Good morning, welcome to the MPLX fourth quarter 2022 earnings conference call. The slides that accompany this call can be found on our website at mplx.com under the Investor tab. Joining me on the call today are Mike Hennigan, Chairman and CEO, John Quaid, CFO, and other members of the executive team. We invite you to read the safe harbor statements and non-GAAP disclaimer on slide two. It's a reminder that we will be making forward-looking statements during the call and during the question-and-answer session that follows. Actual results may differ materially from what we expect today. Factors that could cause actual results to differ are included there, as well as in our filings with the SEC. With that, I'll turn the call over to Mike. Thanks, Christina. Good morning. Thank you for joining our call. First off, I want to recognize a new director on the MPLX board. In November, Christie Breves, who recently served as CFO for U.S. Steel, was appointed as a new independent director. 2022 was a strong year as we successfully executed on all of our strategic priorities. Full year adjusted EBITDA was $5.8 billion and DCF was $5 billion. Strong operational performance and customer demand drove record annual pipelining throughputs and increasing gathering, processing, and fractionation throughputs with each quarter of the year. We also realized EBITDA growth from recent capital investments and remained focused on cost management. Overall, our efforts resulted in a 4% year-over-year adjusted EBITDA and DCF growth. In line with our commitment to return capital for the full year, MPLX returned over $3.5 billion of capital back to unit holders through our distribution and unit repurchases. We also made progress towards our goal of leading in sustainable energy through our methane reduction program and with the receipt of EPA's ENERGY STAR award for energy efficiency improvements at several terminals. Today, we announced our capital expenditure outlook for 2023 of $950 million. Our plan includes approximately $800 million of growth capital and $150 million of maintenance capital. Our growth capital plan is anchored in the Marcellus, Permian, and Bakken basins. In addition to new gas processing plants in the Marcellus and Permian, the remainder of our capital plan is mostly focused on other investments targeted at expansion or debottlenecking of existing assets to meet customer demand. While our capital outlook is primarily focused on our current L&S and G&P footprint, we will continue to evaluate low carbon opportunities where we can leverage technologies that are complementary with our asset footprint and expertise. Moving to our capital allocation framework. First, maintenance capital. We remain steadfast in our commitment to safely operate our assets, protect the health and safety of our employees, and support the communities in which we operate. Second, we remain focused on delivering a secure distribution. Third, after these commitments are met, we will invest to grow while maintaining strict capital discipline. Fourth, we also intend to return excess capital to unit holders. As I've said in the past, we believe this is both a return on and a return of capital business. Last November, based on the strength and growth of our cash flows, we increased our distribution by 10% to an annual rate of $3.10 per unit, while maintaining a strong distribution coverage ratio of 1.6 times. In 2023, we would expect to be similarly focused on our distribution as our primary tool to return capital to unit holders. We are optimistic about our opportunities in 2023 and remain focused on executing the strategic priorities of strict capital discipline, fostering a low-cost culture, optimizing our asset portfolio, which are foundational to the growth of MPLX's cash flows. Let me turn the call over to John to discuss our operational and financial results for the quarter. Thanks, Mike. Slide six outlines the fourth quarter operational and financial performance highlights for our logistics and storage segment. L&S segment adjusted EBITDA increased $45 million when compared to fourth quarter 2021. The increased results were primarily driven by higher pipeline tariffs and contributions from pipeline equity affiliates, partially offset by higher maintenance project-related expenses in the quarter. Pipeline volumes were flat year-over-year, primarily due to the impacts associated with Marathon's refinery turnarounds in both quarters. Terminal volumes were up 4%. Moving to our gathering and processing segment on slide seven, G&P segment adjusted EBITDA decreased $36 million compared to fourth quarter 2021 as the benefits of higher volumes were more than offset by lower natural gas liquids prices, which averaged $0.78 per gallon for the quarter as compared to $1.05 in the fourth quarter of 2021. In total for the quarter, gathered volumes were up 14% year-over-year due to increased production in the Utica and our Southwest region, which includes our Permian operations. Processing volumes were up 1% year-over-year, primarily from higher volumes in the Southwest, driven by increased customer demand and our investments in processing capacity in the Permian. In the Marcellus, while gathering and processing volumes were slightly lower year-over-year, we did see sequential increases for gathering, processing, and fractionation volumes in the basin. These activity levels were in line with our expectations for increased producer activity in the back half of the year. Moving to our fourth quarter financial highlights on slide eight. Total adjusted EBITDA of $1.5 billion was roughly flat versus the same period in the prior year, while distributable cash flow of $1.3 billion increased 5%. Results in the quarter were impacted by a $23 million special compensation award provided to our employees in recognition of their efforts. We do not anticipate that this expense will structurally impact future costs. In the fourth quarter, we returned $975 million to unit holders through approximately $800 million in distributions and $175 million of repurchases of common units held by the public. MPLX ended the year with nearly $850 million remaining available under its unit repurchase authorizations. Last week, MPLX declared a fourth quarter distribution of $0.775 per unit, resulting in a distribution coverage ratio of 1.6 times for the fourth quarter. MPLX ended the year with total debt of around $20 billion and a debt to EBITDA ratio of 3.5 times, comfortably below our target of approximately four times. While our absolute level of debt has remained relatively constant, our leverage has decreased due to the growth in our business. At these leverage levels, we do not see the need to reduce our absolute level of debt. Earlier today, we announced our intent to redeem at par value the $600 million of outstanding Series B preferred units in mid-February. Subject to market conditions, we expect to refinance these preferred units into long-term debt. In closing, we expect our solid operating performance and growth of our cash flows will enable us to continue to invest in and grow the business while also supporting the return of capital to MPLX unit holders. Now let me turn the call back over to Christina. Thanks, John. As we open the call for questions, we ask that you limit yourself to one question plus a follow-up. We may re-prompt for additional questions as time permits. With that, Sheila, we're ready for questions today. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you have a question, please press star then one on your touch tone phone. If you wish to be removed from the queue, please press star then two. If you are using a speakerphone, you may need to pick up the handset first before pressing the numbers. Once again, if you have a question, please press star then one on your touch tone phone. Our first question will come from Brian Reynolds with UBS. Your line is open. Hi, good morning, everyone. Perhaps to start off on capital allocation, we saw, you know, continued commitments, unit repurchases and the redemption announcement on the Preferreds. With the Preferred redemption announcement and some of the debt maturities that are coming up in 2023 and 2024, was just curious if you could opine and discuss on how you expect any change in return of cash via, you know, special distribution or buybacks going forward, like we've seen in the past, just given, you know, the upcoming debt maturities and the Prep that you expect to refinance as well. Thanks. Great. Hey, Brian. Good morning. Thanks for the question. We'll try and pick that apart into a couple pieces. First, as I said in my comments, and just to reiterate, right, we provided notice to the Series B holders that we're going to redeem those in February. As you note, we also have $1 billion of senior notes maturing in July. Given our leverage and where we are and as we've done in the past, we'll likely look to refinance both of those into long-term debt subject to market conditions. So that's the first piece on the Bs and the series notes, senior notes, excuse me. Thinking about return of capital, you know, as you saw us last year, you know, we've gotten lots of feedback from investors. Some prefer distribution, some prefer unit repurchases. We've tried to think about our structure around that framework. As you more recently, it seems like that's been tilted towards the distribution. As Mike commented and as you know, we increased the distribution 10% here, effective with the third quarter distribution. Still really strong coverage at 1.6 times, a strong balance sheet at 3.5 times leverage. I think that'll be an area we'll continue to focus on in 2023. And then we'll also, I think, continue to be opportunistic, perhaps more opportunistic around unit repurchases, right? If you look back to when we began the program, we've done a little over $1 billion at about $29 a unit. In the fourth quarter, we did, what, about $176 million at, I think, $31.75, somewhere in that ballpark. I think it'll continue to be a part of our framework, but perhaps a little more opportunistic. Mike, you wanna add something as well? Yeah, Brian, let me just add a little bit to it. Just on a simple basis, you know, we're generating about $6 billion of EBITDA, about $5 billion of distributable cash flow after that. We've been spending roughly around $1 billion. We have about $4 billion of free cash flow and distributing $3 billion through our base distribution, which has been leaving about $1 billion of cash after all that. I think the key is we have a lot of flexibility, and as John said, we'll try and be opportunistic on the buyback side. We'll try and continue to show the market that we continue to grow this partnership. You'll see us continue to increase distributions over time. We'll talk about that at some point. I think we're in a real good position from a financial standpoint, strong balance sheet, excess cash flow, looking for opportunities to deploy, but staying strict on returns. Overall, hopefully that's, you know, where the market wants us to be. Great. Thanks. Really appreciate all that extra color. Maybe just to quickly touch on the operational side of the house, MPC refinery run setting into 2023 seemed to be faring much better than peers. I'm curious if management could just opine on, you know, expectations for 2023 product volumes versus 2022, and if you're seeing any nuances by products that could perhaps support resiliency in product volumes in 2023 after just seeing really strong refinery runs last year. Thanks. Yeah, it's a good question, Brian. I'm gonna let Shawn give you a little more color. I will say at the MPC side of the house, I mean, we had a really strong year. You know, safe, reliable operations is key to our business on that side. We ran 96% utilization. You know, if you followed some of the activity during the year, we had deferred some turnaround activity to the back half of the year. Overall, it was a very strong utilization. I'll let Shawn comment a little bit on the LNS side. Hey, Brian, this is Shawn. Hey, you know, as Mike said, we had a strong year in 2022. We had, you know, several records across our assets on the terminal pipeline side. In 2023, we're continuing to see another strong year. We're, you know, we'll be matching, you know, the refinery rates that, you know, MPC and others have us. Then also we're, you know, excited about the growth out of the Permian and some of the pipelines coming out of the Permian. Again, we're just like 2022, we're excited to see again, another solid year in 2023 as far as volumes and growth. Great. I'll leave it there. Enjoy the rest of your day. Thanks. Thanks, Brian. Thanks, Brian. Thank you. Our next question will come from John Mackay with Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Hey, good morning, everyone. Thanks for the time. Maybe I'll pick up on the CapEx guide. You touched on some of the moving pieces, but I'm just curious if you could break it down a little more for us just in terms of, you know, and it can be loose, I suppose, but just how much of the guide is going towards these kind of named projects you've talked about, like the next Permian processing plants, versus going to the smaller bucket of one-offs versus, I guess, what we're calling kind of the emerging opportunities on the transition side. Any sort of breakdown there or kind of trend maybe even year-over-year would be interesting. Thank you. Yeah. John, good morning. I'll start, and then I'll let John add some color. In general, most of the capital program is targeted at what we'll call the smaller expansion de-bottlenecking projects. I know people like to see flashy big projects, but we actually get the best returns as producers grow, whether it's in the GMP side or in the LNS side of the business. As production increases, we have a pretty big system that we can continue to bolt on to, you know, add to, expand a little bit here and there. It's where we get our higher return projects. We're still gonna add to the platform. As you mentioned, we got a couple processing plants coming on, which will continue to increase our base, which then allows us to add some gathering to support that, et cetera. The real story behind our growth, and if you step back, I mean, we are pretty large, as I just mentioned, about $6 billion of EBITDA. You know, our base plan is we're gonna have mid-single digit growth in our system. You know, have good discipline so that we get high return projects, continue to add EBITDA, and at the end of the day, you know, look for those other opportunities like you mentioned in low carbon. There hasn't been a lot to date. There's been a lot of rhetoric around it. There's a lot of talk about different things. We're obviously involved in projects that are looking at CCUS. We're involved in a lot of stuff that's, you know, down the road, but not gonna be hitting, you know, the 2023 earnings profile in a strong way yet. I am a believer over time there are gonna be more opportunities for us there. They'll just have to develop as, you know, as technology advances, et cetera. In the meantime, you know, our concentration, we use the term strict capital discipline. You know, it's a nice way of saying we wanna make sure we get good high returns that are really gonna hit the bottom line every year consistently. You know, we've continued to grow this partnership year after year, and obviously a big, you know, outcome of that is returning a lot of capital to our investors. Hey, John, it's Sean. Just a couple things to add to Mike's comments. I mean, one is an example of kind of an expansion in debottleneck. The other item we're looking at in the Marcellus is we've got some space on our existing processing plants. We've got an opportunity to look at those gathering systems and invest some monies and fill up some space on plants we have sitting there and ready to go. Also remember that there's a number of those projects that are listed on the slide there, mainly around our Permian opportunities, where those projects, given shipper support, et cetera, we've been financing those at the JV level. There's a good amount of capital that's gonna drive EBITDA growth that's not in our capital outlook just because of, you know, that's getting financed down at the joint venture. Just wanted to highlight that as well. All right. That's helpful. Appreciate all the thoughts. Maybe, maybe turning to a quarter, two things. John, I think you mentioned some higher expenses maybe on the LNS side in the quarter, and then you also mentioned the $23 million special comp award. I mean, is there any kind of total number there that you might be able to give us for the quarter that, you know, maybe won't be there in a run rate if we're trying to look at 2023 going forward? Is it as simple as kind of adding back $23 million or maybe $25 million, and that's kind of a more representative run rate of the base business? Yeah. Yeah. John, thanks for the question. A couple of pieces there. I mean, the special compensation award by its kind of term we're using there, that's a one-time item we decided to do here in the quarter, and that was the expense for the entire item. I don't know that we anticipate having another award in the first quarter, right? That was Really our effort to look at our employees, kind of non-executive level employees efforts in achieving our 2022 results and wanting to recognize that. That's a little unique. The other piece gets around, our frequent discussion around kind of project maintenance, expenses. Certainly, we tend to be a little more back-half loaded. Sometimes that can move with MPC's turnaround schedules, et cetera. That number year-over-year, I think we see being roughly the same amount of expenses as we continue to focus on cost management. It will move, quarter-to-quarter, John, I don't know that today we're gonna provide that number. Just to flag for you, as in the past, first quarter does tend to be our lowest spend quarter around that activity just due to weather and other items. Hopefully that's helpful. That's great. Appreciate it. Yeah. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Our next question comes from Keith Stanley with Wolfe Research. Your line is open. Hi. Good morning. Wanted to start just I know this is a very recent data point, but just any updated commentary you're hearing from producers on planned Marcellus and Utica activity given the very rapid decline in gas prices that we've seen and how that might be impacting your expectations as well. Yeah, Keith, that's a good question. I'm gonna let Greg take that one. Thanks, Keith. You know, really the 2022 prices, whether it be crude NGL or gas, were very supportive of increased drilling activity by producers. This is not just in the Permian Delaware or even the Marcellus, it was across all basins. We've seen increased activity. Increased drilling in 2022 and some completions, and then completions into 2023 mean higher volume outlook for 2023. Certainly, there has been price volatility. You know, we've seen prices over $10 per MMBtu, you know, in the summer, which, you know, at a high, and now we're kind of back to more of a normal level. In the Permian, in places like the Bakken, even the condensate window in the Utica is really crude price-driven, and the drilling is really the crude price, and we see the benefits of associated gas and NGLs that come off of that. Short-term price swings, really, we don't expect right now will impact the volume as much because a lot of that activity was, you know, was set up by drilling activity in 2022. Got it. Thanks. Second question, I just wanted to follow up on the distribution. You had the 10% hike last quarter. Growth in the distribution, I think, was pretty small in the couple of years before that. How should investors think about distribution growth over the next several years for the company? Does it tie in your head to overall growth and cash flows of the business? Do you see some excess cushion and excess cash flow so the distribution could grow potentially faster? Just how are you thinking about that over the next few years? Hey, Keith, it's John. I'll start, and then, I'm sure Mike will have some comments as well. You know, again, as you said, last quarter really driven off our confidence in the strength of our cash flows. We moved to the 10% distribution increase. As I noted, still a really strong coverage ratio of 1.6 times. I think you've highlighted part of it, right? We've continued to grow the partnership. We've been focused on cost. While we may have slowed on the distribution for a few years, we essentially built up our coverage. That was partly, you heard Mike talk about our target of kind of mid-single-digit growth. You know, ultimately, you would see the distribution getting towards that sort of run rate. We probably have built up some capacity here to think about, you know, how we might look at the distribution later this year. I'm just gonna add a little bit of repeat a little bit of what I said earlier. Got to keep in mind, you know, the law of large numbers. You know, we're roughly $6 billion of EBITDA. You know, if we grow that at mid-single digit, that's, you know, $300 million more EBITDA, which would translate to, you know, more financial flexibility for us, whether we increase the base distribution, you know, do buybacks or whatever. You know, the nice thing about our system is, you know, we're large enough that, you know, even mid-single digit growth will add a significant amount of additional cash flow to, you know, a distribution that today is about $3 billion roughly. If you think about the math of, you know, where does that EBITDA translate, it provides flexibility for us to make more moves. To your point, you know, everybody, the space kinda, you know, paused a little bit during COVID. You know, I think one of the things that I hope the market recognized, you know, we still grew earnings, you know, during that year, even though, you know, it was a tough year on the refining side of the house with reduced demand, et cetera. Part of it is to try and recognize where we are financially. Part of it is to try and recognize where our growth potential is. Then, like I said, if you go to the simple math, you can start to kind of look at, you know, where our financial flexibility will be. I keep saying it's a good problem to have. You know, it's a good place to be. You know, we'll try and reward investors in the best way that we can to get an overall total return in the manner that we think is most efficient at the time. You know, we've traditionally said it's an all of the above approach. You know, as John mentioned, you know, we leaned in a little harder on distribution last year, you know, for the point that you made, as well as, you know, what John just made. You know, we got strong coverage. We got continued line of sight for growth. I think we're in a really good position to continue to grow the partnership. Thank you. You're welcome. Our next question will come from Theresa Chen with Barclays. Your line is open. Good morning. Mike, I'd love to get, you know, some of your thoughts on the potential low carbon expansion opportunities and generally growth beyond, you know, what you have in the slate right now. As far as your ability and willingness to invest in the low carbon renewable space, are there hurdles at this point a matter of technology, financial hurdles? Given that MPC has made significant progress in its renewables investments, is there volition down the line to do something together with the C Corp? Yeah, Theresa. You know, at a high level, most of our low carbon activity in the short term is geared at the MPC side of the house. We'll talk a little bit more about that at the 11:00 call. You know, a little less right now on the MPLX side. As I mentioned earlier, you know, we are a believer that technology will continue to advance. You know, one example that everybody's aware of is, you know, gathering carbon and sequestering it. That's a great opportunity on the MPLX side of the house. We're active in several projects, but they're not 2023 projects. You know, they're not gonna impact our earnings profile this year. You know, overall, you know, as you're very aware, on the MPC side of the house, we have a couple of renewable diesel plants. There's gonna be more growth in that area. You get a little more color on the, on the MPC call as far as what's happening on low carbon. I'll just ask you to listen in on that. We'll give a little more detail. Then on the MPLX side, we think things are coming. They're just, you know, not ready for prime time at this time. Theresa, it's John. I might just jump in real quick, just as a reminder, if you think about like the Martinez Renewable Fuels facility project that MPC is doing, those logistics assets around that were and remain MPLX assets. We don't have a lot of investments to move around a different liquid. So to some degree, it maybe extends the life of the assets we have with minimal investments around those facilities. Theresa, it's Mike. One last thing to your question on what's limiting technology or whatever. In a lot of the areas, the returns that we can get on those opportunities are not quite meeting what we would like to implement. I think over time, the technologies will evolve, and that will be an area for us to invest. As we've been talking throughout the call, we have a lot of financial flexibility on this side of the house. John mentioned we're at 3.5 times on the balance sheet. We're generating $1 billion a year of excess cash beyond a growing distribution. We have the financial flexibility. We are ready and able, but we are gonna be strict on returns. Part of what has held us back from some of what I'll call the splashier discussions, that the returns just are not at a level that we think is investable at this point. We think they're gonna get there. It's just a matter of time. Thank you for the thorough response. Agree, John, we definitely look forward to that 2026 recontracting on the Martinez logistics assets. Maybe turning to the Northeast for a second. Following the startup and ramp-up of your deethanizer, would love to get your take on how that facility is doing as it supports feedstock delivery to the Monaca cracker, as well as your general outlook for ethane economics in the Northeast, given the recent price volatility. Teresa, this is Greg. I'll answer that question on several, there's several layers to it. We have, within MPLX, over 300,000 barrels a day of deethanization capacity in our fleet. We're unique in that our fleet is, our deethanizer actually, fleet is spread across all of our processing plants. We have the ability to reject or recover ethane almost by customer, but definitely by plant. All those plants are connected by a purity ethane line, and we deliver to Mariner East, Mariner West, Utopia, ATEX, as well as the Shell Falcon line for pipeline for Monaca. The Smithburg deethanizer is the latest addition to our fleet. It adds a little over 40,000 barrels a day of purity ethane product production capability to our fleet, which I mentioned is over 300,000 barrels a day. That plant is in operation. It's operating well. It's ramping up along with the rest of our fleet to not only supply Monaca, but also all of the Gulf Coast, East Coast, and even Canadian takeaway points. In terms of the economics, the fractionation spread between ethane and natural gas, whether it's rejected or not, you know, recently we've seen natural gas prices drop at a little higher rate than the ethane price drop. The economics for recovery have improved, but it's really up to the producer in terms of whether we recover more or reject. We have the ability to do both. We have the capacity to do it. Frankly, in the Northeast, most of the recovery is tied to commitments that are already made by the producers for those takeaway pipelines and to the Shell plant. We continue to ramp, you know, up towards as we increase our utilization there. Thank you very much. You're welcome, Teresa. Thank you. Once again, if you would like to ask a question at this time, you can press star one and record your name when prompted. Our next question comes from Jeremy Tonet with J.P. Morgan. Your line is open. Hi. Good morning. Hi, Jeremy. Just want to shift over to the Permian a little bit, if I could, as it relates to natural gas egress. Just wondering any high level thoughts you might be willing to share as far as, you know, takeaway tightness. We've seen Waha touch negative prices recently, not too long ago. Was just curious, I guess, with the Whistler expansion, with Matterhorn, is there any ability to kind of, start partial service ahead of, the dates that you've set? Or, just trying to get a feel for how you see Permian egress tightness unfolding and what MPLX could do there? Hey, Jeremy, this is Sean. I'll touch on the gas takeaway out of the Permian there. As you know, we've got with the Whistler Pipeline, and as we said, you know, last quarter, we're really pleased by the ramp up of the volumes on there. Again, showing that gas takeaway is needed there. That volume and those commitments have continued to be strong. We anticipate those will continue on into 2023 here. You know, we've got the 0.5 B expansion coming online in the third quarter of 2023 for Whistler. Again, we're seeing really, you know, meeting and expectations for that committed volume coming out of the Permian. Then on top of that, you got Matterhorn, that, you know, we're a small participant in, that really matches our producer and customers' needs coming out of there. Again, I think, you know, as Greg said earlier, you're gonna see volatility up and down on natural gas. Again, there's strong volume demand for the gas takeaway out of the Permian. Got it. Thanks for that. Was just curious, I guess, as it relates to weather during the quarter, there was some freezing conditions across country. Wondering if that impacted your operations at all, if there's any weather headwinds that you would be willing to quantify for us if they did materialize? Great. Hey, Jeremy, it's John. Thanks for the question. I'll start, and Greg and Sean can chime in if they want to as well on the ops. Across our platform, in the fourth quarter, we probably had mostly lost a proper opportunity as, you know, some of our producers mainly on the GMP side. Obviously, when it gets that cold, they run into some issues. That reduced our operations there for, you know, 10 to 14 days, give or take, you know, different across the basins in the fourth quarter. That probably was a lost opportunity of, you know, somewhere around $10 million in the quarter. As we look to this quarter, Q1 '23, partly, you know, impacts on MPC's operations. Partly, remember, I'm talking adjusted EBITDA. When we think about our joint ventures on the GMP side, that really is distributions. There's part of the effect in Q4 that shows up as lower distributions in Q1 as well. Probably $10 million of lost opportunity in both Q4 and Q1. Got it. That's helpful. Thank you. You're welcome. Our next question will come from Neal Dingmann with Truist Securities. Your line is open. Morning, all. My question's on your Marcellus G&P, specifically, a number of E&Ps, I haven't heard too much from them as far as plans for any change of activity. Yet I did hear from a frac provider last week that suggested that you could see some slowdown in fracking activity and, you know, for the next few months or a bit longer in the Appalachians. I'd just love to hear. You know, I did know your Looking at slide seven was down a little bit, not a whole lot there versus the year-over-year. I'm just curious more on your overall thoughts in the area for the remainder of the year. Yeah. Neal, this is Greg. You know, at this point, we still, you know, we're in close communication with producer customers and we track over time well pads that are being drilled and completion rates. Depending on rig availability, depending on weather, depending on pricing, those things, obviously those forecasts can and do change. We still, as I mentioned before, a lot of the activity and the volume drive, you know, that we forecast into 2023 is based on, you know, on activity, drilling activity in 2022 and then some completion activity that already, you know, has been underway. So, you know, there could be pads delayed, not aware of those, but that's always a possibility. At this point, we're, we feel, we still feel bullish about volume this year. Yeah, I would agree. Go ahead, Mike. Sorry. Yeah, let me just add, you know, even outside of the Marcellus, I think, you know, everybody realizes now there's a structural change in gas from a lot of perspectives. In some of the areas that had not seen a lot of activity, as, you know, Greg mentioned earlier, in 2022, you know, you're starting to see rigs in other basins, you know, outside of the Marcellus that haven't had a lot of activity. I think overall, people are recognizing a structural change in gas. Very short term, yeah, it's been a little warm, you know, relative to expectation coming into the winter. If you pull back up to a higher level, a structural change, more activity, rigs, you know, being used in basins that there has not been activity for a while, I think shows that there's a, you know, a change in gas, you know, potential going forward. Yeah. Well said, Mike. One just clarification, maybe a follow-up. I want to make sure on the gathering, you continue to have nice increase on the, on the gather on the other side, non-Marcellus. Could you remind me of just capacity? I still think you have a bit there, on the Permian and all. I'm just wondering again what is I think you talked about this earlier today, but I just want to make clear on what is, what is still the capacity available on that, on the gathering side there? In terms of the Permian Delaware, the capacity, we basically build out and connect new wells and add compression, as we need it to fill the processing capacity that we have. Yeah, Neal, it's Sean. I mean, specifically in the Permian, if that's what you were asking about, right? That was. Yeah. I mean, we've got our five plants. We're building our sixth. They're each about 200 million a day. So that's the size and scale of that operation, which in our numbers, it's part of the Southwest region that we show. We're at a B, heading to 1.2 B. we match the gathering, which I believe you specifically asked for to that capacity. That's right. That's right. Okay, thanks, guys. Great details. Thank you. Our next question will come from Spiro Dounis with Citi. Your line is open. Thanks, operator. Morning team. Wanted to go back and follow up on one of Brian's questions, just as we think about refinery run rates for 2023. If we zoom out a bit and just look at the industry as a whole, I believe it's supposed to be kind of a heavier refinery maintenance year this year. Curious how you're all thinking about the impact to your system overall, whether or not that shifts flows on the export side or internally. Curious how you're thinking about the net benefit or negative there. Spiro, it's Mike. I'll start off. You know, MPC had a back-end-weighted turnaround year in 22. You know, we're going to talk about a front-end-weighted, you know, 23. Even with our activity there, I think one of the things that has been part of our success on the MPC side is to figure out a way to keep our utilizations high despite, taking our needed turnaround activities for safe, reliable operations. You know, it is a heavier year for us, you know, especially if you think of the back half of the one year and the front half of the other on the MPC side. You know, at the same time, even with that activity, you know, we ran 96% utilization last year. We still expect a pretty strong year. It'll start off with, you know, more activity, in the first quarter. You know, as Sean mentioned earlier, you know, we're still expecting, even though we had a record year this year on the LNS side, we're still expecting a pretty strong year in 2023. Got it. It's helpful. Thanks, Mike. Second question, just thinking about CapEx going forward. You guys have been utilizing joint ventures pretty effectively over the last few years. I guess I'm curious, as you sort of look back and assess that strategy, I think you'd be satisfied with it, but I'm just curious how you're thinking about it going forward. Is that a strategy using joint ventures something you plan on doing from here on any sort of larger multi-year projects? Ultimately, do you see these joint ventures as a pathway to own more of these current assets or even maybe some of these joint venture partners over time? Hey, Spiro, it's John. I'll start and then let Mike chime in. You know, I think certainly to your first point, we definitely have been very pleased with our investments in the Permian. I don't know that we started those from a financial aspect as well as, you know, other considerations, right? When you're entering a joint venture relationship, sharing of risk, commercial opportunity, et cetera. I think it depends on the situation, 'cause as you know, we certainly have a strong balance sheet in generating a good bit of cash. Those have worked really well for us. I think where there's opportunities that have both commercial, operational, and perhaps financial reasons, we can look at JV opportunities. given the strength of the balance sheet, I don't know that financially we would need to leverage them in that regard. Yeah. Spiro, I was just gonna add to what John said. You know, it's pretty specific to the opportunity and, you know, the desire of all the partners. You know, we try and be a good partner. As John said, in a couple of these instances, we had the financial capability to finance it ourselves. When other members, you know, wanna do it at the project level, and, you know, we can, you know, live with that, we're okay with it. We're not, we're not opposed to it. If it makes for a better partnership, you know, that's fine for us. I would tell you it's specific to the project itself and who the partners are. John mentioned earlier, when we quote our capital, that's the capital that, you know, we're typically doing on our side of the house. There is additional capital that comes from those projects that gets financed at that project level. It's hard to answer your question other than it's specific to John's point. You know, we have been happy with them. We've had good partners. You know, we're usually aligned. You know, the goal obviously in any JV is, are you aligned in the intent of the project, et cetera. We've been, you know, fortunate to have good alignment with our partners and where we finance it at the project level, we, you know, we've been okay with that as well. Helpful as always. Thanks for the time, guys. You're welcome. Our last question will come from Neel Mitra with Bank of America. Your line is open. Hi. Good morning. I wanted to touch on the MPC Galveston Bay upgrades. I was wondering if that would have any impact on the LNS segment, once that's completed. Yeah, I'll start, and I'll let Sean jump in. Yeah, you know, we're probably gonna talk about that in a lot more specifics on the MPC call. Just in general, you know, that project is, you know, pretty strategic for us. You know, it's a lot more crude processing and Brazil upgrading. As you know, obviously down at Galveston Bay, we have flexibility to bring barrels in via pipeline and/or water. Depending on the specifics of where the best crude opportunity is, you know, it could hit our system or it could come waterborne on, you know, on the crude side. Obviously the outcome of the, you know, the products that tends to move on some other pipes as well. It's much more of an MPC impacting project than it is an MPLX, project. Okay. Got it. Thank you. My second question on the G&P side, can you sum up how you look at the Permian portfolio? You have some good gathering and processing natural gas takeaway with Whistler and a little bit with Matterhorn. How far downstream do you wanna go? Are you thinking about NGL pipelines? Do you feel like you need more scale on the G&P side to feed some of the downstream assets? I'm just wondering how you envision this portfolio looking like in, you know, the intermediate to longer term. Yeah. At a high level, yeah, we would like to continue to expand our footprint there, but I'll let you know, Greg and Sean touch or Dave. Yeah, Neal, this is Dave. you know, I think as you look at it, you know, one of our strategies is to leverage the existing infrastructure and assets we have in place from gathering to processing the long-haul pipelines down to the export opportunities or the other infrastructure out there. I think as you see, whether it be organic or inorganic, growth opportunities, it's really gonna keep that in the back of our mind, again, all anchored by, you know, strict capital discipline and ensuring that we get the acceptable returns. If I could just ask a follow-up to that. Are you seeing some synergies between your Gathering & Processing and, you know, possibly being able to win contracts by having the Whistler capacity there, given the lack of natural gas takeaway and possibly bundling contracts between pipelines and G&P? Yeah, there are definitely synergies. You know, on the G&P side, for example, we're building and operating, you know, some of the crude gathering assets. The crude gathering assets as we tie in new wells and put new LACT units in. There's associated gas that comes with that, so we connect the gas wells and bring the gas in. G&P operates that gathering system as well, the gas and oil, and then we operate the processing plants, but we're reliant then on handing off the residue gas, you know, to Whistler, to BANGL, the NGLs, and then of course the crude coming from the pads is going to L&S-operated downstream pipelines as well. We operate seamlessly there. But Neal, it's John. Definitely right to the point of your question, right? Those producer customers want that product to the coast, and that's the solution we've built and will continue to look to think about how we can move further downstream across that value chain. Got it. Neal, it's Mike. I'll just add, you know, we try or make every effort to be a full service provider. We'll gather crude, we'll gather gas, we'll process the gas, we'll transport the crude. You know, our intent is to be, you know, a partner to the producers or whoever needs to make, you know, infrastructure work for them or logistics work for them. We try to be a full service provider and get into conversations, like you said, on contracts or discussions as to, you know, what are their needs and how can we help them and hopefully they turn into win-win situations. Great. I appreciate all the color. Thank you very much. You're welcome. All right. With that, thank you guys for joining us today. Thank you for your interest in MPLX. Should you have additional questions or if you'd like clarification on any of the topics we discussed this morning, members of our IR team will be available to take your call. Please just reach out. Thank you, everybody. Thank you. That does conclude today's conference. Thank you for participating. You may disconnect at this time.