Document QJDnweQLDQ4KD2vNK9ZymrN9k

To: From: Sent: Subject: Jackson, Ryan[jackson.ryan@epa.gov] Desmarie Waterhouse Wed 10/11/2017 4:10:27 PM October 19 APPA meeting request Ryan: Amy Dewey informed me late on Friday that Administrator Pruitt will be in Dallas next week and unable to attend our CEO meeting on Oct. 19.1 asked if EPA could send someone in his place, but still have not heard back. We would really like a representative from the agency at our meeting, especially given the proposed rule to repeal the CPP. Can you attend in his place or have someone like Mandy do so? Our meeting request was put in back in June and hope someone can talk to our CEOs. Please let me know if this is possible. Thanks so much. Desmarie Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00000883-00001 Chemours Mark P. Vergnano President Chief Executive Officer September 7, 2017 The Chemours Company 1007 Market Street Wilmington, DE 19899 President Donald J. Trump The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 Dear Mr. President: I am writing to request your urgent support to prevent a significant setback to American innovationjob creation and economic growth. Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that will negatively impact recent Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) efforts, a pro-business program that was instituted by Congress under President George H.W. Bush that builds upon principles of conservative environmental stewardship by incentivizing private sector innovation to find safer, next-generation chemical substitutes. Supported by the business certainty created by the SNAP program, Honeywell and Chemours have invested well over $1 billion in the development and manufacture of hydrofluoro-olefins (HFOs) to meet domestic and global demand. In fact, we are currently investing hundreds of millions of dollars in our new facility in Corpus Christi. This investment supports thousands of U.S.-based jobs supporting local economies, including manufacturing plants in Louisiana and Texas. These 21st century American solutions replace outdated hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and are being adopted worldwide for use in products such as refrigerators, commercial and residential air conditioners, foam insulation and automobiles. The U.S. HFO manufacturing plants are producing not only for the United States, but are also exporting HFO products to meet rising global demand. This demand is expected to continue to increase as developing countries begin to also transition to the most current solutions. Global adoption of HFOs is well underway, providing the United States with a marketplace advantage that will benefit American workers and the economy. The entire industry worked closely with the EPA on the recent SNAP efforts and have already invested in replacement solutions. The business uncertainty created by this ruling has a huge impact on more than just the producers of the alternatives. Foreign competitors Mexichem Fluor and Arkema, who have not invested in the R&D to create these alternatives and who do not manufacture these alternatives, used the U.S. courts to hurt American companies. In the end, they will benefit along with the Chinese since HFCs produced from fluorospar in China dominate the global market in HFC production. In fact, Chinese imports of HFCs have been the subject of numerous U.S. industry antidumping complaints. If this ruling stands, it will likely create a chilling effect on American businesses which won't risk making the necessary investments in both workers and technology. American companies lead the world in innovation and this ruling, instigated by two foreign competitors, undermines that fundamental tenet. Without action by the Administration, this damaging court ruling will impact U.S. industry and innovation and create significant business uncertainty that will hinder job growth and additional investments. We urge you to support an EPA en banc appeal to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Sincere Mark P Vergnano 17cv1906 Sierra Club v. EPA ED_001523_00000886-00001