JON HUNTSMAN’S ATTACK ON THE EPA:

WHERE IS THE FOCUS ON POLLUTER’S PAST?

History of Clashes With EPA, Ongoing Pollution by Huntsman Corporation Detailed

An Analysis by the Environmental Integrity Project

Just before the Labor Day weekend, Republican presidential candidate Jon Huntsman unveiled a jobs plan ( predicated in part on accusations that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is guilty of "gross regulatory overreach" and a promise by Huntsman to "dramatically rein in the EPA" if elected.

As is detailed below, emissions at two Huntsman Chemical plants increased significantly between 2009 and 2010, by more than 50 percent at the company’s facility in Port Neches, Texas. While the candidate is no longer a manager of The Huntsman Corporation, recent data show that he is heavily invested in the company. Furthermore, John Huntsman Jr. was a member of the board of directors when Huntsman employees committed the illegal acts that led to the company paying a substantial civil penalty and saw two managers sentenced to jail terms for illegal releases of benzene.

While other Republican presidential candidates have made similar anti-EPA pronouncements, they are different in one significant way from Jon Huntsman: None of the other candidates has a history of actual regulatory run-ins with the EPA, and none of them has a family connection with a corporation that is a major polluter today.

Ironically, Huntsman is sometimes referred to as “the greenest Republican in the presidential race” (

HUNTSMAN IS TIED DIRECTLY TO HIS FAMILY’S CORPORATION

Here are some key facts:

  • The Huntsman Corporation was founded as the Huntsman Container Corporation in 1970 by Jon Huntsman, Sr. It went public on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: HUN) in February 2005. The Huntsman Corporation is now a global chemical company with about $8 billion in revenue. (See
  • Jon Huntsman Jr. served from 1993-2001 as vice chairman of the board and executive committee member, Huntsman Corporation. (See
  • Though he no longer serves as a corporate officer, Jon Huntsman Jr.’s personal wealth is directly tied to the ongoing operations of The Huntsman Corporation. “The former Utah governor, who until April had served as President Obama's ambassador to China, owns assets valued between $17.8 million and $84.0 million, according to a personal financial disclosure report filed in May. The report covers Huntsman's personal finances for the 2009 calendar year, when he assumed the China post. The bulk of Huntsman's wealth that year came from investments valued between $7 million and $35 million, as well as from a family holding company. That company, valued between $5 million and $25 million, was solely invested in the Huntsman Corporation, a multi-billion dollar chemical company founded by Jon Huntsman, Sr., the former governor's father.” (See Also, see

THE HUNTSMAN CORPORATION IS A MAJOR POLLUTER

When the EPA warned in 2000 that MTBE had contaminated the soil around 200 underground storage tanks in Utah, the Huntsman Corporation defended the chemical as a “wonderful” thing. (See .) The EPA view of MTBE was starkly different: "The use of MTBE as an additive in gasoline presents an unreasonable risk to the environment," said a draft of the proposed regulation the EPA sent to the White House on the last full day of the Clinton administration in January 2001. The EPA document went on to say that "low levels of MTBE can render drinking water supplies unpotable due to its offensive taste and odor" and that the additive should be phased out over four years. "Unlike other components of gasoline, MTBE dissolves and spreads readily in the ground water . . . resists biodegradation, and is more difficult and costly to remove." (See

Further, two managers at Huntsman’s Port Arthur plant (now owned by Flint Hills) were each sentenced in 2003 to 36 months in jail for illegally operating a storage tank that was emitting dangerous levels of benzene, and of concealing the emissions from regulators. While the criminal case against the corporation itself was dropped, Huntsman had to pay $9 million in civil penalties to resolve the matter, and invest $500,000 in restoration of a wetland. (See information available on USEPA website at and http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/a883dc3da7094f97852572a00065d7d8/467fbfa51f77e787852568490076b04c!OpenDocument.) The illegal emissions between December 1994 and December 1996 occurred during the time that Jon Huntsman Jr., served on the board of his family company.

The Port Arthur case is now a hallmark in Clean Air Act prosecutions. As one observer noted: “A recent Texas prosecution against employees of Huntsman Chemical Company in Beaumont, Texas, is characteristic of a reporting crime. Two employees, the plant manager and the environmental manager, were indicted for making false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims and for conspiracy to present false, fictitious, or fraudulent claims in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 and 371, respectively. The charges centered aroundthe Huntsman plant’s illegal emission of benzene, a known carcinogen, into the ambient air. Both employees were indicted in September 1998, after a four-year investigation, and were charged with the failure to report releases of volatile organic compounds and with falsely claiming on a required report that the Huntsman plant was within the controlled emissions limit. Huntsman Chemical Company, as an entity, was not indicted, but agreed to make a significant payment into an environmental project for the Beaumont region.” (See

Beyond this, an EIP analysis (see shows the following:

  • Toxic air emissions increased by more than 50 percent between 2009 and 2010 at the Huntsman petrochemical plant in Port Neches, based on company data reported to the USEPA Toxics Release Inventory (TRI). According to the latest TRI data from the EPA, Huntsman released 466,880 pounds of toxic pollutants to the air in 2010, compared to 297,510 pounds in 2009.
  • Toxic emissions increased about 13 percent at the company’s advanced materials plant in Washington County, Alabama, between 2009 and 2010, while remaining about the same at two other large plants owned by Huntsman in Florida (Escambia County) and Louisiana (Escambia Parish).
  • EPA has “weighted” toxic releases to account for their relative hazard to human health (i.e., more dangerous chemicals are assigned a higher weight than less toxic ones). Based on this formula, the weight or potential hazard of Huntsman’s toxic emissions increased 32 percent at the Port Neches plant between 2009 and 2010, and about 10 percent at Port Neches, while declining less than 1 percent at the Florida and Louisiana plants. EPA’s toxic weighting formula identifies potential hazard, not actual risk, which depends on factors such as the proximity of surrounding neighborhoods, wind direction, etc.
  • The Port Neches plant has reported that so far in 2011, various equipment malfunctions triggered the release of nearly 40,000 pounds of ethylene, a highly reactive toxic chemical that contributes to smog formation. The same plant reported releasing 15,600 pounds of ethylene oxide at the Port Neches facility on July 18, 2010, when a loading rack was overfilled due to an “inattentive” operator. Although no injuries were reported, ethylene oxide is a potent carcinogen that can also cause burns and damage the eyes and other organs. It is not clear whether these accidental emissions are included in the TRI data discussed above, although they are supposed to be. No data is available for other Huntsman plants, because only Texas provides regular access to detailed accident reports.

ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT

The Environmental Integrity Project ( is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization established in March of 2002 by former EPA enforcement attorneys to advocate for effective enforcement of environmental laws. EIP has three goals: 1) to provide objective analyses of how the failure to enforce or implement environmental laws increases pollution and affects public health; 2) to hold federal and state agencies, as well as individual corporations, accountable for failing to enforce or comply with environmental laws; and 3) to help local communities obtain the protection of environmental laws.

Media Contact: Patrick Mitchell, (703) 276-3266 or .