ranging up to $2,000,000 / $6,000,000. Because this is a separate liability policy, pricing may be subject to certain minimum premiums and the carrier may require that they also write the contractor’s primary CGL policy as a condition of binding RPL.
To obtain a quotation for either of the above railroad coverages, the carrier will typically need the following information:
- Name and address of the railroad
- Description of services performed
- Limit of liability required
- Duration of the project
- Location where work will be performed
As an agent, you may have a site remediation contracting account hired to clean up contaminated soil from an industrial facility, for example. Many of these industrial sites are either adjacent to a rail yard or have railroad tracks running through the property. Without the CG 24 17 endorsement, your client may not have any coverage for their excavation operations.
It is important for agents to distinguish between the Contractual Liability-Railroads endorsement and the Railroad Protective Liability policy. If a contractor is required to provide RPL, the agent should be offering the CG 24 17 endorsement to the contractors CGL policy.
Tags: Environmental Insurance Advice, Insurance for Contractors, Railroad Protective Liability, Tools for Agents
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Monday, September 13th, 2010
In the past several months, we have brought to you account profiles that highlight new business accounts dealing with complex issues or unique insureds. This month, we would like to focus on a renewal account to demonstrate how in many cases the same attention to detail and knowledge of the marketplace should be considered when working with a renewal—not all of them are automatic renewals or easy accounts to keep!
We recently worked with an agent representing a company who specializes in the process design, engineering, and supply of solvent recovery systems, scrubbers, and fans. The company also manages the design and engineering of synthetic resin manufacturing plants. This year at renewal, they were seeking a combined General Liability/Contractors Pollution Liability/Professional policy and a separate Follow-Form Excess policy, to renew on August 1st. The expiring receipts were $2.5M and the insured was projecting $3M for the upcoming fiscal year. However, they were also awarded a large job in Italy that was expected to generate an additional $15M in receipts (for a total of $18M).
Unfortunately, the large amount of foreign work did not fit the underwriting guidelines for the incumbent carrier. They were able to offer renewal terms based on the $3M in projected receipts for work that would be done in the United States, but would not be able to cover the $15M project in Italy and would have to add an exclusion to the policy for this job. After speaking with a few other markets, we were able to find a carrier that could add a worldwide coverage endorsement and write a policy that included this job, based on $18M in projected receipts.
The insured bound coverage with the new carrier; since the project does not start for a few months, the carrier provided an additional premium, which is good for 60 days. When all details are finalized in the project contract, the insured will provide the official start date and the carrier will endorse both policies to increase the amount of projected receipts to include this project and charge the additional premium. The carrier also agreed to increase the Excess limits when the project begins to comply with the limit requirements for the job.
The premium breakdown is as follows:
- General Liability/Contractors Pollution Liability/Professional policy with $2M/$2M limits.
- $10,000 deductible
- Worldwide Coverage Endorsement
- Based on $3M in projected receipts = $41,798 in premium
- Additional premium to add the Italy job and increased projected receipts to $18M = $93,760.
- Follow-Form Excess with a $1M limit = $5,293.
- Additional premium to add Italy job, increase the projected receipts on the primary policy to $18M and increase Excess limits to $2M to comply with contract requirements = $25,368.
This is another example of an account that may not be a fit with one carrier, but may be perfect for another. It is important to work with a wholesale broker that knows the available markets, especially for a challenging account, or one that has “grown out of” its current carrier. This particular underwriter’s flexibility and knowledge of the overall risk ultimately won them the account and allowed the insured to comply with the insurance requirements for an extremely large and unique project. We were able to meet the insured’s immediate needs by renewing coverage based on the jobs they currently have and plan for growth with the upcoming job.
For more information on the products we offer, feel free to call us at 1-800-596-2156 or email us.
Tags: Advice for Agents, Endorsements, Environmental Insurance, Excess
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Thursday, July 15th, 2010
Need some claim scenarios to present to your insured? Here is a list of great examples you can use to show your facility clients the importance of having Site Pollution coverage.
- A property owner conducted Phase I and II Assessments prior to the sale of their facility. Soil and groundwater contamination was traced to a neighboring electronics manufacturing facility. The cause was an old raw material storage area that used to exist over gravel. This area is now over concrete containment. Total investigation, remediation and property damage claims exceeded $1.5 million.
- A property owner had his drinking water well tested prior to selling his land. Testing revealed that the well contained an alarmingly high concentration of total petroleum hydrocarbons. Further investigation revealed that the source of contamination was several dozen drums of waste oil and maintenance fluids buried on a neighboring farm. Though the previous farm owner buried the drums, the current owner was nevertheless responsible for disposal of the drums, soil and groundwater cleanup, and bodily injury and property damage claims submitted by the neighboring property owner. Total costs exceeded $1,000,000 and caused the farmer’s bankruptcy.
- A waste storage area without secondary containment was stacked with drums of a caustic substance. The caustic substance eroded the drums and spilled onto the ground, into an adjacent creek. Subsequent remediation involved the removal of contaminated waste from the premises and dilution of waste from the creek. Cleanup costs exceeded $170,000.
- The toxic presence of methane and hydrogen sulfide gases caused nearly 200 homes in a small town to be evacuated. The emissions were traced to a local coal-mining site. Approximately 350 residents sought compensation for personal injury and property damages. The coal mine operator paid more than $9 million in settlement and defense costs.
- Fuel oil from an oil refinery was found to have leaked from below ground sewer hubs that were connected to aboveground storage tank drains. By the time the leak was discovered, contamination was detected in three groundwater plumes and onsite groundwater was also contaminated. The refinery paid nearly $5 million in cleanup costs and attorney fees.
- An aluminum trailer was loaded with a caustic substance at a transfer station. The substance corroded the trailer, spilling on the ground into an adjacent creek off-site. Constituents of the waste included creosols, methylene chloride and sodium hydroxide. The remedial effort involved pumping contaminated waste from the premises and pumping diluted waste from the creek. Cleanup costs exceeded $100,000.
- A chlorine gas release at a wastewater treatment plant resulted in toxic air emissions. Area residents and businesses were evacuated and several people were hospitalized for inhalation of fumes. A total of 12 businesses were forced to shut down for the better part of a day. Bodily injury claims amounted to $70,000 and business interruption claims totaled $120,000.
- A wastewater treatment plant that was 25 years old had been upgraded several times over the years. Improper closure of an old clarifier and on-site surface impoundment had allowed gradual seepage into the groundwater. These constituents contaminated the underlying groundwater, which was a potable water supply for the neighboring community. The costs for groundwater cleanup and emergency water supply for residents totaled $550,000.
- A maintenance garage that used solvents for parts washing performed the work over a drain leading to an on-site septic system. Over time, the septic system leach fields migrated into the surrounding soils and groundwater. At the time of the septic system closure and conversion to a public sewer system, the contamination was discovered. Site remediation involved soil removal and the installation of a groundwater recovery system. The costs exceeded $720,000.
For information, please visit our website or call us at 1-800-596-2156.
For product details, download a Site Pollution product information sheet (PDF).
Tags: Claim Scenarios, Premises Pollution, Site Pollution, Tools for Agents
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Thursday, June 24th, 2010
We have all heard the current news about the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and its devastating effects on the environment, wildlife, and the fishermen whose livelihoods depend on the now-contaminated waters. But what about the hotels, golf courses, and other coastal properties that may be affected? Agents around the country working with facilities and commercial properties should use this situation as an opportunity to examine their clients’ current insurance policies and make sure the right coverage is in place.
Facilities have the potential for very unique pollution exposures due to their size, daily operations, and the amount of goods typically stored or handled on-site at any given time. To protect against waste that may threaten a facility, any operations which could result in a pollution exposure, or fires, floods, and other natural disasters, owners and managers of facilities should have Site Pollution coverage in place.
Why is Site Pollution coverage important?
Site Pollution Liability insurance, also known as Premises Pollution, Environmental Impairment Liability (EIL insurance), and Pollution Legal Liability (PLL), is designed to cover claims arising from pollution releases at, on, or emanating from a specific scheduled location. A “location” can be as broad as an entire piece of property or as narrow as a specified storage tank. Site Pollution Liability insurance is important because claims arising from a pollution condition from an insured’s premises may not be covered via the insured’s General liability or Property coverage form.
What types of facilities should carry Site Pollution coverage? Hotels, manufacturing facilities, warehouses, landfills, golf courses, recycling centers, restaurants, recreational facilities, and other commercial properties. All of these sites have the potential to experience, or be involved in, a chemical spill, natural disaster, midnight dumping, ground water issue, or other unforeseen exposure.
How does Site Pollution insurance work?
- Coverage is triggered either by a claim for damages from a third party, or by the discovery of contamination above “Actionable Levels” on the insured’s premises.
- “Actionable Levels” are a very important concept to understand. These levels are set in every community on a federal, state, or local level. They represent the allowable concentration of any contaminant for the area in which the contaminant is discovered.
- Policies clean up pollutants to the acceptable level dictated by the governing authority. In other words, if you have pristine land on which you spill diesel fuel, the government will require cleanup to below actionable levels of petroleum contaminants.
- Coverage can be modified to cover only new conditions occurring from policy inception onward, or unknown pre-existing conditions, or both.
- Coverage can be constructed to apply to only On-Site Bodily Injury, Property Damage, and Clean Up, or only Off-site, or both.
- Coverage is very flexible.
- Coverage is almost always Claims Made.
- Available product enhancements can often include first and third party Transportation Pollution Liability, Natural Resources Damages, coverage for scheduled Storage Tank systems, Mold coverage, Extended Reporting Periods, and coverage for Non-Owned waste disposal sites.
The current oil spill is a perfect example of a pollution event happening in one area and carrying over into another. Site Pollution Liability can help protect your clients’ facilities in the event of a problem like this occurring either on-site or on a different property/area and spilling over onto the insured’s premises.
To learn more about Site Pollution coverage or to discuss a specific account, call us today at 1-800-596-2156. You can also visit Beacon Hill’s Site Pollution webpage for more information.
Tags: Environmental Facilities, Facilities, Premises Pollution, Site Pollution
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Thursday, June 10th, 2010
HVAC and Mechanical Contractors are faced with a unique challenge in today’s insurance market. While they are traditional contracting risks, they have become the focus of growing pollution and mold related claims over the last several years. Exacerbating the problem is the trend of holding these contractors to a higher standard than many other trades, in effect giving them a “professional” liability exposure. These firms are now being expected to not only install the equipment properly, but to consult on its design and identify potential problems with another’s design as well. While flattering, it creates a coverage issue for many of these risks. HVAC and Mechanical Contractors have two primary areas of concern: (1) contracting services creating environmental problems and (2) growing professional exposures.
Contracting services can create environmental problems in the following ways:
Installation leads to hazardous indoor air quality.
One of the biggest environmental concerns faced by Mechanical/HVAC professionals is the allegation that their work has led to an unhealthy indoor environment. This can manifest itself in many ways, including odors, ill employees, or staining and damage to walls and fixtures. When these allegations lead to Bodily Injury, Property Damage, or Business Interruption, the claims can become sizeable. If the basis of the claims is the toxic nature of the contaminant, pollution exclusions are often cited.
Installation leads directly to mold growth.
Mold growth is generally caused where moisture, a food source, and an acceptably warm environment meet. One of the unfortunate drawbacks to installation problems with HVAC systems can often be excessive moisture, either in the form of condensation or actual leaks. This moisture, matched with wood or wall board and warmth, leads to mold. Most mold claims are excluded from CGL policies.
Job site pollution caused by the contractor disturbing existing conditions.
Many claims faced by Mechanical/HVAC contractors stem from disturbing asbestos, lead, or existing mold within the structure while work is being performed. This can take the form of asbestos wrap on piping, lead paint on windows and doors, or mold growth that existed prior to the work. Making these conditions worse by spreading the contamination can lead to significant liability on the part of the contractor.
Job site pollution caused by contaminants the contractor brings to the site.
Many Mechanical/HVAC contractors use equipment powered by generators, requiring fueling. They also regularly use solvents, acids, glues, and other toxic substances at the job. The release of these materials, or their improper disposal, can lead to pollution claims.
The operations of subcontractors for which the contractor is responsible.
When Mechanical/HVAC contractors hire subcontractors to do work such as electrical, plumbing, or remodeling and construction, they run the risk of being held responsible for pollution conditions stemming from the subcontractors’ work. Obviously the contractor will require the sub to carry his own insurance, and name the contractor as an additional Insured. If the subcontractor causes a pollution condition, and his environmental coverage is inadequate, the Mechanical/HVAC contractor may have to defend himself against claims relating to work for which they were responsible due to hiring of the sub.
HVAC firms have growing professional exposures:
Actual design work performed.
Many firms provide true design services as part of their corporate profiles. This can range from doing all of the design work for the project, doing some design work relative to an aspect of the HVAC system, or simply having a perceived responsibility to comment on design aspects they know to be poorly developed. The last element is the most difficult to control and manage for HVAC firms.
Job site modifications made.
HVAC contractors are often presented with installations that do not work exactly as planned. In these situations, contractors will often tweak the specs while at the jobsite to make the system work. Malfunctions arising from these changes create a direct professional responsibility for the contractor.
Supervision of subcontractors.
Proper selection and supervision of subcontractors is a professional exposure most contractors share that is generally excluded from CGL and basic CPL policies. For contractors that may need to outsource certain parts of a job, the exposure can be significant.
It is important to remember that while addressing Contractors Pollution and Professional Liability are important, the key for this class of business is to address Mold at the same time. There are very few products that combine all three elements, so knowing how to get the appropriate coverage for your insureds and covering all bases is crucial to keeping them protected.
Tags: Contractors, Contractors Pollution Liability, Environmental Exposures, Environmental Insurance, HVAC, Professional Liability
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Thursday, May 27th, 2010
The “energy” category of insurance has a broad definition and these clients often require varying types of coverage. Energy clients range from blending & mixing facilities, oil and gas servicing contractors, and refineries, to more alternative energy risks, such as biodiesel facilities and contractors handling windmills and solar-powered services/equipment.
And, while some of these activities are regional, most companies operating in the energy industry span across the country. Here are some of the environmental coverages they often require:
General Liability/Contractors Pollution Liability
Combined General Liability and Contractors Pollution Liability policy that provides coverage for pollution claims arising from an insured’s covered and completed operations.
Products Pollution
Provides liability coverage for bodily injury and property damage to third parties arising out of a manufactured product. This would be especially important for blending/mixing facilities, companies that make solar panels, etc.
Transportation Pollution Liability
Coverage for insureds who need protection for pollution conditions caused by transportation. This coverage can also include loading/unloading should the insured’s cargo create a pollution condition. This would be important for haulers of any placard use, salt water disposal companies, etc.
Excess
Follow form Excess policies provide additional limits, following form over the underlying General Liability, Pollution, and any associated Professional, Employers, and Auto liability.
Although environmental liability insurance is not always required, the Gulf of Mexico oil spill is the perfect example of why it is crucial for energy companies to have adequate coverage. This is a great opportunity to contact your energy clients to make sure they have the right insurance program in place. For more information or to discuss a specific energy account, call us at 1-800-596-2156 or email us.
Tags: Contractors Pollution Liability, Energy Risks, Excess, Products Pollution, Transportation Pollution Liability
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
Monday, April 26th, 2010
by Jane Saliba
In today’s competitive insurance market, many carriers are emphasizing the highlights of their coverage form and adding enhancements to further broaden coverage. For Contractors Pollution Liability (CPL), there are typically blanket endorsements that are now readily being included automatically. There are also a number of available coverage grants that can be added once the exposure is evaluated. To name a few:
- Blanket Additional Insured for Owners, Lessees or Contractors where required by written contract – including completed operations: broadly provides protection to the requiring Additional Insured for liabilities arising out of the ongoing and completed operations of the Named Insured.
- Blanket Waiver of Subrogation where required by written contract: the Carrier gives up or waives their right to subrogate, or attempt to collect or share in the responsibility of a loss for a requiring entity.
- Blanket Primary and Non-contributory where required by written contract: the Carrier is affirming that the Insured’s policy will pay first in the event of a claim (or be primary). Non-contributory means that not only will the Insured’s policy respond/pay first, but it will pay the claim (subject to limits) without the requiring entity having to contribute to the loss with their own insurance.
- Transportation Pollution Liability: applies to losses specifically caused by pollution conditions arising from transported cargo and the loading & unloading of that cargo when the vehicle is being used in the performance of Insured’s operations, first and third party carrier coverage available.
- Non-Owned Disposal Site Coverage: coverage for liability arising from the disposal of waste into a third party non-owned disposal facility that at the time of disposal is a licensed/permitted facility. Coverage is available on a scheduled locations basis or blanket basis.
- Restoration Costs: reasonable and necessary costs to restore/repair property damaged by a pollution condition resulting from the Insured’s operations to the condition of the property prior to the loss.
- Separate Defense Limits: The carrier will pay the costs incurred to defend the Insured for a claim; this will not erode the policy limits of liability, but be provided in addition to.
- Sudden / Accidental Site Pollution coverage for your Covered Locations: typically providing coverage for third party claims for pollution conditions migrating from the Insured’s location (locations scheduled, blanket coverage may be available).
- Incidental Professional Services Coverage: coverage for liability arising from opinions/recommendations made by the Insured about the covered operations that are incidental and necessary and for which no compensation is requested.
Your client is better protected with a CPL policy. It is critical to compare coverage/carriers, in addition to price, when determining the best home for your pollution coverage.
Tags: Contractors Pollution Liability, Endorsements, Transportation Pollution Liability
Posted in Environmental Insurance | 5 Comments »
Thursday, April 15th, 2010
Owners and operators of manufacturing facilities face a unique set of exposures stemming from the activities that are part of their daily operations, the premises on which the operations are performed, and handling/distributing the products being manufactured. Here are some of the common coverages required to properly insure a manufacturing facility:
General Liability/Site Pollution
Combined GL and Premises Pollution coverage, which provides coverage for both on-site and off-site clean-up, defense costs, and third party bodily injury and property damage claims.
Contractors Pollution Liability (CPL)
Provides coverage for pollution claims arising from an insured’s covered and completed operations.
Products Pollution
Provides liability coverage for bodily injury and property damage to third parties arising out of a manufactured product.
For more information on coverages for manufacturers and claim scenarios relating to them, email us to request this information.
Tags: Contractors Pollution Liability, Environmental Insurance, Manufacturing, Products Pollution, Site Pollution
Posted in Environmental Insurance | No Comments »
|
|
