Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Amendment No.           )

Filed by the Registrantý


Filed by a Party other than the Registranto


Check the appropriate box:


o



Preliminary Proxy Statement


o



Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))


ý



Definitive Proxy Statement


o



Definitive Additional Materials


o



Soliciting Material under §240.14a-12


Ecolab Inc.


ECOLAB INC.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)



(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)


Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):


ý



☒    No fee required.


o



☐    Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.


(1)



(1)


Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

(2)

(2)

Aggregate number of securities to which transaction applies:

(3)

(3)

Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

(4)

(4)

Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

(5)

(5)

Total fee paid:


o



☐   Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.


o



☐    Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing.



(1)


(1)


Amount Previously Paid:

(2)

(2)

Form, Schedule or Registration Statement No.:

(3)Filing Party:

(3)

Filing Party:

(4)

Date Filed:

 


Table of Contents

LOGO

NOTICE OF 2015
ANNUAL MEETING AND

PROXY STATEMENT

FOR MAY 7, 2015

GRAPHICPicture 1

 

Notice of 2017 Annual Meeting and
Proxy Statement

Annual Meeting to be Held on May 4, 2017


Table of Contents


TABLE OF CONTENTS

NOTICE

NOTICE

ii
1

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY

VOTING PROCEDURES

1
2

VOTING PROCEDURES

STOCKHOLDER ACCESS

3
5

STOCKHOLDER ACCESS

7

 — Communications with Directors

3
7

 — Future Stockholder Proposals and Director Nomination Process

3
7

SECURITY OWNERSHIP

— New Director Selection Process

4
10

SECURITY OWNERSHIP

5

 — Certain Beneficial Owners

5
10

 — Executive Officers and Directors

5
11

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

6
12

 — Corporate Governance Materials and Code of Conduct

6
12

 — Board Structure

6
12

 — Board Leadership Structure

7
12

 — Board'sBoard’s Role onin Risk Oversight

7
13

 — Compensation Risk Analysis

13

Director Attendance

14

Board Committees

14

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

16

RELATED-PERSON TRANSACTIONS

7
16

 — Director Attendance

8

 — Board Committees

8

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION FOR 20142016

10
17

 — Director Compensation Table

10
17

Summary

 — Summary

10
18

 — Stock Retention and Ownership Guidelines

11
19

 — Changes Effective in 2015

11

DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE STANDARDS AND DETERMINATIONS

20

“Independence” Standards

20

“Independence” Determinations

20

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

11

    i

 — "Independence" Standards


11

 — "Independence" Determinations

12

RELATED-PERSON TRANSACTIONS

12

PROPOSAL 1: 1ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

13
22

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

21

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

21
27

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

21
27

Executive Summary

 — Introduction and Overview

21
27

 — Program Objectives and Reward PhilosophyElements

25
31

Compensation Philosophy

 — Base Salaries

27
32

Compensation Process

33

 — Compensation Benchmarking

33

Base Salaries

34

Adjustments to Reported Financial Results

35

Annual Cash Incentives

27
36

 — Long-Term Equity Incentives

30
39

 — Executive Benefits and Perquisites

31
40

 — Executive Change-in-Control Policy

31
41

 — Stock Retention and Ownership Guidelines

31
41

 — Compensation Recovery

32
42

Regulatory Considerations

 — Total Compensation Mix

32
42

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE FOR 20142016

33
43

GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS FOR 20142016

35
45

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END FOR 20142016

36
46

OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED FOR 20142016

37
47

PENSION BENEFITS FOR 20142016

38
48

NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION FOR 20142016

40
51

POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL

42
53

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

46
58

AUDIT FEES

47

Table of Contents

59

PROPOSAL 2: 2:  RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

47
60

PROPOSAL 3: 3:  ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVES DISCLOSED IN THE PROXY STATEMENT

48
61

PROPOSAL 4:4ADVISORY VOTE ON THE FREQUENCY OF FUTURE STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL REQUESTING AN INDEPENDENT BOARD CHAIRADVISORY VOTES ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

49
62

OTHER MATTERS

51
63

 — Proxy Solicitation Costs

51
63

 — Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

51
63

 — Householding Information

51
63

 — Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials

51
63

 — Voting by Plan Participants

51
64

ii    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents

GRAPHICPicture 24

March 23, 201520, 2017

Dear Fellow Stockholder:DEAR FELLOW STOCKHOLDER:

You are cordially invited to join us for our Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be held at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, May 7, 2015,4, 2017, in the Auditorium of the Landmark Center, 75 West 5th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102. The Notice of Annual Meeting and the Proxy Statement that follow describe the business to be conducted at our Annual Meeting. We urge you to read both carefully.

We hope you plan to attend our Annual Meeting. However, if you will not be able to join us, we encourage you to exercise your right as a stockholder and vote. Please sign, date and promptly return the accompanying proxy card, or make use of either our telephone or Internet voting services. Stockholders not in attendance may listen to a broadcast of the meeting on the Internet. Webcast instructions will be available on-line at www.ecolab.com/investor.www.investor.ecolab.com.

Sincerely,

D:\Job Folder\Fatima\2015\12. Dec\25 Dec 2015\QERq15-02292_V1\2. Conversion\img1.jpg

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

Chairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer

Sincerely,

SIGNATURE

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.
Chairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer

YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT!

PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR PROXY TODAY.

PLEASE REFER TO THE ACCOMPANYING MATERIALS FOR VOTING INSTRUCTIONS.

i


Picture 35

Table of Contents


NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

TO BE HELD ON MAY 7, 2015
4, 2017

To the Stockholders of Ecolab Inc.:

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Ecolab Inc. will be held on Thursday, May 7, 2015,4, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., in the Auditorium of the Landmark Center, 75 West 5th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102, for the following purposes (which are more fully explained in the Proxy Statement):

1.

To elect as Directors to a one-year term ending in 2018 the 13 nominees named in the Proxy Statement;

2.

To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the current year ending December 31, 2017;

3.

To approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of executives disclosed in the Proxy Statement;

4.

To vote, on an advisory basis, on the frequency of future stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation; and

5.

To transact such other business as may properly come before our Annual Meeting and any adjournment or postponement thereof.

Our Board of Directors has fixed the close of business on March 10, 20157, 2017 as the record date for the determination of stockholders entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the meeting.

By Order of the Board of Directors





SIGNATUREPicture 45



Michael C. McCormick


James J. Seifert

Executive Vice President, General Counsel
and Assistant Secretary

March 20, 2017

March 23, 2015

ii


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    1


Picture 37

PROXY STATEMENT SUMMARY

This proxy summary is intended to provide a broad overview of the items that you will find elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider, and we encourage you to read the entire Proxy Statement carefully before voting.

Annual Meeting of Stockholders

Table of ContentsDate and Time:  Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 10:00 a.m.

ECOLAB INC.
370 WabashaLocation: 
The Auditorium of the Landmark Center, 75 West 5th Street, North, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102

Record Date:  March 7, 2017

Meeting Agenda and Items of Business

Proposal

Board’s Voting
Recommendation

Reference

1. Election of Directors

FOR

22

2. Ratification of Independent Accountants

FOR

60

3. Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation

FOR

61

4. Advisory Vote on Frequency of Future Stockholder Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation

ANNUAL

62

Election of Directors

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name of Director Nominee

 

Age

 

Years of Service

 

Occupation

Non-Independent Directors

 

 

 

 

 

 

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 

58

 

13

 

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, Ecolab Inc.

Independent Directors

 

 

 

 

 

 

Barbara J. Beck

 

56

 

9

 

Chief Executive Officer, Learning Care Group, Inc.

Leslie S. Biller

 

69

 

19

 

Chief Executive Officer, Harborview Capital

Carl M. Casale

 

55

 

3

 

President and Chief Executive Officer, CHS Inc.

Stephen I. Chazen

 

70

 

4

 

Retired Chief Executive Officer, Occidental Petroleum Corporation

Jeffrey M. Ettinger

 

58

 

2

 

Chairman of the Board, Hormel Foods Corporation

Arthur J. Higgins

 

61

 

7

 

Consultant, Blackstone Healthcare Partners

Michael Larson

 

57

 

5

 

Chief investment officer to William H. Gates III

David W. MacLennan

 

57

 

2

 

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Cargill, Incorporated

Tracy B. McKibben

 

47

 

2

 

Founder and Chief Executive Officer, MAC Energy Advisors, LLC

Victoria J. Reich

 

59

 

7

 

Former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Essendant Inc.

Suzanne M. Vautrinot

 

57

 

3

 

President, Kilovolt Consulting Inc.

John J. Zillmer

 

61

 

11

 

Retired President and Chief Executive Officer, Univar Inc.

The Board of Directors of Ecolab Inc. is asking you to elect 13 director nominees.  The table above provides summary information about the director nominees.  A nominee will only be elected if the number of votes cast for the nominee’s election is greater than the number of votes cast against the nominee.  For more information, see page 22.

2    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


Ratification of Independent Accountants

The Board of Directors is asking you to ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm to audit our consolidated financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2017. For more information, see page 60.

Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation

The Board of Directors is asking you to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this Proxy Statement. For more information, see page 61.

Advisory Vote on the Frequency of Future Stockholder Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation

The Board of Directors is asking you to vote, on an advisory basis, on the frequency of future advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers. The Board of Directors recommends that you vote for ANNUAL frequency. For more information, see page 62.

Summary of Compensation Practices

Key compensation practices include the following:

·

We use different performance measures in our short-term and long-term incentive plans.

·

We have a balanced double-trigger change-in-control severance policy with no tax gross-ups.

·

We have robust stock ownership guidelines of 6 times salary for our CEO and 3 times salary for our other officers. 

·

Risk mitigation features in our compensation programs include varied and balanced performance targets, discretionary authority of the Compensation Committee to reduce award pay-outs, bonus caps at 200% of target and a claw-back policy.

·

We do not maintain employment agreements with any of our named executive officers.

For more information, see page 27.

Corporate Governance Highlights

Key aspects of our corporate governance structure, policies and processes include the following:

·

All of our directors, with the exception of our CEO, are independent.

·

We have an independent Lead Director with substantial and clearly delineated authority.

·

We do not have a stockholder rights plan.

·

Each director serves a one-year term and stands for re-election at each annual meeting.

·

Directors elected in uncontested elections must receive a majority vote.  A director who fails to receive the required number of votes for election must tender his or her written resignation for consideration by the Board.

·

All of our named executive officers hold Ecolab common stock in excess of our stock ownership guidelines.

For more information, see page 12.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    3


Picture 39

PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS

MAY 7, 20154, 2017

1 Ecolab Place, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102

The Board of Directors of Ecolab Inc. is using this Proxy Statement (the “Proxy Statement”) to solicit proxies from the holders of Ecolab Common Stock, par value $1.00 per share ("(“Common Stock"Stock”), for use at the 20152017 Annual Meeting of Ecolab Stockholders. We are first mailing this Proxy Statement and accompanying form of proxy to Ecolab stockholders on or about March 23, 2015.20, 2017.

·

Meeting Time and Place– Thursday, May 4, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., in the Auditorium of the Landmark Center, 75 West 5th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102.

·

Purpose of the Meeting – is to vote on the following items:

1.

To elect as Directors to a one-year term ending in 2018 the 13 nominees named in this Proxy Statement;

2.

To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the current year ending December 31, 2017;

3.

To approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of executives disclosed in the Proxy Statement;

4.

To vote, on an advisory basis, on the frequency of future stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation; and

5.

To transact such other business as may properly come before our Annual Meeting and any adjournment or postponement thereof.

·

Record Date – The record date for determining the holders of Common Stock entitled to vote at our Annual Meeting is the close of business on March 7, 2017.

·

Shares Entitled to Vote – As of March 7, 2017, the record date for the meeting, there were 290,057,333 shares of Common Stock outstanding. Each share of Common Stock is entitled to one vote. Common Stock held by Ecolab in our treasury is not counted in shares outstanding and will not be voted.

Note  — Thursday, May 7, 2015, at 10:00 a.m., in the Auditorium of the Landmark Center, 75 West 5th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102.

Purpose of the Meeting — is to vote on the following items:

(1)
to elect as Directors to a one-year term ending in 2016 the 16 nominees named in this Proxy Statement;

(2)
to ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the current year ending December 31, 2015;

(3)
to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of executives disclosed in this Proxy Statement;

(4)
to consider a stockholder proposal, if properly presented at the meeting, requesting an independent board chair; and

(5)
to transact such other business as may properly come before our Annual Meeting and any adjournment or postponement thereof.

Record Date — The record date for determining the holders of Common Stock entitled to vote at our Annual Meeting is the close of business on March 10, 2015.

Shares Entitled to Vote — As of March 10, 2015, the record date for the meeting, there were 297,349,851 shares of Common Stock outstanding. Each share of Common Stock is entitled to one vote. Common Stock held by Ecolab in our treasury is not counted in shares outstanding and will not be voted.


Note References in this Proxy Statement to "Ecolab," "the“Ecolab,” “the Company," "we,"” “we,” or "our"“our” are to Ecolab Inc.


4    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


VOTING PROCEDURES

VOTING PROCEDURES

Quorum A quorum of stockholders is necessary to hold a valid meeting. The presence in person or by proxy at the meeting of holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of Common Stock entitled to vote at the meeting is a quorum. Abstentions and broker non-votes count as present for establishing a quorum. Common Stock held by Ecolab in our treasury does not count toward a quorum.


Broker Non-Votes — Generally, broker– Broker non-votes occur on a proposal when a broker is not permitted under applicable rules to vote on that proposal without instruction from the beneficial owner of the Common Stock does not submit voting instructions to a broker or bank. Under New York Stock Exchange rules, brokers, banks and no instruction is given. Brokerother nominees generally will have discretionary authority to vote shares in absence of instructions on "routine" matters, such as the ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, and will not have discretion to vote shares on non-routine matters. Other than the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, broker non-votes are not counted as votes cast for any purpose in determining whether a matter has been approved.To ensure that their views are represented at the meeting, we strongly urge all beneficial owners to provide specific voting instructions on all matters to be considered at the meeting to their record-holding brokers.


Treatment of Abstentions
– Shares voted “Abstain” will have no effect on the election of directors or on the advisory vote on the frequency of future stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation. For the other proposals to be voted on at the Annual Meeting, abstentions are treated as shares present or represented and voting and therefore have the same effect as negative votes.

How to Vote by Proxy You may vote in person by ballot at our Annual Meeting or by submitting a valid proxy. We recommend you submit your proxy even if you plan to attend the Annual Meeting. If you attend the Annual Meeting, you may vote by ballot, thereby canceling any proxy previously submitted.

Voting instructions are included on your proxy card. If you properly complete your proxy and submit it to us in time to be tabulated, one of the individuals named as your proxy will vote your Common Stock as you have directed. You may vote for or against each proposal, or you may abstain from voting on a proposal. With respect to the election of directors, you may vote for or against each nominee, or you may abstain from voting on the election of one or more nominees.


Revoking Your Proxy You may revoke your proxy at any time before it is voted by:

timely delivery of a valid, later-dated proxy, including a proxy given by telephone or Internet;

timely delivery of written notice to our Corporate Secretary before the Annual Meeting, stating that you have revoked your proxy; or

voting by ballot at our Annual Meeting.

·

timely delivery of a valid, later-dated proxy, including a proxy given by telephone or Internet;

·

timely delivery of written notice to our Corporate Secretary before the Annual Meeting, stating that you have revoked your proxy; or

·

voting by ballot at our Annual Meeting.

Table of Contents


Treatment of Abstentions — Shares voting "Abstain" will have no effect on the election of directors. For the other proposals to be voted on at the Annual Meeting, abstentions are treated as shares present or represented and voting and therefore have the same effect as negative votes.


Vote Tabulation The vote on each proposal will be tabulated as follows:

    Proposal 1: Election of Directors Each nominee will be elected by a majority of the votes cast in uncontested elections. We currently expect that the election of directors at our meeting will be uncontested. Under the majority voting standard, a nominee must receive a number of "FOR" votes that exceeds 50% of the votes cast with respect to that director'sdirector’s election. Votes cast with respect to a nominee include votesFORorAGAINST a nominee and exclude abstentions and broker non-votes.

    In a contested election, directors will be elected by a plurality vote. A contested election is an election in which the number of candidates for election as directors exceeds the number of directors to be elected. Under the plurality standard, the 16 nominees receiving the most number of "FOR" votes will be elected as directors.

    If an uncontested nominee for director does not receive an affirmative majority of "FOR" votes, he or she will be required to promptly offer his or her resignation to the Board'sBoard’s independent Governance Committee. That committee will then make a recommendation to the Board as to whether the offered resignation should be accepted or rejected, or whether other action should be taken. The Board will publicly announce its decision regarding the offered resignation and the rationale behind it within 90 days after the election results have been certified. Any director who has so offered his or her resignation will not be permitted to vote on or participate in the recommendation of the Governance Committee or the Board'sBoard’s decision with respect to his or her resignation.

    Unless a contrary choice is specified, proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedFOR the election of the 1613 nominees named in this Proxy Statement. If, for any reason, any nominee becomes unavailable for election prior to our Annual Meeting, the proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedFOR such substituted nominee as is selected by our Board of Directors, or our Board of Directors, at its option, may reduce the number of directors to constitute the entire Board.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    5


VOTING PROCEDURES

Proposal 2: Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm The affirmative vote of a majority of the total votes cast by holders of shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote will constitute ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. Unless a contrary choice is specified, proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedFOR ratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

Proposal 3: Advisory Vote to Approve the Compensation of Executives Disclosed in this Proxy Statement The affirmative vote of a majority of the total votes cast by holders of shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote will constitute approval of the compensation of executives disclosed in this Proxy Statement. Unless a contrary choice is specified, proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedFOR approval of the compensation of executives disclosed in this Proxy Statement.

Proposal 4:  Advisory Vote on the Frequency of Future Stockholder Proposal RequestingAdvisory Votes on Executive Compensation –  For this proposal, which provides for an Independent Board Chair — The affirmativeadvisory vote on the frequency of a majorityadvisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers (that is, annually or every two or three years), the Company will treat the option selected by the plurality (that is, the most frequently selected option) of the total votes cast by holders of shares present in person or represented by proxy at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote will constitute approval ofas the proposal. option selected by the stockholders.  Unless a contrary choice is specified, proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedAGAINSTfor the proposal.ANNUAL frequency of an advisory vote on compensation of our named executive officers.


Discretionary Voting We are not currently aware of any other business to be acted upon at our Annual Meeting. If, however, other matters are properly brought before the Annual Meeting, or any adjournment or postponement of the Annual Meeting, your proxy includes discretionary authority on the part of the individuals appointed to vote your Common Stock or act on those matters according to their best judgment, including to adjourn the Annual Meeting.


Adjournments Adjournment of our Annual Meeting may be made for the purpose of, among other things, soliciting additional proxies. Any adjournment may be made from time to time by approval of the holders of Common Stock representing a majority of the votes present in person or by proxy at the Annual Meeting, whether or not a quorum exists, without further notice other than by an announcement made at the Annual Meeting. We do not currently intend to seek an adjournment of the Annual Meeting.


6    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


STOCKHOLDER ACCESS

STOCKHOLDER ACCESSTable of Contents


STOCKHOLDER ACCESS

Communications with Directors

Our stakeholders and other interested parties, including our stockholders and employees, can send substantive communications to our Board using the following methods published on our website at http://investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance.cfm: corporate-governance:

to correspond with the Board's Lead Director, please complete and submit the on-line "Contact Lead Director" form;

to report potential issues regarding accounting, internal controls and other auditing matters to the Board's Audit Committee, please complete and submit the on-line "Contact Audit Committee" form; or

to make a stockholder recommendation for a potential candidate for nomination to the Board, please submit an e-mail to the Board's Governance Committee, in care of our Corporate Secretary, at investor.info@ecolab.com.

·

to correspond with the Board’s Lead Director, please complete and submit the on-line “Contact Lead Director” form;

·

to report potential issues regarding accounting, internal controls and other auditing matters to the Board’s Audit Committee, please complete and submit the on-line “Contact Audit Committee” form; or

·

to make a stockholder recommendation for a potential candidate for nomination to the Board, please submit an e-mail to the Board’s Governance Committee, in care of our Corporate Secretary, at investor.info@ecolab.com.

All substantive communications regarding governance matters or potential accounting, control, compliance or auditing irregularities are promptly relayed or brought to the attention of the Lead Director or Chair of the Audit Committee following review by our management. Communications not requiring the substantive attention of our Board, such as employment inquiries, sales solicitations, questions about our products and other such matters, are handled directly by our management. In such instances, we respond to the communicating party on behalf of the Board. Nonetheless, our management periodically updates the Board on all of the on-line communications received, whether or not our management believes they are substantive. In addition to on-line communications, interested parties may direct correspondence to our Board of Directors, our Board Committees or to individual directors at our headquarters address, repeated at the top of page 14 of this Proxy Statement.


Future Stockholder Proposals and Director Nomination Process

Any stockholder proposal, other than those for director nominations, must comply with advance notice procedures set forth in Article II, Section 4 of our By-Laws. As described in more detail below, stockholder proposals for director nominations must comply with Article II, Section 3 and Section 15 of our By-Laws. Under our By-Laws, to be in proper written form, the stockholder'sstockholder’s notice to our Corporate Secretary must set forth as to each matter such stockholder proposes to bring before the Annual Meeting a brief description of the business desired to be brought before the Annual Meeting and the reasons for conducting such business at the Annual Meeting and, as to the stockholder giving the notice and any Stockholder Associated Person (i.e., any person acting in concert, directly or indirectly, with such stockholder and any person controlling, controlled by or under common control with such stockholder): (i) the name and record address of such person, (ii) the class or series and the number of shares beneficially owned by the stockholder, (iii) the nominee holder for, and number of, shares owned beneficially but not of record by such person, (iv) whether and the extent to which any hedging or other transaction or series of transactions has been entered into by or on behalf of, or any other agreement or arrangement has been made, the effect or intent of which is to mitigate loss to or manage risk or benefit of share price changes for, or to increase or decrease the voting power of, such person with respect to any share of stock of the Company, (v) to the extent known, the name and address of any other stockholder supporting the proposal, (vi) a description of all arrangements or understandings between or among such persons in connection with the proposal and any material interest in such proposal, and (vii) a representation by the stockholder that he or she intends to appear at the Annual Meeting to present the business. Any ownership information shall be supplemented by the stockholder giving the notice not later than ten (10) days after the record date for the meeting as of the record date. This summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of our By-Laws, which can be found on our website at http://investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance.cfm.corporate-governance. If the presiding Chairperson of the Annual Meeting of Stockholders determines that business, or a nomination, was not brought before the meeting in accordance with the By-Law provisions, that business will not be transacted or the defective nomination will not be accepted.

Deadline for Inclusion in the Proxy Statement —All proposals to be considered by the Board for inclusion in the Proxy Statement and form of proxy for next year's Annual Meeting of Stockholders expected to be held on May 5, 2016, must be received by the Corporate Secretary at our headquarters address, repeated at the top of page 1 of this Proxy Statement, no later than November 24, 2015.

Deadline for Consideration —Stockholder proposals not included in a Company proxy statement for an annual meeting as well as proposed stockholder nominations for the election of directors at an annual meeting must each comply with advance notice procedures set forth in our By-Laws in order to be properly brought before that annual meeting of stockholders. In general, written notice of a stockholder proposal or a director nomination must be received by the Corporate Secretary not less than 120 days nor more than 150 days prior to the anniversary date of the preceding annual meeting of stockholders. With regard to next year's Annual Meeting of Stockholders, expected to be held on May 5, 2016, the written notice must be received between December 9, 2015 and January 8, 2016, inclusive.

Director Nomination Process —Our Board's Governance Committee has, under its Charter, responsibility for director nominee functions, including review of any director nominee candidates recommended by stockholders. The Governance Committee has the authority to:

    Review and recommend to the Board of Directors policies for the composition of the Board, including such criteria as:

    size of the Board;

    diversity of experience, employment, background and other relevant factors of Board members;

    the proportion of the Board to be comprised of non-management directors;

    qualifications for new or continued membership on the Board, including experience, employment, background and other relevant considerations; and

    director retirement requirements or standards.

·

Deadline for Inclusion in the Proxy Statement – All proposals, other than with respect to director nominees (as discussed below), to be considered by the Board for inclusion in the Proxy Statement and form of proxy for next year’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders expected to be held on May 3, 2018, must be received by the Corporate Secretary at our headquarters address, repeated at the top of page 4 of this Proxy Statement, no later than November 20, 2017.

·

Deadline for Consideration – Stockholder proposals not included in a Company proxy statement for an annual meeting as well as proposed stockholder nominations for the election of directors for inclusion in the Company’s proxy statement and form of proxy at an annual meeting must each comply with advance notice procedures set forth in our

Table of Contents

Any stockholder nomination for directors must comply with the advance notice procedures set forth in Article II, Section 3 of our By-Laws. Under our By-Laws, to be in proper written form, the stockholder's notice to our Corporate Secretary must set forth as to each person whom the stockholder proposes to nominate for election as a director (i) the name, age, business address, residence address and record address of the person, (ii) the principal occupation or employment of the person, (iii) the class and series and the number of shares owned beneficially or of record by the person, (iv) any information relating to the person that would be required to be disclosed in a proxy statement or other filings required to be made in connection with solicitations of proxies for election of directors pursuant to Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, (v) the nominee holder for, and number of, shares owned beneficially but not of record by the person, (vi) whether and the extent to which any hedging or other transaction or series of transactions has been entered into by or on behalf of, or any other agreement or arrangement has been made, the effect or intent of which is to mitigate loss to or manage risk or benefit of share price changes for, or to increase or decrease the voting power of, the person with respect to any share of stock of the Company, (vii) to the extent known, the name and address of any other stockholder supporting the nominee for election or reelection as a director on the date of such stockholder's notice, (viii) a description of all arrangements or understandings between or among persons pursuant to which the nomination(s) are to be made by the stockholder and (ix) a representation that the stockholder intends to appear in person or by proxy at the meeting to nominate the persons named in its notice. Any ownership information shall be supplemented by the stockholder giving the notice not later than ten (10) days after the record date for the meeting as of the record date. The notice must be accompanied by a written consent of the proposed nominee to being named as a nominee and to serve as a director if elected. No person shall be eligible for election as a director of the Company unless nominated in accordance with the foregoing procedures. This summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of our By-Laws, which can be found on our website at http://investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance.cfm.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    7


STOCKHOLDER ACCESS

By-Laws in order to be properly brought before that annual meeting of stockholders. In general, written notice of a stockholder proposal or a director nomination must be received by the Corporate Secretary not less than 120 days nor more than 150 days prior to the anniversary date of the preceding annual meeting of stockholders. With regard to next year’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders, expected to be held on May 3, 2018, the written notice must be received between December 5, 2017 and January 4, 2018, inclusive.

·

Director Nomination Process – Our Board’s Governance Committee has, under its Charter, responsibility for director nominee functions, including review of any director nominee candidates recommended by stockholders. The Governance Committee has the following duties and authority:

-

Review and recommend to the Board of Directors policies for the composition of the Board, including such criteria as:

§

size of the Board;

§

diversity of gender, race, ethnicity, experience, employment, background and other relevant factors of Board members;

§

the proportion of the Board to be comprised of non-management directors;

§

qualifications for new or continued membership on the Board, including experience, employment, background and other relevant considerations; and 

§

director retirement requirements or standards.

-

Review any director nominee candidates recommended by stockholders.

-

Identify, interview and evaluate director nominee candidates and have sole authority to:

§

retain and terminate any search firm to be used to assist the Committee in identifying director candidates; and

§

approve the search firm’s fees and other retention terms.

-

Recommend to the Board:

§

the slate of director nominees to be presented by the Board for election at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders;

§

the director nominees to fill vacancies on the Board; and

§

the members of each Board Committee.

·

Director Nominations  – Any stockholder nomination for directors must comply with the advance notice procedures set forth in Article II, Section 3 and Section 15 of our By-Laws. Under our By-Laws, to be in proper written form, the stockholder’s notice to our Corporate Secretary must set forth as to each person whom the stockholder proposes to nominate for election as a director: (i) the name, age, business address, residence address and record address of such person, (ii) the principal occupation or employment of such person, (iii) the following information regarding such person: (A) the class or series and number of shares of capital stock of the Company which are owned beneficially or of record by such person, (B) any option, warrant, convertible security, stock appreciation right, or similar derivative instrument related to any class or series of shares of the Company that is directly or indirectly owned beneficially by such person; (C) any proxy, contract, agreement, arrangement, understanding, or relationship pursuant to which such person has a right to vote any shares of any security of the Company; (D) any “short interest” in any security of the Company; (E) any rights to dividends on the shares of the Company owned beneficially by such person that are separated or separable from the underlying shares of the Corporation; (F) any proportionate interest in shares of the Company or derivative instruments held, directly or indirectly, by a general or limited partnership in which such person is a general partner or, directly or indirectly, beneficially owns an interest in a general partner; and (G) any performance-related fees (other than an asset-based fee) to which such person is entitled based on any increase or decrease in the value of shares of the Company or any derivative instruments, if any, as of the date of such notice, including, without limitation, any such interests held by members of such person’s immediate family sharing the same household, (iv) any information relating to such person that would be required to be disclosed in a proxy statement or other filings required to be made in connection with solicitations of proxies for election of directors pursuant to Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, (v) the nominee holder for, and number of, shares owned beneficially but not of record by such person, (vi) to the extent known by the stockholder giving the notice, the name and address of any other stockholder supporting the nominee for election or reelection as a director on the date of such stockholder’s notice, (vii) a description of all arrangements or understandings between or among such persons pursuant to which the nomination(s) are to be made by the stockholder, and (viii) a representation that such stockholder intends to appear in person or by proxy at the meeting to nominate the persons named in its notice. In addition to the information required

8    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


STOCKHOLDER ACCESS

pursuant to Section 3, our By-Laws provide that the Company may require any proposed nominee to furnish such other information: (a) as may reasonably be required by the Company to determine the eligibility of such proposed nominee to serve as an independent director under the rules and listing standards of the principal United States securities exchanges upon which the Common Stock of the Company is listed or traded, any applicable rules of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or any publicly disclosed standards used by the Board of Directors in determining and disclosing the independence of the Company’s directors, (b) that could be material to a reasonable stockholder’s understanding of the independence, or lack thereof, of such nominee, or (c) that may reasonably be requested by the Company to determine the eligibility of such nominee to serve as a director of the Company. Any ownership information shall be supplemented by the stockholder giving the notice not later than ten (10) days after the record date for the meeting as of the record date. The notice must be accompanied by a written consent of the proposed nominee to being named as a nominee and to serve as a director if elected. No person shall be eligible for election as a director of the Company unless nominated in accordance with the foregoing procedures. This summary is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of our By-Laws, which can be found on our website at http://investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance.

·

Proxy Access – Under our By-Laws, a stockholder or a group of up to 20 stockholders owning 3% or more of the Company’s outstanding shares continuously for at least three years may nominate and include in our proxy materials director candidates constituting up to the greater of two individuals or 20% of the Board, provided that the stockholder(s) and the nominee(s) satisfy the requirements specified in our By-Laws. Our proxy access by-law limits the number of stockholders that may aggregate their shares to satisfy the 3% test to 20 stockholders. For purposes of the 20 stockholder limit, certain related funds are counted as one stockholder.

In terms of our principles for composition of the Board generally, and qualifications for director nominees specifically, we refer you to our Corporate Governance Principles, which can be found on our website at http://investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance.cfm.corporate-governance. Under these provisions, for example:

no more than three Board members will be from current management. These management members normally would be the Chief Executive Officer, the Chairman (if an employee of the Company and not the CEO) and the President (if an employee of the Company and not the CEO) but may be any other officer deemed appropriate by the Board;

it is desired that the members of the Board represent a geographical dispersion and variety of business disciplines so as to bring to the work of the Board a diversity of experience and background, with the predominance of members being chief or executive officers from different industries; and

a continuing effort is made to seek well-qualified women and minority group members for the Board, but these persons must be sought out and evaluated as individuals rather than as representatives of specific groups.

·

No more than three Board members will be from current management. These management members normally would be the Chief Executive Officer, the Chairman (if an employee of the Company and not the CEO) and the President (if an employee of the Company and not the CEO) but may be any other officer deemed appropriate by the Board;

·

It is desired that the members of the Board represent a geographical dispersion and variety of business disciplines so as to bring to the work of the Board a diversity of experience and background, with the predominance of members being chief or executive officers from different industries; and

·

A continuing effort is made to seek well-qualified women and minority group members for the Board, but these persons must be sought out and evaluated as individuals rather than as representatives of specific groups. The Board of Directors is committed to actively seeking out highly-qualified women and minority candidates for each search the Board undertakes. In identifying, evaluating and recommending director nominee candidates, the Committee will consider diversity of gender and ethnicity within the Board, the criteria set forth in the section above entitled “Director Nomination Process,” and such other factors as the Committee deems appropriate. The Board conducts a periodic review of its efforts to achieve such diversity among its members. 

Other criteria relevant to service as a director of our Company are also set forth in our Corporate Governance Principles.

In recent years, the Governance Committee’s efforts in recruiting new directors have included a focus on candidates with significant organizational leadership experience, including individuals who were chief executive officers or otherwise headed a large and complex organization, and on qualified candidates with experience that would round out our Board, particularly experience germane to our key end-markets, such as food, water and energy, and technical competencies, such as information technology and cybersecurity. The Committee has also sought to ensure that women and people of color were considered each time that the Committee undertook a formal search process to recruit director candidates.

All directors are encouraged to submit to the Governance Committee the name of any person deemed qualified to serve on the Board, together with information on the candidate'scandidate’s qualifications. The Governance Committee screens and submits to the full Board the names and biographical information of those persons considered by the Committee to be viable candidates for election as directors. The same evaluation process and criteria are used by the Committee (i) for recommendations for director candidates submitted by stockholders in accordance with our Restated Certificate of Incorporation and By-Laws and (ii) for recommendations submitted by any other source, such as a director or a third-party search firm.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    9


SECURITY OWNERSHIP

SECURITY OWNERSHIP
New Director Selection Process — In 2014, the Governance Committee began a search for additional directors in light of the fact that several members of our Board of Directors are approaching the age set forth as a retirement guideline in our Corporate Governance Principles. The Governance Committee intended to concentrate on candidates with significant organizational leadership experience, including individuals who were chief executive officers or otherwise headed a large and complex organization as well as qualified candidates with experience that would round out our Board, particularly experience germane to our key end-markets, such as food, water and energy, and technical competencies, such as information technology and cyber security. The Committee also sought to ensure that women and people of color were considered. Throughout the Committee's process, numerous candidates were identified by a third-party search firm and by members of the Board of Directors. After discussion of the qualifications of the various candidates during regular Governance Committee meetings, the top candidates were agreed on by the Committee and interviewed by our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, the Lead Director and Governance Committee Chair and other members of the Governance Committee. Following this process, Ms. McKibben was appointed to the Board in February 2015 for a term expiring at this year's Annual Meeting. Ms. McKibben was also included by the


Table of Contents

Board of Directors on the slate of nominees for election for a term expiring at the 2016 Annual Meeting, and, as such, she is included in the group of nominees for election at this Annual Meeting. Also, Mr. Ettinger was identified following the process described above and is included by the Board of Directors on the slate of nominees for election for a term expiring at the 2016 Annual Meeting, and, as such, he is included in the group of nominees for election at this Annual Meeting. See Mr. Ettinger's and Ms. McKibben's biographies on pages 16 and 19, respectively.


SECURITY OWNERSHIP

Certain Beneficial Owners

The following table sets forth information as to entities which have reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"(“SEC”) or have advised us that they are a "beneficial“beneficial owner," as defined by the SEC'sSEC’s rules and regulations, of more than 5% of our outstanding Common Stock.

Title of
Class

Name and Address
of Beneficial Owner

Amount and Nature
of Beneficial
Ownership

Percent of
Class
(1)

Common

William H. Gates III

32,786,818 (2)

11.3%

One Microsoft Way

Redmond, WA 98052

Common

The Vanguard Group

19,409,853 (3)

6.7%

100 Vanguard Blvd.

Malvern, PA 19355

Common

BlackRock, Inc.

15,223,668 (4)

5.2%

55 East 52nd Street

New York, NY 10022

(1)

The percent of class is based on the number of voting shares outstanding as of March 7, 2017.

(2)

This information is based on Amendment No. 5 to the Schedule 13D filed jointly with the SEC on May 7, 2012 by Cascade Investment, L.L.C., which we refer to as Cascade, William H. Gates III, whom we refer to as Mr. Gates, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, which we refer to as the Trust, and Melinda French Gates, whom we refer to as Mrs. Gates, and a Form 4 relating to Mr. Gates filed with the SEC on March 10, 2016. Mr. Gates reports that he has sole power to vote or direct the vote, and to dispose or to direct the disposition, of 28,420,393 shares of Ecolab Common Stock beneficially owned by Cascade, as the sole member of such entity. Additionally, the Amendment No. 5 to the Schedule 13D reports that Mr. Gates and Mrs. Gates share the power to vote or direct the vote, and to dispose or to direct the disposition of, 4,366,425 shares of Ecolab Common Stock beneficially owned by the Trust, as co-trustees of such entity.

(3)

This information is based on Amendment No. 4 to the Schedule 13G filed on February 9, 2017 by The Vanguard Group, Inc., which we refer to as Vanguard. Vanguard reports that, as of December 31, 2016, they have sole power to vote or direct the vote of 413,580 shares, shared power to vote or direct the vote of 53,431 shares, sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition of 18,949,153 shares and shared power to dispose or direct the disposition of 460,700 shares of Ecolab Common Stock.

(4)

This information is based on Amendment No. 2 to the Schedule 13G filed on January 23, 2017 by BlackRock, Inc. (“BlackRock”). BlackRock reports that, as of December 31, 2016, they have sole power to vote or direct the vote of 12,761,435 shares, and sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition of 15,223,668 shares of Ecolab Common Stock.

10    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement

  
Title of
Class

 Name and Address
of Beneficial Owner

 Amount and
Nature of
Beneficial
Ownership

 Percent of
Class(1)

 
  
Common William H. Gates III
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
  32,286,819(2) 10.9% 

Common

 

The Vanguard Group
100 Vanguard Blvd.
Malvern, PA 19355

 

 

17,113,538

(3)

 

5.8%

 

Common

 

BlackRock, Inc.
55 East 52nd Street
New York, NY 10022

 

 

15,290,305

(4)

 

5.1%

 

(1)
The percent of class is based on the number of voting shares outstanding as of March 10, 2015.

(2)
This information is based on Amendment No. 5 to the Schedule 13D filed jointly with the SEC on May 7, 2012 by Cascade Investment, LLC, which we refer to as Cascade, William H. Gates III, whom we refer to as Mr. Gates, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Trust, which we refer to as the Trust, and Melinda French Gates, whom we refer to as Mrs. Gates, and a Form 4 relating to Mr. Gates filed with the SEC on June 7, 2012. Mr. Gates reports that he has sole power to vote or direct the vote, and to dispose or to direct the disposition, of 27,920,394 shares of Ecolab common stock beneficially owned by Cascade, as the sole member of such entity. Additionally, the Schedule 13D reports that Mr. Gates and Mrs. Gates share the power to vote or direct the vote, and to dispose or to direct the disposition of, 4,366,425 shares of Ecolab common stock beneficially owned by the Trust, as co-trustees of such entity.

(3)
This information is based on Amendment No. 2 to the Schedule 13G filed on February 11, 2015 by The Vanguard Group, Inc., which we refer to as Vanguard. Vanguard reports that, as of December 31, 2014, they have sole power to vote or direct the vote of 472,041 shares, sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition of 16,669,608 shares and shared power to dispose or direct the disposition of 443,930 shares of Ecolab common stock.

(4)
This information is based on the Schedule 13G filed on February 6, 2015 by BlackRock, Inc. ("BlackRock"). BlackRock reports that, as of December 31, 2014, they have sole power to vote or direct the vote of 12,842,710 shares, and sole power to dispose or to direct the disposition of 15,290,305 shares of Ecolab common stock.

SECURITY OWNERSHIP


Executive Officers and Directors

In general, "beneficial ownership"“beneficial ownership” includes those shares of our Common Stock which a director or executive officer has the power to vote or transfer, as well as stock options that are exercisable currently or within 60 days and stock underlying stock units that may be acquired within 60 days. On March 10, 2015,7, 2017, our current executive officers and directors beneficially owned, in the aggregate, 4,344,0494,377,902 shares of Common Stock constituting approximately 1.5% of our shares outstanding. As required by SEC disclosure rules, "shares outstanding"“shares outstanding” for this purpose includes options exercisable within 60 days and stock underlying stock units that may be acquired within 60 days by such executive officers and directors. The detail of beneficial ownership is set forth in the following table.


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name of Beneficial Owner

 

Amount and Nature of Beneficial Ownership

 

Percentage of Outstanding Shares Beneficially Owned

Named Executive Officers

 

 

 

 

 

 

Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (Chief Executive Officer)

 

1,741,921

(1)(2)(4)

 

*

 

Daniel J. Schmechel (Chief Financial Officer)

 

300,259

(1)(2)

 

*

 

Thomas W. Handley

 

402,397

(1)(2)(4)

 

*

 

Michael A. Hickey

 

214,294

(1)(2)

 

*

 

Christophe Beck

 

185,183

(1)(2)

 

*

 

Directors and Nominees

 

 

 

 

 

 

Barbara J. Beck

 

46,219

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Leslie S. Biller

 

104,261

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Carl M. Casale

 

14,189

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Stephen I. Chazen

 

19,961

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Jeffrey M. Ettinger

 

7,455

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Jerry A. Grundhofer

 

74,741

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Arthur J. Higgins

 

36,820

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Michael Larson

 

18,526

(2)(3)(5)

 

*

(5)

Jerry W. Levin

 

33,844

(2)(3)

 

*

 

David W. MacLennan

 

10,710

(2)(3)(4)

 

*

 

Tracy B. McKibben

 

6,514

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Victoria J. Reich

 

42,115

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Suzanne M. Vautrinot

 

9,721

(2)(3)

 

*

 

John J. Zillmer

 

50,054

(2)(3)

 

*

 

Current Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (28 persons)

 

4,377,902

(4)(5)

 

1.49

%  (4)(5)

*

Table of Contents

 
Name of Beneficial Owner
 Amount and
Nature of
Beneficial
Ownership

 Percentage of
Outstanding Shares
Beneficially Owned

 

Named Executive Officers

    

Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (Principal Executive Officer)

 1,755,779(1)(2)(4)*

Daniel J. Schmechel (Principal Financial Officer)

 263,118(1)(2)*

Thomas W. Handley

 376,685(1)(2)(4)*

Stephen M. Taylor

 144,270(2)*

Michael A. Hickey

 203,186(1)(2)*

Directors and Nominees

    

Barbara J. Beck

 44,517(2)(3)*

Leslie S. Biller

 110,381(2)(3)(4)*

Carl M. Casale

 7,921(2)(3)*

Stephen I. Chazen

 12,653(2)(3)*

Jeffrey M. Ettinger

 0 *

Jerry A. Grundhofer

 104,237(2)(3)(4)*

Arthur J. Higgins

 33,478(2)(3)*

Joel W. Johnson

 163,051(2)(3)(4)*

Michael Larson

 12,223(2)(3)(5)*(5)

Jerry W. Levin

 32,441(2)(3)*

Robert L. Lumpkins

 110,246(2)(3)(4)*

Tracy B. McKibben

 0 *

Victoria J. Reich

 33,499(2)(3)(4)*

Suzanne M. Vautrinot

 3,457(2)(3)*

John J. Zillmer

 43,632(2)(3)*

Current Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (30 persons)

 4,344,049(4)(5)1.5%(4)(5)
*
Indicates beneficial ownership of less than 1% of our outstanding Common Stock.

(1)
Includes the following shares held by officers in the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP for Traditional Benefit Employees as of the last Plan report: Mr. Baker, 9,865; Mr. Schmechel, 5,069; Mr. Handley, 1,003; and Mr. Hickey, 7,102.

(2)
Includes the following shares which could be purchased under Company-granted stock options within 60 days from March 10, 2015 including, in the case of retirement-eligible officers, options vesting upon retirement from the Company: Mr. Baker, 1,276,050; Mr. Schmechel, 151,080; Mr. Handley, 303,640; Mr. Taylor, 78,343; Mr. Hickey, 161,043; Ms. Beck, 28,300; Mr. Biller, 36,600; Mr. Casale, 3,400; Mr. Chazen, 5,600; Mr. Grundhofer, 31,800; Mr. Higgins, 18,100; Mr. Johnson, 42,200; Mr. Larson, 10,100; Mr. Levin, 2,400; Mr. Lumpkins, 42,200; Ms. Reich, 20,300; Ms. Vautrinot, 2,900; and Mr. Zillmer, 36,600.

(3)
Includes the following interests in stock units under our 2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Option and Deferred Compensation Plan: Ms. Beck, 16,217; Mr. Biller, 30,408; Mr. Casale, 716; Mr. Chazen, 2,053; Mr. Grundhofer, 43,127; Mr. Higgins, 10,378; Mr. Johnson, 48,225; Mr. Larson, 2,123; Mr. Levin, 30,041; Mr. Lumpkins, 28,372; Ms. Reich, 12,199; Ms. Vautrinot, 557; and Mr. Zillmer, 7,032. The stock units are Common Stock equivalents which may not be voted or transferred. They are included in the table because in certain circumstances they will be paid in the form of Common Stock within 60 days after a director leaves the Board.

(4)
Beneficial ownership includes 12,415 shares held by or on behalf of family members of certain directors or executive officers. Includes 37,127 shares of Mr. Baker, 1,200 shares of Mr. Biller, 3,492 shares of Mr. Grundhofer, and 40,345 shares of Mr. Johnson, indirectly held in foundations by those respective persons in which they have no economic interest but have voting authority and/or power of disposition; 69,925 shares of Mr. Baker, 19,177 shares of Mr. Handley, 19,124 shares of Mr. Johnson, 37,891 shares of Mr. Lumpkins, and 1,000 shares of Ms. Reich held in trusts over which they or an immediate family member have voting authority and/or power of disposition; 32,179 shares held for executive officers in Company-sponsored employee benefit plans as of the last plan reports; and 2,928,834 shares to which these persons have the right to acquire beneficial ownership within 60 days of March 10, 2015 including, in the case of retirement-eligible officers, options vesting upon retirement from the Company.

(5)
Mr. Larson is the Business Manager of Cascade Investment, LLC ("Cascade"), an entity owned by William H. Gates III, and the chief investment officer for Mr. Gates. As the Business Manager of Cascade, Mr. Larson has voting and investment power with respect to 27,920,394 shares of Ecolab common stock held by Cascade, and as the chief investment officer for Mr. Gates, he has voting and investment power with respect to 4,366,425 shares of Ecolab common stock held by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust (the "Trust"). Mr. Larson disclaims beneficial ownership of any shares held by Cascade or the Trust.

(1)

Includes the following shares held by officers in the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP for Traditional Benefit Employees or Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP as of the last Plan report: Mr. Baker, 10,082; Mr. Schmechel, 5,181; Mr. Handley, 1,025; Mr. Hickey, 7,311; and Mr. Beck, 2,030.

(2)

Includes the following shares which could be purchased under Company-granted stock options within 60 days from March 7, 2017 including, in the case of retirement-eligible officers, options vesting upon retirement from the Company: Mr. Baker, 1,191,225; Mr. Schmechel, 160,493; Mr.  Handley, 282,877; Mr. Hickey, 163,972; Mr. Beck, 161,734; Ms. Beck, 13,900; Mr.  Biller, 32,000; Mr. Casale, 7,900; Mr. Chazen, 10,100; Mr. Ettinger, 4,500; Mr.  Grundhofer, 18,100; Mr. Higgins, 22,600; Mr. Larson, 14,600; Mr.  Levin, 575; Mr. MacLennan, 3,300; Ms. McKibben, 4,900; Ms. Reich, 24,800; Ms. Vautrinot, 7,400; and Mr. Zillmer, 32,000.

(3)

Includes the following interests in stock units under our 2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Option and Deferred Compensation Plan: Ms. Beck, 20,283; Mr. Biller, 32,897; Mr. Casale, 2,484; Mr. Chazen, 4,860; Mr. Ettinger, 2,955; Mr. Grundhofer, 48,114; Mr. Higgins, 14,219; Mr. Larson, 3,925; Mr. Levin, 32,521; Mr. MacLennan, 925; Ms. McKibben, 1,614; Ms. Reich, 16,314; Ms. Vautrinot, 2,321; and Mr. Zillmer, 8,954. The stock units are Common Stock equivalents which may not be voted or transferred. They are included in the table because in certain circumstances they will be paid in the form of Common Stock within 60 days after a director leaves the Board.

(4)

Beneficial ownership includes 14,385 shares held by or on behalf of family members of certain directors or executive officers; includes 25,802 shares of Mr. Baker, indirectly held in a foundation in which he has no economic interest but has voting authority and/or power of disposition; 72,500 shares of Mr. Baker, 104,665 shares of Mr. Handley, and 6,485 shares of Mr. MacLennan held in trusts over which they or an immediate family member have voting authority and/or power of disposition; 32,993 shares held for executive officers in Company-sponsored employee benefit plans as of the last plan reports; and 3,181,678 shares to which these persons have the right to acquire beneficial ownership within 60 days of March 7, 2017 including, in the case of retirement-eligible officers, options vesting upon retirement from the Company.

(5)

Mr. Larson is the Business Manager of Cascade Investment, L.L.C. (“Cascade”), an entity owned by William H. Gates III, and the chief investment officer for Mr. Gates. As the Business Manager of Cascade,  Mr. Larson has voting and investment power with respect to 28,420,393 shares of Ecolab Common Stock held by Cascade, and as the chief investment officer for Mr. Gates, he has voting and investment power with respect to 4,366,425 shares of Ecolab Common Stock held by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust (the “Trust”).  Mr. Larson disclaims beneficial ownership of any shares held by Cascade or the Trust.


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    11


CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Corporate Governance Materials and Code of Conduct

Our Company is managed under the overall direction of our Board of Directors for the benefit of all stockholders. Written materials concerning policies of our Board of Directors, corporate governance principles and corporate ethics practices, including our Code of Conduct as last amended in 2012, are available on our website at http://investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance.cfm. corporate-governance/code-of-conduct.

We intend to promptly disclose on our website should there be any amendments to, or waivers by the Board of Directors of, the Code of Conduct.


Board Structure

Under our Corporate Governance Principles, the preferable size of the Board is between 11 and 15 members, in order to facilitate effective discussion and decision-making, adequate staffing of Board Committees, and a desired mix of diversified experience and background. Our Board of Directors currently consists of 15 members. Messrs. Grundhofer and Levin will be retiring from the Board as of the 2017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. As described on page 1322 under Proposal 1: Election of Directors, the 1613 nominees, if elected, will serve a one-year term ending as of the 20162018 Annual Meeting expected to be held on May 5, 2016.


Table of Contents3, 2018.


Board Leadership Structure

Our Board of Directors is led by Douglas M. Baker, Jr., our Chairman, who is also our Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Baker has served as our Chief Executive Officer and as a director since 2004, and he was elected Chairman in 2006.

As stated in our Corporate Governance Principles, the Board believes that it is best not to have a fixed policy on whether the offices of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer are to be held by one person or not.two. In May 2014,2016, the Board determined that its current board leadership structure remains appropriate and best serves the interests of stockholders at this time. In making that annual determination, the Board considered numerous factors, including the benefits to the decision-making process with a leader who is both Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; the significant operating experience and qualifications of Mr. Baker; the importance of deep Ecolab knowledge in exercising business judgment in leading the Board; the size and complexity of our business; the significant business experience and tenure of our directors; and the qualifications and role of our Lead Director.

In accordance with our Corporate Governance Principles, the independent directors, after recommendation of the Governance Committee, re-appointed Jerry W. Levin as Lead Director in May 2014. As detailed in Mr. Levin's biography and qualifications on page 18,2016. Mr. Levin has extensive public company board experience. Mr. Levin also is independent and is the Board's longest servingBoard’s longest-serving director, with 2224 years of continuous service, so he has considerable knowledge of our business. Specific responsibilities of the Lead Director, as enumerated in our Corporate Governance Principles, include:

presiding over meetings of the board at which the Chairman is not present, including executive sessions of the independent directors;

acting as a liaison between the Chairman and the independent directors;

reviewing and approving information sent to the Board;

reviewing and approving meeting agendas for the Board;

reviewing and approving meeting schedules to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items;

at the discretion of the Lead Director, calling meetings of the independent directors; and

if requested by significant stockholders, ensuring that he or she is available for consultation and direct communication.

·

presiding over meetings of the board at which the Chairman is not present, including executive sessions of the independent directors;

·

acting as a liaison between the Chairman and the independent directors;

·

reviewing and approving information sent to the Board;

·

reviewing and approving meeting agendas for the Board;

·

reviewing and approving meeting schedules to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items;

·

at the discretion of the Lead Director, calling meetings of the independent directors; and

·

if requested by significant stockholders, ensuring that he or she is available for consultation and direct communication.

Mr. Baker continues to workworks closely with Mr. Levin to ensure the smooth and effective operation of the Board.

12    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


CORPORATE GOVERNANCE


Board'sBoard’s Role onin Risk Oversight

The Board of Directors, in exercising its overall responsibility to direct the business and affairs of the Company, has established various processes and procedures with respect to risk management. First, annually as a core agenda item of the full Board, management presents to the Board a comprehensive and detailed risk assessment for the Company after following a vigorous enterprise risk review and analysis. Pursuant to the risk assessment, the Company has categorized the most relevant risks as follows: strategic, operating, reporting and compliance. As part of the annual risk assessment, the Board determines whether any of the Company'sCompany’s overall risk management processes or control procedures requires modification or enhancement.

Strategic risk, which relates to the Company properly defining and achieving its high-level goals and mission, and operating risk, which relates to the effective and efficient use of resources and pursuit of opportunities, are regularly monitored and managed by the full Board through the Board'sBoard’s regular and consistent review of the Company'sCompany’s operating performance and strategic plan. For example, at each of the Board'sBoard’s six regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year, management provided the Board presentations on the Company'sCompany’s various business units as well as the Company'sCompany’s performance as a whole. Agenda items were included for significant developments as appropriate, for example, significant acquisitions, important market developments and management succession. Pursuant to the Board'sBoard’s established monitoring procedures, Board approval is required for the Company'sCompany’s strategic plan and annual plan which are reported on by management at each Board meeting. Similarly, significant transactions, such as acquisitions and financings, are brought to the Board for approval.

Reporting risk, which relates to the reliability of the Company'sCompany’s financial reporting, and compliance risk, which relates to the Company'sCompany’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations, are primarily overseen by the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee meets at least fivesix times per year and, pursuant to its charter and core agendas, receives input directly from management as well as from the Company'sCompany’s independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, regarding the Company'sCompany’s financial reporting process, internal controls and public filings. The Committee also receives regular updates from the Company'sCompany’s General Counsel and the Chief Compliance Officer regarding any Code of Conduct issues or legal compliance concerns and annually receives a summary of all Code of Conduct incidents during the preceding year from the Chief Compliance Officer. See "Board“Board Committees Audit Committee"Committee” on page 814 for further information on how the Audit Committee monitors, and assists the Board of Directors'Directors’ oversight of, reporting and compliance risks.

The Company believes that its leadership structure, discussed in detail above, supports the risk oversight function of the Board. While the Company has a combined Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, we have aour Lead Director has substantial and clearly delineated authority pursuant to our Corporate Governance Principles, strong directors chair the various Board Committees involved in risk oversight, there is open communication between management and directors, and all directors are actively involved in the risk oversight function.


Compensation Risk Analysis

The Compensation Committee has established an annual process and criteria for assessing risk in our compensation programs and has directed management to apply that process and criteria to all compensation plans and practices that have the potential to give rise to behavior that creates risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company and to report the results to the Compensation Committee. As part of the process in 2014,2016, the Company took the following steps to complete the assessment: (1) we agreed on a materiality framework for determining which compensation plans and practices to review; (2) we inventoried plans and practices that fell within the materiality framework;


Table of Contents

(3) we reviewed the identified plans and practices against our evaluation framework established in consultation with the Compensation Committee'sCommittee’s independent compensation consultant, Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. ("(“Cook & Co."); (4) we identified factors, processes or procedures in place which may mitigate any risks in identified plans and practices; and (5) the Compensation Committee reviewed the results of the analysis with Cook & Co. Our risk assessment revealed that our compensation programs do not create risks that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company. In making this determination, we took into account the compensation mix for our employees as well as various risk control and mitigation features of our programs, including varied and balanced performance targets, review procedures for incentive pay calculations, appropriate incentive payout caps, the Company'sCompany’s rights to cancel incentive awards for employee misconduct, discretionary authority of the Compensation Committee to reduce award pay-outs, internal controls around customer and distributor pricing and contract terms, our stock ownership guidelines, prohibition on hedging Company stock and our compensation recovery ("clawback"(“clawback”) policy.


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    13


CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Director Attendance

There were sixseven meetings of the Board of Directors during the year ended December 31, 2014.2016. Each incumbent director attended at least 81%75% of all Board meetings and meetings held by all Committees on which he or she served. Overall attendance at Board and Committee meetings was 96%98%. Directors are expected, but are not required, to attend our Annual Meeting of Stockholders. All of the directors then serving who were continuing to serve following the meeting attended last year'syear’s Annual Meeting.


Board Committees

Our By-Laws permit the Board of Directors to designate Committees, each comprised of three or more directors, to assist the Board in carrying out its duties. The Board annually reviews its Committee structure as well as the Charter and composition of each Committee and makes modifications as necessary. The Charters for the Board'sBoard’s five standing Committees - Audit, Compensation, Finance, Governance and Safety, Health and Environment - were last reviewed and approved by the Board in May 2014, and the charter for the Finance Committee was amended effective February 2015.2016. The Charters of each of our Committees are available on our website at www.ecolab.com/investors/board-of-directors.www.investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance. The separately designated standing Audit Committee meets the requirements of Section 3(a)(58)(A) of the Exchange Act. TheEach of the members of the Audit, Compensation and Governance Committees meet the "independence"“independence” and other requirements established by the rules and regulations of the SEC, the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "IRS Code"“IRS Code”), the New York Stock Exchange and our Board, as applicable.

Audit Committee — The Audit Committee members are Mses. McKibben, Reich (Vice Chair) and Vautrinot and Messrs. Casale, Chazen, Johnson (Chair) and Lumpkins. The Committee met five times during 2014. In addition, either the full Audit Committee or the Committee Chair, as representative of the Committee (and at their election the other members of the Audit Committee), discussed the interim financial information contained in each quarterly earnings announcement for the first three calendar quarters of 2014 with our Chief Financial Officer, Controller and Assistant Controller and with our independent registered public accounting firm, prior to each of our quarterly earnings announcements. The Committee met to discuss the financial information contained in the fourth quarter and full year 2014 earnings announcement prior to dissemination of that press release and it being furnished to the SEC on a Form 8-K in February 2015. The Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, was also discussed by the Committee at its February 2015 meeting.

·

Audit Committee – The Audit Committee members are Mses. McKibben, Reich (Chair) and Vautrinot and Messrs. Casale (Vice Chair), Chazen and MacLennan. The Committee met six times during 2016. In addition, either the full Audit Committee or the Committee Chair, as representative of the Committee (and at their election the other members of the Audit Committee), discussed the interim financial information contained in each quarterly earnings announcement for the first three calendar quarters of 2016 with our Chief Financial Officer and Controller and with our independent registered public accounting firm, prior to each of our quarterly earnings announcements. The Committee met to discuss the financial information contained in the fourth quarter and full year 2016 earnings announcement prior to dissemination of that press release and it being furnished to the SEC on a Form 8-K in February 2017. The Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, was also discussed by the Committee at its February 2017 meeting.

The Committee fulfills, and assists the Board of Directors'Directors’ oversight of, its responsibilities to monitormonitor: (i) the quality and integrity of our consolidated financial statements and management'smanagement’s financial control of operations; (ii) the qualifications, independence and performance of the independent accountants; (iii) the role and performance of the internal audit function; and (iv) our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements.requirements; and (v) our cybersecurity program and related risks. The Committee meets regularly and privately with our management and internal auditors and with our independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

A report of the Audit Committee is found under the heading "Audit“Audit Committee Report"Report” at page 46.58.

The Board of Directors has determined that each member of the Audit Committee is "independent"“independent” and meets the independence and other requirements of Sections 303A.02 and 303A.07(b) of the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange, and Rule 10A-3 under the Exchange Act, as well as of our Board.Board’s independence policy. The Board has determined that each of Mses. McKibben and Reich and Messrs. Casale, Chazen Johnson and LumpkinsMacLennan is an "audit“audit committee financial expert"expert” under the SEC'sSEC’s rules and should be so designated. Further, the Board has determined, in its business judgment, that each of Mses. McKibben and Reich and Messrs. Casale, Chazen Johnson and LumpkinsMacLennan has "accounting“accounting and related financial management expertise"expertise” and that each member of the Audit Committee is "financially literate"“financially literate” under the New York Stock Exchange'sExchange’s listing standards.

Compensation Committee — The Compensation Committee members are Messrs. Biller, Grundhofer (Chair), Higgins, Levin and Zillmer (Vice Chair). The Committee met five times during 2014. The principal functions of this Committee are to (i) review and approve or recommend to the Board, as applicable, with respect to the establishment, amendment and administration of any compensation plans, benefits plans, severance arrangements and long-term incentives for directors and any executive officers (including the CEO); (ii) review and approve our overall compensation policy and annual executive salary plan, including CEO compensation; and (iii) administer our director stock option and deferred compensation plans, executive and employee stock incentive plans, stock purchase plans, cash incentive programs and stock retention and ownership guidelines. The Committee may not delegate its primary responsibilities with respect to overseeing executive officer compensation. In accordance with the terms of our 2010 Stock Incentive Plan, the Committee has delegated to the CEO (in his capacity as a director) the authority to grant long-term incentives to employees who are not officers or directors, subject to specified thresholds and applicable law. A report by the Committee is located on page 21 of this Proxy Statement.

·

Compensation Committee – The Compensation Committee members are Messrs. Biller, Ettinger, Grundhofer (Chair), Higgins, Levin and Zillmer (Vice Chair). The Committee met five times during 2016. The principal functions of this Committee are to: (i) review and approve or recommend to the Board, as applicable, with respect to the establishment, amendment and administration of any compensation plans, benefits plans, severance arrangements and long-term incentives for directors and any executive officers (including the CEO); (ii) review and approve our overall compensation policy and annual executive salary plan, including CEO compensation; and (iii) administer our director stock option and deferred compensation plans, executive and employee stock incentive plans, stock purchase plans, cash incentive programs and stock retention and ownership guidelines. The Committee may not delegate its primary responsibilities with respect to overseeing executive officer compensation. In accordance with the terms of our 2010 Stock Incentive Plan, the Committee has delegated to the CEO (in his capacity as a director) the authority to grant long-term incentives to employees who are not officers or directors, subject to specified thresholds and applicable law. A report by the Committee is located on page 27 of this Proxy Statement.

14    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

To assist the Committee in the design and review of the executive and director compensation programs, the Committee has selected and retained Cook & Co., an independent compensation consulting firm, which reports directly to the Committee. As requested from time to time on behalf of the Committee, Cook & Co. provides the Committee with market data regarding various


Table of Contents

components of executive and director compensation, reviews the methodology on which compensation is based and designed, and informs the Committee of market trends in executive and director compensation. Cook & Co. performs no services for us other than those performed on behalf of the Committee.

The Committee has considered the independence of Cook & Co. in light of SEC rules and New York Stock Exchange listing standards. In connection with this process, the Committee has reviewed, among other items, a letter from Cook & Co. addressing the independence of Cook & Co. and the members of the consulting team serving the Committee, including the following factors: (i) other services provided to us by Cook & Co.; (ii) fees paid by us as a percentage of Cook & Co.'s’s total revenue; (iii) policies or procedures of Cook & Co. that are designed to prevent conflicts of interest; (iv) any business or personal relationships between the senior advisor of the consulting team with a member of the Committee; (v) any Ecolab stock owned by the senior advisor; and (vi) any business or personal relationships between our executive officers and the senior advisor. The Committee discussed these considerations and concluded that the work performed by Cook & Co. and its senior advisor involved in the engagement did not raise any conflict of interest.

The Board of Directors has determined that each member of the Compensation Committee meets the independence requirements of the SEC (including Rule 16b-3), the New York Stock Exchange, and Section 162(m) of the IRS Code and of our Board.

Finance Committee — The current Finance Committee members are Mses. McKibben and Vautrinot and Messrs. Biller (Chair), Chazen, Grundhofer, and Larson (Vice Chair). The Committee met five times during 2014. The principal functions of this Committee are to review and make recommendations to the Board concerning (i) management's financial and tax policies and standards; (ii) our financing requirements, including the evaluation of management's proposals concerning funding to meet such requirements; (iii) share repurchases and dividends; (iv) our capital expenditure budget; (v) adequacy of insurance coverage; and (vi) our use of derivatives to limit financial risk. The Committee also evaluates specific acquisition, divestiture and capital expenditure projects from a financial standpoint and reviews the financial impact of our significant retirement plans.

Governance Committee — The Governance Committee members are Ms. Beck and Messrs. Higgins (Vice Chair), Johnson, Levin (Chair), and Zillmer. The Committee met four times during 2014. Certain functions of the Governance Committee are described on pages 3 and 4 of this Proxy Statement under the heading "Director Nomination Process." In addition, the principal functions of this Committee include: (i) lead the annual review of Board performance and effectiveness; (ii) review the Board's organizational structure and operations (including appointing a lead director for executive sessions of non-management directors) and its relationship to senior management; (iii) review issues of senior management succession; (iv) lead the annual Chief Executive Officer performance review and oversee the evaluation process for senior management; (v) review Certificate of Incorporation, By-Law or stockholder rights plan issues or changes in fundamental corporate charter provisions; (vi) review various corporate governance matters (including any necessary modifications to the Corporate Governance Principles); (vii) review and recommend to the Board with respect to director independence determinations and review, approve or ratify reportable related-person transactions; (viii) receive reports from management with regard to relevant social responsibility issues and report to the Board as appropriate; (ix) review our Company's efforts to achieve its affirmative action and diversity goals; (x) review director orientation, training and continuing education; (xi) review our political contributions policy as well as our corporate contributions; and (xii) undertake special projects which do not fall within the jurisdiction of other committees of the Board.

·

Finance Committee – The current Finance Committee members are Mses. McKibben and Vautrinot and Messrs. Biller (Chair), Chazen, Grundhofer, and Larson (Vice Chair). The Committee met five times during 2016. The principal functions of this Committee are to review and make recommendations to the Board concerning: (i) management’s financial and tax policies and standards; (ii) our financing requirements, including the evaluation of management’s proposals concerning funding to meet such requirements; (iii) share repurchases and dividends; (iv) our capital expenditure budget; (v) adequacy of insurance coverage; and (vi) our use of derivatives to limit financial risk. The Committee also evaluates specific acquisition, divestiture and capital expenditure projects from a financial standpoint and reviews the financial impact of our significant retirement plans.

·

Governance Committee – The Governance Committee members are Ms. Beck and Messrs. Casale, Higgins (Vice Chair), Levin (Chair), MacLennan and Zillmer. The Committee met four times during 2016. Certain functions of the Governance Committee are described starting on page 8 of this Proxy Statement under the heading “Director Nomination Process.” In addition, the principal functions of this Committee include: (i) lead the annual review of Board performance and effectiveness; (ii) review the Board’s organizational structure and operations (including appointing a lead director for executive sessions of non-management directors) and its relationship to senior management; (iii) review issues of senior management succession; (iv) lead the annual Chief Executive Officer performance review and oversee the evaluation process for senior management; (v) review Certificate of Incorporation, By-Law or stockholder rights plan issues or changes in fundamental corporate charter provisions; (vi) review various corporate governance matters (including any necessary modifications to the Corporate Governance Principles); (vii) review and recommend to the Board with respect to director independence determinations and review, approve or ratify reportable related-person transactions; (viii) receive reports from management with regard to relevant social responsibility issues and report to the Board as appropriate; (ix) review our Company’s efforts to achieve its affirmative action and diversity goals; (x) review director orientation, training and continuing education; (xi) review our political contributions policy as well as our corporate contributions; and (xii) undertake special projects which do not fall within the jurisdiction of other committees of the Board.

The Board of Directors has determined that each member of the Governance Committee meets the "independence"“independence” requirements of the SEC, the New York Stock Exchange and of our Board.

·

Safety, Health and Environment Committee – The members of the Safety, Health and Environment Committee are Mses. Beck (Chair) and Reich and Messrs. Baker, Ettinger (Chair) and Larson. The Committee met four times during 2016. This Committee monitors compliance with applicable safety, health and environmental (“SHE”) laws and regulations. The principle functions of this Committee include: (i) review SHE policies, programs and practices, SHE risks, SHE statistics, pending SHE matters, security risks and industry best practices; (ii) review regulatory, environmental and health and safety trends, issues and concerns which affect or could affect Ecolab’s SHE practices; (iii) review the implementation of Ecolab’s SHE practices and related compliance with applicable policies; and (iv) review Ecolab’s Sustainability Report.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    15


CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Compensation Committee Interlocks and EnvironmentInsider Participation

The Compensation Committee is comprised of six non-employee, independent directors:  — The membersMessrs. Biller, Ettinger, Grundhofer (Chair), Higgins, Levin and Zillmer (Vice Chair). No member of the Safety, Health and EnvironmentCompensation Committee are Mses. Beck (Vice Chair) and Reich and Messrs. Baker, Casale, Larson, and Lumpkins (Chair). is or was formerly an officer or an employee of the Company or had any related person transaction required to be disclosed in which the Company was a participant during the last fiscal year. In addition, no executive officer of the Company serves on the compensation committee or board of directors of a company for which any of the Company’s directors serves as an executive officer.

RELATED-PERSON TRANSACTIONS

The Governance Committee met four times during 2014. This Committee monitors complianceof the Board of Directors is responsible for reviewing, approving or ratifying transactions in excess of $120,000 with applicable safety, health and environmental ("SHE") laws and regulations. The principle functions of this Committee include: (i) review SHE policies, programs and practices, SHE risks, SHE statistics, pending SHE matters, security risks and industry best practices; (ii) review regulatory, environmental and health and safety trends, issues and concerns which affectthe Company’s executive officers or could affect Ecolab's SHE practices; (iii) review the implementation of Ecolab's SHEdirectors, including their immediate family members, or any greater than 5% stockholder known to us. Our practices and procedures for identifying transactions with related compliancepersons are located in the charter of the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee considers the related person’s relationship to the Company and interest in the transaction; the material facts of the transaction, including the proposed aggregate value of such transaction; the benefits to the Company of the proposed related-person transaction; if applicable, the availability of other sources of comparable products or services; an assessment of whether the proposed related-person transaction is on terms that are comparable to the terms available to an unrelated third party or to employees; and such other factors and information as the Governance Committee may deem appropriate. The Governance Committee determined that there were no such transactions with applicable policies; and (iv) review Ecolab's Sustainability Report.related persons during 2016, nor any currently anticipated transactions.


16    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents



DIRECTOR COMPENSATION FOR 2014
2016

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION FOR 2016

Director Compensation Table

The following table summarizes the compensation that our non-employee directors received during 2014.2016.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name

 

Fees Earned or
Paid in Cash
(1)
($)

 

Stock
Awards
(2)
($)

 

Option
Awards
(3)
($)

 

All Other
Compensation

($)

 

Total
($)

Barbara J. Beck

 

114,848

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

269,128

Leslie S. Biller

 

120,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

274,280

Carl M. Casale

 

115,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

269,280

Stephen I. Chazen

 

115,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

269,280

Jeffrey M. Ettinger

 

105,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

259,280

Jerry A. Grundhofer

 

125,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

279,280

Arthur J. Higgins

 

105,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

259,280

Joel W. Johnson(4)

 

42,938

 

34,350

 

0

 

5,000

 

82,288

Michael Larson

 

105,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

259,280

Jerry W. Levin

 

145,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

299,280

Robert L. Lumpkins(4)

 

44,655

 

34,350

 

0

 

5,000

 

84,005

David W. MacLennan(5)

 

115,000

 

100,000

 

77,880

 

 

 

292,880

Tracy B. McKibben

 

115,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

269,280

Victoria J. Reich

 

121,565

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

275,845

Suzanne M. Vautrinot

 

115,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

269,280

John J. Zillmer

 

105,000

 

100,000

 

54,280

 

 

 

259,280
 
            Name
 Fees
Earned
or Paid
in Cash(1)
($)

 Stock
Awards(2)
($)

 Option
Awards(3)
($)

 Total
($)

 

Barbara J. Beck

 $100,000 $72,500 $56,520 $229,020

Leslie S. Biller

 $110,000 $72,500 $56,520 $239,020

Carl M. Casale(4)

 $110,000 $72,500 $80,070 $262,570

Stephen I. Chazen

 $110,000 $72,500 $56,520 $239,020

Jerry A. Grundhofer

 $115,000 $72,500 $56,520 $244,020

Arthur J. Higgins

 $100,000 $72,500 $56,520 $229,020

Joel W. Johnson

 $120,000 $72,500 $56,520 $249,020

Michael Larson

 $100,000 $72,500 $56,520 $229,020

Jerry W. Levin

 $135,000 $72,500 $56,520 $264,020

Robert L. Lumpkins

 $120,000 $72,500 $56,520 $249,020

Victoria J. Reich

 $110,000 $72,500 $56,520 $239,020

Mary M. VanDeWeghe(5)

 $38,984 $25,794 $0 $64,768

Suzanne M. Vautrinot(6)

 $92,583 $61,021 $68,295 $221,899

John J. Zillmer

 $100,000 $72,500 $56,520 $229,020

(1)

Represents annual retainer of $105,000 earned during 2016, plus additional fees paid to the Lead Director, the respective Chairs of Board Committees and the members of the Audit Committee; includes retainer and fees, if any, deferred at the election of directors pursuant to the 2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Option and Deferred Compensation Plan (the “2001 Plan”). The features of the 2001 Plan are described in the Summary below. The dollar amount of retainer and fees deferred by applicable directors during 2016 is as follows: Ms. Beck, $114,848; Mr. Chazen, $57,500; Mr. Ettinger, $105,000; Mr. Grundhofer, $125,000; Mr. Higgins, $105,000; Mr. Johnson, $42,938; Mr. Lumpkins, $44,655; and Ms. Reich, $121,565.

(1)
Represents annual retainer of $100,000 earned during 2014, plus additional fees paid to the Lead Director, the respective Chairs of Board Committees and the members of the Audit Committee; includes retainer and fees, if any, deferred at the election of directors pursuant to the 2001 Non-Employee Director Stock Option and Deferred Compensation Plan (the "2001 Plan"), as described in footnote (2) below. The dollar amount of retainer and fees deferred by applicable directors during 2014 is as follows: Ms. Beck, $100,000; Mr. Chazen, $55,000; Mr. Grundhofer, $115,000; Mr. Higgins, $100,000; Mr. Johnson, $120,000; Mr. Lumpkins, $120,000; Ms. Reich, $110,000; and Ms. VanDeWeghe, $38,984.

(2)
Represents the crediting by the Company of $72,500 (or a pro rata portion thereof) to a deferred stock unit account under the 2001 Plan during 2014. The features of the deferred stock unit account are described under footnote (3) to the "Security Ownership — Executive Officers and Directors" table at page 6 and the director compensation deferral paragraph under the "Summary" heading at page 11.

(3)
Represents the full grant date fair value of each option award, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718 (entitled "Compensation-Stock Compensation"). The value has been determined by application of the lattice (binomial)-pricing model, based upon the terms of the option grant to directors. Director stock options granted in May 2014 to directors have a ten-year contractual exercise term and vest 25% at the end of each three-month period following the date of grant. Key assumptions include: risk-free rate of return, expected life of the option, expected stock price volatility and expected dividend yield. The specific assumptions used in the valuation of these options is summarized in the table below:

(2)

Represents the crediting by the Company of $100,000 (or a pro rata portion thereof) to a deferred stock unit account under the 2001 Plan during 2016, which also represents the full grant date fair value of each stock unit award under FASB ASC Topic 718. The features of the deferred stock unit account are described under the Summary below. The aggregate number of stock units held by each non-employee director is set forth under footnote (3) to the “Security Ownership – Executive Officers and Directors” table at page 11.  

(3)

Represents the full grant date fair value of each option award, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The value has been determined by application of the lattice (binomial)-pricing model, based upon the terms of the option grant to directors. Director stock options granted in May 2016 to directors have a ten-year contractual exercise term and vest 25% at the end of each three-month period following the date of grant. Key assumptions include: risk-free rate of return, expected life of the option, expected stock price volatility and expected dividend yield. The specific assumptions used in the valuation of these options are summarized in the table below:

 
       Grant Date
 Risk Free Rate
 Expected Life
 Expected Volatility
 Expected Dividend Yield
 

      05/08/2014

 1.92% 6.11 years 22.93% 1.05%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grant Date

 

Risk Free Rate

 

Expected Life

 

Expected Volatility

 

Expected Dividend Yield

05/05/2016

 

1.38%

 

6.13 years

 

22.84%

 

1.22%

As of December 31, 2014,2016, the aggregate number of stock options held by each director named in the table above is as follows: Ms. Beck, 28,300;32,800; Mr. Biller, 42,200;36,300; Mr. Casale, 3,400;7,900; Mr. Chazen, 5,600;10,100; Mr. Ettinger, 4,500; Mr. Grundhofer, 31,800;18,100; Mr. Higgins, 18,100;22,600; Mr. Johnson, 42,200;34,000; Mr. Larson, 10,100;14,600; Mr. Levin, 2,400;6,900; Mr. Lumpkins, 42,200;34,000; Mr. MacLennan, 3,300; Ms. McKibben, 4,900; Ms. Reich, 20,300; Ms. VanDeWeghe, 8,600;24,800; Ms. Vautrinot, 2,900;7,400; and Mr. Zillmer, 36,600.

(4)
Mr. Casale received an initial stock option grant in May 2014 valued at $23,550 under FASB ASC Topic 718 to reflect his prorated service commencing in December 2013, as well as his periodic stock option grant valued at $56,520.

(5)
Ms. VanDeWeghe retired from the Board on May 8, 2014 and received pro-rated portions of compensation for 2014.

(6)
Ms. Vautrinot was elected to the Board effective February 2014, and received a pro-rated portion of compensation for 2014. Ms. Vautrinot received an initial stock option grant in May 2014 valued at $11,775 under FASB ASC Topic 718 to reflect her prorated service commencing in February, as well as her periodic stock option grant valued at $56,520.
36,300.

(4)

Messrs. Johnson and Lumpkins retired from the Board effective May 2016, and each received a pro-rated portion of compensation for 2016. In connection with their retirement, the Company agreed to permit Messrs. Johnson and Lumpkins to direct charitable contributions by the Ecolab Foundation in the amount of $5,000 each.

(5)

Mr. MacLennan received an initial stock option grant in May 2016 valued at $23,600 under FASB ASC Topic 718 to reflect his prorated service commencing in December 2015, as well as his periodic stock option grant valued at $54,280.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    17


DIRECTOR COMPENSATION FOR 2016

Summary
Summary

During 2014,2016, members of the Board of Directors who are not employees of the Company were entitled to receive base annual compensation valued at $227,500$260,000 as follows:

An annual retainer of $100,000;

$72,500 annually in the form of stock units (which are described under footnote (3) to the "Security Ownership — Executive Officers and Directors" table at page 6 and the director compensation deferral paragraph below); and

Stock options having a grant date fair value of approximately $55,000.

·

An annual retainer of $105,000;

Table of Contents

·

$100,000 annually in the form of stock units (which are described below); and

·

Stock options having a grant date fair value of approximately $55,000.

We also paid the following supplemental retainers to the Lead Director, committee chairs and members of the Audit Committee:

Type
Amount

Director Role

Amount ($)

Lead Director

$
25,000

Audit Committee Chair

$
20,000

Compensation Committee Chair

$
20,000

Finance Committee Chair

15,000

FinanceGovernance Committee Chair

$10,000
15,000

Governance Committee Chair

$10,000

Safety, Health and Environment Committee Chair

$10,000
15,000

Audit Committee Member

$
10,000

The base annual compensation of $260,000 per year, excluding committee retainers, is within the median range of our competitive market. For director compensation, we define our competitive market as a group of 20 comparison companies for compensation benchmarking and the median range as within 10% of the median for total annual director compensation. The companies comprising our comparison group are the same as the executive compensation comparison group and are set forth under the heading “Compensation Benchmarking” found under the Compensation Discussion and Analysis of this Proxy Statement at page 33.  

All reasonable travel, telephone and other expenses incurred by directors on behalf of Ecolab were reimbursed.

Non-employee directors may elect to defer some, or all,The features of the cash portion of their annual retainer and additional fees in a cash account or a deferred stock unit account until cessation of Board service. Amounts deferred in the cash account earn interest at market rates and amounts deferred in the stock unit account are credited with dividend equivalents. Upon cessation of Board service, deferred amounts (whether in the interest-bearing account or in the stock unit account) are paid in a lump sum or in equal installments to a maximum of ten years as elected by the director. The aggregate number of stock units held by each non-employee director is set forth under footnote (3) to the "Security Ownership — Executive Officers and Directors" table at page 6.

Director stock option grants are made on the date of the Annual Meeting of Stockholders and have an exercise price which is the average of the high and low market price on the date of grant. We believe that the use of the average of the high and low market price on the date of the grant removes same-day stock volatility. We do not have a program, plan or practice to time stock option grants to directors in coordination with the release of material non-public information. Director stock options vest 25% at the end of each three-month period following the grant date. The options granted to directors under the 2001 Plan are as follows:

·

Non-employee directors may elect to defer some, or all, of the cash portion of their annual retainer and additional fees in a cash account or a deferred stock unit account until cessation of Board service. Amounts deferred in the cash account earn interest at market rates and amounts deferred in the stock unit account are credited with dividend equivalents. Upon cessation of Board service, deferred amounts are paid in a lump sum or in equal installments to a maximum of ten years as elected by the director, with payments from the interest-bearing account made in cash and payments from the stock unit account made in shares of our Common Stock.

·

Director stock option grants are made on the date of the Annual Meeting of Stockholders and have an exercise price which is the average of the high and low market price on the date of grant. We believe that the use of the average of the high and low market price on the date of the grant removes same-day stock volatility. Director stock options vest 25% at the end of each three-month period following the grant date and will terminate 10 years after the grant date. If a non-employee director ceases to serve as a director of the Company for any reason, then each of his or her stock options will, to the extent it was already exercisable, remain exercisable for the shorter of the remaining term of the stock option or five years after the date service as a director ceased. The stock options granted to directors under the 2001 Plan may be transferred to defined family members or legal entities established for their benefit. We do not have a program, plan or practice to time stock option grants to directors in coordination with the release of material non-public information.

·

The 2001 Plan is the only plan or arrangement under which share-based compensation is provided to our non-employee directors.

·

Pursuant to an amendment approved by our stockholders on May 5, 2016, the aggregate grant date fair value of 2001 Plan awards denominated in shares that may be made to any non-employee director of the Company during any calendar year may not exceed $800,000, excluding such awards made at the election of a director to defer the receipt of cash compensation otherwise payable for services as a director.

18    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement



DIRECTOR COMPENSATION FOR 2016

Stock Retention and Ownership Guidelines

We have in place stock retention and ownership guidelines to encourage our directors to accumulate a significant ownership stake so they are vested in maximizing long-term stockholder returns. Our guidelines provide that our directors own Company stock with a market value of at least five times the annual retainer. Until the stock ownership guideline is met, the director is expected to retain 100% of all after-tax profit shares from stock option exercises. For purposes of complying with our guidelines, stock is not considered owned if subject to an unexercised stock option. Shares owned outright, legally or beneficially, by a director or his or her immediate family members residing in the same household and deferred stock units in the director'sdirector’s deferral plan count towards meeting the guidelines. Our directors may not pledge shares or enter into any risk hedging arrangements with respect to Company stock. Our directors are in compliance with our guidelines by either having achieved the ownership guideline or, if the guideline is not yet achieved, by retaining 100% of all after-tax profit shares from any stock option exercises.


Changes Effective in 2015 — The Committee reviews our compensation program for non-employee directors annually; however, it is our general practice to consider adjustments to our program every other year. Based upon the recommendation of the Compensation Committee's independent consultant, Cook & Co., we made the following changes effective as of January 1, 2015: (1) increased the annual retainer from $100,000 to $105,000; (2) increased the annual deferred stock unit award from $72,500 to $100,000; (3) increased the annual retainer for the Compensation Committee chair from $15,000 to $20,000; and (4) increased the annual retainers for the chairs of the Finance, Governance and Safety, Health and Environment Committees from $10,000 to $15,000. We retained all of the other components of our non-employee director compensation program, including the annual stock option grant with a grant date fair value of $55,000 and the retainers for the Lead Director, Audit Committee chair and Audit Committee members, without change.

The changes to the annual retainer and stock unit awards increase total annual director compensation from $227,500 per year to $260,000 per year, excluding committee retainers, which is within the median range of our competitive market. For director compensation, we define our competitive market as a group of 20 comparison companies for compensation benchmarking and the median range as within 10% of the median for total annual director compensation. The companies comprising our comparison group are the same as the executive compensation comparison group and are set forth at page 26 of this Proxy Statement.


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    19


DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE STANDARDS AND DETERMINATIONS

DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE STANDARDS AND 

DETERMINATIONS

“Independence” Standards "Independence" Standards

Pursuant to the Board of Directors'Directors’ policy, a director is not independent if:

    (i)
    The director is, or has been within the last three years, an employee of the Company, or an immediate family member is, or has been within the last three years, an executive officer, of the Company.

    (ii)
    The director has received, or has an immediate family member who has received, during any twelve-month period within the last three years, more than $120,000 in direct compensation from the Company, other than director and committee fees and pension or other forms of deferred compensation for prior service (provided such compensation is not contingent in any way on continued service).

    (iii)
    (A) The director is a current partner or employee of a firm that is the Company's internal or external auditor; (B) the director has an immediate family member who is a current partner of such a firm; (C) the director has an immediate family member who is a current employee of such a firm and personally works on the Company's audit; or (D) the director or an

A.

The director is, or has been within the last three years, an employee of the Company, or an immediate family member is, or has been within the last three years, an executive officer, of the Company.

Table of Contents

      immediate family member was within the last three years a partner or employee of such a firm and personally worked on the Company's audit within that time.

    (iv)
    The director or an immediate family member is, or has been within the last three years, employed as an executive officer of another company where any of the Company's present executive officers at the same time serves or served on that company's compensation committee.

    (v)
    The director is a current employee, or an immediate family member is a current executive officer, of a company that has made payments to, or received payments from, the Company for property or services in an amount which, in any of the last three fiscal years, exceeds the greater of $1 million, or 2% of such other company's consolidated gross revenues.

B.

The director has received, or has an immediate family member who has received, during any twelve-month period within the last three years, more than $120,000 in direct compensation from the Company, other than director and committee fees and pension or other forms of deferred compensation for prior service (provided such compensation is not contingent in any way on continued service).

C.

(A) The director is a current partner or employee of a firm that is the Company’s internal or external auditor; (B) the director has an immediate family member who is a current partner of such a firm; (C) the director has an immediate family member who is a current employee of such a firm and personally works on the Company’s audit; or (D) the director or an immediate family member was within the last three years a partner or employee of such a firm and personally worked on the Company’s audit within that time.

D.

The director or an immediate family member is, or has been within the last three years, employed as an executive officer of another company where any of the Company’s present executive officers at the same time serves or served on that company’s compensation committee.

E.

The director is a current employee, or an immediate family member is a current executive officer, of a company that has made payments to, or received payments from, the Company for property or services in an amount which, in any of the last three fiscal years, exceeds the greater of $1 million, or 2% of such other company’s consolidated gross revenues.

The Board of Directors'Directors’ independence policy is also available on our website at www.ecolab.com/investors/www.investor.ecolab.com/corporate-governance/board-of-directors.

“Independence” Determinations
"Independence" Determinations

In February 2015,2017, the Governance Committee undertook a review of director independence by examining the nature and magnitude of transactions and relationships during 2014, 20132016, 2015 and 20122014 between each director serving during 20142016 or director nominee, as the case may be (or any member of his or her immediate family or the company he or she is employed by and its subsidiaries and affiliates), and Ecolab, its subsidiaries and affiliates. Appropriate scrutiny is given to any situation which could be reasonably considered a material relationship. Both the existence and nature of the relationship are considered. The relationships include, among others, commercial, industrial, banking, consulting, legal, accounting, charitable and familial relationships. Ecolab also endeavors to identify, quantify and evaluate ordinary-course commercial transactions between Ecolab and any company that employs a director or director nominee, including subsidiaries and affiliates of the company. In this regard, the Board'sBoard’s Governance Committee has reviewed the following transactions and determined that the transactions do not exceed the Board'sBoard’s categorical "independence"“independence” standards described above or adversely affect the director or director nominee for "independence"“independence” status as the combined impact of the transactions is immaterial to Ecolab and the respective organizations:

Mr. Chazen serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of Occidental Petroleum Corporation. During 2014, Ecolab's sales to Occidental Petroleum and its affiliates were approximately $58 million, or less than 0.3% of Occidental Petroleum's revenues, and Ecolab's purchases from Occidental Petroleum and its affiliates were approximately $10 million, or less than 0.05% of Occidental Petroleum's revenues. Ecolab believes all sales to, and purchases from, Occidental Petroleum were made in the ordinary course, at arm's length, and at prices and on terms customarily available. Further, Ecolab believes Mr. Chazen had no personal interest in, nor received any personal benefit from, such commercial transactions.

Mr. Ettinger serves as Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of Hormel Foods Corporation. During 2014, Ecolab's sales to Hormel Foods and its affiliates were approximately $8 million, or less than 0.1% of Hormel Foods' revenues, and Ecolab's purchases from Hormel Foods and its affiliates were approximately $0.1 million, or less than 0.001% of Hormel Foods' revenues. Ecolab believes all sales to Hormel Foods were made in the ordinary course, at arm's length, and at prices and on terms customarily available. Further, Ecolab believes Mr. Ettinger had no personal interest in, or received any personal benefit from, such commercial transactions.

Mr. Casale serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of CHS, Inc. During 2014, Ecolab's sales to CHS and its affiliates were approximately $3 million, or less than 0.008% of CHS's revenues. Ecolab believes all sales to CHS were made in the ordinary course, at arm's length, and at prices and on terms customarily available. Further, Ecolab believes Mr. Casale had no personal interest in, or received any personal benefit from, such commercial transactions.

·

Until May 2016, Mr. Chazen served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Occidental Petroleum Corporation. During 2016, Ecolab’s sales to Occidental Petroleum and its affiliates were approximately $63 million, or less than 0.63% of Occidental Petroleum’s revenues, and Ecolab’s purchases from Occidental Petroleum and its affiliates were approximately $6 million, or less than 0.06% of Occidental Petroleum’s revenues. Ecolab believes all sales to, and purchases from, Occidental Petroleum were made in the ordinary course, at arm’s length, and at prices and on terms customarily available. Further, Ecolab believes Mr. Chazen had no personal interest in, nor received any personal benefit from, such commercial transactions.

20    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE STANDARDS AND DETERMINATIONS

·

Mr. Ettinger serves as Chairman of the Board of Hormel Foods Corporation and, until October 2016, served as its Chief Executive Officer. During 2016, Ecolab’s sales to Hormel Foods and its affiliates were approximately $11 million, or less than 0.12% of Hormel Foods’ revenues, and Ecolab’s purchases from Hormel Foods and its affiliates were approximately $100 thousand, or approximately 0.001% of Hormel Foods’ revenues. Ecolab believes all sales to, and purchases from, Hormel Foods were made in the ordinary course, at arm’s length, and at prices and on terms customarily available. Further, Ecolab believes Mr. Ettinger had no personal interest in, or received any personal benefit from, such commercial transactions.

·

Mr. Casale serves as President and Chief Executive Officer of CHS, Inc. During 2016, Ecolab’s sales to CHS and its affiliates were approximately $3 million, or less than 0.011% of CHS’s revenues. Ecolab believes all sales to CHS were made in the ordinary course, at arm’s length, and at prices and on terms customarily available. Further, Ecolab believes Mr. Casale had no personal interest in, or received any personal benefit from, such commercial transactions.

·

Mr. MacLennan serves as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Cargill, Incorporated. During 2016, Ecolab’s sales to Cargill and its affiliates were approximately $26 million, or less than 0.025% of Cargill’s revenues, and Ecolab’s purchases from Cargill and its affiliates were approximately $6 million, or less than 0.006% of Cargill’s revenues. Ecolab believes all sales to, and purchases from, Cargill were made in the ordinary course, at arm’s length, and at prices and on terms customarily available. Further, Ecolab believes Mr. MacLennan had no personal interest in, or received any personal benefit from, such commercial transactions.

Based on the review of the Governance Committee, the Board of Directors has determined that the following directors or director nominees, as the case may be, including those on the slate of nominees for election to the Board at this year'syear’s Annual Meeting (other than Mr. Baker), are, and have been since January 1, 2014, or the date which they became an Ecolab director if later than January 1, 2014,2016, independent in accordance with the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange, the rules and regulations of the SEC, applicable law, and the Board's "independence"Board’s “independence” policy: Barbara J. Beck, Leslie S. Biller, Carl M. Casale, Stephen I. Chazen, Jeffrey M. Ettinger, Jerry A. Grundhofer, Arthur J. Higgins, Joel W. Johnson, Michael Larson, Jerry W. Levin, Robert L. Lumpkins,David W. MacLennan, Tracy B. McKibben, Victoria J. Reich, Suzanne M. Vautrinot Mary M. VanDeWeghe (retired from the Board in May 2014) and John J. Zillmer.

The Board determined that Douglas M. Baker, Jr. is not "independent,"“independent,” due to his status as the current Chief Executive Officer.


RELATED-PERSON TRANSACTIONS

The Governance Committee of the Board of Directors is responsible for reviewing, approving or ratifying transactions in excess of $120,000 with the Company's executive officers or directors, including their immediate family members, or any greater than 5% stockholder known to us. Our practices and procedures for identifying transactions with related persons are located in the charter of the Governance Committee. The Governance Committee considers the related person's relationship to the Company and interest in the transaction; the material facts of the transaction, including the proposed aggregate value of such transaction; the benefits to the Company of the proposed related-person transaction; if applicable, the availability of other sources of comparable products or services; an assessment of whether the proposed related-person transaction is on terms that are comparable to the terms available to an unrelated third party or to employees; and such other factors and information as the Governance Committee may deem appropriate. The Governance Committee determined that there were no such transactions with related persons during 2014, nor any currently anticipated transactions.


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    21

Table of Contents



PROPOSAL 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

PROPOSAL 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Our Board of Directors currently consists of 15 members. Messrs. Grundhofer and Levin will be retiring from the Board as of the 2017 Annual Meeting. Accordingly, the Board has taken action to reduce the size of the Board to 13 members effective immediately prior to the time of the 2017 Annual Meeting. The 1613 nominees, if elected, will serve a one-year term ending as of the 20162018 Annual Meeting expected to be held on May 5, 2016.3, 2018.

Pursuant to the recommendation of the Governance Committee, Mses. Beck, McKibben, Reich and Vautrinot and Messrs. Baker, Biller, Casale, Chazen, Ettinger, Grundhofer, Higgins, Johnson, Larson, Levin, LumpkinsMacLennan and Zillmer were nominated for election as Directors. The Board of Directors has no reason to believe that any of the named nominees is not available or will not serve if elected.


Board of Directors'Directors’ Recommendation The Board of Directors recommends a voteFOR the election of the 1613 nominees named in this Proxy Statement. Unless a contrary choice is specified, proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedFOR each of the nominees named in this Proxy Statement.


Table of Contents

The following information with regard to business experience, qualifications and directorships has been furnished by the respective director nominees or obtained from our records.

Nominees for Election to the Board of Directors (Term Ending in May 2018)

NOMINEES FOR ELECTION TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS (TERM ENDING 2016)


PHOTO


DOUGLAS M. BAKER, JR.,age 56.

BiographyPicture 40 — Chairman

Years of the Service: 13
Age: 58

Board and Chief Executive Officer of Ecolab. Director of Ecolab since 2004. Member of the Committees:

Safety, Health and Environment Committee.

Since joining Ecolab in 1989, Mr. Baker has held various leadership positions within our Institutional, Europe and Kay operations. Mr. Baker was named Ecolab's President and Chief Operating Officer in August 2002, was promoted to President and Chief Executive Officer in July 2004, and added the position

of Chairman of the Board in May 2006. Mr. Baker relinquished the office of President in December 2011 upon completion of the Nalco merger. Prior to joining Ecolab in 1989, Mr. Baker was employed by The Procter & Gamble Company in various marketing and management positions.

Qualifications —

Mr. Baker has more than 25 years of Ecolab marketing, sales and general management experience, including leadership roles in Ecolab'sEcolab’s Institutional, Europe and Kay businesses before becoming Ecolab'sEcolab’s Chief Operating Officer in 2002 and Chief Executive Officer in 2004. He has deep and direct knowledge of Ecolab'sEcolab’s businesses and operations. In addition, his experience at The Procter & Gamble Company included various marketing and management positions, including in the institutional market in which Ecolab operates. As a director of two other public companies, Mr. Baker also has extensive corporate governance experience.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

Lead Director of Target Corporation and director of U.S. Bancorp.




PHOTO


BARBARA J. BECK, age 54.

Biography —

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer Learning Care Group,  Inc., a leading for-profit early education/child care provider in North America.of Ecolab. Director of Ecolab since 2008. Vice Chair2004. Member of the Safety, Health and Environment CommitteeCommittee.

Since joining Ecolab in 1989, Mr. Baker has held various leadership positions within our Institutional, Europe and member of the Governance Committee.

PriorKay operations. Mr. Baker was named Ecolab’s President and Chief Operating Officer in August 2002, was promoted to joining Learning Care Group in 2011 asPresident and Chief Executive Officer Ms. Beck spent nine years as an executivein July 2004, and added the position

BARBARA J. BECK

Picture 27

Years of Manpower Inc., a world leader in the employment services industry. From 2006 to 2011, Ms. Beck was President of Manpower's EMEA operations, overseeing Europe (excluding Service: 9
Age: 56

Board Committees:

Safety, Health and Environment

Governance

France), the Middle East and Africa. She previously served as Executive Vice President of Manpower'sManpower’s U.S. and Canada business unit from 2002 to 2005. Prior to joining Manpower, Ms. Beck was an executive of Sprint, a global communications company, serving in various operating and leadership roles for 15 years.

Qualifications —

Ms. Beck has extensive North American and European general management and operational experience, including as a current CEO, allowing her to contribute to Ecolab'sEcolab’s strategic vision particularly as it relates to Europe, the Middle East and Africa. With her Manpower knowledge of the impact of labor market trends on global and local economies combined with her knowledge of employment services, which tends to be a leading economic indicator, she provides timely insight into near-term projections of general economic activity. As an executive at Sprint, Ms. Beck obtained experience in the information technology field which is relevant to Ecolab'sEcolab’s development of its ERP systems as well as field automation tools.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

None.




Biography

Table of Contents


PHOTO


LESLIE S. BILLER, age 67.

Biography — Chief Executive Officer, of Harborview Capital,Learning Care Group, Inc., a private investment and consultive company.leading for-profit early education/child care provider in North America. Director of Ecolab since 1997.2008. Chair of the FinanceSafety, Health and Environment Committee and member of the CompensationGovernance Committee.

Prior to joining Learning Care Group in 2011 as Chief Executive Officer, Ms. Beck spent nine years as an executive of Manpower Inc., a world leader in the employment services industry. From 2006 to 2011, Ms. Beck was President of Manpower’s EMEA operations, overseeing Europe (excluding

22    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement

After holding various positions with Citicorp and Bank


PROPOSAL 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

LESLIE S. BILLER

Picture 34

Years of America, Mr. Biller joined Norwest Corporation in 1987 as Executive Vice President in charge of strategic planning and acquisitions for Norwest Banking. He was appointed Executive Vice President in charge of South Central Community Banking in 1990. Mr. Biller served as President and Chief Operating Officer of Norwest Corporation from February 1997 until its merger Service: 19
Age: 69

Board Committees:

Finance

Compensation

with Wells Fargo & Company in November 1998. Mr. Biller retired as Vice Chairman and Chief Operating Officer of Wells Fargo & Company in October 2002. He became Chairman of Sterling Financial Corporation in 2010 and served in that capacity until its merger with Umpqua Corporation in April 2014.

Qualifications —

Throughout his career in banking, including as Vice Chair and Chief Operating Officer of Wells Fargo, Mr. Biller gained extensive public company senior management and board experience. Having spent a significant part of his career in international assignments in Europe, he is familiar with operating businesses in that region, which allows him to provide advice and guidance relevant to our significant European operations. He has extensive knowledge and experience in banking, treasury and finance, which enables him to provide insight and advice on financing, treasury and enterprise risk management areas. As a chemical engineer, he is familiar with chemicals manufacturing and distribution, which allows him to relate well to our operations.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Director of Knowledge Schools Inc. and Knowledge Universe Education.

Formerly a director of Sterling Financial Corporation.




PHOTO


CARL M. CASALE, age 53.

Biography — President and

Chief Executive Officer of CHS Inc.,Harborview Capital, a leading integrated agriculturalprivate investment and consultive company. Director of Ecolab since 2013. Member1997. Chair of the AuditFinance Committee and Safety, Healthmember of the Compensation Committee.

After holding various positions with Citicorp and Environment Committees.

Bank of America, Mr. CasaleBiller joined CHSNorwest Corporation in 1987 as Executive Vice President in charge of strategic planning and acquisitions for Norwest Banking. He was appointed Executive Vice President in charge of South Central Community Banking in 1990. Mr. Biller served as President and Chief ExecutiveOperating Officer in 2011. Previously he spent 26 years with Monsanto Company, advancing through of Norwest Corporation from February 1997 until its merger

CARL M. CASALE

Picture 42

Years of Service: 3
Age: 55

Board Committees:

Audit

Governance 

sales, strategy, marketing and technology-related positions before being named Chief Financial Officer in 2009.

Qualifications —

As chief executiveChief Executive Officer of CHS, Mr. Casale has experience running a large diverse organization, which includes a significant energy business. In addition to his importantextensive industry experience, through his more than 25-year career at CHS and Monsanto and his experience as a director of other public companies, Mr. Casale possesses knowledge and experience in finance, international operations, sales, corporate management, strategy, public company governance and board practices. Mr. Casale is also familiar with our water and energy businesses, having served as a director of Nalco Holding Company from 2009 until Ecolab'sEcolab’s acquisition of Nalco in 2011.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Formerly a director of Nalco Holding Company.

None.




PHOTO


STEPHEN I. CHAZEN, age 68.

Biography —

President and Chief Executive Officer of Occidental Petroleum Corporation, an oil, natural gas and chemicals producer.CHS Inc., a leading integrated agricultural company. Director of Ecolab since 2013. Member of the Audit and FinanceGovernance Committees.

Mr. Chazen becameCasale joined CHS as President and Chief Executive Officer of Occidental Petroleum Corporation in 2011. He previously served as Occidental's President and Chief Operating Officer from 2010 to 2011 and President and Chief Financial Officer from 2007 to 2010. He was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from 1999 to Previously he spent 26 years with Monsanto Company, advancing through

STEPHEN I. CHAZEN

Picture 43

Years of Service: 4
Age: 70

Board Committees:

Audit

Finance

2007. Prior to joining Occidental in 1994, Mr. Chazen was a Managing Director in Corporate Finance and Mergers and Acquisitions at Merrill Lynch. Mr. Chazen is Chairman of the American Petroleum Institute.

Qualifications —

With more than 20 years of senior management experience with a major oil and gas company, Mr. Chazen has significant direct experience in the energy sector, one of the Company'sEcolab’s most significant end markets. As a chief executiveChief Executive Officer of Occidental, Mr. Chazen is intimately familiar with the competitive landscape and trends within the energy sector as well as the regulatory framework. In addition to his important industry experience, through his more than 30-year career at Occidental and Merrill Lynch and his experience as a director of other public companies, Mr. Chazen possesses knowledge and experience in corporate management, strategy, mergers and acquisitions, public company governance and board practices.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

Director of Occidental Petroleum Corporation.Corporation and The Williams Companies, Inc.




Table of Contents


PHOTO


JEFFREY M. ETTINGER, age 56.

Biography — Chairman of the Board, President and

Retired Chief Executive Officer of Hormel FoodsOccidental Petroleum Corporation, a processoran oil, natural gas and marketerchemicals producer. Director of meatEcolab since 2013. Member of the Audit and food products. Nominee for director.Finance Committees.

From 2011 to 2016 Mr. Chazen was Chief Executive Officer of Occidental Petroleum Corporation. He served as Occidental’s President from 2007 to 2015, as President and Chief Operating Officer from 2010 to 2011 and as President and Chief Financial Officer from 2007 to 2010. He was Executive Vice President- Corporate Development and Chief Financial Officer from 1999 to

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

Mr. Ettinger became    23


PROPOSAL 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

JEFFREY M. ETTINGER

Picture 12

Years of Service: 2
Age: 58

Board Committees:

Compensation

Safety, Health and Environment

Prior to being named President of Hormel Foods Corporation, in 2004 and Chief Executive Officer in 2005. He joined Hormel Foods in 1989 and previouslyMr. Ettinger served as President of Jennie-O Turkey Store, the largest subsidiary of Hormel Foods, and in various other various positions including Treasurer, Product Manager for Hormel® Hormel®  chili products, and corporate and senior attorney.

Qualifications —

With more than 25 years of experience with Hormel Foods, a public food products company with global operations, Mr. Ettinger brings directly relevant operational experience in one of Ecolab'sEcolab’s major end-markets. As Chairman President and Chief Executive Officer of a Fortune 500 public company with global operations, Mr. Ettinger possesses executive leadership attributes and provides relevant insight and guidance with respect to numerous issues important to Ecolab, including public company governance, mergers and acquisitions and regulatory matters.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

Director of Hormel Foods Corporation and The Toro Company.




PHOTO


JERRY A. GRUNDHOFER, age 70.

Biography — Chairman Emeritus and retired Chairman of the Board of U.S. Bancorp, a financial services holding company. Director of Ecolab since 1999. Chair of the Compensation Committee and member of the Finance Committee.

Following an extensive career

Mr. Ettinger joined Hormel Foods Corporation in the commercial banking industry, including serving1989. He served as Vice Chairman of the Board of BankAmerica Corporation, Mr. Grundhofer joined Star Banc Corporation as President and Chief Executive Officer from 2006 to 2016 and as President from 2004 to 2015.

ARTHUR J. HIGGINS

Picture 13

Years of Service: 7
Age: 61

Board Committees:

Governance

Compensation

Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), of the Council of the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) and President of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA).

Qualifications

Mr. Higgins has extensive leadership experience in 1993, assuming the Chairman post later that year.global healthcare market. Through leadership positions with large healthcare developers and manufacturers in both the United States and Europe, Mr. Higgins has gained deep knowledge of the healthcare market and the strategies for developing and marketing products in this highly regulated area. This knowledge and industry background allows him to provide valuable insight to Ecolab’s growing Healthcare business, which is developing in both the U.S. and Europe. In November 1998, Star Banc acquired Firstar Corporationaddition, his global perspective from years of operating global businesses and he assumed the position of Presidenthis background in working with high growth companies fits well with Ecolab’s ambitions for global growth and provide him experiences from which to draw to advise Ecolab on strategies for sustainable growth. In his role as Chief Executive Officer of Firstar Corporation. In 2001, following a merger of Firstar Corporation and U.S. Bancorp, Mr. Grundhofer was named President and Chief Executive Officer of U.S. Bancorp and added the position of Chairman of the Board in 2003. Mr. Grundhofer retired as CEO in 2006, and as Chairman of the Board in December 2007.

Qualifications —Mr. Grundhofer has more than 40 years of leadership experience in the banking and financial services industry, including as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of U.S. Bancorp. His senior operating experience and public company board experience give him an understanding for leading a public company and allow himBayer HealthCare, he gained significant exposure to provide strategic vision to the Company. He has extensive knowledge and experience in banking, treasury and finance, which enables him to provide insight and advice on financing, treasury and enterprise risk management areas. He also possesses extensive experience with mergersas well as quality and acquisitions.operating risk management necessary in a highly regulated industry such as healthcare.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Formerly Chairman

Director of the Board of SantanderEndo International plc and Zimmer Biomet Holdings, USA, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary Sovereign Bank. Formerly Chairman of the Board of Citibank, N.A. Formerly a director of Citigroup.Resverlogix Corp.




Biography

Table of Contents


PHOTO


ARTHUR J. HIGGINS, age 59.

Biography — Consultant, Blackstone Healthcare Partners of The Blackstone Group. Director of Ecolab since 2010. Vice-ChairVice Chair of the Governance Committee and member of the Compensation Committee.

Mr. Higgins joinedPrior to joining The Blackstone Group in 2010. Prior to that2010, Mr. Higgins served as Chairman of the Board of Management of Bayer HealthCare AG, a developer and manufacturer of human and animal health products, and Chairman of the Bayer HealthCare Executive Committee. Prior to joining Bayer HealthCare in 2004, Mr. Higgins served as Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Enzon Pharmaceuticals, Inc. from 2001 to 2004. Prior to joining Enzon Pharmaceuticals, Mr. Higgins spent 14 years with Abbott Laboratories, most recently as President of the Pharmaceutical Products Division from 1998 to 2001. He is a past member of the Board Board  of Directors of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), of the Council of the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations (IFPMA) and President of the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA).

Qualifications —Mr. Higgins has extensive leadership experience in the global healthcare market. Through leadership positions with large healthcare developers and manufacturers in both the United States and Europe, Mr. Higgins has gained deep knowledge of the healthcare market and the strategies for developing and marketing products in this highly regulated area. This knowledge and industry background allows him to provide valuable insight to Ecolab's growing Healthcare business, which is developing in both the U.S. and Europe. In addition, his global perspective from years of operating global businesses and his background in working with high growth companies fits well with Ecolab's ambitions for global growth and provide him experiences from which to draw to advise the Company on strategies for sustainable growth. In his role as Chief Executive Officer of Bayer HealthCare he gained significant exposure to enterprise risk management as well as quality and operating risk management necessary in a highly regulated industry such as healthcare.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Director of Endo International plc and Zimmer Holdings Inc. Formerly a director of Resverlogix Corp.




PHOTO


JOEL W. JOHNSON, age 71.

Biography — Retired Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Hormel Foods Corporation, a processor and marketer of meat and food products. Director of Ecolab since 1996. Chair of the Audit Committee and member of the Governance Committee.

Following an extensive career at General Foods Corporation, Mr. Johnson joined Hormel Foods Corporation in 1991 as Executive Vice President — Sales & Marketing. He advanced to President in 1992, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Executive Officer in 1993 and Chairman of the Board in 1995. Mr. Johnson retired as Chief Executive Officer of Hormel in 2005 and as Chairman in 2006.

Qualifications —Mr. Johnson's tenure as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Hormel Foods, a public company with global operations, provides him with directly relevant operating experience. As the former leader of a food products company, Mr. Johnson has insights into one of Ecolab's major end-markets. In addition, with Hormel, he has experience with and understanding of the complexities of operating a global manufacturing company in a regulated environment like the one in which Ecolab operates (e.g., EPA, FDA and USDA). His roles on the boards of Hormel, Meredith Corporation and U.S. Bancorp have provided him with significant public company board experience.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Director of the Meredith Corporation and U.S. Bancorp.MICHAEL LARSON




Table of Contents

Picture 14


PHOTO



MICHAEL LARSONYears of Service: 5
, age 55.Age: 57

Biography — Chief Investment Officer to William H. Gates III. Director of Ecolab since 2012. Vice Chair of the Board Committees:

Finance Committee and member of the

Safety, Health and Environment Committee.

Mr. Larson has been Chief Investment Officer for Mr. Gates and the Business Manager of Cascade Investment LLC, since 1994. He is responsible for Mr. Gates'

Gates’ non-Microsoft investments as well as the investment assets of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust. Previously, Mr. Larson was at Harris Investment Management, Putnam Management Company and ARCO.

Qualifications —

With more than 30 years of portfolio management experience, Mr. Larson has deep investment expertise and broad understanding of the capital markets, business cycles and capital efficiency and allocation practices. He also has served on several other public company boards providing him relevant corporate governance experience. In addition, as a professional investor and as the investment officer of the Company'sEcolab’s largest shareholder, Mr. Larson brings a long-term shareholder perspective to the Board.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

Director of AutoNation, Inc., Republic Services, Inc. and Fomento Mexicano Economico, S.A.B. de C.V. In addition, he is Chairman of the Board of Trustees forof two funds in the Western Asset/Claymore Inflation-Linked Securities & Income Fund and Western Asset/Claymore Inflation-Linked Opportunities & Income Fund.Asset Management fund complex. Formerly a director of Pan American Silver Corp. and Grupo Televisa, S.A.B.




PHOTO


JERRY W. LEVIN, age 70.

Biography — Chairman of Wilton Brands Inc., a consumer products company. Also Chairman of JW Levin Partners LLC, a private

Chief investment and advisory firm.officer to William H. Gates III. Director of Ecolab since 1992. Lead Director,2012. Vice Chair of the GovernanceFinance Committee and member of the CompensationSafety, Health and Environment Committee.

Mr. Levin served in a number of senior executive positions with The Pillsbury Company from 1974 through 1989. In 1989, he joined MacAndrews & Forbes Holdings, Inc., which controlled Revlon, Inc. and The Coleman Company, among other companies. From 1989 through 1997,Larson has been chief investment officer for Mr. Levin served in various capacities at the Coleman Company, Inc., Revlon, Inc., Revlon Consumer Products CorporationGates and the Cosmetic Center, Inc.Business Manager of Cascade Investment, L.L.C., includingsince 1994. He is responsible for Mr.

24    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


PROPOSAL 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

DAVID W. MACLENNAN

Picture 15

Years of Service: 2
Age: 57

Board Committees:

Audit

Governance

He has been Cargill’s Chief Executive Officer since 2013, and he held the offices of Chief Operating Officer and President from 2011 until his appointment as Chairman and/or Chief Executive Officer. Prior to these roles, Mr. Levin served as ChairmanMacLennan held several positions with Cargill, including Chief Financial Officer, President of Cargill Energy and Chief Executive OfficerManaging Director of American Household, Inc. (formerly known as Sunbeam Corporation) from 1998 to 2005.the Value Investment Group. He joined the Board of Sharper Image in July 2006,has also held various management positions with US Bancorp Piper Jaffray and served as interim CEO from September 2006 to April 2007. He became Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Wilton Brands in 2009 and Chairman in March of 2014.Goldberg Securities.

Qualifications —Mr. Levin has

With more than 3025 years of public company operatingleadership experience including as Chairman and/or Chief Executive Officer of Coleman, Revlon and American Household, and has served on numerous public company boards. In addition to his experience leading companies, he has a background and expertise in mergers and acquisitions, which allows him to provide the company guidance and counsel for its acquisition program. He has experience in operating companies in diverse industries, giving him a unique perspective to provide advice to the Company regarding its many operating units. In addition, with over 20 years on Ecolab's Board,at Cargill, Mr. Levin is our longest serving director andMacLennan has developed a deepsignificant leadership and strategic planning skills, as well as extensive knowledge of our business. His long history with the Company, combined with his leadership skills and operating experience, makes him particularly well suited to be our Lead Director.insight in corporate governance, risk management, financial management and global business practices.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Director of U.S. Bancorp and Lorillard, Inc.

Formerly a director and Governance Committee chair of Saks Incorporated.C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.




PHOTO


ROBERT L. LUMPKINS, age 71.

Biography —

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Board of The Mosaic Company, a leading producer and marketer of crop and animal nutrition products and services.Cargill, Incorporated. Director of Ecolab since 1999. Chair of the Safety, Health and Environment Committee and member of the Audit Committee.

Mr. Lumpkins, who retired as Vice Chairman and a director of Cargill Inc. in 2006, began his career with Cargill in 1968, and served in various finance and general management positions. He was named President of the Financial Services Division in 1983 and Chief Financial Officer for Cargill Europe in 1988. Served as Chief Financial Officer of Cargill from 1989 to 2005, and was elected to Cargill's Board of Directors in 1991 and Vice Chairman in 1995.

Qualifications —Mr. Lumpkins' nearly 40-year career at Cargill, a large and diverse global industrial company, which operates in the food industry and chemicals industry, provides him with background in two industries relevant to Ecolab. His service in various domestic and international senior operating and financial roles at Cargill, including as Chief Financial Officer, allows him to contribute both strategic direction and sophisticated financial management advice to the Company. As Chairman of the Board of Mosaic, he also has current experience leading a public company Board.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Chairman of The Mosaic Company. Formerly a director of Airgas, Inc. and Webdigs Inc.




Table of Contents


PHOTO


TRACY B. MCKIBBEN, age 46.

Biography — Founder and President of MAC Energy Advisors,  LLC, a consulting company that assists clients on investments and strategic opportunities across a global platform. Director of Ecolab since February 2015. Member of the Audit and FinanceGovernance Committees.

In September 2015, Mr. MacLennan became Chairman of the Board of Cargill, Incorporated, a privately held company and world-leading producer and marketer of food, agricultural, financial, and industrial products and services.

TRACY B. MCKIBBEN

Picture 17

Years of Service: 2
Age: 47

Board Committees:

Ms. McKibben has been the President of MAC Energy Advisors since its founding in 2010. From September 2007 to August 2009, she served as Managing Director and Head of Environmental Banking Strategy at Citigroup Global Markets. Prior to joining Citigroup, Ms. McKibben served in the National Security Council at The White House from July 2003 to August 2007 as Audit

Finance

Director of European Economic Affairs and EU Relations and as Acting Senior Director for European Affairs. Before joining the National Security Council, she served in various senior advisory roles in the U.S. Department of Commerce from March 2001 to July 2003.

Qualifications —

Ms. McKibben has more than 15 years of experience in the energy sector, with a focus on alternative energy, water and infrastructure. In this role and in her prior role at Citigroup, Ms. McKibben developed considerable strategic and financial experience advising energy companies and multinational corporations on strategic investments, M&A, and energy policy. In addition to her experience in the energy and financial sectors, Ms. McKibben has gained extensive public sector and international experience working at the U.S. Department of Commerce and within the National Security Council at The White House where she advised the President of the United States, Cabinet Secretaries and other senior officials on political, security, commercial and international trade issues.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

Director of GlassBridge Enterprises, Inc. Formerly a director of ROI Acquisition Corp. II.




PHOTO


VICTORIA J. REICH, age 57.

Biography — Former Senior Vice President

Founder and Chief FinancialExecutive Officer of United Stationers Inc., a broad line wholesale distributor of business products.MAC Energy Advisors, LLC, an investment consulting company that  provides integrated and innovative energy solutions to help clients utilize capital strategically around the globe. Director of Ecolab since 2009. Vice-Chair2015. Member of the Audit Committee and memberFinance Committees.

Ms. McKibben has been the head of MAC Energy Advisors since its founding in 2010. From September 2007 to August 2009, she served as Managing Director and Head of Environmental Banking Strategy at Citigroup Global Markets. Prior to joining Citigroup, Ms. McKibben served in the National Security Council at the White House from July 2003 to August 2007 as

VICTORIA J. REICH

Picture 18

Years of Service: 7
Age: 59

Board Committees:

Audit

Safety, Health and Environment Committee.

From 2007 to 2011 Ms. Reich was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of United Stationers Inc. Prior to joining United Stationers, Ms. Reich spent ten years as an executive with Brunswick Corporation, last serving as President —

Brunswick European Group, and previously as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Before joining Brunswick, Ms. Reich was employed for 17 years at General Electric Company in various financial management positions.

Qualifications —

As a former Chief Financial Officer of a public company, Ms. Reich possesses relevant financial leadership experience with respect to all financial management disciplines relevant to the Company,Ecolab, including public reporting, strategic planning, treasury, IT and financial analysis. Her financial management background at United Stationers,Essendant, Brunswick and General Electric, combined with her experience in European general management at Brunswick, enables her to provide strategic input as well as financial discipline. United StationersEssendant operates a cleaning supplies distribution business which provided Ms. Reich familiarity with the institutional market, one of our largest end-markets.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

Director of H&R Block, Inc. and Ingredion Incorporated.


Biography

Former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Essendant Inc. (formerly United Stationers Inc.), a broad line wholesale distributor of business products. Director of Ecolab since 2009. Chair of the Audit Committee and member of the Safety, Health and Environment Committee.

From 2007 to 2011 Ms. Reich was Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Essendant  Inc. Prior to joining Essendant, Ms. Reich spent ten years as an executive with Brunswick Corporation, last serving as President -



Table of Contents

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    25


PHOTO



PROPOSAL 1: ELECTION OF DIRECTORS


SUZANNE M. VAUTRINOT, age 55.

BiographyPicture 20

Years of Service:  3
Age: 57

Board Committees:

Audit

Finance

Air Forces Cyber, where she was responsible for cyber defense operations. Prior to that, General Vautrinot was the Director of Plans and Policy, U.S. Cyber Command and the Special Assistant to the Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force. On multiple occasions, she was selected by military leaders and White House officials to spearhead high-profile engagements. General Vautrinot is the recipient of the Symantec Cyber Award, Women in Aerospace Leadership Award, Air Force Association’s Aerospace Citation of Honor and the Presidential Award for Training. During her career, she has also been awarded numerous medals and commendations, including the Distinguished Service Medal.

Qualifications

General Vautrinot brings a unique perspective to the Board with her 31-year military career. Having led large and complex organizations, she provides insights into the challenges facing large global organizations. As an expert in cyber security, she can advise Ecolab on appropriate protections for its networks. In addition, General Vautrinot has significant experience in strategic planning, organizational design and change management, which allows her to provide advice and insight to Ecolab as its business grows and develops.

Other directorships held during the past five years

Director of Symantec Corporation and Wells Fargo & Company.

Biography

President, Kilovolt Consulting Inc. Retired Major General of the U.S. Air Force. Director of Ecolab since February 2014. Member of the Audit and Finance Committees.

General Vautrinot retired from the Air Force in 2013. During her 31-year career in the Air Force, she served in various assignments, including cyber operations, plans and policy, strategic security, space operations and staff work. General Vautrinot commanded at the squadron, group, wing and numbered Air Force levels, as well as the Air Force Recruiting Service. She has served on the Joint Staff, the staffs at major command headquarters and Air Force headquarters. From 2011 to 2013, she was Commander, 24th24th Air Force and Commander, Air Forces Cyber, where she was responsible for, among other things, cyber defense operations. Prior to that, General Vautrinot was the Director of Plans and Policy, U.S. Cyber Command and the Special Assistant to the Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force. On multiple occasions, she was selected by military leaders and White House officials to spearhead high-profile engagements. As a result, she received a number of prestigious awards, including the Symantec Cyber Award, Women in Aerospace Leadership Award, Air Force Association's Aerospace Citation of Honor and the Presidential Award for Training. During her career, she has also been awarded numerous medals and commendations, including the Distinguished Service Medal.

Qualifications —General Vautrinot brings a unique perspective to the Board with her 31-year military career. Having led large and complex organizations she provides insights into the challenges the company faces as a large global organization. As an expert in cyber security, she can advise the company on appropriate protections for its networks. In addition, she has significant experience in strategic planning, organizational design and change management, which allows her to provide advice and insight to the company as its business grows and develops.

Other directorships held during the past five years — Director of Symantec Corporation and Wells Fargo.





PHOTO




JOHN J. ZILLMER age 59.

BiographyPicture 25 — Retired President and Chief Executive Officer

Years of Univar Inc., a global distributor of industrial chemicals and related specialty services. Director of Ecolab since 2006. Vice-Chair of the Compensation Committee and member of the Governance Committee.Service: 11
Age: 61

Mr. Zillmer joined Univar in 2009 as President and Chief Executive Officer. In 2012, he stepped down as President and CEO and became Executive Chairman until December 2012 when he retired from Univar. Prior to joining Univar, Mr. Zillmer served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Allied Waste Industries, a solid waste management business, from 2005 until the merger of Allied Waste with Republic Services, Inc. in December 2008. Before Allied Waste, Mr. Zillmer spent 30 years in the managed services Board Committees:

Compensation

Governance

industry, most recently as Executive Vice President of ARAMARK Corporation, a provider of food, uniform and support services. During his eighteen-year career with ARAMARK, Mr. Zillmer served as President of ARAMARK'sARAMARK’s Business Services division, the International division and the Food and Support Services group. Prior to joining ARAMARK, Mr. Zillmer was employed by Szabo Food Services until Szabo was acquired by ARAMARK in 1986.

Qualifications —

As the former Chief Executive Officer of Univar and previously Allied Waste, Mr. Zillmer has experience leading both public and large private companies. With Univar, he became intimately familiar with the chemical market, including with respect to chemicals that Ecolab uses to manufacture its products. He also has extensive knowledge of the environmental aspects of chemicals manufacturing and distribution. His experience leading various ARAMARK operations has given him deep knowledge of the institutional market, particularly the contract catering segment, which is a large market for the Company.Ecolab. His roles on the boards of Reynolds American, Allied Waste and United Stationers have provided him with significant public company board experience.

Other directorships held during the past five years —

Director of Reynolds American Inc., Veritiv Corp., Performance Food Group Company and Veritiv Corp. FormerlyCSX Corporation.

Biography

Retired President and Chief Executive Officer of Univar Inc., a directorglobal distributor of industrial chemicals and related specialty services. Director of Ecolab since 2006. Vice Chair of the Compensation Committee and member of the Governance Committee.

Mr. Zillmer joined Univar in 2009 as President and Chief Executive Officer. In 2012, he stepped down as President and CEO and became Executive Chairman until December 2012 when he retired from Univar. Prior to joining Univar, Mr. Zillmer served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Allied Waste Industries, a solid waste management business, from 2005 until the merger of Allied Waste with Republic Services, Inc. and Pathmark Stores Inc.in December 2008. Before Allied Waste, Mr. Zillmer spent 30 years in the managed services


26    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Table of Contents


EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the following Compensation Discussion and Analysis of the Company with management. Based on their review and discussion, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors, and the Board has approved, the inclusion of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in both the Company'sCompany’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014,2016, and the Company'sCompany’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held May 7, 2015.4, 2017.

Dated: February 26, 201524, 2017

Leslie S. Biller

Arthur J. Higgins

Jeffrey M. Ettinger

Jerry W. Levin

Jerry A. Grundhofer

Arthur J. Higgins
Jerry W. Levin

John J. Zillmer


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW

The Company'sThis Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) provides information about the Company'sprinciples underlying our executive compensation philosophyprograms and the components of itskey executive compensation programs, including information about how compensationdecisions that were made for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20142016 (“2016”), including the most important factors relevant to those decisions. This CD&A is intended to provide additional context and background for the Company'scompensation earned by and awarded to the following named executive officers met the compensation philosophy's goals and was aligned with the Company's 2014 financial goals and performance. The Compensation Discussion and Analysis helps readers better understand the information found(“NEOs”) for 2016 as reported in the Summary Compensation Table and other accompanying tables located inwhich follows this proxy statement.discussion:

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis focuses on our executive pay program as it relates to the following executive officers:

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

Daniel J. Schmechel

Chief Financial Officer

Thomas W. Handley

President and Chief Operating Officer

Stephen M. Taylor

Michael A. Hickey

Executive Vice President and President — Nalco Champion– Global Institutional

Michael A. Hickey

Christophe Beck

Executive Vice President and President Global InstitutionalWater and Process Services

The Company'sCompany’s compensation programs have enabledenable us to attract and retain the leadership talent that hasis necessary to successfully managedmanage our strong earnings growth and returns over the past decade. The mix of annual salary, annual cash incentive bonus and long-term incentives, as more fully described in this Compensation Discussion and Analysis, has been an important contributing factor in attracting and motivating executives to meet the Company's annual growth targets (in nearly all these years, showing strong revenue and operating income growth accompanied by double-digit earnings per share ("EPS"), or adjusted EPS, growth)return on invested capital objectives, while balancing necessary investmentsinvestment in the businessbusinesses in order to achieve attractive, long-term shareholder returns. Evidence of the Company's consistently strongOur corporate short-term and long-term incentive plan performance can be seenmeasures are aligned with this strategy by utilizing growth in both our financial performance and stock appreciation over the past decade. For the ten-year period from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2014, the Company's adjusted earnings per share have increased 237%. During this same ten-year period, our stock price has appreciated 198% versus the S&P 500's 70% increase. More recently, 2014 reported sales and adjusted diluted earnings per share (earnings(hereinafter, “adjusted EPS,” unless the context otherwise requires) and adjusted return on invested capital (hereinafter, “adjusted ROIC,” unless the context otherwise requires), both as defined later in this CD&A. At the business unit level, we also incorporate business unit sales and operating income performance measures.

Executive Summary

Business Environment

The Company continued to work aggressively through 2016’s difficult environment, where lackluster global economies, significantly unfavorable foreign currency translation and continued depressed energy market activities presented multiple headwinds to our growth. The Company achieved good adjusted earnings per share excludinggrowth before the impact of special gainscurrency translation as the Global Institutional, Global Industrial and chargesOther segments once again showed solid fixed currency organic sales growth and discrete tax items)(1) increased 8%margin expansion. These performances offset challenging results in our Global Energy segment, which continued to outperform very challenging industry trends.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    27


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The charts below illustrate our 1-year adjusted EPS growth and 18%, respectively, over 2013. Following a very strong outperformance1-year TSR, in 2013 (when our share price increased 45%each case compared withto the S&P 500 gain of 30% forand our comparison companies:

Picture 3

Picture 41

*  Adjusted Diluted EPS is a non-GAAP financial measure that is defined and reconciled to Diluted EPS (as reported in our financial statements) in the year), Ecolab shares rose 0.2%section at page 35 entitled “Adjustments to Reported Financial Results.”

**Diluted EPS at the comparison companies represents amounts excluding extraordinary items standardized in 2014 comparedaccordance with the S&P 500's 11% increase.GAAP.

 


(1)
A reconciliation of 2014 diluted earnings per share

Our Company remains committed to 2014 adjusted diluted earnings per share is as follows: 2014 reported earnings per share were $3.93; excluding the impact of special gains and charges ($0.20) and discrete tax items ($0.04), adjusted diluted earnings per share were $4.18. (Per-share amounts do not necessarily sum due to rounding.) Reporteddriving attractive sales and adjusted diluted earnings per shareEPS growth as well as continuing to make the right investments to deliver superior shareholder returns for years to come.

Compensation Actions

We took the years 2004 through 2014 are provided in our 2014 Annual Report. We believe that in this context adjusted diluted earnings per share is a more meaningful measure of the Company's underlying business performance than reported diluted earnings per share because it provides greater transparencyfollowing actions with respect to our resultsNEOs in 2016:

Compensation Element

2016 NEO Compensation Action

Base salaries

With respect to NEOs who were employed by us in 2015 and 2016, base salaries increased between 3.3% and 14.3% and on average 7.6% versus 2015 excluding promotions

Annual cash incentives

Annual cash incentive bonus payouts were between 91% and 111% of target, and averaged 98% of target

Annual cash incentive bonus payout for our CEO was at 95% of target

Long-term incentives

Long-term equity incentive awards, consisting of stock options and performance-based restricted stock units (“PBRSUs”), were granted in the same proportion as prior years and were within the median range of our size-adjusted competitive market for each NEO

For the 2014 to 2016 PBRSU grant cycle, average award payouts were at 100% of target award opportunities

28    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The charts below illustrate our Company’s actual performance relative to our pre-established performance goals as well as our actual award payouts as a percentage of operationstarget award opportunities for the annual cash and that it is more useful for period-to-period comparisonlong-term incentive plans:

Picture 7

*  The achievement of results. In addition, we use adjusted diluted earningsEPS of $4.37 per share internallyactually aligned with a payout of 98% of target under the annual cash incentive plan.  The payout was reduced to evaluate our performance95% of target which aligned with adjusted EPS of $4.36 per share. See “Annual Cash Incentives – Performance Goals and in making financial and operational decisions.


Table of Contents

The chart below depicts our 10-year adjusted earnings performance from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2014 (left axis) and our stock price performance versus the S&P 500 Composite Index over the same period (right axis).

GRAPHIC


Highlights — SomeAchievement – Corporate”, starting on page 36 for a further discussion of the key componentsadjustment.

Picture 2

*Adjusted ROIC is a non-GAAP financial measure that is described in the section starting on page 35 entitled “Adjustments to Reported Financial Results.”

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    29


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Compensation Practices

Our compensation programs encourage executive decision-making that is aligned with the long-term interests of our stockholders. We tie a significant portion of pay to Company performance over a multi-year period. Our Compensation Committee has incorporated the following market-leading governance features into our executive compensation programs:

Compensation Philosophy

We maintain a market median range compensation philosophy for all elements of total direct compensation, with Committee discretion to position our NEOs appropriately relative to that range based on factors such as tenure, past performance, and future potential

Goal Setting Process

We have in place a robust planning process to establish financial and business performance metrics for incentive plans

Performance Measures

We use different performance measures in our short-term and long-term incentive plans

Stock Ownership

We maintain stock ownership guidelines that encourage executives to retain a significant long-term position in our stock and thereby align their interests with the interests of our stockholders

Change in Control

We have implemented a balanced change-in-control severance policy that provides our officers severance at two times the sum of base salary plus annual incentive pay at target following a change in control and termination of employment (a so-called “double-trigger”), with no tax gross-ups

Risk Mitigation

We employ features to mitigate against our executives taking excessive risk in order to maximize pay-outs, including varied and balanced performance targets, discretionary authority of the Compensation Committee to reduce award pay-outs, bonus caps at 200% of target and a Policy on Reimbursement of Incentive Payments (or so-called “clawback” policy)

Problematic Practices

We do not provide or permit “single-trigger” vesting in event of change in control, hedging or pledging of our Company stock, or backdating or repricing of stock option awards

Employment Agreements

We do not maintain employment agreements with any of our NEOs

The Compensation Committee oversees the design and administration of our executive compensation programs that have contributedaccording to our successful track record of business results are briefly highlighted belowthe processes and procedures discussed in more detail throughoutthe Corporate Governance section of this Proxy Statement. The Compensation Discussion and Analysis:Committee is advised by an independent compensation consultant, Cook & Co.

Pay-for-Performance and Pay Risk Philosophy.

Pay-Versus-Performance Alignment

We emphasize pay-for-performance and structure our programs to provide incentives for executives to drive business and financial results. We believe that the pay of our executives, particularly our principal executive officer,CEO, correlates well with our total shareholder returns; and while our incentive programs help to drive results, they do so without encouraging excessive risk taking that would threaten the long-term growth of our business (see "Total Compensation Mix" on page 32, "Annual Cash Incentives" on page 27, "Long-term Equity Incentives" on page 30 and "Corporate Governance — Compensation Risk Analysis" on page 7);

Compensation Mix.  We utilize a mix of compensation elements — salary, annual cash incentive bonus and long-term incentives — that is within the median range for the mix of executive compensation provided by the market survey data we review in determining compensation (see "Total Compensation Mix" on page 32);

Total Compensation Philosophy.  We provide executives with competitive total compensation that is within the median range of our size-adjusted competitive market (see "Program Objectives and Reward Philosophy" on page 25);

2014 Compensation Actions.  We took the following actions with respect to our named executive officers in 2014:

With respect to named executive officers who were employed by us in 2013 and 2014, base salaries increased between 3% and 11.1% and on average 5.1% versus 2013 (see "Base Salaries" on page 27);

Annual cash incentive bonus payouts were between 151% and 174% of target, and averaged 162% of target (see "Annual Cash Incentives" on page 27); and

Long-term incentive awards, consisting of stock options and performance-based restricted stock units, were granted in the same proportion as prior years and were within the median range of our size-adjusted competitive market for each named executive officer.

Performance-Based Compensation.  At least 76% of each of our named executive officers' 2014 target compensation was performance-based (89% in the case of our principal executive officer), with the majority of the performance-based compensation coming in the form of long-term incentives (see "Total Compensation Mix" on page 32);

Setting Performance Targets.  We utilize a robust planning process to establish financial and business performance metrics for incentive plans that, while challenging, are designed to be achievable for the participant when we meet our performance goals, and appropriately balance short-term results with necessary investments to achieve our long-term goals. These performance measures are fully disclosed in this Proxy Statement (see "Annual Cash Incentives" on page 27);

Performance Measures.  We use numerous performance measures to determine the amount of incentive compensation an executive will receive under both short-term and longer-term performance-based incentive programs, including adjusted earnings per share, business unit sales and operating income and return on invested capital. Again, this approach balances annual financial objectives with long-term value creation and avoids reliance on a single metric that could unduly cause our executives to focus on limited components of our business (see "Annual Cash Incentives" on page 27 and "Long-term Equity Incentives" on page 30);

Table of Contents

Long-term Incentives.  A significant portion of our executives' compensation is derived from long-term equity based compensation awards granted each year. Our long-term incentive program is designed so that approximately 50% of the value is delivered in the form of performance-based restricted stock units ("PBRSUs") with the remaining 50% of the value delivered in the form of stock options. Under such awards, our executives' compensation increases in an appropriate relationship with the increase in the value of our Company, promoting our pay-for-performance philosophy. In addition, the PBRSU component can only be earned when our performance on return on invested capital (adjusted for the impact of purchase accounting and special charges relating to the Nalco and Champion mergers) is above our weighted average cost of capital. This further aligns compensation with performance and shareholder value creation (see "Long-term Equity Incentives" on page 30);

Stock Ownership Guidelines.  We have established stock ownership guidelines that encourage executives to retain a significant long-term position in our stock and thereby align their interests with the interests of our stockholders (see "Stock Retention and Ownership Guidelines" on page 31);

Change-in-Control Benefits.  We have in place a balanced change-in-control severance policy that provides our officers severance at two times the sum of base compensation plus annual incentive pay at target following a change in control and termination of employment (a so-called "double-trigger"), with no tax gross-ups (see "Executive Change-in-Control Policy" on page 31); and

Risk Mitigation Features.  Our programs contain other features to mitigate against our executives taking excessive risk in order to maximize pay-outs, including varied and balanced performance targets, discretionary authority of the Compensation Committee to reduce award pay-outs, bonus caps at 200% of target and a Policy on Reimbursement of Incentive Payments (or so-called "clawback" policy) (see "Compensation Recovery" on page 32 and "Corporate Governance — Compensation Risk Analysis" on page 7).

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors oversees the design and administration of our executive compensation programs according to the processes and procedures discussed in the Corporate Governance section of this Proxy Statement, located at pages 8 and 9 hereof. The Committee is advised by an independent compensation consultant as it deems appropriate.business.


Shareholder Outreach and 20142016 Say-on-Pay Results

During 2014,2016, we engaged in discussions with stockholders holding approximately 50% of our shares concerning a variety of topics, including our executive compensation program. The stockholders did not raise any significant issues with respect to our program. Additionally, at the 20142016 Annual Meeting, Ecolab stockholders approved on an advisory basis the compensation of our named executive officersNEOs disclosed in that year'syear’s proxy statement, with more than 96%95% of the total votes cast by holders of shares represented at the meeting voting in favor of our executive compensation proposal. The Compensation Committee took this favorable shareholderstockholder support into account in deciding to retain the overall structure and philosophy of our compensation plans and programs in 2014.2016.

30    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Program Elements
Changes in 2014 — We made two changes to our compensation programs in 2014, and several changes approved to the program in prior years became effective in 2014.

First, as noted at page 25, we further refined the peer group that we use in conjunction with competitive industry surveys to create competitive compensation scenarios for our named executive officers by adding one oil and gas equipment and services company to the group. This addition, which increases the total number of companies in the peer group from 19 to 20, does not materially impact our position at the market median for compensation. We believe the addition is appropriate as it brings into the peer group a non-U.S. company that provides U.S.-based compensation disclosure and has significant peer group overlaps with other companies in our peer group. The revised peer group of 20 companies was developed after the establishment of 2014 base salaries and annual incentive compensation. It was utilized for determining long-term equity incentives in 2014 and will additionally be used for establishing base salaries, annual incentive compensation as well as long-term incentives in 2015 (see "Program Objectives and Reward Philosophy" on page 25).

Second, at the 2014 Annual Meeting, our stockholders re-approved our Management Performance Incentive Plan, which is an annual cash incentive plan for our executives described at page 27. Several changes were approved in connection with the re-submission of the plan to the stockholders, including an increase in the maximum permitted payout to any individual in connection with an annual plan award from $5 million to $7 million and extension of the duration of the plan for five years.

In 2013, we made changes to the Company's Mirror Savings Plan, a non-qualified plan described at page 40. Certain of those changes took effect in 2014, namely 2014 served as a transition year for eligible executives of our Nalco and Champion subsidiaries during which such executives were permitted to defer bonus payments but not base salary earned in 2014, and a match was provided on base salary over the IRS limits on compensation in qualified plans for such executives in 2014 as though they had been eligible to defer base salary (a "deemed match"). The deemed match ended after 2014 and will not be provided on base salary earned after 2014. Base salary deferral elections for all executives in the plan were also simplified as part of the 2013 changes and are limited to the amount necessary for an executive to receive the maximum company match on base salary above the IRS pay cap for base salary earned in 2015 and subsequent calendar years. Mr. Taylor became eligible for the 2014 deemed matching contribution under the plan effective September 1, 2014, when he first became a participant in the Mirror Savings Plan following his transfer from employment in the United Arab Emirates to employment in the U.S.; as mentioned, the deemed matching contribution is not provided on base pay earned in 2015 and subsequent calendar years.

Additionally, eligible Champion employees entered the Pension Plan in 2014, and certain Champion executives entered the Mirror Pension Plan in 2014 as well. The Company's broad-based tax-qualified defined contribution/401(k) retirement plans, as well as the Mirror Savings Plan, provide an enhanced matching contribution for certain individuals who became participants in the Pension Plan after January 1, 2007. The enhanced matching contribution is equal to (i) 100% of the amount of the participant's deferrals that do not exceed 4% of covered compensation, plus (ii) 50% of the participant's deferrals that exceed 4% but do not


Table of Contents

exceed 8% of covered compensation. Mr. Taylor became eligible for the enhanced matching contribution under the deferred compensation plans when he entered those plans following his transfer to employment in the U.S.


Program ElementsThe principal elements of our executive compensation programs for 20142016 are illustrated below:

Picture 49

CHART

*
Total

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    31


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

To align pay levels for NEOs with the Company’s performance, our pay mix places the greatest emphasis on performance-based incentives. Approximately 91% of our CEO’s target total direct compensation is defined as the sum of base salary,(salary, target annual cash incentivesbonus and the grant date presentfair value of long-term incentive awards), and approximately 78% of the average target total direct compensation of our other NEOs is performance-based, as summarized below, with equity incentives,elements depicted in blue and does not necessarily tiecash elements depicted in gray:

CEO Pay Mix

Average Other Named Executive Officer Pay Mix

Picture 21

Picture 23

Our Analysis

Our analysis indicates that total direct compensation mix for our NEOs on average is generally consistent with the competitive market. The CEO receives a higher proportion of his total direct compensation allocated to performance-based components than non-performance-based components and more allocated to equity-based compensation than cash-based compensation compared to the values disclosedother NEOs. The higher emphasis on performance-based compensation for the CEO is designed to reward him for driving company performance and creating long-term shareholder value that is a greater responsibility in his position than in the Summary positions of the other NEOs, and is consistent with the competitive market for the CEO position. The level of compensation of our CEO reflects the many responsibilities of serving as CEO of a public company. Accordingly, our CEO’s median range competitive pay levels (including long-term equity awards) reflect his broader scope and greater responsibilities compared to our other NEOs.

Compensation Table and supplemental tables. The chart is not drawn to scale for any particular named executive officer.


Philosophy

TableOur executive compensation program is designed to meet the following objectives:

·

Support our corporate vision and long-term financial objectives

·

Communicate the importance of our business results

·

Retain and motivate executives important to our success

·

Reward executives for contributions at a level reflecting our performance

Our executive compensation program as a whole, as well as each element, is designed to be market-competitive in order to attract, motivate and retain our executives in a manner that is in the best interests of Contentsour stockholders. Our executive compensation program is further designed to reinforce and complement ethical and sustainable management practices, promote sound risk management and align management interests (such as sustainable long-term growth) with those of our stockholders. We believe that our long-term equity incentive program, which typically accounts for at least half of our

32    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

NEOs’ total annual compensation, is an effective tool in aligning our executives’ interests with those of our stockholders and in incentivizing long-term value creation.

Our philosophy is to position the aggregate of these elements of compensationbase salary, annual cash incentives, and long-term equity incentives in the median range of our competitive market, adjusted for the Company's currentCompany’s size. We define the median range as within 15% of the median for base salaries and within 20% of the median for annual cash incentive targets and long-term incentive targets. For annual cash incentives, our philosophy generally is to also position them at a level commensurate with the Company'sCompany’s performance based on adjusted earnings per shareEPS compared to EPS growth in the Standard & Poor'sPoor’s 500. We position annual cash incentives and long-term incentives to provide lower than median compensation for lower than competitive market performance and higher than median compensation for higher than competitive market performance. This approach provides motivation to executives without incentivizing inappropriate risk-taking to achieve pay-outs, as we believe that the Company'sCompany’s prospects for growth are generally at least as favorable as the average of the S&P 500.

Our Analysis

For stock options,2016, total direct compensation opportunities for all our grant processes do not permit backdating and, as described under Long-Term Equity Incentives, stock options are granted onNEOs were positioned in the same date as themarket median range. The Compensation Committee approval date.

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis contains statements regarding incentive targets and goals. These targets and goals are disclosed in the limited context of the Company'shas determined to establish total direct compensation programs and should not be understood to be statements of management's expectations or estimates of results or other guidance.


PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND REWARD PHILOSOPHY

In General — We use executive compensation (i) to supportopportunities for our corporate vision and long-term financial objectives, (ii) to communicate the importance of our business results, (iii) to retain and motivate executives important to our success and (iv) to reward executives for contributions at a level reflecting our performance. Our executive compensation program, that is the compensation package as a whole as well as each element of compensation, is designed to be market-competitive in order to attract, motivate and retain our executives in a manner that is in the best interests of our stockholders. Our executive compensation program is further designed to reinforce and complement ethical and sustainable management practices, which is supported in part by our compensation recovery (or "clawback") policy, promote sound risk management and align management interests (such as sustainable long-term growth) with those of our stockholders. We believe that our long-term equity incentive program, which typically accounts for at least half of our named executive officers' total annual compensation, is an effective tool in aligning our executives' interests with those of our stockholders and in incentivizing long-term value creation.


Competitive Market — We define our competitive market to be a broad range of general industry companies, as reflected in third-party surveys in which we participate. We use surveys published by Aon Hewitt, Towers Watson and Cook & Co. as the primary sources of competitive data because we have determined these to be the best sources for credible, size-adjusted market data for general industry companies. Due toCEO toward the high correlation between annual sales revenue and compensation, we size-adjust the competitive market compensation data and use the median to set our targeted parameters, which we refer to as the median range. We defineend of the median range as within 15%in recognition of the median for base salarieshis long tenure and within 20% of the median for annual cash incentive targets and long-term incentive targets.sustained exceptional performance.

Additionally, for purposes of benchmarking 2014 base salaries and annual incentive compensation for the named executive officers, we utilized competitive data from a comparison group of 19 companies constructed from the screening process conducted in 2013 by the Compensation Committee's independent compensation consultant, Cook & Co., based on input from the Company and the Compensation Committee with respect to the selection criteria (the "Peer Group"). During 2014, utilizing the same process, we modified the size of the Peer Group from 19 companies to 20 companies by adding one company. The revised Peer Group was utilized in conjunction with the market surveys for determining long-term equity incentives in 2014 and will additionally be used in conjunction with the market surveys for establishing base salaries, annual incentive compensation and long-term incentives in 2015. Both the Peer Group constructed in 2013 and the revised Peer Group are comprised of companies that, under the Global Industry Classification Standards (GICS) taxonomy, fall into the classifications of Chemicals; Containers & Packaging, Paper Products; Oil & Gas Equipment & Services or Industrial Conglomerates; that have annual revenues of one-fourth to four times the annual revenues of the Company, within a reasonable size range in various other measures such as annual operating income, total employees and market capitalization; and that meet several other criteria, such as inclusion in the Company's primary GICS industry classification and positioning the Company near the Peer Group's median in terms of size. The


Process

Table of Contents

companies comprising the Peer Group constructed in 2013 and the revised Peer Group, as well as the information on each that the Compensation Committee reviewed at the time the Peer Group was revised, are set out below.

  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 Composite
Percentile Rank
 
 
  
 Most Recent Fiscal Year End ($ Mil.) Data available as of February 28, 2014  
 
 
  
 02/28/2014
Market
Capital

 
Company Name
  
 Net
Revenue

 Operating Inc.
(EBIT)

 Total
Assets

 Total
Equity

 Total
Employees

 Group
of 19

 Group
of 20

 
  

Schlumberger

 $45,266 $8,497 $67,100 $39,469  123,000 $121,582  98% 98%

Dow Chemical

 $57,080 $4,448 $69,501 $26,898  52,731 $59,223  88% 88%

3M

 $30,871 $6,666 $33,550 $17,502  88,667 $89,366  85% 86%

DuPont

 $35,734 $4,266 $51,499 $16,229  64,000 $61,805  82% 82%

Halliburton

 $29,402 $4,138 $29,223 $13,581  77,000 $48,499  73% 75%

Danaher

 $19,118 $3,306 $34,672 $22,385  66,000 $53,427  74% 75%

National Oilwell Varco

 $22,767 $3,468 $34,812 $22,230  63,779 $33,014  72% 73%

Baker Hughes

 $22,364 $2,107 $27,934 $17,713  59,400 $27,717  62% 63%

Monsanto

 $14,861 $3,572 $20,664 $12,559  26,200 $57,753  57% 57%

Ecolab

 $13,253 $1,775 $19,637 $7,344  45,415 $32,447  49% 49%

Praxair

 $11,925 $2,625 $20,255 $6,609  27,560 $38,346  49% 48%

Weatherford Intl (added in 2014)

 $15,263 $652 $21,977 $8,162  67,000 $12,856    46%

PPG Industries

 $15,108 $1,918 $15,863 $4,932  41,400 $27,427  45% 45%

Air Products and Chemicals

 $10,180 $1,508 $17,850 $7,042  21,600 $25,680  37% 37%

Cameron International

 $9,838 $1,145 $14,249 $5,852  29,000 $14,185  31% 32%

Sherwin-Williams

 $10,186 $1,210 $6,383 $1,775  37,633 $20,108  27% 27%

Eastman Chemical

 $9,350 $1,888 $11,845 $3,796  14,000 $13,333  22% 23%

Ashland

 $7,813 $1,237 $12,088 $4,553  15,000 $7,343  19% 19%

Sealed Air

 $7,691 $709 $9,134 $1,389  25,000 $6,679  10% 11%

Celanese

 $6,510 $941 $9,018 $2,699  7,430 $8,379  10% 10%

Airgas

 $4,957 $606 $5,618 $1,537  15,000 $7,973  5% 4%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

75th Percentile

 Group of 19 $26,085 $3,855 $34,111 $17,608  63,889 $55,590       

 Group of 20 $24,426 $3,714 $33,831 $17,555  64,500 $54,509       

Mean

 Group of 19 $19,527 $2,858 $25,855 $12,039  44,968 $37,991       

 Group of 20 $19,314 $2,745 $25,662 $11,846  46,070 $36,735       

Median

 Group of 19 $14,861 $2,107 $20,255 $7,042  37,633 $27,717       

 Group of 20 $14,985 $2,013 $20,460 $7,602  39,517 $27,572       

25th Percentile

 Group of 19 $9,594 $1,224 $11,967 $4,175  23,300 $13,759       

 Group of 20 $9,716 $1,194 $12,027 $4,364  24,150 $13,214       

Ecolab Rank

 Group of 19  47% 37% 49% 50% 58% 55%      

 Group of 20  44% 41% 46% 49% 54% 57%      
Companies are ranked in descending order based on overall average percentile rank.

All financial and market data are taken fromStandard & Poor's Compustat Service.

Revenue excludes non-operating income, gain on sale of securities or fixed assets, discontinued operations, excise taxes and royalty income.

Operating income (EBIT) excludes special items such as restructuring charges.

We used the average of size-adjusted data from two surveys and the Peer Group data for benchmarking 2014 base salary and annual cash incentive compensation. The 2013 Towers Watson CDB Executive Compensation Survey includes over 442 corporate entities that range in revenue from approximately $1 billion to over $50 billion. Including subsidiaries, this survey includes over 850 participants. We also used the 2013 Aon Hewitt TCM Executive Regression Analysis Survey, which includes over 450 corporate entities that range in revenue from approximately $2 million to $469 billion. For benchmarking long-term incentives, we used the average of the competitive data yielded by the Peer Group, the 2014 Towers Watson CDB General Industry Executive Compensation Survey report and the Cook & Co. 2014 Survey of Long-Term Incentives. The 2014 Towers Watson survey has over 446 participants which range in revenue from less than $1 billion to greater than $20 billion. The Cook & Co. survey has 57 participants which range in revenue from $5.1 billion to $421 billion.

We size-adjust the survey data by inserting the annual revenue for the Company (for use with the principal executive officer and principal financial officer) or the applicable business unit (for use with the leaders of particular business units) into a statistical regression model supplied by the survey providers, which then computes the size-adjusted median by position for base salaries and annual cash incentives. We use the average of the size-adjusted medians from the two surveys and the Peer Group data as the standard by which we set base salary and annual cash incentive targets. For long-term incentive guidelines, we calculate the size-adjusted median by applying the median long-term incentive value as a percentage of salary from the Towers Watson and Cook & Co. long-term incentive surveys and the Peer Group data to the size-adjusted base salary.


Compensation Process — For the named executive officers,our NEOs, the Compensation Committee reviewed and approved all elements of 20142016 compensation, taking into consideration recommendations from our principal executive officerCEO (but not for his own compensation), as well as competitive market guidance and feedback provided by the Compensation Committee'sCommittee’s independent compensation consultant and our human resources staff regarding individual performance, time in position and internal pay comparisons. The Compensation Committee reviewed and approved all elements of 20142016 compensation for our principal executive officer,CEO, taking into consideration the Board'sBoard’s performance assessment of the principal executive officerCEO and recommendations, competitive market guidance and feedback from the Compensation Committee'sCommittee’s independent compensation


Table of Contents

consultant and our human resources staff. Recommendations with respect to the compensation of our principal executive officerCEO are not shared with our principal executive officer.CEO.

Compensation Benchmarking
Regulatory Considerations — We monitor changes in the tax

For benchmarking purposes, we define our competitive market for compensation data to be a simple average of median compensation from a 20-company comparison group and accounting regulatory environment when assessing the financial efficiency of the various elements of our executive compensation program. We have designed and administered our annual cash incentives, particularly our stockholder-approved Management Performance Incentive Plan,size-adjusted median general industry data from third-party surveys in which we refer to as the MPIP, and long-term equity incentive plans in a manner that is intended to preserve the federal income tax deductibility of the associated compensation expense.participate.

The MPIPcomparison group is designed to meetselected by the requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m) regarding performance-basedindependent compensation consultant based on input from the Company and the Compensation Committee, and is administeredreviewed and approved annually by the Compensation Committee which selectsin the participantsspring of each yearyear. The independent consultant utilizes an objective selection process methodology that consists of the following steps:

·

Focus on companies in the chemicals, oil & gas equipment & services, and industrial conglomerates industry groups

·

Screen for companies with annual revenues of one-fourth to four times the annual revenues of our Company

·

Further screen for companies within a reasonable size range in various other measures such as annual operating income, total assets, total equity, total employees and market capitalization

·

Identify companies that meet several other criteria, such as significant international operations, inclusion in the S&P 500, business-to-business focus, and not highly cyclical

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    33


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The chart below summarizes our Company’s percentile ranking versus the 20 companies selected for the comparison group for 2016 based on the above selection criteria:

Picture 9

Picture 31

Picture 5

Picture 8

All financial and establishes the annual performance goal based upon performance criteria that it selects, the performance targetmarket data are taken from Standard & Poor’s Capital IQ

The third‐party general industry surveys used during 2016 were from Aon Hewitt, Willis Towers Watson and a maximumCook & Co. For benchmarking 2016 base salary and annual cash award dependent on achievementincentive compensation, we used the average of size‐adjusted median compensation data from Aon Hewitt and Towers Watson, as well as median compensation data from the comparison companies. The 2015 Towers Watson CDB Executive Compensation Survey includes 465 organizations that range in revenue from approximately $1 billion to over $46 billion. We also used the 2015 Aon Hewitt TCM Executive Regression Analysis Survey, which includes over 400 organizations that range in revenue from approximately $34 million to $179 billion. For benchmarking long‐term incentives, we used the average of the performance goal. For 2014,median compensation data yielded by the comparison companies, the 2016 Willis Towers Watson CDB General Industry Executive Compensation Committee selected diluted earnings per share as the performance measure under the MPIP. The Compensation Committee certifies the extent to which the performance goal has been metSurvey report and the corresponding amountCook & Co. 2016 Survey of the award earned by theLong‐Term Incentives. The 2016 Willis Towers Watson survey has 484 participants with the abilitywhich range in revenue from approximately $1 billion to exercise downward discretiongreater than $42 billion. The Cook & Co. survey has 57 participants which range in revenue from over $5 billion to lower, but not raise, the award to an amount based upon the metrics used for our broader-based Management Incentive Plan cash incentive and to recognize individual performance. In effect, the MPIP establishes the maximum bonus payouts for the named executive officers, while the Management Incentive Plan criteria are used by the Compensation Committee to guide the exercise of its downward discretion in determining the actual pay-outs which have historically been (and were in 2014) well below the MPIP maximum permitted payouts. As described under Long-Term Equity Incentives on page 30, the Compensation Committee has similarly positioned the performance-based restricted stock units to meet the requirements of Section 162(m).$179 billion.

We have designed and administered our deferred compensation, equity compensation and change-in-control severance plans to be in compliance with federal tax rules affecting non-qualified deferred compensation. In accordance with FASB Accounting Standards Codification 718,Compensation — Stock Compensation, for financial statement purposes, we expense all equity-based awards over the service period for awards expected to vest, based upon their estimated fair value at grant date. Accounting treatment has not resulted in changes in our equity compensation program design for our named executive officers.Base Salaries


BASE SALARIES

In GeneralThe Compensation Committee reviews base salaries for the named executive officersour NEOs and other executives annually in February effective as of April 1 of the current fiscal year, and increases are based on changes in our competitive market, changes in scope of responsibility, individual performance and time in position. Our philosophy is to pay base salaries that are within the median range of our size-adjusted competitive market. When an executive officer is new to his/her position, his/her initial base salary will likely be at the low end of the median range but, if performance is acceptable, his/her base salary will be increased over several years to arrive at the median.


34    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Salary Increases

For 20132015 and 2014,2016, annualized base salary rates for the named executive officersour NEOs are summarized below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name

    

2015
Annualized Base
Salary Rate ($)

    

2016
Annualized Base
Salary Rate ($)

    

Increase
Percentage
(1)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 

1,150,000

 

1,200,000

 

4.3%

Daniel J. Schmechel

 

525,000

 

600,000

 

14.3%

Thomas W. Handley

 

620,000

 

675,000

 

8.9%

Michael A. Hickey

 

515,000

 

552,500

 

7.3%

Christophe Beck

 

535,000

 

552,500

 

3.3%
Name
 2013
Annualized Base Salary Rate

 2014
Annualized Base Salary Rate

 Increase
Percentage(1)

 
  

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 $1,079,000 $1,111,370  3.0%

Daniel J. Schmechel

 $450,000 $500,000  11.1%

Thomas W. Handley

 $580,000 $600,000  3.4%

Stephen M. Taylor

 $500,000 $525,000  5.0%

Michael A. Hickey

 $475,000 $490,000  3.2%
(1)
All increases represent merit increases.

(1)

All increases represent merit increases.


Our Analysis

For 2014,2016, base salaries accounted for approximately 11%9% of total compensation for the principal executive officerCEO and 22% on average for the four other named executive officers. 2014NEOs. 2016 base salary rates were within the median range for all of our named executive officers with the exception of Mr. Schmechel, who is below the median range due to being newly promoted to the role of Chief Financial Officer in October 2012.NEOs. In general, the 20142016 merit salary increases for our named executive officersNEOs were in line with the principles used to deliver the Company'sCompany’s U.S. salary increases broadly.

Adjustments to Reported Financial Results

The Compensation Committee has authority to adjust the reported diluted EPS and ROIC on which incentive compensation payouts are determined in order to eliminate the distorting effect of unusual income or expense items that may occur during a given year that impact year-over-year growth or return percentages.

For purposes of the adjusted EPS performance measure used in our annual cash incentive program, a reconciliation of 2016 diluted EPS as reported to 2016 adjusted diluted EPS is summarized below:

2016 reported diluted EPS

$
4.14

Adjustments:

   Special (gains) and charges

$
0.21

   Discrete tax net expense (benefit)

$
0.01

Adjusted diluted EPS

$
4.37

Note: Per-share amounts do not necessarily sum due to rounding. Additional information regarding the composition of the adjustments identified in the table above is contained on pages 31-35 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016.

Reported diluted earnings per share and adjusted EPS for the years 2012 through 2016 are provided in our 2016 Annual Report. We believe that in this context adjusted EPS is a more meaningful measure of the Company’s underlying business performance than reported diluted earnings per share because it provides greater transparency with respect to our results of operations and that it is more useful for period-to-period comparison of results. In addition, we use adjusted EPS internally to evaluate our performance and in making financial and operational decisions.

For purposes of the measurement of divisional and business unit performance goals and in the determination of payouts to executives under our annual cash incentive program, the revenue and operating income performance measures are recorded at fixed currency rates of foreign exchange and adjusted for special gains and charges, as well as certain other exceptional items, such as the results of certain businesses acquired during the year and certain strategic initiatives. We include within special gains and charges items that we believe can significantly affect the period-over-period assessment of operating results and not necessarily reflect costs and/or income associated with historical trends and future operating results, as more fully identified on pages 31-34 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016. We use these measures internally to evaluate our performance and in making financial and operational decisions, including with respect to incentive compensation. We believe that our use of these measures provides greater transparency with respect to our results of operations and that these measures are useful for period-to-period comparison of results.

For purposes of the adjusted ROIC performance measure used in our PBRSU program, we define ROIC as the quotient of after-tax operating income divided by the sum of short-term and long-term debt and shareholders’ equity, less cash and cash equivalents. The PBRSU awards provide for adjustment of the ROIC calculation in the event of a large acquisition (such

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    35


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

as the Nalco and Champion transactions) or other significant transaction or event approved by the Board. Considering the significant impact of purchase accounting and special gains and charges related to the Nalco and Champion transactions on the ROIC calculation, for the 2017 to 2019 performance cycle, adjusted ROIC is measured excluding the purchase accounting impact and special gains and charges related to these transactions and is also adjusted for acquisitions, accounting or tax changes, gains or losses from discontinued operations, restructurings, and certain other unusual or infrequently occurring charges during the performance period.

This CD&A contains statements regarding incentive targets and goals. These targets and goals are disclosed in the limited context of the Company’s compensation programs and should not be understood to be statements of management’s expectations or estimates of results or other guidance.

Annual Cash Incentives
ANNUAL CASH INCENTIVES

The Company maintains annual cash incentive programs for executives referred to as the Management Incentive Plan, or MIP, and Management Performance Incentive Plan, or MPIP. In Generaleffect, the MPIP establishes the maximum bonus payouts for the NEOs, while the MIP criteria are used by the Compensation Committee to guide the exercise of its downward discretion in determining the actual pay-outs which have historically been (and were in 2016) well below the MPIP maximum permitted payouts. As further described under the “Regulatory Considerations” heading on page 42, the annual cash incentive programs have been designed and administered in this manner to preserve the federal income tax deductibility of the associated compensation expense by the Company. To determine the 20142016 award payments (which were paid in March 2015)2017), the Committee reviewed the performance of the named executive officersNEOs and other executives at its February 2015 meeting.2017 meeting prior to filing. With respect to the 20142016 awards, the Committee established a performance goal under the MPIP to determine the maximum pay-out potential and then used the goals described below with respect to the Management Incentive Plan (or MIP)MIP to determine whether and to what degree the actual payout amount for each named executive officer'sNEO’s annual cash incentive award would be less than the maximum permitted amount.


Target Award Opportunities

Under the MIP, we establish annual target award opportunities expressed as a percentage of base salary paid during the year and various award payment limits expressed as a percentage of the target award. Our annual cash incentive targets are set within the median range relative to our competitive market for each position, and the annual cash incentive plan is structured so that lower performance results in below-market payouts and superior performance drives payouts above the median range. For 2014,2016, target award opportunities were within the median range for all our named executive officers


Table of Contents

rangingNEOs, and ranged from 75% to 140%150% of base salary. Minimum and maximum payout opportunities ranged from 0%40% to 200% of target award opportunity, respectively, with no payout for performance below the minimum level specified.

Performance Measures —

Under the MIP, we use a mix of overall corporate, business unit and individual performance measures to foster cross-divisional cooperation and to assure that executives have a reasonable measure of control over the factors that affect their awards. This performance measure mix varies by executive position. For 2014, the performance measure mix for the named executive officers is summarized in the table on page 29.


Performance Goals and Achievement - Corporate

Under the MIP, several performance goals are used, including goals measuring overall corporate performance as well as goals for specific business unit performance for those executives who are responsible for these business units. Overall corporate performance in 20142016 was based on adjusted diluted earnings per shareEPS goals. The Company uses adjusted diluted earnings per share as a measure because it is most closely aligned with our strategy of delivering profitable growth and increased stockholder value. We define adjusted diluted earnings per share as diluted earnings per share excluding special gains and charges and discrete tax items. See footnote (1) on page 21 for a reconciliation of 2014 reported diluted earnings per share to 2014 adjusted diluted earnings per share. We believe that adjusted diluted earnings per shareEPS is a better measure of the Company'sCompany’s underlying business performance than reported diluted earnings per shareEPS because it provides greater transparency with respect to our results of operations, which is more useful for period-to-period comparison of results. In addition, a total company measure of performance such as adjusted diluted earnings per shareEPS is used as one of the performance measures with respect to our named executive officersNEOs who manage particular business units because it reinforces our Circle the Customer -- Circle the Globe strategy and fosters cross-divisional cooperation.

36    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

In establishing these goals for 2014,2016, we took into consideration our prior year results, overall economic and market trends, other large companies'companies’ performance expectations and our anticipated business opportunities, investment requirements and the competitive situation. For 2014,2016, the adjusted diluted earnings per shareEPS goals were: payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level) at $3.66; payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level) at $3.96; payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level) at $4.15; and payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level) at $4.22 or greater.

Payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level) at

$4.12

Payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level) at

$4.38

Payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level) at

$4.48

Payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level) at

$4.64 or greater

Payouts for results between performance levels are interpolated on a straight-line basis. Actual 20142016 adjusted diluted earnings per share were $4.18EPS was $4.37 resulting in the achievement of the adjusted diluted earnings per shareEPS goal at 166%98% of target. However, Management recommended that the Compensation Committee exercise its discretion as provided under the MIP and adjust the Company's performance achievement with respect to adjusted EPS from the actual adjusted EPS achieved of $4.37 to $4.36. The Compensation Committee followed Management's recommendation, and as a result, the adjusted EPS pay-out was adjusted from 98% of target to 95% of target. Management recommended the $0.01 adjustment for all participants in the MIP in order to fund awards to non-MIP participants.

Performance Goals and Achievement - Division

For Mr. Handley, who is our presidentPresident and chief operating officer, as indicated in the table on page 29,Chief Operating Officer, 30% of his annual cash incentive is based upon a 20142016 total division operating income goal. For 2014,2016, the total division operating income goals were: 1.8% growth over 2013 total division operating income for payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level); 8.0% growth over 2013 total division operating income for payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level); 12.1% growth over 2013 total division operating income for payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level); and 18.5% growth over 2013 total division operating income for payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level). Champion's results for the period prior to the acquisition in 2013 were included for purposes of determining the growth of 2014 business unit revenue and operating income over 2013 business unit revenue and operating income for Mr. Handley.

-1.5% growth over 2015 total division operating income for payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level)

 5.2% growth over 2015 total division operating income for payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level)

10.1% growth over 2015 total division operating income for payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level)

18.9% growth over 2015 total division operating income for payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level)

Payouts for results between performance levels are interpolated on a straight-line basis. Adjusted as noted above, 20142016 total division operating income grew 12.6%3.1% over 20132015 total division operating income resulting in the achievement of the total division operating income goal at 144%81% of target.

For two of our named executive officers,NEOs, namely Messrs. TaylorHickey and Hickey,Beck who manage particular business units for us, as indicated in the table on page 29, 70% of their annual cash incentive is based upon their respective 20142016 business unit performance goals which are measured against the achievement of revenue and operating income goals. For Mr. Taylor and Mr. Hickey, theThe revenue and operating income goals, which are weighted equally. equally, are set forth below.

The 20142016 revenue goal for Mr. Taylor was 3.3% growth over 2013Hickey was:

 4.1% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level)

 7.9% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level)

 9.5% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level)

11.2% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level)

The 2016 revenue for payout at the minimum level, 6.5% growth for payout at the target level, 8.7% growth for payout at the 140% level and 13.4% growth for payout at the maximum level; andgoal for Mr. Hickey it was –0.3% growth over 2013 revenue for payout at the minimum level, 2.2% growth for payout at the target level, 3.9% growth for payout at the 140% level and 6.2% growth for payout at the maximum level. Beck was:

 0.8% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level)

 4.5% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level)

 6.2% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level)

10.3% growth over 2015 business unit revenue for payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level)

The 20142016 operating income goal for Mr. Taylor was 2.9% growth over 2013Hickey was:

-0.3% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level)

 7.3% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level)

 9.9% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level)

16.3% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level)

The 2016 operating income for payout at the minimum level, 15.0% growth for payout at the target level, 23.1% growth for payout at the 140% level and 31.2% growth for payout at the maximum level; andgoal for Mr. Hickey it was 1.4% growth over 2013 operating income for payout at the minimum level, 4.4% growth for payout at the target level, 6.4% growth for payout at the 140% level and 11.8% growth for payout at the maximum level. Champion's results for the period prior to the acquisition in 2013 were included for purposes of determining the growth of 2014 business unit revenue and operating income over 2013 business unit revenue and operating income for Mr. Taylor. Beck was:

 4.6% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 40% of the target award opportunity (minimum level)

11.6% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 100% of the target award opportunity (target level)

18.6% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 140% percent of the target award opportunity (140% level)

30.4% growth over 2015 business unit operating income for payout at 200% of the target award opportunity (maximum level)

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    37


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

No pay-outpay‐out is made with respect to the business unit revenue goal unless the business unit achieves at least the minimum level on its operating income goal. Pay-outsPay‐outs for results between these two performance levels are interpolated on a straight-linestraight‐line basis. Adjusted as noted above, revenue growth and operating income growth for the business units managed by Mr. TaylorHickey were 10.4%7.9% and 30.5%9.4%, respectively, resulting in achievement by Mr. TaylorHickey of his business unit goal at 178%118% of target. Revenue growth and operating income growth for the business units managed by Mr. HickeyBeck were 3.7%2.9% and 7.5%15.6%, respectively, resulting in achievement by Mr. HickeyBeck of his business unit goal at 144%98% of target.

Performance Goals and Achievement - Individual

For Mr. Schmechel, who holds a staff position as our chief financial officer, as indicated in the table on page 29,Chief Financial Officer, 30% of his annual cash incentive is based upon attainment of individual performance goals. This component of his staff position award under the MIP is set at 30% of the performance measure mix for annual cash incentives so that achievement of these goals is a component of the award but remains balanced against achievement of corporate performance goals. The 20142016 individual performance objectives for our principal financial officerChief Financial Officer are specific, qualitative, and achievable with significant effort and, if achieved, provide benefit to the Company. Mr. Schmechel'sSchmechel’s individual performance goals covered financial, organizational and strategic initiatives, including delivering on financial objectives, developing talent and projects to increase efficient service delivery. Mr. Schmechel achieved 140%95% of his individual target performance goals. The Compensation Committee, with input from the principal executive officer,


Table of Contents

CEO, approved thean annual cash incentive as shown on the table on page 29,of $443,100, including the component based on the principal financial officer'sChief Financial Officer’s achievement of his 20142016 individual performance goals.


20142016 Annual Incentive Compensation Pay-Out Summary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Performance Measure Mix

 

 

2016
Base Salary
Earnings ($)

 

MIP

Target Award Opportunity (% of Base Salary)

(%)

 

EPS 

(%)

 

Business Unit

(%)

 

Individual (%)

 

MIP

Target
Pay-Out Level

($)

 

MIP
Performance
Achieved

(%)

 

Pay-Out 

Based on

MIP
Performance ($)

 

Compensation
Committee
Adjustments
(1)

($)

 

Actual
Payout
($)

Douglas M.

 

1,187,500 

 

150

 

100

 

 

 

 

 

1,781,250

 

98

 

1,740,200

 

(41,100)

 

1,699,100

Baker, Jr.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Daniel J.

 

581,250 

 

80

 

70

 

 

 

 

 

325,500

 

98

 

318,000

 

 

 

 

Schmechel

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30

 

139,500

 

95

 

132,600

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

450,600

 

(7,500)

 

443,100

Thomas W.

 

661,250 

 

90

 

70

 

 

 

 

 

416,588

 

98

 

407,000

 

 

 

 

Handley

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30

 

 

 

178,537

 

81

 

145,400

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

552,400

 

(9,600)

 

542,800

Michael A.

 

543,125 

 

75

 

30

 

 

 

 

 

122,203

 

98

 

119,400

 

 

 

 

Hickey

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

70

 

 

 

285,141

 

118

 

335,200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

454,600

 

(2,800)

 

541,800

Christophe

 

548,125 

 

75

 

30

 

 

 

 

 

123,328

 

98

 

120,500

 

 

 

 

Beck

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

70

 

 

 

287,766

 

98

 

283,200

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

403,700

 

(2,800)

 

400,900

(1)Management recommended that the Compensation Committee exercise its discretion as provided under the MIP and adjust the Company's performance achievement with respect to adjusted earnings per share from the actual adjusted earnings per share achieved of $4.37 to $4.36. The Compensation Committee followed Management's recommendation, and, as a result, the adjusted earnings per share pay-out was adjusted from 98% of target to 95% of target. See "Annual Cash Incentives — The table below illustrates the calculationPerformance Goals and Achievement - Corporate", beginning at page 36 for a discussion of the 2014 annual cash incentive pay-outsreasons for our named executive officers based on the targets and performance achievements described above:adjustment.

38    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement

  
 
  
 MIP
Target
Award
Opportunity
(% of Base
Salary)

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 
 
  
 Performance Measure Mix  
  
  
  
  
 
 
 2014
Base
Salary
Earnings

 MIP Target
Pay-Out
Level

 MIP
Performance
Achieved

 Pay-Out
Based on MIP
Performance

 Compensation
Committee
Adjustments

  
 
 
 EPS
 Business
Unit

 Individual
 Actual
Payout

 
  

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 $1,103,277  140% 100%      $1,544,588  166%$2,564,100    $2,564,100 

Daniel J. Schmechel

 $487,500  75% 70%      $255,937  166%$424,900       

              30%$109,687  140%$153,600       

                      $578,500    $578,500 

Thomas W. Handley

 $595,000  85% 70%      $354,025  166%$587,700       

           30%   $151,725  144%$218,500       

                      $806,200    $806,200 

Stephen M. Taylor

 $518,818  75% 30%      $116,734  166%$193,800       

           70%   $272,380  178%$484,900       

                      $678,700    $678,700 

Michael A. Hickey

 $486,250  75% 30%      $109,406  166%$181,700       

           70%   $255,281  144%$387,600       

                      $549,300    $549,300 


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Discretionary Adjustments

To recognize individual performance, the Compensation Committee also may increase or decrease a named executive officer'san NEO’s payout from the level recommended by applying the MIP performance metrics (but always subject to the maximum permitted MPIP payout), with input from the principal executive officerCEO (other than as to his own award), based on the individual performance of the named executive officer.NEO. This is done to recognize either inferior or superior individual performance in cases where this performance is not fully represented by the performance measures. No such discretionary adjustments were made to the 20142016 annual cash incentive payouts.

The Compensation Committee reviews and approves all adjustments to our overall corporate results and significant adjustments to our business unit performance results. The 2014Other than described above, the 2016 annual cash incentive payouts were made in accordance with the overall corporate results and business unit performance results established for the named executive officersNEOs without adjustment.


Our Analysis

In 20142016 the Compensation Committee set the minimum, target and maximum levels of the adjusted EPS component of the annual incentive so that the intended relative difficulty of achieving the various levels is consistent with the past several years, taking into account current prospects and market considerations. Target award opportunities in 20142016 accounted for approximately 17% of total compensation on average for the named executive officersNEOs receiving all elements of our compensation program and were within the median range of our competitive market for each position. Actual award payments for the named executive officersNEOs averaged 162%98% of target award opportunities. Ecolab'sEcolab’s businesses experienced a number ofmultiple headwinds in 2014,2016, including weaker internationalcontinued depressed energy market activity, lackluster global economies and emerging markets,unfavorable foreign currency translation, which made our executives'executives’ performance goals challenging. The 20142016 award payouts are indicative of solid fixed currency organic sales growth and operating margin gainsexpansion in our businesses other than our energy business during the year despite these challenges.year.


Long-Term Equity Incentives

Table of Contents


LONG-TERM EQUITY INCENTIVES

In GeneralThe Compensation Committee granted long-term equity incentives to our named executive officersNEOs and other executives in December 2014,2016, consistent with its core agenda and past practice of granting these incentives at its regularly scheduled December meeting. For 2014,2016, our long-term equity incentive program consisted of an annual grant of stock options and performance-based restricted stock units,PBRSUs, weighted approximately equally in terms of grant value.

Our program continues to be based on pre-established grant guidelines that are calibrated annually to our competitive market. Grant guidelines for 2014 for the named executive officers were developedmarket on a position-by-position basis using competitive data fromfor the revised Peer Group and market data from the 2014 Towers Watson CDB General Industry Executive Compensation Survey report and the Cook & Co. 2014 Survey of Long-Term Incentives. The survey data represent the median range of long-term incentive values adjusted for size based on revenue. The average of the three data points is used for determining the guideline.

NEOs. Actual grants may be above or below our guidelines based on our assessment of individual performance and future potential. Generally, long-term equity incentives are granted on the same date as our Compensation Committee approval date and in no event is the grant date prior to the approval date.


Stock Options

Our stock options have a 10-year contractual exercise term from the date of grant and vest ratably over three years. Our stock options have an exercise price which is the average of the high and low market price on the date of grant. We believe that the use of the average of the high and low market price on the date of the grant removes potential same-day stock volatility. We do not have a program, plan or practice to time stock option grants to executives in coordination with the release of material non-public information. From time to time, in addition to our annual grants, we may make special grants of stock options to our named executive officersNEOs and other executives in connection with promotions and recruitment, and for general retention purposes. During 2014,2016, we did not make any such special grants of stock options to our named executive officers.NEOs.


Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units

Our performance-based restricted stock units, or PBRSUs cliff-vest after three years, subject to attainment of three-year average annual return on invested capital (ROIC)adjusted ROIC goals over the performance period. We selected ROIC as the performance measure because it reinforces focus on capital efficiency throughout the organization, is highly correlated with shareholder returns, matches well with our long-standing corporate goal of achieving consistent return on beginning equity and is understood by our external market. We define ROIC asAs further described under the quotient“Regulatory Considerations” heading on page 42, our PBRSUs have been designed and administered in a manner to preserve the federal income tax deductibility of after-tax operating income dividedthe associated compensation expense by the sum of short-term and long-term debt and shareholders' equity, less cash and cash equivalents. The PBRSU awards provide for adjustment ofCompany. In this

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    39


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

connection, the ROIC calculation in the event of a large acquisition (such as the Nalco and Champion transactions) or other significant transaction or event approved by the Board. Considering the significant impact of purchase accounting and special gains and charges related to the Nalco and Champion transactions on the ROIC calculation, for the 2015 to 2017 performance cycle, ROIC is measured excluding the purchase accounting impact and special gains and charges related to these transactions and is also adjusted for acquisitions and certain other unusual, non-recurring charges during the performance period. The Compensation Committee establishedannually establishes an adjusted ROIC goal for the executive officers to determine maximum payout potential, for Code Section 162(m) purposes, with the ability to exercise downward discretion to reduce the actual payout in accordance with the adjusted ROIC goals described below to be applied to a broader group of PBRSU award recipients.

For the 20152017 to 20172019 performance cycle, 40% of the PBRSUs granted may be earned subject to attainment of a threshold goal of 10% average annual ROIC over the cycle, and 100% of the PBRSUs may be earned subject to attainment of a target goal of 15% average annual ROIC over the cycle, in each case adjusted as described above under the heading “Adjustments to Reported Financial Results” beginning at page 35, with straight-line prorationinterpolation for performance results between threshold and target goals. No PBRSUs may be earned if adjusted ROIC is below the threshold goal, and no more than 100% of the PBRSUs may be earned if adjusted ROIC is above the target goal; accordingly, target and maximum are equal. Importantly, the threshold goal exceeds our cost of capital, thereby ensuring that value is created before awards are earned. Excluding the impact of purchase accounting and special gains and charges related to the Nalco and Champion transactions, the Company'sCompany’s annual adjusted ROIC for 20142016 was 22.2%21.9%. Dividend equivalents are not paid or accrued on the PBRSUs during the performance period.


Pay-out of Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units Vesting in 20142016

The PBRSUs granted by the Committee in December 20112013 for the 20122014 to 20142016 performance cycle vested on December 31, 20142016 and the Committee has determined the pay-outpay‐out for such PBRSUs, including with respect to Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley, TaylorHickey and Hickey,Beck, to be 100% of the target opportunity. For the PBRSUs granted in December 2011,2013, the target payout would be earned upon attainment of an average annual ROIC, adjusted in a manner consistent with the preceding paragraph,as previously described, of 13%15% over the 20122014 through 20142016 performance cycle. Consistent with the established formula and definition of adjusted ROIC, the Company'sCompany’s average annual ROIC over the cycle, excluding the impact of purchase accounting and special gains and charges relating to the Nalco and Champion transactions, was 20.1%21.4%. Based upon this performance, the Committee approved pay-outpay‐out of 100% of the PBRSUs. The number of PBRSUs vested and the value realized at vesting are shown in the Option Exercises and Stock Vested for 2014 table on page 37.


Restricted Stock

From time to time, we may make special grants of restricted stock or restricted stock units subject only to service-based vesting to our named executive officersNEOs and other executives in connection with promotions and recruitment, and for general retention purposes. During 2014,2016, we did not make any special grants of restricted stock units to our named executive officers.NEOs.


Our Analysis

For the last completed fiscal year, long-term equity incentives accounted for approximately 74%77% of total target compensation for the principal executive officerCEO and 61%60% on average for the other named executive officers,NEOs, which is consistent with our competitive market. Actual grants to the named executive officersNEOs were within the median range for all of our named executive officers.NEOs. Our annual practice of granting equity incentives in the form of stock options and PBRSUs is similar to our competitive market, where other forms of long-term equity and cash compensation are typically awarded in addition to, or in lieu of, stock options. Our selective use of restricted stock or restricted stock units as a retention or recruitment incentive is


Table of Contents

consistent with our competitive market. We believe that our overall long-term equity compensation cost is within a reasonable range of our competitive market as to our named executive officersNEOs and also our other employees.

Executive Benefits and Perquisites
EXECUTIVE BENEFITS AND PERQUISITES

In GeneralOur named executive officersNEOs participate in all of the same health care, disability, life insurance, pension, and 401(k) benefit plans made available generally to the Company'sCompany’s U.S. employees. In addition, our named executive officersNEOs are eligible to participate in a deferred compensation program, restoration plans for the qualified 401(k) and pension plans, and, with respect to certain of our named executive officers,NEOs, an executive disability and life benefit and a supplemental retirement benefit. The non-qualified retirement plans supplement the benefits provided under our tax-qualified plans, taking into account compensation and benefits above the IRS limits for qualified plans. These plans are described in more detail on pages 38 to 41. In the case of Mr. Taylor, he became eligible to participate in these plans on September 1, 2014. For the period January 1, 2014 through August 31, 2014, Mr. Taylor participated in certain plans offered to localized employees by a non-U.S. subsidiary. Mr. Taylor also continues to participate in the same executive death benefit plan that he participated in prior to the Nalco merger. The named executive officersNEOs also receive limited perquisites that are described in more detail in footnote (6)the footnotes to the Summary Compensation Table.Table including certain allowances and limited perquisites received by Mr. Beck related to his relocation.

The Company has maintained a private aircraft use policy for several years authorizing the use of private aircraft for business and personal use by the Company'sCompany’s Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer and, under certain

40    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

circumstances, business use by its directors and certain other executives. Under the policy, personal use of private aircraft by the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer is limited to $100,000 of unreimbursed usage per year. During 2014, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer did have unreimbursed personal usage. Additional information with respect to this perquisite is provided in more detail in footnote (6)the footnotes to the Summary Compensation Table on page 33.Table.


Our Analysis

We review our executive benefits and perquisites program periodically to ensure it remains market-competitive for our executives and supportable to our stockholders. Excluding allowances and perquisites provided to Mr. Taylor relatedBeck to support his localization in a non-U.S. subsidiary and subsequent relocation, to the U.S.,our perquisites account for 0.6%1.2% of total compensation for the principal executive officerCEO and the other named executive officersNEOs receiving all elements of our compensation program in 2014.2016. Executive benefits and perquisites are consistent with our competitive market.

Executive Change-In-Control Policy


EXECUTIVE CHANGE-IN-CONTROL POLICY

In GeneralThe terms of our Change-In-Control Severance Compensation Policy, including the events constituting a change in control under our policy, are described on pages 44 and 45.in Potential Payments upon Termination or Change in Control section of this Proxy Statement. Our policy applies to all elected officers, including the named executive officers,NEOs, except those who are covered by separate change-in-control or similar agreements with the Company or a subsidiary, a circumstance which arises only in the case of an executive having such an agreement with a company we acquire. Such an executive will become covered automatically under the Company's change-in-control policyCompany’s Change-In-Control Severance Compensation Policy when the existing agreements terminate or expire.


Our Analysis

We review our change-in-control protection periodically to ensure it continues to address the best interests of our stockholders. Our analysis indicates that our change-in-control policy, which is structured as a so-called "double-trigger"“double-trigger” policy, promotes the interests of stockholders by mitigating executives'executives’ concerns about the impact a change in control may have on them, thereby allowing the executives to focus on the best interests of stockholders under such circumstances.

Stock Retention and Ownership Guidelines


STOCK RETENTION AND OWNERSHIP GUIDELINES

In GeneralWe have in place stock retention and ownership guidelines to encourage our named executive officersNEOs and other executives to accumulate a significant ownership stake so they are vested in maximizing long-term stockholder returns. Our guidelines provide that the principal executive officerCEO own Company stock with a market value of at least six times current base salary. The Company also requires other corporate officers to own Company stock with a market value of at least three times current base salary. Until the stock ownership guideline is met, our principal executive officer, principal financial officerCEO, CFO and presidentPresident are expected to retain 100% of all after-tax profit shares from exercise, vesting or payout of equity awards. Our other officers are expected to retain 50% of all after-tax profit shares from exercise, vesting or payout of equity awards until their stock ownership guidelines are met. For purposes of complying with our guidelines, stock is not considered owned if subject to an unexercised stock option or unvested performance-based restricted stock unit.PBRSU. Shares owned outright, legally or beneficially, by an officer or his or her immediate family members residing in the same household and shares held in the 401(k) plan count towards meeting the guideline. Our named executive officersNEOs and other officers may not pledge shares or enter into any risk hedging arrangements with respect to Company stock.


Table of Contents


NEO Stock Ownership Against Guideline SummaryRelative to Guidelines

The table below illustrates the standing of each of our named executive officersNEOs in relation to their respective stock ownership guidelines as of December 31, 2014,30, 2016, based on the closing market price of our Common Stock on such date of $104.52$117.22 per share.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2016
Annualized
Base Salary ($)

 

Stock
Ownership Guideline

 

Stock
Ownership
(1)

 

Multiple of
2016 Base Salary

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 

1,200,000

 

6X salary

 

508,257

 

49.6

X salary

Daniel J. Schmechel

 

600,000

 

3X salary

 

136,061

 

26.6

X salary

Thomas W. Handley

 

675,000

 

3X salary

 

112,014

 

19.5

X salary

Michael A. Hickey

 

552,500

 

3X salary

 

46,682

 

9.9

X salary

Christophe Beck

 

552,500

 

3X salary

 

19,700

 

4.2

X salary

(1)

Excludes shares underlying unexercised or unvested long-term incentive awards.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    41

  
 
 2014
Annualized
Base Salary

 Stock
Ownership
Guideline

 Stock
Ownership(1)

 Multiple of
2014 Base Salary

 
  

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 $1,111,370  6× salary  417,429  39.3× salary 

Daniel J. Schmechel

 $500,000  3× salary  109,583  22.9× salary 

Thomas W. Handley

 $600,000  3× salary  66,767  11.6× salary 

Stephen M. Taylor

 $525,000  3× salary  60,916  12.1× salary 

Michael A. Hickey

 $490,000  3× salary  16,968  3.6× salary 

(1)
Excludes shares underlying unexercised or unvested long-term incentive awards.

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS


Our Analysis

Our analysis indicates that our stock retention and ownership guidelines are consistent with the design provisions of other companies disclosing such guidelines, as reported in public SEC filings and as periodically published in various surveys and research reports. Our analysis further indicates that our named executive officersNEOs are in compliance with our guidelines either by having achieved the ownership guideline or, if the guideline is not yet achieved, by retaining 100% or 50%, as applicable, of all after-tax profit shares from any stock option exercises or restricted stock unit vesting.

Compensation Recovery
COMPENSATION RECOVERY

The Company'sCompany’s Board of Directors has adopted a policy requiring the reimbursement of annual cash incentive and long-term equity incentive payments made to an executive officer due to the executive officer'sofficer’s misconduct, as determined by the Board based on the recommendation of the Compensation Committee. Each of our executive officers has agreed in writing to this policy. This policy was filed with the Company'sCompany’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008 as Exhibit (10)W.W and is available along with our other SEC filings at our website at www.investor.ecolab.com/earnings-center/sec-filings.

Regulatory Considerations
TOTAL COMPENSATION MIX

In General — The table below illustrates how totalWe monitor changes in the tax and accounting regulatory environment when assessing the financial efficiency of the various elements of our executive compensation forprogram. We have designed and administered our named executive officers for 2014 was allocated between performance-based and fixed components, how performance-based compensation is allocated between annual cash incentives, particularly our stockholder-approved MPIP, and long-term components and how totalequity incentive plans in a manner that is intended to preserve the federal income tax deductibility of the associated compensation is allocated between cash and equity components:

expense.

  
2014 Total Compensation Mix
(base salary, target annual incentives, and long-term equity incentives valued in total at grant)

 
  
 
 Percent of
Total Compensation
that is:

 Percent of
Performance-Based
Total Compensation
that is:

 Percent of
Total Compensation
that is:

 
  
Name
 Performance-Based(1)
 Fixed(2)
 Annual(3)
 Long-Term(4)
 Cash Based(5)
 Equity Based(6)
 
  

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

  89%  11%  17%  83%  26%  74% 

Daniel J. Schmechel

  80%  20%  19%  81%  36%  64% 

Thomas W. Handley

  80%  20%  21%  79%  36%  64% 

Stephen M. Taylor

  77%  23%  22%  78%  40%  60% 

Michael A. Hickey

  76%  24%  24%  76%  42%  58% 
(1)
Target annual incentives plus long-term equity incentives divided by total compensation.

(2)
Base salary divided by total compensation.

(3)
Target annual incentives divided by target annual incentives plus long-term equity incentives.

(4)
Long-term equity incentives divided by target annual incentives plus long-term equity incentives.

(5)
Base salary plus target annual incentives divided by total compensation.

(6)
Long-term equity incentives divided by total compensation.


Our Analysis — Our analysis indicates that total compensation mix for our named executive officers on average is generally consistent with the competitive market. The principal executive officer receives a higher proportion of his total compensation allocated to performance-based components than non-performance-based components and more allocated to equity-based compensation than cash-based compensation compared to the other named executive officers. The higher emphasis on performance-based compensation for the principal executive officerMPIP is designed to reward him for driving companymeet the requirements of Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m) regarding performance-based compensation and is administered by the Compensation Committee, which selects the participants each year and establishes the annual performance goal based upon performance criteria that it selects, the performance target and creating long-term shareholder value that is a greater responsibility in his position than in the positionsmaximum annual cash award dependent on achievement of the other namedperformance goal. For 2016, the Compensation Committee selected reported diluted earnings per share as the performance measure under the MPIP. The Compensation Committee certifies the extent to which the performance goal has been met and the corresponding amount of the award earned by the participants, with the ability to exercise downward discretion to lower, but not raise, the award to an amount based upon the metrics used for our broader-based MIP cash incentive and to recognize individual performance.

The Compensation Committee has similarly positioned the PBRSUs to meet the requirements of Section 162(m). The Compensation Committee annually establishes an adjusted ROIC goal for the executive officers and is consistentto determine maximum payout potential for Code Section 162(m) purposes, with the competitive marketability to exercise downward discretion to reduce the actual payout in accordance with the adjusted ROIC goals to be applied to a broader group of PBRSU award recipients as described above under “Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units.”

We have designed and administered our deferred compensation, equity compensation and change-in-control severance plans to be in compliance with federal tax rules affecting non-qualified deferred compensation. In accordance with FASB Accounting Standards Codification 718, Compensation - Stock Compensation, for financial statement purposes, we expense all equity-based awards over the CEO position. The level ofservice period for awards expected to vest, based upon their estimated fair value at grant date. Accounting treatment has not resulted in changes in our equity compensation of Mr. Baker reflects the many responsibilities of serving as chief executive officer of a public company. Accordingly, Mr. Baker's median range


Table of Contentsprogram design for our NEOs.

competitive pay levels (including long-term equity awards) reflect his broader scope and greater responsibilities compared to our other named executive officers.


42    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE FOR 2014
2016

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE FOR 2016

The following table shows cash and non-cash compensation for the years ended December 31, 2014, 20132016, 2015 and 20122014 for the persons serving as the Company's "PrincipalCompany’s “Principal Executive Officer"Officer” and "Principal“Principal Financial Officer"Officer” during the year ended December 31, 20142016 and for the next three most highly-compensated executive officers who were serving in those capacities at December 31, 2014.2016.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name & Principal Position

 

Year

 

Salary(1)
($)

 

Bonus
($)

 

Stock
Awards
(2)
($)

 

Option
Awards
(3)
($)

 

Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation
(1)(4)
($)

 

Change in
Pension
Value and
Non-qualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
(5)
($)

 

All Other
Compensation
(6)
($)

 

Total

($)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 

2016

 

1,187,500

 

-

 

4,680,970

 

4,839,616

 

1,699,100

 

1,749,879

 

193,386

 

14,350,452

Chairman of the Board and

 

2015

 

1,140,343

 

-

 

4,355,360

 

4,453,947

 

0

 

3,513,831

 

139,888

 

13,603,369

Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer)

 

2014

 

1,103,277

 

-

 

3,701,798

 

3,778,299

 

2,564,100

 

4,049,270

 

260,078

 

15,456,822

Daniel J. Schmechel

 

2016

 

581,250

 

-

 

886,936

 

916,988

 

443,100

 

444,275

 

(307,949)

 

2,964,599

Chief Financial Officer

 

2015

 

518,750

 

-

 

822,722

 

841,312

 

124,500

 

1,000,637

 

278,152

 

3,586,073

(principal financial officer)

 

2014

 

487,500

 

-

 

740,339

 

755,664

 

578,500

 

902,730

 

12,078

 

3,476,811

Thomas W. Handley

 

2016

 

661,250

 

-

 

985,497

 

1,018,869

 

542,800

 

240,017

 

102,600

 

3,551,034

President and

 

2015

 

615,000

 

-

 

967,909

 

989,754

 

150,600

 

1,027,943

 

72,235

 

3,823,441

Chief Operating Officer

 

2014

 

595,000

 

-

 

925,475

 

944,581

 

806,200

 

1,017,281

 

90,088

 

4,378,625

Michael A. Hickey

 

2016

 

543,125

 

-

 

591,253

 

611,316

 

451,800

 

791,405

 

73,564

 

3,062,464

Executive Vice President and President – Global

 

2015

 

508,750

 

-

 

580,745

 

593,848

 

442,600

 

1,161,591

 

64,022

 

3,351,556

Institutional

 

2014

 

486,250

 

-

 

555,306

 

566,748

 

549,300

 

1,272,420

 

68,571

 

3,498,595

Christophe Beck (7)

 

2016

 

548,125

 

-

 

591,253

 

611,316

 

400,900

 

171,790

 

134,738

 

2,458,122

Executive Vice President and President – Global

 

2015

 

530,000

 

-

 

580,745

 

593,848

 

295,100

 

349,476

 

150,173

 

2,499,342

Water and Process Services

 

2014

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

(1)

Includes amounts deferred under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code pursuant to the Company’s Savings Plan and ESOP, amounts deferred under a non-qualified mirror 401(k) deferred compensation plan maintained by the Company for a select group of executives, and any salary reductions per Section 125 or Section 132(f)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code.

(2)

Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) award grants during the year in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, based on the average daily share price of the Company’s Common Stock at the date of grant, adjusted for the absence of future dividends, and assuming full (maximum) achievement of applicable performance criteria over the performance period. The PBRSU awards cliff-vest after three years, subject to attainment of three-year average annual return on invested capital goals for the Company over the performance period. See Note 11 to the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2016, located at Item 8 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, for further discussion of the assumptions used in determining these values. See footnote (1) to the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards” for 2016 table on page 45 for a description of the specific performance goals for the PBRSUs.

(3)

Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of stock option grants during the year in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718 but with no discount for estimated forfeitures. The value of grants has been determined by application of the lattice (binomial)-pricing model. Key assumptions include: risk-free rate of return, expected life of the option, expected stock price volatility and expected dividend yield. See Note 11 to the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2016, located at Item 8 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, for further discussion of the assumptions used in determining these values. The specific assumptions used in the valuation of the options granted in 2016 are summarized in the table below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grant Date

 

Risk Free Rate

 

Expected Life (years)

 

Expected Volatility

 

Expected Dividend Yield

12/02/2016 (all executives)

 

1.99%

 

6.14

 

22.94%

 

1.26%

(4)

Represents the annual cash incentive awards earned and paid in respect of 2016 under the Company’s Management Performance Incentive Plan (“MPIP”). The MPIP is discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 36and as part of the table entitled “Grants of Plan-Based Awards For 2016” at page 45.  

  
Name & Principal Position
 Year
 Salary(1)
($)

 Bonus
($)

 Stock
Awards(2)
($)

 Option
Awards(3)
($)

 Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
Compensation(1,4)
($)

 Change in
Pension
Value and
Non-qualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings(5)
($)

 All Other
Compensation(6)
($)

 Total
($)

 
  
Douglas M. Baker, Jr.  2014 $1,103,277  0 $3,701,798 $3,778,299 $2,564,100 $4,049,270 $260,078 $15,456,822 

Chairman of the Board and

  2013 $1,079,000  0 $3,302,468 $3,490,561 $2,534,600  0 $210,935 $10,617,564 

Chief Executive Officer

  2012 $1,050,000  0 $2,956,325 $2,711,830 $1,950,000 $3,037,398 $161,199 $11,866,752 

(principal executive officer)

                            
Daniel J. Schmechel  2014 $487,500  0 $740,339 $755,664 $578,500 $902,730 $12,078 $3,476,811 

Chief Financial Officer

  2013 $450,000  0 $613,284 $648,297 $516,000 $89,133 $59,458 $2,376,172 

(principal financial officer)

  2012 $394,167  0 $345,259 $315,780 $311,000 $266,132 $194,089 $1,826,427 
Thomas W. Handley  2014 $595,000  0 $925,475 $944,581 $806,200 $1,017,281 $90,088 $4,378,625 

President and Chief Operating Officer

  2013 $580,000  0 $943,591 $997,237 $825,300 $357,981 $92,151 $3,796,260 

  2012 $520,000  0 $788,674 $722,970 $564,000 $590,368 $76,121 $3,262,133 
Stephen M. Taylor(7)  2014 $518,818  0 $647,822 $661,195 $678,700 $107,884 $117,341 $2,731,760 

Executive Vice President and

  2013 $500,109  0 $566,154 $598,481 $573,800 $32,897 $125,827 $2,397,268 

President — Nalco Champion

  2012 $474,971  0 $1,919,214 $1,807,425 $645,000 $51,696 $163,806 $5,062,112 
Michael A. Hickey(8)  2014 $486,250  0 $555,306 $566,748 $549,300 $1,272,420 $68,571 $3,498,595 

Executive Vice President and

  2013                 

President — Global Institutional

  2012 $440,000  0 $492,835 $451,510 $512,000 $780,194 $59,512 $2,736,051 
(1)
Includes amounts deferred under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code pursuant to the Company's Savings Plan and ESOP, amounts deferred under a non-qualified mirror 401(k) deferred compensation plan maintained by the Company for a select group of executives, and any salary reductions per Section 125 or Section 132(f)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code.

(2)
Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) award grants during the year in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, based on the average daily share price of the Company's Common Stock at the date of grant, adjusted for the absence of future dividends, and assuming full (maximum) achievement of applicable performance criteria over the performance period. The PBRSU awards cliff-vest after three years, subject to attainment of three-year average annual return on invested capital goals for the Company over the performance period. See Note 11 to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2014, included as Exhibit 13.1 to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, for further discussion of the assumptions used in determining these values. See footnote (1) to the Grants of Plan-Based Awards for 2014 table on page 35 for a description of the specific performance goals for the PBRSUs.


In addition to his regular PBRSU award, Mr. Taylor received a special restricted stock unit award of 21,540 units in December 2012 as a retention incentive that is included in the 2012 amount reported for Mr. Taylor in the table above. Mr. Taylor's special restricted stock unit award was valued at $1,426,379 and his regular PBRSU award was valued at $492,835 in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. The special restricted stock unit award vests 50% on the third anniversary of the date of grant, and 25% on each of the fourth and fifth anniversaries of the date of grant, subject to continued employment and the post-termination and change-in-control provisions generally described at pages 42 through 45 under the heading "Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control."

(3)
Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of stock option grants during the year in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718 but with no discount for estimated forfeitures. The value of grants has been determined by application of the lattice (binomial)-pricing model. Key assumptions include: risk-free rate of return, expected life of the option, expected stock price volatility and expected dividend yield. See Note 11 to the Company's Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2014, included as Exhibit 13.1 to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, for further discussion of the assumptions used in determining these values. The specific assumptions used in the valuation of the options granted in 2014 are summarized in the table below:

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    43

  
Grant Date
 Risk Free Rate
 Expected Life (years)
 Expected Volatility
 Expected Dividend Yield
 
  
12/03/2014 (all executives)  1.83% 6.12  22.91% 1.23%


In addition to his regular stock option grant, Mr. Taylor received a special stock option grant to acquire 97,900 shares in December 2012 as an additional retention incentive that is included in the 2012 amount reported for Mr. Taylor in the table above. Mr. Taylor's special stock option was valued at $1,355,915 and his 2012 regular stock option was valued at $451,510 in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. Both of Mr. Taylor's 2012 options have a ten-year term. Mr. Taylor's 2012 regular stock option vests on a cumulative basis as to one third of the shares subject to the option on each of the first three anniversaries of the grant date, while his 2012 special stock option vests as to 100% of the shares on the third anniversary of the grant date.

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE FOR 2016


Table of Contents

(4)
Represents the annual cash incentive awards earned and paid in respect of 2014 under the Company's Management Performance Incentive Plan ("MPIP"). The MPIP is discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 27 and as part of the table entitled "Grants of Plan-Based Awards For 2014" at page 35.

(5)
Represents the change in the actuarial present value of the executive officer's accumulated benefit under the Company's defined benefit plans as of December 31, 2014 over such amount as of December 31, 2013. The Company's defined benefit plans include the Pension Plan, the U.K. Plan, the Mirror Pension Plan and the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan which are discussed beginning at page 38 and as part of the table entitled Pension Benefits for 2014. Mr. Taylor first became eligible to accrue benefits under the Pension Plan and the Mirror Pension Plan as of September 1, 2014. Mr. Taylor is an inactive participant in the U.K. Plan, a broad-based pension plan covering certain United Kingdom employees. There are no "above market" earnings under the Mirror Savings Plan, because all earnings under this plan are calculated at the same rate as earnings on one or more externally managed investments available to participants in the Company's broad-based tax-qualified deferred compensation plans. The Mirror Savings Plan is discussed beginning at page 40.

(6)
Amounts reported as All Other Compensation include:

(a)
Payment by the Company of certain perquisites, including costs relating to the following: (i) executive physical examinations for each of the named executive officers except Mr. Taylor; (ii) allowances in connection with Mr. Taylor's localization at a non-U.S. subsidiary, including dependent education, housing allowance and cost-of-living equalization payments totaling $26,128, storage fees, expenses related to his relocation to the U.S. of $56,391, and a gross-up on taxable relocation expenses of $11,640; (iii) in the case of Mr. Baker, $72,160 for the personal use of corporate aircraft, with incremental cost calculated using a method that takes into account aircraft fuel expenses and engine reserve expense per flight hour, as well as any landing and parking fees, crew travel expenses, on-board catering costs and dead-head flight costs attributable to such use; and (iv) business travel and accident insurance for each of the named executive officers for which no incremental cost is allocated to the named executive officers.

(b)
Pursuant to the Company's tax equalization policy, the Company paid tax preparation fees, and a gross-up of $11,100 on foreign income, on behalf of Mr. Schmechel, in connection with income earned during a previous international assignment. The total amount listed in the All Other Compensation Column also reflects a negative entry of ($63,159), representing a net amount the Company withheld from Mr. Schmechel's earnings pursuant to the Company's tax equalization policy so that his withholdings were at least equal to the tax withholdings which would have applied in the U.S.

(c)
Payment by the Company of life insurance premiums in 2014 for: Mr. Baker, $41,102; Mr. Schmechel, $18,537; Mr. Handley, $33,810; and Mr. Hickey, $25,284. Mr. Taylor also has a self-funded death benefit agreement described at page 43 which imposes no incremental cost on the Company.

(d)
Payment of matching contributions made by the Company for 2014 as follows: (i) matching contributions of $10,400 to Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley and Hickey, and a matching contribution of $10,501 to Mr. Taylor, made by the Company under the Company's tax-qualified defined contribution 401(k) Savings Plan and ESOP available generally to all employees; and (ii) matching contributions made or to be made by the Company on base salary and annual cash incentive award earned in respect of 2014 that the executive deferred under a non-qualified mirror 401(k) deferred compensation plan maintained by the Company for a select group of executives, in the following amounts: Mr. Baker, $136,295; Mr. Schmechel, $32,240; Mr. Handley, $45,648; Mr. Taylor $8,474, and Mr. Hickey, $31,022.

(e)
The Company maintains a self-funded, supplemental long-term disability benefit plan for certain executives, which benefits Messrs. Baker, Schmechel and Handley. No specific allocation of cost is made to any named executive officer prior to the occurrence of a disability.

(7)
Mr. Taylor's salary and allowances in connection with his localization at a non-U.S. subsidiary from January 1, 2014 to August 31, 2014 are denominated in United Arab Emirates dirham and have been converted into U.S. dollars for reporting in this table based on a conversion rate of 1.0 AED=0.27 $U.S. Mr. Taylor's change in pension benefit is accrued in British pounds and is reported based on a conversion rate of 1GBP=1.5645 $U.S. on November 30, 2014, and a conversion rate of 1GBP=1.6348 $U.S. on November 30, 2013, using pension measurement dates of November 30, 2014 and November 30, 2013, consistent with the Company's assumptions under FASB ASC Topic 715 for financial reporting regarding international retirement plans.

(8)
Mr. Hickey was not a named executive officer in 2013.

(5)

Represents the change in the actuarial present value of the executive officer’s accumulated benefit under the Company’s defined benefit plans as of December 31, 2016 over such amount as of December 31, 2015. The Company’s defined benefit plans include the Pension Plan, the Mirror Pension Plan and the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan which are discussed beginning at page 48 and as part of the table entitled “Pension Benefits for 2016.” There are no “above market” earnings under the Mirror Savings Plan, a non-qualified defined contribution plan, because all earnings under this plan are calculated at the same rate as earnings on one or more externally managed investments available to participants in the Company’s broad-based tax-qualified deferred compensation plans. The Mirror Savings Plan is discussed beginning at page 51.  


(6)

Amounts reported as All Other Compensation include:

(a)

Payment by the Company of certain perquisites, including costs relating to the following: (i) executive physical examinations for each of the named executive officers; (ii) in the case of Mr. Baker, business entertainment expense and transportation, and $32,243 for the personal use of corporate aircraft, with incremental cost calculated using a method that takes into account aircraft fuel expenses and engine reserve expense per flight hour, as well as any landing and parking fees, crew travel expenses, on-board catering costs and dead-head flight costs attributable to such use; personal use of corporate aircraft was also attributable to Mr. Schmechel at no incremental cost to the Company; (iii) housing allowance in connection with Mr. Beck’s assignment at the Company’s Naperville worksite, $50,000; (iv) travel of immediate family members, and gross-ups on such amounts of: Mr. Handley, $4,893; Mr. Hickey, $2,263; and Mr. Beck, $2,841; and (v) business travel and accident insurance for each of the named executive officers for which no incremental cost is allocated to the named executive officers.

(b)

Pursuant to the Company’s tax equalization policy, the Company paid tax preparation fees, and a gross-up of $15,149 on foreign income, on behalf of Mr. Schmechel, in connection with income earned during a previous international assignment. The total amount listed in the All Other Compensation Column also reflects a negative entry of ($394,349), representing a net amount the Company withheld from Mr. Schmechel’s earnings pursuant to the Company’s tax equalization policy so that his withholdings were at least equal to the tax withholdings which would have applied in the U.S.

(c)

Payment by the Company of life insurance premiums in 2016 for: Mr. Baker, $44,292; Mr. Schmechel, $26,019; Mr. Handley, $43,472; Mr. Hickey, $27,882; and Mr. Beck, $19,816.

(d)

Payment of matching contributions made by the Company for 2016 as follows: (i) matching contributions made by the Company under the Company’s tax-qualified defined contribution 401(k) Savings Plan and ESOP available generally to all employees for: Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley, and Hickey, $10,600; Mr. Beck, $14,297; and (ii) matching contributions made or to be made by the Company on base salary and annual cash incentive award earned in respect of 2016 that the executive deferred under a non-qualified mirror 401(k) deferred compensation plan maintained by the Company for a select group of executives, in the following amounts: Mr. Baker, $104,864; Mr. Schmechel, $30,374; Mr. Handley, $37,562; Mr. Hickey, $29, 197; and Mr. Beck, $41,041.

(e)

The Company maintains a self-funded, supplemental long-term disability benefit plan for certain executives, which benefits Messrs. Baker, Schmechel and Handley. No specific allocation of cost is made to any named executive officer prior to the occurrence of a disability.

(7)

Mr. Beck was not a named executive officer in 2014.

Table of Contents


44    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS FOR 2014
2016

GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS FOR 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

op

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Estimated Future Payouts Under

 

Estimated Future Payouts Under

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards

 

Equity Incentive Plan Awards (1) (3)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All Other

 

All Other

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stock

 

Option

 

 

 

Closing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Awards:

 

Awards:

 

Exercise

 

Market

 

Grant Date

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number

 

Number

 

or Base

 

Price of

 

Fair Value

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

of Shares

 

of Securities

 

Price of

 

Stock on

 

of Stock 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

of Stock

 

Underlying

 

Option

 

Grant

 

and Option

 

 

Grant

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

or Units

 

Options(2)(3)

 

Awards(4)

 

Date(4)

 

Awards(5)

Name

 

Date

 

($)

 

($)

 

($)

 

(#)

 

(#)

 

(#)

 

(#)

 

(#)

 

($/Sh)

 

($/Sh)

 

($)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPIP(6)

 

N/A

 

712,500

 

1,781,300

 

3,562,500

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

188,679

 

117.73

 

118.81

 

4,839,616

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

16,604

 

41,509

 

41,509

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

4,680,970

Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPIP(6)

 

N/A

 

186,000

 

465,000

 

930,000

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

35,750

 

117.73

 

118.81

 

916,988

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

3,146

 

7,865

 

7,865

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

886,936

Thomas W. Handley

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPIP(6)

 

N/A

 

238,100

 

595,200

 

1,190,300

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

39,722

 

117.73

 

118.81

 

1,018,869

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

3,496

 

8,739

 

8,739

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

985,497

Michael A. Hickey

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPIP(6)

 

N/A

 

163,000

 

407,400

 

814,700

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

23,833

 

117.73

 

118.81

 

611,316

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

2,097

 

5,243

 

5,243

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

591,253

Christophe Beck

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPIP(6)

 

N/A

 

164,500

 

411,100

 

822,200

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

23,833

 

117.73

 

118.81

 

611,316

2010 Stock Incentive Plan

 

12/07/2016

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

2,097

 

5,243

 

5,243

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

591,253

(1)

Amounts reflect the threshold, target and maximum number of shares of Company Common Stock that may be earned pursuant to performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) awards granted in 2016. No PBRSUs may be earned if adjusted ROIC is below the threshold goal, and no more than 100% of the PBRSUs may be earned if adjusted ROIC is above the target goal; accordingly, target and maximum are equal. Dividend equivalents are not paid or accrued during the performance period. See the discussion under the heading “Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units” in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis for more information on these awards, including with respect to the target and maximum performance goals.

(2)

Options granted in 2016 have a ten-year contractual exercise term and vest (or will be exercisable) over three years, on a cumulative basis, as to one third of the option shares on the first and second anniversaries of the date of grant and as to the remaining option shares on the third anniversary.

(3)

If a holder terminates employment at or after age 55 with five or more years of continuous employment, stock options held at least six months will become immediately exercisable in full and the service-based vesting conditions on PBRSU awards held at least six months will be deemed satisfied but vesting will remain subject to attainment of the performance goals; all unvested restricted stock unit awards will terminate and be forfeited. A discussion of the consequences of a change in control on outstanding options, PBRSU awards and restricted stock awards begins at page 55 under the heading “Change in Control.”

(4)

Each of the stock options granted to our named executive officers during the year ended December 31, 2016 and reported in the table above were granted on the same date as our Compensation Committee approval date and have an exercise price which is the average of the high and low market price on the date of grant. We believe that the use of the average of the high and low market price on the date of the grant removes potential same-day stock volatility.

(5)

Represents the grant date fair value of each equity award, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. With respect to stock options, the value has been determined by application of the lattice (binomial)-pricing model, based upon the terms of the option grant and Ecolab’s stock price performance history as of the date of the grant. Key assumptions include: risk-free rate of return, expected life of the option, expected stock price volatility and expected dividend yield. The specific assumptions used in the valuation of these options are located in footnote (3) to the Summary Compensation Table at page 43. With respect to PBRSUs, the value has been determined based on the maximum award payout, consistent with the estimate of aggregate compensation cost to be recognized over the three-year vesting period of the award. See footnote (1) above for a description of the performance goals and performance period.

(6)

The Company maintains annual cash incentive programs for executives referred to as the Management Incentive Plan, or MIP, and Management Performance Incentive Plan, or MPIP, which are discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis under the headings “Annual Cash Incentives” and “Regulatory Considerations,” including detail regarding the MPIP and MIP performance goals.  In the case of the named executive officer participants, the potential payouts that could be earned under the MIP for 2016 and that would be used to guide the Committee’s discretion under the MPIP are noted in the MPIP row of the above table. Actual payouts to each of the named executive officers with respect to 2016 are included under the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column in the Summary Compensation Table at page 43.  Each award is subject to and interpreted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the MPIP or MIP, as applicable, and no amount will be paid under the MPIP or the MIP unless and until the Committee has determined the extent to which the applicable performance goal has been met, the corresponding amount of the award earned by the participant and the degree to which the Committee chooses to exercise its permitted discretion under the MPIP.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    45

  
 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 All Other
Stock
Awards:
Number of
Shares of
Stock or
Units
(#)

 All Other
Option
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Options(2,3)
(#)

  
 Closing
Market
Price of
Stock on
Grant
Date(4)
($/Sh)

  
 
 
  
 Estimated Future Payouts
Under Non-Equity
Incentive Plan Awards
 Estimated Future Payouts
Under Equity
Incentive Plan Awards(1,4)
 Exercise
or Base
Price of
Option
Awards(4)
($/Sh)

 Grant Date
Fair Value
of Stock
and Option
Awards(5)
($)

 
Name
 Grant
Date

 Threshold
($)

 Target
($)

 Maximum
($)

 Threshold
(#)

 Target
(#)

 Maximum
(#)

 
  
Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO)                                     
MPIP(6)  N/A  617,800  1,544,600  3,089,200  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  163,139  107.685  109.25  3,778,299 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  14,356  35,891  35,891  0  0  0  0  3,701,798 
Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO)                                     
MPIP(6)  N/A  146,300  365,600  731,300  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  32,628  107.685  109.25  755,664 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  2,871  7,178  7,178  0  0  0  0  740,339 
Thomas W. Handley                                     
MPIP(6)  N/A  202,300  505,800  1,011,500  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  40,785  107.685  109.25  944,581 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  3,589  8,973  8,973  0  0  0  0  925,475 
Stephen M. Taylor                                     
MPIP(6)  N/A  154,814  387,036  774,072  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  28,549  107.685  109.25  661,195 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  2,512  6,281  6,281  0  0  0  0  647,822 
Michael A. Hickey                                     
MPIP(6)  N/A  145,900  364,700  729,400  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  0 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  0  0  0  0  24,471  107.685  109.25  566,748 
2010 Stock Incentive Plan  12/03/2014  0  0  0  2,154  5,384  5,384  0  0  0  0  555,306 

(1)
Amounts reflect the threshold, target and maximum number of shares of Company Common Stock that may be earned pursuant to performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) awards granted in 2014. The PBRSU awards cliff-vest after three years, subject to attainment of performance goals over a three-year performance period of 2015 to 2017. For the 2015 to 2017 performance cycle, 40% of the PBRSUs granted may be earned subject to attainment of a threshold goal of 10% average annual return on invested capital excluding purchase accounting and special gains and charges relating to the Nalco and Champion transactions (ROIC) over the performance cycle, and 100% of the PBRSUs may be earned subject to attainment of a target goal of 15% average annual ROIC over the cycle, with straight-line proration for performance results between threshold and target goals. No PBRSUs may be earned if ROIC is below the threshold goal, and no more than 100% of the PBRSUs may be earned if ROIC is above the target goal; accordingly, target and maximum are equal. Dividend equivalents are not paid or accrued during the performance period. See the discussion of performance-based restricted stock units in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis at page 30 for more information on these awards.

(2)
Options granted in 2014 have a ten-year contractual exercise term and vest (or will be exercisable) over three years, on a cumulative basis, as to one third of the option shares on the first and second anniversaries of the date of grant and as to the remaining option shares on the third anniversary.

(3)
If a holder terminates employment at or after age 55 with five or more years of continuous employment, stock options held at least six months will become immediately exercisable in full and the service-based vesting conditions on PBRSU awards held at least six months will be deemed satisfied but vesting will remain subject to attainment of the performance goals; all unvested restricted stock unit awards will terminate and be forfeited. A discussion of the consequences of a change in control on outstanding options, PBRSU awards and restricted stock awards is at page 44 under the heading "Change in Control."

(4)
Each of the stock options granted to our named executive officers during the year ended December 31, 2014 and reported in the table above were granted on the same date as our Compensation Committee approval date and have an exercise price which is the average of the high and low market price on the date of grant. We believe that the use of the average of the high and low market price on the date of the grant removes potential same-day stock volatility.

(5)
Represents the grant date fair value of each equity award, computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. With respect to stock options, the value has been determined by application of the lattice (binomial)-pricing model, based upon the terms of the option grant and Ecolab's stock price performance history as of the date of the grant. Key assumptions include: risk-free rate of return, expected life of the option, expected stock price volatility and expected dividend yield. The specific assumptions used in the valuation of these options are located in footnote (3) to the Summary Compensation Table at page 33.


With respect to PBRSUs, the value has been determined based on the maximum award payout, consistent with the estimate of aggregate compensation cost to be recognized over the three-year vesting period of the award. See footnote (1) above for a description of the performance goals and performance period.

(6)
The Company maintains annual cash incentive programs for executives referred to as the Management Incentive Plan, or MIP and Management Performance Incentive Plan, or MPIP, which are discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 27. In May 2014, the Company's stockholders approved the version of the MPIP applicable for 2014, an annual incentive plan under which awards are intended to qualify as performance-based under Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m). As required under the terms of the MPIP, the Compensation Committee of the Board ("Committee") selected each of Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley, Taylor and Hickey to participate in the MPIP for 2014 for the period January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2014, established the 2014 performance goal based upon the performance criteria of diluted earnings per share ("EPS"), an EPS performance target of a designated amount, and a maximum permitted cash payout of 300% of the participant's base salary for the period of participation in 2014 to the extent the goal is achieved. The MPIP permits the Committee to exercise downward discretion and pay an amount which is less than the amount of the maximum permitted payout that may have been earned by the participant. In applying this downward discretion, the Committee is guided by applying operating metrics established under the MIP at the beginning of 2014. In the case of the named executive officer participants, the potential payouts that could be earned under the MIP for 2014 and that

Table of Contents

    would be used to guide the Committee's discretion under the MPIP are noted in the MPIP row of the above table. Actual payouts to each of the named executive officers with respect to 2014 are included under the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column in the Summary Compensation Table at page 33. Refer to the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 27 for more detail regarding the MPIP and MIP performance goals. Each award is subject to and interpreted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the MPIP or MIP, as applicable, and no amount will be paid under the MPIP or the MIP unless and until the Committee has determined the extent to which the applicable performance goal has been met, the corresponding amount of the award earned by the participant and the degree to which the Committee chooses to exercise its permitted discretion under the MPIP.


OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END FOR 2014
2016

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END FOR 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


That Have 
Not Vested
(2)
($)

 

 

 

 

Option Awards

 

Stock Awards

Name

 

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Exercisable

 

Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Unexercisable(1)

 


Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
(#)

 

Option
Exercise
Price
($)

 

Option
Expiration
Date

 

Number
of Shares or
Units of Stock
That Have
Not Vested
(#)

 

Market Value
of Shares or
Units of Stock 
That Have
Not Vested
($)

 

Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares, Units
or Other Rights
That Have 
Not Vested
(2)
(#)

 

Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market or
Payout Value of
Unearned
Shares, Units

or Other Rights 
That Have 
Not Vested
(2)
($)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 

156,400

 

0

 

-

 

45.665000

 

12/02/19

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

(PEO)

 

160,100

 

0

 

-

 

48.055000

 

12/01/20

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

192,100

 

0

 

-

 

55.595000

 

12/01/21

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

195,800

 

0

 

-

 

71.540000

 

12/05/22

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

150,650

 

0

 

-

 

103.265000

 

12/04/23

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

108,759

 

54,380

 

-

 

107.685000

 

12/03/24

 

-

 

-

 

35,891

 

4,207,143

 

 

57,678

 

115,358

 

-

 

119.120000

 

12/02/25

 

-

 

-

 

38,068

 

4,462,331

 

 

0

 

188,679

 

-

 

117.730000

 

12/07/26

 

-

 

-

 

41,509

 

4,865,685

 

 

 

 

 

 

-

 

 

 

 

 

-

 

-

 

 

 

 

Daniel J. Schmechel

 

14,500

 

0

 

-

 

45.665000

 

12/02/19

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

(PFO)

 

14,500

 

0

 

-

 

48.055000

 

12/01/20

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

15,400

 

0

 

-

 

55.595000

 

12/01/21

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

22,800

 

0

 

-

 

71.540000

 

12/05/22

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

27,980

 

0

 

-

 

103.265000

 

12/04/23

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

21,752

 

10,876

 

-

 

107.685000

 

12/03/24

 

-

 

-

 

7,178

 

841,405

 

 

10,895

 

21,790

 

-

 

119.120000

 

12/02/25

 

-

 

-

 

7,191

 

842,929

 

 

0

 

35,750

 

-

 

117.730000

 

12/07/26

 

-

 

-

 

7,865

 

921,935

Thomas W. Handley

 

31,400

 

0

 

-

 

45.665000

 

12/02/19

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

34,700

 

0

 

-

 

48.055000

 

12/01/20

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

42,300

 

0

 

-

 

55.595000

 

12/01/21

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

52,200

 

0

 

-

 

71.540000

 

12/05/22

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

43,040

 

0

 

-

 

103.265000

 

12/04/23

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

27,190

 

13,595

 

-

 

107.685000

 

12/03/24

 

-

 

-

 

8,973

 

1,051,815

 

 

12,817

 

25,635

 

-

 

119.120000

 

12/02/25

 

-

 

-

 

8,460

 

991,681

 

 

0

 

39,722

 

-

 

117.730000

 

12/07/26

 

-

 

-

 

8,739

 

1,024,386

Michael A. Hickey

 

13,700

 

0

 

-

 

45.665000

 

12/02/19

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

19,300

 

0

 

-

 

48.055000

 

12/01/20

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

25,000

 

0

 

-

 

55.595000

 

12/01/21

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

32,600

 

0

 

-

 

71.540000

 

12/05/22

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

25,830

 

0

 

-

 

103.265000

 

12/04/23

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

16,314

 

8,157

 

-

 

107.685000

 

12/03/24

 

-

 

-

 

5,384

 

631,112

 

 

7,690

 

15,381

 

-

 

119.120000

 

12/02/25

 

-

 

-

 

5,076

 

595,009

 

 

0

 

23,833

 

-

 

117.730000

 

12/07/26

 

-

 

-

 

5,243

 

614,584

Christophe Beck

 

23,500

 

0

 

-

 

45.665000

 

12/02/19

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

25,100

 

0

 

-

 

48.055000

 

12/01/20

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

30,700

 

0

 

-

 

55.595000

 

12/01/21

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

32,600

 

0

 

-

 

71.540000

 

12/05/22

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

25,830

 

0

 

-

 

103.265000

 

12/04/23

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

-

 

 

16,314

 

8,157

 

-

 

107.685000

 

12/03/24

 

-

 

-

 

5,384

 

631,112

 

 

7,690

 

15,381

 

-

 

119.120000

 

12/02/25

 

-

 

-

 

5,076

 

595,009

 

 

0

 

23,833

 

-

 

117.730000

 

12/07/26

 

-

 

-

 

5,243

 

614,584

(1)

Stock options have a ten-year contractual exercise term and vest ratably on the first three anniversaries of the date of grant, subject to the post-termination and change-in-control provisions generally described on page 53 under the heading “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.”

46    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement

 
 Option Awards
 Stock Awards
 
  
Name
 Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Exercisable

 Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(#)
Unexercisable(1)

 Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Unearned
Options
(#)

 Option
Exercise
Price
($)

 Option
Expiration
Date

 Number of
Shares or
Units of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested
(#)

 Market
Value of
Shares or
Units of
Stock That
Have Not
Vested
($)

 Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Number of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested(2)
(#)

 Equity
Incentive
Plan Awards:
Market or
Payout
Value of
Unearned
Shares,
Units or
Other
Rights That
Have Not
Vested(2)
($)

 
  
Douglas M. Baker, Jr.  421,000  0  0 $35.630000  12/03/18  0  0  0  0 
(PEO)  156,400  0  0 $45.665000  12/02/19  0  0  0  0 
   160,100  0  0 $48.055000  12/01/20  0  0  0  0 
   192,100  0  0 $55.595000  12/01/21  0  0  0  0 
   130,533  65,267  0 $71.540000  12/05/22  0  0  43,070 $4,501,676 
   50,216  100,434  0 $103.265000  12/04/23  0  0  33,144 $3,464,211 
   0  163,139  0 $107.685000  12/03/24  0  0  35,891 $3,751,327 
Daniel J. Schmechel  21,500  0  0 $49.420000  12/05/17  0  0  0  0 
(PFO)  34,400  0  0 $35.630000  12/03/18  0  0  0  0 
   14,500  0  0 $45.665000  12/02/19  0  0  0  0 
   14,500  0  0 $48.055000  12/01/20  0  0  0  0 
   15,400  0  0 $55.595000  12/01/21  0  0  0  0 
   15,200  7,600  0 $71.540000  12/05/22  0  0  5,030 $525,736 
   9,326  18,654  0 $103.265000  12/04/23  0  0  6,155 $643,321 
   0  32,628  0 $107.685000  12/03/24  0  0  7,178 $750,245 
Thomas W. Handley  40,000  0  0 $49.420000  12/05/17  0  0  0  0 
   60,000  0  0 $35.630000  12/03/18  0  0  0  0 
   31,400  0  0 $45.665000  12/02/19  0  0  0  0 
   34,700  0  0 $48.055000  12/01/20  0  0  0  0 
   42,300  0  0 $55.595000  12/01/21  0  0  0  0 
   34,800  17,400  0 $71.540000  12/05/22  0  0  11,490 $1,200,935 
   14,346  28,694  0 $103.265000  12/04/23  0  0  9,470 $989,804 
   0  40,785  0 $107.685000  12/03/24  0  0  8,973 $937,858 
Stephen M. Taylor  9,600  0  0 $55.595000  12/01/21  0  0  0  0 
   38,400(3) 0  0 $55.595000  12/01/21  0  0  0  0 
   21,733  10,867  0 $71.540000  12/05/22  0  0  7,180 $740,454 
   0  97,900(3) 0 $71.540000  12/05/22  21,540(4)$2,251,361  0  0 
   8,610  17,220  0 $103.265000  12/04/23  0  0  5,682 $593,883 
   0  28,549  0 $107.685000  12/03/24  0  0  6,281 $656,490 
Michael A. Hickey  20,900  0  0 $45.240000  12/06/16  0  0  0  0 
   21,500  0  0 $49.420000  12/05/17  0  0  0  0 
   30,300  0  0 $35.630000  12/03/18  0  0  0  0 
   13,700  0  0 $45.665000  12/02/19  0  0  0  0 
   19,300  0  0 $48.055000  12/01/20  0  0  0  0 
   25,000  0  0 $55.595000  12/01/21  0  0  0  0 
   21,733  10,867  0 $71.540000  12/05/22  0  0  7,180 $750,454 
   8,610  17,220  0 $103.265000  12/04/23  0  0  5,682 $593,883 
   0  24,471  0 $107.685000  12/03/24  0  0  5,384 $562,736 
  

(1)
Except for options held by Mr. Taylor described under footnote (3) to this table, stock options have a ten-year contractual exercise term and vest ratably on the first three anniversaries of the date of grant, subject to the post-termination and change-in-control provisions generally described at pages 42 through 45 under the heading "Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control."

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END FOR 2016


Table of Contents

    The vesting dates of the respective stock options held at December 31, 20142016 that were unexercisable are summarized in the table below:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name

 

Option Grant
Date

 

Securities vesting
December 2017

 

Securities vesting
December 2018

 

Securities vesting
December 2019

 

Option Expiration
Date

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 

12/03/14

 

54,380

 

0

 

0

 

12/03/24

(PEO)

 

12/02/15

 

57,679

 

57,679

 

0

 

12/02/25

 

 

12/07/16

 

62,893

 

62,893

 

62,893

 

12/07/26

Daniel J. Schmechel

 

12/03/14

 

10,876

 

0

 

0

 

12/03/24

(PFO)

 

12/02/15

 

10,895

 

10,895

 

0

 

12/02/25

 

 

12/07/16

 

11,917

 

11,917

 

11,917

 

12/07/26

Thomas W. Handley

 

12/03/14

 

13,595

 

0

 

0

 

12/03/24

 

 

12/02/15

 

12,817

 

12,818

 

0

 

12/02/25

 

 

12/07/16

 

13,240

 

13,241

 

13,241

 

12/07/26

Michael A. Hickey

 

12/03/14

 

8,157

 

0

 

0

 

12/03/24

 

 

12/02/15

 

7,690

 

7,691

 

0

 

12/02/25

 

 

12/07/16

 

7,944

 

7,944

 

7,945

 

12/07/26

Christophe Beck

 

12/03/14

 

8,157

 

0

 

0

 

12/03/24

 

 

12/02/15

 

7,690

 

7,691

 

0

 

12/02/25

 

 

12/07/16

 

7,944

 

7,944

 

7,945

 

12/07/26

  
Name
 Option Grant Date
 Securities vesting
December 2015

 Securities vesting
December 2016

 Securities vesting
December 2017

 Option
Expiration Date

 
  
Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO)  12/05/12  65,267  0  0  12/05/22 
   12/04/13  50,217  50,217  0  12/04/23 
   12/03/14  54,379  54,380  54,380  12/03/24 
Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO)  12/05/12  7,600  0  0  12/05/22 
   12/04/13  9,327  9,327  0  12/04/23 
   12/03/14  10,876  10,876  10,876  12/03/24 
Thomas W. Handley  12/05/12  17,400  0  0  12/05/22 
   12/04/13  14,347  14,347  0  12/04/23 
   12/03/14  13,595  13,595  13,595  12/03/24 
Stephen M. Taylor  12/05/12  108,767  0  0  12/05/22 
   12/04/13  8,610  8,610  0  12/04/23 
   12/03/14  9,516  9,516  9,517  12/03/24 
Michael A. Hickey  12/05/12  10,867  0  0  12/05/22 
   12/04/13  8,610  8,610  0  12/04/23 
   12/03/14  8,157  8,157  8,157  12/03/24 

(2)

Represents performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) awards which cliff-vest after three years, subject to attainment of performance goals over a three-year performance period, and assuming attainment of target (which also represents maximum) performance, as the performance over the prior three-year period has exceeded threshold. In order from top to bottom, the PBRSUs have performance periods of 2015-2017, 2016-2018, and 2017-2019 and will vest on December 31, 2017, December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2019, respectively, and, subject to certification of results by the Compensation Committee, will be paid out in shares of Common Stock no later than March 15 following each vesting date. The awards are subject to the post-termination and change-in-control provisions generally described at pages 53 through 57 under the heading “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control.” The reported market value of $117.22 per share is based on the closing market price of the Company’s Common Stock on December 30, 2016, the last trading day of 2016.

(2)
Represents performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) awards which cliff-vest after three years, subject to attainment of performance goals over a three-year performance period, and assuming attainment of target (which also represents maximum) performance, as the performance over the prior three-year period has exceeded threshold. The reported market value is based on the closing market price of the Company's Common Stock on December 31, 2014 of $104.52 per share. The awards are subject to the post-termination and change-in-control provisions generally described at pages 42 through 45 under the heading "Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control."

(3)
On December 1, 2011 and December 5, 2012, Mr. Taylor received special stock option grants which vest as to 100% of the shares on the third anniversary of the grant and have a ten-year term.

(4)
Represents the grant of a restricted stock unit award on December 5, 2012 to Mr. Taylor which vests 50% on the third anniversary of the date of grant, and 25% on each of the fourth and fifth anniversaries of the date of grant, subject to continued employment.


OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED 
FOR 2014
2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Option Awards

 

Stock Awards

Name

 

Number of Shares
Acquired on Exercise
(#)
(1)

 

Value Realized on
Exercise
($)
(1)

 

Number of Shares
Acquired on Vesting
(#)
(2)

 

Value Realized on Vesting

($)(2)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO)

 

210,500

 

18,350,338

 

33,144

 

3,885,140

Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO)

 

55,900

 

4,536,909

 

6,155

 

721,489

Thomas W. Handley

 

20,000

 

1,724,700

 

9,470

 

1,110,073

Michael A. Hickey

 

51,800

 

4,192,244

 

5,682

 

666,044

Christophe Beck

 

14,800

 

1,305,064

 

5,682

 

666,044

(1)

Represents the aggregate number of shares and dollar amount realized by the named executive officer upon exercise of one or more stock options during 2016. The dollar amount realized on exercise represents the difference between the fair market value of our Common Stock on the exercise date and the exercise price of the option.

(2)

Represents the performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) shares earned for the 2014-2016 performance period that ended on December 31, 2016 because performance targets were met. The value shown as realized is based on the number of shares earned for the 2014-2016 performance period using the per-share closing market price of our Common Stock of $117.22 on December 30, 2016, the last trading day of 2016, although shares were not issued until Compensation Committee certification of results on February 22, 2017.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    47

 
 Option Awards
 Stock Awards
 
  
Name
 Number of Shares
Acquired on Exercise
(#)(1)

 Value Realized
on Exercise
($)(1)

 Number of Shares
Acquired on Vesting
(#)

 Value Realized
on Vesting
($)

 
  

Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO)

  603,100 $38,562,285  46,100(2)$4,818,372(2)

Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO)

  68,800 $4,969,061  3,690(2)$385,679(2)

Thomas W. Handley

  63,800 $3,742,142  10,140(2)$1,059,833(2)

Stephen M. Taylor

  28,735 $1,721,332  25,620(3)$2,721,778(3)

Michael A. Hickey

  0 $0  5,990(2)$626,075(2)

(1)
Represents the aggregate number of shares and dollar amount realized by the named executive officer upon exercise of one or more stock options during 2014. The dollar amount realized on exercise represents the difference between the fair market value of our Common Stock on the exercise date and the exercise price of the option.

(2)
Represents the performance-based restricted stock unit (PBRSU) shares earned for the 2012-2014 performance period that ended on December 31, 2014 because performance targets were met. The value shown as realized is based on the number of shares earned for the 2012-2014 performance period using the per-share closing market price of our common stock of $104.52 on December 31, 2014, although shares were not issued until Compensation Committee certification of results on February 25, 2015.

(3)
Represents (i) the vesting on February 28, 2014 of a performance stock unit award granted in 2011 that, in connection with the Nalco merger, was converted from an award to receive shares of Nalco Common Stock, (ii) the vesting on December 1, 2014 of a restricted stock unit award granted on December 1, 2011, and (iii) the vesting of PBRSUs in the manner set forth in footnote (2) above.

Table of Contents


PENSION BENEFITS FOR 2014
2016

PENSION BENEFITS FOR 2016

  
Name
 Plan Name
 Number of
Years Credited
Service
(#)

 Present
Value of
Accumulated
Benefit
($)

 Payments
During Last
Fiscal Year
($)

 
  
Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO) Pension Plan  25 $923,612  0 
  Mirror Pension Plan  25 $12,694,004  0 
  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan  25 $4,026,344  0 
Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO) Pension Plan  19 $679,987  0 
  Mirror Pension Plan  19 $1,366,415  0 
  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan  20.35 $669,964  0 
Thomas W. Handley Pension Plan  11 $144,102  0 
  Mirror Pension Plan  11 $364,631  0 
  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan  25.10 $3,254,093  0 
Stephen M. Taylor U.K. Plan  7.75 $536,624  0 
  Pension Plan  0.33 $4,482  0 
  Mirror Pension Plan  0.33 $0  0 
  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan  N/A $0  0 
Michael A. Hickey Pension Plan  29 $964,159  0 
  Mirror Pension Plan  29 $2,581,531  0 
  Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan  29 $1,115,674  0 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name

 

Plan Name

 

Number of Years
of Credited Service
(#)

 

Present Value of
Accumulated Benefit
($)

 

Payments During 
Last Fiscal Year

($)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO)

 

Pension Plan

 

27.0

 

1,071,421

 

0

 

 

Mirror Pension Plan

 

27.0

 

16,683,455

 

0

 

 

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

 

27.0

 

5,152,794

 

0

Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO)

 

Pension Plan

 

21.0

 

806,399

 

0

 

 

Mirror Pension Plan

 

21.0

 

2,334,048

 

0

 

 

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

 

22.35

 

1,020,831

 

0

Thomas W. Handley

 

Pension Plan

 

13.0

 

182,691

 

0

 

 

Mirror Pension Plan

 

13.0

 

451,971

 

0

 

 

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

 

27.10

 

4,396,124

 

0

Michael A. Hickey

 

Pension Plan

 

31.0

 

1,103,032

 

0

 

 

Mirror Pension Plan

 

31.0

 

4,075,689

 

0

 

 

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

 

31.0

 

1,435,639

 

0

Christophe Beck

 

Pension Plan

 

9.0

 

56,825

 

0

 

 

Mirror Pension Plan

 

9.0

 

116,846

 

0

 

 

Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan

 

14.10

 

1,091,528

 

0

The Company maintains the following non-contributory defined benefit plans for its executives: (i) a U.S. tax-qualified plan (Pension Plan); (ii) a non-qualified excess plan (Mirror Pension); and (iii) a supplemental executive retirement plan (SERP). Mr. Taylor has a pension benefit in the Nalco Limited 2002 Pension Plan (U.K. Plan), which covers certain U.K. employees of the Company hired prior to October 1, 2002, from a prior employment assignment in the U.K. The U.K. Plan is described in more detail on page 40. Mr. Taylor became a participant in the Pension Plan and the Mirror Pension Plan at the time of his transfer to employment in the U.S. on September 1, 2014.

The preceding table shows the actuarial present value of the accumulated benefit for each executive officer under the Pension Plan, the Mirror Pension and the SERP as of December 31, 2014,2016, using the same assumptions as are used by the Company for financial reporting purposes under generally accepted accounting principles, except that retirement age is assumed to be age 62, the earliest retirement age at which a participant may retire under the plans without any benefit reduction due to age. The current accrued benefit for U.S. executives is allocated between the tax-qualified Pension Plan and the related supplemental non-qualified plans based on the Internal Revenue Code limitations applicable to tax-qualified plans as of December 31, 2014.2016. The present value is determined by using a discount rate of 4.14%4.30% for 2014the Pension Plan and 3.70% for the Mirror Pension Plan and SERP for 2016 and assuming that the executive officerofficer: (i) terminated employment on December 31, 20142016 with vested benefits; and (ii) commenced a retirement benefit at age 62 as a single life annuity or lump sum, if available. The present value of the Pension Plan single life annuity assumed mortality rates from the “RP 2014 Healthy Annuitant Mortality” table, projected back to 2006 with mortality improvement scale MP 2014, and projected forward with scale MP 2016. Mirror Pension and SERP annuities were converted to lump sums, where available, using an interest rate of 2.88%2.20% and the mortality rates defined in the Mirror Pension and SERP plans as prescribed in Revenue Ruling 2001-62. The present value of the pension single life annuity assumed mortality rates from the RP 2014 Healthy Annuitant Mortality with generational mortality improvement scale MP 2014 table. Cash balance benefits were valued assuming future interest credits of 2.33%2.14% for periods after December 31, 2014.2016. The cash balance annuity conversion for the SERP offset used the interest rate and mortality assumptions prescribed by the IRS under Internal Revenue Code Section 417(e) for 20142016 pension lump sum calculations. The actuarial assumptions used for the U.K. Plan are discussed at page 40.

The Pension Plan is a tax-qualified defined benefit plan covering most U.S. employees of the Company and its U.S. affiliates. It is intended to provide long-service employees a foundation for retirement benefits in the form of regular income. Participants hired prior to January 1, 2003, including Messrs. Baker, Schmechel and Hickey, earn monthly pension benefits under the following formula ("(“traditional formula"formula”):1/ 1/12 of the sum ofof: (a) years of credited service times 1% of "final“final average compensation"compensation” plus (b) years of credited service (not exceeding 35) times 0.45% of "final“final average compensation"compensation” minus "covered“covered compensation." "Final” “Final average compensation"compensation” is the average of the participant'sparticipant’s annual compensation for the five consecutive calendar years that produce the highest average, counting the participant'sparticipant’s base salary and annual cash incentive compensation for a plan year, excluding any long-term and non-cash incentive bonuses and amounts above the IRS compensation limits for qualified plans. "Covered compensation"“Covered compensation” is the average Social Security taxable wage base over a 35 year period ending at a participant'sparticipant’s Social Security retirement age.

Participants hired after 2002, including Messrs.Mr. Handley and Taylor (following his entry into the Pension Plan on September 1, 2014),Mr. Beck, accrue an account credit at the end of each year equal to a fixed percentage of the participant'sparticipant’s compensation for that year plus an interest credit applied to the participant'sparticipant’s account balance on the first day of that year ("(“cash balance formula"formula”). The fixed percentage is either 3%5% or 5%3% depending on a participant'sparticipant’s date of entry into the Pension Plan. Mr. Handley'sHandley’s and Mr. Beck’s cash balance formula isformulas are based on 5% and 3% of compensation, while Mr. Taylor's cash balance formula is based on 3% of compensation.respectively. Compensation used in determining the credits is the participant'sparticipant’s base salary and

48    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


PENSION BENEFITS FOR 2016

annual cash incentive compensation for a plan year, excluding any long-term and non-cash incentive bonuses and amounts above the IRS limits for qualified plans.

Participants become entitled to a non-forfeitable ("vested"(“vested”) right to their Pension Plan benefit upon completing three years of continuous service with the Company. Normal retirement date is the date on which the participant attains age 65 and has completed at least three years of continuous service. Traditional formula participants who have terminated employment with the Company may begin to receive benefit payments as early as age 55, reducing the benefit by 1/280 for each month by which


Table of Contents

payment begins before age 62. Unreduced benefits may begin after attaining age 62. The normal form of benefit is a single life only annuity for participants who are not married and a joint and 50% survivor annuity for married participants. Subject to a spousal consent requirement for married participants, participants may select an actuarially equivalent benefit in one of the following forms: single life only annuity; joint and 75% or 100% survivor annuity (married participants only); life and five-year certain annuity; and life and ten-year certain annuity. If a participant dies after benefit commencement, payments to a beneficiary, if any, are made according to the payment option selected by the participant. If a participant with a vested traditional formula benefit dies before benefit payments commence, the participant'sparticipant’s beneficiary is entitled to a death benefit. If the beneficiary is the participant'sparticipant’s surviving spouse, the benefit is a life annuity beginning after the participant would have attained age 55. Other beneficiaries receive a five- or ten-year annuity benefit.

Cash balance formula participants with at least three years of continuous service may commence benefit payment at any time after termination. The payment will be the actuarial equivalent value of their account balance, determined using the mortality and interest factors prescribed by the IRS. The normal form of benefit for cash balance formula participants is a single life only annuity for participants who are not married and a joint and 50% survivor annuity for married participants. Optional forms of payment for cash balance formula participants are lump-sum payment, single life annuity, and, for married participants only, joint and 75% or 100% survivor annuity. The beneficiary of a cash balance formula participant who dies before commencing benefits will receive a death benefit actuarially equivalent to the participant'sparticipant’s account balance.

The Mirror Pension Plan is a non-qualified plan intended to restore benefits under the tax-qualified Pension Plan for those employees whose benefits are reduced by Internal Revenue Code limits. The Mirror Pension has generally the same terms as the Pension Plan except: (i) compensation is determined without regard to the IRS limits for qualified plans; (ii) vesting is accelerated upon a change in control; (iii) benefits may be forfeited for certain serious misconduct; and (iv) the optional forms of benefits available to participants with respect to benefits accrued and vested as of December 31, 2004 ("(“Grandfathered Mirror Pension Benefits"Benefits”) include a lump sum payment. Benefits accrued or vested after December 31, 2004 are subject to Internal Revenue Code Section 409A ("(“409A Mirror Pension Benefits"Benefits”) and are not linked to the Pension Plan. The normal form of 409A Mirror Pension Benefits is a 10-year annual installment payout commencing upon the later of attainment of age 55 or separation from service for traditional formula participants, or upon separation from service for cash balance formula participants, provided that payment to a "specified employee"“specified employee” (corporate officers, including each of the named executive officers) may not commence earlier than six months after separation from service. Optional forms of benefits available to participants include 5-year annual installments, lump sum or an annuity option (single life, life and 5-year certain, life and 10-year certain, and for married participants, joint and 50%, 75% or 100% survivor). Participants were permitted to make a transition election as to an optional form of benefit for their 409A Mirror Pension Benefits before the end of 2008 as permitted under 409A regulations. Any subsequent change in optional form by a participant is subject to the "1-year/“1-year/5-year rule"rule” which requires that the change be made 12 months before separation from service and must not become effective for 12 months after the election is made (the 1-year rule), and the payment commencement date must be delayed for five years after the date the amounts would otherwise have been paid (the 5-year rule). A participant who elects an annuity option may choose among the various types of annuity forms at any time before benefit commencement. Despite the plan'splan’s normal form of benefit or a participant'sparticipant’s election of an optional form of benefit, the Company will cash out the participant'sparticipant’s Grandfathered Mirror Pension Benefit and/or the participant'sparticipant’s 409A Mirror Pension Benefit in a lump sum if the present value of such portion of the benefit at the time of distribution does not exceed $25,000.

The SERP is a non-qualified supplemental executive retirement plan intended to ensure a pension benefit that replaces a significant portion of the income of certain executives. The maximum SERP benefit equals 2% of final average compensation multiplied by years of credited service (up to 30 years), reduced by the benefits payable under the Pension Plan, the Mirror Pension and 50% of the age 65 Primary Social Security benefit. A participant age 65 with 30 years of service would receive benefits from all three defined benefit plans equal to 60% of final average compensation (less 50% of the age 65 Social Security benefit). For certain executives hired by the Company after age 35 and therefore unable to earn the maximum benefit at age

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    49


PENSION BENEFITS FOR 2016

65, the SERP provides an additional "past“past service benefit." The annual past service benefit equals 1% of the difference between final average compensation and annualized earnings at the time of joining the Company ("(“first year earnings"earnings”) multiplied by the difference between the executive'sexecutive’s age at date of hire and 35. Material terms of the SERP are similar to those of the Pension Plan except: (i) compensation is determined without regard to the IRS limits for qualified plans; (ii) the SERP benefit vests upon attainment of age 55 and completion of ten years of service or attainment of age 65; (iii) vesting is accelerated upon a change in control; (iv) benefits may be forfeited for certain serious misconduct; and (v) participants hired after age 35 are credited with additional "past“past service credit"credit” equal to one year for each year by which the executive'sexecutive’s age at date of hire exceeded 35. In addition, the normal form of benefit with respect to SERP benefits accrued and vested as of December 31, 2004 ("(“Grandfathered SERP Benefits"Benefits”) is a 15-year certain monthly annuity commencing at age 65, and participants may elect to receive an actuarially equivalent benefit in any of the optional forms of payment available under the Pension Plan or in a lump sum. SERP benefits accrued or vested after December 31, 2004 are subject to Internal Revenue Code Section 409A ("(“409A SERP Benefits"Benefits”). The normal form of benefit, election of optional forms of benefit and time of commencement of the 409A SERP Benefits are linked to the Mirror Pension. Despite the normal form of benefit or a participant'sparticipant’s optional form of benefit election, the Company will cash out the participant'sparticipant’s grandfathered SERP Benefits and/or the participant'sparticipant’s 409A SERP Benefits in a lump sum if the present value of such portion of the benefit at the time of distribution does not exceed $25,000.

Messrs. Schmechel, Handley and HandleyBeck were hired by the Company after age 35 and will benefit from the past service benefit and past service credits under the SERP. The SERP benefit in the above table includes past service benefits for Mr. Schmechel totaling $69,008$98,022 for 1.35 years of past service credit, and Mr. Handley totaling $1,248,305$1,504,106 for 14.10 years of past service credit and Mr. Beck totaling $194,220 for 5.10 years of past service credit.

In 2010, the SERP was amended to eliminate further benefit accruals after December 31, 2020.

Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley and HandleyHickey are the only named executive officers eligible for early retirement under the Pension Plan, Mirror Pension and SERP as of December 31, 2014.2016. As a cash balance formula participant,participants, Mr. Handley and Mr. Beck would be eligible to receive histheir vested benefits under the Pension Plan and Mirror Pension upon separation from service.


Table of Contents

The Company does not grant extra years of credited service under the Pension Plan or the Mirror Pension Plan except as approved by its Board of Directors. Prior service credits have been approved by the Board in limited circumstances in connection with a business acquisition or merger, entry into plan participation by employees formerly participating in a union plan while employed with the Company and for employment with the Company before the Pension Plan was adopted in 1972. None of the named executive officers has been granted extra years of service under these plans. The SERP grants extra years of credited service for certain executive officers hired by the Company after age 35. Messrs. Schmechel, Handley and HandleyBeck have been granted extra years as noted above in the discussion of the SERP.

The actuarial present value of Mr. Taylor's accumulated benefit in the U.K. Plan as of November 30, 2014, is $536,624 and is reflected in the Pension Benefits for 2014 table on the line for "U.K. Plan". The measurement date of November 30, 2014, and other assumptions used to determine the value of Mr. Taylor's benefit, are consistent with those used by the Company for financial reporting purposes under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The value of Mr. Taylor's current accrued benefit was determined based on a 3.50% discount rate. Different portions of the U.K. pensions are indexed according to various inflation measures (CPI or RPI), which in addition in some instances are subject to caps. The resulting inflation measures are assumed to range from 1.75% to 4.5%, with the underlying inflation being assumed as 3.25% for RPI and 2.25% for CPI.

The U.K. Plan provides benefits described in the Trust Deed and Rules dated July 4, 2002, as amended on August 25, 2009, and subsequently amended at December 22, 2009, and November 8, 2012, and as supplemented by the provisions of the predecessor plans. The U.K. Plan provides a 5-year certain-and-life annuity benefit at normal retirement equal to one-sixtieth (1/60) of final pensionable pay multiplied by years of pensionable service. Final pensionable pay is defined as the average of the last three pensionable pay figures at the date of retirement or earlier exit. Pensionable pay is basic salary on each April 1. Effective January 1, 2010, the U.K. Plan was amended to limit increases in pensionable earnings to no more than 2% per year.

Participants in the U.K. Plan may exchange part of their pension for a tax-free lump sum at retirement. The rate of exchange is determined by the Trustees based on actuarial advice. The normal retirement age is 65, but members may draw their pension early. Active and deferred members require consent from the Company to retire early. Once in payment, pensions increase each April 1, in line with the provisions of the Trust Deed and Rules and in accordance with statutory provisions. Partner's and children's pensions may become payable on the event of the death of a member of the Plan.

50    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement

Mr. Taylor's benefit in the U.K. Plan increased solely as a passage of time, as his service and compensation in 2014 were not considered in determining his U.K. Plan benefit.



NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION FOR 2014
2016

NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION FOR 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Name

 

Executive
Contributions in
Last FY
(1)(2)
($)

 

Registrant
Contributions in
Last FY
(1)(2)
($)

 

Aggregate
Earnings in
Last FY
($)

 

Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions
($)

 

Aggregate
Balance at
Last FYE
(3)
($)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO)

 

131,080

 

104,864

 

284,331

 

0

 

4,275,708

Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO)

 

126,588

 

30,374

 

100,337

 

0

 

999,908

Thomas W. Handley

 

46,953

 

37,562

 

51,050

 

0

 

2,035,861

Michael A. Hickey

 

36,496

 

29,197

 

44,224

 

0

 

677,034

Christophe Beck

 

54,722

 

41,041

 

45,663

 

0

 

655,226
  
Name
 Executive Contributions
in Last FY(1,2)
($)

 Registrant Contributions
in Last FY(1)
($)

 Aggregate Earnings
in Last FY
($)

 Aggregate Withdrawals/
Distributions
($)

 Aggregate Balance at
Last FYE(3)
($)

 
  
Douglas M. Baker, Jr. (PEO) $170,369 $136,295 $164,879  0 $3,602,251 
Daniel J. Schmechel (PFO) $40,300 $32,240 $58,778  0 $770,694 
Thomas W. Handley $57,060 $45,648 $80,236  0 $1,821,592 
Stephen M. Taylor(4) $11,299 $8,474  0  0  0 
Michael A. Hickey $38,777 $31,022 $23,740  0 $504,914 

(1)

Contributions credited in 2016 include deferrals and match on base salary earned in 2016 and annual cash incentive earned in respect of 2016.

(1)
Contributions credited in 2014 include deferrals and match on base salary earned in 2014 and annual cash incentive earned in respect of 2014.

(2)
Amounts reported for executive contributions and included in the aggregate balance at year end include the following amounts which were reported as salary in 2014 in the Summary Compensation Table at page 33 and which were deferred by each named executive officers: Mr. Baker, $42,164; Mr. Schmechel, $11,375; Mr. Handley, $16,750; and Mr. Hickey, $11,312. Mr. Taylor did not defer any of his salary earned in 2014. Amounts reported for executive contributions include the following amounts reported as annual incentive bonus in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table at page 33 and which were deferred by each of the following named executive officers: Mr. Baker, $128,205; Mr. Schmechel, $28,925; Mr. Handley, $40,310; Mr. Taylor, $11,299; and Mr. Hickey, $27,465.

(3)
Amounts reported in the aggregate balance at last fiscal year end include the following amounts which were reported as compensation to the named executive officer in the Summary Compensation Table in 2006-2013: Mr. Baker, $1,920,204; Mr. Schmechel, $104,955 (Mr. Schmechel became a named executive officer in 2012); Mr. Handley, $696,862 (Mr. Handley became a named executive officer in 2007); and Mr. Hickey, $63,180 (Mr. Hickey was a named executive officer in 2012). Amounts reported in the aggregate balance at last fiscal year end do not include deferrals or match on 2014 annual incentive bonus reported in the table above that are reported in the 2014 Summary Compensation Table at page 33 as these amounts are not credited to the executive's accounts until 2015.

(4)
Mr. Taylor began participating in the Company's non-qualified deferred compensation arrangements on September 1, 2014. However, contributions to his account were not credited until 2015 and so are not included in his Aggregate Balance at Last FYE.

(2)

Amounts reported for executive contributions and included in the aggregate balance at year end include the following amounts which were reported as salary in 2016 in the Summary Compensation Table at page 43 and which were deferred by each named executive officer: Mr. Baker, $46,125; Mr. Schmechel, $15,813; Mr. Handley, $19,813; Mr. Hickey, $13,906; and Mr. Beck, $22,650. Amounts reported for executive contributions include the following amounts reported as annual incentive bonus in the Summary Compensation Table at page 43 and which were deferred by each of the following named executive officers: Mr. Baker, $84,955; Mr. Schmechel, $110,775; Mr. Handley, $27,140; Mr. Hickey, $22,590; and Mr. Beck, $32,072. Amounts reported for registrant contributions are described in more detail in part (ii) of footnote 6(d) to the Summary Compensation Table at page 43.  

(3)

Amounts reported in the aggregate balance at last fiscal year end include the following amounts which were reported as compensation to the named executive officer in the Summary Compensation Table in 2007-2016: Mr. Baker, $2,305,649; Mr. Schmechel, $236,438 (Mr. Schmechel became a named executive officer in 2012); Mr. Handley, $844,624 (Mr. Handley became a named executive officer in 2007); Mr. Hickey, $194,752 (Mr. Hickey was a named executive officer in 2012, 2014, 2015 and 2016); and Mr. Beck, $78,414 (Mr. Beck was a named executive officer in 2015 and 2016).

The Mirror Savings Plan is a non-qualified mirror 401(k) deferred compensation excess plan which enables executives to obtain the benefits of a tax-deferred savings and investment program without regard to limits on compensation and benefits imposed by the Internal Revenue Code on the Company'sCompany’s tax-qualified deferred compensation plans. The plan is unfunded and does not protect the executive from insolvency of the Company. Effective January 1, 2013, we made changesIn 2016, participants were permitted to the Company's U.S. qualified and non-qualified retirement plans to provide fordefer a unified platformspecified percentage of retirement benefits for eligible employeesbase salary in excess of the Company. In that regard,Internal Revenue Code compensation limit for tax-qualified plans. For participants entitled to a final average pay benefit or 5% cash balance benefit in the Mirror SavingsPension Plan, this percentage was amended as of January 1, 2013,5%; for participants entitled to provide an enhanced matching contribution for individuals who became participantsa 3% cash balance benefit in the Pension Plan (those entering the Pension Plan after January 1, 2007, including Mr. Taylor.


Table of Contents

In 2014, participants2007), the specified percentage was 8%. Participants were also permitted to defer up to 25%100% of base salary and up to 100% oftheir annual cash incentive compensation for the calendar year. The Company credits a matching contribution for each of the named executive officers participating in the plan. Participants who are entitled to a final average pay benefit or 5% cash balance benefit in the Pension Plan, including Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley, and Hickey, receive a matching contribution credit equal toto: (i) 100% of the amount of the executive'sexecutive’s deferrals that do not exceed 3% of covered compensation, plus (ii) 50% of the executive'sexecutive’s deferrals that exceed 3% but do not exceed 5% of the executive'sexecutive’s covered compensation. Participants in the Pension Plan who are eligible to accrue a 3% cash balance benefit in the Pension Plan, such asincluding Mr. Taylor,Beck, receive a matching contribution credit equal toto: (i) 100% of the amount of the executive'sexecutive’s deferrals that do not exceed 4% of covered compensation, plus (ii) 50% of the executive'sexecutive’s deferrals that exceed 4% but do not exceed 8% of the executive'sexecutive’s covered compensation. However, Nalco and Champion executives, including Mr. Taylor beginning September 1, 2014, were not eligible to defer base salary earned in 2014, but received matching contributions as though they had deferred base salary in excess of the compensation that can be considered under the Company's tax-qualified 401(k) plan.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    51


NON-QUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION FOR 2016

An account is maintained on the Company'sCompany’s books in the name of each participating executive. The account is credited with phantom earnings at the same rate as earnings on externally managed investment funds available to participants in the Company'sCompany’s tax-qualified deferred compensation plans. An executive is allowed to elect the investment fund or funds that will apply and may change the election at any time; provided thatthat: (i) an executive officer is not permitted to elect the Company stock fund, and (ii) effective January 1, 2006, the Company discontinued making its matching contributions to the Company stock fund. The earnings rate applicable to each such investment fund for 20142016 is as set forth in the following table:

Fund Name
2014 Earnings Rate

Fund Name

2016 Earnings Rate

Managed Income Portfolio II – Class 3

1.73 %

1.41%

Fidelity InstitutionalInvestments Money Market — Money MarketGovernment Portfolio – Institutional Class I

0.29 %

0.05%

SpartanFidelity U.S. Bond Index Fund Institutional Premium Class

2.51 %

6.05%

SSgAWestern Asset Core Plus Bond Fund Class IS

4.73 %

State Street Target Retirement Income Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

5.82 %

3.69%

SSgA Target Retirement 2010 Non-Lending Series Fund — Class K

4.05%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2015 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

6.65 %

5.32%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2020 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

7.57 %

5.99%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2025 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

8.28 %

6.39%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2030 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

8.40 %

6.47%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2035 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

8.66 %

6.41%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2040 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

9.09 %

6.30%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2045 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

9.45 %

6.24%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2050 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

9.45 %

6.24%

SSgAState Street Target Retirement 2055 Non-Lending Series Fund Class KW

9.45 %

6.24%

State Street Target Retirement 2060 Non-Lending Series Fund – Class W

9.46 %

Janus Triton Fund Class N

10.65 %

9.69%

Spartan®Fidelity 500 Index Fund — Fidelity Advantage Institutional Premium Class

11.97 %

13.66%

Harbor Capital Appreciation Fund Institutional Class

(1.07)%

9.93%

Dodge & Cox Stock Fund

21.28 %

10.40%

SpartanVanguard Extended Market Index Fund — Fidelity Advantage Institutional ClassPlus Shares

16.17 %

7.71%

CRM Small/MidAmerican Beacon Small Cap Value Fund – Class Institutional Class

26.77 %

4.12%

Dodge & Cox International Stock Fund

8.26 %

0.08%

Vanguard FTSE All-World Ex-U.S. Index Fund — Admiral– Institutional Shares

4.77 %

(4.05)%

Ecolab Stock Fund

3.60 %

1.33%

Participants are always 100% vested in their deferred compensation account and are entitled to receive a distribution in cash upon termination, death or disability. The normal form of distribution with respect to the portion of the account attributable to contributions made before 2005 ("(“Grandfathered Mirror Savings Benefit"Benefit”) is a single lump sum, but an executive may elect to receive such portion of the account in the form of annual installments over a period not to exceed ten years. The portion of the executive'sexecutive’s account attributable to contributions made after 2004 is subject to Internal Revenue Code Section 409A ("(“409A Mirror Savings Benefit"Benefit”). The normal form of 409A Mirror Savings Benefit is a 10-Year Annual Installment payout commencing upon separation from service, provided that payment to a "specified employee"“specified employee” (corporate officers, including each of the named executive officers) may not commence earlier than six months after separation from service. Optional forms of benefits available to participants include 5-year annual installments or lump sum. Participants were permitted to make a transition election as to an optional form of benefit for their 409A Mirror Savings Benefit before the end of 2008 as permitted under 409A regulations and new participants may make such an election at the time of initial enrollment. Any subsequent change in optional form by a participant is subject to the "1-year/“1-year/5-year rule"rule” which requires that the change be made 12 months before separation from service and must not become effective for 12 months after the election is made (the 1-year rule), and the payment commencement date must be delayed for five years after it would otherwise be paid (the 5-year rule). Despite the plan'splan’s normal form of benefit or a participant'sparticipant’s election of an optional form of benefit, the Company will cash out the participant'sparticipant’s Grandfathered Mirror Savings Benefit and/or the participant'sparticipant’s 409A Mirror Savings Benefit in a lump sum if the present value of such portion of the benefit at the time of distribution does not exceed $25,000. Deferrals may be withdrawn during employment only upon an unforeseeable emergency and are limited to the amount needed to satisfy such emergency. Company matching amounts are not available for such in-service withdrawal and are subject to forfeiture for certain serious misconduct.


52    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement

Table of Contents



POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR
CHANGE IN CONTROL

POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL

The Company maintains certain plans, policies and practices covering named executive officers that will require it to provide incremental compensation upon certain types of terminations, including termination due to a change in control of the Company.


Overview
Overview The following discussion describes additional amounts that the Company would pay or provide to a named executive officer or his or her beneficiaries as a result of termination of employment in each of the following situations: voluntary resignation, discharge for cause, discharge without cause, resignation due to constructive discharge, death or disability and change in control of the Company. For purposes of this discussion, estimated benefits are calculated as if the termination and/or change in control occurred on December 31, 2014 and2016, PBRSU awards are valued based on the value of a share of the Company'sCompany’s stock on that day was $104.52,of $117.22, the closing price on December 31, 2014,30, 2016, the last trading day of 2014.2016, and option awards are valued based on the difference between $117.22 and the per share exercise price of the respective awards.

As permitted by SEC rules, the following discussion and amounts do not include the payments and benefits that are not enhanced by the termination of employment or change in control. These payments and benefits are referred to hereafter in this discussion as "vested benefits"“vested benefits” and include:

benefits accrued under the Company's Pension Plan, U.K. Plan, tax-qualified deferred compensation 401(k) and profit-sharing plan, in which all eligible employees participate;

benefits provided under a retiree health, and except as specified, a death benefits program, in which all eligible employees participate;

accrued vacation pay, health and life insurance plan continuation and other similar amounts payable when employment terminates under programs applicable to the Company's salaried employees generally;

payment of earned annual cash incentive payable if employed through the end of the year described at page 27;

benefits accrued under the Mirror Savings Plan described in connection with the Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation table at page 40;

benefits accrued that have become vested under the SERP described in connection with the Pension Benefits table at page 38;

stock options that have vested and become exercisable as described at page 30;

PBRSU awards that have vested upon completion of the relevant service period and whose payout are subject to the attainment of the relevant performance goals as described at page 30; and

shares of restricted stock or restricted stock units that have vested as described at page 30.

·

benefits accrued under the Company’s Pension Plan, tax-qualified deferred compensation 401(k) and profit-sharing plan, in which all eligible employees participate;

·

benefits provided under a retiree health, and except as specified, a death benefits program, in which all eligible employees participate;

·

accrued vacation pay, health and life insurance plan continuation and other similar amounts payable when employment terminates under programs applicable to the Company’s salaried employees generally;

·

payment of earned annual cash incentive payable if employed through the end of the year described at page 36;

·

benefits accrued under the Mirror Savings Plan described in connection with the “Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation” table at page 51;

·

benefits accrued that have vested under the SERP described in connection with the “Pension Benefits” table at page 48;

·

stock options that have vested and become exercisable as described at page 39;

·

PBRSU awards that have vested upon completion of the relevant service period and whose payout are subject to the attainment of the relevant performance goals as described at page 39; and

·

shares of restricted stock or restricted stock units that have vested as described at page 40.


Voluntary Resignation The Company is not obligated to pay any amounts in addition to the named executive officer'sofficer’s vested benefits in the event of a voluntary termination of employment, unless the executive'sexecutive’s age and years of service qualify for special provisions applicable for retirement under the plans described below.

Annual Cash Incentive — If termination is after age 55 and completion of at least three years of service, the executive would receive payment of a portion of the annual cash incentive under the Company's annual cash incentive program (Management Performance Incentive Plan or "MPIP" and Management Incentive Plan or "MIP") which is described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 27 and as part of the table entitled "Grants of Plan — Based Awards in 2014" at page 35 earned for the year that is proportionate to the portion of the performance period under the Plan that was completed prior to the termination of employment. The earned annual cash incentive payable to such an eligible executive officer for termination on December 31, 2014 would be the full amount of the actual annual cash incentive earned as reported as Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column of the Summary Compensation Table at page 33.

Retiree Life Insurance — Certain elected corporate officers who terminate employment at or after (i) attaining age 55 and completing at least ten years of service or (ii) attaining age 65 are covered by an executive life insurance policy. Under the program, the beneficiary of the retired executive is entitled to a death benefit equal to the lesser of (i) 200% of the executive's average compensation for the five consecutive years of employment preceding retirement which yields the highest average compensation, or (ii) $750,000. Mr. Taylor is not eligible for this benefit. Pursuant to the terms of a separate death benefit agreement described on page 43, if Mr. Taylor completes ten or more years of service after attaining age 45, his beneficiary would be entitled to a retiree death benefit of 150% of his annual base salary in effect on his termination date. Mr. Taylor had not met the conditions for the retiree death benefit as of December 31, 2014.

Options — If termination is after (i) age 55 and (ii) completion of at least five years of service, the executive would be entitled to accelerated vesting for options held at least six months and an extended, post-retirement exercise period of five years (or the remaining term of the options, if shorter).

PBRSUs — If termination is after (i) age 55 and (ii) completion of at least five years of service, service-vesting conditions with respect to PBRSU awards held at least six months will be deemed satisfied, but vesting remains subject to the attainment of performance goals.

·

Annual Cash Incentive – If termination is after age 55 and completion of at least three years of service, the executive would receive payment of a portion of the annual cash incentive under the Company’s annual cash incentive program (Management Performance Incentive Plan or “MPIP” and Management Incentive Plan or “MIP”), which is described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 36 and as part of the table entitled “Grants of Plan-Based Awards for 2016” at page 45, earned for the year that is proportionate to the portion of the performance period under the Plan that was completed prior to the termination of employment. The earned annual cash incentive payable to such an eligible executive officer for termination on December 31, 2016 would be the full amount of the actual annual cash incentive earned as reported in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column of the Summary Compensation Table at page 43.

·

Retiree Life Insurance – Certain elected corporate officers who terminate employment at or after: (i) attaining age 55 and completing at least ten years of service or (ii) attaining age 65 are covered by an executive life insurance policy. Under the program, the beneficiary of the retired executive is entitled to a death benefit equal to the lesser of: (i) 200%

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    53


POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL

of the executive’s average compensation for the five consecutive years of employment preceding retirement which yields the highest average compensation, or (ii) $750,000.

·

Options – If termination is after: (i) age 55 and (ii) completion of at least five years of service, the executive would be entitled to accelerated vesting for options held at least six months and an extended, post-retirement exercise period of five years (or the remaining term of the options, if shorter).

·

PBRSUs – If termination is after: (i) age 55 and (ii) completion of at least five years of service, service-vesting conditions with respect to PBRSU awards held at least six months will be deemed satisfied, but vesting remains subject to the attainment of performance goals.

Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley and Handley are the only named executive officers whoHickey would have been entitled to some or all of such special retirement provisions as of December 31, 2014,2016, as follows:

Mr. Baker'sBaker’s retirement benefits would include: $2,564,100$1,699,100 annual cash incentive; $750,000 retiree life insurance coverage; 165,701169,738 accelerated option shares at $2,278,550$518,513 value; and 76,21473,959 PBRSUs at $7,965,887$8,669,474 value.


Table of Contents

Mr. Schmechel'sSchmechel’s retirement benefits would include: $578,500$443,100 annual cash incentive; $750,000 retiree life insurance coverage; 26,25432,666 accelerated option shares at $274,059$103,703 value; and 11,18514,369 PBRSUs at $1,169,056$1,684,334 value.

Mr. Handley'sHandley’s retirement benefits would include: $806,200$542,800 annual cash incentive; $750,000 retiree life insurance coverage; 46,09439,230 accelerated option shares at $609,863$129,628 value; and 20,96017,433 PBRSUs at $2,190,739$2,043,496 value.


Mr. Hickey’s retirement benefits would include: $451,800 annual cash incentive; $750,000 retiree life insurance coverage; 23,538 accelerated option shares at $77,777 value; and 10,460 PBRSUs at $1,226,121 value.

Discharge for Cause The Company is not obligated to pay any amounts in addition to the named executive officer'sofficer’s vested benefits in the event of a termination of employment for cause. The executive'sexecutive’s right to exercise vested options expires and unvested PBRSU and restricted stock unit awards are forfeited upon discharge for cause. Cause under the Company'sCompany’s stock incentive plans includesincludes: (a) deliberate injury or attempted injury related to the Company or any subsidiary, including dishonesty, fraud, misrepresentation, or embezzlement; (b) any unlawful or criminal activity of a serious nature; (c) any intentional and deliberate material breach of duty; or (d) material breach of any confidentiality or non-compete agreement.

An elected corporate officer with qualifying age and years of service would receive coverage under the retiree life insurance program described in the above section entitled "Voluntary“Voluntary Resignation." However, under Mr. Taylor's separate death benefit agreement described below, his death benefit is forfeited if he is terminated for cause or violates the terms of any agreement between him and certain of Ecolab's subsidiaries.


Death or Disability In the event of a termination as a result of death or disability, the named executive officer or his or her beneficiaries would be entitled to the following benefits in addition to his or her vested benefits.

Executive Long-Term Disability Benefits — Certain executives who become "disabled" will, following a 180-day elimination period, receive payments from the Company equal to 60% of his or her base salary and annual cash incentive, reduced by the benefit paid under the Company's insured long-term disability plan available to all full-time employees (which is limited to $15,000 per month). Total disability benefits are limited to $35,000 per month. An executive is "disabled" during the first 18 months if he or she cannot earn at least 80% of his or her pre-disability compensation at his or her own occupation. After 18 months, the executive is "disabled" if he or she cannot earn at least 80% of his or her pre-disability compensation at any occupation for which he or she is qualified by training, education or experience. Benefits may continue until the executive reaches Social Security Normal Retirement Age, subject to certain minimum lengths of payment. Benefits are limited to 24 months if disability is a result of mental illness that results from any cause, any condition that may result from mental illness, alcoholism which is under treatment, or the non-medical use of narcotics, sedatives, stimulants, hallucinogens or any other such substance. Mr. Taylor is not eligible for this long-term disability benefit.

Executive Life Insurance — If an executive covered by executive life insurance dies, his beneficiary will receive an insured basic executive death benefit equal to three times the executive's annual compensation for the year preceding the death, subject to a maximum benefit of $9,000,000. The death benefit which would have been payable to the beneficiaries of each of the named executive officers for a death as of December 31, 2014 would be as follows: Mr. Baker, $9,000,000; Mr. Schmechel, $2,283,000; Mr. Handley, $3,432,000; and Mr. Hickey, $2,674,800. If an executive's death is accidental, the beneficiary would receive an additional accidental death benefit amount equal to the executive death benefit, subject to a maximum of $6,000,000. If an executive's death occurs during travel on Company business, the benefit would be increased by three times the executive's annual compensation for the year preceding the death, subject to a maximum business travel benefit of $6,000,000. Mr. Taylor is not eligible for the Company's executive life insurance program, and would instead be eligible for life insurance under the Company's plan for U.S. salaried employees of $1,050,000, and business travel accident insurance under the Company's plan for U.S. salaried employees. Mr. Taylor would also receive death benefits under a separate death benefit agreement dated December 2, 2007, which provides a death benefit equal to two times his base salary in effect on the date of his death. This separate agreement benefiting Mr. Taylor is filed as Exhibit 10.23 to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014. The death benefit that would have been payable to Mr. Taylor's beneficiary under this agreement as of December 31, 2014, is $1,050,000.

Annual Cash Incentive — Payment of the annual cash incentive under the Company's annual cash incentive program (Management Performance Incentive Plan or "MPIP" and Management Incentive Plan or "MIP"), which is described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 27 and as part of the table entitled "Grants of Plan — Based Awards For 2014" at page 35, earned for the year that is proportionate to the portion of the performance period under the Plan that was completed prior to the termination of employment. The earned annual cash incentive payable to each of the named executive officers for termination due to death or disability on December 31, 2014 would be the full amount of the actual annual cash incentive earned as reported as Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column of the Summary Compensation Table at page 33.

Options — If employment terminates as a result of death or disability, the vesting of options is accelerated and the post-death/disability exercise period is extended to five years (or the remaining term of the options, if shorter). Accelerated vesting for each of the named executive officers would be as follows: Mr. Baker, 328,840 option shares at $2,278,550 value; Mr. Schmechel, 58,882 option shares at $274,059 value; Mr. Handley, 86,879 option shares at $609,863 value; Mr. Taylor, 154,536 option shares at $3,608,747 value; and Mr. Hickey, 52,558 option shares at $380,005 value.

PBRSUs — If employment terminates as a result of death or disability, service-based vesting conditions on PBRSUs will be deemed satisfied, but vesting remains subject to attainment of performance goals. Accelerated vesting for each of the named executive officers would be as follows, assuming full attainment of performance goals, payment after the end of the performance period and a stock price of $104.52, the closing price on December 31, 2014: Mr. Baker, 112,105 units at $11,717,215 value; Mr. Schmechel, 18,363 units at $1,919,301 value; Mr. Handley, 29,933 units at $3,128,597 value; Mr. Taylor, 19,143 units at $2,000,826 value; and Mr. Hickey, 18,246 units at $1,907,072 value.

·

Executive Long-Term Disability Benefits – Certain executives who become “disabled” will, following a 180-day elimination period, receive payments from the Company equal to 60% of his or her base salary and annual cash incentive, reduced by the benefit paid under the Company’s insured long-term disability plan available to all full-time employees (which is limited to $15,000 per month). Total disability benefits are limited to $35,000 per month. An executive is “disabled” during the first 18 months if he or she cannot earn at least 80% of his or her pre-disability compensation at his or her own occupation. After 18 months, the executive is “disabled” if he or she cannot earn at least 80% of his or her pre-disability compensation at any occupation for which he or she is qualified by training, education or experience. Benefits may continue until the executive reaches Social Security Normal Retirement Age, subject to certain minimum lengths of payment. Benefits are limited to 24 months if disability is a result of mental illness that results from any cause, any condition that may result from mental illness, alcoholism which is under treatment, or the non-medical use of narcotics, sedatives, stimulants, hallucinogens or any other such substance.

·

Executive Life Insurance – If an executive covered by executive life insurance dies, his beneficiary will receive an insured basic executive death benefit equal to three times the executive’s annual compensation for the year preceding the death, subject to a maximum benefit of $9,000,000. The death benefit which would have been payable to the beneficiaries of each of the named executive officers for a death as of December 31, 2016 would be as follows: Mr. Baker, $9,000,000; Mr. Schmechel, $3,291,750; Mr. Handley, $4,263,600; Mr. Hickey, $3,174,150; and Mr. Beck, $3,090,000. If an executive’s death is accidental, the beneficiary would receive an additional accidental death benefit amount equal to the executive death benefit, subject to a maximum of $6,000,000. If an executive’s death occurs during travel on Company business, the benefit would be increased by three times the executive’s annual compensation for the year preceding the death, subject to a maximum business travel benefit of $6,000,000.

Table of Contents

Restricted Stock Unit Awards — If employment terminates as a result of death or disability, the vesting of restricted stock unit awards is accelerated. In the case of Mr. Taylor, accelerated vesting of restricted stock unit awards would be as follows: 21,540 units at $2,251,361 value, pursuant to the special retention grant and regular grants under the Ecolab Inc. 2010 Stock Incentive Plan.


54    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL

·

Annual Cash Incentive – Payment of the annual cash incentive under the Company’s annual cash incentive program (Management Performance Incentive Plan or “MPIP” and Management Incentive Plan or “MIP”), which is described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning at page 36  and as part of the table entitled “Grants of Plan-Based Awards For 2016” at page 45, earned for the year that is proportionate to the portion of the performance period under the Plan that was completed prior to the termination of employment. The earned annual cash incentive payable to each of the named executive officers for termination due to death or disability on December 31, 2016 would be the full amount of the actual annual cash incentive earned as reported in the Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation column of the Summary Compensation Table at page 43.

·

Options – If employment terminates as a result of death or disability, the vesting of options is accelerated and the post-death/disability exercise period is extended to five years (or the remaining term of the options, if shorter). Accelerated vesting for each of the named executive officers would be as follows: Mr. Baker, 358,417 option shares at $518,513 value; Mr. Schmechel, 68,416 option shares at $103,703 value; Mr. Handley, 78,952 option shares at $129,628 value; Mr. Hickey, 47,371 option shares at $77,777 value; and Mr. Beck, 47,371 option shares at $77,777 value.

·

PBRSUs – If employment terminates as a result of death or disability, service-based vesting conditions on PBRSUs will be deemed satisfied, but vesting remains subject to attainment of performance goals. Accelerated vesting for each of the named executive officers would be as follows, assuming full attainment of performance goals, payment after the end of the performance period and a stock price of $117.22, the closing price on December 30, 2016, the last trading day of the year: Mr. Baker, 115,468 units at $13,535,159 value; Mr. Schmechel, 22,234 units at $2,606,269 value; Mr. Handley, 26,172 units at $3,067,882 value; Mr. Hickey, 15,703 units at $1,840,706 value; and Mr. Beck, 15,703 units at $1,840,706 value.

·

Restricted Stock Unit Awards – If employment terminates as a result of death or disability, the vesting of restricted stock unit awards is accelerated. None of the named executive officers holds any unvested restricted stock units.

Discharge Not for Cause: Resignation Due to Constructive Discharge The Company negotiates severance arrangements on a case-by-case basis if an executive'sexecutive’s employment is terminated involuntarily without cause or if the executive resigns as a result of a constructive discharge. Any such negotiated settlement would require the named executive officer to sign a general release and waiver of claims against the Company and would typically require compliance with confidentiality and non-compete restrictions. Payment of such severance will generally be made in equal installments over regular payroll periods. For purposes of this disclosure, such a negotiated severance is estimated to include payment of up to two years'years’ base salary and target annual cash incentive for each of the named executive officers listed, as follows: Mr. Baker, $5,334,740;$6,000,000; Mr. Schmechel, $1,750,000;$2,160,000; Mr. Handley, $2,220,000;$2,565,000; Mr. Taylor, $1,837,600;Hickey, $1,933,800; and Mr. Hickey, $1,715,000.Beck, $1,933,800.

At the discretion of the Compensation Committee, the vesting of options may be accelerated or extended and the exercise period extended. However, no option may remain exercisable or continue to vest for more than two years beyond the date such option would have terminated if not for the Compensation Committee'sCommittee’s action, or beyond its expiration date, whichever first occurs. In addition, the Compensation Committee may, at its discretion, accelerate the vesting of PBRSU and restricted stock unit awards. The PBRSU awards further provide that vesting of the service-based vesting conditions will be accelerated on a pro-rated basis in the event an executive'sexecutive’s employment is terminated without cause, with payment of the pro-rated award subject to satisfaction of applicable performance criteria. Accelerated vesting for our named executive officers would be as follows: Mr. Baker, 39,76136,616 units at $4,155,820$4,292,128 value; Mr. Schmechel, 5,4057,182 units at $564,931$841,874 value; Mr. Handley, 10,8178,802 units at $1,130,593$1,031,770 value; Mr. Taylor, 6,681Hickey, 5,281 units at $698,298$619,039 value; and Mr. Hickey, 6,681Beck, 5,281 units at $698,298$619,039 value.

In addition, if an executive'sexecutive’s position, age and years of service qualify at time of termination, the executive would receive benefits under the same special provisions applicable for retirement as are described in the section entitled voluntary resignation above. As noted in that section, Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley and Schmechel are the only named executive officers whoHickey would have been entitled to such special retirement provisions as of December 31, 2014.2016.


Change in Control The Company maintains a Change-in-Control Severance Compensation Policy (the "Policy"“Policy”) which applies to elected officers (other than assistant officers) of the Company, including each named executive officer listed in the Summary Compensation Table at page 33.43. The Policy excludes an officer thatwho may otherwise be eligible for coverage but is covered by separate change-in-control or similar agreements with the Company or a subsidiary. The Board of Directors may terminate the Policy after two years'years’ advance notice, except that the Policy may not be terminated within two years after a change in control has occurred.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    55


POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL

The Policy entitles an officer to a severance payment if, within two years following a change in control, the officer'sofficer’s employment with the Company is terminated without Just Cause (as defined in the Policy) or the officer voluntarily terminates employment for Good Reason (as defined in the Policy). The severance payment is paid in a lump sum equal to the sum ofof: (i) two times the sum of the officer'sofficer’s base salary plus target annual cash incentive; plus (ii) a pro-rated portion of the target annual cash incentive for the year of termination. The officer also is entitled to payment of reasonable outplacement service fees up to 20% of base salary, and continuation, for up to 18 months, of medical and dental health coverage at the cost the officer paid prior to termination of employment. The Policy does not provide a gross-up for the 280G excise tax. However, the Policy does provide for a reduction of payments if the Policy results in higher after-tax income to the participant due to 280G excise tax. As a condition of the payment of such benefits, the officer must release the Company from employment-related claims.

The Company'sCompany’s non-qualified Mirror Pension Plan and Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan discussed under the section entitled Pension Benefits For 20142016 at page 3948 provide that the interests of participants shall vest and become non-forfeitable upon a change in control of the Company. Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley, TaylorHickey, and HickeyBeck each participate in the Mirror Pension Plan and the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan, and Messrs. Baker, Schmechel, Handley and Hickey each participateare already vested in the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan.these benefits.

Upon a change in control, if any outstanding option, PBRSU award or restricted stock unit award is continued, assumed or replaced by the Company or the surviving or successor entity in connection with the change in control, and if within two years after the change in control an executive'sexecutive’s employment or other service is terminated without Cause or is terminated by the executive for Good Reason, thenthen: (i) each of the executive'sexecutive’s outstanding options will become exercisable in full and remain exercisable for the remaining term of the option, (ii) each of the holder'sholder’s unvested restricted stock unit awards and PBRSU awards will fully vest, and (iii) any performance goals applicable to the holder'sholder’s PBRSU awards will be deemed to have been satisfied to the target level of performance. If any outstanding option, PBRSU award or restricted stock unit award is not continued, assumed or replaced in connection with the change in control, then the same consequences as specified in clauses (i) through (iii) of the previous sentence will occur in connection with a change in control unless and to the extent the Compensation Committee elects to terminate such options or awards in exchange for a payment with respect to each option or award in an amount equal to the excess, if any, between the fair market value of the shares subject to the option or award immediately prior to the effective date of such change in control (which may be the fair market value of the consideration to be received in the change-in-control transaction for the same number of shares) over the aggregate exercise price (if any) for the shares subject to such option or award (or, if there is not excess, such option or award may be terminated without payment).

For purposes of the Policy and stock incentive plans, the term "change“change in control"control” means the occurrence of any of the events set forth in the paragraph immediately below.following events:


·

a person or group acquires 25% or more of the Company’s outstanding voting power;

·

during any 24 consecutive month period, individuals who constitute the Board on the first day of the period or any new director (other than a director whose initial assumption of office is in connection with an actual or threatened election relating to the election of directors) whose election or nomination for election by the Company’s stockholders was approved or recommended by a vote of at least two-thirds of the directors then still in office who were directors on the first day of such period (or whose election or nomination were previously so approved) shall cease for any reason to constitute at least a majority of the Board of Directors;

·

the Company engages in a merger or consolidation, other than a merger or consolidation in which the Company’s voting securities immediately prior to the transaction continue to represent over 50% of the voting power of the Company or the surviving entity immediately after the transaction and in which no person or group acquires 50% or more of the voting power of the Company or surviving entity; or

·

the consummation of a plan of complete liquidation or the Company sells all or substantially all of the Company’s assets, other than to an entity with more than 50% of its voting power owned by the Company’s stockholders in substantially the same proportion as their ownership of the Company immediately prior to the sale.

Table of Contents

A change in control of the Company occurs if:

a person or group acquires 25% or more of the Company's outstanding voting power;

during any 24 consecutive month period, individuals who constitute the Board on the first day of the period or any new director (other than a director whose initial assumption of office is in connection with an actual or threatened election relating to the election of directors) whose election or nomination for election by the Company's stockholders was approved or recommended by a vote of at least two-thirds of the directors then still in office who were directors on the first day of such period (or whose election or nomination were previously so approved) shall cease for any reason to constitute at least a majority of the Board of Directors;

the Company engages in a merger or consolidation, other than a merger or consolidation in which the Company's voting securities immediately prior to the transaction continue to represent over 50% of the voting power of the Company or the surviving entity immediately after the transaction and in which no person or group acquires 50% or more of the voting power of the Company or surviving entity; or

the consummation of a plan of complete liquidation or the Company sells all or substantially all of the Company's assets, other than to an entity with more than 50% of its voting power owned by the Company's stockholders in substantially the same proportion as their ownership of the Company immediately prior to the sale.

56    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


POTENTIAL PAYMENTS UPON TERMINATION OR CHANGE IN CONTROL

The table below summarizes the maximum additional payments the Company would be obligated to make if a qualifying termination due to a change in control occurred on December 31, 2014.2016.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Severance Payments

 

Equity Awards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(A)

 

(B)

 

(C)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accelerated

 

 

 

Health

 

Total

 

Accelerated Portion of

 

Accelerated Portion of

 

 

 

 

 

 

Portion of

 

Outplacement

 

Insurance

 

Severance

 

Stock Options

 

PBRSU & RSU Awards

 

Total

 

 

Cash Lump

 

Pension

 

Service Fees

 

Premiums

 

Payments

 

Number

 

 

 

Number

 

 

 

Potential

Name

 

Sum ($)

 

($)(1)

 

($)

 

($)

 

($)

 

(#)(2)

 

Value ($)(3)

 

(#)

 

Value ($)(4)

 

Value ($)(5)

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 

6,000,000

 

-

 

240,000

 

29,131

 

6,269,131

 

358,417

 

518,513

 

115,468

 

13,535,159

 

20,322,803

Daniel J. Schmechel

 

2,160,000

 

-

 

120,000

 

9,339

 

2,289,339

 

68,416

 

103,703

 

22,234

 

2,606,269

 

4,999,311

Thomas W. Handley

 

2,565,000

 

-

 

135,000

 

19,693

 

2,719,693

 

78,952

 

129,628

 

26,172

 

3,067,882

 

5,917,203

Michael A. Hickey

 

1,933,800

 

-

 

110,500

 

31,933

 

2,076,233

 

47,371

 

77,777

 

15,703

 

1,840,706

 

3,994,716

Christophe Beck

 

1,933,800

 

1,091,528

 

110,500

 

29,131

 

3,164,959

 

47,371

 

77,777

 

15,703

 

1,840,706

 

5,083,441

(1)

Represents that portion of the actuarial present value of accumulated pension benefits reported in the “Pension Benefits For 2016” table at page 48 which would become payable upon a change in control as a result of acceleration of vesting.

(2)

Total number of unvested options as of December 31, 2016.

(3)

Represents the difference between the closing price of our Common Stock as of December 30, 2016 ($117.22) and the exercise price of each option that would be accelerated. All options may be exercised at any time during the three months (or five years if retirement eligible) after employment after the change in control, but not beyond the original ten-year term of the option.

(4)

Represents the value of PBRSU and restricted stock unit awards as of December 30, 2016 ($117.22) that would be accelerated.

(5)

Represents the sum of amounts in Column (A) Total Severance Payments, (B) Accelerated Portion of Stock Options and (C) Accelerated Portion of PBRSU and Restricted Stock Unit Awards.

ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    57


AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

 
 
 Severance Payments  
 Equity Awards
 
  
  
  
  
  
 (B)
Accelerated Portion of
Stock Options
 (C)
Accelerated Portion of
PBRSU & RSU Awards
  
 
  
 Accelerated
Portion of
Pension(1)

  
 Health
Insurance
Premiums

 (A)
Total
Severance
Payments

 Total
Potential
Value(5)

 
 Cash Lump
Sum

 Outplacement
Service Fees

Name
 Number(2)
 Value(3)
 Number
 Value(4)
 

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

 $5,334,740  $222,274 $28,633 $5,585,647 328,840 $2,278,550 112,105 $11,717,215 $19,581,412

Daniel J. Schmechel

 $1,750,000  $100,000 $18,321 $1,868,321 58,882 $274,059 18,363 $1,919,301 $4,061,681

Thomas W. Handley

 $2,220,000  $120,000 $27,868 $2,367,868 86,879 $609,863 29,933 $3,128,597 $6,106,328

Stephen M. Taylor(6)

 $1,837,600  $105,000 $31,480 $1,974,080 154,536 $3,608,747 40,683 $4,252,187 $9,835,014

Michael A. Hickey

 $1,715,000 $1,115,674 $98,000 $31,480 $2,960,154 52,558 $380,005 18,246 $1,907,072 $5,247,231
(1)
Represents that portion of the actuarial present value of accumulated pension benefits reported in the Pension Benefits For 2014 table at page 38 which would become payable upon a change in control as a result of acceleration of vesting.

(2)
Total number of unvested options as of December 31, 2014.

(3)
Represents the difference between the closing price of our Common Stock as of December 31, 2014 ($104.52) and the exercise price of each option that would be accelerated. All options may be exercised at any time during the three months (or five years if retirement eligible) after employment after the change in control, but not beyond the original ten-year term of the option.

(4)
Represents the value of PBRSU and restricted stock unit awards as of December 31, 2014 ($104.52) that would be accelerated.

(5)
Represents the sum of amounts in Column (A) Total Severance Payouts, (B) Accelerated Portion of Stock Options and (C) Accelerated Portion of PBRSU and restricted stock unit awards.

(6)
Mr. Taylor's Accelerated Portion of PBRSU and restricted stock unit awards represents 19,143 unvested PBRSUs with a value of $2,000,826 and 21,540 restricted stock units with a value of $2,251,361.

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

Table of Contents


AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

The Audit Committee operates under a written Charter and the functions of the Committee are described under the heading "Board“Board Committees Audit Committee"Committee” at page 814 hereof. The Audit Committee'sCommittee’s Charter recognizes thatthat: (i) it is the responsibility of management to prepare the Company'sCompany’s financial statements in accordance with Accounting Principles Generally Accepted in the United States of America and to maintain an effective system of financial control; and (ii) it is the responsibility of the independent auditors to plan and conduct the annual audit and express their opinion on the consolidated financial statements in accordance with professional standards. As recognized in the Charter, the Committee'sCommittee’s responsibilities include overseeing the work of the participants in the financial reporting and control process.

In this context, the Audit Committee hashas: (i) reviewed and discussed the audited consolidated financial statements of the Company as of December 31, 2014,2016, and for the year then ended (the "Financial Statements"“Financial Statements”) with management which has represented that the Financial Statements were prepared in accordance with Accounting Principles Generally Accepted in the United States of America, (ii) discussed the Financial Statements with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (our independent registered public accounting firm), including the matters required to be discussed by Public Company Accounting Oversight Board AU Section 380, "CommunicationsAuditing Standard 1301, “Communications with Audit Committees," and (iii) received the written disclosures and the letter from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP required by applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountant'saccountant’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence and has discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP their independence. The Committee has also considered whether PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP'sLLP’s provision of non-audit services as described below under the heading "Audit Fees"“Audit Fees” is compatible with maintaining PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP'sLLP’s independence.

Based on the foregoing review and discussions, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors, and the Board has approved, that the Financial Statements be included in the Company'sCompany’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 20142016 for filing with the SEC.

Dated: February 26, 201524, 2017

Carl M. Casale

Robert L. Lumpkins

David W. MacLennan

Stephen I. Chazen

Tracy B. McKibben

Victoria J. Reich

Joel W. Johnson

Suzanne M. Vautrinot


58    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


AUDIT FEES

Table of Contents


AUDIT FEES

The following table presents fees for professional services rendered by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP ("PwC"(“PwC”) for the years ended December 31, 20142016 and 2013.2015.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fee Category

 

 

2016

 

2015

Audit Fees (1)

$

12,013,000

$

12,015,000

Audit-related Fees (2)

$

130,000

$

90,000

Tax Fees (3)

$

4,070,000

$

3,580,000

All Other Fees (4)

$

0

$

0
Fee Category
 2014
 2013

Audit Fees(1)

 $12,885,000 $14,655,000

Audit-related Fees(2)

 $     140,000 $     110,000

Tax Fees(3)

 $  3,775,000 $  2,850,000

All Other Fees(4)

 $                0 $                0

(1)

Fees and expenses paid to PwC for: (i) annual audit (annual audit and quarterly reviews of the consolidated financial statements required to be performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards); (ii) 404 attestation services (attestation services relating to the report on the Company’s internal controls as specified in Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act); (iii) statutory audits (statutory audits or financial audits for subsidiaries or affiliates required to be performed in accordance with local regulations); (iv) regulatory financial filings (services associated with SEC registration statements, periodic reports and other documents filed with the SEC or other documents issued in connection with securities offerings (e.g., comfort letters, consents) and assistance in responding to SEC comment letters); (v) incremental audit procedures related to acquisitions or other transactions; and (vi) consultations on accounting and disclosure matters.

(1)
Fees and expenses paid to PwC for: (i) annual audit (annual audit and quarterly reviews of the consolidated financial statements required to be performed in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards); (ii) 404 attestation services (attestation services relating to the report on the Company's internal controls as specified in Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act); (iii) statutory audits (statutory audits or financial audits for subsidiaries or affiliates required to be performed in accordance with local regulations); (iv) regulatory financial filings (services associated with SEC registration statements, periodic reports and other documents filed with the SEC or other documents issued in connection with securities offerings (e.g., comfort letters, consents) and assistance in responding to SEC comment letters); (v) incremental audit procedures related to acquisitions or other transactions; and (vi) consultations on accounting and disclosure matters (consultations by the Company's management as to the accounting or disclosure treatment of transactions or events and/or the actual or potential impact of final or proposed rules, standards or interpretations by the SEC, FASB or other regulatory or standard setting bodies). The decrease in Audit Fees in 2014 resulted primarily from a reduction in audit procedures related to the 2013 Champion transaction.

(2)
Fees and expenses paid to PwC for: (i) agreed-upon procedures (agreed-upon or expanded audit procedures related to accounting records required to respond to or comply with financial, accounting or regulatory matters); (ii) attest services; and (iii) employee benefit plan audits (financial statement audits of pension and other employee benefit plans).

(3)
Fees and expenses paid to PwC for: (i) U.S. federal, state and local tax compliance, $60,000 (preparation and/or review of tax returns including sales and use tax, excise tax, income tax and property tax, as well as consultation regarding applicable handling of items for tax returns, required disclosures, elections and filing positions available to the Company); (ii) U.S. federal, state and local tax advice, $290,000 (assistance with tax audits, technical interpretations, applicable laws and regulations, tax advice on mergers, acquisitions and restructurings); (iii) international non-U.S. tax compliance, $1,950,000 (preparation and review of income, local, VAT, and GST tax returns or other tax filings, required disclosures, elections and filing positions available to the Company); (iv) international non-U.S. tax advice, $500,000 (assistance with tax examinations (but not legal or other representation in tax courts or agencies), advice on various matters including foreign tax credit, foreign income tax, tax accounting, foreign earnings and profits, U.S. treatment of foreign subsidiary income, VAT, GST, excise tax or equivalent taxes in the jurisdiction, and tax advice on restructurings, mergers, and acquisitions); and (v) transfer pricing, $975,000 (advice and assistance with respect to transfer pricing matters, including preparation of reports used by the Company to comply with taxing authority documentation requirements regarding royalties and inter-company pricing and assistance with tax exemptions). The increase in Tax Fees in 2014 resulted primarily from additional U.S. and international tax compliance and transfer pricing documentation services following the Nalco and Champion transactions.

(4)
This category includes all fees paid to PwC that must be disclosed and are appropriately not included in the Audit, Audit-Related and Tax categories.

(2)

Fees and expenses paid to PwC for: (i) agreed-upon procedures (agreed-upon or expanded audit procedures related to accounting records required to respond to or comply with financial, accounting or regulatory matters); (ii) attest services; and (iii) employee benefit plan audits (financial statement audits of pension and other employee benefit plans).

(3)

Fees and expenses paid to PwC for: (i) U.S. federal, state and local tax advice (assistance with tax audits, technical interpretations, applicable laws and regulations, tax advice on mergers, acquisitions and restructurings), $230,000; (ii) US Federal, state and local tax compliance (preparation and/or review of tax returns including sales and use tax, excise tax, income tax, and property tax; consultation regarding applicable handling of items for tax returns, required disclosures, elections, and filing positions available to the Company), $60,000; (iii) international non-U.S. tax compliance (preparation and review of income, local, VAT, and GST tax returns or other tax filings, required disclosures, elections and filing positions available to the Company) and international non-U.S. tax advice (assistance with tax examinations (other than legal or other representation in tax courts or agencies), advice on various matters including foreign tax credit, foreign income tax, tax accounting, foreign earnings and profits, U.S. treatment of foreign subsidiary income, VAT, GST, excise tax or equivalent taxes in the jurisdiction, and tax advice on restructurings, mergers, and acquisitions), $2,360,000; and (iv) transfer pricing (advice and assistance with respect to transfer pricing matters, including preparation of reports used by the Company to comply with taxing authority documentation requirements regarding royalties and inter-company pricing and assistance with tax exemptions), $1,420,000.

(4)

This category includes all fees paid to PwC that must be disclosed and are appropriately not included in the Audit, Audit-Related and Tax categories.

All of the professional services provided by PwC in 20142016 and 20132015 were approved or pre-approved in accordance with policies of the Audit Committee and the Company. The Audit Committee has pre-approved projects for certain permissible non-audit services. Under the policy, requests for pre-approvals of permissible non-audit services must be accompanied by detailed documentation regarding specific services to be provided. The policy specifies that:

annual pre-approval of the audit engagement (including internal control attestation) is required;

the independent auditor may not provide prohibited services;

annual pre-approval is provided for employee benefit plan audits and special audits, as well as other attestation services;

management and the independent auditors report to the Committee on all non-audit service projects and related fees;

all services and fees are reviewed annually; and

the Committee Chair has been delegated authority to approve specific permissible non-audit service projects and fees to ensure timely handling of unexpected matters.

·

annual pre-approval of the audit engagement (including internal control attestation) is required;

·

the independent auditor may not provide prohibited services;

·

annual pre-approval is provided for employee benefit plan audits and special audits, as well as other attestation services;

·

management and the independent auditors report to the Committee on all non-audit service projects and related fees;

·

all services and fees are reviewed annually; and

·

the Committee Chair has been delegated authority to approve specific permissible non-audit service projects and fees to ensure timely handling of unexpected matters.

Examples of permissible non-audit services under the policy include: (i) merger/acquisition due diligence services; (ii) attest services; (iii) tax compliance, filings and returns; and (iv) tax planning services, provided that such services are limited to projects having "known“known or accepted"accepted” outcomes.


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    59


PROPOSAL 2: RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

PROPOSAL 2: RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors has appointed PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP ("PwC"(“PwC”) as our independent registered public accounting firm to audit our consolidated financial statements for the year ending December 31, 20152017 and to perform other appropriate services. Representatives of PwC are expected to be present at our Annual Meeting of Stockholders. They will have an opportunity to make a statement if they desire to do so and are expected to be available to respond to appropriate questions.

PwC has provided professional services to the Company in 2014,2016, the aggregate fees and expenses of which are reported above.at page 59.  


Board of Directors'Directors’ Recommendation The Board of Directors recommends that the stockholders voteFORthe ratification of the appointment of PwC as our independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2015.2017. Under the


Table of Contents

laws of the State of Delaware, stockholder ratification of the appointment of our independent registered public accounting firm is not required. However, the Board deems it advisable to submit the appointment of PwC for stockholder consideration and ratification. If the appointment of PwC is not ratified, the Audit Committee will reconsider the matter, but will not be required to change its decision to appoint PwC as independent registered public accounting firm. Unless a contrary choice is specified, proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedFORratification of the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.LLP.  

60    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


PROPOSAL 3: ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVES DISCLOSED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT


PROPOSAL 3: ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE
COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVES DISCLOSED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT

Ecolab'sEcolab’s executive compensation program is intended toto: (1) support our corporate vision and long-term financial objectives, (2) communicate the importance of business results, (3) retain and motivate executives important to our success and (4) reward executives for contributions at a level reflecting our performance. We believe that our compensation policies and procedures have met these objectives. They have contributed to the Company'sCompany’s historically strong growth and returns, rewarded executives based on performance and are aligned with the long-term interests of our stockholders. See "Executive Compensation — Compensation“Compensation Discussion and Analysis," beginning at page 21.27.

The Company is presenting this proposal, which gives you as a stockholder the opportunity to endorse or not endorse our executive pay program through an advisory vote for or against the following resolution:

"RESOLVED, that the stockholders approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers, as disclosed in the Company'sCompany’s Proxy Statement for the 20152017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the compensation tables, and the related disclosure contained in the Proxy Statement."

The Company has provided stockholders with an advisory vote on its executive compensation atpresented this proposal for the last five Annual Meetings of Stockholders. Atpast seven years and each meeting,year the advisory vote on executive compensationproposal has received support from greater than 95% of the total shares cast on the proposal.

The Board of Directors urgesencourages stockholders to endorse the compensation program for our named executive officers by votingFOR the above resolution. As discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (the "CD&A") contained in this Proxy Statement, we believe that the executive compensation for 2014 is2016 was reasonable and appropriate and iswas justified by the performance of the Company. Our compensation program is the result of a carefully considered approach, afterincluding input and advice from the Compensation Committee'sCommittee’s independent compensation consultant.

In deciding how to vote on this proposal, the Board of Directors urges you to consider the following factors, many of which are more fully discussed in the CD&A, which begins on page 21:

Performance

Our share performance has exceeded the S&P 500 over the five years we have been conducting the shareholder advisory vote, rising 134% since the beginning of 2010 compared with the S&P 500's 85% increase. Our annual share performance has risen 198% since the beginning of 2005 compared with the S&P 500's 70% increase and has exceeded the S&P 500 in ten out of the past eleven years.

2014 reported diluted earnings per share increased 24% from 2013 to $3.93. Excluding special gains and charges (($0.20) in 2014 and ($0.51) in 2013) and discrete tax items (($0.04) in 2014 and (+$0.14) in 2013), adjusted diluted earnings per share were $4.18 in 2014, up 18% from $3.54 in 2013.

We increased our quarterly dividend rate for the 23rd consecutive year, as it rose 20% in December to an indicated annual rate of $1.32 per common share for 2015. Ecolab has paid cash dividends for 78 consecutive years.

Compensation

We emphasize pay for performance and structure our compensation programs to provide appropriate incentives to executives to drive business and financial results for both the near-term and long-term.

At least 76% of each of our named executive officers' 2014 target compensation was performance-based, 89% in the case of our principal executive officer, with the majority of performance-based compensation coming in the form of long-term incentives.

Our compensation programs do not encourage excessive and unnecessary risks that would threaten the value of the Company, and our programs have various risk mitigation features, such as our Policy on Reimbursement of Incentive Compensation (or so-called "clawback" policy).

We have no history of abusive compensation practices.

Awards

In 2015, Ecolab was named to the Corporate Knights' 2015 Global 100 Most Sustainable Corporations in the World index. Companies named to the Global 100 index are the top overall sustainability performers in their respective industrial sectors, selected from a starting universe of 4,609 companies with a market capitalization greater than $2 billion.

Table of Contents

In 2015, for the ninth consecutive year, Ecolab was named one of the "World's Most Ethical Companies" byEthisphere magazine. The list is composed of companies that use ethical leadership as a purposeful method to drive profits and growth.

In 2014, Ecolab was named to the list of the "World's Most Innovative Companies" byForbes magazine. The list is calculated by projecting a company's cash flows from existing businesses, anticipated growth from those businesses and the net present value of cash flows.Forbes has named Ecolab to this list since the annual rankings began in 2011.

Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding upon the Board of Directors. However, the Compensation Committee will take into account the outcome of the vote when considering future executive compensation arrangements.


Board of Directors'Directors’ Recommendation The Board of Directors recommends that you voteFOR approval of the compensation of Ecolab'sEcolab’s executives as described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis and the compensation tables and otherwise in this Proxy Statement pursuant to the compensation disclosure rules of the SEC. Proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedFORapproval of the proposal unless otherwise specified.


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    61


PROPOSAL 4: ADVISORY VOTE ON THE FREQUENCY OF FUTURE STOCKHOLDER ADVISORY VOTES ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

PROPOSAL
REQUESTING AN INDEPENDENT BOARD CHAIR
4: ADVISORY VOTE ON THE FREQUENCY OF FUTURE STOCKHOLDER ADVISORY VOTES ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

John Chevedden, 2215 Nelson Avenue, No. 205, Redondo Beach, CA 90278, who owns 100 shares of our Common Stock, has notified the Company that he intends to present the following resolution at the Annual Meeting. The Company disclaims any responsibility for the content ofis presenting this proposal and statement of support, the text of which in accordance with rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission, is printed verbatim from its submission, with only the modification of the title solely to add the proposal number and designate that it isgives you as a stockholder proposal.

After careful consideration, theBoard of Directors unanimously recommends that you voteAGAINSTthe stockholder proposal set forth below.

STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL

Independent Board Chairman

Resolved: Shareholders request thatopportunity to recommend to the Board of Directors adoptwhether future advisory votes on the compensation of the executives described in the proxy statement, such as that provided for in Proposal 3: Advisory Vote to Approve the Compensation of Executives Disclosed in this Proxy Statement, should occur every one, two or three years. Stockholders also may, if they wish, abstain from casting a policyvote on this proposal. This non-binding advisory vote is required to be conducted every six years under Section 14A of the Exchange Act pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act. We last asked our stockholders to indicate the frequency with which they believe executive compensation advisory votes should occur at the Company’s 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Following that the Chair ofmeeting, the Board of Directors shall be an independent director who is not a current or former employee of the company, and whose only nontrivial professional, familial or financial connection to the company or its CEO is the directorship. The policydetermined that such votes should be implemented so as not to violate existing agreements and should allow for departure under extraordinary circumstances such as the unexpected resignation of the chair.conducted every year.

When our CEO is our board chairman, this arrangement can hinder our board's ability to monitor our CEO's performance. Many companies already have an independent Chairman. An independent Chairman is the prevailing practice in the United Kingdom and many international markets. This proposal topic won 50%-plus support at 5 major U.S. companies in 2013 including 73%-support at Netflix.

This topic is of additional importance for Ecolab because our Chairman/CEO Douglas Baker appears to be overburdened with seats on the boards of 3 public companies. And Lead Director Jerry Levin, with 22-years long-tenure, seems to have less than the best qualifications. GMI Ratings, an independent investment research firm, said long-tenured directors can form relationships that may compromise their independence and therefore hinder their ability to provide effective oversight.

Our clearly improvable corporate governance (as reported in 2014) is an added incentive to vote for this proposal:

Five directors had 15 to 22 years long-tenure which detracts from their independence: Jerry Grundhofer, Robert Lumpkins, Leslie Biller, Joel Johnson and Lead Director Jerry Levin. These directors controlled 43% of the votes on our most important board committees.

Michael Larson appears to be overextended with service on 5 public boards and he received our highest negative vote (11% negative). It is highly unusual for any director in an uncontested election to receive more than 10% in negative votes. It is also highly unusual for a relatively new director, such as Mr. Larson, to receive more than 10% in negative votes. Due to his other commitments Mr. Larson should arguably not serve on any of our board committees.

GMI Ratings, an independent investment research firm, said Ecolab had not disclosed specific, quantifiable performance objectives for our CEO. Our company pays long-term incentives to executives without requiring the company to perform above the median of its peer group. Unvested equity awards partially or fully accelerate upon CEO termination. Douglas Baker also had excessive perks. Meanwhile there was a potential 12% stock dilution for shareholders.

Returning to the core topic of this proposal from the context of our clearly improvable corporate governance, please vote to protect shareholder value: Independent Board Chairman — Proposal 4.


Table of Contents

RESPONSE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

After careful consideration, ourthe Board of Directors, recommendson the recommendation of the Compensation Committee, has determined that you voteAGAINST this proposalconducting annual executive compensation advisory votes remains the best approach for the following reasons:

As set outCompany and our stockholders as it allows our stockholders to provide timely, direct input on the Company’s executive compensation philosophy, policies and practices as disclosed in our Corporate Governance Principles,the proxy statement. While this new stockholder vote on this matter will not be binding on the Company, the Board has long held that stockholders are best served by not having a fixed policyof Directors will take into account the outcome of the vote when considering the frequency of future votes on whether the offices of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer are to be held by one person or not. This proposal would remove this flexibility and narrow the governance arrangements that theexecutive compensation. The Board may consider, which could be contrary todecide that it is in the best interests of our stockholders. As set out under "Corporate Governance — Board Leadership Structure" on page 7, currently, the Board believes that combining our Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") with the Chairman of the Board position is the most appropriate structure forstockholders and the Company and best serves the interests of our stockholders due to numerous factors, including:

The benefits to the decision-making process with a leader who is both Chairman and Chief Executive Officer;

The significant operating experience and qualifications of Mr. Baker;

The importance of deep Ecolab knowledge, which Mr. Baker's years at Ecolab have provided him, in exercising business judgment in leading the Board;

The size and complexity of our business;

The significant business experience and tenure of our directors; and

The qualifications and role of our Lead Director.

The Board believes that this proposal should also be evaluated in the context of our independent Board and Lead Director's effective oversight of management and the Company's governance best practices:

All of the directors on our Board except for Mr. Baker are independent in accordance with the listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange, the rules and regulations of the SEC, applicable law, and the Board's "independence" policy;

This means that oversight of key matters such as the integrity of Ecolab's financial statements, executive compensation, the nomination of directors and evaluation of the Board and its Committees, is entrusted to independent directors;

The independent directors meet in connection with each regularly scheduled Board meeting in separate executive sessions led by the Lead Director and without the CEO present;

Direct accountability of the Board to stockholders is achieved through the annual election of directors and majority voting in uncontested director elections;

Our directors have complete access to Ecolab's senior management;

The Board and each of the Board's committees have the authority to retain independent advisors and consultants;

Our independent Board members drive the annual CEO performance review, as the evaluation is led by the Governance Committee and the evaluation is used by the Compensation Committee in determining the compensation of the CEO; and

Additionally, as described under "Corporate Governance — Board Leadership Structure" on page 7, our Board has established a Lead Director position with substantial and clearly delineated authority. Specific responsibilities of the Lead Director, as enumerated in our Corporate Governance Principles, include:

    presiding over meetings of the Board at which the Chairman is not present, including executive sessions of the independent directors;

    acting as a liaison between the Chairman and the independent directors;

    reviewing and approving information sent to the Board;

    reviewing and approving meeting agendas and meeting schedules for the Board to assure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items; and

    calling meetings of the independent directors at his or her sole discretion; and

    if requested by significant stockholders, ensuring that he or she is available for consultation and direct communication.

In accordance with our Corporate Governance Principles, the Board has appointed Jerry W. Levin as Lead Director. Mr. Levin is particularly well qualified to serve as our Lead Director. He is independent and is our longest serving director, with 22 years of continuous service on the Board, so he has considerable knowledge of our business. As detailed in Mr. Levin's biography and qualifications on page 18, Mr. Levin also has extensive public company board experience.

Our current structure is not only robust but is proven effective as well. In his combined role as the CEO and Chairman, Mr. Baker has enabled decisive leadership and driven strong performance and long-term value creation for our stockholders. For the eight-year period from 2007, the first full year of Mr. Baker's tenure as Chairman and CEO, through 2014, the Company's performance has been outstanding as evidenced by the measures below:

Our share price has risen 135%, significantly outperforming the Standard & Poor's 500 index, which rose 45% during the same period.

Our sales have increased 160% over this period, from $5.5 billion to $14.3 billion.

Table of Contents

Our adjusted diluted earnings per share has increased 152% over this period, from $1.66 in 2007 to $4.18 in 2014. Over the same period, our reported earnings per share has increased 131%.

We have increased our quarterly dividend rate each year during this eight-year period at a compound annual growth rate of almost 12%.

We have been widely recognized for being a company that not only performs well, but also works hard to do business the right way. As evidence of this, Ecolab has been named one of the "World's Most Ethical Companies" byEthisphere magazine for nine consecutive years. We were named to the 2013 CDP Global 500 Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI) and CDP Global 500 Climate Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI), two leading environmental indices. In 2014, Ecolab was again named to the FTSE4Good Index for meeting their globally recognized corporate social responsibility standards related to environmental, social and governance practices. In 2014, CR Magazine recognized Ecolab's commitment to transparency and accountability by naming us to their 100 Best Corporate Citizens List.

Finally, we believe that the proponent also has been very selective in his critique of the Company's practices. In its most recent review using its "QuickScore" rating system, Institutional Shareholder Services ("ISS") has assessed our corporate governance practices and given us its highest possible overall rating. The proponent describes our CEO pay practices in ways that we believe are misleading, and the proponent fails to mention our 2014 shareholderhold an advisory vote on executive compensation receivedmore or less frequently than the approvalfrequency receiving the most votes cast by our stockholders.

Stockholders may cast a vote on the preferred frequency by selecting the option of approximately 97%one year, two years, or three years (or abstain) when voting in response to the resolution set forth below.

"RESOLVED, that the stockholders wish the company to include an advisory vote on the compensation of Ecolab Inc. named executive officers pursuant to Section 14A of the shares voted. Further, the proponent fails to mention that last year our stockholders agreed with the Board and rejected a similar proposal from the proponent.Security Exchange Act every:

-

one year (annual);

-

two years (biennial); or

-

three years (triennial).”

In view of our highly independent board structure, Corporate Governance Principles, strong corporate governance practices and proven track record of success, the Board believes that this stockholder proposal is an unnecessary limitation on the Board's flexibility and would not strengthen the Board's independence or oversight functions.


Board of Directors' Recommendation — The Board of Directors recommends that you vote for AGAINSTANNUAL this proposal. frequency. Unless a contrary choice is specified, proxies solicited by our Board of Directors will be votedAGAINSTfor ANNUAL the stockholder proposal.frequency.

The proposal is advisory in nature, and approval of the proposal would serve as a recommendation to the Board of Directors to adopt a policy, and amend other governing documents as necessary to reflect this policy, to require the Chair of our Board of Directors to be an independent member of our Board. As with all proposals, if the proposal is not properly presented by the proponent at the Annual Meeting, it will not be voted upon.

62    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


OTHER MATTERS


OTHER MATTERS

Proxy Solicitation Costs

We will bear the cost of the preparation and solicitation of proxies, including the charges and expenses of brokerage firms, banks or other nominees for forwarding proxy material to beneficial owners. In addition to solicitation by mail, proxies may be solicited by telephone, the Internet or personally. We have retained Georgeson Inc., 480 Washington Blvd., 26thFloor, Jersey City, NJ 07310, to aid in the solicitation of proxies for a fee of $12,000 plus expenses. Proxies may also be solicited by certain directors, officers and employees of the Company without extra compensation.


Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires the Company'sCompany’s executive officers and directors, and persons who own more than ten percent of a registered class of the Company'sCompany’s equity securities, to file with the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange reports on ownership of Company securities and changes in reported ownership. ExecutiveAs a practical matter, Company personnel assist executive officers and directors by monitoring transactions and greater than ten percent shareholders are required by SEC rulescompleting and filing Section 16 reports (SEC Forms 3, 4 and 5) on their behalf based upon company records and information provided to furnish the Company with copies of all Section 16(a) reports they file.us.

Based solely on a review of theSection 16 reports furnished to the Company, orand on written representations from reporting persons, that all reportable transactions were reported, the Company believes that during the fiscal year ended December 31, 20142016 the Company'sCompany’s executive officers, directors and greater than ten percent owners timely filed all reports they were required to file under Section 16(a).


Householding Information

Some banks, brokers and other nominee record holders may be participating in the practice of "householding"“householding” proxy soliciting material. This means that you and other holders of our Common Stock in your household may not receive separate copies of the Company'sCompany’s Proxy Statement or Annual Report. We will promptly deliver an additional copy of either document to any stockholder upon request to: Corporate Secretary, Ecolab Inc., 370 Wabasha Street North,1 Ecolab Place, Saint Paul, MN 55102; telephone (651) 250-2233;250-2981; or e-mail investor.info@ecolab.com. If you desire to reduce the number of copies mailed to your household, please contact your bank or broker.


Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Stockholder Meeting to be held on May 7, 20154, 2017

The Notice of 20152017 Annual Meeting, Proxy Statement and Annual Report to Stockholders of Ecolab Inc. areis available at www.edocumentview.com/ecl.www.proxyvote.com.


ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement    

    63


OTHER MATTERS

Voting by Plan Participants

Generally, you will receive only one notice, proxy card or voting instruction form covering all the shares you hold:

in your own name;

in the Dividend Reinvestment Plan sponsored by Computershare Trust Company, N.A., if any; and

if you participate in one or more of the following Plans:

    the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP*; or

·

in your own name;

·

in the Dividend Reinvestment Plan sponsored by Computershare Trust Company, N.A., if any; and

·

if you participate in one or more of the following Plans:

-

the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP*; or

-

the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP for Traditional Benefit Employees*; or

-

the Ecolab Puerto Rico Savings Plan*; or

-

the Ecolab Stock Purchase Plan administered by Computershare Trust Company, N.A.; or

-

the Ecolab Canada Share Purchase Plan administered by Computershare Trust Company of Canada

Table of Contents

      the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP for Traditional Benefit Employees*; or

      the Ecolab Puerto Rico Savings Plan*; or

      the Ecolab Stock Purchase Plan administered by Computershare Limited; or

      the Ecolab Canada Share Purchase Plan administered by SG Vestia Systems Inc.

*
If you participate in the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP, the Ecolab Savings Plan and ESOP for Traditional Benefit Employees or the Ecolab Puerto Rico Savings Plan, you are entitled to direct the respective plan trustee to vote (or not to vote) the equivalent number of shares of Common Stock credited to your Plan account. Your proxy card will serve as a voting instruction to the Trustee and if your instructions are timely received, the Trustee will follow your voting instructions. If you do not timely submit your voting instructions, the Trustee will vote your Plan shares in the same proportion as to each respective proposal as the shares for which voting instructions have been received from other Plan participants.To allow sufficient time for voting of your shares by the Trustee, your voting instructions should be received by May 4, 20151, 2017 to ensure tabulation.

If you hold Ecolab shares through any other Ecolab plans, you will receive voting instructions from that plan'splan’s administrator.

By Order of the Board of Directors





GRAPHICPicture 46

March 23, 2015

Michael C. McCormick

Executive Vice President, General Counsel
and Assistant Secretary

March 20, 2017


64    

    ECOLAB  -  2017 Proxy Statement


Table of Contents


DIRECTIONS TO THE ECOLAB ANNUAL MEETING

Saint Paul'sPaul’s Landmark Center is located at 75 West 5th Street in downtown Saint Paul, adjacent to Rice Park. There are numerous paid ramps and parking meters within easy walking distance. The closest parking ramps are RiverCentre, Lawson Commons and Kellogg Street Ramp.

MAPPicture 6



Picture 10



LOGO



Global Headquarters
370 Wabasha Street N

1 Ecolab Place, St. Paul, MN 55102

www.ecolab.com 1 800 2 ECOLAB




LOGOPicture 32



*** Exercise Your Right to Vote ***

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the

Stockholder Meeting to Be Held on May 4, 2017.

Meeting Information

ECOLAB INC.

Meeting Type:

Annual Meeting

For holders as of:

March 7, 2017

Date:

May 4, 2017

Time:

10:00 AM

Location:

Landmark Center

75 West 5th Street

Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102

GRAPHICPicture 19

www.envisionreports.com/ECL Step 1: Go to www.envisionreports.com/ECL to view the materials. Step 2: Click on Cast Your Vote or Request Materials. Step 3: Follow the instructions on the screen to log in. Vote by Internet • Go to www.envisionreports.com/ECL • Or scan the QR code with your smartphone • Follow the steps outlined on the secure website Stockholder Annual Meeting Notice 020M2A + + Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Ecolab Inc. Stockholder Meeting to be Held on May 7, 2015 Under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, you

You are receiving this communication because you hold shares in the company named above.

ECOLAB INC.
CORPORATE SECRETARY
1 ECOLAB PLACE
SAINT PAUL, MN  55102-2739

This is not a ballot. You cannot use this notice that the proxy materials for the annual stockholders’ meeting are available on the Internet. Follow the instructions below to view the materials and vote online or request a copy. The items to be voted on and location of the annual meeting are on the reverse side. Your vote is important!these shares. This communication presents only an overview of the more complete proxy materials that are available to you on the Internet. You may view the proxy materials online at www.proxyvote.com, scan the QR Barcode on the reverse side, or easily request a paper copy (see reverse side).

We encourage you to access and review all of the important information contained in the proxy materials before voting. The

See the reverse side of this notice to obtain proxy statementmaterials and annual reportvoting instructions.

E20933‑P87865


Before You Vote

How to Access the Proxy Materials

Proxy Materials Available to stockholders are available at: Easy Online Access — A Convenient WayVIEW or RECEIVE:

NOTICE AND PROXY STATEMENT

ANNUAL REPORT

How to View Proxy MaterialsOnline:

Have the information that is printed in the box marked by the arrow Picture 24 (located on the following page) and Vote When you go onlinevisit: www.proxyvote.com, or scan the QR Barcode below.

How to view materials, you can also vote your shares. Step 4: Make your selection as instructed on each screen to select delivery preferencesRequest and vote. When you go online, you can also help the environment by consenting to receive electronic delivery of future materials. ObtainingReceive a Copy of the Proxy Materials – PAPER or E-MAIL Copy:

If you want to receive a paper or e-mail copy of these documents, you must request one. There is noNO charge to you for requesting a copy. Please choose one of the following methods to make your request forrequest:

1)

BY INTERNET:

www.proxyvote.com

2)

BY TELEPHONE:

1-800-579-1639

3)

BY E-MAIL*:

sendmaterial@proxyvote.com

*If requesting materials by e-mail, please send a copyblank e-mail with the information that is printed in the box marked by the arrow

Picture 26

(located on the following page) in the subject line.

Requests, instructions and other inquiries sent to this e-mail address will NOT be forwarded to your investment advisor. Please make the request as instructed on the reverse sideabove on or before April 17, 201520, 2017 to facilitate timely delivery. . IMPORTANT ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION

 


How To Vote

GRAPHICPicture 11

Please Choose One of the Following Voting Methods

Vote In Person: Many stockholder meetings have attendance requirements including, but not limited to, the possession of an attendance ticket issued by the entity holding the meeting. Please check the meeting materials for any special requirements for meeting attendance. At the meeting, you will need to request a ballot to vote these shares.

Vote By Internet: Go to www.proxyvote.com or from a smart phone, scan the QR Barcode above. Have the information that is printed

in the box marked by the arrow

Here’s how to order a copy of the proxy materials and select a future delivery preference: Paper copies: Current and future paper delivery requests can be submitted via the telephone, Internet or email options below. Email copies: Current and future email delivery requests must be submitted via the Internet following the instructions below. If you request an email copy of current materials you will receive an email with a link to the materials. PLEASE NOTE: You must use the number in the shaded barPicture 25

(located on the reverse side when requesting a set of proxy materials. g Internet – Go to www.envisionreports.com/ECL. Click Cast Your Vote or Request Materials. Follow the instructions to log in and order a copy of the current meeting materials and submit your preference for email or paper delivery of future meeting materials. g Telephone – Call us free of charge at 1-866-641-4276following page) available and follow the instructions to log in and orderinstructions.

Vote By Mail: You can vote by mail by requesting a paper copy of the materials, by mail for the current meeting. You can also submitwhich will include a preference to receive a paper copy for future meetings. g Email – Send email to investorvote@computershare.com with “Proxy Materials Ecolab” in the subject line. Include in the message your full name and address, plus the number located in the shaded bar on the reverse, and state in the email that you want a paper copy of current meeting materials. You can also state your preference to receive a paper copy for future meetings. To facilitate timely delivery, all requests for a paper copy of the proxy materials must be received by April 17, 2015. . 020M2A 94 94 94 35E = parking 35E 10th Street Exit 11th St 10th St 7th St 6th St 5th St 4th St Kellogg Mississippi River from the West Side from Minneapolis Macy’s Wells Fargo Place Children's Museum MN History Center State Capitol Saint Paul Hotel Lawson Landmark Center Rice Park Science Museum RiverCentre Xcel Center Ordway Center Crowne Plaza Ecolab Exchange St St. Peter Street Wabasha Street Cedar Street 5th Street Exit Kellogg Blvd Exit Directions to the Ecolab Annual Meeting Saint Paul's Landmark Center is located at 75 West 5th Street in downtown St. Paul, adjacent to Rice Park. There are numerous paid ramps and parking meters within easy walking distance. The closest parking ramps are RiverCentre, Lawson Commons and Kellogg Street Ramp. Stockholder Meeting Notice Ecolab Inc.’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders will be held at 10:00 a.m. on May 7, 2015, at the Landmark Center, 75 West 5th Street, Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102. Proposals to be voted on at the meeting are listed below along with the Board of Directors’ recommendations. card.

E20934‑P87865


Voting Items

The Board of Directors recommends ayou vote FOR all each
of
the nominees listed and in proposal 1:

1.

Election of Directors.

Nominees:

The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR Proposals

management proposals 2 and 3. 1. Election of Directors to a one-year term ending in 2016: 3:

1a.

Douglas M. Baker, Jr., Barbara J. Beck, Leslie S. Biller, Carl M. Casale, Stephen I. Chazen, Jeffrey M. Ettinger, Jerry A. Grundhofer, Arthur J. Higgins, Joel W. Johnson, Michael Larson, Jerry W. Levin, Robert L. Lumpkins, Tracy B. McKibben, Victoria J. Reich, Suzanne M. Vautrinot and John J. Zillmer

2.

Ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

as independent registered public accounting firm for the

1b.

Barbara J. Beck

current year ending December 31, 2017.

1c.

Leslie S. Biller

3.

Advisory vote to approve the compensation of executives

disclosed in the Proxy Statement. 

1d.

Carl M. Casale

The Board of Directors recommends you vote 1 YEAR on

1e.

Stephen I. Chazen

management proposal 4:

4.

Advisory vote on the frequency of future stockholder

1f.

Jeffrey M. Ettinger

advisory votes on executive compensation.

1g.

Arthur J. Higgins

1h.

Michael Larson

1i.

David W. MacLennan

1j.

Tracy B. McKibben

E20935‑P87865

1k.

Victoria J. Reich

1l.

Suzanne M. Vautrinot

1m.

John J. Zillmer


image1.png®

ECOLAB INC.
CORPORATE SECRETARY
1 ECOLAB PLACE
SAINT PAUL, MN 55102-2739





Picture 10

VOTE BY INTERNET -
www.proxyvote.com or scan the QR Barcode above.

Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form.

ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF FUTURE PROXY MATERIALS

If you would like to reduce the costs incurred by our company in mailing proxy materials, you can consent to receiving all future proxy statements, proxy cards and annual reports electronically via e-mail or the Internet. To sign up for electronic delivery, please follow the instructions above to vote using the Internet and, when prompted, indicate that you agree to receive or access proxy materials electronically in future years.

VOTE BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903

Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions.

VOTE BY MAIL

Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.

TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS:

E00931-P87865

KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS

DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION ONLY

THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED.

ECOLAB INC.

Picture 90

The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR each of the nominees
listed in proposal 1:

1.

Election of Directors.

Nominees:

For

Against

Abstain

For

Against

Abstain

1a.

Douglas M. Baker, Jr.

1l.

Suzanne M. Vautrinot

1b.

Barbara J. Beck

1m.

John J. Zillmer

1c.

Leslie S. Biller

The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR management proposals 2 and 3:

1d.

Carl M. Casale

2.

Ratify the appointment of Pricewaterhouse Coopers LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for the

1e.

Stephen I. Chazen

current year ending December 31, 2015. 2017.

1f.

Jeffrey M. Ettinger

3.

Advisory vote to approve the compensation of executives disclosed in the Proxy Statement.

1g.

Arthur J. Higgins

The Board of Directors recommends that you vote AGAINST1 YEAR on

1h.

Michael Larson

management proposal 4:

1 Year

2 Years

3 Years

Abstain

1i.

David W. MacLennan

4. 4. Stockholder proposal requesting an independent board chair. PLEASE NOTE – YOU CANNOT VOTE BY RETURNING THIS NOTICE. To

Advisory vote on the frequency of future stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation. 

1j.

Tracy B. McKibben

1k.

Victoria J. Reich

Please sign exactly as your shares youname(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must vote onlinesign. If a corporation or request a paper copy of the proxy materials to receive a proxy card. If you wish to attend and vote at the meeting,partnership, please bring this notice with you.sign in full corporate or partnership name by authorized officer.

Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX]

Date

Signature (Joint Owners)

Date

 


 

Directions to the Ecolab Annual Meeting

Saint Paul's Landmark Center is located at 75 West 5th Street in downtown St. Paul, adjacent to Rice Park. There are numerous paid ramps and parking meters within easy walking distance. The closest parking ramps are RiverCentre, Lawson Commons and Kellogg Street Ramp.

Picture 16

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting:

The Notice and Proxy Statement and Annual Report are available at www.proxyvote.com.

GRAPHIC

Using a black ink pen, mark your votes with an X as shown in this example. Please do not write outside the designated areas. X 020M0A 1 U PX + Annual Meeting Proxy Card — Ecolab Inc. . + IMPORTANT ANNUAL MEETING INFORMATION 01 - Douglas M. Baker, Jr. 1. Election of Directors: 02 - Barbara J. Beck 03 - Leslie S. Biller 04 - Carl M. Casale For Against Abstain Proposals — You must sign the card on the reverse side for your vote to be tabulated. A The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR all the nominees listed and FOR Proposals 2 and 3. For Against Abstain 3. Advisory vote to approve the compensation of executives disclosed in the Proxy Statement. 07 - Jerry A. Grundhofer 08 - Arthur J. Higgins 09 - Joel W. Johnson 10 - Michael Larson 11 - Jerry W. Levin For Against Abstain 12 - Robert L. Lumpkins 13- Tracy B. McKibben 14 - Victoria J. Reich 15 - Suzanne M. Vautrinot 16 - John J. Zillmer For Against Abstain For Against Abstain 2. Ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for the current year ending December 31, 2015. The Board of Directors recommends a vote AGAINST Proposal 4. For Against Abstain 4. Stockholder proposal requesting an independent board chair. 05 - Stephen I. Chazen 06 - Jeffrey M. Ettinger qIFIF YOU HAVE NOT VOTED VIA THE INTERNET OR TELEPHONE, FOLD ALONG THE PERFORATION, DETACH AND RETURN THE BOTTOM PORTION IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE.q Electronic Voting Instructions You can vote by Internet or telephone! Available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week! Instead of mailing your proxy, you may choose one of the two voting methods outlined below to vote your proxy. VALIDATION DETAILS ARE LOCATED BELOW IN THE TITLE BAR. Proxies submitted by the Internet or telephone must be received by 1:00 a.m., Eastern Time, on May 7, 2015. Vote by Internet • Go to www.envisionreports.com/ECL • Or scan the QR code with your smartphone • Follow the steps outlined on the secure website Vote by telephone • Call toll free 1-800-652-VOTE (8683) within the USA, US territories & Canada on a touch tone telephone • Follow the instructions provided by the recorded messageENVELOPE.

 


E20932-P87865

GRAPHIC

. Directions to the

Proxy — Ecolab Annual Meeting Saint Paul's Landmark Center is located at 75 West 5th Street in downtown St. Paul, adjacent to Rice Park. There are numerous paid ramps and parking meters within easy walking distance. The closest parking ramps are RiverCentre, Lawson Commons and Kellogg Street Ramp. Inc.

THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

ECOLAB INC.
ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
MAY 7, 2015 4, 2017

The undersigned hereby appoints Douglas M. Baker, Jr., James J. SeifertMichael C. McCormick and Theodore D. Herzog, and each of them, with power of substitution to each as proxies to represent the undersigned at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Ecolab Inc., to be held in St. Paul, Minnesota, at the Landmark Center at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, May 7, 2015,4, 2017, and at any adjournment(s)adjournment or postponement thereof, and to vote all shares of stock which the undersigned may be entitled to vote at said meeting as directed on the reverse side with respect to the proposals as set forth in the Proxy Statement, and in their discretion, upon any other matters that may properly come before the meeting. You are encouraged to specify

This proxy will be voted as specified by the undersigned. If no such direction is given, your choices by markingproxies will have the appropriate boxes, SEE REVERSE SIDE, but you need not mark any boxes if you wishauthority to vote “for” each of the nominees listed in accordance withproposal 1, “for” proposals 2 and 3, “1 year” on proposal 4 and in the Boarddiscretion of Directors’ recommendations as indicatedthe proxy holder on any other matter that may properly come before the reverse side. annual meeting and any adjournment or postponement thereof.

The tabulator cannot vote yourthe shares unless you sign and return this card, or you use the telephone or Internet voting services to cast your proxy. Proxy — Ecolab Inc. 94 94 94 35E = parking 35E 10th Street Exit 11th St 10th St 7th St 6th St 5th St 4th St Kellogg Mississippi River from the West Side from Minneapolis Macy’s Wells Fargo Place Children's Museum MN History Center State Capitol Saint Paul Hotel Lawson Landmark Center Rice Park Science Museum RiverCentre Xcel Center Ordway Center Crowne Plaza Ecolab Exchange St St. Peter Street Wabasha Street Cedar Street 5th Street Exit Kellogg Blvd Exit Authorized Signatures — This section must be completed for your vote

Continued and to be counted. B Please sign exactly as name(s) appears hereon. Joint owners should each sign. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, corporate officer, trustee, guardian, or custodian, please give full title. Signature 1 — Please keep signature within the box. Signature 2 — Please keep signature within the box. Date (mm/dd/yyyy) — Please print date below. + + qIF YOU HAVE NOT VOTED VIA THE INTERNET OR TELEPHONE, FOLD ALONG THE PERFORATION, DETACH AND RETURN THE BOTTOM PORTION IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE.qsigned on reverse side