Mark Vergnano CEO:Chemours/DuPont,
BOD/ACC, BOD/Johnson Controls, JohnsonControls/NFPA, and PFOA, & DuPont/BOD of FFFC, BOD/NSC
There is no doubt in my mind that the PPE rep coming to your station to talk about gear had any notion about chemical additives. They could not have known. They were told the same thing(s) you were., ‘trace amounts’, ‘by-products of manufacturing’., safe for humans, no know humans harmed, new chemistry is safe., etc. But, those at the top absolutely knew about the concerns of PFOA and the lesser known PFAS chemicals that are endocrine disruptors, reproductive cancer causing carcinogens, etc.. It’s in all the SEC Filings for the company for years. The problem is the top tier of management is forced to keep the BAU statements of ‘new chemistry is safe’. But that’s not true. We don’t know it is. This is concerning because the top tier of management, like Mike Vergnano, sit as Board of Directors of American Chemistry Council, ACC is the lobbying group for FFFC Fire Fighting Foam Coalition, sits as Board of Director for Johnson Controls, and Johnson Controls was just added as Board of Directors for NFPA.
So, if someone that thinks the new chemistry is safe, is sitting on all these BOD for the companies that have such a hold in the fire service, is it concerning that he/they think you don’t need to be warned about theses chemicals, or told what exactly is used, or the amounts thereof?
You had every right to be warned. To be told the coatings contained PFAS chemicals that would degrade to PFOA. Especially when manufacturers knew your gear is made to last for years.
Mark Vergnano, is CEO of Chemours. Chemours is the spin off of DuPont. Some say DuPont spun off Chemours to protect the mother ship, DuPont, from the many legal awards given after the PFOA lawsuits, in particular after Rob Bilott’s 671 million dollar lawsuit for the citizens of WV. It didn’t work though. Both DuPont and Chemours have to split the cost of the settlement 50/50.
https://www1.salary.com/Mark-Vergnano-Salary-Bonus-Stock-Options-for-CHEMOURS-CO.html
https://www.linkedin.com/in/markvergnano
2003:
http://www2.dupont.com/Media_Center/en_US/news_releases/2003/nr04_15_03.html
DuPont Affirms Position that PFOA Does Not Pose Undue Risk
Supports EPA Position On Continued Use of Consumer Products
April 15, 2003 — DuPont today affirmed its position that there is no evidence indicating adverse human health effects related to low levels of exposure to perfluorooctanoate (PFOA), an essential processing aid used by DuPont and others to manufacture fluoropolymers. The company also said it fully supports the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) position that EPA “does not believe there is any reason for consumers to stop using any consumer or industrial related products” because of concerns about PFOA.
The company said that cookware sold under the Teflon® brand does not contain PFOA. Although PFOA is a process aid used to make the Teflon® branded fluoropolymers, it is removed in the manufacturing process. PFOA is not used to produce telomers, a different family of chemicals used to make soil, stain and grease repellants for paper, apparel, upholstery and carpet.
http://www2.dupont.com/Media_Center/en_US/news_releases/2003/nr06_05_03.html
DuPont Reaffirms Support for Science-Based EPA Regulatory Process on PFOA
WILMINGTON, Del., June 05, 2003 — DuPont today reaffirmed its support for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) plans to conduct a science-based risk assessment for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and to convene a technically informed Scientific Advisory Board to evaluate the risk assessment’s findings.
DuPont believes that the process, which may lead to regulation, should assure the public’s health and safety while allowing the continued use of PFOA.
PFOA, a processing aid used by DuPont and others to manufacture fluoropolymers, is currently an unregulated compound. EPA is holding the first of several public meetings on PFOA on June 6 in Washington, D.C., following issuance of a preliminary risk assessment on PFOA in mid-April. In addition to manufacturing and using PFOA for fluoropolymer manufacture, DuPont also manufactures telomers, products in which it has been suggested trace amounts of PFOA may be present.
“DuPont remains confident that in 50 years of use of PFOA by DuPont and others, there have been no known adverse human health effects associated with this material,” said Dr. Uma Chowdhry, global vice president for DuPont Central Research & Development. “However, we recognize that EPA and others have raised questions about PFOA and, as a science-based company, we support further study to address those questions. We also very much respect the rights and insistence of consumers around the world to know that the products they purchase, use and rely upon are safe.”
In written comments submitted to EPA in advance of the public meeting, DuPont emphasized that the regulatory process should be based on high-quality, credible scientific data, and should include a complete characterization of all past and current PFOA exposure routes.
2007 https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/30554/000135740607000016/dsfvreport1.txt
POTENTIAL CONSUMER LIABILITY: CLASS ACTION AND “DUTY TO WARN”
NOTICES
Companies receiving notices of a potential legal duty to warn
consumers of PFOA exposure included Rug Doctor, Stanley Steemer,
Conagra Foods, McDonalds, Taco Bell, Levi Strauss, GAP, W. L.
Gore, Wal-Mart, Sears, Mannington, Mohawk Industries, and Shaw
Industries.
Retailers and manufacturer purchasers of PFOA-containing products
are being made aware of potential liabilities associated with
sales of those products. Consumer protection laws in many states,
including statutory and common law, provide that sellers of
products may have a duty to warn consumers if they are exposing
them to products that pose an unreasonable risk to health or
safety.
In addition, consumer-related liability notices have been spread
throughout the array of consumer-oriented markets where PFOA-
related products are sold. On August 9, 2005, the United
Steelworkers (USW) union released a statement saying they had
sent letters to major carpet cleaning retailers and wholesalers,
fast food chains, and major retail clothing companies, informing
them that they may have “a legal duty to warn” their customers
about potential health risks associated with exposure to products
that contain PFOA. These letters informed recipients that they
could face legal liability in the event that consumers sue and
prove harm to their health./38/
On December 21, 2005, the United Steelworkers released another
statement, reporting that they had mailed advisory information on
potential PFOA-related health hazards to over 4,500 retail carpet
dealers and to the CEOs of 35 carpet manufacturing companies. “We
sincerely hope that our efforts will encourage carpet
manufacturers and retailers to provide warnings and thereby
protect the public,” said Ken Test, Chair of the USW DuPont
Council, a coordinating body for 1,800 USW members at
DuPont. “Carpet company employees who may have the highest
exposure to PFOA must also be warned and protected.”/39/ USW
reports that it has sent about 40,000 “duty to warn” letters to
various firms that may be buying PFOA-containing products.
<PAGE>
The companies who have received duty to warn notices from USW
read like a Who’s Who of household consumer products. According
to USW press releases, some of the thousands of companies
receiving the notices included Rug Doctor, Stanley Steemer,
McDonalds, Taco Bell, Papa John’s, Pizza Hut, KFC, California
Pizza Kitchen, Levi Strauss, Conagra Foods, GAP, W.L. Gore, Eddie
Bauer, J. Crew, Wal-Mart, Sears, Nordstrom, Dillard’s, Dalton
Carpet Outlet, Carpet Giant, Carpet Land, Mannington, Mohawk
Industries, and Shaw Industries.
2007: http://stockproinfo.com/doc/2007/US2635341090_2007_20071231_US_1I.pdf
Mark Vergnano was VP of DuPont Safety and Protection from July 2005 to October 2009
That’s important to me. Why? Because he was driving the bus. He knew PFOA was a issue within DuPont. He was VP of ‘Safety and Protection’. No labels in your gear to warn you of PFAS. So that you could decide and research what these ‘PFAS’ chemicals are. By omitting it completely you knew nothing. But they knew.
Page 36: Major markets, Protective Apparel
2016? 2017? UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. THE CHEMOURS COMPANY, E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, MARK VERGNANO, and MARK NEWMAN, Defendants. Case No.: DRAFT CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
****************************************************************************
http://www.howardsmithlaw.com/Complaints/Chemours_Complaint.pdf
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ________________, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. THE CHEMOURS COMPANY, E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, MARK VERGNANO, and MARK NEWMAN, Defendants. Case No.: DRAFT CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
NATURE OF THE ACTION AND OVERVIEW 1. This is a class action on behalf of persons or entities that acquired Chemours securities between June 19, 2015 and June 2, 2016, inclusive (the “Class Period”), seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). 2. Chemours is a provider of performance chemicals and has three reporting segments: Titanium Technologies, Fluoroproducts, and Chemical Solutions. The Titanium Technologies segment produces titanium dioxide (TiO2), a premium white pigment used to deliver whiteness, brightness, opacity and protection in a variety of applications. The Fluoroproducts segment provides fluoroproducts, such as refrigerants and industrial fluoropolymer resins. Finally, the Chemical Solutions segment is a provider of industrial and specialty chemicals used in gold production, oil refining, agriculture, industrial polymers, and other industries. 3. Chemours was created through a separation from E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company (“DuPont”). Chemours consists of DuPont’s former Performance Chemicals reporting segment, and certain other assets and liabilities which formerly belonged to DuPont. The Law Offices of Howard G. Smith CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 2 separation was completed by way of a distribution of all of the then-outstanding shares of common stock of Chemours to holders of DuPont common stock. 4. On June 2, 2016, Citron Research published a report on Chemours demonstrating that Chemours is a business “designed for bankruptcy.” The report disclosed that Chemours is potentially subject to massive liabilities relating to its manufacturing of C8 — also known as PFOA — and that DuPont created Chemours to distance DuPont from the potential environmental liability. The report also pointed out that the Company was over-leveraged with nearly $4 billion in debt on its books. 5. On this news, Chemours stock price fell $0.41 per share, or more than 4.6%, to close at $8.25 per share on June 3, 2016, on unusually heavy trading volume. 6. Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose: (1) that Chemours is potentially subject to massive liabilities relating to its manufacturing of C8 — also known as PFOA; (2) that DuPont created Chemours to distance DuPont from the potential environmental liability; (3) that, as such, Chemours is a company “designed for bankruptcy”; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants’ statements about Chemours’ business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. 7. As a result of Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company’s securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages.
2016: http://keepyourpromisesdupont.com/news-sentinel-dupont-critics-slam-190m-gift/
“It is shameful and dishonest for CEO (Mark) Vergnano to mischaracterize the special indemnification and to downplay DuPont’s gift of $190 million to prop up the failing company,” said Dr. Paul Brooks, an adviser to Keep Your Promises. “Chemours’ directors and officers are securing their lifeboats on a sinking ship while thousands of C8 victims are suffering and dying.”
Brooks’ company, Brookmar, organized the testing in the original C8 Health Project created in a settlement of the C8 lawsuits against DuPont. C8, also known as PFOA, was used at the Washington Works Plant and has appeared in numerous local water systems and water systems in other states.
C8 exposure has been linked to kidney cancer, testicular cancer, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, pregnancy induced hypertension, including preeclampsia and hypercholesterolemia.
DuPont prepaid Chemours $190 million for goods and services anticipated in the next 12 to 15 months, according to a presentation in the fourth-quarter earnings conference on Wednesday.
“Chemours is committed to meeting all its environmental and legal obligations that have been ongoing at its Washington Works facility, in keeping with local, state and federal regulatory guidelines,” a statement from Chemours said on Wednesday. “We have addressed issues related to liabilities in our public financial disclosures.”
2018:
The Chemours Company President And CEO Named New Officer Of ACC
WASHINGTON, DC (February 12, 2018) — The American Chemistry Council (ACC) announced today that The Chemours Company President and Chief Executive Officer, Mark Vergnano, became the Council’s newest officer, effective January 1, 2018.
As its newest officer, Mr. Vergnano will first assume the role of Vice Chairman of the Board and chair of the Council’s Board Finance, Audit and Membership Committee. He’ll serve in this capacity for one year, followed by a one year term each as Chairman of the Executive Committee and Chairman of the Board. Mr. Vergnano was first elected to ACC’s board of directors in 2015.
February 2018: The Chemours Company President and CEO Named New Officer of ACC
WASHINGTON, DC (February 12, 2018) — The American Chemistry Council (ACC) announced today that The Chemours Company President and Chief Executive Officer, Mark Vergnano, became the Council’s newest officer, effective January 1, 2018.
NOTICE OF ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2018 THE MERRION HOTEL, 24 UPPER MERRION STREET, DUBLIN 2, IRELAND NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the 2018 Annual General Meeting of Shareholders of Johnson Controls International plc will be held on March 7, 2018 at The Merrion Hotel, 24 Upper Merrion Street, Dublin 2, Ireland at 3:00 pm, local time for the following purposes: Ordinary Business 1. By separate resolutions, to elect the following individuals as Directors for a period of one year, expiring at the end of the Company’s Annual General Meeting of Shareholders in 2019: (a) Michael E. Daniels (b) W. Roy Dunbar © Brian Duperreault (d) Gretchen R. Haggerty (e) Simone Menne (f) George R. Oliver (g) Juan Pablo del Valle Perochena (h) Jürgen Tinggren (i) Mark Vergnano (j) R. David Yost (k) John D. Young 2. To ratify the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as the independent auditors of the Company and to authorize the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors to set the auditors’ remuneration. Special Business 3. To authorize the Company and/or any subsidiary of the Company to make market purchases of Company shares. 4. To determine the price range at which the Company can re-allot shares that it holds as treasury shares (special resolution). 5. To approve, in a non-binding advisory vote, the compensation of the named executive officers. 6. To approve the Directors’ authority to allot shares up to approximately 33% of issued share capital. 7. To approve the waiver of statutory pre-emption rights with respect to up to 5% of issued share capital (special resolution). 8. By separate resolutions to approve (a) the reduction of Company capital and (b) a clarifying amendment to the Company’s Articles of Association to facilitate the capital reduction (special resolutions). 9. To act on such other business as may properly come before the meeting or any adjournment thereof. This notice of annual general meeting and
NFPA appoints Johnson Controls to BOD:
NFPA Board of Directors appoints new members to Standards Council
March 9, 2018 — The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Board of Directors has appointed two new members to the NFPA Standards Council: Jack Poole of Poole Fire Protection Inc., and Rodger Reiswig of Johnson Controls. Poole and Reiswig are each serving a three-year term effective January 1, 2018.
NFPA also announced that current members Patricia Gleason of Safety Equipment Institute (SEI), Chad Beebe of the American Society of Healthcare Engineering and Gary Keith of FM Global were each reappointed for a second three-year term. Current member Daniel O’Connor of JENSEN HUGHES was also reappointed for a two-year term extension. All reappointments began January 1, 2018.
The NFPA Standard Council, a 13-member body appointed by the Board of Directors of NFPA, is charged with overseeing the NFPA codes and standards making process. Generally, the duties of the Council include supervising activities related to NFPA codes and standards development, acting as administer of rules and regulations, and serving as an appeals body.
Founded in 1896, NFPA is a global, nonprofit organization devoted to eliminating death, injury, property and economic loss due to fire, electrical and related hazards. The association delivers information and knowledge through more than 300 consensus codes and standards, research, training, education, outreach and advocacy; and by partnering with others who share an interest in furthering the NFPA mission. For more information visit www.nfpa.org. All NFPA codes and standards can be viewed online for free at www.nfpa.org/freeaccess.
Mark Vergnano is also on the Board of Trustees of the National Safety Council https://www.nsc.org/company/nsc-board
We could do our own research, and stop taking the word of the manufacturers that tell us the ‘chemical coatings are safe’. Maybe they are not. Maybe your cancers are not just from ‘products of combustion’, maybe they are from products of deception.
Diane Cotter