A Dark Vector Cognition product

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

10K characters. Original on sec.gov · Markdown

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.

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 a specified threshold. We use a threshold of $1 million for this purpose.

Climate Change Litigation

Governmental and other entities in various states have filed climate-related lawsuits against a number of energy companies, including MPC. Although each suit is separate and unique, the lawsuits generally allege defendants made knowing misrepresentations about knowingly concealing, or failing to warn of the impacts of their petroleum products, which led to increased demand and worsened climate change. Plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and abatement under various tort theories, as well as breaches of consumer protection and unfair trade statutes. 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:

PlaintiffDate InstitutedName of Court(s) where pending
County of San Mateo, CaliforniaJuly 17, 2017California Superior Court of San Mateo County
County of Marin, CaliforniaJuly 17, 2017California Superior Court of Marin County
City of Imperial Beach, CaliforniaJuly 17, 2017California Superior Court of Contra Costa County
County of Santa Cruz, CaliforniaDecember 20, 2017California Superior Court of Santa Cruz County
City of Santa Cruz, CaliforniaDecember 20, 2017California Superior Court of Santa Cruz County
City of Richmond, CaliforniaJanuary 22, 2018California Superior Court of Contra Costa County
State of Rhode IslandJuly 2, 2018Superior Court of Providence County
Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, MarylandJuly 20, 2018Circuit Court of Baltimore County
City and County of Honolulu, HawaiiMarch 9, 2020Circuit Court of the First Circuit (State of Hawaii)
City of Charleston, South CarolinaSeptember 9, 2020Court of Common Pleas of the 9th Circuit; US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
State of DelawareSeptember 10, 2020Superior Court of Hudson County
County of Maui, HawaiiOctober 12, 2020Circuit Court of the Second Circuit (State of Hawaii)
City of Annapolis, MarylandFebruary 22, 2021Maryland Circuit Court, Anne Arundel County; US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Anne Arundel County, MarylandApril 26, 2021Maryland Circuit Court, Anne Arundel County; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
County of Multnomah, OregonJune 22, 2023U.S. District Court of Oregon

Dakota Access Pipeline

MPLX holds a 9.19 percent indirect interest in a joint venture (“Dakota Access”) which owns and operates the Bakken Pipeline system. In 2020, 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 prepare an environmental impact statement (“EIS”) relating to an easement under Lake Oahe in North Dakota. The D.D.C. later vacated the easement. The Army Corps issued a draft EIS in September 2023 detailing various options for the easement, including denying the easement, approving the easement with additional measures, rerouting the easement, or approving the easement with no changes. The Army Corps has not selected a preferred alternative, but will make a decision in its final review, after considering input from the public and other agencies. The pipeline remains operational while the Army Corps finalizes its decision which is expected to be issued by the end of 2024.

Table of Contents

MPLX has entered into a Contingent Equity Contribution Agreement whereby it, 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.

If the vacation of the easement results in a temporary shutdown of the pipeline, 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. MPLX also expects to contribute its 9.19 percent pro rata share of any costs to remediate any deficiencies to reinstate the easement and/or return the pipeline into operation. If the vacation of the easement 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, 2023, our maximum potential undiscounted payments under the Contingent Equity Contribution Agreement were approximately $170 million.

Tesoro High Plains Pipeline

In July 2020, Tesoro High Plains Pipeline Company, LLC (“THPP”), a subsidiary of 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 demanded the immediate cessation of pipeline operations and assessed trespass damages of approximately $187 million. After subsequent appeal proceedings and in compliance with a new order issued by the BIA, in December 2020, THPP paid approximately $4 million in assessed trespass damages and ceased use of the portion of the pipeline that crosses the property at issue. In March 2021, the BIA issued an order purporting to vacate the BIA's prior orders related to THPP’s alleged trespass and direct the Regional Director of the BIA to reconsider the issue of THPP’s alleged trespass and issue a new order. In April 2021, THPP filed a lawsuit in the District of North Dakota against the United States of America, the U.S. Department of the Interior and the BIA (collectively, the “U.S. Government Parties”) challenging the March 2021 order purporting to vacate all previous orders related to THPP’s alleged trespass. On February 8, 2022, the U.S. Government Parties filed their answer and counterclaims to THPP’s suit claiming THPP is in continued trespass with respect to the pipeline and seek disgorgement of pipeline profits from June 1, 2013 to present, removal of the pipeline and remediation. On November 8, 2023, the Court granted THPP’s motion to sever and stay the U.S. Government Parties’ counterclaims. The case will proceed on the merits of THPP’s challenge to the March 2021 order purporting to vacate all previous orders related to THPP’s alleged trespass. THPP continues not to operate the portion of the pipeline that crosses the property at issue.

Martinez Refinery

On October 20, 2023, Tesoro Refining & Marketing Company LLC, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of MPC, received an offer to settle 59 Notices of Violation (“NOVs”) received from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The NOVs were issued for alleged violations of air quality regulations at our Martinez refinery between June 2018 and May 2022. We cannot currently estimate the timing of the resolution of this matter but do not believe any civil penalty will have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

Edwardsville Incident

In March 2022, the State of Illinois brought an action in Madison County Circuit Court in Illinois against Marathon Pipe Line LLC, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of MPLX, asserting various violations and demanding a permanent injunction and civil penalties in connection with a release of crude oil on the Wood River to Patoka 22” line near Edwardsville, Illinois. In September 2023, the U.S. Department of Justice and EPA confirmed they will be pursuing federal enforcement for alleged Clean Water Act violations arising from this incident as well as three pipeline incidents in Illinois and Indiana in 2018, 2020 and 2021. We cannot currently estimate the amount of any civil penalty or the timing of the resolution of this matter but do not believe any civil penalty will have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

Previous: Item 2. Properties · Next: Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures