Complete the NGL pipeline expansion to 225 MBD
Not delivered by the deadline
AI-confirmed · human review in progress Independent AI checks agreed on primary SEC or regulator evidence. Records are now being reviewed by hand, starting with those our customers order.
- Announced
- 1 Apr 2025
- Due
- 30 Jun 2025
- Checked
- 17 Oct 2026
- Deadline
- Met
- Late
- Not met
- Today
What the company said
“The expansion project from 175 MBD to 225 MBD for the NGL pipeline is expected to be completed in the second quarter.”
What we found
Evidence strength A What the grades mean
As of June 30, 2025, the company reported that the NGL pipeline expansion project was still in progress, indicating it was not completed by the end of the second quarter.
-
A Phillips 66 8-K filed 2025-07-25
“As of June 30, 2025, the company had $1.1 billion of cash and cash equivalents and $3.7 billion of committed capacity available under credit facilities. Business Highlights and Strategic Priorities Progress •Advanced NGL wellhead-to-market strategy by acquiring Coastal Bend and nearing completion of” ✓ confirmed on the page
Market reaction: the shares moved +3.2% against the S&P 500 over the three sessions around the disclosure (24 Jul 2025 to 29 Jul 2025). What this measures
Checked 17 Oct 2026.
Commitment DNA
The structured record of this commitment. Fields the company did not state are left blank rather than guessed.
- Event type
- Construction
- Indicative materiality
- Medium rules
- Action
- Complete
- Deliverable
- NGL pipeline expansion
- Target
- 225 MBD
- Language
- Expected (“expects”, “plans”)
- In the company’s control
- High
- Specificity
- High
How this entry was checked
- Commitment recordedThe company's words were matched word for word against the filing.
- First checkAn AI model, Gemini (Google), read the company's later filings and recorded the outcome with a quoted passage.
- Second check: agreesA different AI model, Claude (Anthropic), re-read the evidence without being told the outcome and reached the same answer.
- Third check on a negative finding: agreesBecause a negative finding could harm a company if wrong, a stronger model re-read the evidence fully blind and reached the same answer.
Confirmed. This outcome counts towards the company's Kept Score. How verification works
Are you Phillips 66? You can publish an official statement next to this entry, free. Add a statement.
Is something here wrong or out of date? Companies and readers can ask us to check it. Please bring a link to a public source.
Report an error in this entry Reference: KI-C-2025-PSX-010243 · Corrections policy