The Commission approved interpretive guidance on disclosure related to climate change.  The release hasn't yet been issued but the notice of the development provided some insight into the guidance.  The examples set out in the press release include:

• Impact of Legislation and Regulation: When assessing potential disclosure obligations, a company should consider whether the impact of certain existing laws and regulations regarding climate change is material. In certain circumstances, a company should also evaluate the potential impact of pending legislation and regulation related to this topic.

• Impact of International Accords: A company should consider, and disclose when material, the risks or effects on its business of international accords and treaties relating to climate change.

• Indirect Consequences of Regulation or Business Trends: Legal, technological, political and scientific developments regarding climate change may create new opportunities or risks for companies. For instance, a company may face decreased demand for goods that produce significant greenhouse gas emissions or increased demand for goods that result in lower emissions than competing products. As such, a company should consider, for disclosure purposes, the actual or potential indirect consequences it may face due to climate change related regulatory or business trends.

• Physical Impacts of Climate Change: Companies should also evaluate for disclosure purposes the actual and potential material impacts of environmental matters on their business.

Mostly the release (as evidenced by the press release) emphasizes the need for companies to disclose the impact of enviornmental/climate change legislation/regulations (and treaties) whenever they can have a material effect on the company.  In short, the release looks like little more than a reiteration of the already existing requirement that material effects on business need to be disclosed.  If no other place, this would be required disclosure as a trend in the MD&A. 

Indeed, the release stressed that the obligations would not "create new legal requirements nor modify existing ones, but are intended to provide clarity and enhance consistency for public companies and their investors."