The Chemours Company | Report on project-specific Nature/Biodiv. impacts, dependencies, risks, opportunities The Chemours Company

Status
Filed
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Biodiversity / nature
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Materials
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that Chemours adopt a policy to assess any reasonably likely irreversible impacts on biodiversity prior to commencing mining operations in ecologically sensitive areas, as well as any related financial, reputational and operational implications for the Company should those impacts occur.
Whereas clause
Biodiversity loss is a global systemic risk. Wildlife populations have declined by an average of 69% since 1970,[1] with an estimated one million plant and animal species at risk of extinction by 2050 – approximately 25% of species on Earth.[2] $44 trillion of economic value generation – more than half of the world’s total GDP – is moderately or highly dependent on nature.[3]

Nature-related risks such as biodiversity loss are materially relevant to Chemours. The Company depends on an uninterrupted supply of titanium-bearing minerals for its Titanium Technologies segment, which comprises nearly half of net sales.[4]

The North American Coastal Plain, which includes Florida, much of Georgia, and many of Chemours’ mining operations, was named the 36th global biodiversity hotspot in 2016,[5] indicating it is both threatened and irreplaceable.[6] Impacts from mining operations at ecologically sensitive areas such as biodiversity hotspots may exacerbate nature-related risks that no amount of reclamation can mitigate, exposing Chemours to supply chain disruption as well as financial and reputational risk.

In its 2023 Sustainability Report, Chemours identifies as “a company committed to doing the right thing for our environment and communities,” and states, "Chemours works to continuously pursue and apply responsible mining principles.”[7] However, the Company’s environmental track record contradicts these statements, heightening financial and reputational risk:

Since its spin-off from DuPont in 2015, Chemours has incurred 43 violations for which it has paid, cumulatively, nearly $1B in settlements, penalties, and fines including a national class action lawsuit, EPA lawsuits and lawsuits in 10 states.[8]
Between 2017 and 2023, Chemours was fined nearly $90,000 for repeatedly polluting groundwater with radioactive particles and iron, and for spilling over 3 million gallons of wastewater from its Starke, Florida mining operations.[9],[10],[11]
In 2023, Chemours was fined for violating wastewater toxicity limits at its Georgia minerals processing facility.[12]
Ultimately, financial and systemic risks from mining operations in ecologically sensitive areas combined with reputational risk from Chemours’ previous environmental violations suggest that the Company would be well served to develop plans, above and beyond existing disclos
Supporting statement
Proponents recommend, at Board discretion:

The assessment be conducted or verified by an independent third party; and
In defining ecologically sensitive areas, the Company consider guidance from such entities as The Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures and the United Nations Environment Programme.
?

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.