NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Note A — Description of Business and Basis of Presentation

Description of business — The business of Murphy USA Inc. (“Murphy USA” or the “Company”) and its subsidiaries primarily consists of the U.S. retail marketing business that was separated from its former parent company, Murphy Oil Corporation (“Murphy Oil” or “Parent”), plus certain ethanol production facilities and other assets, liabilities and operating expenses of Murphy Oil that were associated with supporting the activities of the U.S. retail marketing operations.  The separation was approved by the Murphy Oil board of directors on August 7, 2013, and was completed on August 30, 2013 through the distribution of 100% of the outstanding capital stock of Murphy USA to holders of Murphy Oil common stock on the record date of August 21, 2013. Murphy Oil stockholders of record received one share of Murphy USA common stock for every four shares of Murphy Oil common stock. The spin-off was completed in accordance with a separation and distribution agreement entered into between Murphy Oil and Murphy USA. Following the separation, Murphy USA is an independent, publicly traded company, and Murphy Oil retains no ownership interest in Murphy USA.

Murphy USA markets refined products through a network of retail gasoline stations and unbranded wholesale customers. Murphy USA’s owned retail stations are almost all located in close proximity to Walmart stores in 23 states and use the brand name Murphy USA®. Murphy USA also markets gasoline and other products at standalone stations under the Murphy Express brand. At September 30, 2013, Murphy USA had a total of 1,185 Company stations. In October 2009, Murphy USA acquired an ethanol production facility located in Hankinson, North Dakota. The facility was originally designed to produce 110  million gallons of corn-based ethanol per year. Expansion of the plant occurred during 2012, bringing the overall ethanol production capacity to 135  million gallons per year. The Company acquired a partially constructed ethanol production facility in Hereford, Texas, in late 2010. The Hereford facility is designed to produce 105  million gallons of corn-based ethanol per year, and it began operations near the end of the first quarter of 2011.

The contributed assets of Murphy Oil included in the Company’s financial statements also include buildings, real estate, an airplane and computer equipment and software that are used to support the operating activities of Murphy USA.

Basis of Presentation — Murphy USA was incorporated in March 2013 and, in connection with its incorporation, Murphy USA issued 100 shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, to Murphy Oil for $1.00 . Murphy USA was formed solely in contemplation of the separation and until the separation was completed on August 30, 2013, it had not commenced operations and had no material assets, liabilities, or commitments.  Accordingly the accompanying consolidated and combined financial statements reflect the combined historical results of operations, financial position and cash flows of the Murphy Oil subsidiaries and certain assets, liabilities and operating expenses of Murphy Oil that comprise Murphy USA, as described above, as if such companies and accounts had been combined for all periods presented prior to August 30, 2013. All significant intercompany transactions and accounts within the combined financial statements have been eliminated.  

The assets and liabilities in these consolidated and combined financial statements at December 31, 2012 have been reflected on a historical basis, as all of the assets and liabilities presented were 100 percent owned by Murphy Oil at December 31, 2012 and represented operations of Murphy USA prior to the separation.  For the period prior to separation, the consolidated and combined statements of income also include expense allocations for certain corporate functions historically performed by Murphy Oil, including allocations of general corporate expenses related to executive oversight, accounting, treasury, tax, legal, procurement and information technology. These allocations are based primarily on specific identification, headcount or computer utilization. Murphy USA’s management believes the assumptions underlying the consolidated and combined financial statements, including the assumptions regarding the allocation of general corporate expenses from Murphy Oil, are reasonable. However, these consolidated and combined

financial statements may not include all of the actual expenses that would have been incurred had the Company been a stand-alone company during the period prior to separation and may not reflect the combined results of operations, financial position and cash flows had the Company been a stand-alone company during the entirety of the periods presented.

Actual costs that would have been incurred if Murphy USA had been a stand-alone company for the period prior to separation would depend upon multiple factors, including organizational structure and strategic decisions made in various areas, including information technology and infrastructure. As a result, the combined results of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be experienced in the future.

In preparing the financial statements of Murphy USA in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, management has made a number of estimates and assumptions related to the reporting of assets, liabilities, revenues, expenses and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. Actual results may differ from these estimates.

Interim Financial Information — The interim period financial information presented in these consolidated and combined financial statements is unaudited and includes all known accruals and adjustments, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the consolidated and combined financial position of Murphy USA and its results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented. All such adjustments are of a normal and recurring nature.

These interim consolidated and combined financial statements should be read together with our audited financial statements for the years ended December 2010, 2011 and 2012, included in our Registration Statement on Form 10 (File No. 001-35914), as amended (the “Form 10”) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

Note B — Related Party Transactions

Related-party transactions of the Company include the allocation of certain general and administrative costs from Murphy Oil to the Company and payment of interest expense to Murphy Oil for intercompany payables balances.

General and administrative costs were charged by Murphy Oil to the Company based on management’s determination of such costs attributable to the operations of the Company. However, such related-party transactions cannot be presumed to be carried out on an arm’s length basis as the requisite conditions of competitive, free-market dealings may not exist.

Prior to the separation Murphy Oil provided cash management services to the Company. As a result, the Company generally remitted funds received to Murphy Oil, and Murphy Oil paid all operating and capital expenditures on behalf of the Company. Such cash transactions were reflected in the change in the Net Investment by Parent.

The Consolidated and Combined Statements of Income include expense allocations for certain functions provided to the Company by Murphy Oil prior to the separation. If possible, these allocations were made on a specific identification basis. Otherwise, the expenses related to services provided to the Company by Murphy Oil were allocated to Murphy USA based on relative percentages, as compared to Murphy Oil’s other businesses, of headcount or other appropriate methods depending on the nature of each item of cost to be allocated.

Charges for functions historically provided to the Company by Murphy Oil were primarily attributable to Murphy Oil’s performance of many shared services that the Company benefitted from, such as treasury, tax, accounting, risk management, legal, internal audit, procurement, human resources, investor relations and information technology. Murphy USA also participated in certain Murphy Oil insurance, benefit and incentive plans. The Consolidated and Combined Statements of Income reflect charges from Murphy Oil

and its other subsidiaries for these services of $16,421,000 and $17,306,000 for the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, and $53,161,000 and $53,109,000 for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Included in the charges above are amounts recognized for stock-based compensation expense (Note G), as well as net periodic benefit expense associated with the Parent’s retirement plans (Note H).

Included in Interest income in the Consolidated and Combined Statements of Income for the three months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 was interest income from affiliates of $353,000 and $28,000 , respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, interest income from affiliates was $1,080,000 and $52,000 , respectively.  These amounts were paid on balances that were previously intercompany prior to the separation from Murphy Oil and were settled in full at the separation date. 

Transition Services Agreement

In conjunction with the separation and distribution, we entered into a Transition Services Agreement with Murphy Oil on August 30, 2013.  This Transition Services Agreement sets forth the terms on which Murphy Oil provides to us, and we provide to Murphy Oil, on a temporary basis, certain services or functions that the companies have historically shared.  Transition services include administrative, payroll, human resources, information technology and network transition services, tax, treasury and other support and corporate services.  The Transition Services Agreement provides for the provision of specified transition services generally for a period of up to eighteen months, with a possible extension of six months, on a cost basis.  We record the fee Murphy Oil charges us for these services as a component of general and administrative expenses.

We believe that the operating expenses and general and administrative expenses allocated to us and included in the accompanying consolidated and combined statements of income were a reasonable approximation of the costs related to Murphy USA’s operations.  However, such related-party transactions cannot be presumed to be carried out on an arm’s-length basis as the terms were negotiated while Murphy USA was still a subsidiary of Murphy Oil.  At September 30, 2013 Murphy USA had a receivable from Murphy Oil of $455,000 and a payable to Murphy Oil of $1,622,000 related to the Transition Services Agreement. 

Note C — Inventories

Inventories consisted of the following:

At September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the replacement cost (market value) of last-in, first-out (LIFO) inventories exceeded the LIFO carrying value by $304,646,000 and $303,344,000 , respective ly. Corn based products consisted primarily of corn, dried distillers ’ grain s with solubles (DDGS) and wet distillers ’ grain s with solubles (WDGS), and were all valued on a first-in, first-out ( FIFO ) basis.

Senior Notes

On August 14 , 2013, Murphy Oil USA, Inc., our primary operating subsidiary, issued 6.00% Senior Notes due 2023 (the “Senior Notes”) in an aggregate principal amount of $500 million in a private offering pursuant to Rule 144A and Regulation S under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The Senior Notes are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by Murphy USA, and are guaranteed by certain subsidiary guarantors that guarantee our credit facilities. The indenture governing the Senior Notes contains restrictive covenants that limit, among other things, the ability of Murphy USA, Murphy Oil USA, Inc. and the restricted subsidiaries to incur additional indebtedness or liens, dispose of assets, make certain restricted payments or investments, enter into transactions with affiliates or merge with or into other entities.

The Senior Notes and the guarantees rank equally with all of our and the guarantors’ existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness and effectively junior to our and the guarantors’ existing and future secured indebtedness (including indebtedness with respect to the credit facilities) to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness.  The Senior Notes are structurally subordinated to all of the existing and future third-party liabilities, including trade payables, of our existing and future subsidiaries that do not guarantee the notes.

We used the net proceeds of the Senior Notes, together with borrowings under the credit facilities, to finance, a cash dividend of $650 million to Murphy Oil paid in connection with the separation.

In addition, we have entered into a registration rights agreement, which requires us to exchange the Senior Notes for notes eligible for public resale within 360 days of the issuance of the Senior Notes, or alternatively under certain circumstances, to file a shelf registration statement for public resale of the Senior Notes.

Credit Facilities

On August 30, 2013, we entered   into a credit agreement   in connection with the separation   from Murphy Oil.   The credit agreement provides for   a committed $450 million   asset-based loan (ABL)   facility (with availability subject to the borrowing base described below)   and a $150 million   term   facility.   It   also provides   for a $200 million   uncommitted   incremental   facility. The ABL facility is scheduled to mature on August 30, 2018 , subject to the ability to extend for two additional one -year periods with the consent of the extending lenders. The term facility is scheduled to mature on August 30, 2016 . On August 30, 2013, Murphy Oil USA, Inc. borrowed $150 million   under the term facility,   together   with the net proceeds   of the offering of the Senior   Notes, to finance   a   $650 million   cash dividend   from   Murphy Oil USA, Inc. to Murphy Oil.

The borrowing base is expected, at any time of determination, to be an amount (net of reserves) equal to the sum of:

•       100% of eligible cash at such time, plus

•       90% of eligible credit card receivables at such time, plus

•       90% of eligible investment grade accounts, plus

•       85% of eligible other accounts, plus

•       80% of eligible product supply/wholesale refined products inventory at such time, plus

•       75% of eligible retail refined products inventory at such time, plus

the lesser of (i) 70% of the average cost of eligible retail merchandise inventory at such time and (ii) 85% of the net orderly liquidation value of eligible retail merchandise inventory at such time.

The ABL facility includes a $75 million sublimit on swingline loans and a $200 million sublimit for the issuance of letters of credit. Swingline loans and letters of credit issued under the ABL facility reduce availability under the ABL facility.

Interest payable on the credit facilities is based on either:

• the Alternate Base Rate, which is defined as the highest of (a) the prime rate, (b) the federal funds effective rate from time to time plus 0.50% per annum and (c) the one-month Adjusted LIBO Rate plus 1.00% per annum,

plus, (A) in the case Adjusted LIBO Rate borrowings, (i) with respect to the ABL facility, spreads ranging from 1.50% to 2.00% per annum depending on the average availability under the ABL facility or (ii) with respect to the term facility, spreads ranging from 2.75% to 3.00% per annum depending on a secured debt to EBITDA ratio and (B) in the case of Alternate Base Rate borrowings, (i) with respect to the ABL facility, spreads ranging from 0.50% to 1.00% per annum depending on the average availability under the ABL facility or (ii) with respect to the term facility, spreads ranging from 1.75% to 2.00% per annum depending on a secured debt to EBITDA ratio.

The interest rate period with respect to the Adjusted LIBO Rate interest rate option can be set at one -, two -, three -, or six -months as selected by us in accordance with the terms of the credit agreement.

We are obligated to make quarterly principal payments on the outstanding principal amount of the term facility beginning on the first anniversary of the effective date of the credit agreement in amounts equal to 10% of the term loans made on such effective date, with the remaining balance payable on the scheduled maturity date of the term facility. Borrowings under the credit facilities are prepayable at our option without premium or penalty. We are also required to prepay the term facility with the net cash proceeds of certain asset sales or casualty events, subject to certain exceptions. The credit agreement also includes certain customary mandatory prepayment provisions with respect to the ABL facility.

The credit agreement contains certain covenants that limit, among other things, the ability of us and our subsidiaries to incur additional indebtedness or liens, to make certain investments, to enter into sale-leaseback transactions, to make certain restricted payments, to enter into consolidations, mergers or sales of material assets and other fundamental changes, to transact with affiliates, to enter into

agreements restricting the ability of subsidiaries to incur liens or pay dividends, or to make certain accounting changes. In addition, the credit agreement requires us to maintain a fixed charge coverage ratio of a minimum of 1.0 to 1.0 when availability for at least three consecutive business days is less than the greater of (a) 17.5% of the lesser of the aggregate ABL facility commitments and the borrowing base and (b) $70,000,000 (including as of the most recent fiscal quarter end on the first date when availability is less than such amount), as well as a maximum secured debt to EBITDA ratio of 4.5 to 1.0 at any time when term facility commitments or term loans thereunder are outstanding.  As of September 30, 2013, our secured leverage ratio and the fixed charge coverage ratio were 0.39 and 2.48, respectively.

All obligations under the credit agreement are guaranteed by Murphy USA and the subsidiary guarantors party thereto, and all obligations under the credit agreement, including the guarantees of those obligations, are secured by certain assets of Murphy USA, Murphy Oil USA, Inc. and the guarantors party thereto.

Note E — Asset Retirement Obligations (ARO)

The majority of the ARO recognized by the Company at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 related to the estimated costs to dismantle and abandon certain of its retail gasoline stations. The Company has not recorded an ARO for certain of its marketing assets because sufficient information is presently not available to estimate a range of potential settlement dates for the obligation. These assets are consistently being upgraded and are expected to be operational into the foreseeable future. In these cases, the obligation will be initially recognized in the period in which sufficient information exists to estimate the obligation.

A reconciliation of the beginning and ending aggregate carrying amount of the ARO is shown in the following table.

The estimation of future ARO is based on a number of assumptions requiring professional judgment. The Company cannot predict the type of revisions to these assumptions that may be required in future periods due to the availability of additional information.

Note F — Income Taxes

The Company’s effective income tax rate generally exceeds the U.S. Federal statutory tax rate of 35%. The effective tax rate is calculated as the amount of income tax expense divided by income before income tax expense. For the three- month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 ,   the Company’s effective tax rates were as follows:

The effective tax rate for the 2013 and 2012 periods ended September 30 exceeded the U.S. Federal tax rate of 35% primarily due to U.S. state tax expense.

Murphy Oil’s tax returns in multiple jurisdictions that include the Company are subject to audit by taxing authorities. These audits often take years to complete and settle. As of September 30, 2013, the earliest year remaining open for audit and/or settlement in the United States is   2010 .  Although the Company believes that recorded liabilities for unsettled issues are adequate, additional gains or losses could occur in future periods from resolution of outstanding unsettled matters.

Under U.S. GAAP the financial statement recognition of the benefit for a tax position is dependent upon the benefit being more likely than not to be sustainable upon audit by the applicable taxing authority. If this threshold is met, the tax benefit is then measured and recognized at the largest amount that is greater than 50 percent likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. The Company has not recorded any effect for unrecognized income tax benefits for the periods reported.

Note G — Incentive Plans

Prior to the separation and distribution, our employees participated in the Murphy Oil 2007 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”) and the Murphy Oil 2012 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2012 Plan”) and received Murphy Oil restricted stock awards and options to purchase shares of Murphy Oil common stock. While participating in these two plans, costs resulting from share-based payment transactions were allocated and recognized as an expense in the financial statements using a fair value-based measurement method over the periods that the awards vested. Certain employees of the Company have received annual grants in the form of Murphy Oil stock options, restricted stock units and other forms of share based payments prior to the separation and distribution. Accordingly, the Company has accounted for expense for these plans in accordance with SAB Topic 1-B for periods prior to the separation and distribution. 

2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan

Effective August 30, 2013, certain of our employees participate in the Murphy USA 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “MUSA 2013 Plan”). The MUSA 2013 Plan authorizes the Executive Compensation Committee of our Board of Directors (“the Committee”) to grant non-qualified or incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, stock awards (including restricted stock and restricted stock unit awards), cash awards, and performance awards to our employees. No more than 10  million shares of MUSA common stock may be delivered under the MUSA 2013 Plan and no more than 1  million shares of common stock may be awarded to any one employee, subject to adjustment for changes in capitalization. The maximum cash amount payable pursuant to any “performance-based” award to any participant in any calendar year is $5 million.

In connection with the separation and distribution, stock compensation awards granted under the 2007 Plan and the 2012 Plan by Murphy Oil were adjusted or substituted as follows:

Awards granted in connection with the adjustment and substitution of awards originally issued under the 2007 Plan and the 2012 Plan are a part of the MUSA 2013 Plan and reduce the maximum number of shares of common stock available for delivery under the MUSA 2013 Plan.

The adjustment and substitution of awards did not cause us to recognize incremental compensation expense during the period ended September 30, 2013 for the stock options and stock appreciation rights awards that had been replaced.  The restricted stock units were replaced subsequent to September 30, 2013 and any incremental compensation cost will be recorded in the fourth quarter. 

The adjustment and substitution of the stock compensation awards occurred in conjunction with the distribution of MUSA common stock to Murphy Oil stockholders in the September 30, 2013 after-market distribution. As a result, no grant, exercise, or cancellation activity occurred on MUSA stock compensation awards during the nine months ended September 30, 2012.

2013 Stock Plan for Non-employee Directors

Effective August 8, 2013, Murphy USA adopted the 2013 Murphy USA Stock Plan for Non-employee Directors (the “Directors Plan”).  The directors for Murphy USA are compensated with a mixture of cash payments and equity-based awards.  Awards under the Directors Plan may be in the form of restricted stock, restricted stock units, stock options, or a combination thereof.  An aggregate of 500,000 shares of common stock shall be available for issuance of grants under the Directors Plan. 

For the three months ended September 30, 2013, the Company issued 53,881 restricted stock units to its non-employee directors at a weighted average grant date fair value of $39.60 per share.  These shares vest in three years from the grant date. 

For the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, share based compensation allocated to the Company from Murphy Oil through intercompany charges was $6.5 million and $7.7 million, respectively.  For the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, share based compensation from the MUSA 2013 Plan and the Directors Plan combined charged against income before income tax benefit was $460,000 and $0 , respectively.  The related income tax benefit for this share based compensation cost was $161,000 and $0 for the nine month period ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. 

As of September 30, 2013, unrecognized compensation cost related to stock option awards was $3.6 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.9 years. Unrecognized compensation cost related to restricted stock awards was $12.1 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 2.9 years.

Note H — Employee and Retiree Benefit Plans

PENSION AND POSTRETIREMENT PLANS — Murphy Oil has defined benefit pension plans that are principally noncontributory and cover most full-time employees. Upon separation from Murphy Oil, all amounts for these plans related to Murphy USA were frozen and retained by Murphy Oil. Therefore, the assets and liabilities related to Murphy USA employees in these plans are not included in these financial statements as Murphy USA is considered to be participating in multiple employer benefit plans due to co-

mingling of various plan assets. However, the periodic benefit expense for each period includes the expense of the U.S. benefit plans. All U.S. tax qualified plans meet the funding requirements of federal laws and regulations. Murphy Oil also sponsors health care and life insurance benefit plans, which are not funded, that cover most retired U.S. employees. The health care benefits are contributory; the life insurance benefits are noncontributory. Murphy USA does not expect to have similar pension or post-retirement plans for its employees.

The table that follows provides the components of net periodic benefit expense associated with Company employees for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012.  For the periods in 2013, only dates prior to August 30, 2013 contain any net periodic benefit expense.

U.S. Health Care Reform — In March 2010, the United States Congress enacted a health care reform law. Along with other provisions, the law (a) eliminated the tax free status of federal subsidies to companies with qualified retiree prescription drug plans that are actuarially equivalent to Medicare Part D plans beginning in 2013; (b) imposes a 40% excise tax on high-cost health plans as defined in the law beginning in 2018; (c) eliminated lifetime or annual coverage limits and required coverage for preventative health services beginning in September 2010; and (d) imposed a fee of $2 (subsequently adjusted for inflation) for each person covered by a health insurance policy beginning in September 2010. The new law did not significantly affect the Company’s consolidated and combined financial statements as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 and for the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2012.

Note I — Financial Instruments and Risk Management

DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS — The Company makes limited use of derivative instruments to manage certain risks related to commodity prices. The use of derivative instruments for risk management is covered by operating policies and is closely monitored by the Company’s senior management. The Company does not hold any derivatives for speculative purposes and it does not use derivatives with leveraged or complex features. Derivative instruments are traded primarily with creditworthy major financial institutions or over national exchanges such as the New York Mercantile Exchange (“NYMEX”). To qualify for hedge accounting, the changes in the market value of a derivative instrument must historically have been, and would be expected to continue to be, highly effective at offsetting changes in the prices of the hedged item. To the extent that the change in fair value of a derivative instrument has

less than perfect correlation with the change in the fair value of the hedged item, a portion of the change in fair value of the derivative instrument is considered ineffective and would normally be recorded in earnings during the affected period.

The Company is subject to commodity price risk related to corn that it will purchase in the future for feedstock and DDGS and WDGS that it will sell in the future at its ethanol production facilities in the United States. At September 30, 2013 and 2012, the Company had open physical delivery commitment contracts for purchase of approximately 10.6  mil lion and 32.3 million bushels of corn, respectively, for processing at its ethanol plants. For the periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, the Company had open physical delivery commitment contracts for sale of approximately 5.0  million and 1.5  million equivalent bushels, respectively, of DDGS and WDGS . To manage the price risk associated with certain of these physical delivery commitments which have fixed prices, at September 30, 2013 and 2012, the Company had outstanding derivative contracts with a net long volume of approximately 2.2  million bushels and net short volume of 6.9  million bushels, respectively, that mature at future prices in effect on the expected date of delivery under the physical delivery commitment contracts. Additionally, at September 30, 2013 and 2012, the Company had outstanding derivative contracts with a net short volume of 1.4 and 3.4  million bushels of corn to buy back when certain corn inventories are expected to be processed at the Hankinson, North Dakota, and Hereford, Texas facilities. The impact of marking to market these commodity derivative contracts decreased income before taxes by $4.1  million and increased income before taxes by $6.3 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

At September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the fair value of derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments are presented in the following table.

For the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, the gains and losses recognized in the consolidated and combined Statements of Income for derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments are presented in the following table.

The Company offsets certain assets and liabilities related to derivative contracts when the legal right of offset exists. Derivative assets and liabilities which have offsetting positions at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 are pr esented in the following tables:  

All commodity derivatives above are corn-based contracts associated with the Company’s two U.S. ethanol plants. Net derivative assets are included in Accounts Receivable presented in the table on the prior page and are included in Accounts Receivable on the Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheets; likewise, net derivative liabilities in the above table are included in Accounts Payable in the table above and are included in Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities on the Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheets. Separate derivative agreements exist for each of the ethanol plants and at September 30, 2013 one plant had a net receivable and the other had a net payable for derivative contracts. These contracts permit net settlement on a plant-specific basis and the Company generally avails itself of this right to settle net. At September 30, 2013 cash deposits of $2.7 million related to commodity derivative contracts were reported in Prepaid Expenses in the Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheets. These cash deposits have not been used to reduce the reported net liabilities on the corn-based derivative contracts at September 30, 2013.

Note J – Earnings Per Share

Basic earnings per common share is computed by dividing net income available to common stockholders by the weighted average of common shares outstanding during the period.  Diluted earnings per common share adjusts basic earnings per common share for the effects of stock options and restricted stock in the periods where such items are dilutive. 

On August 30, 2013, 46,743,316 shares of our common stock were distributed to the shareholders of Murphy Oil in connection with the separation and distribution.  For comparative purposes, we have assumed this amount to be outstanding as of the beginning of each prior period prior to the separation and distribution presented in the calculation of weighted average shares outstanding. 

The following table provides a reconciliation of basic and diluted earnings per share computations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 (in thousands, except per share amounts):

Excluded from the calculation of shares used in the diluted earnings per share calculation for the three months and nine months ended September 30, 2013 are 59,250 anti-dilutive options at a weighted average share price of $40.25 . 

Note K — Other Financial Information

CASH FLOW DISCLOSURES — Cash income taxes paid (collected), net of refunds , were $ 7,852,000 and   $ 17,757,000 for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Interest paid was $201 ,000 and $326 ,000 for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Noncash reductions to net parent investment related primarily to settlement of income taxes were $ 453,00 0 and $ 6,702,000 for the nine-month periods ended September 30, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Note L — Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value

The Company carries certain assets and liabilities at fair value in its Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheets. The fair value hierarchy is based on the quality of inputs used to measure fair value, with Level 1 being the highest quality and Level 3 being the lowest quality. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs are observable inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs which reflect assumptions about pricing by market participants.

The Company carries certain assets and liabilities at fair value in its Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheets. The fair value measurements for these assets and liabilities at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 are presented in the following table.

At the balance sheet date the fair value of commodity derivatives contracts for corn was determined based on market quotes for No. 2 yellow corn. The change in fair value of commodity derivatives is recorded in Fuel and ethanol cost of goods sold. The carrying value of the Company’s Cash and cash equivalents, Accounts receivable-trade and Trade accounts payable approximates fair value.

The following table presents the carrying amounts and estimated fair values of financial instruments held by the Company at September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012. The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties. The table excludes Cash and cash equivalents, Accounts receivable-trade, and Trade accounts payable and accrued liabilities, all of which had fair values approximating carrying amounts. The fair value of Current and Long-term debt was estimated based on rates offered to the Company at that time for debt of the same maturities. The Company has off-balance sheet exposures relating to certain financial guarantees and letters of credit. The fair value of these, which represents fees associated with obtaining the instruments, was nominal.

Note M — Contingencies

The Company’s operations and earnings have been and may be affected by various forms of governmental action. Examples of such governmental action include, but are by no means limited to: tax increases and retroactive tax claims; import and export controls; price controls; allocation of supplies of crude oil and petroleum products and other goods; laws and regulations intended for the promotion of safety and the protection and/or remediation of the environment; governmental support for other forms of energy; and laws and regulations affecting the Company’s relationships with employees, suppliers, customers, stockholders and others. Because governmental actions are often motivated by political considerations, may be taken without full consideration of their consequences, and may be taken in response to actions of other governments, it is not practical to attempt to predict the likelihood of such actions, the form the actions may take or the effect such actions may have on the Company.

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS AND LEGAL MATTERS — Murphy USA is subject to numerous federal, state and local laws and regulations dealing with the environment. Violation of such environmental laws, regulations and permits can result in the imposition of significant civil and criminal penalties, injunctions and other sanctions. A discharge of hazardous substances into the environment could, to the extent such event is not insured, subject the Company to substantial expense, including both the cost to comply with applicable regulations and claims by neighboring landowners and other third parties for any personal injury, property damage and other losses that might result.

The Company currently owns or leases, and has in the past owned or leased, properties at which hazardous substances have been or are being handled. Although the Company believes it has used operating and disposal practices that were standard in the industry at the time, hazardous substances may have been disposed of or released on or under the properties owned or leased by the Company or on or under other locations where they have been taken for disposal. In addition, many of these properties have been operated by third parties whose management of hazardous substances was not under the Company’s control. Under existing laws the Company could be required to remediate contaminated property (including contaminated groundwater) or to perform remedial actions to prevent future contamination. Certain of these contaminated properties are in various stages of negotiation, investigation, and/or cleanup, and the Company is investigating the extent of any related liability and the availability of applicable defenses. With the sale of the U.S. refineries in 2011, Murphy Oil retained certain liabilities related to environmental matters. Murphy Oil also obtained insurance covering certain levels of environmental exposures. The Company believes costs related to these sites will not have a material adverse effect on Murphy USA’s net income, financial condition or liquidity in a future period.

Certain environmental expenditures are likely to be recovered by the Company from other sources, primarily environmental funds maintained by certain states. Since no assurance can be given that future recoveries from other sources will occur, the Company has not recorded a benefit for likely recoveries at September 30, 2013 , however certain jurisdictions provide reimbursement for these expenses which have been considered in recording the net exposure .  

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) currently considers the Company a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) at one Superfund site. The potential total cost to all parties to perform necessary remedial work at this site may be substantial. However, based on current negotiations and available information, the Company believes that it is a de minimis party as to ultimate responsibility at the Superfund site. Accordingly, the Company has not recorded a liability for remedial costs at the Superfund site at September 30, 2013. The Company could be required to bear a pro rata share of costs attributable to nonparticipating PRPs or could be assigned additional responsibility for remediation at this site or other Superfund sites. The Company believes that its share of the ultimate costs to clean-up this site will be immaterial and will not have a material adverse effect on its net income, financial condition or liquidity in a future period.

Based on information currently available to the Company, the amount of future remediation costs to be incurred to address known contamination sites is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s future net income, cash flows or liquidity. However, there is the possibility that additional environmental expenditures could be required to address contamination, including as a result of discovering additional contamination or the imposition of new or revised requirements applicable to known contamination.

Since the beginning of fiscal 2007, over 45 class action lawsuits have been filed in federal courts across the country against petroleum companies and significant retailers in the petroleum industry ,   in which the plaintiffs generally allege that they received less motor fuel than the defendants agreed to deliver because the defendants measured the amount of motor fuel they delivered in non-temperature adjusted gallons which, at higher temperatures, contain less energy.  Murphy USA’s subsidiary, Murphy Oil USA, Inc., is a defendant in eight of these cases.

Pursuant to an Order entered by the Joint Panel on Multi-District Litigation, all of the cases, including those in which Murphy Oil USA, Inc. is named, have been transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Kansas and consolidated for all pre-trial proceedings. These cases seek, among other relief, an order requiring the defendants to install temperature adjusting equipment on their retail motor fuel dispensing devices. In certain of the cases, including some of the cases in which Murphy Oil USA, Inc. is named, plaintiffs also have alleged that because defendants pay fuel taxes based on temperature adjusted 60 degree gallons, but allegedly collect taxes from consumers on non-temperature adjusted gallons, defendants receive a greater amount of tax from consumers than they paid on the same gallon of fuel. The plaintiffs in these cases seek, among other relief, recovery of excess taxes paid and punitive damages. Both types of cases seek compensatory damages, injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees and costs, and prejudgment interest.

The defendants filed motions to dismiss all cases for failure to state a claim, which were denied by the court on February 21, 2008. A number of the defendants, including Murphy Oil USA, Inc., subsequently moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or, in the alternative, for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiffs’ claims constitute non-justiciable “political questions.” The Court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss on political question grounds on December 3, 2009, and defendants request to appeal that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit was denied on August 31, 2010. In May 2010, in a lawsuit in which Murphy Oil USA, Inc. was not a party, the Court granted class certification to Kansas fuel purchasers seeking implementation of automated temperature controls and/or certain disclosures, but deferred ruling on any class for damages. Defendants sought permission to appeal that decision to the Tenth Circuit in June 2010, and that request was denied on August 31, 2010. On November 12, 2011, Defendants in the Kansas case filed a motion to decertify the Kansas classes in light of a new favorable United States Supreme Court decision. On January 19, 2012,

the Judge denied the Defendants’ motion to decertify and granted plaintiffs’ motion to certify a class as to liability and injunctive relief aspects of plaintiffs’ claims. The court has continued to deny certification of a damages class. On September 24, 2012, the jury in the Kansas case returned a unanimous verdict in favor of defendants finding that defendants did not violate Kansas law by willfully failing to disclose temperature and its effect on the energy content of motor fuel. On October 3, 2012 the judge in the Kansas case also ruled that defendants’ practice of selling motor fuel without disclosing temperature or disclosing the effect of temperature was not unconscionable under Kansas law. On January 23, 2013, the judge ordered that three cases not involving the Company venued in California be remanded for trial.

At this stage of proceedings, losses are reasonably possible, however, we cannot estimate our loss, range of loss or liability, if any, related to these lawsuits because there are a number of unknown facts and unresolved legal issues that will impact the amount of any potential liability, including, without limitation: (i) whether defendants are required, or even permitted under state law, to sell temperature adjusted gallons of motor fuel; (ii) the amounts and actual temperature of fuel purchased by plaintiffs; and (iii) whether or not class certification is proper in cases to which Murphy Oil USA, Inc. is a party. An adverse outcome in this litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Murphy USA is engaged in a number of other legal proceedings, all of which the Company considers routine and incidental to its business. Based on information currently available to the Company, the ultimate resolution of those other legal matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s net income, financial condition or liquidity in a future period.

 INSURANCE — The Company maintains insurance coverage at levels that are customary and consistent with industry standards for companies of similar size. Murphy USA maintains statutory workers compensation insurance with a deductible of $1 million per occurrence. As of September 30, 2013, there were a number of outstanding claims that are of a routine nature. The estimated incurred but unpaid liabilities relating to these claims are include in Trade account payables and accrued liabilities on the Consolidated and Combined Balance Sheet s . While the ultimate outcome of these claims cannot presently be determined, management believes that the accrued liability of $4.0 million will be sufficient to cover the related liability and that the ultimate disposition of these claims will have no material effect on the Company’s financial position and results of operations.

The Company was insured under Murphy Oil’s insurance policies for occurrences prior to the completion of the separation . The specifications and insured limits under those policies, however, were at a level consistent with Murphy Oil as a whole. Following the separation , the Company has obtain ed insurance coverage as appropriate for the business in which it is engaged , but may incur losses that are not covered by insurance or reserves, in whole or in part, and such losses could adversely affect our results of operations and financial position.