50% of gas now supplied to owner’s customers in Contra Costa originates in Canada as much as 3,500 miles away instead of 35, about 80% from fracking

“The farther that natural gas must travel to its destination, the greater the carbon emissions” – California Resources Production Corporation

They’re “just doing it for political reasons. That only benefits them, not us on climate change.” – local oil producer Bob Nunn

By Allen D. Payton

After following the lead of the Brentwood City Council, in September 2021, the Antioch City Council voted 2-3 against renewing the franchise agreement for the low-pressure, natural gas pipeline that runs beneath the two communities. That resulted in it being closed and the City foregoing the annual franchise fee of $16,871.90. Pipeline franchise agrmt extension ACC092821

Proposed by District 4 Councilwoman Monica Wilson, Mayor Lamar Hernandez-Thorpe and District 1 Councilwoman Tamisha Torres-Walker joined her in opposing the 35-mile long, 12-inch pipe which carried 1.8 million cubic feet of natural gas daily which is enough to supply about 9,000 homes. District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica and District 3 Councilwoman Lori Ogorchock supported the motion to renew the agreement. The result has been an increase in the emission of greenhouse gases and a much dirtier product being used by the refineries, from which Antioch is downwind, thus defeating the purpose the three council members claimed was the reason for their action.

The gas had been supplied from the Brentwood natural gas field, and natural gas fields in western San Joaquin County on Union Island in the Delta, southeast of Discovery Bay, as well as in French Camp and Lathrop. But the council’s decision also forced the pipeline company’s customer that it served, Chevron refinery in Richmond, to obtain their supply elsewhere. At least 99% of that supply originates out of state with over half from natural gas fields in British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan east of the Rocky Mountains in Canada, traveling a distance of as much as 3,500 miles instead of just 35.

In Canada, natural gas production is concentrated in the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin (WCSB), with the highest production in the provinces of Alberta and British Columbia with more than twice as much from Alberta than from BC.

Pipeline Owner Sues City

Following the decision, the company that owns the pipeline, California Resources Corporation (CRC), believed they had the right to continue operating the pipeline. At that time, spokesman Richard Venn, Senior Director, Communications said, “We believe there are legal protections in place that prevent an arbitrary and immediate shutdown, and we will continue to work with the city and its staff on the best solution.”

However, that was not to be the case, the pipeline was shut down, and on Dec. 27, 2021 the company’s subsidiary, California Resources Production Corporation (CRPC), filed a lawsuit against the City of Antioch over the council’s decision.

CRPC did not file a lawsuit against the City of Brentwood and the company has reapplied for the franchise agreement for the portion of the pipeline that runs beneath that city.

CRPC did not file a lawsuit against the City of Brentwood and the company has reapplied for the franchise agreement for the portion of the pipeline that runs beneath that city.

Questions were sent on May 12, 2024, to a representative for CRC about the status of the lawsuit, details about the pipeline and any impacts the change in supply is having on the environment. Venn responded on May 28, 2024, with the company’s answers:

1. Where is CRC in the process with its lawsuit against the City of Antioch? Was one also filed against the City of Brentwood? When were they filed and how soon does CRC expect them to be finalized?

On May 25, 2023, the trial court sustained the City’s motion to dismiss CRPC’s complaint, effectively ending trial court proceedings against the City. On August 25, 2023, CRPC appealed this decision. The parties are currently briefing the appeal. CRPC’s opening appellate brief was filed on April 22, 2024. The City’s brief is due July 3, 2024. CRPC’s reply will be due on August 16, 2024. A decision is unlikely to occur until late 2024 or even early 2025.

No lawsuit has been filed against Brentwood. The application for renewal of the Brentwood franchise is still pending. Per the Brentwood City Council’s request, CRC hired independent consultants, Bear, Inc., to perform a safety study on the Union Island (“UI”) Pipeline, which was published in April 2022. The study confirmed the UI Pipeline is a very well maintained and safe pipeline.

2. If the company had certain rights granted by the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC) that would prevent the cities from stopping CRC from operating the pipeline and continuing to ship gas through it how has the City of Antioch been winning in court? What have been the decisions in favor of the City?

CRPC does not presently have any rights granted to it by the PUC related to the UI Pipeline. However, CRPC has applied for a certificate for public convenience and necessity (“CPCN”) to have the UI Pipeline converted from a private pipeline to a common carrier pipeline. If the CPCN is granted, CRPC would become a regulated public utility, with the CPUC controlling certain aspects of the UI Pipeline’s operations and the rates that CRPC can charge for use of the Pipeline. The UI Pipeline’s day-to-day operations would not change however, after flow through the UI Pipeline restarts, and CRPC would be subject to the same federal and state regulations for safety and environmental protection.

If the UI Pipeline right-of-way were condemned to allow it to resume operations as a common carrier pipeline, as part of the condemnation proceedings, CRPC would have to provide “just compensation” for use of the right of way.

3. Where does the natural gas originate that was running through the pipeline in Antioch and Brentwood?

The natural gas that was running through the pipeline originates from the French Camp, Lathrop, and Union Island natural gas fields in western San Joaquin County and the Brentwood natural gas field in Contra Costa County.

4. Who are the customers served by the pipeline?

The gas is transported from the UI Pipeline to Chevron Corporation’s Richmond Refinery. The gas is used to power the refinery and used in its industrial processes to make jet fuel, diesel and gasoline that is distributed throughout Northern California.

5. From where are those customers now receiving the gas?

The gas that the Richmond refinery is no longer receiving from the UI Pipeline is supplanted by gas from PG&E’s system. The overwhelming majority of PG&E-supplied gas is from out of state. According to the most recent published information on PG&E’s gas sources, over 50% of the natural gas supplied by PG&E comes from Canada via the Gas Transmission Northwest (“GTN”) system. See 2023 California Gas Report, Table 5, https://www.socalgas.com/sites/default/files/Joint_Biennial_California_Gas_Report_2023_Supplement.pdf. Only around 1% of PG&E’s gas comes from California.

Around 80% of the natural gas produced in British Columbia, the upstream production region feeding the GTN pipeline, is produced by fracking. See https://stand.earth/.

6. Is the gas coming from Canada, is it not as clean as that produced in California, and how many miles is the gas now being shipped versus how many miles, previously?

As stated above, 80% of the natural gas produced in British Columbia is produced by fracking. Accordingly, we expect the majority of PG&E gas from Canada to be the result of fracking. This means that by stopping the UI Pipeline from operation, the City may be prioritizing the use of fracked gas.

The GTN system, which transports PG&E’s Canada gas to California, is a > 1,300-mile pipeline system. A map of it can be found at https://www.tcenergy.com/siteassets/pdfs/natural-gas/gas-transmission-northwest/tc-gas-transmission-northwest-map.pdf. (See center map at top of this article)

The >1,300-mile figure does not reflect the total distance Canadian gas must travel to reach Richmond, California, though. The GTN system only runs from the Canadian border in Montana to northern California. Accordingly, Canadian gas going to the Richmond refinery must be transported from wherever the natural gas fields are located in Canada to the mouth of the GTN system in Montana. It must also be transported from northern California to the Bay area. Accordingly, gas from Canada travels well over 1,300 miles to reach the Richmond refinery.

By contrast, the UI Pipeline assisted in the transportation of local gas from the natural gas fields in western San Joaquin County and the Brentwood natural gas field in Contra Costa County to Richmond, a drastically shorter distance.

7. Have there been any environmental impacts because of the change in the natural gas supply to those customers?

The farther that natural gas must travel to its destination, the greater the carbon emissions attendant to those pipeline operations. Additionally, the gas transported by the UI Pipeline is not fracked, as compared to the majority of PG&E’s gas obtained from Canada.

Finally, any GHG emissions from gas production in California are compensated for under the cap-and-trade program, which is not the case in most of the other jurisdictions supplying PG&E.

8. Has there been a change in the costs to CRC’s customer(s) in both the purchase of the natural gas from one or more different sources and the production of their products to their customers? And ultimately to the consumers?

Without the UI Pipeline, local gas cannot be delivered to the Chevron refinery. The contribution of local gas to the refinery helps keep gas prices competitive, which further keeps prices low and the refinery open. The Richmond refinery has a workforce of over 2,700 company employees and 850 contract workers, according to the Richmond Chamber of Commerce. See https://www.rcoc.com/membership-directory-2/name/chevron-richmondlorenz/.

9. Is the pipeline that runs through Brentwood and Antioch different than the high-pressure line that exploded in San Bruno in 2010? What are the differences between the two pipelines?

10. What could the Antioch and/or Brentwood City Council do to remedy the situation?

The City could extend the franchise to allow for operation of the UI Pipeline. With an extension, the City could propose additional conditions on the operation of the Pipeline to address any of its continuing concerns. Using this authority to ensure enhanced protections or benefits for the City, while allowing the Pipeline to safely transport gas as it has for the past thirty years, was not something the City officials considered during the public hearing on the franchise renewal. This kind of win-win solution would have protected the citizens from the costs of litigation, brought revenue to the City, and given the City peace of mind about the UI Pipeline’s operations.

It is also important to keep in mind that the UI Pipeline is by no means the only natural gas pipeline running through Antioch. All federally regulated natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines can be identified using the National Pipeline Mapping System Public Viewer, which can be accessed at https://pvnpms.phmsa.dot.gov/PublicViewer/.

There are several natural gas transmission pipelines running through Antioch besides the UI Pipeline. Some of these are high-pressure pipelines, in contrast to the UI Pipeline, which is considered a low-pressure pipeline. In addition to these other natural gas pipelines, there are over 34,000 natural gas connections in Antioch.

11. If the council(s) choose to settle the lawsuit(s) would the city(ies) have to reimburse CRC for their attorney’s fees?

The terms of any settlement would govern whether attorney’s fees are reimbursed by either side.

12. Is there anything else you would like to share about the matter?

CRPC is committed to operating in a manner focused on safety, environmental stewardship, and promoting the health and welfare of all Californians. One of our leading “Values” is being a responsible operator, meeting – if not exceeding – California’s high standards for safety and environmental protection. We have a decades-long successful track record of safely and efficiently operating critical energy infrastructure such as the UI Pipeline within the City of Antioch and we look forward to continuing to work with the City and its staff to provide safe, reliable, and low carbon.

Local Environmental and Economic Benefits of Pipeline, Supports Farmers

In addition, CRPC shared information from their application to the state’s PUC about the pipeline and its benefits to the environment and local economy. The company wrote, “The UI Pipeline currently provides the only viable avenue for the natural gas produced from the Fields to reach the market, including the Richmond Refinery, which currently utilizes all of the natural gas carried on the UI Pipeline. The use of in-state natural gas displaces the use of out-of-state natural gas produced in other states and transported by pipeline into California. Currently, California imports over 90% of its natural gas from out-of-state fields where the environmental and greenhouse gas regulations may not be as stringent as those required here in California. Absent the UI Pipeline, production from the Fields would cease and the State would have to look to alternate natural gas capacity at a time when natural gas supply constraints have been widely reported.

“Given California’s current natural gas demand, the natural gas production from these Fields would likely be replaced by out-of-state production, which would be contrary to statutory preferences for in-state production of natural gas and would result in appreciable environmental impacts and increased costs. Natural gas produced out of state is not obligated to follow California’s more stringent environmental and greenhouse gas regulations, and transporting natural gas from out of state through interstate pipelines increases greenhouse gas emissions, as compared to in-state production. Furthermore, in the future, the Field would be capable of converting to carbon dioxide storage and sequestration, which is widely considered a necessary component to achieving long-term climate goals. The UI Pipeline is therefore a key component in not only ensuring the Fields continue to provide in-state natural gas, but also in reducing the environmental impact of natural gas consumption. In-state natural gas production may also mitigate the substantial increases in natural gas costs to California customers over the past year.

“Closure of the UI Pipeline would also have a significant economic impact to the local community. Over 200 local landowners receive revenue from royalties associated with natural gas transported on the UI Pipeline. Many of the royalty holders are local farmers, and monetizing these mineral rights helps support local farming operations. Closure of the UI Pipeline would eliminate any opportunity for those mineral owners to monetize their assets.”

Questions for Council Members Go Unanswered

All five council members were informed of the answers provided by CRPC on Monday, June 24, 2024. Herandez-Thorpe, Wilson and Torres-Walker were asked if, knowing now that the action by the council majority has had a greater impact on the environment, will they reconsider and reverse their vote to deny the franchise agreement allowing the pipeline to resume operations in Antioch.

They were all also asked if they know how much the City has spent to date defending against the lawsuit by the pipeline owner.

None of the council members responded prior to publication time.

Additional Questions for CRC

Asked if the Antioch City Council reverses its decision and approves their franchise agreement can the pipeline reopen, company spokesman Venn said, “The renewal for the franchise for Brentwood is still pending.”

Both cities must approve their separate franchise agreements in order for the pipeline to reopen.

Local Oil Producer Says Council Members “Doing the Opposite of What They Claim”

When reached for comment about the information from CRPC and the council’s decision to shutter the pipeline, Brentwood businessman, Bob Nunn, whose company is the only holder of a permit to drill for natural gas and oil in Antioch said, “We have the strictest rules for oil and gas in California. The energy used to move the gas 100 times further is going to be greater.”

“California is doing its best in the name of climate change. But in the last three years, California has used more oil each year than in the previous year,” he continued. “The production of oil in California to support that demand has gone down each of those three years. CARB (California Air Resources Board) will show you, on the whole, imported oil will have more emissions than oil produced in California.”

“If they’re doing it in the name of climate change, they’re doing the opposite of what they claim,” Nunn stated. “The issue is to lower demand not squeeze supply. It’s Economics 101. Their model is flawed.”

“I support decisions that will reduce man’s impact on climate change. But make sure you do your homework that their positions are for the benefit of climate change,” he said. “If not, then you’re just doing it for political reasons. That only benefits them, not us on climate change.”

Please check back later for any updates to this report.

By Allen D. Payton

During their meeting on Tuesday, February 13, 2024, the Antioch City Council approved the redevelopment of the PG&E Service Center on Hillcrest Avenue on a 3-0 vote with Mayor Pro Tem Monica Wilson and District 2 Councilman Mike Barbanica absent. The project includes a new operations building, fleet maintenance, logistics shops and warehouse, warehouses, material storage and support structures. (See Agenda Item 3)

Located on 36.39 acres of the existing 56.15-acre parcel at 2111 Hillcrest Avenue just north of the Sunset Drive and Slatten Ranch Road intersection, as well as the Union Pacific Railroad railroad right-of-way and the Antioch BART station.

The proposed project involves the replacement and demolition of four existing buildings within the existing PG&E Service Center (Fleet Maintenance, Logistics Warehouse, Logistics Shops, and Operations buildings). Additionally, the proposed project would include the construction of new non-occupied support structures, a below grade parking area, circulation improvements, expansion of paved surfaces, and expansion of lighting infrastructure.

During the Planning Commission meeting on Jan. 17, 2024, Brett Badelle, Local Government Affairs Representative for PG&E stated the Antioch service center would improve service to customers, add beautification and have a positive impact on the economy. He also explained that the project would improve safety, reliability, resiliency and sustainability. On a 4-0 vote with two members absent and one vacancy, the commissioners recommended the council approve the project.

Include non-transit transportation, environment, housing and economy strategy refinements

Will impact Antioch’s BART Station and industrial areas

The Joint Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Planning Committee with the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Administrative Committee on Jan. 12, 2024 approved the revised Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint strategies and Growth Geographies.  This action enables staff to further study the strategies’ performance in meeting critical regional goals for an affordable, connected, diverse, healthy and vibrant Bay Area for all. Staff are aiming for adoption of the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Final Blueprint in summer 2024.

Given Plan Bay Area 2050’s solid foundation of 35 strategies, the Draft Blueprint phase for Plan Bay Area 2050+ is focusing on making targeted refinements to select plan strategies. These refinements reflect Plan Bay Area 2050’s implementation progress, the post-pandemic planning context and insights gathered during engagement with the public and partners in summer 2023.

What is the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Blueprint?

The Plan Bay Area 2050+ Blueprint will integrate strategies across the four elements of the plan — the economy, the environment, housing and transportation — to create a more equitable and resilient future for all.

Beginning in summer 2023 and wrapping up in late 2024, staff will develop the Blueprint over two phases: the Draft Blueprint and the Final Blueprint. Given Plan Bay Area 2050’s solid foundation of 35 strategies, the Draft Blueprint phase for Plan Bay Area 2050+ will focus on making targeted refinements to select plan strategies.

What are Growth Geographies?

Priority Development Areas — Places nominated by local governments served by transit and planned for new homes and jobs at densities necessary to support effective transit service.

Priority Production Areas — Industrial areas of importance to the regional economy and local communities that support middle-wage jobs.

Transit-Rich Areas — Places near rail, ferry or frequent bus service that were not already identified as Priority Development Areas.

High-Resource Areas — State-identified places with well-resourced schools and access to jobs and open space.

Staff previously shared proposed Draft Blueprint strategy refinements in October and November 2023, detailing which of Plan Bay Area 2050’s 35 strategies were likely to see major, minor or no changes in Plan Bay Area 2050+. This month, the MTC and ABAG committees approved moving forward with revisions for further study and analysis, including:

• Non-transit transportation strategy refinements focused on prioritizing equity considerations, adapting to tighter fiscal constraints, promoting active transportation and safety, and expanding pricing strategies;
• Environment strategy refinements focused on further reducing greenhouse gas emissions and proactively adapting to climate change; and
• Housing and economy strategy refinements focused on addressing pressing challenges of housing affordability, homelessness and access to opportunity.

At this time the Draft Blueprint only includes a handful of modified transportation strategies, pending the development of a fiscally constrained Transportation Project List, which will integrate recommendations from the ongoing parallel Transit 2050+ effort. The complete suite of revised transportation strategies will be integrated as part of the Final Blueprint in summer 2024.

The Joint ABAG and MTC Committee also approved targeted updates to the Growth Geographies that were adopted as part of Plan Bay Area 2050. Growth Geographies are places that Plan Bay Area prioritizes for future homes, jobs, services and amenities and serve as a component of the plan’s housing and economy elements. Specifically, draft Growth Geographies for Plan Bay Area 2050+ will include five new Priority Development Areas (PDAs) and 16 modified existing PDAs nominated by local Bay Area jurisdictions; reflect up-to-date information on transit service, natural hazards and demographics; and integrate areas subject to MTC’s revised Transit Oriented Communities Policy.

The Draft Blueprint approval comes six months after MTC and ABAG kicked off the limited and focused update to Plan Bay Area 2050. In November 2023, staff shared progress-to-date with policymakers, including findings from the first round of engagement, core planning assumptions, the draft Regional Growth Forecast, a financial needs and revenue analyses and proposed strategy refinements.

The next round of public and partner organization engagement activities, which will inform the development of the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Final Blueprint, is planned to begin in spring 2024. MTC and the ABAG Executive Board are expected to approve Final Blueprint strategies in summer 2024.

Learn more about the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint strategies and Growth Geographies. For additional technical resources, please visit the Plan Bay Area 2050+ Draft Blueprint Documents page on our website.

Introduces three bills

Congressman Mark DeSaulnier (D, CA-11) announced, Monday, his effort to create a model that will help transition our economy away from petroleum products to cleaner, renewable energy while simultaneously supporting workers, communities, and state and local governments. The model will also create more investments in our transportation system, developing an inter-connected, world-class public transportation network and creating jobs. The coronavirus pandemic has expedited our transition away” from petroleum products which increases the urgency of a planned and serious effort to make sure we shape this transition in a way that works for everyone. DeSaulnier’s model will allow local communities to join with workers, industry, environmental leaders, mayors, and other local elected officials to proactively plan for the transition away from the petroleum industry and support worker transition and training.

As part of this effort, Congressman DeSaulnier announced three bills that will address this transition. The first bill, the Protecting Workers for a Clean Future Act, addresses the imminent market evolution to renewable, clean energy by providing direct support to local communities to convene industry, the local petroleum products workforce whose jobs are at risk, environmental justice advocates, and environmental groups to make a plan to transition workers to meaningful, sustainable work. The market is inevitably moving to cheaper, more sustainable energy sources, and refinery workers across America will fall victim to joblessness if we do not act now.

The second bill, the Jobs for a Carbon Free Transportation System Act, takes a unique approach to addressing the intersection of three of the biggest challenges our nation faces: climate change, outdated infrastructure, and job insecurity. The bill prioritizes and invests in state-of-the-art transportation system reforms that would improve mobility and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by developing low-carbon, efficient, inter-connected, and smart transportation corridors all while creating good paying union jobs. With the inevitable transition away from petroleum products these improvements would have, it also supports workers to transition out of the petroleum products industry and into meaningful, more secure work.

The third bill, the Clean Corridors Act, would launch a federal program that would accelerate the expansion of electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure to help reverse climate change and modernize our country’s infrastructure. Specifically, the Clean Corridors Act, which the congressman also introduced in the 116th Congress, would direct $3 billion over the coming decade to construct and install infrastructure to support technologies like hydrogen fuel cell and electric battery-powered vehicles. With this legislation, we can help sustain the growth of the EV market, which means more jobs, a healthier Earth, and a strong economy.

“We’re seeing firsthand in Contra Costa that refineries are idling…and local governments are losing their tax base because of the decrease in…consumption during the pandemic. Failing to address the market shift will inevitably create a snowball effect including dramatic job loss and decreased local and county revenues, which in turn create drastically underfunded schools. The time is now…to shift toward more sustainable sources of energy, but they cannot leave thousands of workers jobless in their wake,” said DeSaulnier. “At home in Contra Costa and around the country, we have the opportunity to set the stage for green jobs that are both worthy of workers’ skills and help our nation in the much-needed fight against climate change. This effort can help make Contra Costa a model for the rest of the nation.”

In developing this effort, the congressman has held dozens of meetings with stakeholders over the past two years, including with local mayors, county supervisors, the Contra Costa County administrator, other elected officials, environmental justice advocates, environmental representatives, labor leaders, university researchers, and other thought leaders on the energy transition.

“I am proud to support Rep. DeSaulnier’s transition model that will support workers while also incentivizing the move toward clean energy,” said Congressman Mike Thompson (D, CA-5), who represents Martinez. “These three bills are a critical step forward in using renewable energy right here in our community while also ensuring that workers have the opportunity for retraining and job opportunities in new industries. I am proud that our region can be an example in this important step toward tackling climate change and paving the way forward for green jobs.”

“We welcome Congressman DeSaulnier’s bold effort since our county is on the front lines of the transition to cleaner energy,” said Contra Costa County Supervisor John Gioia, who represents West County in District 1. “Given the plans of two Contra Costa refineries to end crude oil production and convert to the world’s largest renewable fuels plants, we need to ensure our workers and local economy are not left behind and that residents in communities which bear the burden of pollution benefit from the transition to clean energy.”

“We welcome leadership and assistance from the federal government as we develop plans to help workers, bolster our economy, and support communities that have historically been the most impacted,” said Contra Costa County Administrator Monica Nino.

“As we transition to clean fuels and high-tech energy, it is a matter of equity and economic justice that we support the growth of high-paying jobs and industries to replace those which are being phased out,” said California Assemblyman Tim Grayson. “The green economy presents us the opportunity to not only protect our planet, but to also empower workers, particularly those within historically-marginalized communities, by investing in their training and education.”

“The future of work in the green economy cannot be a race to the bottom in terms of labor standards and not having a voice at work,” said Contra Costa Labor Council Executive Director Josh Anijar. “Contra Costa’s labor movement is encouraged by Congressmember DeSaulnier and all those who are committed toward the future by building the bridge between the green economy and working families.”

“The clean energy economy can work for everyone, providing good paying jobs for a just transition, giving all of us more options,” said Ann Notthoff, retired Natural Resources Defense Council California Advocacy Director.

“The International Brotherhood of Boilermakers has a history of being at the forefront of innovation related to clean, reliable energy.” said International Vice President for the Western States Section of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers Tom Baca. “To that end, we continue to advocate for carbon capture, use and storage and other carbon capture technology as a solution – all while preserving and creating jobs, economic growth, and social stability.”

“Contra Costa​ County’s refineries are well aware of the energy future and work every day to help meet it. Local refineries have invested billions to upgrade their facilities as California leads the nation with ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets,” said President and CEO of the East Bay Leadership Council Kristin Connelly. “Without a doubt, the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically impacted countless industries including the local energy sector. Protecting the thousands of high paying jobs created by these employers must be a top priority. The East Bay Leadership Council looks forward to working with Congressman DeSaulnier in facilitating industry’s engagement in this process.”

“Congressman DeSaulnier has clearly thought about the American workers and communities that will be impacted by this transition, and he is seeking solutions to ensure those workers and communities are supported as we move into a low-carbon future,” said Citizens’ Climate Lobby Executive Director Mark Reynolds.

Rep. DeSaulnier is a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Education and Labor Committee, Transportation & Infrastructure Committee, and Oversight and Reform Committee. He previously served as the Chair of the State Senate Transportation and Housing Committee and in the State Assembly as the first freshman in history to chair the Assembly Transportation Committee. He is also a former Concord City Councilmember, Mayor, County Supervisor, and member of the California Air Resources Board.

PITTSBURG, CA — Nonprofit organizations, municipal or government agencies or school districts in East Contra County are invited to apply for community grants of up to $5,000 in the areas of education and environmental sustainability and workforce development programs for local students through Corteva Agriscience – Pittsburg Operations. Deadline for submittal of applications is Oct. 18, 2019.

The Corteva Community Grants are reviewed and approved by the site’s Community Advisory Panel (CAP), members of the East Contra Costa community who serve as liaisons between the community and Corteva (formerly Dow), and learn about the site’s operations, support shared goals and voice any concerns on behalf of the community.

“Corteva Agriscience values the opportunity to provide charitable giving to communities where the company has a presence,” said Jose Carrascal, Corteva Agriscience Site Director. “This site has been involved with the community for many, many years, and our CAP members help us to be better neighbors and we look forward to continuing that tradition. We know the CAP strives to select sustainable projects that result in positive and definitive outcomes within the neighboring communities. We support this endeavor wholeheartedly.”

Applicants must be certified 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations, schools, municipalities and county entities located in or which provides services in Pittsburg, Bay Point and Antioch. Ineligible organizations, per Corteva’s contribution guidelines, include funding for individuals, political organizations, religious organizations, and grants cannot be used to underwrite salaries, stipends, travel, fundraisers, meals, utilities.

To obtain a grant application, go to the following link: Application, Guidelines, and FAQ’s

About Corteva Agriscience

Corteva Agriscience is a publicly traded, global pure-play agriculture company that provides farmers around the world with the most complete portfolio in the industry – including a balanced and diverse mix of seed, crop protection and digital solutions focused on maximizing productivity to enhance yield and profitability. With some of the most recognized brands in agriculture and an industry-leading product and technology pipeline well positioned to drive growth, the company is committed to working with stakeholders throughout the food system as it fulfills its promise to enrich the lives of those who produce and those who consume, ensuring progress for generations to come. Corteva Agriscience became an independent public company on June 1, 2019, and was previously the Agriculture Division of DowDuPont. More information can be found at www.corteva.com.

Follow Corteva Agriscience on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Twitter and YouTube.