Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

Litigation related to TRC/TRP Merger

On December 16, 2015, two purported unitholders of TRP (the “State Court Plaintiffs”) filed a putative class action and derivative lawsuit challenging the TRC/TRP Merger against TRC, TRP (as a nominal defendant), Targa Resources GP LLC (“TRP GP”), the members of the board of TRP GP (the “TRP GP Board”) and Merger Sub (collectively, the “State Court Defendants”). This lawsuit was styled Leslie Blumberg et al. v. TRC Resources Corp., et al., Cause No. 2015-75481, in the 234th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas (the “State Court Lawsuit”). The State Court Plaintiffs amended the State Court Lawsuit on July 26, 2016.

The State Court Plaintiffs alleged several causes of action challenging the TRC/TRP Merger. Generally, the State Court Plaintiffs alleged that (i) the members of the TRP GP Board breached express and/or implied duties under the Partnership Agreement and (ii) TRC, TRP GP, and Merger Sub aided and abetted in these alleged breaches of duties. The State Court Plaintiffs further alleged, in general, that (a) the premium offered to TRP’s unitholders was inadequate, (b) the TRC/TRP Merger did not include a collar to protect TRP unitholders from decreases in TRC’s stock price, (c) the TRP GP Board agreed to contractual terms that allegedly may have dissuaded other potential acquirers from seeking to acquire TRP (including the “no-solicitation,” “matching rights,” and “termination fee” provisions), (d) the process leading up to the TRC/TRP Merger was unfair, (e) the TRP GP Board had conflicts of interest due to TRC’s control of TRP GP, (f) the TRP GP Conflicts Committee’s financial advisor was conflicted and conducted flawed analyses, and (g) the joint proxy statement/prospectus filed in connection with the TRC/TRP Merger (the “Proxy”) failed to disclose allegedly material information concerning, among other things, (i) the TRC and TRP projections included in the Proxy, and (ii) the analyses conducted by the TRP GP Conflicts Committee’s financial advisor in connection with the TRC/TRP Merger.

Based on these allegations, the State Court Plaintiffs sought damages and attorneys’ fees. On February 26 and 29, 2016, the State Court Defendants filed general denials and asserted affirmative defenses. On August 26, 2016, the State Court Defendants filed Special Exceptions and a Motion for Summary Judgment. On December 5, 2016, the Court granted Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissed the State Court Lawsuit in its entirety with prejudice.

Environmental Proceedings

On June 18, 2015, the New Mexico Environment Department’s Air Quality Bureau issued a Notice of Violation to Targa Midstream Services LLC for alleged violations of air emissions regulations related to emissions events that occurred at the Monument Gas Plant between June 2014 and December 2014. The Monument Gas Plant is owned by Versado Gas Processors, L.L.C., which was a joint venture in which we owned a 63% interest until October 31, 2016, when we acquired the remaining 37% membership interest from Chevron U.S.A. Inc. The Partnership has been in discussions with the New Mexico Environment Department to resolve the alleged violations. The New Mexico Environment Department has offered to settle the matter for $29,223.

We and the Partnership are also parties to various legal, administrative and regulatory proceedings that have arisen in the ordinary course of our business.