Environmental and Other Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2017
Environmental and Other Contingencies [Abstract]
Environmental and Other Contingencies	Note L – Environmental and Other Contingencies The Company’s operations and earnings have been and may be affected by various forms of governmental action both in the United States and throughout the world. Examples of such governmental action include, but are by no means limited to: tax increases, tax rate changes and retroactive tax claims; royalty and revenue sharing increases; import and export controls; price controls; currency controls; allocation of supplies of crude oil and petroleum products and other goods; expropriation of property; restrictions and preferences affecting the issuance of oil and gas or mineral leases; restrictions on drilling and/or production; 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. Murphy and other companies in the oil and gas industry are subject to numerous federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations dealing with the environment. Violation of federal or state environmental laws, regulations and permits can result in the imposition of significant civil and criminal penalties, injunctions and construction bans or delays. 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 and property damage 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 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 these wastes have been taken for disposal. In addition, many of these properties have been operated by third parties whose treatment and disposal or release of hydrocarbons or other wastes were not under Murphy’s control. Under existing laws the Company could be required to remove or remediate previously disposed wastes (including wastes disposed of or released by prior owners or operators), to clean up contaminated property (including contaminated groundwater) or to perform remedial plugging operations to prevent future contamination. Certain of these historical properties are in various stages of negotiation, investigation, and/or cleanup and the Company is investigating the extent of any such liability and the availability of applicable defenses. The Company has retained certain liabilities related to environmental matters at formerly owned U.S. refineries that were sold in 2011. The Company also obtained insurance covering certain levels of environmental exposures related to past operations of these refineries. The Company has not retained any environmental exposure associated with Murphy’s former U.S. marketing operations. The Company believes costs related to these sites will not have a material adverse affect on Murphy’s net income, financial condition or liquidity in a future period. Note L – Environmental and Other Contingencies (Contd.) During 2015, the Company’s subsidiary in Canada identified a leak or leaks at an infield condensate transfer pipeline at the Seal field in a remote area of Alberta. The pipeline was immediately shut down and the Company’s emergency response plan was activated. In cooperation with local governmental regulators, and with the assistance of qualified consultants, an investigation and remediation plan is progressing as planned and the Company’s insurers were notified. The Company has not yet established a complete estimate of the costs to remediate the site. Based on the assessments done, the Company recorded $43.9 million in Other expense during 2015 associated with the estimated costs of remediating the site. As of March 31, 2017, the Company has a remaining accrued liability of $7.1 million associated with this event. During the first quarter of 2017, the Company’s Canadian subsidiary paid approximately $130.0 thousand as the complete and final resolution of administrative penalties assessed by the Alberta Energy Regulator regarding this matter. Further refinements in the estimated total cost to remediate the site are anticipated in future periods including possible insurance recoveries. It is possible that the ultimate net remediation costs to the Company associated with the condensate leak or leaks will exceed the amount of liability recorded. The Company retained the responsibility for this remediation upon sale of the Seal field in the first quarter of 2017. There is the possibility that environmental expenditures could be required at currently unidentified sites, and new or revised regulations could require additional expenditures at known sites. However, based on information currently available to the Company, the amount of future remediation costs incurred at known or currently unidentified sites is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s future net income, cash flows or liquidity. Murphy and its subsidiaries are engaged in a number of other legal proceedings, all of which Murphy considers routine and incidental to its business. Based on information currently available to the Company, the ultimate resolution of environmental and legal matters referred to in this note is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s net income, financial condition or liquidity in a future period.

Note L – Environmental and Other Contingencies

The Company’s operations and earnings have been and may be affected by various forms of governmental action both in the United States and throughout the world. Examples of such governmental action include, but are by no means limited to: tax increases, tax rate changes and retroactive tax claims; royalty and revenue sharing increases; import and export controls; price controls; currency controls; allocation of supplies of crude oil and petroleum products and other goods; expropriation of property; restrictions and preferences affecting the issuance of oil and gas or mineral leases; restrictions on drilling and/or production; 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.

Murphy and other companies in the oil and gas industry are subject to numerous federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations dealing with the environment. Violation of federal or state environmental laws, regulations and permits can result in the imposition of significant civil and criminal penalties, injunctions and construction bans or delays. 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 and property damage 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 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 these wastes have been taken for disposal. In addition, many of these properties have been operated by third parties whose treatment and disposal or release of hydrocarbons or other wastes were not under Murphy’s control. Under existing laws the Company could be required to remove or remediate previously disposed wastes (including wastes disposed of or released by prior owners or operators), to clean up contaminated property (including contaminated groundwater) or to perform remedial plugging operations to prevent future contamination. Certain of these historical properties are in various stages of negotiation, investigation, and/or cleanup and the Company is investigating the extent of any such liability and the availability of applicable defenses. The Company has retained certain liabilities related to environmental matters at formerly owned U.S. refineries that were sold in 2011. The Company also obtained insurance covering certain levels of environmental exposures related to past operations of these refineries. The Company has not retained any environmental exposure associated with Murphy’s former U.S. marketing operations. The Company believes costs related to these sites will not have a material adverse affect on Murphy’s net income, financial condition or liquidity in a future period.

Note L – Environmental and Other Contingencies (Contd.)

During 2015, the Company’s subsidiary in Canada identified a leak or leaks at an infield condensate transfer pipeline at the Seal field in a remote area of Alberta. The pipeline was immediately shut down and the Company’s emergency response plan was activated. In cooperation with local governmental regulators, and with the assistance of qualified consultants, an investigation and remediation plan is progressing as planned and the Company’s insurers were notified. The Company has not yet established a complete estimate of the costs to remediate the site. Based on the assessments done, the Company recorded $43.9 million in Other expense during 2015 associated with the estimated costs of remediating the site. As of March 31, 2017, the Company has a remaining accrued liability of $7.1 million associated with this event. During the first quarter of 2017, the Company’s Canadian subsidiary paid approximately $130.0 thousand as the complete and final resolution of administrative penalties assessed by the Alberta Energy Regulator regarding this matter. Further refinements in the estimated total cost to remediate the site are anticipated in future periods including possible insurance recoveries. It is possible that the ultimate net remediation costs to the Company associated with the condensate leak or leaks will exceed the amount of liability recorded. The Company retained the responsibility for this remediation upon sale of the Seal field in the first quarter of 2017.

There is the possibility that environmental expenditures could be required at currently unidentified sites, and new or revised regulations could require additional expenditures at known sites. However, based on information currently available to the Company, the amount of future remediation costs incurred at known or currently unidentified sites is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s future net income, cash flows or liquidity.

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