MTBE

Chevron and many other companies in the petroleum industry have used methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) as a gasoline additive. In October 2008, 59 cases were settled in which the company was a party and which related to the use of MTBE in certain oxygenated gasolines and the alleged seepage of MTBE into groundwater. The terms of this agreement are confidential and not material to the company's results of operations, liquidity or financial position. Chevron is a party to 37 other pending lawsuits and claims, the majority of which involve numerous other petroleum marketers and refiners. Resolution of these lawsuits and claims may ultimately require the company to correct or ameliorate the alleged effects on the environment of prior release of MTBE by the company or other parties. Additional lawsuits and claims related to the use of MTBE, including personal-injury claims, may be filed in the future. The settlement of the 59 lawsuits did not set any precedents related to standards of liability to be used to judge the merits of the claims, corrective measures required or monetary damages to be assessed for the remaining lawsuits and claims or future lawsuits and claims. As a result, the company's ultimate exposure related to pending lawsuits and claims is not currently determinable, but could be material to net income in any one period. The company no longer uses MTBE in the manufacture of gasoline in the United States.

RFG Patent

Fourteen purported class actions were brought by consumers who purchased reformulated gasoline (RFG) from January 1995 through August 2005, alleging that Unocal misled the California Air Resources Board into adopting standards for composition of RFG that overlapped with Unocal's undisclosed and pending patents. The parties agreed to a settlement that calls for, among other things, Unocal to pay $48 million and for the establishment of a cy pres fund to administer payout of the award. The court approved the final settlement in November 2008.

Ecuador

Chevron is a defendant in a civil lawsuit before the Superior Court of Nueva Loja in Lago Agrio, Ecuador, brought in May 2003 by plaintiffs who claim to be representatives of certain residents of an area where an oil production consortium formerly had operations. The lawsuit alleges damage to the environment from the oil exploration and production operations, and seeks unspecified damages to fund environmental remediation and restoration of the alleged environmental harm, plus a health monitoring program. Until 1992, Texaco Petroleum Company (Texpet), a subsidiary of Texaco Inc., was a minority member of this consortium with Petroecuador, the Ecuadorian state-owned oil company, as the majority partner; since 1990, the operations have been conducted solely by Petroecuador. At the conclusion of the consortium and following an independent third-party environmental audit of the concession area, Texpet entered into a formal agreement with the Republic of Ecuador and Petroecuador for Texpet to remediate specific sites assigned by the government in proportion to Texpet's ownership share of the consortium. Pursuant to that agreement, Texpet conducted a three-year remediation program at a cost of $40 million. After certifying that the sites were properly remediated, the government granted Texpet and all related corporate entities a full release from any and all environmental liability arising from the consortium operations.

Based on the history described above, Chevron believes that this lawsuit lacks legal or factual merit. As to matters of law, the company believes first, that the court lacks jurisdiction over Chevron; second, that the law under which plaintiffs bring the action, enacted in 1999, cannot be applied retroactively to Chevron; third, that the claims are barred by the statute of limitations in Ecuador; and, fourth, that the lawsuit is also barred by the releases from liability previously given to Texpet by the Republic of Ecuador and Petroecuador. With regard to the facts, the company believes that the evidence confirms that Texpet's remediation was properly conducted and that the remaining environmental damage reflects Petroecuador's failure to timely fulfill its legal obligations and Petroecuador's further conduct since assuming full control over the operations.

In April 2008, a mining engineer appointed by the court to identify and determine the cause of environmental damage, and to specify steps needed to remediate it, issued a report recommending that the court assess $8 billion, which would, according to the engineer, provide financial compensation for purported damages, including wrongful death claims, and pay for, among other items, environmental remediation, health care systems, and additional infrastructure for Petroecuador. The engineer's report also asserted that an additional $8.3 billion could be assessed against Chevron for unjust enrichment. The engineer's report is not binding on the court. Chevron also believes that the engineer's work was performed and his report prepared in a manner contrary to law and in violation of the court's orders. Chevron submitted a rebuttal to the report in which it asked the court to strike the report in its entirety. In November 2008, the engineer revised the report and, without additional evidence, recommended an increase in the financial compensation for purported damages to a total of $18.9 billion and an increase in the assessment for purported unjust enrichment to a total of $8.4 billion. Chevron submitted a rebuttal to the revised report, and Chevron will continue a vigorous defense of any attempted imposition of liability.

Management does not believe an estimate of a reasonably possible loss (or a range of loss) can be made in this case. Due to the defects associated with the engineer's report, management does not believe the report itself has any utility in calculating a reasonably possible loss (or a range of loss). Moreover, the highly uncertain legal environment surrounding the case provides no basis for management to estimate a reasonably possible loss (or a range of loss).

Environmental

The company is subject to loss contingencies pursuant to environmental laws and regulations that in the future may require the company to take action to correct or ameliorate the effects on the environment of prior release of chemicals or petroleum substances, including MTBE, by the company or other parties. Such contingencies may exist for various sites, including, but not limited to, federal Superfund sites and analogous sites under state laws, refineries, crude oil fields, service stations, terminals, land development areas, and mining operations, whether operating, closed or divested. These future costs are not fully determinable due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible contamination, the unknown timing and extent of the corrective actions that may be required, the determination of the company's liability in proportion to other responsible parties, and the extent to which such costs are recoverable from third parties.

Year-End Environmental Remediation Reserves
Year-End Environmental Remediation Reserves

Although the company has provided for known environmental obligations that are probable and reasonably estimable, the amount of additional future costs may be material to results of operations in the period in which they are recognized. The company does not expect these costs will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position or liquidity. Also, the company does not believe its obligations to make such expenditures have had, or will have, any significant impact on the company's competitive position relative to other U.S. or international petroleum or chemical companies.

The following table displays the annual changes to the company's before-tax environmental remediation reserves, including those for federal Superfund sites and analogous sites under state laws.

Millions of dollars 2008 2007 2006
Balance at January 1 $1,539 $1,441 $1,469
Net Additions 784 562 366
Expenditures (505) (464) (394)
Balance at December 31 $1,818 $1,539 $1,441

Included in the $1,818 million year-end 2008 reserve balance were remediation activities of 248 sites for which the company had been identified as a potentially responsible party or otherwise involved in the remediation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or other regulatory agencies under the provisions of the federal Superfund law or analogous state laws. The company's remediation reserve for these sites at year-end 2008 was $120 million. The federal Superfund law and analogous state laws provide for joint and several liability for all responsible parties. Any future actions by the EPA or other regulatory agencies to require Chevron to assume other potentially responsible parties' costs at designated hazardous waste sites are not expected to have a material effect on the company's consolidated financial position or liquidity.

Of the remaining year-end 2008 environmental reserves balance of $1,698 million, $968 million related to current and former sites for the company's U.S. downstream operations, including refineries and other plants, marketing locations (i.e., service stations and terminals), and pipelines. The remaining $730 million was associated with various sites in international downstream ($117 million), upstream ($390 million), chemicals ($154 million) and other ($69 million). Liabilities at all sites, whether operating, closed or divested, were primarily associated with the company's plans and activities to remediate soil or groundwater contamination or both. These and other activities include one or more of the following: site assessment; soil excavation; offsite disposal of contaminants; onsite containment, remediation and/or extraction of petroleum hydrocarbon liquid and vapor from soil; groundwater extraction and treatment; and monitoring of the natural attenuation of the contaminants.

The company manages environmental liabilities under specific sets of regulatory requirements, which in the United States include the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and various state or local regulations. No single remediation site at year-end 2008 had a recorded liability that was material to the company's financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

It is likely that the company will continue to incur additional liabilities, beyond those recorded, for environmental remediation relating to past operations. These future costs are not fully determinable due to such factors as the unknown magnitude of possible contamination, the unknown timing and extent of the corrective actions that may be required, the determination of the company's liability in proportion to other responsible parties, and the extent to which such costs are recoverable from third parties.

The company accounts for asset retirement obligations in accordance with FASB Statement No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations (FAS 143). Under FAS 143, the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation is recorded when there is a legal obligation associated with the retirement of long-lived assets and the liability can be reasonably estimated. The liability balance of approximately $9.4 billion for asset retirement obligations at year-end 2008 related primarily to upstream properties.

For the company's other ongoing operating assets, such as refineries and chemicals facilities, no provisions are made for exit or cleanup costs that may be required when such assets reach the end of their useful lives unless a decision to sell or otherwise abandon the facility has been made, as the indeterminate settlement dates for the asset retirements prevent estimation of the fair value of the asset retirement obligation.

Refer also to Note 24, related to FAS 143 and the company's adoption in 2005 of FASB Interpretation No. (FIN) 47, Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations — An Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 143 (FIN 47), and the discussion of "Environmental Matters" below.

Income Taxes

The company calculates its income tax expense and liabilities quarterly. These liabilities generally are subject to audit and are not finalized with the individual taxing authorities until several years after the end of the annual period for which income taxes have been calculated. Refer to Note 16 for a discussion of the periods for which tax returns have been audited for the company's major tax jurisdictions and a discussion for all tax jurisdictions of the differences between the amount of tax benefits recognized in the financial statements and the amount taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The company does not expect that settlement of income tax liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions will have a material effect on its results of operations, consolidated financial position or liquidity.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, which contained a number of energy and tax-related provisions, known as the Energy Improvement and Extension Act of 2008 (the Act), was signed into U.S. law in October 2008. The Act includes two provisions that affect Chevron's tax liability, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2008. The Act freezes at 6 percent the domestic manufacturer's deduction on income from U.S. oil and gas operations that was scheduled to increase to 9 percent in 2010. Effective in 2009, the Act expands the current foreign tax credit (FTC) limitation for Foreign Oil and Gas Extraction Income to also include foreign downstream income, known as Foreign Oil Related Income. This change is expected to impact Chevron's utilization of FTCs.

Suspended Wells

The company suspends the costs of exploratory wells pending a final determination of the commercial potential of the related crude oil and natural gas fields. The ultimate disposition of these well costs is dependent on the results of future drilling activity or development decisions or both. At December 31, 2008, the company had approximately $2.1 billion of suspended exploratory wells included in properties, plant and equipment, an increase of $458 million from 2007. The 2007 balance reflected an increase of $421 million from 2006.

The future trend of the company's exploration expenses can be affected by amounts associated with well write-offs, including wells that had been previously suspended pending determination as to whether the well had found reserves that could be classified as proved. The effect on exploration expenses in future periods of the $2.1 billion of suspended wells at year-end 2008 is uncertain pending future activities, including normal project evaluation and additional drilling.

Refer to Note 20 for additional discussion of suspended wells.

Equity Redetermination

For oil and gas producing operations, ownership agreements may provide for periodic reassessments of equity interests in estimated crude oil and natural gas reserves. These activities, individually or together, may result in gains or losses that could be material to earnings in any given period. One such equity redetermination process has been under way since 1996 for Chevron's interests in four producing zones at the Naval Petroleum Reserve at Elk Hills, California, for the time when the remaining interests in these zones were owned by the U.S. Department of Energy. A wide range remains for a possible net settlement amount for the four zones. For this range of settlement, Chevron estimates its maximum possible net before-tax liability at approximately $200 million, and the possible maximum net amount that could be owed to Chevron is estimated at about $150 million. The timing of the settlement and the exact amount within this range of estimates are uncertain.

Other Contingencies

Chevron receives claims from and submits claims to customers; trading partners; U.S. federal, state and local regulatory bodies; governments; contractors; insurers; and suppliers. The amounts of these claims, individually and in the aggregate, may be significant and take lengthy periods to resolve.

The company and its affiliates also continue to review and analyze their operations and may close, abandon, sell, exchange, acquire or restructure assets to achieve operational or strategic benefits and to improve competitiveness and profitability. These activities, individually or together, may result in gains or losses in future periods.