U.S. Department of Justice Environment and Natural Resources Division 90-5-2-1-06722/6 Telephone (202) 514-5261 Thomas.Benson@usdoj.gov P.O. Box 7611 Ben Franklin Station Washington, DC 20044-7611 April 2, 2020 By Email Donna Carvalho Senior Counsel Philllips 66 Company 2331 CityWest Boulevard Houston, Texas 77042 Donna.H.Carvalho@p66.com Re: Force Majeure Notification under 2018 Consent Decree Dear Ms. Carvalho: We have received your letter of March 9, 2020, submitting a force majeure notice due to the impact of the novel coronavirus COVID-19. This letter will serve as the initial response on behalf of the United States, after consultation with the State of Illinois, pursuant to the Consent Decree entered in United States, et al v. WRB Refining LP, et al, Case No. 18-cv-01484 (S.D. Ill.). Please note that with the retirement of prior Department of Justice counsel Annette Lang, I will serve as the DOJ attorney for Decree implementation issues going forward. My contact information is provided above. Your letter states that “the transmission and spread of the virus could impact the Company’s performance” with the Decree, but that “[n]o known impact has occurred yet.” (Emphasis added). For that reason, your letter does not identify any particular Decree requirements for which compliance would be delayed. We appreciate your notice under the Decree and your commitment to take all feasible steps to “prevent and mitigate” any potential issues. As you know, the Decree requires that Phillips 66 exercise its “best efforts” to fulfill the Decree obligations, which “includes using best efforts to anticipate any potential force majeure event and best efforts to address the effects of any such event (a) as it is occurring and (b) after it has occurred, to prevent or minimize any resulting delay to the greatest extent possible.” CD ¶128. Please adhere to the force majeure provisions of the Decree to the extent you believe any delays in Phillips 66’s obligations are warranted. Because your notice does not identify a specific obligation that Phillips 66 anticipates will not be met due to a potential force majeure event, the United States must defer judgment on Phillip 66’s force majeure claim at this time. For a force majeure claim to be ripe for decision, Phillip 66 should identify particular obligation(s) that will be delayed by the asserted force majeure event, along with the specific information required by the force majeure section of the Decree. This may well require multiple notices, depending on the deadlines for different obligations and the effect of the event on those deadlines. The United States’ decision to defer judgment at this time should not be construed as acceptance of any potential noncompliance at the facility covered by the Decree. Thank you for your attention to these matters. Please feel free to contact me to discuss any of these issues further. Sincerely, s/Thomas A. Benson Thomas A. Benson CC (via email) r5ardreporting@epa.gov Constantinos Loukeris, EPA Greg Gehrig, EPA Mary McAuliffe, EPA William Wagner, EPA Kent Mohr, Manager, Illinois EPA Maureen Wozniak, Illinois EPA Andrew Armstrong, Chief, Illinois Attorney General’s Office Raymond Callery, Illinois Attorney General’s Office Tim.E.Goedeker, P66 Dean.P.Maniatis, P66 Paul.Hamada, P66 Gerald.A.Knoyle, P66   2