XML 33 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.24.3

Commitments and Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2024
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Loss Contingencies — General To the extent we are able to assess the likelihood of a negative outcome for a contingency, our assessments of such likelihood range from remote to probable. If we determine that a negative outcome is probable and the amount of loss is reasonably estimable, we accrue an undiscounted liability equal to the estimated amount. If a range of probable loss amounts can be reasonably estimated and no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, then we accrue an undiscounted liability equal to the minimum amount in the range. In addition, we estimate legal fees that we expect to incur associated with loss contingencies and accrue those costs when they are material and probable of being incurred. We do not record a contingent liability when the likelihood of loss is probable but the amount cannot be reasonably estimated or when the likelihood of loss is believed to be only reasonably possible or remote. For contingencies where an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible and the impact would be material to our consolidated financial statements, we disclose the nature of the contingency and, where feasible, an estimate of the possible loss or range of loss. Legal Proceedings — General In the ordinary course of business, we are involved in various legal proceedings, including those arising from regulatory and environmental matters. In connection with determining the probability of loss associated with such legal proceedings and whether any potential losses associated therewith are estimable, we take into account what we believe to be all relevant known facts and circumstances, and what we believe to be reasonable assumptions regarding the application of those facts and circumstances to existing agreements, laws and regulations. Although we are insured against various risks to the extent we believe it is prudent, there is no assurance that the nature and amount of such insurance will be adequate, in every case, to fully protect us from losses arising from current or future legal proceedings. Accordingly, we can provide no assurance that the outcome of the various legal proceedings that we are currently involved in, or will become involved with in the future, will not, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Environmental — General We currently own or lease, and in the past have owned and leased, properties where hazardous liquids, including hydrocarbons, are or have been handled. These properties and the hazardous liquids or associated wastes disposed thereon may be subject to the U.S. federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended, and the U.S. federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended, as well as state and Canadian federal and provincial laws and regulations. Under such laws and regulations, we could be required to remove or remediate hazardous liquids or associated wastes (including wastes disposed of or released by prior owners or operators) and to clean up contaminated property (including contaminated groundwater). Assets we have acquired or will acquire in the future may have environmental remediation liabilities for which we are not indemnified or insured. Although we have made significant investments in our maintenance and integrity programs, we have experienced (and likely will experience future) releases of hydrocarbon products into the environment from our pipeline, rail, storage and other facility operations. These releases can result from accidents or from unpredictable man-made or natural forces and may reach surface water bodies, groundwater aquifers or other sensitive environments. We also may discover environmental impacts from past releases that were previously unidentified. Damages and liabilities associated with any such releases from our existing or future assets could be significant and could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. We record environmental liabilities when environmental assessments and/or remedial efforts are probable and the amounts can be reasonably estimated. Generally, our recording of these accruals coincides with our completion of a feasibility study or our commitment to a formal plan of action. We do not discount our environmental remediation liabilities to present value. We also record environmental liabilities assumed in business combinations based on the estimated fair value of the environmental obligations caused by past operations of the acquired company. We record receivables for amounts we believe are recoverable from insurance or from third parties under indemnification agreements in the period that we determine the costs are probable of recovery. Environmental expenditures that pertain to current operations or to future revenues are expensed or capitalized consistent with our capitalization policy for property and equipment. Expenditures that result from the remediation of an existing condition caused by past operations and that do not contribute to current or future profitability are expensed. Our estimated undiscounted reserve for environmental liabilities (excluding liabilities related to the Line 901 incident, as discussed further below) were reflected on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as follows (in millions):
| September 30, 2024 |  | December 31, 2023
Other current liabilities | $ | 14 |  |  | $ | 10 |
Other long-term liabilities and deferred credits | $ | 45 |  |  | $ | 46 |
Total | $ | 59 |  |  | $ | 56 |
In some cases, the actual cash expenditures associated with these liabilities may not occur for three years or longer. Our estimates used in determining these reserves are based on information currently available to us and our assessment of the ultimate outcome. Among the many uncertainties that impact our estimates are the necessary regulatory approvals for, and potential modification of, our remediation plans, the limited amount of data available upon initial assessment of the impact of soil or water contamination, changes in costs associated with environmental remediation services and equipment and the possibility of existing or future legal claims giving rise to additional liabilities. Therefore, although we believe that the reserve is adequate, actual costs incurred (which may ultimately include costs for contingencies that are currently not reasonably estimable or costs for contingencies where the likelihood of loss is currently believed to be only reasonably possible or remote) may be in excess of the reserve and may potentially have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Specific Legal, Environmental or Regulatory Matters Line 901 Incident. In May 2015, we experienced a crude oil release from our Las Flores to Gaviota Pipeline (Line 901) in Santa Barbara County, California. A portion of the released crude oil reached the Pacific Ocean at Refugio State Beach through a drainage culvert. Following the release, we shut down the pipeline and initiated our emergency response plan. A Unified Command, which included the United States Coast Guard, the EPA, the State of California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”), the California Office of Spill Prevention and Response and the Santa Barbara Office of Emergency Management, was established for the response effort. Clean-up and remediation operations with respect to impacted shoreline and other areas was determined by the Unified Command to be complete in 2016, and the Unified Command was dissolved. Our estimate of the amount of oil spilled, based on relevant facts, data and information, and as set forth in the Consent Decree described below, is approximately 2,934 barrels; of this amount, we estimate that 598 barrels reached the Pacific Ocean. As a result of the Line 901 incident, several governmental agencies and regulators initiated investigations into the Line 901 incident, various claims have been made against us and a number of lawsuits have been filed against us, most of which have been resolved. Set forth below is a brief summary of actions and matters that are currently pending or recently resolved. As the “responsible party” for the Line 901 incident we are liable for various costs and for certain natural resource damages under the Oil Pollution Act. In this regard, following the Line 901 incident, we entered into a cooperative Natural Resource Damage Assessment (“NRDA”) process with the federal and state agencies designated or authorized by law to act as trustees for the natural resources of the United States and the State of California (collectively, the “Trustees”). Additionally, various government agencies sought to collect civil fines and penalties under applicable state and federal regulations. On March 13, 2020, the United States and the People of the State of California filed a civil complaint against Plains All American Pipeline, L.P. and Plains Pipeline L.P. along with a pre-negotiated settlement agreement in the form of a Consent Decree (the “Consent Decree”) that was signed by the United States Department of Justice, Environmental and Natural Resources Division, the United States Department of Transportation, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, the EPA, CDFW, the California Department of Parks and Recreation, the California State Lands Commission, the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection’s Office of the State Fire Marshal, Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board, and Regents of the University of California. The Consent Decree was approved and entered by the Federal District Court for the Central District of California on October 14, 2020. Pursuant to the terms of the Consent Decree, Plains paid $24 million in civil penalties and $22.325 million as compensation for injuries to, destruction of, loss of, or loss of use of natural resources resulting from the Line 901 incident. The Consent Decree, which resolved all regulatory claims related to the incident, also contains requirements for implementing certain agreed-upon injunctive relief, as well as requirements for potentially restarting Line 901 and the Sisquoc to Pentland portion of Line 903. On October 13, 2022, Plains sold Line 901 and the Sisquoc to Pentland portion of Line 903 to Pacific Pipeline Company, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Exxon Mobil Corporation. As required by the terms of the Consent Decree, such purchaser assumed responsibility for compliance with the Consent Decree as it relates to the future ownership and operation of Line 901 and the Sisquoc to Pentland portion of Line 903. Following an investigation and grand jury proceedings, in May of 2016, PAA was charged by a California state grand jury, pursuant to an indictment filed in California Superior Court, Santa Barbara County (the “May 2016 Indictment”), with alleged violations of California law in connection with the Line 901 incident. Fifteen charges from the May 2016 Indictment were the subject of a jury trial in California Superior Court in Santa Barbara County, and the jury returned a verdict on September 7, 2018, pursuant to which we were (i) found guilty on one felony discharge count and eight misdemeanor counts (which included one reporting count, one strict liability discharge count and six strict liability animal takings counts) and (ii) found not guilty on one strict liability animal takings count. The remaining counts were subsequently dismissed by the Court. On April 25, 2019, PAA was sentenced to pay fines and penalties in the aggregate amount of just under $3.35 million for the convictions covered by the September 2018 jury verdict (the “2019 Sentence”). The fines and penalties imposed in connection with the 2019 Sentence have been paid. In September 2021, the Superior Court concluded a series of hearings on the issue of whether there were any “direct victims” of the spill that are entitled to restitution under applicable criminal law. Through a series of final orders issued at the trial court level and without affecting any rights of the claimants under civil law, the Court dismissed the vast majority of the claims and ruled that the claimants were not entitled to restitution under applicable criminal laws. The Court did award an aggregate amount of less than $150,000 to a handful of claimants and we settled with approximately 40 claimants before the hearings for aggregate consideration that is not material. The prosecution and certain separately represented claimants appealed the Court’s rulings. The Appellate Court’s order resulted in approximately $275,000 of claims being remanded to the trial court for further adjudication and the affirmation of the trial court’s dismissal of all other claims. We also received individual lawsuits and claims from companies, governmental agencies and individuals alleging damages arising out of the Line 901 incident. These lawsuits and claims generally seek restitution, compensatory and punitive damages, and/or injunctive relief. Most of these lawsuits have been settled or dismissed by the court. We recently settled the following two lawsuits (the “2024 Settlements”): (i) a lawsuit in California Superior Court in Santa Barbara County for lost revenue or profit asserted by a former oil producer that declared bankruptcy and shut in its offshore production platform following the Line 901 incident; and (ii) a lawsuit filed by the California State Land Commission in California Superior Court in Santa Barbara County seeking lost royalties following the shut-down of Line 901, as well as costs related to the decommissioning of such platform. In connection with the 2024 Settlements, we recognized additional costs related to the Line 901 incident of $120 million. Our remaining Line 901 lawsuits include various lawsuits filed in California Superior Court in Santa Barbara County by companies and individuals who provided labor, goods, or services associated with oil production activities they claim were disrupted following the Line 901 incident. We are vigorously defending these remaining lawsuits, which have not yet been set for trial, and believe we have strong defenses. In a separate class action lawsuit that was pending in United States District Court for the Central District of California, the plaintiffs claimed two different classes of claimants were damaged by the release: (i) commercial fishermen who landed fish in certain specified fishing blocks in the waters off the coast of Southern California or persons or businesses who resold commercial seafood caught in those areas; and (ii) owners and lessees of residential beachfront properties, or properties with a private easement to a beach, where plaintiffs claim oil from the spill washed up. In 2022, in order to fully and finally resolve all claims and litigation for both classes, we reached an agreement to settle this case in exchange for a payment of $230 million (the “Class Action Settlement”). The Class Action Settlement was formally approved by the trial court on September 20, 2022, and we made the $230 million settlement payment on October 27, 2022 and the lawsuit was subsequently dismissed. Plains formally submitted claims for reimbursement of the Class Action Settlement to our insurance carriers on November 7, 2022. To date, we have received payment of approximately $3.6 million from one insurer, which represents the final payment obligation of such insurer and brings the total amount collected from all insurers under such program to $275 million of the $500 million policy limits as of September 30, 2024. Insurers responsible for $185 million of the remaining $225 million of coverage have formally communicated a denial of coverage for the Class Action Settlement, generally alleging that some or all damages encompassed by the Class Action Settlement are not covered by their policies and that all or some portion of the $275 million for which Plains has already received insurance reimbursement does not properly exhaust the underlying policies that paid those sums. The insurer responsible for the final $40 million of coverage under such insurance program has not yet accepted nor denied coverage. We have initiated final and binding arbitration proceedings against all of the insurers responsible for the remaining $225 million of coverage with respect to which we have not received reimbursement. With respect to our reimbursement claim against insurers representing $175 million of the $225 million total reimbursement claim, a binding arbitration hearing was concluded in early October and we expect a decision from the arbitration panel in January 2025. We continue to believe that our claim for reimbursement from our insurers of the Class Action Settlement payment is strong and that our ultimate recovery of such amounts is probable. Our belief is based on: (i) our analysis of the terms of the underlying insurance policies as applied to the facts and circumstances that comprise our claim for reimbursement, (ii) our experience with the cost submissions and timely collection of claims for the $275 million collected to date for this incident under the same insurance program as the denied claims, including from some of the same insurers who are now denying claims, (iii) our extensive legal review and assessment of the insurer’s claimed basis for denial of coverage, which review and assessment includes the advice of external legal counsel experienced in these type of matters and solidly supports our belief that our insurers are required to provide coverage based on the terms of the policies and the nature of our claims, and (iv) the financial strength of the insurance carriers as determined by an independent credit ratings agency. Various factors could impact the timing and amount of recovery of our insurance receivable, including future developments that adversely impact our assessment of the strength of our coverage claims, the outcome of any dispute resolution proceedings with respect to our coverage claims (including the arbitration proceeding for which a hearing was completed in October) and the extent to which insurers may become insolvent in the future. An unfavorable resolution could have a material impact on our results of operations. In connection with the foregoing, including the Class Action Settlement and the 2024 Settlements, we have made adjustments to our total estimated Line 901 costs and the portion of such costs that we believe are probable of recovery from insurance carriers, net of deductibles. Effective as of September 30, 2024, we estimate that the aggregate total costs we have incurred or will incur with respect to the Line 901 incident will be approximately $870 million, which includes actual and projected emergency response and clean-up costs, natural resource damage assessments, fines and penalties payable pursuant to the Consent Decree, certain third-party claims settlements (including the Class Action Settlement and the 2024 Settlements), and estimated costs associated with our remaining Line 901 lawsuits and claims as described above, as well as estimates for certain legal fees and statutory interest where applicable. We accrue such estimates of aggregate total costs to “Field operating costs” in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. This estimate considers our prior experience in environmental investigation and remediation matters and available data from, and in consultation with, our environmental and other specialists, as well as currently available facts and presently enacted laws and regulations. We have made assumptions for (i) the resolution of certain third-party claims and lawsuits, but excluding claims and lawsuits with respect to which losses are not probable and reasonably estimable, and (ii) the nature, extent and cost of legal services that will be required in connection with all lawsuits, claims and other matters requiring legal or expert advice associated with the Line 901 incident. Our estimate does not include any lost revenue associated with the shutdown of Line 901 or 903 and does not include any liabilities or costs that are not reasonably estimable at this time or that relate to contingencies where we currently regard the likelihood of loss as being only reasonably possible or remote. We believe we have accrued adequate amounts for all probable and reasonably estimable costs; however, this estimate is subject to uncertainties associated with the assumptions that we have made. For example, with respect to potential losses that we regard as only reasonably possible or remote, we have made assumptions regarding the strength of our legal position based on our assessment of the relevant facts and applicable law and precedent; if our assumptions regarding such matters turn out to be inaccurate (i.e., we are found to be liable under circumstances where we regard the likelihood of loss as being only reasonably possible or remote), we could be responsible for significant costs and expenses that are not currently included in our estimates and accruals. In addition, for any potential losses that we regard as probable and for which we have accrued an estimate of the potential losses, our estimates regarding damages, legal fees, court costs and interest could turn out to be inaccurate and the actual losses we incur could be significantly higher than the amounts included in our estimates and accruals. Also, the amount of time it takes for us to resolve all of the current and future lawsuits and claims that relate to the Line 901 incident could turn out to be significantly longer than we have assumed, and as a result the costs we incur for legal services could be significantly higher than we have estimated. Accordingly, our assumptions and estimates may turn out to be inaccurate and our total costs could turn out to be materially higher; therefore, we can provide no assurance that we will not have to accrue significant additional costs in the future with respect to the Line 901 incident. We recognized costs, net of amounts probable of recovery from insurance carriers, of $120 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2024. We did not recognize any such costs during the nine months ended September 30, 2023. As of September 30, 2024, we had a remaining undiscounted gross liability of approximately $94 million related to the Line 901 incident, which aggregate amount is reflected in “Current liabilities” on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. As discussed above, we maintain insurance coverage, which is subject to certain exclusions and deductibles, in the event of such liabilities. As of September 30, 2024, our incurred costs for the Line 901 incident have exceeded our insurance coverage limit of $500 million related to our 2015 insurance program applicable to the Line 901 incident by $370 million. Through September 30, 2024, we had collected, subject to customary reservations, approximately $280 million out of the $505 million of release costs that we believe are probable of recovery from insurance carriers (including the 2015 insurance program and our directors and officers (D&O) insurance policies), net of deductibles. Therefore, as of September 30, 2024, we have recognized a receivable of approximately $225 million for the portion of the release costs that we believe is probable of recovery from insurance, net of deductibles and amounts already collected. We anticipate that the process to enforce our coverage claims with respect to the Class Action Settlement will take time and, accordingly, have classified the related receivable amounts as short-term and long-term based on the resolution status of the process as of the balance sheet date. As of September 30, 2024, we have classified $175 million of the receivable as a short-term asset in “Trade accounts receivable and other receivables, net” with the remaining $50 million recognized as a long-term asset in “Other long-term assets, net” on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. As of December 31, 2023, we classified $225 million as a long-term asset in “Other long-term assets, net” on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. We have completed the required clean-up and remediation work as determined by the Unified Command and the Unified Command has been dissolved; however, we expect to make payments for additional legal, professional and regulatory costs during future periods. Taking into account the costs that we have included in our total estimate of costs for the Line 901 incident and considering what we regard as very strong defenses to the claims made in our remaining Line 901 lawsuits, we do not believe the ultimate resolution of such remaining lawsuits will have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Other Litigation Matters. On July 19, 2022, Hartree Natural Gas Storage, LLC (“Hartree”) filed a lawsuit under seal in the Superior Court for the State of Delaware asserting claims against PAA Natural Gas Storage, L.P. (“PNGS”) and PAA arising out of a Membership Interest Purchase Agreement relating to the 2021 sale of the Pine Prairie Energy Center natural gas storage facility to Hartree. A bifurcated bench and jury trial was held in May of 2024, with the jury deciding claims asserted against PAA (“PAA claims”) and the court to decide the claims asserted against PNGS (“PNGS claims”). The jury found PAA liable but awarded $0 damages on the PAA claims. We are still awaiting a verdict from the court on the PNGS claims and an entry of judgement on the PAA claims. We expect that the outcome of the lawsuit will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 405 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/405-30/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147478522/954-440-50-1 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 6: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration