Delek US Holdings (DK) Risk Analysis

In addition, as regulatory initiatives have required an increase in the consumption of renewable transportation fuels, such as ethanol and biodiesel, consumer acceptance of electric, hybrid and other alternative vehicles is increasing. Increased use of renewable fuels and alternative vehicles may result in a decrease in demand for petroleum-based transportation fuels. Increased use of renewable fuels may also result in an increase in transportation fuel supply relative to decreased demand and a corresponding decrease in margins. A significant decrease in transportation fuel margins or demand for petroleum-based transportation fuels could have an adverse impact on our financial results. As described above, RFS-2 requires replacement of increasing amounts of petroleum-based transportation fuels with biofuels through 2022. RFS-2 and widespread use of E-15 or E-85 could cause decreased crude runs and materially affect our profitability, unless fuel demand rises at a comparable rate or other outlets are found for the displaced petroleum products. On October 11, 2018, the White House announced the President has signed a memorandum directing the EPA to conduct a rulemaking that is intended to increase the utilization of E-15 during the summer months. In its regulatory agenda, the EPA projects publication of a proposed rule in February 2019 and a final rule in May 2019. Notwithstanding this timeline, the Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs has not yet announced that it has received a draft proposal for interagency review. In 2012, the EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration finalized rules raising the required Corporate Average Fuel Economy and GHG standards for passenger vehicles beginning with 2017 model year vehicles and increasing to the equivalent of 54.5 mpg by 2025. These standards were reaffirmed by the EPA in January 2017, but that action was subsequently withdrawn on April 13, 2018. Additional increases in fuel efficiency standards for medium and heavy-duty vehicles were finalized in 2016. Such increases in fuel economy standards and potential electrification of the vehicle fleet, along with mandated increases in use of renewable fuels discussed above, could result in decreasing demand for petroleum fuels, which, in turn, could materially affect profitability at our refineries. To meet higher fuel efficiency and GHG emission standards for passenger vehicles, automobile manufacturers are increasingly using technologies, such as turbocharging, direct injection and higher compression ratios that require high octane gasoline. Many auto manufacturers have expressed a desire that only a high-octane grade of gasoline be allowed in order to maximize fuel efficiency, rather than the three octane grades common now. Regulatory changes allowing only one high-octane grade, or significant increases in market demand for high-octane fuel, could result in a shift to high-octane ethanol blends containing 25% - 30% ethanol, the need for capital expenditures at our refineries to increase octane or reduced demand for petroleum fuels, which could materially affect profitability of our refineries.

Negative publicity, regardless of whether the concerns are valid, concerning food, beverage, fuel or other product quality, food, beverage or other product safety or other health concerns, facilities, employee relations or other matters may materially and adversely affect demand for products offered at our stores and could result in a decrease in customer traffic to our stores. We offer food products in our stores that are marketed under our brand names and certain nationally recognized brands. These nationally recognized brands have significant operations at facilities owned and operated by third parties and negative publicity concerning these brands as a result of events that occur at facilities that we do not control could also adversely affect customer traffic to our stores. Additionally, we may be the subject of complaints or litigation arising from food or beverage-related illness or injury in general which could have a negative impact on our business. Health concerns, poor food, beverage, fuel or other product quality or operating issues stemming from one store or a limited number of stores can materially and adversely affect the operating results of some or all of our stores and harm our proprietary brands.

Our industry is subject to extensive laws, regulations, permits and other requirements including, but not limited to, those relating to the environment, fuel composition, safety, transportation, pipeline tariffs, employment, labor, immigration, minimum wages, overtime pay, health care benefits, working conditions, public accessibility, retail fuel pricing, the sale of alcohol and tobacco and other requirements. These permits, laws and regulations are enforced by federal agencies including the EPA, DOT, PHMSA, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration ("FMCSA"), Federal Railroad Administration ("FRA"), OSHA, National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB"), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"), Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") and the FERC, and numerous other state and federal agencies. We anticipate that compliance with environmental, health and safety regulations could require us to spend significant amounts in capital costs during the next five years. These estimates do not include amounts related to capital investments that management has deemed to be strategic investments. These amounts could materially change as a result of governmental and regulatory actions. Various permits, licenses, registrations and other authorizations are required under these laws for the operation of our refineries, biodiesel facilities, terminals, pipelines, retail locations and related operations, and these permits are subject to renewal and modification that may require operational changes involving significant costs. If key permits cannot be renewed or are revoked, the ability to continue operation of the affected facilities could be threatened. Ongoing compliance with, or violation of, laws, regulations and other requirements could also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We face potential exposure to future claims and lawsuits involving environmental matters, including, but not limited to, soil, groundwater and waterway contamination, air pollution, personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by substances we manufactured, handled, used, released or disposed. We are, and have been, the subject of various state, federal and private proceedings relating to environmental regulations, conditions and inquiries. In addition, new legal requirements, new interpretations of existing legal requirements, increased legislative activity and governmental enforcement and other developments could require us to make additional unforeseen expenditures. Companies in the petroleum industry, such as us, are often the target of activist and regulatory activity regarding pricing, safety, environmental compliance, derivatives trading and other business practices, which could result in price controls, fines, increased taxes or other actions affecting the conduct of our business. The specific impact of laws and regulations or other actions may vary depending on a number of factors, including the age and location of operating facilities, marketing areas, crude oil and feedstock sources and production processes. We generate wastes that may be subject to RCRA and comparable state and local requirements. The EPA and various state agencies have limited the approved methods of managing, transporting, recycling and disposal of hazardous and certain non-hazardous wastes. Our refineries are large quantity generators of hazardous waste and require hazardous waste permits issued by the EPA or state agencies. Additionally, certain of our other facilities, such as terminals and biodiesel plants, generate lesser quantities of hazardous wastes. Under RCRA, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act ("CERCLA") and other federal, state and local environmental laws, as the owner or operator of refineries, biodiesel plants, bulk terminals, pipelines, tank farms, rail cars, trucks and retail locations, we may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of contamination at our existing or former locations, whether we knew of, or were responsible for, the presence of such contamination. We have incurred such liability in the past, and several of our current and former locations are the subject of ongoing remediation projects. The failure to timely report and properly remediate contamination may subject us to liability to third parties and may adversely affect our ability to sell or rent our property or to borrow money using our property as collateral. Additionally, persons who arrange for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances also may be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of these substances at sites where they are located, regardless of whether the site is owned or operated by that person. We typically arrange for the treatment or disposal of hazardous substances generated by our refining and other operations. Therefore, we may be liable for removal or remediation costs associated with releases of these substances at third party locations, as well as other related costs, including fines, penalties and damages resulting from injuries to persons, property and natural resources. Our El Dorado refinery is a minor potentially responsible party at a Superfund site, for which we expect our costs to be non-material. In the future, we may incur substantial expenditures for investigation or remediation of contamination that has not been discovered at our current or former locations or locations that we may acquire or at third party sites where hazardous substances from these locations have been treated or disposed. Our operations are subject to certain requirements of the CAA, as well as related state and local laws and regulations governing air emissions. Certain CAA regulatory programs applicable to our refineries, terminals and other operations require capital expenditures for the installation of air pollution control devices, operational procedures to minimize emissions and monitoring and reporting of emissions. In 2012, the EPA announced an industry-wide enforcement initiative directed at flaring operations and performance at refineries and petrochemical plants and finalized revisions to NSPS Subpart Ja that primarily affects flares and process heaters. We completed capital and other projects at our refineries related to flare compliance with NSPS Ja in 2015 and 2016. A consent decree was entered in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas in June 2019 resolving alleged historical violations of the CAA at our Big Spring refinery. In addition to a civil penalty of $0.5 million that we paid in June 2019, we will be required to expend capital for pollution control equipment that may be significant over the next 10 years. According to the EPA, approximately 95% of the nation's refining capacity has entered into "global" settlements under the EPA National Refinery Initiative. Our El Dorado and Tyler refineries entered into similar global settlements in 2002 and 2009. A similar consent decree covering the Krotz Springs refinery entered into in 2005 by a previous owner was terminated by the court in October 2017. In 2015, the EPA finalized reductions in the NAAQS for ozone, from 75 ppb to 70 ppb. Our Tyler refinery is located near areas that have been reclassified as being in non-attainment with the new standard. However, the refinery area has not been classified as being in non-attainment with the new standard. If air quality near our facilities worsens in the future, it is possible that these area(s) could be reclassified as being in non-attainment for the new ozone standard which could require us to install additional air pollution control equipment for ozone forming emissions in the future. We do not believe such capital expenditures, or the changes in our operation, will result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In late 2015, the EPA finalized additional rules regulating refinery air emissions from a variety of sources (such as cokers, flares, tanks and other process units) through additional NSPS and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and changing the way emissions from startup, shutdown and malfunction operations are regulated (the "Refinery Risk and Technology Review Rules" or "RTR"). The RTR rule also requires that we monitor property line benzene concentrations at our refineries, and report those concentrations quarterly to the EPA, which will make the results available to the public. Even though the concentrations are not expected to exceed regulatory or health-based standards, the availability of such data may increase the likelihood of lawsuits against our refineries by the local public or organized public interest groups. Delek has obtained 1-year compliance extensions to certain provisions of the rule. Most of the capital cost needed to comply with these new rules has already been spent. We do not anticipate that any additional capital costs or future operating costs will be material, and do not believe compliance will affect our production capacities or have a material adverse effect upon our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition to our operations, many of the fuel products we manufacture are subject to requirements of the CAA, as well as related state and local laws and regulations. The EPA has the authority, under the CAA, to modify the formulation of the refined transportation fuel products we manufacture, in order to limit the emissions associated with their final use. In 2007, the EPA issued final Mobile Source Air Toxic II rules for gasoline formulation that required the reduction of annual average benzene content by July 1, 2012. We have purchased credits in the past to comply with these content requirements for two of our refineries. Although credits have been readily available, there can be no assurance that such credits will continue to be available for purchase at reasonable prices, or at all, and we could have to implement capital projects in the future to reduce benzene levels. In March 2014, the EPA issued final Tier 3 gasoline rules that require a reduction in annual average gasoline sulfur content from 30 ppm to 10 ppm by January 1, 2017 for "large refineries" and retains the current maximum per-gallon sulfur content limit of 80 ppm. In April 2016, the EPA finalized a change to the Tier 3 standard, requiring small volume refineries that increase their annual average crude processing rate above 75,000 bpd to meet the Tier 3 sulfur limits 30 months from that "disqualifying" date. Under the final rules, all of our refineries are considered "small refineries" and are exempt until January 1, 2020. We anticipate that our refineries will meet these new limits when they become effective and that capital spending at our refineries to achieve compliance by the effective date were $12.0 million through 2019. We do not anticipate that this rule change will affect our refineries. Our operations are also subject to the CWA, the OPA-90 and comparable state and local requirements. The CWA, and similar laws, prohibit any discharge into surface waters, ground waters, injection wells and publicly-owned treatment works, except as allowed by pre-treatment permits and NPDES permits issued by federal, state and local governmental agencies. The OPA-90 prohibits the discharge of oil into "Waters of the U.S." and requires that affected facilities have plans in place to respond to spills and other discharges. The CWA also regulates filling or discharges to wetlands and other "Waters of the U.S." In 2015, the EPA, in conjunction with the Army Corps of Engineers, issued a final rule expanding the definition of "Waters of the U.S." The rule, which was subject to litigation and judicial stays, was repealed in December 2019 and the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers have published a proposed rule containing an alternative definition of "Waters of the U.S." that is intended to increase predictability and consistency and generally adopts a narrower definition than the 2015 rule. However, legal challenges continue and the ultimate resolution is uncertain at this time. To the extent a final rule expands the scope of the CWA's jurisdiction, we could face increased operating costs or other impediments that could alter the way we conduct our business, which could in turn have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We are subject to regulation by the DOT and various state agencies in connection with our pipeline, trucking and rail transportation operations. These regulatory authorities exercise broad powers, governing activities such as the authorization to operate hazardous materials pipelines and engage in motor carrier operations. There are additional regulations specifically relating to the transportation industry, including integrity management of pipelines, testing and specification of equipment, product handling and labeling requirements and personnel qualifications. The transportation industry is subject to possible regulatory and legislative changes that may affect the economics of our business by requiring changes in operating practices or pipeline construction or by changing the demand for common or contract carrier services or the cost of providing trucking services. Possible changes include, among other things, increasingly stringent environmental regulations, increased frequency and stringency for testing and repairing pipelines, replacement of older pipelines, changes in the hours of service regulations that govern the amount of time a driver may drive in any specific period, on-board black box recorder devices or limits on vehicle weight and size and properties of the materials that can be shipped. Required changes to the specifications governing rail cars carrying crude oil will eliminate the most commonly used tank cars or require that such cars be upgraded. In January 2017, PHMSA announced they were considering limits on the volatility of crude oil that could be shipped by rail and other modes of transportation. These rules could limit the availability of tank cars to transport crude to our refineries and increase the cost of crude oil transported by rail or truck. In addition to the substantial remediation costs that could be caused by leaks or spills from our pipelines, regulators could prohibit our use of affected portions of the pipeline for extended periods, thereby interrupting the delivery of crude oil to, or the distribution of refined products from, our refineries. In addition, the DOT has issued guidelines with respect to securing regulated facilities such as our bulk terminals against terrorist attack. We have instituted security measures and procedures in accordance with such guidelines to enhance the protection of certain of our facilities. We cannot provide any assurance that these security measures would fully protect our facilities from an attack. Our operations are subject to various laws and regulations relating to occupational health and safety and process safety administered by OSHA, the EPA and various state equivalent agencies. We maintain safety, training, design standards, mechanical integrity and maintenance programs as part of our ongoing efforts to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations and to protect the safety of our workers and the public. More stringent laws or regulations or adverse changes in the interpretation of existing laws or regulations by government agencies could have an adverse effect on our financial position and the results of our operations and could require substantial expenditures for the installation and operation of systems and equipment. Health and safety legislation and regulations change frequently. We cannot predict what additional health and safety legislation or regulations will be enacted or become effective in the future or how existing or future laws or regulations will be administered or interpreted with respect to our operations. Compliance with applicable health and safety laws and regulations has required, and continues to require, substantial expenditures. Future process safety rules could also mandate changes to the way we operate, the processes and chemicals we use and the materials from which our process units are constructed. Such regulations could have a significant negative effect on our operations and profitability. For example, in response to Executive Order 13650, Improving Chemical Facility Safety and Security, OSHA announced it intends to propose comprehensive changes to the process safety requirements, although they have not yet formally proposed any revisions. In January 2017, the EPA finalized changes to process safety requirements in its Risk Management Program rules that require evaluation of safer alternatives and technologies, expanded routine audits, independent third-party audits following certain process safety events and increased sharing of information with the public and emergency response organizations. In January 2017, OSHA announced changes to its National Emphasis Program, and specifically identified oil refineries as facilities for increased inspections. The changes also instruct inspectors to use data gathered from EPA Risk Management Plan inspections to identify refiners for additional Process Safety Management inspections. Environmental regulations are becoming more stringent, and new environmental and safety laws and regulations are continuously being enacted or proposed. Compliance with any future legislation or regulation of our produced fuels, including renewable fuel or carbon content; GHG emissions; sulfur, benzene or other toxic content; vapor pressure; octane; or other fuel characteristics, may result in increased capital and operating costs and may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions or results of operations. While it is impractical to predict the impact that potential regulatory and activist activity may have, such future activity may result in increased costs to operate and maintain our facilities, as well as increased capital outlays to improve our facilities. Such future activity could also adversely affect our ability to expand production, result in damaging publicity about us, or reduce demand for our products. Our need to incur costs associated with complying with any resulting new legal or regulatory requirements that are substantial and not adequately provided for, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Our operating responsibility for bulk product terminals and refined product pipelines includes responsibility to ensure the quality and purity of the products loaded at our loading racks. If our quality control measures were to fail, we may have contaminated or off-specification products in pipelines and storage tanks or off-specification product could be sent to public gasoline stations. These types of incidents could result in product liability claims from our customers, as well as negative publicity. Product liability is a significant commercial risk. Substantial damage awards have been made in certain jurisdictions against manufacturers and resellers based upon claims for injuries caused by the use of or exposure to various products. There can be no assurance that product liability claims against us would not have a material adverse effect on our business or results of operations or our ability to maintain existing customers or retain new customers. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the "Dodd-Frank Act") is comprehensive financial reform legislation that, among other things, establishes comprehensive federal oversight and regulation of over-the-counter derivatives and many of the entities that participate in that market. Although the Dodd-Frank Act was enacted on July 21, 2010, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ("CFTC") and the SEC, along with certain other regulators, must promulgate final rules and regulations to implement many of the Dodd-Frank Act's provisions relating to over-the-counter derivatives. While some of these rules have been finalized, others have not; and, as a result, the final form and timing of the implementation of the new regulatory regime affecting commodity derivatives remains uncertain.

Economic slowdowns may have serious negative consequences for our business and operating results, because our performance is subject to domestic economic conditions and their impact on levels of consumer spending. Some of the factors affecting consumer spending include general economic conditions, unemployment, consumer debt, reductions in net worth based on declines in equity markets and residential real estate values, adverse developments in mortgage markets, taxation, energy prices, interest rates, consumer confidence and other macroeconomic factors. Political instability and global health crises, such as the recent outbreak of the novel coronavirus, can also impact the global economy and decrease worldwide demand for oil and refined products. During a period of economic weakness or uncertainty, current or potential customers may travel less, reduce or defer purchases, go out of business or have insufficient funds to buy or pay for our products and services. Moreover, a financial market crisis may have a material adverse impact on financial institutions and limit access to capital and credit. This could, among other things, make it more difficult for us to obtain (or increase our cost of obtaining) capital and financing for our operations. Our access to additional capital may not be available on terms acceptable to us or at all. Also, because all of our operating refineries are located in the Gulf Coast Region, we primarily market our refined products in a relatively limited geographic area. As a result, we are more susceptible to regional economic conditions compared to our more geographically diversified competitors, and any unforeseen events or circumstances that affect the Gulf Coast Region could also materially and adversely affect our revenues and cash flows. The primary factors include, among other things, changes in the economy, weather conditions, demographics and population, increased supply of refined products from competitors and reductions in the supply of crude oil or other feedstocks. In the event of a shift in the supply/demand balance in the Gulf Coast Region due to changes in the local economy, an increase in aggregate refining capacity or other reasons, resulting in supply exceeding the demand in the region, our refineries may have to deliver refined products to more customers outside of the Gulf Coast Region and thus incur considerably higher transportation costs, resulting in lower refining margins, if any. Additionally, general economic conditions in West Texas are highly dependent upon the price of crude oil. When crude oil prices exceed certain dollar per barrel thresholds, demand for people and equipment to support drilling and completion activities for the production of crude oil is robust, which supports overall economic health of the region. If crude oil prices fall below certain dollar per barrel thresholds, economic activity in the region may slow down, which could have a material adverse impact on the profitability of our business in West Texas.

We and our joint ventures have made and are continuing to make significant investments in infrastructure to gather crude oil from the Permian Basin in West Texas. Similar investments have been made and additional investments may be made in the future by us, our competitors or by new entrants to the markets we serve. The success of these and similar projects largely relies on the realization of anticipated market demand and growth in production in the Permian Basin. These projects typically require significant development periods, during which time demand for such infrastructure may change, production in the Permian Basin may decrease, or additional investments by competitors may be made. Lower production in the Permian Basin, or further investments by us or others in new pipelines, storage or dock capacity could result in capacity that exceeds demand, which could reduce the utilization of our gathering system and midstream assets and the related services or the prices we are able to charge for those services. There are several projects currently underway that are expected to increase pipeline capacity from the Permian Basin beyond current production. This excess capacity could decrease the differential between the Permian and end markets, resulting in a highly competitive environment for transportation services and reducing the rates for those services. When infrastructure investments in the markets we serve result in capacity that exceeds the demand in those markets, our facilities or investments could be underutilized, and rates could be unfavorably impacted, which could materially adversely affect our results of operations, financial position or cash flows, as well as our ability to pay cash distributions.

We rely on information technology across our operations, including the control of our refinery processes, monitoring the movement of petroleum through our pipelines and terminals, the point of sale processing at our retail sites and various other processes and transactions. We utilize information technology systems and controls throughout our operations to capture accounting, technical and regulatory data for subsequent archiving, analysis and reporting. Disruption, failure, or cyber security breaches affecting or targeting our computer and telecommunications, our infrastructure, or the infrastructure of our cloud-based IT service providers may materially impact our business and operations. An undetected failure of these systems, because of power loss, unsuccessful transition to upgraded or replacement systems, unauthorized access or other cyber breach or attack could result in disruption to our business operations, access to or disclosure or loss of data and/or proprietary information, personal injuries and environmental damage, which could have an adverse effect on our business, reputation, and effectiveness. We could also be subject to resulting investigation and remediation costs as well as regulatory enforcement of private litigation and related costs, which could have a material adverse impact on our cash flow and results of operations. We rely on commercially available systems, software, tools and monitoring to provide security for processing, transmission and storage of confidential customer information, such as payment card and personal credit information. In addition, the systems currently used for transmission and approval of payment card transactions, and the technology utilized in payment cards themselves, may put certain payment card data at risk. These standards for determining the required controls applicable to these systems are mandated by credit card issuers and administered by the Payment Card Industry Security Standards Counsel and not by us. The regulatory environment surrounding information security and privacy is increasingly demanding, with the frequent imposition of new and constantly changing requirements. We have taken the necessary steps to comply with the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI-DSS) at all of our locations. However, compliance with these requirements may result in cost increases due to necessary systems changes and the development of new administrative processes. In recent years, several retailers have experienced data breaches, resulting in the exposure of sensitive customer data, including payment card information. A breach could also originate from, or compromise, our customers' and vendors' or other third-party networks outside of our control. Any compromise or breach of our information and payment technology systems could cause interruptions in our operations, damage our reputation, reduce our customers' willingness to visit our sites and conduct business with them, or expose us to litigation from customers or sanctions for violations of the PCI-DSS. In addition, a compromise of our internal data network at any of our refining or terminal locations may have disruptive impacts similar to that of our retail operations. These disruptions could range from inconvenience in accessing business information to a disruption in our refining operations. Despite our security measures, we experience attempts by external parties to penetrate and attack our networks and systems. Although such attempts to date have not, to our knowledge, resulted in any material breaches, disruptions, or loss of business-critical information, our systems and procedures for protecting against such attacks and mitigating such risks may prove to be insufficient in the future and such attacks could have an adverse impact on our business and operations, including damage to our reputation and competitiveness, remediation costs, litigation or regulatory actions. In addition, as technologies evolve, and cyber-attacks become more sophisticated, we may incur significant costs to upgrade or enhance our security measures to protect against such attacks and we may face difficulties in fully anticipating or implementing adequate preventive measures or mitigating potential harm. We could also be liable under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, subject to regulatory penalties, experience damage to our reputation or a loss of consumer confidence, or incur additional costs for remediation and modification or enhancement of our information systems to prevent future occurrences, all of which could adversely affect our reputation, business, operations or financial results.