Shannon S. Broome

Broome leverages her experience as a chemical engineer in the oil and gas industry to lead Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP's California environmental practice. She is the managing partner of the firm's San Francisco office. She represents clients in the manufacturing and energy sectors, including oil and gas, chemical, paper, automotive, power generation and utilities. She also advises companies preparing for and responding to environmental incidents.

She maintains a second office in Washington, D.C., and often is up at 4 a.m. to dash off early emails to the East Coast. "I don't get a lot of sleep," she said.

The Environmental Protection Agency shifted its rules on air toxics, reversing an Obama administration approach to when companies could reduce their hazardous emissions and have that reduction be counted toward compliance. Environmental groups sued as a result of shift in policies. Broome represented an industry coalition that included the Air Permitting Forum and utilities and argued the issue on April 1, 2019, before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The panel ruled 2-1 in her clients' favor Aug. 20, 2019.

"My winning argument was that it definitely was the right of a new administration to take a fresh look at how new regulations have been applied," Broome said, adding that her challenge included facing a panel featuring an Obama-appointed judge, Robert L. Wilkins, who wrote the majority opinion supporting her clients' view. California Communities Against Toxics v. EPA, 18-1085 (D.C. Cir., filed March 26, 2018).

"The mere fact that it's a new administration shouldn't mean their interpretation isn't well-grounded," she contended. "The judges [in the majority] concluded that the new administration can change its mind and we won't hold it against them."

In his opinion, Wilkins memorably cited comparing two James Baldwin novels, "Giovanni's Room" and "The Fire Next Time," to comparing government agency actions. Books by the same writer are one thing; EPA decision-making is different.

It "is a mistake to assume--even if [agency actions] appear facially similar--that they can lend each other definition through comparison, or that they are decipherable under a common rubric," Wilkins wrote.

"It's an important decision because it allows agencies to speak to the law without reissuing regulations, which takes years," Broome said. She noted that the plaintiffs have until October to petition for a rehearing or rehearing en banc.

Broome represents client Marathon Petroleum Corp. in "public nuisance" litigation brought by environmentalists suing for damages due to climate change. After a federal judge dismissed the suit, the plaintiffs took the case to the 9th Circuit.

"I feel fortunate to be involved in the next big issue," Broome said. "I just wish it wasn't so potentially harmful to my clients."

-- John Roemer