Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We are the subject of, or a party to, a number of pending or threatened legal actions, contingencies and commitments involving a variety of matters, including laws and regulations relating to the environment. While it is possible that an adverse result in one or more of the lawsuits or proceedings in which we are a defendant could be material to us, based upon current information and our experience as a defendant in other matters, we believe that these lawsuits and proceedings, individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

Litigation

Climate Change

Governmental and other entities in various states have filed lawsuits against energy companies, including MPC. The lawsuits allege damages as a result of climate change and the plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and abatement under various tort theories. Similar lawsuits may be filed in other jurisdictions. The names of the courts in which the proceedings are pending and the dates instituted are as follows:

Dakota Access Pipeline

In connection with MPLX’s 9.19 percent indirect interest in a joint venture (“Dakota Access”) that owns and operates the Dakota Access Pipeline and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline projects, (collectively the “Bakken Pipeline system” or “DAPL”), MPLX has entered into a Contingent Equity Contribution Agreement whereby MPLX LP, along with the other joint venture owners in the Bakken Pipeline system, has agreed to make equity contributions to the joint venture upon certain events occurring to allow the entities that own and operate the Bakken Pipeline system to satisfy their senior note payment obligations. The senior notes were issued to repay amounts owed by the pipeline companies to fund the cost of construction of the Bakken Pipeline system.

Table of Contents

In March 2020, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (the “D.D.C.”) ordered the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Army Corps”), which granted permits and an easement for the Bakken Pipeline system, to conduct a full environmental impact statement (“EIS”), and further requested briefing on whether an easement necessary for the operation of the Bakken Pipeline system should be vacated while the EIS is being prepared.

On July 6, 2020, the D.D.C. ordered vacatur of the easement to cross Lake Oahe during the pendency of an EIS and further ordered a shut down of the pipeline by August 5, 2020. The D.D.C. denied a motion to stay that order. Dakota Access and the Army Corps appealed the D.D.C.’s order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the “Court of Appeals”). On July 14, 2020, the Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay while the court considered Dakota Access and the Army Corps’ emergency motion for stay pending appeal. On August 5, 2020, the Court of Appeals stayed the D.D.C.’s injunction that required the pipeline be shutdown and emptied of oil by August 5, 2020. The Court of Appeals denied a stay of the D.D.C.’s March order, which required the EIS, and further denied a stay of the D.D.C.’s July order, which vacated the easement. On January 26, 2021, the Court of Appeals upheld the D.D.C.’s order vacating the easement while the Army Corps prepares the EIS. The Court of Appeals reversed the D.D.C.’s order to the extent it directed that the pipeline be shutdown and emptied of oil. In the D.D.C., briefing has been completed for a renewed request for an injunction. The pipeline remains operational.

If the pipeline is temporarily shut down pending completion of the EIS, MPLX would have to contribute its 9.19 percent pro rata share of funds required to pay interest accruing on the notes and any portion of the principal that matures while the pipeline is shutdown. It is also expected that MPLX would contribute its 9.19 percent pro rata share of any costs to remediate any deficiencies to reinstate the permit and/or return the pipeline into operation. If the vacatur of the easement permit results in a permanent shutdown of the pipeline, MPLX would have to contribute its 9.19 percent pro rata share of the cost to redeem the bonds (including the one percent redemption premium required pursuant to the indenture governing the notes) and any accrued and unpaid interest. As of December 31, 2020, our maximum potential undiscounted payments under the Contingent Equity Contribution Agreement were approximately $230 million and we had an investment of $465 million in MarEn Bakken Company LLC, which includes our 9.19 percent direct interest in Dakota Access.

Tesoro High Plains Pipeline

In early July 2020, MPLX received a Notification of Trespass Determination from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”) relating to a portion of the Tesoro High Plains Pipeline that crosses the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota. The notification covered the rights of way for 23 tracts of land and demanded the immediate cessation of pipeline operations. The notification also assessed trespass damages of approximately $187 million. MPLX appealed this determination, which triggered an automatic stay of the requested pipeline shutdown and payment. On October 29, the Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs issued an order vacating the BIA’s trespass order and requiring the Regional Director for the BIA Great Plains Region to issue a new decision on or before December 15 covering all 34 tracts at issue. On December 15, the Regional Director of the BIA issued a new trespass notice to THPP consistent with the Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs order vacating the prior trespass order. The new order found that THPP was in trespass and assessed trespass damages of approximately $4MM (including interest). The order also required THPP to immediately cease and desist use of the portion of the pipeline that crosses the property at issue. The new order was appealed, and was upheld by the Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs. THPP has complied with the Regional Director’s December 15, 2020 notice. On February 12, 2021, landowners filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota, requesting, among other things, that decisions by the Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs and the Interior Board of Indian Appeals be vacated as to the award of damages to plaintiffs.

MPLX continues to work towards a settlement of this matter with holders of the property rights at issue.

Environmental Proceedings

Item 103 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the SEC requires disclosure of certain environmental matters when a governmental authority is a party to the proceedings and such proceedings involve potential monetary sanctions, unless we reasonably believe that the matter will result in no monetary sanctions, or in monetary sanctions, exclusive of interest and costs, of less than $300,000. The following matters are disclosed in accordance with that requirement. We do not currently believe that the eventual outcome of any such matters, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Table of Contents

Martinez Refinery

We are currently negotiating the settlement of 141 NOVs received from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“BAAQMD”). The NOVs were issued from 2011 to 2019 and allege violations of air quality regulations and the idled Martinez refinery’s air permit. While we are negotiating a settlement of the allegations with the BAAQMD through two separate enforcement actions, we cannot currently estimate the timing of the resolution of these matters.

On July 18, 2016, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) lodged a complaint on behalf of the EPA and a Consent Decree in the U.S. Court for the Western District of Texas. Among other things, the Consent Decree required that the Martinez refinery meet certain annual emission limits for NOx by July 1, 2018. In February 2018, TRMC informed the EPA that it would need additional time to satisfy requirements of the Consent Decree. In the fourth quarter of 2019, TRMC and the United States entered into an agreement to amend the Consent Decree to resolve these issues. In light of the actions to strategically reposition the Martinez refinery to a renewable diesel facility, we are renegotiating the Consent Decree modification. Subject to final approval by the court, we expect that the renegotiated Consent Decree modification will no longer require the installation of a Selective Catalytic Reduction system to control NOx emissions from the now-idled fluid catalytic cracking unit, but will result in an increased civil penalty.

Gathering and Processing

In November 2020, we received an offer from the EPA to settle multiple alleged violations of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants by the Chapita, Coyote Wash, Island, River Bend and Wonsits Valley Compressor Stations in Utah. The proposed settlement consists of an injunctive relief package, mitigation project and proposed penalty in excess of $300,000. We continue to negotiate a settlement of the allegations and cannot currently estimate the timing of the resolution of this matter.