Marathon Petroleum Corporation: 10-K Risk Factor Changes

Currently, multiple legislative and regulatory measures to address GHG (including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxides) and other emissions are in various phases of consideration, promulgation or implementation. These include actions to develop international, federal, regional or statewide programs, which could require reductions in our GHG or other emissions, establish a carbon tax and decrease the demand for refined products. Requiring reductions in these emissions could result in increased costs to (i) operate and maintain our facilities, (ii) install new emission controls at our facilities and (iii) administer and manage any emissions programs, including acquiring emission credits or allotments. For example, California and Washington have enacted cap-and-trade programs. Other states are proposing, or have already promulgated, low carbon fuel standards or similar initiatives to reduce emissions from the transportation sector. If we are unable to pass the costs of compliance on to our customers, sufficient credits are unavailable for purchase, we have to pay a significantly higher price for credits, or if we are otherwise unable to meet our compliance obligation, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. Certain municipalities have also proposed or enacted restrictions on the installation of natural gas appliances and infrastructure in new residential or commercial construction, which could affect demand for the natural gas that MPLX transports and stores. Regional and state climate change and air emissions goals and regulatory programs are complex, subject to change and considerable uncertainty due to a number of factors including technological feasibility, legal challenges and potential changes in federal policy. Increasing concerns about climate change and carbon intensity have also resulted in societal concerns and a number of international and national measures to limit GHG emissions. Additional stricter measures and investor pressure can be expected in the future and any of these changes may have a material adverse impact on our business or financial condition. International climate change-related efforts, such as the 2015 United Nations Conference on Climate Change, which led to the creation of the Paris Agreement, may impact the regulatory framework of states whose policies directly influence our present and future operations. In the United States, an Executive Order issued on January 27, 2021, announced putting the U.S. on a path to achieve net-zero carbon emissions, economy-wide, by 2050. The Executive Order also calls for the federal government to pause oil and gas leasing on federal lands and reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas sector as quickly as possible, and requires federal permitting decisions to consider the effects of GHG emissions and climate change. In December 2023, EPA completed one provision of the order by promulgating a final rule to reduce methane and volatile organic compounds from oil and gas operations. Concurrently, EPA significantly increased the social cost of greenhouse gases. A higher social cost of greenhouse gases could support more stringent GHG emission regulation. The scope and magnitude of the changes to U.S. climate change strategy under the current and future administrations, however, remain subject to the passage of legislation and interpretation and action of federal and state regulatory bodies; therefore, the impact to our industry and operations due to GHG regulation is unknown at this time.

Currently, multiple legislative and regulatory measures to address GHG (including carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxides) and other emissions are in various phases of consideration, promulgation or implementation. These include actions to develop international, federal, regional or statewide programs, which could require reductions in our GHG or other emissions, establish a carbon tax and decrease the demand for refined products. Requiring reductions in these emissions could result in increased costs to (i) operate and maintain our facilities, (ii) install new emission controls at our facilities and (iii) administer and manage any emissions programs, including acquiring emission credits or allotments. For example, California and Washington have enacted cap-and-trade programs. Other states are proposing, or have already promulgated, low carbon fuel standards or similar initiatives to reduce emissions from the transportation sector. If we are unable to pass the costs of compliance on to our customers, sufficient credits are unavailable for purchase, we have to pay a significantly higher price for credits, or if we are otherwise unable to meet our compliance obligation, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. Certain municipalities have also proposed or enacted restrictions on the installation of natural gas appliances and infrastructure in new residential or commercial construction, which could affect demand for the natural gas that MPLX transports and stores. Regional and state climate change and air emissions goals and regulatory programs are complex, subject to change and considerable uncertainty due to a number of factors including technological feasibility, legal challenges and potential changes in federal policy. Increasing concerns about climate change and carbon intensity have also resulted in societal concerns and a number of international and national measures to limit GHG emissions. Additional stricter measures and investor pressure can be expected in the future and any of these changes may have a material adverse impact on our business or financial condition. International climate change-related efforts, such as the 2015 United Nations Conference on Climate Change, which led to the creation of the Paris Agreement, may impact the regulatory framework of states whose policies directly influence our present and future operations. Though the United States had withdrawn from the Paris Agreement, President Biden issued an executive order recommitting the United States to the Paris Agreement on January 20, 2021. President Biden also issued an Executive Order on climate change in which he announced putting the U.S. on a path to achieve net-zero carbon emissions, economy-wide, by 2050. The Executive Order also calls for the federal government to pause oil and gas leasing on federal lands, reduce methane 24 24 24 Table of Contents Table of Contents emissions from the oil and gas sector as quickly as possible, and requires federal permitting decisions to consider the effects of GHG emissions and climate change. In a second Executive Order, President Biden reestablished a working group to develop the social cost of carbon and the social cost of methane. The social cost of carbon and social cost of methane can be used to weigh the costs and benefits of proposed regulations. A higher social cost of carbon could support more stringent GHG emission regulation. The scope and magnitude of the changes to U.S. climate change strategy under the Biden administration and future administrations, however, remain subject to the passage of legislation and interpretation and action of federal and state regulatory bodies; therefore, the impact to our industry and operations due to GHG regulation is unknown at this time.

Our Restated Certificate of Incorporation provides that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, if the Court of Chancery does not have subject matter jurisdiction, the federal district court for the District of Delaware) will be the sole and exclusive forum for: •any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of MPC; •any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director or officer of MPC to MPC or its stockholders; •any action asserting a claim against MPC arising pursuant to any provision of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, MPC’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation, any Preferred Stock Designation or the Bylaws of MPC; or •any other action asserting a claim against MPC or any Director or officer of MPC that is governed by or subject to the internal affairs doctrine for choice of law purposes. The exclusive forum provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. Our Restated Certificate of Incorporation also provides that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the U.S. federal district courts shall be, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the exclusive forum any action asserting a claim under the Securities Act. The forum selection provision may restrict a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim against us or directors or officers of MPC in a forum that it finds favorable, which may discourage stockholders from bringing such claims at all. Alternatively, if a court were to find the forum selection provision contained in our Restated Certificate of Incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in another forum, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our Restated Certificate of Incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for: •any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of MPC; •any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director or officer of MPC to MPC or its stockholders •any action asserting a claim against MPC arising pursuant to any provision of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, MPC’s Restated Certificate of Incorporation, any Preferred Stock Designation or the Bylaws of MPC; or •any other action asserting a claim against MPC or any Director or officer of MPC that is governed by or subject to the internal affairs doctrine for choice of law purposes. The forum selection provision may restrict a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim against us or directors or officers of MPC in a forum that it finds favorable, which may discourage stockholders from bringing such claims at all. Alternatively, if a court were to find the forum selection provision contained in our Restated Certificate of Incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in another forum, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. However, the forum selection provision does not apply to any claims, actions or proceedings arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.

Our operations are subject to business interruptions, such as scheduled and unscheduled refinery turnarounds, unplanned maintenance, explosions, fires, refinery or pipeline releases, product quality incidents, power outages, severe weather, labor disputes, acts of terrorism, or other natural or man-made disasters. These types of incidents adversely affect our operations and may result in serious personal injury or loss of human life, significant damage to property and equipment, impaired ability to manufacture our products, environmental pollution, and substantial losses. We have experienced certain of these incidents in the past. For assets located near populated areas, the level of damage resulting from such an incident could be greater. In addition, we operate in and adjacent to environmentally sensitive waters where tanker, pipeline, rail car and refined product transportation and storage operations are closely regulated by federal, state and local agencies and monitored by environmental interest groups. Certain of our refineries receive crude oil and other feedstocks by tanker or barge. MPLX operates a fleet of boats and barges to transport light products, heavy oils, crude oil, renewable fuels, chemicals and feedstocks to and from our refineries and terminals owned by MPC and MPLX. Transportation and storage of crude oil, other feedstocks and refined products over and adjacent to water involves inherent risk and subjects us to the provisions of the OPA-90 and state laws in U.S. coastal and Great Lakes states and states bordering inland waterways on which we operate, as well as international laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate. If we are unable to promptly and adequately contain any accident or discharge involving tankers, pipelines, rail cars or above ground storage tanks transporting or storing crude oil, other feedstocks or refined products, we may be subject to substantial liability. In addition, the service providers contracted to aid us in a discharge response may be unavailable due to weather conditions, governmental regulations or other local or global events. Damages resulting from an incident involving any of our assets or operations may result in our being named as a defendant in one or more lawsuits asserting potentially substantial claims or in our being assessed potentially substantial fines by governmental authorities.

Our operations are subject to business interruptions, such as scheduled and unscheduled refinery turnarounds, unplanned maintenance, explosions, fires, refinery or pipeline releases, product quality incidents, power outages, severe weather, labor disputes, acts of terrorism, or other natural or man-made disasters. These types of incidents adversely affect our operations and may result in serious personal injury or loss of human life, significant damage to property and equipment, impaired ability to manufacture our products, environmental pollution, and substantial losses. We have experienced certain of these incidents in the past. For assets located near populated areas, the level of damage resulting from such an incident could be greater. In addition, we operate in and adjacent to environmentally sensitive waters where tanker, pipeline, rail car and refined product transportation and storage operations are closely regulated by federal, state and local agencies and monitored by environmental interest groups. Certain of our refineries receive crude oil and other feedstocks by tanker or barge. MPLX operates a fleet of boats and barges to transport light products, heavy oils, crude oil, renewable fuels, chemicals and feedstocks to and from refineries and terminals owned by MPC. Transportation and storage of crude oil, other feedstocks and refined products over and adjacent to water involves inherent risk and subjects us to the provisions of the OPA-90 and state laws in U.S. coastal and Great Lakes states and states bordering inland waterways on which we operate, as well as international laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate. If we are unable to promptly and adequately contain any accident or discharge involving tankers, pipelines, rail cars or above ground storage tanks transporting or storing crude oil, other feedstocks or refined products, we may be subject to substantial liability. In addition, the service providers contracted to aid us in a discharge response may be unavailable due to weather conditions, governmental regulations or other local or global events. Damages resulting from an incident involving any of our assets or operations may result in our being named as a defendant in one or more lawsuits asserting potentially substantial claims or in our being assessed potentially substantial fines by governmental authorities.

Approximately 3,800 of our employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements with expiration dates ranging from 2024 to 2027. These agreements may be renewed at an increased cost to us. In addition, we have experienced in the past, and may experience in the future, work stoppages as a result of labor disagreements. Any prolonged work stoppages disrupting operations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In 2024, there are two collective bargaining agreements, one expired on January 31 and the other will expire on April 7. These two agreements cover approximately 500 employees in refining. The parties to the expired agreement continue operating under the relevant terms of the expired agreement while negotiating a successor agreement. In the event of a work stoppage impacting operations, we have a contingency plan in place to continue operations. In addition, some states in which we operate require refinery owners to pay prevailing wages to contract craft workers and restrict refiners’ ability to hire qualified employees to a limited pool of applicants. Legislation or changes in regulations could result in labor shortages, higher labor costs, and an increased risk that contract workers become joint employees, which could trigger bargaining issues, and wage and benefit consequences, especially during critical maintenance and construction periods.

Approximately 3,755 of our employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements. Approximately 2,545 refinery employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements with expiration dates ranging from 2023 to 2027. These agreements may be renewed at an increased cost to us. In addition, we have experienced in the past, and may experience in the future, work stoppages as a result of labor disagreements. Any prolonged work stoppages disrupting operations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, California requires refinery owners to pay prevailing wages to contract craft workers and restricts refiners’ ability to hire qualified employees to a limited pool of applicants. Legislation or changes in regulations could result in labor shortages, higher labor costs, and an increased risk that contract workers become joint employees, which could trigger bargaining issues, and wage and benefit consequences, especially during critical maintenance and construction periods.

Governmental and other entities in various U.S. states have filed lawsuits against various energy companies, including us, alleging damages as a result of climate change, false statements about climate change, and violations of various consumer protection statutes. The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified damages and abatement under various tort theories. Governments and private parties may continue to file lawsuits or initiate regulatory action based on allegations that certain public statements regarding climate change and other ESG related matters and practices by companies are false and misleading “greenwashing” that violate deceptive trade practices and consumer protection statutes, presenting a high degree of uncertainty regarding the extent to which energy companies face an increased risk of liability stemming from climate change or ESG disclosures and practices. 24 24 24 Table of Contents Table of Contents Attorneys general and other government officials may continue to pursue litigation in which they seek to recover civil damages against us on behalf of a state or its citizens for a variety of claims, including violation of consumer protection and product pricing laws or natural resources damages. Additionally, private plaintiffs and government parties have undertaken efforts to shut down energy assets by challenging operating permits, the validity of easements or the compliance with easement conditions. For example, the Dakota Access Pipeline, in which MPLX has a minority interest, has been subject to, and may in the future be subject to, litigation seeking a permanent shutdown of the pipeline. There remains a high degree of uncertainty regarding the ultimate outcome of these types of proceedings, as well as their potential effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows.

Governmental and other entities in various U.S. states have filed lawsuits against various energy companies, including us. 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. Additionally, private plaintiffs and government parties have undertaken efforts to shut down energy assets by challenging operating permits, the validity of easements or the compliance with easement conditions. For example, the Dakota Access Pipeline, in which MPLX has a minority interest, has been subject to, and may in the future be subject to, litigation seeking a permanent shutdown of the pipeline. There remains a high degree of uncertainty regarding the ultimate outcome of these types of proceedings, as well as their potential effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation and cash flows.