A Dark Vector Cognition product

Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

6K characters. Original on sec.gov · Markdown

Item 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Disclosure Controls and Procedures

An evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) was carried out under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer. Based upon that evaluation, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that the design and operation of these disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of September 30, 2021, the end of the period covered by this report.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

During the quarter ended September 30, 2021, there were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Table of Contents

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1. 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 $300,000.

Except as described below, there have been no material changes to the legal matters previously disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020 (our “2020 10-K”), as updated in our subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q.

Martinez

As previously disclosed in our 2020 10-K, we had been negotiating, through two separate actions, the settlement of 141 NOVs received from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (“BAAQMD”). The NOVs were issued from 2011 to 2019 and alleged violations of air quality regulations and the idled Martinez refinery’s air permit. In the third quarter of 2021, we finalized a settlement with the BAAQMD, which provides for a cash penalty of approximately $2.2 million to resolve 58 of these NOVs. We continue to negotiate a settlement of the remaining allegations with the BAAQMD through a separate enforcement action. We cannot currently estimate the timing of the resolution of the remaining NOVs.

Dakota Access Pipeline

MPLX holds a 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 referred to as the Bakken Pipeline system or DAPL. In 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 prepare an environmental impact statement (“EIS”) relating to an easement under Lake Oahe in North Dakota. The D.D.C. later ordered vacatur of the easement during the pendency of the EIS and further ordered a shut down of the pipeline by August 5, 2020. On August 5, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (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. 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 May 2021, the D.D.C. denied a renewed request for an injunction to shut down the pipeline while the EIS is being prepared. In June 2021, the D.D.C. issued an order dismissing without prejudice the tribes’ claims against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The judge noted that the plaintiffs may move to reopen the case in the event of a violation of the court’s prior orders. Dakota Access has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for review of the Court of Appeal’s decision upholding the D.D.C.’s order vacating the easement. The pipeline remains operational.

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 pipeline were temporarily shut down, 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 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 1% redemption premium required pursuant to the indenture governing the notes) and any accrued and unpaid interest. As of September 30, 2021, our maximum potential undiscounted payments under the Contingent Equity Contribution Agreement were approximately $230 million.

Previous: Item 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK · Next: Item 1A. RISK FACTORS