You are on page 1of 156

United States Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Economic Impact Analysis

The Economic Impacts of GOM Oil and Natural Gas Development on the U.S. Economy

Prepared by:

Quest Offshore Resources, Inc. 1600 Highway 6, Suite 300 Sugar Land, TX 77478 June 2011

Prepared for: American Petroleum Institute (API) National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA)

Key Findings
generate tax revenues at all levels of This report has documented the decline in capital expenditures and operational government – if the government pursues a balanced regulatory approach that allows for the timely development of the backlog of GoM projects in an

spending of the GoM offshore oil and natural gas industry that occurred over the 2008 to 2010 period. The principal reasons for this decline include the economic recession in 2008-09 and the establishment of a moratorium on deepwater drilling and subsequent slowdown of permit issuance in both GoM deep and shallow waters in 2010 and into 2011. We estimate that tens of thousands of jobs have been lost in response to the decline in capital

environmentally

responsible

manner.

Under such government policy, we estimate total spending by the GoM offshore oil and natural gas industry to increase by over 70 percent by 2013 from 2010 levels, and capital

expenditures to increase by over 140 percent. If potential spending levels are reached, total employment supported by the Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry in 2013 could exceed 430 thousand jobs or a 77 percent increase from 2010.

expenditures and operational spending of the offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry over this period.

We

also

demonstrate

the

near

term

.

potential of the offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry to create jobs, boost GDP and

Table 1: Estimated Historical and Projected Capital and Operational Spending, GDP Impacts, and Employment Supported by the Offshore Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry (2008-2013)*
($b illions) 2008 Operating Expenditures Capital Expenditures GDP Impacts Total Employment $16.7 $11.9 $30.8 306,870 Historical 2009 $17.2 $9.7 $29.1 285,042 2010 $17.7 $6.5 $26.1 242,317 2011 $21.6 $8.9 $32.9 311,023 Projected 2012 $25.0 $10.4 $38.2 356,174 2013 $25.7 $15.7 $44.5 429,208
1

*Projected spending, GDP, and employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.

Source: Quest Offshore Resources, Inc.
1

Total employment includes direct, indirect, and income induced employment. i

i

...........118 Appendix 7: Selected Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Suppliers........... Review of Capital Investment and Operational Spending ..................101 Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells .............. Introduction ... 15 2-2 Uncertainty and Assumptions in Data Collection and Forecasting ..............................................................................113 Appendix 6: Employment Summary Table ............ 1 Economic Impacts Associated with Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas IndustryActivity .........................................…………………………................................................ Data Development ............................. 34 5-2 State and Regional Impacts .................................................................................................. ............................... Gulf of Mexico’s Offshore Oil & Natural Gas Industry .................................................. 40 6...................................................................... 94 Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations............................ National and State Economic Impacts.....30 5...................................................................................................... 84 Operate ........................ 89 Appendix 4: Explanation of Terms ...................................................... Conclusions ................ 42 Appendix 1: Summary of Non-Gulf Coast State Economic Impacts…........................... 67 Life Cycle of a Field Development ....................................109 Construction ................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 5 State Impacts............................................................... Appraisal and Definiton .... 18 3.............. 82 FEED (Front-End Engineering & Design) and Detailed Engineering .................................... 97 Oil and Natural Gas Extraction ............................ 33 5-1 Naitonal Impacts .......... ……....................... 11 1.........................................................................................................Table of Contents Executive Summary .........................................105 Mining and Oil and Natural Gas Field MachineryManufacturing .................................................................................................. 1 Capital Investment and Spending of the Oil and Natural Gas Industry – Gulf of Mexico .................................. 69 Concept Selection................................................................................................... 68 Assesment.....119 ii .. 11 2.......... 73 Project Sanctioning .................................................... Exploration.....................................................................................................................21 4..................................................…..........117 Estimated Historical and Projected Employment Summary Table ......... 83 Execute ..............................…......................................... I/O Methodology ....................S........................................ 88 Appendix 3: RIMS II I/O Model Definitions .......................... 93 Total Summary Tables .................................... International Capital Investment .........................……………... 8 Main Report .......................29 4-2 Spending Trends Within and Outside of the Gulf States……………….................................... 91 Appendix 5: RIMS Category Summary Tables .................................................................................................. 17 2-3 Allocation of Capital Investment and Operational Spending to States ..................................................................................23 4-1 Domestic vs.........................................................................................46 Appendix 2: Introduction to the U................................................................... 14 2-1 Overview of Quest Offshore Data Development ............................................................ …............................................................................................................ 37 5-3 Impacts on Other Industries .......

...................................................... Contributions to GDP..............2013) .... 4 Table 3: Total Estimated Historical and Projected Contribution to GDP due to the Offshore GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Investments and Spending (2008-2013).............................. MS................... 22 Table 8: Estimated Historical and Projected GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Domestic Spending Trends by Detailed Spending Type .............................. ................................. 92 Table 23: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Contribution to GDP by State Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013) ......................................................................................................................... 87 Table 22: Explanation of Terms ............Various Industries..... and Employment Impact for Other States due to Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013) ........................................................ GDP.................... 26 Table 9: Estimated Historical and Projected GoM Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Industry Domestic vs................................................... 6 Table 4: Total Employment Supported by the Gulf of Mexico Offshore Oil and Gas Industry by State (2013) .......................................... 20 Table 6: Steps to Determine Non................................... and Employment Supported by the Offshore GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry (2008-2013).... 20 Table 7: Determining State Spending by RIMS II Industrial Category .................................................GoM State Allocated Spending .............................. 71 Table 17: Estimated Historical and Projected Number of Platforms Installed in the GoM by Year (2008-2013) ................. 66 Table 16: Estimated Historical Offshore Drilling Rigs in Service (2009-2011) ..... 40 Table 14: Estimated Historical Sectoral GDP and Employment Impacts due to Offshore GoM Oil and Natura Gas Industry Activity (2010)........................... 82 Table 20: Average Estimated Historical 2010 GoM Deepwater Modu Day-Rates .. Non-Gulf State Total Spending (2008................. AL Direct................ 30 Table 10: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf States vs.. 95 iii .... 32 Table 12: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf Coast States Spending and GDP due to the Offshore GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry(2008-2013) ............................ 37 Table 13: Estimated Historical and Projected TX............................................................................ LA............................................... International Spending Trends ............................................................ 74 Table 18: Estimated Historical and Projected Number of Subsea Trees Installed in the GoM byYear ............................ Indirect and Induced Employmet (2008-2013) ............ 9 Table 5: Distance Multipliers .................................................................................................................................................................................................................i Table 2: Selected GoM Oil and Natural gas Industry Suppliers Outside the Gulf Coast.......... .....List of Tables Table 1: Estimated Historical and Projected Capital and Operational Spending...... Income and Profit Margin for Major Companies...................... 31 Table 11: Estimated Historical and Projected Key Development Equipment for Offshore GoM Oil and Natural Gas Fields (2008-2013) ............ 76 Table 19: Comparison of 2010 Revenue...... 84 Table 21: Estimated Historical and Projected Pipeline Capex Spent Overseas (2008-2013)........................................................................................ 41 Table 15: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Spending............................................94 Table 24: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Spending by State Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013) ...................

...................118 Table 42: Selected Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Suppliers.................121 iv ...........................115 Table 40: Estimated Historical and Projected Construction Employment by State (2008-2013).................................................................107 Table 34: Estimated Historical and Projected Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells Employment by State (2008-2013) .................................................................................................103 Table 31: Estimated Historical and Projected Oil and Natural Gas Extraction Employment by State (2008-2013) ....................................................102 Table 30: Estimated Historical and Projected Oil and Natural Gas Extraction Spending by State (2008-2013) ......................................................................................................................................Table 25: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Employment by State Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013)..............................................106 Table 33: Estimated Historical and Projected Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells Spending by State (2008-2013) .............114 Table 39: Estimated Historical and Projected Construction Spending by State (2008-2013).......110 Table 36: Estimated Historical and Projected Mining Oil and Natural Gas Field Machinery Manufacturing Spending by State (2008-2013) ..104 Table 32: Estimated Historical and Projected Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) .111 Table 37: Estimated Historical and Projected Mining Oil and Natural Gas Field Machinery Manufacturing Employment by State (2008-2013).................................................................................................................................................................100 Table 29: Estimated Historical and Projected Oil and Natural Gas Extraction Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) .....108 Table 35: Estimated Historical and Projected Mining Oil and Natural Gas Field Machinery Manufacturing Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013)...................99 Table 28: Estimated Historical and Projected Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations Employment by State (2008-2013) .................96 Table 26: Estimated Historical and Projected Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) ................................................98 Table 27: Estimated Historical and Projected Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations Spending by State (2008-2013) .......................................................................... ….......112 Table 38: Estimated Historical and Projected Construction Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) ...........................116 Table 41: Estimated Historical and Projected Employment Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Operations Summary Table (2008-2013) ............

.............................. 17 Figure 8: Estimated Historical and Projected GoM Oil and Natural Gas Spending Trends by Type of Spending (2008-2013) ...... 39 v ................................. 34 Figure 12: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Spending and Contribution to GDP of GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industy Activity (2008-2013)............................................... 8 Figure 5: Estimated Historical and Projected Employment in Gulf Coast and Non-Gulf Coast States due to GoM Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2008-2013) ............................................. Indirect and Induced Employment due to the Offshore GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2008-2013) ....................... 3 Figure 3: Estimated Historical and Projected Direct................................ Inc............................ 24 Figure 9: GoM Deep and Shallow Water Drilling Permit Approvals .......................... 7 Figure 4: Estimated Historical and Projected Spending of the GoM Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Industry in Gulf Coast and Non-Gulf Coast States (2008-2013) .....................Simplified Data Collection and Research Model ................... 16 Figure 7: Quest Spending Categories ............................ 27 Figure 10: Estimated Historical and Projected GoM Oil and Natural Gas Production Trends(2008-2013) ............................................... Other States (2008-2013) ........................................................................................................ 2 Figure 2: Estimated Historical and Projected Number of Projects and Capital Expenditures in the GoM (2008-2013) ...................................................................................List of Figures Figure 1: Estimated Historical and Projected Offshore GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Domestic Spending (2008............. 29 Figure 11: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Employment Supported by GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2008-2010)......................................... 35 Figure 13: Estimated Historical and Projected Direct and Indirect/Induced Jobs in Gulf Coast States Supported by GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity vs..........................2013) ... 9 Figure 6: Quest Offshore......................................................................................................

energy security.5 billion a year 2 activity supports employment across a wide swath of industries in manufacturing and services. Capital investments. This production is crucial to U. legal and insurance services. identifies linkages to supplying industries. which are This report builds out the entire value chain of oil and natural gas development and production in the Gulf of Mexico. (Quest). 3 1 . 3 associated natural development. including oil and natural gas machinery. over 30 percent of the oil and 11 percent of the natural gas produced in the United States was produced in the Gulf of Mexico (GoM). In 2010. capital investment and purchases of intermediate inputs of the oil and natural gas industry stimulate its entire value chain and ripple through many sectors of the economy. Inc. Operating expenditures. A unique feature and strength of this study is the primary nature of the capital investment and spending data. drawing on its proprietary database of suppliers of Industry investment and spending includes labor associated with design.S. It quantifies the capital investment and purchases of intermediate goods undertaken by the oil and natural gas industry. contributing to GDP and generating tax revenue at all levels of government. averaging $9.0 billion over the same three-year period. air and marine transport.6 billion or an average of $17. Oil and natural gas industry capital equipment and intermediate goods to Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas operations.S. which are required to bring new oil and natural gas production online. creating jobs. In addition. Total industry investment and spending in the GoM is estimated to have been $80 billion from 2008 to 2010 or an average of $26.3 billion per year over this period.2 billion per year . is able to bring primary data to bear on the issues of importance to this study. Capital Investment and Spending of the Oil and Natural Gas Industry – Gulf of Mexico Historical Spending 2008-2010 The development of oil and natural gas resources in the offshore Gulf of Mexico is highly capital intensive. GDP and job creation. Quest 2 Offshore Resources. fabrication. (Figure 1).Executive Summary The offshore oil and natural gas industry is instrumental to the United States both from an energy supply perspective and due to its contribution to U. Operating expenditures include labor for operations. and installation. totaled $28. and estimates both job creation and with contribution oil and to GDP gas comprised of purchases of intermediate inputs totaled $51.

the economic recession which began in of and late a 2008. Shallow water drilling increased slightly during that period while capital expenditures plummeted by 46 percent.Figure 1: Estimated Historical and Projected Offshore Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Domestic Spending (2008-2013)* $45 $40 $35 $30 Capital Expenditures Operating Expenditures Total Spending Billions $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.2 billion per year.5 billion to $24. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. Inc. Total spending in the Gulf of Mexico declined 15 percent over the 2008 to 2010 time period from $28. Operational expenditures drilling moratorium. Quest’s forecasts for Gulf of Mexico establishment moratorium deepwater drilling reduced spending are based on actual project developments in the Gulf of Mexico. and the significantly slowed due to a slowdown in permitting activity. 2 . Quest tracks individual projects on a day to day basis and utilizes actual contracts (when available) and historical benchmark data to 4 subsequent offshore permitting following the Macondo incident in 2010. Approximately one-third of the 2010 decline in capital investment was due to reductions in GoM shallow water capital investment even though the shallow water was not directly subjected to the drilling moratorium. The principal reasons for reduced GoM capital investment were declining energy prices. The 10 percent year-toyear decline in total spending and 33 percent decline in capital spending from 2009 to 2010 were due in large part to the 4 Projects are defined as oil field developments or oil field development components.

This project data. 3 .0 Billion $13.2 Billion 42 Projects $11.6 Billion 100 Number of Projects 80 53 Projects $12.0 Billion 83 Projects $21. coupled spending with for historical various benchmarks equipment of and expenditure data where possible. Quest has identified key providers to the oil and natural gas supply chain throughout the country.2 Billion 20 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Installation Year * Projected number of projects contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.1 Billion 28 Projects $16. provide the basis for Quest’s capital investment projections. services.best ascertain the timing and scope of future projects (Figure 2).2 Billion 23 Projects 31 Projects $11. Inc.1 Billion 60 72 Projects $17. operational expenditures are determined through benchmarking against comparable projects on a project by project basis.3 Billion 83 Projects $19. Operational expenditures are determined using actual Figure 2: Estimated Historical and Projected Number of Projects and Capital Expenditures in the Gulf of Mexico (2008-2013)* 140 Historical Shallow Water Historical Deepwater Projected Shallow Water Projected Deepwater 27 Projects $14. both along the Gulf Coast region and in other parts of the United States. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.2 Billion 40 27 Projects $14.7 Billion 90 Projects $16. When actual operational expenditures are not known. A sample of companies that contribute to the offshore oil and natural gas industry is identified in Table 2.4 Billion 120 37 Projects $20.

Inc.Dyne General Cable McDermott Flotation Technologies Aerotek Cashman Equipment Corporation Dow Chemical 3M Corporation Ingalls Shipbulding Emerson Electric Pieter Kiewit and Sons GE Energy Sponge. Mooring Systems Cable and Pipe Sealing Solutions Manufacture Centrifugal Pumps Mooring Rope Manufacturing Manufacture Tools Polymer Extrusionist and Material Science Drill Pipe Environment Cleaner Manufacture Specialty Electric Connectors Oilfield Service Machine Automation Custom Technical Ceramic Parts and Components Spill Response Services Energy and Environmental Research and Development  Equipment and Pipe Manufacturer Offshore Oil and Gas and Inland Marine Services What they do? Source: Quest Offshore Resources. High Performance Fibers Drilling Training Manufacture Valve Actuators & Control Systems Transport Specialist Technology Management Umbilicals. Topsides Automation Engineer and Build FPS Topsides and Platforms Measurement and Control Abrasive Blasting Topsides and Control Systems. Sioux Corporation Thomas & Betts Corporation Baker Hughes TankLogix Superior Technical Ceramics Corporation Marine Spill Response Corporation Rasmussen Equipment Company PCC Energy Group Veolia VES Special Services Marine Production Facility Supplier of Subsea Communication Systems Manufacture Fasteners Manufacture Electrical Industrial Motors. 4 . Please see Appendix 7 for a more comprehensive company list of Gulf of Mexico suppliers.Jet.IT APS Technology DuPont Oceaneering WIKA Instrument Corporation Structural Solution Caterpillar Trellborg Fisher Valves KMT Aqua. Honeywell Murchison Drilling Schools Rotork SOS Global Express Revel Digital Parker Corporation Roxtec Sulzer Pumps Whitehill Manufacturing Bad Dog Tools Zues. Inc. Inc.Table 2: Selected Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Suppliers State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Company Alabama Drydock & Shipping Company RJE International Inc Valley Forge & Bolt Manufacturing Co. Drives and Generators Specialized Water Solutions Engineer Band Clamping and Fastening Solutions Oilfield Equipment Manufacturer Upstream Oil and Gas Technology Solutions Manufacture Umbilicals Pressure & Temperature Messurement Solutions Architecture Design and Engineering Power Generation Insulation and Pipeline Technologies High Pressure Valves Water Blasting Technologies and Solutions Communications Wire and Cable Fabricator & Installer for Offshore Structures R&D and Maufacturing Distributed Buoyancy Offshore Oil and Gas Staffing Solutions Material Barges Pipeline and Subsea Equipment Insulation & Coatings Foams for Pipeline Insulation Construction and Repair for Commercial Marine Structures Provider of Process Management. Baldor Electric Company Compass Water Solutions BAND.

contributions to GDP. the GDP and employment impacts track the pattern over of the economic recession. royalties. largely attributable to the same forces driving the spending reduction over this period. To the extent that this does not happen.S GDP impact environment going forward. Our estimated economic impacts are likely conservative because they do not take into account the benefits of increased government revenue from bonus bids. Less than five percent of GoM operational spending and capital employment. investment is spent outside the U. (Table 3) If the issuance of permits returns to 5 . If this backlog of existing projects is developed in a timely manner spending by the Gulf of Mexico offshore oil and natural gas industry could change course and resume an upward trend. volatile energy prices.7 billion in 2013. Crucial to Quest’s spending/investment projection is the assumption that permitting rates in the Gulf of Mexico return to their pre-Macondo levels. declining historical period from 2008 to 2010 and rising over the projected period of 2011 to 2013.4 billion by 2013.9 billion in 2011. These factors have contributed to a large back log of projects which operators are expected to develop assuming a balanced regulatory spending/investment.S. The unique confluence of the global As expected. the deepwater drilling moratorium. and the slow down in GoM permit rates have aligned to drop Gulf of Mexico offshore spending to its lowest level in years. a 71 percent increase. They also do not account for the economic impact associated with certain profit type income. all spending and economic projections in this report would need to be revised downward accordingly. This rise in capital and operational spending would also facilitate an increase in associated with offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry spending is projected to improve to $32.Projected Spending 2011-2013 The vast majority of the Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry expenditures are spent domestically. a 141 percent increase from 2010 levels. The GDP impacts decreased by an estimated 15 percent from 2008 to 2010. Total domestic spending levels are projected to increase from the 2010 level of $24. after falling to its lowest level in the study period in 2010 at $26. The total U. and tax revenues at all levels of government.1 billion. Capital expenditures are projected to reach $15.2 billion to $41. Economic Impacts Associated with Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity Quest estimated both the employment and GDP impacts associated with offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry investment and spending at both national and state levels. and corporate income taxes.

a 28 percent increase on 2010 due to increased investments associated with long delayed projects.pre-Macondo levels required to support planned developments. This estimate is likely optimistic given the current rate of investments reached its lowest level over the study period in 2010 (Figure 3).S.1 2011 $32. Table 3: Total Estimated Historical and Projected Contribution to Gross Domestic Product due to the Offshore Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Investments and Spending. Quest estimated a 5 permitting. For 2010. the 2009 employment level is estimated to be 7 percent below 2008 levels. Even so. Induced employment is jobs supported by household spending of labor income earned either directly or indirectly from oil and natural gas business activity. the total contribution to U. Employment in 2011 is expected to grow to 310 thousand jobs. estimates of total employment (direct. 6 . To the extent that permitting rates do not return to historical levels.1 2010 $26. Indirect employment occurs throughout the supply chain of the oil and natural gas industry. these estimates would need to be adjusted downwards. Quest estimates that over 60 thousand of these jobs were within the oil and natural gas industry and 180 thousand were either indirect (providing equipment and services to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry) or induced jobs. with an estimated 242 thousand jobs supported by industry activity in 2010.2 2013 $44. Direct employment is defined as jobs within the oil and natural gas industry. employment is projected to reach its highest level in the study period at 430 thousand jobs which is a 20 percent increase on the 2012 level and a 77 percent increase over the 2010 level. Similar to GDP impacts. Inc. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.8 2009 $29.9 Projected 2012 $38. indirect and induced jobs ) associated with offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry 5 15 percent reduction in total jobs associated with GoM oil and natural gas industry activity compared to 2009. $billions (2008-2013)* Historical 2008 GDP Im pact Associated w ith GoM $30. Employment levels in 2012 are expected to increase by 15 percent compared to 2011 to 350 thousand jobs. GDP is expected to reach $44.5 * Projected GDP impacts contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. In 2013.5 billion by 2013. a 70% increase over the 2010 level. Likewise. the GoM offshore oil and natural gas industry is a significant provider of employment in the United States.

Figure 3: Estimated Historical and Projected Direct, Indirect and Induced Employment due to Offshore Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2008-2013)*
500,000 450,000 400,000

6

Historical ─ Direct Historical ─ Indirect and Induced

Projected ─ Direct Projected ─ Indirect and Induced

Number of Jobs

350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

* Projected employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. Source: Quest Offshore Resources, Inc.

6

Employment is defined as total payroll, and self employed employment inclusive of part time workers. Includes employment throughout the U.S. including states outside the Gulf region.

7

State Impacts
The majority of the spending/capital percent from 2008. Total employment in the four GoM states supported by the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry is estimated to have been 175 thousand in 2010, a decrease of 60 thousand (25 investments and therefore the majority of the associated economic impacts are estimated to occur in the four main producing Gulf coast states: Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. In 2010, 72 percent of

percent) from 2008 (Figure 5). The Gulf State’s direct oil and natural gas industry employment is estimated to have dropped by 25 thousand jobs over the same time period.

spending and investment, or approximately $17.5 billion, is estimated to have occurred in the four Gulf States (Figure 4), down 19

Figure 4: Estimated Historical and Projected Spending of the Gulf of Mexico Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Industry in Gulf Coast States and Non-Gulf States (2008-2013) *

$45 $40 $35

Historical ─ Gulf States Historical ─ Non-Gulf States

Projected ─ Gulf States Projected ─ Non-Gulf States

Spending in $Billions

$30 $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

* Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. Source: Quest Offshore Resources, Inc.

8

Figure 5: Estimated Historical and Projected Employment in Gulf Coast States and NonGulf States due to Gulf of Mexico Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (20082013)*
500,000 450,000
Historical ─ Gulf States Historical ─ Non-Gulf States Projected ─ Gulf States Projected ─ Non-Gulf States

Number of Jobs

400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

* Projected employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. Source: Quest Offshore Resources, Inc.

Table 4: Total Employment Supported by the Gulf of Mexico Offshore Oil and Gas Industry by State (2013)
Alabama Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Florida Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri 48,793 3,116 4,355 22,216 14,582 1,340 2,842 871 2,559 1,522 129,108 721 191 3,359 990 Nebraska New Jersey New Mexico New York North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming 971 480 12,842 165 143 6,150 20,000 3,911 148 140,213 1,570 978 1,555 1,272 2,010

Montana 161 * Projected employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.

Source: Quest Offshore Resources, Inc. 9

Reaching these employment levels will require a return to pre-Macondo permitting rates and a balanced regulatory estimated 29 percent increase in spending from 2010 is projected to spur an expansion of non-Gulf State employment to 110 thousand. GDP. Quest projects spending in the non-Gulf States due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico activity to increase to $10. and increase U. They are spread over a wide geographic area and ripple through many sectors of the economy. and for spurring job creation and economic growth.S. and employment increasing 77 percent are all predicated on the assumption of a return to historical rates of permitting. of This annual 65 Growth of the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry will be crucial for meeting U. the return to normal activity in the Gulf of Mexico in a safe and environmentally responsible manner is of utmost importance to the United States. they will only be able to do so according to the speed with which The positive economic impacts of the offshore oil and natural gas industry offshore drilling permits are granted. a 66 percent increase. This would represent an 80 percent increase over the 2010 employment levels and would be comprised of Coast States. The offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry is estimated to have spent $6. In light of the potential of the offshore oil and natural gas industry to create jobs.7 billion in 2010 outside the for Gulf 35 Coast percent and states. from oil and natural gas machinery manufacturers to marine and air transport services to food service providers servicing offshore operations and financial companies that provide financial services and insurance to the industry. The 2010 spending was 4 percent lower than in 2008 with employment 7 percent lower. environment that allows for a resumption of environmentally production. enhance U.8 billion as operators invest heavily to bring forward delayed projects. Quest’s projections of domestic spending increasing by 71 percent from 2010-2013.S.We estimate that supported employment levels could exceed 320 thousand in the four Gulf Coast states by 2013 if projected spending and investment levels are met (Table 4). accounted investment/spending supported thousand jobs in the non-Gulf of Mexico 10 . energy needs over the coming decades. energy security. contributions to GDP increasing by 70 percent. This approximately 85 thousand direct industry jobs and 235 thousand indirect and induced jobs.S. In 2013. safe development and While the industry remains committed to developing the natural resources located in the Gulf of Mexico. investments/spending in the Gulf of Mexico are not restricted to the Gulf States or limited to the oil and natural gas industry.

Introduction 11 .1.

7 viable. Quest Offshore Resources. Risers and Flowlines). This analysis accounts for all offshore GoM capital investment and operational spending through the entire “life cycle” of offshore operations.S. the full range of above and below water equipment must be designed and purchased. economy as a whole as well as estimates of economic contributions to individual states. Preceding this introductory section is the Key Findings and Executive Summary outlining all principal results and conclusions of this report.S. Following this is the I/O Methodology section that outlines how economic impacts from offshore development (both shallow and deepwater) on the U. 7 spending are estimated as well as how these impacts are allocated among the individual states. Quest is a full-service market research and consulting firm focused on the global deepwater oil and natural gas industry. energy security. Offshore equipment includes production platforms and potentially on-site processing facilities as-well as below water equipment generally referred to as SURF (Subsea. For projects that are commercially barrels per day of crude oil or 30 percent of 2010 domestic oil production. The full process necessary to bring an offshore field to production from initial appraisal to operation is detailed in Appendix 2.6 million gas project must go through a series of steps in order to be developed. Inc. GDP and tax revenues. The development of these resources provides positive economic impacts to our nation’s economy in terms of employment. Much of the analysis in this report relies on information that Quest has received directly from companies Finally the equipment must be installed and additional development wells must be drilled. This report assesses the total economic impacts of GoM section is the Data Development section outlining how Quest gathers data on current projects and creates projections of future offshore industry spending. It is also crucial to U. Includes offshore state waters. natural gas production (11 percent) originated from the GoM . and 6.Production of oil and natural gas from the offshore Gulf of Mexico (“GoM”) provides a significant share of total U. This report is structured as follows.S. (Quest) was commissioned by the American Petroleum Institute (API) and the National Ocean Industries Association (NOIA) to provide an evaluation of the impacts of offshore GoM oil and natural gas development. Immediately following this operating in the GoM. 12 . Umbilicals.7 billion cubic feet per day of U. Initial expenditures necessary to identify targets and estimate the potential recoverable resources in place include seismic surveys and the drilling and evaluation of exploration wells.S. oil and natural gas production. In the next section we Every offshore oil or natural review recent historical offshore capital investment and operational spending as well Source: Energy Information Administration. Approximately 1.

as project spending through 2013. The following national section and details the state estimated economic Quest Offshore is providing this study on the impacts of Gulf of Mexico offshore oil and natural gas development under the assumption that permits for offshore drilling which began to be reissued during the first half of 2011. and ultimately arriving back at pre- individual impacts including number of jobs supported as well as contributions to GDP. Appendixes included in this report are: Appendix 1: Summary of Non-Gulf Coast State Economic Impacts Appendix 2: An Introduction to the Offshore Oil & Natural Gas Industry Appendix 3: RIMS II I/O Model Definitions Appendix 4: Explanation of Terms Appendix 5: RIMS Category Summary Tables Appendix 6: Employment Summary Table Appendix 7: Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Suppliers Macondo rates. will continue to be issued at an increasing pace throughout the year. The final section of the report summarizes the main conclusions • • • • • • • and results. 13 . all spending and economic projections in this report would need to be revised downward accordingly. To the extent that this is not the case.

Data Development 14 .2.

As a function of Quest’s core business. and which lends it high credibility. but also projects that are in all stages of development from the prospect (or undrilled target) stage through to development. this information coupled with operators expected exploration and appraisal programs are used to take into account yet to be discovered and delineated fields that may be developed in the forecast time frame. and many others by providing detailed data and analysis on capital investment and operational spending undertaken by the offshore industry. financial firms. Quest Offshore tracks not only existing or historical projects. Quest builds up capital and operating expenditures on a project by project basis. is its reliance on primary data through direct contact with the industry’s supply chain. For projects without firm development information. This connection with operating oil and natural gas companies through to the smallest of equipment and service providers imparts a high quality/accuracy to the data. Quest serves the global community of operating oil and natural gas companies. Quest collects and develops market data from a variety of sources at the project-level (Figure 6).2-1 Overview of Quest Offshore Data Development Quest Offshore Resources. 15 . with detailed information recorded on the supply of the equipment develop and services oil and necessary natural to gas offshore projects. their suppliers. Quest utilizes benchmarking based on Quest’s proprietary databases to forecast development timing and scenarios. the company is daily engaged in the collection and analysis of data as it relates to the offshore oil and natural gas industry. is a fullservice market research and consulting firm focused on the global deepwater oil and natural gas industry. A unique feature of this analysis. This data is tracked in Quest’s proprietary Quest Enhanced Deepwater Development Database as well as other proprietary databases related to shipyards and other facets of the supply chain. Inc.

and fabrication and installation (Figure 7). industry presentations. industry white papers. The primary components of this proprietary database are the numerous pieces of offshore oilfield equipment and services that are used in the development of an offshore project. which were then cross classified according to shallow water This proprietary approach allows Quest to ensure a comprehensive “canvassing” of the industry. The designation of “Tertiary” data collection was reserved for areas of research that fell outside of the offshore oil and natural gas industry. Inc. such as press releases.Figure 6: Quest Offshore. Inc. Quest Offshore’s estimation of domestic GoM offshore spending was delineated into four primary categories (Geoseismic and Geophysical (G&G). 16 . which in turn facilitates a high level of validation and quality control needed to and deepwater. Drilling. .Simplified Data Collection and Research Model Research & Data Project-Level Data Primary Sources Quest Data Validation Process Quest Offshore Deepwater Development Database Market Data & Analysis Secondary Sources Consulting Tertiary Research Quest Supplemental Databases / Offline Data Records Client-Directed Consulting Source: Quest OffshoreResources. This information was collected in the same manner as described for secondary data development and relied heavily on public sources of information. Subsea Equipment and Facilities). Once collected and verified. financial reports (and other SEC filings). procurement. the data is housed and maintained in Quest Offshore’s Deepwater Development Database. capital and operations spending and further by engineering and labor. produce accurate analysis and forecasts. Secondary data development was also undertaken in this analysis and refers to any source of information and data that is not collected via direct contact with the industry. and other publicly available sources.

Operational costs were based on known operating costs for facilities and were extrapolated for unknown facilities based on benchmarks according to facility type. While Quest has provided the spending numbers according to a sound forecasting methodology that has 17 . while subsea equipment two to and major the facilities capital Energy Management and was combined with Quest’s forecast of shallow water platforms and wells to provide information on the number of shallow water developments for historical and forecast years. umbilicals and other associated equipment. drilling constitutes the actual drilling of the wells. and roughly follow the life cycle of a field described in the “LifeCycle of a Field Development” section (Appendix 2).Figure 7: Quest Spending Categories G &G Drilling Subsea Equip. pipelines and wells was collected from the Bureau of Ocean macroeconomic conditions. pipelines. This information was then combined with estimated costs for the various equipment pieces to provide estimates of capital investment. 2-2 Uncertainty and Assumptions in Data Collection and Forecasting As with any market forecast. constitutes expenditures the related equipment needed to bring the field into production. Inc. and age. These categories represent the four main expenditure classes of offshore oil and natural gas production. production. the projections provided herein are subject to change according to the dynamics of the offshore oil and natural gas industry and Information on the number of historical shallow water platforms. Facilities Shallow Water Capex Engineering & Labor Deepwater Capex Engineering & Labor Opex Opex Procurement & Fabrication Procurement & Fabrication Installation Installation Source: Quest Offshore Resources. G&G or geological and geophysical describes the work done before drilling to identify drilling prospects. Facilities are platforms and floating production units that act as the physical location where oil or natural gas is initially produced as well as drilling and control centers. Subsea equipment includes trees. facility size.

For example. and accounts for 18 . due to the level of detail available in Quest’s data. This allows Quest to provide accurate information on the supply chain accounting for a majority of capital spending which enables Quest to allocate a majority of historical spending to the location where it was spent. field Quest has relied on its industry experience to assign the cost of equipment to certain states based on known manufacturing contracts placed with equipment providers. floating production unit construction takes place at shipyards in known locations so this spending is placed into the appropriate states. This level of spending – referred to herein as “Primary Spending” – represents the cost for goods and services that can be assigned to certain components of development projects. In that particular. When determining spending by state. a changed economic outlook or regulatory environment could have a significant impact on the forecast this contained herein. analysis assumed permitting rates in the Gulf of Mexico return to their pre-Macondo levels over the 2011 to 2013 period. Quest has utilized these actual historical spending breakdowns to extrapolate the spending locations for future projects. In particular. To the extent that this does not happen. via the data contained in Quest’s database. Other key equipment manufacturing and support services also take place at known location allowing this spending to be accurately placed in the appropriate state as well. capital investment and associated economic impacts would need to be adjusted downward. Quest industry. believes that both historical and projected capital investment projections provided herein are based upon the highest quality data available. and are realistic given the universe of development projects that are assumed to be undertaken through 2013.been widely accepted throughout the offshore oil and natural gas industry. 2-3 Allocation of Capital Investment and Operational Spending to States The data compiled for this analysis allows for a comprehensive characterization of the complete value chain associated with oil and natural gas field developments in the Gulf of Mexico. Also. spending for a subsea production system can be tied directly to a specific state based on which manufacturer is producing the final product (given Quest’s knowledge manufacturing of oilfield equipment Platform and locations). Quest is able to track the supply chain involved in the equipment by location. this data provides Quest with the ability to tie offshore capital investment with specific pieces of equipment for known and named offshore Hence. which should continue to provide an accurate depiction of the location of supplies associated with primary offshore oil and natural gas capital investment and operational spending. there will remain some margin of error (or uncertainty) when assessing longterm activity for individual companies. Additionally.

Quest weighted the state level oil and natural gas intensity factors by distance factors (given below) under the assumption that the further the distance between the state and the GoM. The non-Gulf of Mexico allocated spending was assigned to states using a measure of oil and natural gas industry “intensity” by state. Due to the complexity of the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas supply chain some of the state locations for some spending could not be determined with certainty. Quest’s proprietary database provides this level of detail for all major components of developments. construction and installation locations for projects in the Gulf of Mexico. manufacturing of oil and natural gas equipment and support services. Quest used this data to determine historical spending trends by state for those parts of developments with known manufacturing locations. which allows Quest to track manufacturing. Initially each state was apportioned the primary spending that could be reasonably determined due to Quest’s knowledge of the oil and natural gas supply chain. spending occurring within one of the four GoM states and spending deemed to have occurred outside the GoM region. the less likely it is that the allocated spending occurred there.over half of the total annual spending. A measure of oil and natural gas intensity by Allocation of spending across states was carried out as follows. For the Gulf of Mexico states. the allocated spending was partitioned by state based upon the need for the equipment and services in offshore Gulf operations and the assessed ability of each Gulf of Mexico state to provide them. This spending (referred to as allocated) was divided into two sections. 19 . Quest then utilized these historical trends to project spending locations by state associated with potential future projects. state was developed with Bureau of Economic Analysis state level data on oil and natural gas production. and engineering and management services provided to the oil and natural gas industry.

TX GA. FL. MD UT. WY. NC. CO. AR.Table 5: Distance Multipliers Band Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Band 4 Band 5 Band 6 Distance Multiplier 36% 25% 16% 12% 8% 2% Example of States AL. TN MO. IL NE. MT. NY. Table 6: Steps to Determine Non-Gulf of Mexico State Allocated Spending Step Number 1 2 3 4 5 Determining Non-GoM State Allocated Spending Calculate total non-GoM allocated spending Calculate state oil and gas intensity factor Calculate distance weighted state oil and natural gas intensity factor Calculate state share of non-GoM allocated spending Calculate state GoM allocated spending Source: Quest Offshore Resources. CT AK. 20 . ND Source: Quest Offshore Resources. IA. LA. MS. Inc. This resulting weighted state intensity factors were employed to determine each state’s share of allocated non-Gulf of Mexico capital investment and operational spending. Inc. KY. HI.

I/O Methodology 21 .3.

manufacturing to the Economic employed to estimate GDP and employment impacts from the estimated capital investment and operational spending data. oil and natural manufacturing category. construction. e. Quest followed the same procedure to estimate employment impacts for each state. corresponding Rims II GDP multipliers and summing the products. Inc. For each state and for each year primary and allocated spending were partitioned into five BEA industrial sectors corresponding to the relevant Rims II multipliers (drilling oil of natural gas wells. Table 7: Determining State Spending by RIMS II Industrial Category Step Number 2 3 4 5 Determining State Spending by Category Apportion State Primary Spending by RIMS II Industrial Category Apportion State Allocated Spending by RIMS II Industrial Category Calculate Total Spending by RIMS II Industrial Category Sum State Totals to Calculate National Impacts Source: Quest Offshore Resources. Reported national GDP impacts and employment are the sum total of the individual state impacts. etc. drilling spending to the drilling category. This was accomplished by utilizing the detailed industry effects of spending provided by the BEA RIMS II model multipliers (which detail the industry by industry activity for each spending category).g. support activities for oil and natural gas operations. 22 . Rims II multipliers give contribution to GDP and employment per unit increase in final per dollar spending. Primary and allocated spending across these categories was then summed to provide yearly state by state totals for each category (Table 7). 8 For a more detailed explanation of the RIMS II multipliers please see Appendix 2. using the appropriate spending and corresponding Rims II employment multipliers. This was accomplished by dividing spending according to the activity type this spending entailed.Rims II Input/Output Bureau of 8 multipliers from the Analysis were gas extraction. Direct and indirect/induced employment State level GDP impacts were estimated by multiplying the capital and operational spending (partitioned into BEA industrial sectors as described above) by the impacts were derived from total employment impacts. mining and oil and natural gas field machinery manufacturing).

Review of Capital Investment and Operational Spending 23 .4.

Gulf of Mexico’s offshore oil and natural gas industry invests billions of dollars each year for the development and $26.5 billion. In 2010. which fell to $6. spending again declined to $24. 9 Capital spending includes labor associated with design.4 billion from $9.9 billion. and installation 24 . For 2009. Inc. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.2 billion despite the economy beginning to recover. fabrication.6 billion (Figure 8). The annual sums invested in the Gulf of Mexico are regularly in the tensof-billions of dollars range. are more accurately indicated by the 33 percent decrease in capital spending from 2009 to 2010. spending fell 6 percent to Figure 8: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf of Mexico Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Spending Trends by Type of Spending (2008-2013)* $45 $40 $35 $30 Capital Expenditures Operating Expenditures Total Spending Billions $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.The U.S. making this sector one of the most capital intensive industries in the economy. The impacts of the moratorium 9 operation of offshore oil and natural gas fields that provide critical energy resources to the country. This 10 percent decrease was due primarily to the drilling moratorium and the slowdown in permitting after the Macondo incident. due primarily to the global recession. Spending due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry in 2008 was $28.

operational expenditures 10 causing) significant reductions in spending. It should also be noted that shallow water spending activity in the Gulf has been adversely affected due to a significant slowdown in permitting activity in 2010 (despite their being no official moratorium on shallow water permits) with shallow water capital expenditures down 32 percent in 2010 as compared to 2009 (Table 8).2 billion in spending in 2010. Capital expenditures are expected to be highest over the study period relative to operating expenditures in 2013 at $15. While the federal moratorium on offshore deepwater drilling activity and subsequent regulatory changes caused (and are still 10 Operational spending includes labor for operations. expenditures of $41. the future for the region has the potential to be very positive and could see increasing levels of spending under a balanced accounted for 64 percent of total spending (its highest over the 2010-2013 period) due to a major decrease in capital investment of 46 percent compared to 2008. A significant backlog of projects are expected to proceed if and when regulatory uncertainties are removed. 25 .7 billion.4 billion. or 38 percent of total regulatory environment.Of the $24.

8 Shallow Water Total Shallow Water Total OPEX 2009 $11.5 $0.9 2009 $0.4 Operating Expenditures (Billions) Deepwater Deepwater 2010 $6. Inc.9 $9.6 $1.0 $1.3 $1.8 2008 $0.3 $5.1 2010 $0.1 $1.3 2013 $15.1 $21.3 $0.5 $26.3 $0.2 $1. The most affected sector was the drilling sector. The drilling sector is also expected to see the most significant growth in spending if a return to historical conditions occurs.9 $2.8 $1.1 $3.8 $9.4 $0.9 $6.3 Shallow Water 2012 $0.1 $2.2 Shallow Water Total Spend $28.7 $6.3 2011 $0.5 Shallow Water G&G Drilling Facilities SURF Total Shallow Water Total CAPEX 2009 $0.1 $17.4 $0.9 $15. with spending expected to be up by 113 percent over 2008 levels reaching $3. overall spending (both deep and shallow water) fell by 10 percent.7 2013 $10.1 $4.4 $41.8 $1.4 $25.8 $1.7 2011 $8.1 $1.1 $2.5 $8.3 $5.1 $2.5 $35.2 2010 $0.7 2010 $11.3 $1.9 2012 $15.0 $5.4 $0.2 2011 $0.1 $1.Table 8: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Domestic Spending Trends by Detailed Spending Type* Capital Expenditures (Billions) Historical Projected Deepwater G&G Drilling Facilities SURF Total Deepwater 2008 $0.1 2013 $0.1 $2.9 $16.6 $0.4 $0.9 $1.8 $6. Facilities spending is also expected to see significant growth from 2010 to 2013.4 $3.1 $4.8 2008 $10.9 $24.1 $11.2 billion.5 2011 $13.6 2012 $9.9 Deepwater 2012 $0. For this particular category.1 $0.0 $2.1 $4.9 $6.7 2013 $0.1 $25.0 $17. which saw a 41 percent decrease in spending during the period as deepwater drilling all but halted for two quarters of the year due to the moratorium and shallow water drilling significantly declined due to the extreme slowing of drilling permit issuances.3 $4.2 $3.9 $10. From 2009-2010.2 Total Deepwater 2008 $5. with drilling spending in 2013 expected to rise 165 percent from 2010 levels to $9.0 $3.1 $2.1 $3.1 billion.3 $4.5 $0. 2010 spending was 26 .0 2009 $6.6 $0.5 $1.5 * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.2 $30.

Mexico.8 billion seen in 2008. and ultimately arriving back at levels seen prior to the Macondo incident (Figure 9). due to the drilling moratorium pushing the next big wave of very large projects further out into the future. 27 . Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.actually 236 percent higher at $1. Inc. which began to be reissued during the first half of 2011. which had already completed exploration and appraisal drilling moved forward. It is important to note that Quest Offshore is providing the spending forecasts used in this report on the U. Quest’s spending projections are based on actual projects to be developed in the Gulf of Figure 9: Gulf of Mexico Deep and Shallow Water Drilling Permit Approvals 14 Oil Spill 12 Number of Permits Moratorium Lifted 10 8 6 4 2 0 Deep Water Shallow Water Note: Excludes Water Injection Wells Source: Greater New Orleans.S. risers. coupled with operators expected exploration and appraisal programs which are used to take into account yet to be discovered and delineated fields that may be developed in the forecast time frame.4 billion in 2010. This level will still be slightly below the $3. will continue to be issued at an increasing pace throughout the year. pipelines and umbilicals is expected to grow 125 percent to $3. Subsea spending inclusive of hardware.2 billion in 2013 from $1. Gulf of Mexico’s offshore oil and natural gas industry under the assumption that permits for offshore drilling.5 billion than in 2008 as specific large projects. Such major projects drive subsea spending through major hardware and pipeline installation contracts.

The capital investment and operational spending projections estimated by Quest Offshore rely on the assumption that permitting activity in the U. rather it has delayed the sanctioning of numerous world class deepwater projects postponing deepwater production growth into 2015-2016. companies still exist. Increases in production will lag spending due to the time necessary for development to come online. Quest’s forecast for both oil and natural gas GoM production would need to be revised downward if permitting activity does not see a significant increase from current levels. Recent increases in on-shore natural gas production have made purely natural gas targets in the Gulf less attractive.8 million barrels per day by 2016 given that many large capital projects have already been sanctioned. One upside to Quest’s production projections is that natural gas production could be higher if there is a relatively greater If there is a return to historical permitting levels and annual GoM investment and amount of associated gas with newly developed oil projects. GoM oil production levels could reach approximately 1. Quest projects declining natural gas production through 2013 followed by several years of relative steady production levels of around 5 Bcf per day. it is important to note that the projects slated for evaluation and development by oil operational spending levels increase as forecasted. as well as the first half of 2011. investment levels and projected economic impacts estimated herein would need to be revised downward. The halt in drilling permits has likely not resulted in cancellation of these projects. Gulf of Mexico will see a noticeable increase during the second half of 2011 further accelerating in 2012 and continue into the future as oil companies. drilling contractors and federal regulators work to restore permitting rates back to historical levels.Although activity has slowed dramatically in 2010. 28 . To the extent that this is not the case.S. Quest projects that GoM oil production will begin to increase after 2013 (Figure 10).

Figure10: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Production Trends 3. This changed only slightly for the 29 . are fabricated in the United States. which are the more technically complex and thus expensive equipment.5 8 6 4 0. International Capital Investment As many of the service providers employed by the oil and natural gas industry are located overseas. account Operating for the expenditures..5 2 0. for instance.0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Oil Total BOE Natual Gas 1.5 14 12 10 2. the processing and production topsides. it is important to built in an Asian shipyard.0 0 Source: Energy Information Administration.0 16 Millions of Barrels of Oil Equivelent per day 2.0 Bcf per Day 1. steel pipe and floating production system hulls. consisting of. while the hull is likely maintain and operate existing producing assets. Most of the internationally purchased equipment is of relatively lower value. spending which to understand what portion of the capital investment remains in the U.S. Quest Offshore Resources 4-1 Domestic vs. the vast majority is used to purchase equipment and structures manufactured in the United States. and what part flows to other countries. 98 percent of total spending (capital investment and operational spending) was domestic with an average of only 2 percent occurring overseas. From 2008 to 2010. Quest’s required analysis reveals that while a portion of offshore capital investment flows abroad. account on average for 66 percent of spending over the 2008-2013 period and occur almost exclusively in the United States. For floating production systems.

2 $0. International Spending Trends (2008-2013)* $Billions Spending Domestic International Total Percentage of Spending Domestic International 97% 3% 99% 1% 97% 3% 96% 4% 97% 3% 97% 3% 2008 $28.4 $1. Quest estimates that a significant portion of the spending.9 2011 $30. and throughout many sectors of the economy. Mississippi. The primary reason spending is significantly higher in the Gulf states is due to supplying firms location near to production due to the cost (or in some cases impossibility) of transporting supplies and equipment and the need for services to be located close to producing areas.5 $1.43 $31. occurs over a wider geographic area outside the Gulf.9 * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. spending outside the region results in the economic impacts of GoM offshore development being felt throughout the U.9 $0.9 Projected 2012 $35.76 $29.4 $0.3 Historical 2009 $26. This is due to a higher share of capital spending flowing overseas (primarily floating production units hull and pipelines) relative to the earlier time frame (Table 9).period 2011-2013 with 97 percent of total spending being domestic compared to 3 percent occurring overseas.71 $24.94 $36.5 $0. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. 4-2 Spending Trends Within and Outside of the Gulf States The majority (roughly three-quarters) of GoM offshore operational spending and investment occurs in the Gulf Coast states: Texas.3 2010 $24. about one-quarter. Table 9: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf of Mexico Offshore Oil and Natural Gas Industry Domestic vs. Inc. Despite this.40 $27. and Alabama (Table10). 30 .S. Louisiana.45 $42.3 2013 $41.

5 $9. Mississippi and Texas account for 74 percent of spending on average.1 $26.8 $12.3 $9.9 $0.4 73% 27% 2013 $4.3 $8.0 $7.5 $10.0 $28.7 $0. Inc.0 $0. TX Other States $3.Table 10: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf State vs. as non-Gulf Coast States see most of their spending from capital expenditures. After dismal showings in 2009 Although it may appear that the estimated amount of spending in non-Gulf Coast States is not significant.8 $41. A relatively higher proportion of operational expenditures occur in the Gulf States. The Gulf States Alabama.8 billion in 2013.7 $9.9 74% 26% 2010 $2.4 74% 26% * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. MS. with development activity expected to increase steadily into the forecast period.3 72% 28% 2011 $3. 31 . Spending is expected to grow 61 percent to $10.7 $24.3 $9. and up to 76 percent of spending (in 2008). that constitute these percentages.3 $6.3 $7. This spending thus contributes to both GDP and employment impacts outside the immediate Gulf Coast area.3 $8.4 $30.3 $0. number of wells drilled and miles of pipelines installed are projected to begin to steadily grow (Table 11).5 76% 24% 2009 $3.4 $10. it is important to understand the absolute scale of investment and 2010. LA.7 $7.3 $8.6 $0.7 $7. Louisiana. The percentage of total spending is higher in the Gulf States in years with less capital investment. the estimated amount of spending totaled $6.4 $12. Growth in operational expenditures accounts for the slight decline in the share of total expenditures in non-Gulf Coast States over the forecast period.7 billion across 36 non-Gulf Coast States. Non-Gulf State Total Spending (2008 –2013)* Domestic Spending ($billions) Hi s tori ca l 2008 Alab ama Louisiana Mississippi Texas Other States Total Spending AL.0 $8.5 72% 28% Projected 2012 $4. Forecasted spending increases are driven by increases in development activity in the Gulf of Mexico. key indicators of development activity such as host facilities. In 2010.2 $10.4 $35. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.3 $0.

9 $1.1 $1.6 $1.0 $7.0 $1.828 850 353 730 1.7 $6.6 $0.1 $2.Table 11: Estimated Historical and Projected Key Development Equipment for Offshore Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Fields (2008-2013)* Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Host Facilities Drilling Domestic Domestic # of Wells # of Units Spend Spend ($Billions) ($Billions) 148 57 52 183 169 171 $0.4 * Projected Activity contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.7 Pipelines Domestic Miles Spend ($Billions) 1.7 $0. Inc.3 $5.0 566 320 252 247 414 615 $6.3 $0.0 $3.0 $3.7 $0.0 $2. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.050 1. Projected Historical 32 .070 $1.

National and State Economic Impacts 33 .5.

000 200.000 50.000 300. the tail end of a strong investment period which had seen development activity increase and economic impacts grow. royalties.) and induced jobs (meaning jobs throughout the economy that result from the spending of income from direct and indirect employment such as waiters. etc. The year 2008 coincided with. Approximately 90 thousand of those jobs were directly related to the industry (meaning jobs working directly for oil and natural gas companies or for contractors that are directly paid by the oil and natural gas industry) while 220 thousand 11 were indirect (meaning jobs providing goods and services to oil companies such as components for manufacturing. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. 34 . and corporate income taxes. service providers. Figure 11: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Employment Supported by Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2008 . Inc 11 GDP and employment impact results are likely conservative because they do not take into account the economic impacts of increased government revenue from bonus bids.000 Historical─ Direct Historical─ Indirect and Induced Projected─ Direct Projected─ Indirect and Induced Number of Jobs 350. etc).000 150. automobile manufacturers.8 billion (Figure 12) .000 250. retail workers.000 400.5 billion which translated into a total GDP impact of over $30.000 100. legal and financial services.000 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 * Projected employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. This impact was felt throughout the country and supported over 305 thousand jobs nationwide (Figure 11).000 450. Nor do they account for the impacts of certain profit type income associated with oil and gas operations.5-1 National Impacts Overall spending for the Gulf of Mexico offshore industry in 2008 was over $28.2013)* 500.

The year 2010 saw capital investment and operational spending fall to its lowest level over the period of interest to $24. in part due to the effects of the economic recession. Inc. This economic activity supported approximately 285 thousand jobs in total of which 80 thousand were direct.2 billion. This was primarily due to the moratorium on drilling in the deepwater GoM and the subsequent lack of deepwater drilling permits issued and the associated slow down in drilling in the capital investment and operational spending in 2010. Figure 12: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Spending and Contribution to GDP of Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2008-2013)* $50 $45 $40 $35 Historical ─ Spending Historical ─ GDP Projected ─ Spending Projected ─ GDP $Billions $30 $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. As a result of the decrease in investment and operational spending fell to $27.1 billion with an associated GDP impact of just over $29. industry capital shallow water due to the decrease in permits issued. This employment levels associated with GoM offshore oil and natural gas development falling to roughly 240 thousand jobs of which 60 thousand were direct jobs and 180 thousand were indirect and induced jobs. 35 .1 billion despite the stirrings led to of total economic recovery. Overall this was a 21 percent decline nationwide from supported employment levels in 2008. the total GDP impact decreased to $26. and 205 thousand were indirect and induced jobs.In 2009. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.3 billion (Figure 12). contributions to GDP fell 15 percent nationwide.

4 billion. a 16 percent increase over thousand jobs of which 90 thousand are 36 . which was an optimistic assumption not in line with current permitting rates. Total supported employment is estimated at 311 thousand jobs of which 80 thousand are direct and 230 thousand are indirect and induced.5 billion. This would represent a 15 percent increase in supported employment from 2011 and an 18 percent increase in contribution to GDP. intermediate goods ripple through many sectors of the economy. Examples include the transportation and warehousing sectors with increases of $340 million in 2010. A large portion of this projected spending increase stems from major projects far along in the development cycle which had been delayed in the previous two years. the health care and social assistance industry. with a $686 million increase. Alabama and Mississippi region almost all sectors of the economy benefit. and the food service industry. Capital spending is Finally we estimate that in 2013. In the combined Louisiana. it is estimated that capital and operational spending in the GoM could reach $35. again assuming a return to historical permitting rates in the GoM. This would represent a 28 percent increase in employment over 2010 and a 24 percent increase in contributions to GDP. This is projected to grow at the fastest rate at 17 percent due to more and more delayed projects beginning development while operational expenditures are projected to increase by 16 percent as more projects come into production. (an optimistic assumption not met). investment and spending should reach nearly $41. resulting in a total GDP impact of over $32. In 2012.2 billion. which shows a $2. projects which had seen their exploration and appraisal drilling halted by the drilling moratorium should see final investment decisions and subsequent major spending. This uptick in activity should see the industry and its suppliers hiring with total supported employment associated with GoM oil and natural gas development projected to reach 355 estimated to result in a total GDP impact of $44.5 billion increase. Texas.3 billion.Our industry capital investment and Economic impacts from oil and natural gas capital investment and purchases of operational spending outlook for the GoM in 2011 was predicated on a return to historical permitting rates by the second half of 2011. which is projected to yield all time record investment and spending levels under the assumption that permitting rates in the GoM had returned to pre-Macondo levels by mid 2011.4 billion resulting in an estimated GDP impact of over $38. direct and 265 thousand are indirect and induced. In 2013. Spending is expected to reach $30. the real estate industry. with a $221 million increase.5 billion.

1 $10.2 $4.3 2013 $4.1 $0.8 2010 $2.1 2011 $3.7 $12.4 $0.3 $0.4 $0. Louisiana.9 $13. These states are the location of most of the primary spending for capital equipment and purchases of intermediate inputs needed for the operational activities of the Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry.8 $19. MS.0 $8.5 2009 $3.1 Projected 2012 $4. a 21 percent increase over the 2012 level.4 $0.0 $28.0 $0.3 $9.3 $8.3 $9.6 $7.1 $24.9 $21.6 $33.7 billion of spending.3 $9. the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry is instrumental in the economic health of these states. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. Mississippi.1 $30.5 $15.7 $13.7 $2.7 $10.3 billion. In 2010.9 $17. Louisiana accounting for $7.3 billion (Table 12). and Alabama.0 $3. manufacturing of equipment.3 $11. $0. MS.2012.1 $26. TX Total Contribution to GDP: AL.3 $0. support of offshore activities.4 $9. LA.1 billion in 2010 with $2.4 billion in Louisiana. and fabrication of employment is estimated to comprise 115 thousand of these jobs while 315 thousand are estimated to be indirect and induced. spending in these four states totaled $17.4 $0.3 billion of spending and Texas $7.2 billion in Mississippi and $8. This would represent a 21 percent increase in supported employment from 2012 and a 17 percent increase in contribution to GDP.5 billion.2 $7. Mississippi accounting for $0.7 $0.8 $0.6 $8.3 $0.2 $8.6 $23.2 * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. capital investment and operational 5-2 State and Regional Impacts The Gulf Coast states. (including the federal waters of these states) are areas which produce oil and natural gas and receive the majority of the spending from the offshore oil and natural gas industry in the Gulf of Mexico. LA.3 $3.8 $4. Inc. The total contribution to GDP of these states associated with GoM offshore oil and natural gas activity stood at just over $19.9 billion in Texas. with Alabama accounting for $2.5 $19. Due to this concentration of primary investment and spending.3 $7. 37 . activities such as engineering and management.6 $21. Table 12: Estimated Historical and Projected Gulf Coast States Spending and GDP Impacts due to the Offshore Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2008-2013)* Historical Billions AL Spending AL Contribution to GDP LA Spending LA Contribution to GDP MS Spending MS Contribution to GDP TX Spending TX Contribution to GDP Total Spending: AL. platforms and topsides are widespread.4 $12.0 $9.3 $0. with the primary four being Texas.2 $8.7 $10. propelling employment levels to an all time high of 430 thousand jobs. $7. Direct Throughout the Gulf Coast.3 $10. TX 2008 $3.5 $3.6 billion centered in Alabama.0 $9.2 $22.

particular for 2013. Mississippi $0. Louisiana at $12. Louisiana. and Texas. Louisiana $13 billion.4 billion and Texas at $15. defined as Alabama.2 billion. This investment and purchases of intermediate inputs is estimated to increase GDP in the four state area by over $33.9 billion. Mississippi at $0. In providers to the industry are located near to the Gulf coast. Employees on drilling rigs and other offshore personnel who often work offshore for two week stretches normally live close to their onshore bases for ease of transportation. Mississippi.4 billion and Texas at $12.8 billion. investment and in Alabama oil associated natural with gas In 2010 the Gulf Coast States.1 billion.5 billion. These states see the highest employment levels due to the concentration of spending in the region as many goods and services GoM and development is estimated at $4. assuming that permitting rates in the Gulf of Mexico return to pre-Macondo levels. 38 .In 2013 capital investment and purchases of intermediate goods are projected to reach their highest levels in the studied period. Jobs tied directly to the industry were estimated at 42 thousand while indirect and induced jobs were estimated at 135 thousand. Total capital investment and spending in the four state region is projected to reach $30. spending offshore More specifically. the contributions to GDP in Alabama due to GoM offshore oil and natural gas industry activity is projected to be $4.6 billion. saw employment levels of 175 thousand due to Gulf of Mexico offshore oil and natural gas industry activity (Figure 13).7 billion.

000 50. induced jobs in the Gulf States were due to the GoM offshore oil and natural gas industry’s investment and spending (Table 13).Gulf States Number of Jobs 200.Gulf States 300. 15 hundred jobs supported in Mississippi and 63 thousand jobs were employment at 7 thousand in Alabama. Other States (2008-2013)* 350.000 100.000 Historical ─ Gulf States Projected ─ Gulf States Projected ─ Non. At the time of the moratorium the Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Natural Gas 18 thousand in Louisiana. 12 Source: Louisiana Mid-Continent Oil and Natural gas Association 39 . 52 thousand jobs supported in Louisiana. 500 in Mississippi and 16 thousand in Texas. with a maximum of 33 rigs having been idled at the peak. In 2010 an estimated 135 thousand indirect and Association stated that for every idle rig platform there were 800-1400 jobs at risk. 19 thousand jobs in Alabama were supported due to the indirect and induced effects of offshore oil and Direct employment associated with oil and natural gas operations in the Gulf States stood at 42 thousand in 2010. Inc.000 250. 12 According to the association wages lost for these jobs could exceed $5 to $10 million for one month per platform.Figure 13: Estimated Historical and Projected Direct and Indirect/Induced Jobs in Gulf Coast States Supported by Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity vs. with natural gas industry investment and spending. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.000 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 *”I and I” defined as Indirect and Induced.000 150.000 Historical ─ Non. More specifically. * Projected employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.

supported in Texas. Total employment impacts for Texas, Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi are projected to reach 320 thousand jobs (direct, indirect and induced)

in 2013 with 50 thousand being supported in Alabama, 130 thousand in Louisiana, 3 thousand in Mississippi and 140 thousand being supported in Texas.

Table 13: Estimated Historical and Projected Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama Direct, Indirect & Induced Employment (2008-2013)*
Historical Number of Jobs AL Direct Jobs AL Indirect and Induced Jobs LA Direct Jobs LA Indirect and Induced Jobs MS Direct Jobs MS Indirect and Induced Jobs TX Direct Jobs Tx Indirect and Induced Jobs Total Direct Jobs: AL,LA, MS, TX 2008 11,851 24,275 30,301 67,947 648 1,629 24,619 76,189 67,419 2009 10,134 22,158 26,385 62,798 640 1,658 20,717 70,066 57,876 156,680 2010 7,186 18,635 18,110 52,363 531 1,529 16,524 62,751 42,351 135,278 2011 9,959 24,606 23,804 64,943 685 1,889 22,760 79,818 57,208 171,256 Projected 2012 11,312 29,354 27,326 76,814 759 2,162 25,201 92,443 64,598 200,773 2013 14,338 34,456 36,469 92,638 929 2,431 32,060 108,152 83,796 237,677

Toal Indirect and Induced Jobs: AL,LA,MS,TX 170,040

* Projected employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. Source: Quest Offshore Resources, Inc.

Outside of the Gulf States, Quest estimated that offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry activity supported 65 thousand jobs in 36 other states in 2010. Total contribution to GDP from these states due to offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry activity was estimated at $7.0 billion in 2010 based on total spending in these states of $6.7 billion. The non-Gulf of Mexico States, which primarily provide manufactured

contributions to GDP to $11.3 billion and a 67 percent increase in employment to 105 thousand jobs. (See Appendix 1 for a detailed description of non-Gulf Coast State impacts)

5-3 Impacts on Other Industries
While the economic impact of the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry is felt across many sectors, certain industries are impacted more than others. The largest other industry beneficiary, due to the

goods, component parts and services to the industry, are expected to see spending levels rise 61 percent to $10.8 billion in 2013 from 2010 levels. This spending rise is expected to yield a 61 percent increase in

investment and operations of the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry,

40

was the real estate and rental and leasing industry (Table 14). Activity in this sector

were supported due to offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry activity.

was nearly $3.5 billion and over 18,500 jobs

Table 14: Estimated Historical Sectoral GDP and Employment Impacts Due to Offshore Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Activity (2010)
Contribution to GDP (Billions) Real Estate and Rental Leasing Manufacturing Profession, Scientific, and Technical Services Construction $3.5 $2.0 $1.2 $1.1 Employment Impact (In Jobs) 18,533 23,303 14,061 23,192

Source: Quest Offshore Resources, Inc.

Other

industries

in

2010

which include

were the

Total indirect and induced jobs due to offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry activity stood at 180 thousand jobs in 2010. The large impacts of oil and natural gas industry activity on other sectors make up a large share of the total economy-wide economic impacts. This plays an important role in the value of the industry to the U.S. economy.

beneficially

supported

manufacturing sector, with a GDP impact of approximately $2.0 billion and over 23 thousand professional, jobs supported and and the

scientific

technical

services sector with GDP impact in 2010 of $1.2 billion and supported employment of approximately 14 thousand jobs. The GoM oil and natural gas industry also supports jobs in the real estate and construction sectors.

41

6. Conclusions

42

This report has documented the decline in capital expenditures and operational

industry

over

this

period.

We

also

demonstrate the near term potential of the offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry to create jobs, boost GDP and generate tax revenues at all levels of government – if the government pursues a balanced regulatory approach that allows for the timely

spending of the GoM offshore oil and natural gas industry that occurred over the 2008 to 2010 period. The principal reasons for this decline include the economic recession in 2008-09 and on the establishment drilling of a

moratorium

deepwater

and

development of the backlog of GoM projects in an environmentally responsible manner. Under such government policy, we estimate total spending by the GoM offshore oil and natural gas industry to increase by over 70 percent by 2013 from 2010 levels, and capital expenditures to increase by over 140 percent.

subsequent slowdown of permit issuance in both GoM deep and shallow waters in 2010 and into 2011. We estimate that tens of thousands of jobs have been lost in response to the decline in capital

expenditures and operational spending of the offshore GoM oil and natural gas •

The Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry’s operational and capital investment spending is projected to average $35.7 billion from 2011-2013, with spending estimated at $26.5 billion for the 2008-2010 period. In 2013 spending is projected to reach $41.4 billion, a 71 percent increase from the 2010 level of $24.2 billion.

The majority of the Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry’s spending is spent domestically, with an average of 98 percent of industry expenditures occurring within the United States from 2008-2010 and 97 percent expected to be spent domestically from 2011-2013.

Direct employment from GoM development expenditures and operations is projected to average 95 thousand from 2011 to 2013, after averaging 75 thousand from 2008-2010, with direct employment reaching a high of nearly 115 thousand by 2013. Total employment supported by the Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry, including indirect and induced (income related) effects, is projected to average nearly 365 thousand jobs from 2011-2013 compared to total estimated employment of 275 thousand from 2008-2010. Employment in 2013 is projected to exceed 430 thousand jobs or a 77 percent increase from 2010.

43

• While spending from the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry is focused along the Gulf coast. Total contributions to GDP in 2013 are expected to have increased 73 percent from 2010 to $33. or a 71 percent increase over the 2010 estimated level of $26. compared to estimated total employment of 67 thousand in the 2008-2010 period.1 billion. as compared to $21. In 2013 total contributions to GDP are projected to reach $44.7 billion a year from 2008-2010. are projected to average $28. an 80 percent increase over the 2010 level. would significantly decrease projections of spending and thus economic and job impacts.S. corporate income taxes.2 billion spending per year from 2008-2010. royalties. total supported employment is expected to grow to 320 thousand jobs. and certain profit type income associated with oil and natural gas operations. Mississippi and Texas. GDP from 2011-2013 as compared to $28. due to offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry activity. A failure to return to historical issuance of drilling permits. This may be optimistic given current rates of permitting.• The Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry is projected to contribute an average of $38. NonGulf Coast States are expected to average $9.9 billion in spending from 20112013. many states see benefits from the industry.2 billion due to offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry activity. • GDP impacts in the Gulf of Mexico states of Alabama. Louisiana. compared to an average of $7.5 billion a year to U.5 billion a year from 2011-2013. 44 . These results are likely conservative because they do not take into account the economic impacts of increased government revenue from bonus bids. as well as implementation of overly excessive regulation.5 billion. Total supported employment in the Gulf states due to offshore GoM oil and natural gas industry activity is expected to average 270 thousand jobs from 2011-2013 compared to 210 thousand jobs in the 2008-2010 period. In 2013. Total supported non-Gulf State employment due to offshore oil and natural gas industry operations is expected to average 94 thousand from 2011-2013. • Quest’s forecast for spending and hence contribution’s to GDP and employment for forecast years are predicated on a return to normal permitting activity in the second half of 2011.4 billion a year from 2008-2010.

This is likely to yield realistic estimates of economic activity both with respect to magnitude and location. capital investment and operational and natural gas industry supports hundreds of thousands of jobs across multiple sectors and regions.• Quest’s estimated and projected spending are based on Quest’s proprietary Enhanced Deepwater Development Database and thus provide a high degree of accuracy with relation to both spending levels and the locations of spending. therefore critical that It is permitting return to historical rates. and generates significant tax revenue at all levels of government. The offshore oil and natural gas industry is a key contributor to the energy supply of the United States. spending by the Gulf of Mexico oil 45 . Additionally. additionally the industry contributes both to the gross national product and overall employment of the country. The offshore GoM industry contributed 14 percent of the oil and natural gas produced in the United States in 2010. and that development and production are allowed to reach their potential in an environmentally responsible manner under a balanced regulatory regime. spurs economic growth.

Appendix 1: Summary of Non-Gulf Coast State Economic Impacts 46 .

Index: Non-Gulf Coast State Economic Impacts: State Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Florida Idaho Illinois Indiana Kansas Kentucky Michigan Minnesota Missouri Montana Nebraska New Jersey New Mexico New York North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Dakota Tennessee Utah Virginia West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming " Other States" Arizona Connecticut Delaware Georgia Hawaii Iowa Maine Maryland Massachusetts Nevada New Hampshire North Carolina Oregon Rhode Island South Carolina Vermont Washington Page 57 57 53 55 62 70 59 66 58 61 64 70 62 69 65 67 55 68 69 56 54 58 70 69 59 61 60 63 59 71 47 .

However. professional scientific and technical services with an $88 million impact. In general. finance and insurance.7 billion in 2010 derived from $1. sophisticated electronics instrumentation for the industry. These types of manufacturers supply components that are used throughout offshore developments in important equipment such as platform topsides and subsea hardware. for instance Chevron. the reason GoM oil and natural gas development impacts the California economy is due to California’s standing as 48 . Inc. Its base of high tech industries supports a large number of equipment manufacturers and technology providers.3 billion. a major player in the offshore Gulf of Mexico. approximately 14 thousand men and women in California were employed due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry in 2010 as a result of spending of $1. In addition. In 2013 total contribution to GDP in California due to GoM oil and natural gas operations is projected to reach $2. which sees an $81 million impact and manufacturing with an $85 million impact in 2010. Notably affected industries in California include real estate with a $262 million impact in 2010.5 billion associated with GoM oil and natural gas operations.Non. there are areas where California is directly involved in the offshore oil and natural gas industry. From an employment perspective. Examples Teledyne include companies that such as Technologies produce and contribution to GDP of $1.6 billion with total related employment estimated to reach over Source: Quest Offshore Resources. California has had a long historical involvement in oil and natural gas production. California. 22 thousand on spending of $2.Gulf Coast States California The results of the study indicate that California has the next largest economic impact (second to the Gulf Coast States) as a result of the Offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry with total the largest overall state economy. It may seem surprising that the economy of a west coast state would benefit so greatly from oil and natural gas operations in the GoM.5 billion in spending. is headquartered in San Ramon.

LP. natural gas liquid (NGL) fractionation. these three pipelines transport enough natural gas in one day to serve the needs of more than 30 million homes. Placed into service in May 2002. borders Texas and has historically been heavily involved in oil production both inside the state and through its legacy as one of the historical centers of the oil and natural gas industry. The state of Oklahoma sees significant economic and employment due to the Offshore Gulf of Mexico offshore oil and natural gas industry.Oklahoma Oklahoma while not directly on the Gulf of Mexico. local distribution companies and municipal users. Williams Oklahoma Williams Partners L. with total employment impact set to reach slightly over 20 thousand jobs. with total employment impact reaching 12 thousand jobs. – Tulsa. As the Sunshine State's first new natural gas pipeline in more than 40 years. a key owner of pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico. storage. gathering. Source: Quest Offshore Resources.P.2 billion.26 billion cubic feet of natural gas each day from vast natural gas reserves to a wide array of customers. Industries such as Real estate which sees employment 11 hundred and over $188 million of contributions to GDP and finance with supported employment of 500 and over $43 million of contributions to GDP. Williams operates three natural gas transmission pipelines: With a combined design capacity of more than 12 billion cubic feet per day. Oklahoma or through equipment manufacturing. Partners L. a 60 percent increase from 2010. Gulfstream can transport approximately 1. Some of Oklahoma’s involvement the offshore Gulf of Mexico operations is through corporate operations such as ConocoPhillips headquartered in Bartlesville. and oil transportation. Total contributions to GDP stood at $1. 745-mile natural gas delivery network across the Gulf of Mexico. 49 .9 billion dollars of spending. Inc. In 2013 Oklahoma is forecast to see slightly over 2 billion dollars of contributions to GDP from the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry due to slightly over 1. treating. and processing. is a leading diversified master limited partnership focused on natural gas transportation. Gulfstream is a state-of-the-art.3 billion in 2010 based on spending of almost $1. including electric utilities. or the ownership of key infrastructure such as Williams Partners.P.

2013 economic impact is predicted to reach $1.8 billion leading to a total employment impact of slightly of 15 thousand jobs due to spending of $1. scientific and technical services with $60 million in impact.Colorado Colorado. New Mexico experienced a loss of 700 jobs in 2010 compared to 2008. which is home to a large domestic oil and natural gas industry. 50 .5 billion in spending. the total economic impact stood at nearly $1. and management of companies and enterprises with $52 million in economic impact see the most benefits.3 billion due to $1. with contributions to GDP of $61 million. 2013 should see total economic impact in Colorado at about $1. and retail trade with $30 million. with total employment impact at over 9 thousand jobs based on spending of $1 billion. Job losses from 2008 to 2010 were 680 jobs. Key industries include real estate industry Industries such as real estate with $174 million of economic impact. New Mexico New Mexico which also has a large domestic oil and natural gas industry felt a total economic impact due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry of $810 million in 2010 due to spending of slightly over $943 million. In 2010. predicted total to employment 13 impact is reach thousand jobs. also benefits through the supply chain from the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry. professional.5 billion.1 billion. the construction industry with contributions to GDP at $37 million.

melting and hot processing (open and closed-die forging and rolling. Aubert & Duval.Ohio Aubert & Duval (A&D). AK Steel Corp. provides advanced metallurgical solutions in the form of parts or long products required for projects in the most demanding industries including aerospace. The Company’s core activity is developing. industrial tool steels. providing precision-engineered solutions for a wide variety of commercial. energy. Parker Hannifin is the world's leading diversified manufacturer of motion and control technologies and systems. aluminum alloys and titanium alloys which need to meet clients’ stronger specifications. Impacts to the manufacturing industry stood at $56 million with 750 employed. subsea power cables and associated termination equipment to the offshore oil & natural gas industry. With annual sales of $10 billion for fiscal year 2010. Employment impact stood at 34 hundred jobs. GE. based on spending of $280 million. and the offshore wind turbine industry. Emerson Electric. and motor racing. total employment impact in 2013 should reach 6 thousand. Parker Hannifin has operations in 36 states and 153 U. Other top 50 manufacturing companies directly involved in the oil & natural gas supply chain with facilities in Ohio: Siemens. 2013 total economic impact for Ohio is predicted to reach $530 million based on spending of $476 million. a100 percent increase on 2009. Ohio Parker Hannifin is the 13 largest Manufacturing Company in Ohio with 9 facilities in the state (including headquarters).Ohio Ohio which produces very little oil and natural gas relative to the largest producing states is still a major manufacturer of goods utilized in both the onshore and offshore oil and natural gas industries. th The total economic impact of the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry was $306 million in 2010. industrial and aerospace markets. Rockwell Automation. Parker is a global supplier of umbilicals. Some of the leading members of the oil and natural gas supply chain are based in Ohio. super alloys.S. cities. a member of the Eramet Group. casting or powder metallurgy) special steels. Parker Hannifin corporation which is based out of Cleveland is heavily involved in the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and Natural gas industry fabricating such items as umbilicals and mooring ropes. Parker Hannifin – Cleveland.. mobile. 51 .

still sees significant economic impact from the industry due to its links to the oil and natural gas industry as a whole based on its significance as one of the leading oil and natural gas producing states in the country. Inc.S. Murphy operates over 1. states. It is headquartered in El Dorado at Murphy's corporate offices.S. Total employment impact was slightly under 2 thousand jobs. Total economic impact in 2010 was $262 million based on spending of $291 million. Louisiana. states under the Murphy USA brand and 93 Murphy Express stations in 11 U. Murphy is the 16 largest leaseholder in deepwater Gulf of Mexico (>500fsw) with 113 operated leases and 57 leases as partner. which produces refined petroleum products for distribution in the Gulf Coast market. The deepwater Gulf of Mexico remains an integral component of Murphy’s upstream strategy. Murphy’s refining and marketing operations are conducted through whollyowned subsidiaries including Murphy Oil USA. 2013 should see spending levels in Alaska reach $455 million. Wisconsin. In 2013 spending levels are set to reach over $472 million in Arkansas. Murphy Oil USA. Alaska Alaska though very distant from the Gulf Coast and the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry. a gain of 200 jobs on 2010. 52 . (Murphy EXPRO) is engaged worldwide in crude oil and natural gas exploration and production. Arkansas Murphy Exploration & Production Company.. which serves the Upper Midwest.000 barrel-aday refinery in Superior. In 2010 Murphy’s U. and a 35. Total employment impact is predicted to reach slightly over 4 thousand. Murphy Oil – El Dorado. production was 20. with total economic impact reaching $404 million.Arkansas Arkansas which borders the gulf coast region. due to this spending total employment impact is predicted to reach slightly over 3 thousand jobs.S. Texas.000 retail natural gas stations in 23 U. with the industry accounting for over 3 thousand jobs based on spending of $300 million. Murphy EXPRO is headquartered in Houston.000 barrel-a-day refinery in Meraux. Over 60 percent of the production came from just two deepwater Gulf of Mexico fields – Thunder Hawk and Medusa – both of which are expected to see production declines in 2011 due inability to drill new wells.100 barrels of oil per day and 53 million cubic feet of natural gas. Total economic impact in 2010 reached $273 million. which should see total economic impact reach $430 million. Medusa and Front Runner) and a fourth now in development th at Thunder Hawk. Murphy moved to the deepwater in 1996 and to date has three major discoveries on production (Habanero. The company’s refining business includes a 125. sees significant impacts to its economy due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry. (MOUSA) is engaged in refining. marketing and transportation of petroleum products in the United States.

Kansas Offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas spending for Kansas stood at $190 million for 2010. a two fold increase on 2010. U. 53 . Texas and Pennsylvania. container. Many of their competitors produce high volume. oil tankers and drilling rigs and floating production units. due to its legacy as both a key manufacturing state for the United States and its past (and now growing) involvement in the oil and natural gas industry. In 2010 U. new designs and new concepts supported with rigorous testing to meet the of evolving changing requirements applications. industrial machinery. The industry contributed $16 million to Kansas’s real estate industry in 2010.S. low cost products for general use. saw spending due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry of $170 million in 2010. and coupling stock. Total economic impact stood at $200 million with total employment impact of 2 thousand jobs. engineering precision and technical support. Total employment impact was 15 hundred jobs. leading to a total economic impact of $170 million.7 million net tons. Offshore rigs and floating units are very reliant on these products. Whitehill has invented and reinvented high performance rope with new fibers. The company manufactures a wide range of value-added steel sheet and tubular products for the automotive. U.PA Whitehill supplies mooring lines for the navy. and oil and natural gas industries. Canada and Central Europe and an annual raw steel-making capability of 31. Whitehill can be described as a differentiated niche player in the high performance rope arena. Steel revenues were $17.4BN.S. United States Pennsylvania Steel – Pittsburgh.Pennsylvania Pennsylvania. Steel is the ninth largest fortune 500 company in Pennsylvania and one of the few fully integrated steel manufacturers left in the United States. standard and line pipe. In 2013. Steel Tubular Products manufactures quality tubular products for the energy industry including drill pipe for offshore applications. Ohio. These problem-solving projects often involve developing new technical solutions for existing industries using a unique engineering experience with high performance synthetic fibers. In 2013 spending for Kansas is predicted to reach $292 million leading to a total economic impact of $266 million and a total employment impact of impact of 25 hundred. total economic impact is predicted to reach $404 million based on spending of $341 million.S. Major product lines include oil country tubing. Tubular Products are manufactured in Alabama. Steel is an integrated steel producer with major production operations in the United States. Whitehill Manufacturing. appliance. construction. Whitehill focuses its efforts and expertise on demanding projects that require high quality materials. Total employment impact in 2013 is predicted to reach slightly over 4 thousand jobs. casing and drill pipe. U. Whitehill's competitive advantage is their experience with high performance synthetic materials. S.

a 50 percent increase over 2010. Total In 2013. This spending was responsible for a total economic impact of $161 million and a total employment impact of almost 12 hundred jobs. predicted to reach slightly over 15 hundred jobs. In 2013 industry growth should lead to spending of $213 million. total economic is predicted to rise to $150 million based on spending of $130 million with total employment impact impact of slightly over 2 Spending in 2010 due to the industry stood at $83 million leading to a total economic impact of $96 million.Wyoming Wyoming. Illinois In 2010 Illinois saw a total economic impact due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry of $124 million based on spending of $104 million. Total employment impact was at slightly under 1 thousand jobs. though very distant from the Gulf of Mexico offshore oil and natural gas industry geographically still received leading to a total economic impact of $254 million and a total employment impact of 3 thousand jobs. employment impact in 2010 stood at 13 hundred jobs. while relatively distant geographically from the Gulf of Mexico has a strong domestic In 2013 total economic impact for Wyoming is expected to reach $248 million dollars on spending of $291 million leading to an employment thousand. 54 . oil and natural gas industry through which it is connected to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas supply chain. spending of almost $186 million in 2010. Utah Utah.

focused on the clean production and use of the Nation's domestic fossil energy resources. Through this West Virginia saw total The Office of Research and Development (ORD) provides DOE's Fossil Energy R&D program an onsite "corporate laboratory" at NETL.S. and environmentally sound energy. affordable. also is involved in oil and natural gas production domestically and with the overall oil and natural gas supply chain. with total employment impact at 15 hundred jobs due to spending of $168 million. WV. One of DOE's primary strategic goals is “to protect our national and economic security by promoting a diverse supply and delivery of reliable. In 2013.100 Federal and contractor employees are involved with onsite research activity. The onsite R&D efforts utilize state-of-the-art capabilities and facilities in Morgantown. though traditionally seen as a coal state.” NETL contributes to this strategic goal through cutting-edge research and development.West Virginia West Virginia. About one-quarter of NETL's approximately 1. U. total economic impact should reach $150 million. and security needs. Total employment impact was 1 thousand jobs. Because NETL is DOE's only government-owned. the onsite research program has a core group of about 150 Federal scientists and engineers. government-operated (GOGO) national laboratory. 55 . DOE National Energy Tech LabsWV economic impact due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry of $95 million in 2010. Advanced technologies provide policymakers with expanded options for meeting vital national energy. environmental.

9BN in sales. Our ongoing technology effort delivers new solutions that continue to advance the drilling. design. IEC. The company is present in 13 U. In 2010 Virginia spending from the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry was at $65 million. With years of industry knowledge and insight. production and refining of natural resources for Oil. In 2010 General Cable had $4. Industrial and Communications wire and cable solutions tested and certified on both a global and regional scale. specialty and communications markets. exploration. aluminum and fiber optic wire and cable products for the energy. General Cable is the fifth largest company in Kentucky. Natural gas & Petrochemical (OGP) market. states and 19 U. In 2013 General Cable – Highland Heights. total economic impact should reach about $121 million. marketing and distribution of copper. General Cable offers the most comprehensive line of specialty IEEE.S. industrial. the effects of the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry are still felt despite its distance from the centers of production. while total employment impact is expected to reach 15 hundred jobs. Virginia In Virginia. which has often been seen as a possible location for future offshore production. General Cable is one of few experienced global manufacturers with the technical expertise. leading to a total economic impact of $71 million and a total employment impact of 800 jobs.S. with total economic impact of $67 million and total employment impact of 600 jobs. material science and processing and testing capabilities called upon to service the Oil. cities. 56 . Kentucky General Cable is a leader in the development. In 2013 growth in the industry should see spending into Virginia reach $102 million leading to a total economic impact of $105 million and a total employment impact of 1 thousand jobs. General Cable engineers exclusive designs to meet product and application specifications and withstand demanding environments. Natural gas & Petrochemical (OGP) markets globally. manufacture.Kentucky Kentucky’s portion of Offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas spending was at $74 million in 2010.

In 2009 Emerson acquired the Norwegian based subsea metering specialists Roxar ASA. Recognized widely for its engineering capabilities and management excellence.S. despite being geographically on the Gulf of Mexico coast does not produce significant amounts of oil and natural gas offshore. with a focus on deepwater applications. Almaco . FL involvement in the oil and natural gas industries both on and offshore. However some key suppliers to the oil and natural gas industry have a presence in the state.700 employees and 240 manufacturing locations worldwide. topsides automation and network power for offshore platforms. Florida. which should reach 13 hundred jobs in 2013. and ultimately through refining and production of goods . Oceaneering is a leading provider of Remotely Operated Vehicles as well as subsea production umbilicals. Oceaneering .3MM attributed to U. process management. industrial automation. Emerson has approximately 127. Oceaneering is a global oilfield provider of engineered services and products. climate technologies. offshore platforms and land-based buildings. 57 . commercial. Emerson is the second largest company in Missouri and the largest Fortune 500 Company in Electrical Equipment.Panama City. and tools and storage businesses. exports.S. and consumer markets through its network power. such as Oceaneering International which operates an umbilical manufacturing plant in Panama City. primarily to the offshore oil and natural gas industry.Boca Raton. addressing all aspects from conceptualization and design. The deal creates the world’s first integrated automation solutions company whose products span from subsea oil and natural gas reservoirs. In 2013 total economic impact should reach about $80 million. Despite this. Louis.Missouri Missouri’s share of Offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas spending was $43 million in 2010. Total employment impact in 2010 stood at 600 jobs. Florida still sees the impacts of the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry. Total spending in 2013 is forecasted to be $98 million leading to a total economic impact of about $91 million. Missouri Emerson is a diversified global manufacturing and technology company that offers a wide range of products and services in the industrial. FL. In 2010 Emerson had revenues of $21BN including $1. Relative to its closeness to the producing region Florida has little Emerson Electric – St. to platform and floating production. Total economic impact in 2010 stood at $42 million derived from spending of $44 million. The company spends nearly $500MM annually in research and development. floating accommodations. FL ALMACO provides a complete range of products and services in Accommodations and Food Handling Systems. rigs and floating production systems. Florida Florida. Oceaneering operates and umbilical manufacturing plant in Panama City. based provider of process management solutions. leading to a total economic impact of $43 million and a total employment impact of 500 jobs. while total employment impact is expected to reach 1 thousand jobs. Emerson is the leading U. through complete turnkey deliveries and efficient post-delivery support for passenger ships. to transmission.

th 58 . environmental waste management. Industrial services include: Industrial cleaning. Rockwell Automation – Milwaukee.S. Rockwell is the second leading U. mechanical services. industrial cleaning and maintenance solutions.Industrial offers proven Services (VES-IS) experience in environmental. provides sequential. Wisconsin Rockwell Automation is the 8 largest company in Wisconsin with 2010 revenues of nearly $5BN. process and power control in one architecture for seamless information flow from production fields and platforms. Veolia Environmental Services. Rockwell’s Integrated Architecture Solutions.WI Veolia Environmental Services in North America is a subsidiary of Veolia Environmental Service (VES). Veolia Environmental Services . based provider of process and control solutions for large manufacturing facilities. Predicted spending of $88 million should lead to a total economic impact of about $ 90 million in 2013. The company is present in 33 states and 49 U.Wisconsin In 2010 Wisconsin had a total economic impact of $41 million due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry spending. These advanced technologies enable the safe operations of large fields in complex environments where 24/7 monitoring is required. cities.S. and special services. The company spends nearly $200MM annually on research and development. Employment Impact from the industry was 600 jobs with expectations to reach 12 hundred by 2013.

based employees. drilling rigs and platforms. Total employment impact of 400 jobs was felt.S. Young Company. this led to a total economic impact of $38 million. with total employment impact at 700 jobs. Michigan Dow Chemical is the third largest company in Michigan (the largest non-auto manufacturing company in the state).MI The company has 40 years of experience in manufacturing meteorological instruments. advanced materials. As a leading expert in materials science Dow provides essential knowledge around insulation and coatings for deepwater pipelines and subsea equipment. and provides sensors for many unique applications.Michigan Michigan received spending of $34 million due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry in 2010. coatings and agriculture. Dow is present in 24 U.M. Dow’s diversified industry-leading portfolio of specialty chemical.S. R. states with roughly 24 thousand U. Dow Oil & Natural gas is a business unit of The Dow Chemical Company and its consolidated subsidiaries combining Dow’s experience in the chemicals industry with their knowledge of the energy business. energy.Midland. The company provides meteorological instruments that are used on offshore vessels. agrosciences and plastics businesses delivers a broad range of technology-based products and solutions to customers in approximately 160 countries and in high growth sectors such as electronics. 59 . Dow Chemical Corporation . In 2013 total economic impact is expected to reach $67 million on spending of $61 million. The company ranks 46 on the fortune 500. water.

Nebraska Nebraska received spending due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry of $44 million in 2010. This spending led to a total economic impact of about $33 million and a total employment impact of 500 jobs. In 2013 spending is predicted to rise to $80 million dollars, leading to a total economic impact of $60 million and a total employment impact of 900 jobs.

Peter Kiewit Nebraska

Sons

Omaha,

Kiewit is one of North America's largest and most respected construction and mining organizations. For over 125 years, Kiewit has delivered world-class solutions to projects of every size, in th every market. Kiewit is the 4 largest company in Nebraska with just under $10BN in annual revenues. The company is present in 19 U.S. states and 29 U.S. cities. Through their subsidiary Kiewit Offshore Services, Ltd., the company fabricates large, oil production complex offshore platforms at their 400-acre fabrication facility in Ingleside, Texas. Kiewit builds fixed and floating structures for most of the world's major oil companies. Kiewit has extensive experience in the fabrication, erection and construction of offshore jackets and decks; concrete gravity base structures; oil and natural gas processing units; well heads, flow lines and flow stations; pipelines and compressor stations; and enhanced oilrecovery facilities.

60

Indiana Indiana received spending of $24 million in 2010 from the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry leading to a total economic impact of $24 million and a total employment impact of 300 jobs. In 2013 growth in spending to $62 million will lead to a total economic impact of about $63 million and total employment impact of 900 jobs, a threefold increase from 2010.

Cummins, Inc. – Columbus, Indiana Cummins Inc., a global power leader, is a corporation that designs, manufacture, distributes and services engines and related technologies, including fuel systems, controls, air handling, filtration, emission solutions and electrical power generation systems. Cummins serves customers in approximately 190 countries and territories.. Cummins reported net income of $428 million on sales of $10.8 billion in 2009. Cummins is the third largest fortune 500 company in Indiana. The company is present in 13 U.S. states and 22 U.S. cities. Cummins is a leading supplier of engines and generators for offshore drilling and production units in addition to power supply solutions for well servicing, pressure pumping, and natural gas compression. Trelleborg- Indiana The company offers customized and standard sealing solutions for the Construction, Industrial and Transport sectors mainly in Europe and North America Using their extensive application knowledge coupled with state-of-the-art design and tooling technology Trelleborg provides optimized sealing solutions to meet customer needs. Trelleborg offer profiles from a comprehensive range of elastomer and thermoplastic materials including multicomponent composite solutions. Supported by the polymer materials expertise available within Trelleborg can offer a full range of materials, surface treatments and fabrication techniques for use in the oil and natural gas industry.

61

New Jersey In 2010, spending by the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry in New Jersey was $15 million, leading to a total economic impact of over $15 million and a total employment impact of 200 jobs. In 2013 spending should rise to $42 million leading to a total economic impact of $41 million and a total employment impact of 500 jobs .

Honeywell International – Morristown, New Jersey Honeywell is the 4 largest Fortune 500 th Company in New Jersey and the 6 largest U.S. Aerospace and Defense Contractor. Honeywell invents and manufactures technologies to address tough challenges linked to global macro trends such as safety, security, and energy. In 2010 Honeywell spent $1.5BN in research and development. The company has approximately 122,000 employees worldwide, including more than 19,000 engineers and scientists. Nearly 50 percent of the workforce is based in the U.S. Honeywell operates through four distinct business units: Aerospace, Transportation Systems, Automation & Control Solutions, and Specialty Materials. Honeywell’s key roles in the offshore oil & natural gas market include topside control systems, safety & security systems, and high performance fibers. The ACS business unit provides topside control systems & safety/security systems for floating production platforms and drilling rigs. Specialty Materials provides advanced fibers and coatings for deepwater mooring ropes, slings, and installation work ropes.
th

62

S. The company is the ninth largest leaseholder in deepwater (>500fsw) with 237 operated leases and 58 leases as partner. Hess Corporation – New York.000 barrels of crude and natural gas liquids per day and 108 million cubic feet of natural gas per day.350 natural gas and retail stores serving 1.S. In 2013 spending is set to rise to $23 million leading to a total economic impact of $21 million and a total employment impact of 156 jobs. NY Pall Corporation is a technology leader in the $48 billion global filtration. The company spends roughly $3BN per year on U. cities. In 2010 Hess produced domestically (U.S. Their water filtrations systems are also deployed on subsea components offshore. as well as the refining and marketing of petroleum products. floating production units and fixed platforms to enable the separation of fluids for environmental and commercial purposes. The company offices can be found in 8 U. this spending led to a total economic impact of $11 million and a total employment impact of 85 jobs. Pall has become a $2. Pall Subsea Division. Roughly 70 percent of Hess crude and natural gas liquid production comes from offshore while 50 percent of natural gas production comes from offshore fields.New York New York State received $12 million of spending due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry in 2010.Port Washington. Pall corp’s equipment is deployed on drilling rigs.) 89. 63 . Pall Corp is a leading provider of topsides fluid processing and separation equipment to the oil and natural gas industry.S. separation and purification industry.4 billion company by solving complex fluid management challenges for diverse customers around the world. New York Hess Corporation is a fully integrated energy company engaged in exploration and production of crude oil and natural gas. states and 11 U. exploration and production activities. Hess is one of a few large independent oil companies that play an active role in exploration and production of deepwater Gulf of Mexico. natural gas and electricity. Revenues are almost evenly split between the Industrial and Life Sciences markets. Hess is the 13 largest Fortune 500 Company in New York City.3MM customers per day in 16 states along the th East Coast USA. Hess operates 1.

64 . through its involvement in the oil and natural gas supply chain still saw spending of $11 million in In 2010 offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas spending in Tennessee was $8 million. In 2013 due to growth in the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry. Tennessee In 2013 spending should rise to $19 million. Due to increasing spending levels total economic impact is projected to reach $14 million in 2013. Total employment impact stood at 90 jobs. North Dakota North Dakota has significant domestic oil and natural gas production and as such sees very little of its substantial oil and natural gas related domestic product derived from the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry. spending in Tennessee is expected to reach $12 million leading to a total economic impact of $13 million while total employment impact is expected to reach 150 jobs. In 2010 total spending in Montana was at $12 million. with a total economic impact of $17 million and a total employment impact of 150 jobs. total economic impact of this spending stood at $9 million while total employment impact was at 100 jobs. However.Montana Montana has a large domestic oil and natural gas industry and thus sees a relatively small percentage of its oil and natural gas industry spending from the offshore Gulf of Mexico. 2010 leading to a total economic impact of $9 million. with total employment impact expected to reach 100 jobs from spending of $17 million. leading to a total economic impact of $11 million dollars and total employment impact of 100 jobs.

Idaho Idaho felt and economic impact of $1 million in 2010 due to the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry based on spending of $2 million. total employment impact stood at 20 jobs. refining and marketing. Today. Paul. 3M has also been supplying products to the Oil and Natural gas business for over 50 years.5BN including $20MM on pure scientific research. spending in South Dakota is expected to reach $4. The company has 33.5 million leading to a total economic impact of over $3 million while total employment impact is expected to reach 25 jobs.Minnesota In 2010. employees including 3. Though widely known as the company that introduced the “sticky-note”. With nearly $25 billion dollars in annual revenues and 74 manufacturing facilities across 27 US states 3M Corporation is one of America’s most notable innovation leaders. nearly 10.000 3M products are available into every corner of the industry – from exploration and production to transportation. South Dakota In 2010 offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas spending in South Dakota was $3 million. 3M’s key enabling contribution to the deepwater sector is the advanced material solutions for syntactic foams used to insulate pipelines in water-depths with extreme pressures and temperatures such as the Gulf of Mexico. spending by the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry in Minnesota was $4 million.S. In 2013 spending should rise to $13 million dollars leading to a total economic impact of over $13 million and a total employment impact of 200 jobs.000 U. 65 .700 scientific researchers and an annual R&D budget of $1. In 2013 due to growth in the offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry. leading to a total economic impact of over $4 million and a total employment impact of 60 jobs. In 2013 spending should reach $2 million leading to a total economic impact of $2 million and a total employment impact of 30 jobs. total economic impact of this spending stood at $2 million while total employment impact was at 15 jobs in 2010. Minnesota 3M is the largest publicly held manufacturing company in Minnesota which is home base to the world renowned 3M Corporate Research Labs. 3M Corporation – St.

7 $2. APS also provides engineering analysis. Hawaii. and software designs for the oilfield and other harsh environments. Oregon. Inc. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. and Employment Impact for Other States due to Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013)* 2008 $1. Vermont. Iowa.4 15 Projected 2012 2013 $1.1 $1. APS has engineering expertise in oilfield drilling and sensor equipment. Georgia. shock and vibration isolation designs.1 $1. and Washington.2 12 2011 $1. Arizona. APS's customers include all of the major integrated multinational oilfield service companies. as well as their total contributions to GDP and employment is listed below (Table 15). Inc.CT APS Technology.3 $1. independent directional drilling companies. The remaining nonGulf States include. sensor. Delaware. and proprietary products to customers worldwide. North Carolina.5 $1. development and manufacture of electromechanical. product development services.2 13 Historical 2009 $1. 66 . New Hampshire.0 $1.3 17 19 Total Contribution to GDP (Millions) Total Spending (Millions) Total Employment Impact * Projected employment contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. instrumentation.2 14 2010 $1. Table 15: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Spending. Massachusetts.Other States The total offshore Gulf of Mexico oil and natural gas industry spending for the APS Technology. Rhode Island. Nevada. Maine. and stress analysis for static and rotating conditions.6 $1. Connecticut. Maryland. specializes in the design. Contributions to GDP. remaining states. MWD service companies and oilfield companies engaged in non-drilling related services. South Carolina.

Gulf of Mexico’s Offshore Oil & Natural Gas Industry 67 .S.Appendix 2: Introduction to the U.

These challenges only activities and practices the industry must engage in to provide offshore oil and natural gas production. The review also discusses the relevant pieces of equipment at the reservoir level. but the steps are generally the same.Life-Cycle of a Field Development The domestic offshore oil and natural gas industry provides vital energy for the U. This plan essentially involves deciding the equipment pieces and infrastructure that will be needed to produce the wells and transport resources back to shore. and where these pieces of equipment will be placed to optimize production. The purpose of this section is to give the reader a better understanding of the necessary Figure 14: Typical Development Timeline for Offshore Oil and Natural gas Developments Source: Quest Offshore Resources.S. A review of what actions are undertaken during each stage provides insight into the operational plans of offshore oil companies operating in the U. These six stages outline the main processes every offshore oil and natural gas development goes through in order to become a producing asset. Every potential offshore oilfield development project goes through a “life-cycle”. and at the water surface. Inc. This section outlines all of the major steps that a typical project must go through from initial resource appraisal to production (Figure 16). developing offshore oil and natural gas resources is significantly more challenging than their land-based counterparts. increase with increasing water depth. economy. What follows is a walk-through of this cycle to provide an understanding of the functioning and process of the offshore oil and natural gas industry via a typical offshore oilfield development plan. the sea floor. However. The typical field development plan moves through predetermined stages – the terminology may vary from operator to operator. 68 .S.

Inc. are highly specialized pieces of equipment that play a pivotal role in the acquisition of this information. Operations typically involve a vessel towing “streamers” which are sensors used to send and receive electromagnetic waves in a set pattern throughout a defined area which normally encompasses a group of standardized “blocks” which operators The seismic images and data captured by these vessels provide critical information to properly trained eyes. the industry relies on specialized seismic contractors who provide imaging and data of the geologic formations below the GoM’s seafloor. geologists. and companies engage in the evaluation and appraisal of potential oil and natural gas targets. or vessels. oil G&G Assessment The first stage in developing an offshore oil and natural gas field is finding out where these resources may be present.Stage 1: Assessment. To do this. Appraisal and Definition During Appraisal the “Assessment. These boats. conducted Seismic to locate surveys must be promising areas. stage. Definition” Exploration. Exploration wells must be drilled to further determine the size and extent of the potential field. These seismic contractors own and operate a fleet of boats that use acoustic imaging techniques formations to lying assess beneath the the geological seafloor have leased. geoscientists. (Figure 17). Figure 15: Seismic Vessel Source: Quest Offshore Resources. and other experts 69 . According to the physical composition of these formations. Exploration.

the entire barge and drilling structure are slowly Jack-up Drilling Rig A jack-up rig is a combination of a drilling rig and floating barge. sea bottom. Wave. the legs are jacked down onto the seafloor. an exploration well is viewed as a “sample” production well. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. If a legs that can be raised or lowered independently of each other (Figure 18). In general terms. the quality of the product and the potential size of the Offshore formation (or “drilling target”). fitted with long support raised above the water to a predetermined height above the water. Inc. drilling contractors have been vital to the industry since the first underwater well was drilled beneath a lake in Louisiana in the 1910s. or reservoirs. preloaded to securely drive them into the potential oil or natural gas target looks promising. and then all three legs are jacked further down. which is attached to the barge and drilling package. the oil company that owns the federal offshore plan lease which will create an the exploration involves scheduling of exploration wells. is accomplished by drilling Figure 16: Jack-up Drilling Rig exploration wells. been preloaded and will not penetrate the seafloor further. This exploration well will allow companies to determine 2 3 1 if oil or natural gas is present. Since the legs have In general. this jacking down of the legs has the effect of raising the jacking mechanism. the industry’s fleet of offshore drilling rigs can subdivided between shallow water rigs (often referred to as “Jackups”) and deepwater rigs (floating Mobile offshore drilling units.will then determine the areas in which oil and natural gas may be present. Exploration Drilling Direct physical evaluation of formations. The jack-up is towed onto location with its legs up and the barge section floating on the water. In this manner. tidal and current loading acts only on the relatively small legs and not the bulky barge and 70 . These contractors own and operate a sophisticated fleet of offshore drilling rigs whose equipment specifications are relevant to the intended water depth in which these drilling rigs will be used. or MODUs). Upon arrival at the drilling location.

including ultra deep water.S. GoM from March 2009-2011 compared to an average of 40 in the rest of the world. Drillships typically carry larger payloads than semisubmersible drilling vessels (discussed below). Drillship A drillship is a maritime vessel modified to include a drilling rig and special stationkeeping equipment. On average 21 semi-submersible drilling rigs 71 . From March 2009. but their motion characteristics are usually inferior. dynamic propulsion (thrusters) or a combination of these. Inc. Semisubmersibles can operate in a wide range of water depths. while in the same period and average of 301 were working in the rest of the world (Table 15). Table16: Estimated Historical Offshore Drilling Rigs in Service (2009 – 2011) Type of Rig in Service U. The operating decks are elevated perhaps 100 or more feet above the pontoons on large steel columns. This positioning may be accomplished with multiple anchors. to which are computer station keeping controlled (mooring maintain systems). They are usually anchored with six to twelve anchors tethered by strong chains and wire cables. primarily on large pontoon-like structures submerged below the sea surface. work over operations. This design has the advantage of submerging most of the area of components in contact with the sea and minimizing loading from waves and wind.S.March 2011 there was an average of 39 jack-up drilling rigs working in the Gulf of Mexico.drilling package. A drillship must stay relatively stationary on location in the water for extended periods of time. The vessel is typically capable of operating in deep water. An average of 7 drillships have been in service in the U. depending on the equipment with which they are equipped. GoM Drill Ships Semi-Submersibles Jack-Ups Rest of World Drill Ships Semi-Submersibles Jack-Ups Total Worldwide March 2009 7 22 40 March 2009 35 139 319 562 March 2010 March 2011 7 8 24 18 40 38 March 2010 March 2011 40 45 138 138 296 289 545 536 Source: Quest Offshore Resources. and Semisubmersible Drilling Rig A semisubmersible drilling rig is a particular type of floating vessel that is supported production platforms. Semisubmersibles (called semi-subs or simply semis) can be used for drilling.

and support staff and people from the operating oil company and other various contractors. Field Definition Approximately 125 crew men are on the rig at any given time. data and The operating company uses information collected during order to collect some oil for further Products consumed in this period include drill pipe. The drilling contractor continues to feed more and more pipe through the rig. Inc. Whether drilling a well in shallow waters or the ever complex deepwater. and a suitable drilling rig has been contracted. the drilling contractor will then temporarily plug the well until the operator is able to make a decision on the commerciality of the well. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. until the targeted depth is reached. Once an adequate quantity is produced. assessment (a drill stem test). Once the target depth is reached. 72 . Most employees work on a rotational schedule with two weeks offshore followed by two weeks off.have been in service in the U. while the drill bit churns deeper and deeper. drillers. drilling mud. exploration and appraisal drilling to define the layout and physical composition of the oil and natural gas resources in place. Figure 17: Drillship Drilling Well Drilling the Well Once the appropriate drilling target has been located. This process is performed under some of the most technically advanced and challenging conditions in the world. The crew consists of a mixture of personnel from the drilling The “define” stage is very important. GoM from March 2009-2011 compared to an average of 138 in the rest of the world. the drilling contractor will allow the well to flow briefly in A drill bit surrounded by an outer pipe is sent thousands of feet below the waterline to penetrate the Earth’s surface at the sea floor (Figure 19). as it sets the foundation for if and how a field is developed. contractor such as rough necks (manual laborers). averaging between 15 thousand and 30 thousand feet below the subsurface (beneath the ocean floor).S. drilling contractors are aiming at a target that is often many miles from the drilling rig. and other supplies such as food and fuel which are transported by specialized supply ships from shore bases located along the Gulf Coast. the operator will then engage in a drilling campaign to explore the potential formation found in the G&G process.

Texas or in the headquarters location of the company. During this stage. optimize well placement. as well as determining the quantity and location of other equipment to be placed on the seafloor. Shallow Water Fields In general. there are few options available to fields that will require a host facility. the pipeline needs and designs. Operators consider the determine the commercial viability of the field. If the field is deemed economic. fixed platform. the companies will consider different concepts for how to best develop the field in a manner that adheres to any and all regulations and is efficiently components that are used in the development of these resources. What follows is a concise overview of the various equipment and oil field infrastructure While these fields require less technical difficulty than their deepwater counterparts.Flow tests during exploration drilling are very important because they determine how easily oil and natural gas flows throughout the reservoir. This stage is also where the companies will decide how many wells to drill offshore. the primary choice is the employment of a fixed platform – or a steel jacketed structure that is physically attached to the seafloor. further development plans are made in the “concept selection" phase of field estimated recoverable amount of resource in place and apply financial models to development. Contract engineers also contribute to this process as do contractors throughout the country who provide information to the oil profitable to all parties. the operating oil company and its partners work together to develop an optimal plan for developing an offshore field or well. For shallow water fields. This stage of development is primarily undertaken by engineers and their support staff working in both the major oil and natural gas centers such as Houston. Often included in this stage are discussions around whether or not the field is large enough to require its own in-field host / processing facility (a stand alone. or floating platform). they account for a very large portion of the 73 . Stage 2: Concept Selection During the “concept selection” stage. companies on the products they can supply and how these could fit into the development.

74 . 63 fixed platforms are expected to be installed in the Gulf of Mexico per year (Table 16). Table 17: Estimated Historical and Projected Number of Platforms Installed in the Gulf of Mexico by Year (2008-2013)* Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Number of Platforms Installed 72 27 23 90 83 2013 83 * Projected platforms contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates.GoM’s production. piping. The processed liquid is then transported via underwater pipeline (export pipeline) back to shore to be refined into the multitude of components for which the final product is used. The surface wells are all controlled from the platform topsides and allow for easier access to the reservoir to ensure the field maintains its desired production rates. surface wells and export pipelines. as well as the drilling in the case of most fixed platforms. These are assembled in shipyards from steel. oil and natural gas in Most of the platforms utilized in the Gulf of Mexico are fabricated in shipyards along the gulf coast. the of the hull according to the engineered design using heavy equipment such as cranes. Being near to the water allows for ease of transportation as these are often either towed out or placed on barges. Once production reaches the platform. and other components such as separation units. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. A platform’s weight can vary widely from a few thousand tons to tens of thousands of tons depending on the size of the field and amount of production expected. Inc. In the shipyards workers such as welders and machinists assemble steel into the sections addition to other impurities) takes place. On average from 2008-2013. Most of the Gulf’s fixed platforms consist of the fixed platform. “topsides” are where the actual processing of the produced fluids (which normally includes water. power supply units. and drilling equipment which is sourced from throughout the country.

which are often utilized for the largest projects in the Tension-Leg Platforms are very buoyant platforms either with three or four columns which are moored to the sea bottom via multiple steel tendons. The lower part of the hull sits below the water level while the upper part sits above the waterline.000 feet. Inc. the Semiplatform. operators must use floating hosts or “floating The FPS production solutions systems” that are Spar platforms are long cylindrical hulled platforms with the length and weight of the hull providing enough stability necessary to conduct drilling operations. Semi-submersible platforms. 75 . Therefore. Therefore in deep water.Figure 18: Types of Production Platforms / Floating Production Units Used in the Gulf of Mexico Source: Quest Offshore Resources. Due to the length of the hull. These tendons are shorter than the distance the platform would settle at if it was not moored to the sea floor. this can be actively adjusted via the movement of water thus allowing drilling operations to be conducted from the platform. currently available are the Tension-Leg Platform (TLP). the application of a fixed platform is unfeasible. and in specific Submersible instances a Floating Production Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessel (Figure 20). The practical limit is 1. the SPAR. topsides must be lifted and integrated onto the platform offshore. The arrangement leads to a large topside area. (FPS’s). this leads the platform to be very stable and prevents vertical and horizontal movement offshore Gulf of Mexico normally consist of four columns on pontoons with a large deck built on top. Deepwater Fields: Facilities In deepwater environments. the hull must be towed out to the field horizontally and righted at the field.

” or tree. These are of a simpler design. This allows for the export of oil without a pipeline and thus makes it more common in less developed regions where less infrastructure is in place. leading to more spending from floating production platforms in the country versus overseas.into and out of the tanks which are inside the pontoons at the bottom of the hull. which basically constitutes a strengthened oil tanker with production topsides. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. an average of 60 subsea trees are expected to be installed per year (Table 17). A each of these components is provided below. These technologically advanced components tie together to power and transport the production back to the surface facility for thorough processing review of and delivery. “SURF” market. 76 . Umbilicals. Subsea While subsea equipment is used as a “catch Most hulls for floating production units are fabricated in foreign shipyards due to the lack of suitable facilities in the United States. (Figure 21) From 2008-2013. The tree and control pod is a highly technical piece of equipment that sits on top of the well and allows for the control of each well’s production and performance. Deepwater Fields: SURF Equipment Equipment below the water line and at the seafloor is generally referred to as the Floating production storage and offloading units (FPSO) are a technology that is rare in the Gulf. where SURF stands for Subsea. the most critical component of subsea production equipment is the subsea “Christmas tree. with only one existing unit which is due to start up this year. all” for a large portion of the equipment on the sea floor. Table 18: Estimated Historical and Projected Number of Subsea Trees Installed in the Gulf of Mexico by Year (2008-2013)* Year 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Number of Trees Installed 79 87 79 46 22 30 * Projected trees contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. The topsides are more complex and highly engineered than the platform hulls though. Risers and Flowlines. Inc. Fabrication of Topsides for floating platforms is done almost exclusively in Shipyards in the United States.

Inc. all trees serve as the primary access point to the reservoir(s) being produced on a field. Manifold: A central collection point for multiple subsea wells. but differ greatly from oilfield to oilfield. Whatever pieces Other components included in the broader “subsea” equipment category include the various pieces of connection machinery. These pieces of equipment are of a fairly standard composition from a general • Pipeline End Termination (PLET): a connection point between a pipeline and a subsea tree or manifold Jumper: short.Figure 19: Subsea Christmas Tree Source: Quest Offshore Resources. These include: • of the specific component. with 77 . Gulf of Mexico is almost exclusively manufactured inside the Unites States. pipeline-like link connecting a PLET or manifold to a pipeline Flying Lead: short-range connector of power (electric or hydraulic) to subsea tree(s) standpoint. A manifold is then connected to a pipeline to transport production to the host location Subsea equipment utilized in the U. However. in the the equipment “Subsea” category of SURF all serve to connect and control production from the well to the infrastructure and / or equipment that will transport the produced product.S. Operating oil companies often access a well via the subsea tree to performing operating • • maintenance operations to ensure a safe and productive flow of liquids from the well.

These installation specialized operations and also require marine expensive construction and installation equipment. Inc. the installation of that line becomes increasingly difficult – requiring extensive installation Figure 20: Umbilical Cross Section engineering to ensure that the unit is not damaged before coming online. Both segments refer to the pipeline transportation system of an oilfield (Figure 23). 78 . these cables also carry various chemicals that are injected into a well to enhance production and inhibit the formation of hydrates that can block the flow of liquids through the well. Gulf of Mexico. Risers & Flowlines The “R” (risers) and “F” (flowlines) portions of the SURF market refer to the pipelines Source: Quest Offshore Resources. These functions in a single umbilical. needed for any offshore oilfield (the term flowlines “cables” are often very complex and technologically advanced containing multiple functions in a single umbilical (Figure 22) is used interchangeably with pipelines). The umbilicals often require a large amount of engineering to ensure there is no negative interaction between the power and other Umbilicals The umbilical performs functions that are required to provide power and fluids to the entire subsea production system. also Moreover.all the contractors involved (including foreign companies) maintaining factories and shore bases to serve the U. in addition to providing the electrical or hydraulic power for the subsea trees. Alabama) throughout the country due to companies which as subcontractors supply components to the industry. physically and located but (Texas.S. as umbilicals increase in the number of functions contained in a single line. This activity provides large levels of spending due to their high value and complexity into not only the key states where these are primarily Louisiana. Additionally. This optimization is called flow assurance.

the industry has – through exhaustive and ongoing research and simple terms. Inc. which often hit riser pipelines directly. these lines are subject to a great deal of environmental conditions with on the any potential offshore to oil Fortunately.” In equipment. The risers are pipelines that are run vertically to connect the production facility at the surface with the subsea hardware and equipment on the seafloor. the pipeline has no choice but to experience some movement as a result. While at first glance the riser pipelines may seem fairly rudimentary in terms of technology.Figure 21: The Purple Line Shows a Riser and the Red Shows Flowlines Source: Quest Offshore Resources. these pieces of equipment are actually very highly engineered. As these forces exert themselves on the riser. As stands to reason. these loop currents create excess force in underwater currents. technology development efforts – essentially solved this problem. called “strakes. Since risers run through the entire depth of the water column. Special pieces of This is especially true in the Gulf of Mexico as the region is home to the current-induced phenomenon known as “loop currents. create disarray production project. excessive movement of a field’s riser pipelines poses a serious threat to the environment and to production.” are typically added to a riser to serve as a deflector for these environmental conditions such as 79 .

these strakes allow the riser to “shed” the force of the loop currents and maintain a reliable position in relation to the surface and subsea equipment being connected. companies can create a detailed map of the seafloor. This is done with the aid of additional services from “G&G” or seismic companies. In every project development plan.vortex induced vibration (Figure 24). risers are still evolving as oil companies and equipment providers strive to refine and perfect these technologies. reduce the weight of the riser to allow for smaller facilities. and many other technological advances that will increase the efficiency by which produced liquids flow through the pipeline system As with risers. the primary purpose of an offshore. This allows companies to visually map the best route for a subsea pipeline. While it is generally understood what these lines are used for the technology being used in many of the Gulf’s subsea pipelines is leading edge incorporating space age materials. ensuring the safe and efficient transportation of produced materials. Inc.Pipelines are used to transport material both to and from a producing well(s). In effect. or from the host facility back to shore. pipeline routes from the production platform to onshore must be determined. these . subsea flowline is to transport liquids either from the well back to the host facility. Figure 22: Riser Pipe with Anti Vortex Induced Vibration Strakes Source: Quest Offshore Resources. A few added benefits of increasingly new riser technologies will be the ability to quickly disconnect a surface facility in the event of a hurricane. Through the use of acoustic imaging technology. Additionally. 80 .

of the project has been determined. or “vessels. To install offshore risers and flowlines. The fleet is operated by a very capable group of companies with a very long history of successfully installing the multitude of Figure 23: Marine Construction Vessel Installing Flowlines equipment pieces needed to produce the offshore natural resources of the U. These boats. installation contractors are very selective when deciding whether or not to build any new vessels. economic value potential approval to proceed with the final investment decision. 81 .S. and provides the most effective use of all parties’ capital expenses. ranging from US$150 million to more than US$1 billion to design and build. a field Source: Quest Offshore Resources. the company(s) will then proceed to the “project sanctioning” phase of development wherein an offshore oilfield receives ultimate development plan is presented to the relevant decision makers for the companies involved. the risers and flowlines of an oilfield are some of the most critical components that employ a high degree of technical complexity and subsequently high capital cost. When the plan and has the been thoroughly reviewed. For this reason. Inc.While conceptually fairly straightforward.” are large and expensive pieces of equipment. Once the partners for a given field have determined which solution best suits the field. the offshore oil and natural gas industry utilizes a of fleet specialized offshore installation boats.

The project sanctioning experience profit margins of three to ten percent. However.2% 0.1 45.S. the field in question.0% 4. In other words. the companies involved in steep investment – or re-employment of those profits. the cost of being in this business is very.9 16. companies. A fact that can often be overshadowed by the focus placed solely on announced profit numbers.4% 1.9% 19.6% 30. In order to maintain domestic production. decision is crucial decision and must ensure that the owners in a project remain financially healthy and are able to maintain a long-term competitive position.0 21.S.1 13.7 5. very high.3 10.9% 82 .0 9.Stage 3: Project Sanctioning Once the proposed concept for developing a field has been presented. Tobacco Reynolds American (Tobbaco) Food Pepsico Oil & Gas Chevron Oil & Gas ExxonMobil Pharmecuticals Merck & Co.8 198.5% 5. from a profitability perspective they are in fact outperformed by other large American companies.0 22. This happens at such a rate that most major oil companies only developing and producing the field must be assured that each will receive a companyspecific return on the capital investment that must be made. It is important to understand that oil and natural gas exploration and production companies consistently realize rather low profit margins. The decision to sanction a project given a suitable development plan has been presented – is largely a consideration of the profitability of the field. Securities and Exchange Commission Revenue 19.1 57.6% 6.9 Income Profit Margin 6.4% 1. or give the goahead to. Income and Profit Margin for Major Companies – Various Industries Industry Company Technology Microsoft Food McDonalds Pharmecuticals Eli Lilli Technology Google Tobacco Lorillard Tobbaco Co.4 8.8 1.2 23.0 17.1 370. Source: U.3% 4.2 19. A field may cost as much as $10 billion and make take several years to fully develop.6 33.9 8.9 30. a decision is made whether or not to Sanction. Both ExxonMobil and Chevron rank at the top of the list when ranked by revenues. Table 18 below shows the 2010 revenues for a select group of major U. these companies face a rather Moreover. Table 19: Comparison of 2010 Revenue ($ Billions).

early career engineer programs and other mediums. This phase of the project development life cycle is a critical source of creation for jobs. this stage of work employs the use of many highly trained and highly skilled engineers. the oil companies. but generally takes more than a year to complete. it is one that is being addressed through university partnerships. public development plans. and compile the designs that will guide the companies through the actual building and acquiring of the materials to create the equipment that is needed. considered. While the vast majority of oil companies have their own engineers to carryout design and At present. Additionally. counterparts While this poses a large threat to the industry. This process can vary in duration depending on the overall size of the project being specification. with many employing upwards of 200 employees. this generational gap presents a great opportunity for young engineers and other business students to fill a growing. the project moves into the engineering and design phase.Stage 4: FEED (Front-End Engineering & Design) & Detailed Engineering Once sanctioned. During this time. their suppliers and third-party support organizations work Specific tasks in this stage are to take the concept created in stage 2 and sanctioned in stage 3. As such. always vital role in the energy supply chain. relations campaigns. Many of these engineering firms have grown fairly large over the last decade. Regardless. many contract to highly specialized engineering firms as an added measure of safety and quality assurance. young engineers to continue this work when their move more towards experienced retirement. as much of the engineering work that is to be done is contracted to third parties – namely engineering firms. 83 . there is a large deficit of qualified. many of these firms serve as a great entry point into the industry for young college graduates. together designing the highly technical pieces of equipment and installation methods that will be needed according to the concept chosen in the “Concept Engineers spend many hours pouring over technical specifications and designs to ensure that the minute details of each piece of equipment are built exactly to Selection” phase of development.

equipment that will be used to produce the oil and / or natural gas from a field. these rigs are contracted under longterm. By and large. as well as providing an added measure of financial assurance to the rig operators. development drilling simply refers to the process by which the wells that will produce the field are drilled and completed. this component of a field regularly accounts for roughly 55 to 60 percent of a field overall capital cost (including exploration drilling). Development Drilling As the name suggests. A vital component of this stage is ensuring that companies contracted by the oil company to perform various scopes of work have been fully vetted and meet company safety and quality requirements. Consequently. multi-year agreements ensuring that operators have access to a rig when needed. Inc. materials and Table 20: Average Estimated Historical 2010 GoM Deepwater MODU Day-Rates Price per Day in 2010 Drillship $500. and powered by subsea cables or “umbilicals.” so to speak. The wells are then tied together via pipelines. The primary costs incurred during these During an oil company’s execute cycle. The execute phase sees the installation of the physical equipment procurement. production facility.” Pipelines carry the produced product either straight back to shore.000 Source: Quest Offshore Resources. the wells for the field are completed and finished with control modules (called subsea trees). The general stages of the Execute Phase are development drilling. 84 . this stage is also the primary point during which the bulk of capital spending takes place.000 Semi-Submersible $400. or to an offshore fixed or floating platform activities are the contracting of an offshore drilling rig and the supporting services that accompany these assets(Table 19). While technically easy to understand. facility fabrication and SURF fabrication.Stage 5: Execute The “execute” phase is the stage during which the field is “put together.

while ensuring that the project schedule is maintained. the oil Figure 24: Gulf of Mexico Topside Fabrication Yards Source: Quest Offshore Resources. the most critical component to be Materials Fabrication & Equipment Procurement / fabricated is the host facility for the field. etc. Inc. During these activities. Facility Fabrication Often.) which all must be procured and physically transported to the field. as well as paying for helicopter transportation for company will begin the process of sourcing all of the materials needed for the subsea and facility equipment. operators will often seek to separate the hull (base of the structure that supports the weight of the and topsides topsides processing (above-water processing equipment) portion of the facility. the operator must also pay for the support boats that transport all drilling fluids and other supplies to the rig. drilling mud. Additionally. This is due to the region’s fortunate position of having multiple fabrication yards along the Gulf Coast that are specially geared to providing topsides fabrication services 85 equipment) . and can take upwards of three years to complete depending on the size of the unit. development drilling (and often even before development drilling begins). oil companies rely on supply chain management professionals to negotiate personnel. These units represent a large portion of Simultaneous to the beginning of capital costs to the oil company. the operator will incur costs related to the physical materials used during drilling operations (pipe. mutually beneficial terms for all parties involved.Aside from the actual cost of the rig and its crew. When contracting for a facility in the GoM.

with an average control system (subsea tree plus control package) costing between $9 million to $15 million. Gulf of Mexico subsea production systems are largely built and assembled domestically. as well as providing essential fluids and chemicals to maintain production. the oil company will employ the use of the drilling This separation in the construction of the hull and topsides of a facility is an important distinction for the Gulf.(Figure 26). and Delivery & Installation. Fabrication.S. or the topsides are transported to the field and lifted onto the hull for final commissioning in preparation for production. has in terms of these systems is that 86 . The contracts are often quite large compared to other SURF equipment pieces. subsea trees and control systems. the umbilical is a highly engineered piece of equipment that requires a fair amount of engineering work to safely employ on a field. the oil company will contract for the installation of this equipment using one of the industries highly capable installation boats. SURF Fabrication: Subsea Umbilicals To ensure proper control and powering of the well. The costs for this piece of equipment can be generally categorized as: Engineering / Design. as well as ensuring that a majority of the facility (often the most expensive piece of equipment) is purchased and manufactured domestically. the hull and topsides are “mated” either just offshore from the fabrication yard. While costs technologically advanced equipment pieces that will control the production of each well. subsea umbilicals are employed. Once the umbilical has been delivered. The existence of local fabrication yards for these services provides a large amount of jobs to the nation. as nearly 60 percent of facilities spending are allocated to the topsides. A great advantage the U. Raw Materials. As mentioned above. This provides an added value of allowing the oil company to maintain a presence at the construction yard – ensuring that designs and plans are carried out per specifications. rig working on the development wells to install the system on each completed well. these units are essentially long underwater cables used to Once fabrication is completed. a large SURF Fabrication: Subsea Systems The company must also take the designs and plans previously developed for the subsea production systems and contract for the fabrication and delivery of these majority of these units Similar are to provide power (electric or hydraulic) to subsea systems. The control systems are connected and controlled at the surface by the use of subsea umbilicals. Once fabricated and delivered. Similar to subsea production systems. manufactured domestically.

a pipeline is a pipeline. for example.3 $0. the oil company is competing for the raw materials.4 $0. whose cost is dependent on global demand for steel. Additionally. on a global inter-industry scale. is home to many of the world’s largest pipeline fabrication companies. the cost of all pipelines needed for a field can see volatile shifts across the life of the project’s development cycle. efficiencies in the installation of these cables. manufacturing has been contracted. Moreover. it is important to note that the industry’s highly skilled contractors have created large SURF Fabrication: Risers & Flowlines While subsea umbilicals are highly specialized units.S. steel is traded globally across a multitude of industries. offshore pipelines (and pipelines in general) are essentially a global commodity (Table 20).1 $0. A very important distinction to understand regarding the offshore pipelines of a project This means that for every pipeline that needs to be purchased.3 * Projected spending contingent on returning to pre-Macondo permitting rates. reducing the total time required for installation significantly. the operator begins the process of contracting for the installation of these pipelines typically through a competitive tendering process. Inc. the installation of Once the amount of material needed has been determined.6 $0.for these assets can reach rather large numbers of a “cost-per-day” basis. This can primarily be attributed to the migration of heavy industrial activities to developing countries. Source: Quest Offshore Resources. Like the subsea umbilical. and suitable pipeline pipelines relies on the industry’s fleet of offshore installation vessels to complete 87 . generally speaking. making costs harder to control.3 $0. Table 21: Estimated Historical and Projected Pipeline Capex Spent Overseas (2008-2013)* Billions 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total Pipeline Capex Spent $0. India. Even though there are added complexities with the fabrication of subsea pipelines. is that between 67 to 85 percent of the offshore pipelines installed in the Gulf of Mexico are purchased outside of the U.

repairing damage caused by the wear and and supplies back and forth. the risers and flowlines of an oilfield are some of the most critical components that employ a high degree of technical complexity and subsequently high capital cost. Once the flowlines and risers are installed. and worked over when 88 . The actual tasks required to maintain safe and efficient production are extremely vast in quantity. However. tear associated with full time exposure to the elements. Wells must be monitored necessary. Stage 6: Operate The “Operate” phase is generally used as a generic description for the activities that are undertaken once a field is brought on to production. the assets that install these flowlines and / or risers are often noticeably more expensive. Boats and helicopters are needed to transfer crew Operating activities range from continuously supplying food and fuel to the platform. increase in boat cost reflects the larger. the suppliers provide necessary equipment and supplies. This transportation system of the oilfield is ready for use. a key difference for these pieces of equipment is seen in the type of boat needed. The operating company requires onshore administrative. Provided that these tests produce positive results. The general categories include all activities that maintain a suitable flow of material through the infrastructure and systems installed during the “execute” phases. and ensuring safe transportation of produced fluids. but also require support staff onshore. While conceptually fairly straightforward. management. Onshore and engineering must support.these activities. the Given that pipelines weigh a significant amount more than an umbilical. the lines are tested to ensure there was no damage during installation. performing routine maintenance to ensure continued safe operations. Operations must ensure that production levels are capable of continuing at levels that are sufficient to ensure a financial return to the parties involved. more highly rated equipment needed on the boat to ensure that these lines can be safely installed. All these activities require continued employment of not only a large crew on the production platform itself.

Appendix 3: RIMS II I/O Model Definitions 89 .

provide for the comprehensive employment multiplier. Type II multipliers estimate an impact that is the sum of the Final-demand employment multipliers show the total number of jobs per $1 million change in final demand. economic impact of the industry on an individual state. Rather. and induced impacts. 90 . Furthermore. Final-demand value-added multipliers show the total value added per $1 change in final demand. This money does not disappear after being paid to the individual. this individual will use some portion of earnings to buy necessities. but they also account for the induced impacts associated with the purchases made by employees. For example. An estimate of the change in total output in a region’s economy is calculated by multiplying a final-demand change times a final-demand output multiplier. An estimate of the change in total number of jobs in a region’s economy is calculated by multiplying a finaldemand change times a final-demand direct impacts. an individual who works in offshore manufacturing in Ohio earns a certain amount per year.RIMS II I/O Model Definitions *Provided by BEA Final-demand Multipliers Final-demand output multipliers show the total industry output per $1 change in final demand. An estimate of the change in total value added in a region’s economy is calculated by multiplying a final-demand change times a final-demand value-added multiplier. luxury items. The RIMS II multipliers account for this effect. and as such. etc. Type II Multipliers Type II multipliers not only account for the direct and indirect impacts based on how goods and services are supplied within the region. a good majority of this spending will occur in Ohio across multiple industries. indirect impacts.

Appendix 4: Explanation of Terms 91 .

component price inputs Subsea Umbilicals Risers & Flowlines Tree.Table 22: Explanation of Terms FPS / Facilities The processing facility located at the surface. Flying Leads. engineering. Risers & Flowlines. processing systems Pipelines Refer to "SURF. component price inputs Drilling Rig (SW Jackup / DW MODU) Day-rate cost of rig and supply boats. engineering Steel piping. SEMI or FPSO). buoyancy. chemicals. as well as the support boats and chemicals needed to operate the rig. chemicals. Refers to all equipment needed on the seafloor to bring production from the well to the host facility. Controls. drilling mud Fixed Platforms (incl. buoyancy. PLETs. a Fixed Platform. In deepwater. as well as the cost to drill and complete the surface (dry-tree) wells located on the platform. engineering Steel piping. electrical wiring." Pipeline = Flowline 92 . control systems. control systems. The primary components of spending are the steel for the hull (bottom structure) and topsides (processing facilities). engineering." This includes the fixed platforms. In shallow water. The cost of the drilling rig includes the day-rate for the rig. SPAR. an FPS (TLP. Jumpers. chemicals *SDU = Subsea power Distribution Unit Steel fabrication. surface wells) Refer to "FPS / Facilities. composite armoring. SDUs *PLET = Pipeline End-Termination Steel piping. component price inputs HULL TOPSIDES Steel. *Day-rate includes the lab or on the rig. drill pipe. proccesing equipment SURF Subsea. Manifolds. Ubilicals. installation Drilling The shallow or deep water vessel used to drill the well. component price inputs JACKET TOPSIDES Steel.

Appendix 5: RIMS Category Summary Tables 93 .

332 $1.308 $41.882 $245.545 $149.067 $9.867 $157.148 Louisiana $10.980 $89.012 $1.992 $117.007 2010 $2.178.185 Idaho $1.336 $15.875 $252.034 $1.618 $299.725 $56.366 $254.846 $239.449 $169.481 $67.168 Montana $11.521 $2.547 $208.141.518 Ohio $298.719.174 $696.819 $1.338 $135.981 $43.057.272 $101.694.831 $4.138 $2.677 $1.325 Kansas $176.418 $42.246 $2.748.646 $9.533 $20.004 $1.863 $132.973 $13.474 Alaska $269.999.083 $11.850 $77.081.108.875 $262.401 New York $12.356.253 $62.213 Mississippi $241.621 $1.759 $529.595 $363.155.129 Colorado $1.638 $57.150 $41.597 Illinois $113.810 $8.327.946 Indiana $49.996.973 $3.586.904 $62.107 $2.326 $1.944 $11.164.389.011 $385.644.920 $306.081 $37.271.078 $46.720 $19.821 $320.524 $488.563 $37.382.081.751.254 $82.892.529 $336.377 $1.474 $87.888 West Virginia $99.135 $1.242.308 $1.201.035 $160.600 $68.557 $3.267 $1.588 $2.753 $1.844 $3.872 $172.885 $80.310 $71.615 $150.575.345.401.034 $26.767 $180.352 $78.369.231 Oklahoma $1.454 $1.411 $11.859 Virginia $69.974 $13.025 $7.126.449 $248.139 Nebraska $11.167.262 $21.159 $1.617 $808.252 $3.162 $10.879 Tennessee $8.819 $404.788 $410.122 $701.273 $8.478 $326.135.022 $196.529.674 $66.380 Wisconsin $8.138 $14.484 $11.960 $15.423 $104.322 2011 2012 2013 Total $3.115 $284.627 Alabama $9.517 $32.295 $270.650 $861.959 $32.146 $120.283.879 $231.048 $272.060 California $1.665 $1.881 $265.263 $1.183 $387.044 $429.746.733 New Jersey $34.694.422 $2.412 $33.870 $2.876 $59.223 $9.513 $4.353 $1.521 $38.180 $66.716 $1.050 Arkansas $284.889 $10.414 $9.854 $226.638 $1.591.190.687 Florida $76.667.414.919 $107.888 $291.861.764 $11.851 $251.902.988 Minnesota $12.839.009.093 Total $30.144.812.942 $8.225 $200.663 $12.527 Michigan $49.319 $56.007 $44.480 $32.165 $318.294 $50.596 $16.805 $9.907.113 Utah $99.917 $4.985 $13.139 $40.211 $170.529 $1.336 $43.777 Wyoming $165.398 $1.282 $95.230.734 $254.516.063 $992.694 $41.342 $403.538 Kentucky $45.281 $39.751 $260.244 $7.000 $1.306 $1.312 $73.773 $368.108 $14.747 $101.825 North Dakota $9.562 $29.098 Missouri $8.249 $201.052 $83.849 $415.103 $5.262.898 $7.350 $58.174 South Dakota $2.188 $24.275 $94.709 $469.408.423 New Mexico $841.081 $13.029 $9.620 $16.069 $1.301 $2.977.585.356 $2.627 $1.Table 23: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Contribution to GDP by State Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 2009 Texas $3.924 $201.412 $1.795.373 $15.753 $118.924 $123.215 $976.245 $91.806.238 $12.980 $13.764.423 $13.410 Other States $1.354 $8.184 $14.601 $7.470 $11.750.956 $96.347 $1.641 $20.814.801 $247.209 $8.343 94 .008 $5.639 $33.724 $276.141.245.322 $8.701 $179.008 $51.429 $1.549 $71.301 $27.172 $70.403 Pennsylvania $281.079 $134.

356.837 $111.713 $230.230 $1.196.672 $95.384 $23.393 $85.133 $3.491.826.305 $376.029 $15.829 $21.490 $21.206 $130.607 $2.981 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Alaska Ohio Kansas Wyoming Pennsylvania West Virginia Illinois Utah Kentucky Virginia Nebraska Florida Missouri Wisconsin Michigan Indiana New Jersey Montana New York North Dakota Tennessee Minnesota South Dakota Idaho Other States Total 95 .769 $1.825 $79.617 $64.308 $318.062 $43.001 $228.625 $77.642 $265.871 $57.199 $83.490.679 $61.491 $43.445 $291.547 $9.519 $10.284.424 $1.137 $17.149 $282.981 $8.223 $22.126.194.753 $311.767 $269.469 $8.518.735 $484.010.608 $821.779 $8.986 $1.085 $4.957 $268.740 $373.182.958.291.544.717 $102.078 $20.559 $5.269 $358.669 $113.901 $185.032.250 $186.021 $1.545 $2.744.902.562 $9.312.867 $75.807 $11.538 $44.411 $213.505 $953.329.523 $17.520 $943.863 $785.321 $17.457 $237.826 $12.453.707.647 $104.903 $276.203 $11.018.715 $42.423 $472.490 $96.863 $4.384.598 $308.685 $987.603 $1.488.483 $2.547 2011 $9.090 $12.385 $41.277 2013 $12.823 $169.768 $4.185 $83.408 $2.083 $300.355 $67.293 $1.276 $36.274 $73.062 $292.203 $11.215 $7.345 $997.213 $74.647 $196.184 $2.052.118 $246.677 $61.594 $1.478 $163.375 $2.675 $417.555 $374.573 $192.843.054 $28.400 $290.483 2009 $8.476 $261.830 $476.507 $219.067 $2.897 $39.661 $101.838 $4.475.955 $8.984 $11.257.639.573.431 $10.072 $1.008.680.769 $6.652 $117.308 $1.132 $1.792 $21.726 $12.393 $9.873 $10.096 $2.009 $1.388 $263.702 $3.115 2010 $7.805 $48.507 $2.624 $186.513 $39.683 $15.690 $50.448.287 $12.232 $10.704 $3.646 $88.354 $197.565 $370.280 $124.806 $91.941 $193.997 $1.107 $1.454 Total $56.750 $1.082 $1.734 $15.543 $42.471 $150.642 $8.951 $8.580.915 $98.671 $3.270 $89.892.654.944 $6.994 $13.247 $46.263.545 $78.690 $301.363.077 $3.287 $1.442 $28.539 $1.153 $12.209 $4.894 $1.608 $111.478 $42.048 $1.030 $34.265 $273.935 $35.170 $1.693 $1.541.315 $132.905 $1.080 $251.675 $214.750 $68.808 $1.561 $976.340 $328.344.141 $455.900 $44.310.747 $43.575 $1.900 $30.789.105 $12.466 $12.882.014 $168.507.Table 24: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Spending by State Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $8.621 $107.486 $3.252.139 $240.946.351 $2.736 $13.209.014 $473.009 $7.752 $145.636 $151.475 $423.499.419 $24.478 $110.115 $41.365 $277.121 $16.705.788 $88.045.936 $80.255 $86.450.106 2012 $10.503 $52.279.365 $410.067 $252.307 $3.661.173.662 $607.570 $415.632 $9.063 $42.295 $31.223 $73.972.160.187 $1.494.217 $14.223 $12.407 $1.735 $3.628 $1.435 $266.045 $12.443 $19.867.052 $1.423 $51.263 $33.342 $56.369 $1.402 $8.170 $26.714 $341.190 $7.534 $78.315 $37.284 $60.

911 2.473 25.559 2.063 436 52 665 843 46 104 462 462 227 116 100 98 99 105 20 18 13 282.213 129.566 2.216 20.921 19.023 2012 117.109 7.116 3.738 1.793 8.355 3.482 1.029 494 522 595 590 317 146 133 128 123 132 26 22 17 356.368 1.248 36.809 98.122 761 732 970 934 479 445 237 125 117 112 122 76 22 18 15 311.183 32.340 990 971 721 871 480 161 148 143 165 191 29 25 19 429.010 1.140 40.528 3.208 96 .570 1.978 3.315 9.277 14.565 1.342 2.870 2009 90.459 9.776 1.856 1.856 1.666 2.372 1.274 70.888 12.432 2.233 15.975 2.102 2.060 13.359 22.356 1.081 13.126 2.357 2.644 104.842 2.821 2.293 2.150 4.918 2.047 495 129 656 1.688 1.601 12.793 3.588 1.789 3.126 2.901 2.Table 25: Estimated Historical and Projected Total Employment by State Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Operations (2008-2013) (In Jobs) 2008 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Ohio Arkansas Alaska Pennsylvania Kansas Illinois Wyoming Utah West Virginia Kentucky Wisconsin Virginia Florida Missouri Nebraska Michigan Indiana New Jersey Montana Tennessee North Dakota New York Minnesota Idaho South Dakota Other States Total 100.354 1.249 1.577 88.054 1.174 2013 140.555 1.260 984 975 873 626 614 609 542 540 386 330 174 103 95 91 86 62 18 15 12 242.747 34.404 1.770 2.208 1.676 3.842 6.783 89.871 11.468 9.201 1.317 2011 102.969 13.272 978 1.370 1.389 1.919 8.715 1.108 48.793 2.959 1.582 12.642 17.499 11.378 976 570 866 1.998 2.759 2.068 1.794 1.133 112 162 552 691 408 112 99 97 91 190 19 17 13 306.522 1.221 1.000 14.931 4.010 1.298 15.277 4.621 9.950 2.415 2.573 17.915 2010 79.

Summary Tables: Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations 97 .

546 $863 $800 $583 $318 $292 $196 $166 $161 $121 $99 $91 $69 $67 $48 $27 $24 $17 $7 $22 $46.941 $167 $1.229 $15.533 $61 $564 $315 $292 $213 $116 $107 $72 $61 $59 $44 $36 $33 $25 $25 $18 $10 $9 $6 $3 $8 $16.249 $3.623 $7.720 $2.677 $88 $819 $457 $424 $309 $168 $155 $104 $88 $85 $64 $52 $48 $36 $36 $25 $14 $13 $9 $4 $12 $24.499 $837 $776 $565 $308 $283 $190 $161 $157 $117 $96 $88 $67 $65 $47 $26 $23 $17 $7 $22 $45.305 $3.652 $5.180 $794 $673 $652 $487 $400 $366 $278 $272 $195 $109 $96 $69 $30 $91 $188.845 $11.489 $3.415 $3.057 $673 $6.733 $162 $1.370 $28.677 $6.283 $79 $731 $408 $378 $276 $150 $138 $93 $79 $76 $57 $47 $43 $33 $32 $23 $13 $11 $8 $3 $11 $22.135 2010 $6.531 2009 $17.Table 26: Estimated Historical and Projected Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $18.891 $117 $1.651 2013 $12.090 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Illinois New York Alaska Ohio Kansas Wyoming Pennsylvania Utah West Virginia Virginia Kentucky Michigan Florida Montana Other States Total 98 .010 2012 $9.356 $1.207 $6.658 $8.089 $608 $563 $411 $224 $206 $138 $117 $114 $85 $70 $64 $48 $47 $34 $19 $17 $12 $5 $16 $32.046 $4.689 $63.683 $15.785 Total $73.979 2011 $8.233 $2.284 $1.

221 Total $64.847 $5.988 $184 $1.663 $2.887 $3.283 $836 $659 $651 $341 $228 $201 $192 $140 $129 $128 $74 $73 $58 $45 $26 $21 $16 $8 $25 $42.024 $14.544 $14.604 2010 $5.890 2009 $15.779 $179 $1.377 $2.291 $10.Table 27: Estimated Historical and Projected Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations Spending by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $16.306 $87 $607 $395 $312 $308 $162 $108 $95 $91 $66 $61 $61 $35 $35 $27 $21 $12 $10 $8 $4 $12 $20.375 Louisiana Texas Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Illinois Alaska New York Ohio Kansas Wyoming West Virginia Pennsylvania Utah Virginia Kentucky Michigan Florida Montana Other States Total 99 .489 $7.186 $3.244 $810 $639 $632 $331 $221 $195 $186 $135 $125 $125 $72 $71 $56 $43 $25 $20 $16 $8 $24 $41.249 $745 $5.380 $920 $814 $775 $564 $522 $519 $301 $296 $233 $181 $106 $84 $66 $34 $101 $173.775 $58.559 $6.288 2012 $8.852 $28.722 2013 $11.924 $130 $904 $589 $464 $459 $241 $160 $142 $135 $98 $91 $90 $52 $52 $41 $32 $18 $15 $11 $6 $18 $30.550 $67 $468 $305 $240 $238 $125 $83 $73 $70 $51 $47 $47 $27 $27 $21 $16 $10 $8 $6 $3 $9 $15.713 $3.258 $4.580 $6.650 2011 $7.123 $6.702 $98 $680 $443 $349 $345 $181 $121 $107 $102 $74 $68 $68 $39 $39 $30 $24 $14 $11 $9 $4 $13 $22.633 $1.312 $2.

Table 28: Estimated Historical and Projected Support Activities for Oil and Natural Gas Operations Employment by State (2008-2013) (In Jobs) 2008 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Illinois Ohio New York Alaska Kansas Wyoming Pennsylvania Utah Other States Total 202 190 79 2 17 11 9 8 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 540 2009 196 184 77 2 17 11 9 8 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 524 2010 74 69 29 1 6 4 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 197 2011 96 90 37 1 8 5 4 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 255 2012 107 101 42 1 9 6 5 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 286 2013 142 134 56 2 12 8 6 6 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 381 100 .

Summary Tables: Oil and Natural Gas Extraction 101 .

839.203 $5.007 $4.557 $78.000 $268.118 $205.261.077 $5.598 $222.993 $78.732 $136.993.955 $20.045 $7.818 $7.548 $1.766 $3.514.105 $30.432 $135.425 $1.797 $41.069.507 $215.402 $1.444 $128.147 $9.565 $1.522.252 $189.003.151 $1.554 2012 $9.858 $11.730 $2.163 $28.369 $215.265 $6.236 $1.282 $6.964 $1.522 $324.021 $969.361.718 $145.922.127 $7.614 $1.919 $195.734 $42.299 $132.320.250 $2.485 $9.405 $234.787 $1.173.118 $214.473 $650.928 $136.934 $98.656 $199.105 $747 $394 $392 $252 $764 $18.874 $1.844 $5.375.137 $171.137 $768 $405 $404 $259 $787 $19.499 $79.379.414 $1.080 $57.778.844 $2.275.524 $13.280 $41.189.720 $1.798 $2.279 $314.282 $981.741 $4.698 $5.225 $152.455.226 2013 $9.834 $395.296 $36.519 $6.868 $8.845 $1.835 $1.614 $37.067 $77.477 $32.646 $4.821 2010 $6.495 $116.819 $911.275 $7.561 $6.642.224 $31.146 $68.019 $8.162.582.838 $4.402 $4.046.683 $222.069 $722 $381 $379 $243 $739 $18.152 $44.393 $1.348.335 $29.994 $11.Table 29: Estimated Historical and Projected Oil and Natural Gas Extraction Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $6.484 $2.539 $1.363 $921 $486 $484 $310 $943 $23.069 $19.147 $228.310 $969.816 $276.521 $104.784 $29.261.732 $9.937.931 $7.746 $1.147 $33.090 $575 $572 $367 $1.837 $2.217 $68.952 $113.307 $952.900 $182.189 $1.398 $199.646 $8.788 $5.722.001.737 $20.613 $1.961 $942.637 $2.315 $81.334 $26.852 $5.697 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Alaska Arkansas Ohio Kansas Wyoming Pennsylvania Utah West Virginia Virginia Kentucky Illinois Michigan Florida Montana North Dakota Tennessee New York Nebraska Indiana South Dakota Idaho New Jersey Wisconsin Missouri Nevada Other States Total 102 .795 $829.733 $114.793 $55.408 $10.405 2011 $8.327 $8.676 $183.832 $9.721 $3.360 $559.641 $1.034.640 $1.334.220 $6.297 $26.427.147 $27.101.305 $2.716 $12.248 $2.617 $2.580.644.943 $18.066.696.443 $177.546 $50.517 $143.771 $208.737.683 $1.057 $557 $555 $356 $1.115.360 2009 $6.240.752 $39.457 $219.068 $1.082 $27.089.602.771 $2.528 $193.578 $11.053 $7.400 $13.590 $7.873 $274.123 $229.934 $2.019 $140.479 $38.228 $29.760.478 $568.939 $251.711 $1.857.258 $24.731 $7.784 $692.772 $1.561.881 $168.083.753 $274.093 $1.961 $324.564 $140.426 $672.068 $10.265.137 $55.354 $10.532 $82.903 $1.366.111 $42.067 $4.116 $28.476 $1.564 $3.054.205 $53.365 $76.235 $28.634 $1.448.484 $107.814.279 $315.156 $191.407.610 $30.037 $101.146 $1.486 $1.191 $1.281 $1.610 $259.084 $173.289 $147.255 $111.332 Total $46.360.999 $742.197 $13.022 $35.550.124 $6.698 $97.696 $1.982 $81.785.774 $7.

218 $2.644 $4.741.992.821 $13.820 $23.536 $232.403 $14.990 $236.518 $109.930 $66.337 $25.357 $272.105 $24.733 $247.154.778 $2.139 $25.089 $27.102 $321.071.761 $8.183 $252.098 $966.823 $66.618 $2.272 $672 $387 $384 $268 $780 $17.211 $84.573 $33.791 $1.408 $351.368 $1.922 $7.021 $4.892 $5.749 $2.708 $2.080 $381.188 2009 $5.210 $5.574 $51.921 $1.801 $6.903 $5.146 $489.657.487 $1.287 $45.711.015 $12.364 $6.940 $762.832 $213.931 $1.536 $2.167 $222.Table 30: Estimated Historical and Projected Oil and Natural Gas Extraction Spending by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $5.028.973 $1.174 $1.912 $1.506 $1.557 $14.747.830 $1.058 $1.884 $9.834 $171.885 $30.402 $1.450 $78.173 $97.986 $100.242 $17.292 $72.680 $1.463 $149.700.247 $26.123 $5.204 $1.260 2010 $5.308 $24.622 $41.358 $632.839 Total $37.367 $36.472 $125.471 $1.600.596 2011 $6.551 $1.675 $4.977 $158.505 $1.963 $1.343 $7.217 $1.319 $1.103.167 $28.060 $91.039 $4.097.224 $623.952 $3.729.800.616 $3.788 $108.850 $3.221 $19.309 $692 $398 $395 $276 $803 $17.493 $7.186.551 $5.835 $53.986.624 $225.193.699 $5.954 $44.029 $10.115.708 $347.394 $226.983 $190.553 $245.230.617 $189.730 $37.664 $31.867 $38.801 $952 $548 $544 $379 $1.603.799 $811.189 $1.601 $358.564 $90.777 $788.033 $297.428.647 $31.135.464 $10.930.784 $19.833 $55.366 $218.098.787 $2.689.091.270 $6.044 $1.656 $45.450 $224.164 $64.647.060 $802.450 $36.230 $650 $374 $372 $259 $755 $16.370 $8.663 $24.478.157 $9.579.204 $32.637 $3.601 $88.792 $158.687 $1.274.341 $2.091 $8.233 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Alaska Ohio Kansas Wyoming West Virginia Pennsylvania Utah Virginia Kentucky Illinois Michigan Florida Montana North Dakota Tennessee New York Nebraska Indiana South Dakota Idaho New Jersey Missouri Wisconsin Nevada Other States Total 103 .906 2013 $7.250 $70.857 $981 $565 $561 $391 $1.938.334 $35.323 $1.162 $6.461 $243.212 $6.850 $127.059 $84.532 $11.934.291 $999.823 $8.878.538.400 $1.268 $1.653 $182.150 $129.607 $6.619 $312.556 $972.100 $6.063 $9.735.487.704 $68.989 2012 $7.842 $166.092 $138.970 $18.603 $240.064 $5.959 $1.317 $3.103.544 $123.137.191 $38.379 $2.932 $161.837 $303.421 $5.415.824 $9.923.850 $14.599 $7.730 $340.408 $25.663 $30.418 $148.511 $1.859 $5.834 $3.981 $87.292 $753.159 $205.838.946 $154.545.566.279 $9.579 $24.480 $961.233.247 $220.949 $237.150.570 $830 $477 $474 $330 $963 $21.587.503 $20.866.492 $153.556 $86.745.227.180 $779.730 $1.458 $75.073 $1.203 $2.228 $7.337 $176.380 $12.733 $217.458.472.839.619 $2.982 $124.451 $9.

584 1.435 11.899 1.579 11.364 8.508 1.865 2.484 10.331 2.763 7.784 1.953 2.932 2.402 2.Table 31: Estimated Historical and Projected Oil and Natural Gas Extraction Employment by State (2008-2013) (In Jobs) 2008 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Ohio Alaska Kansas Wyoming Pennsylvania Utah West Virginia Virginia Florida Kentucky Michigan Illinois Montana Tennessee North Dakota Nebraska New York Indiana Idaho South Dakota New Jersey Wisconsin Missouri Oregon Other States Total 49.161 1.632 10.393 1.214 1.880 8.531 9.127 40.193 1.614 1.093 1.258 1.012 952 948 596 356 338 307 260 105 96 90 65 37 34 18 14 7 6 6 4 11 191.897 38.332 14.055 8.361 2010 53.908 7.614 39.087 684 409 388 352 298 120 111 103 74 42 39 21 16 8 7 6 4 13 222.628 49.197 1.027 104 .932 2.798 15.246 2.244 20.957 1.629 7.890 14.150 1.031 1.312 6.099 58.082 1.858 2011 64.666 2.309 2013 77.121 2.121 705 422 400 363 307 124 114 107 77 43 40 21 17 9 7 7 4 13 229.592 1.436 1.475 24.552 2.534 10.179 1.246 1.745 24.051 10.223 984 820 772 768 483 289 274 249 211 85 78 73 53 30 28 15 12 6 5 5 3 9 153.205 9.308 6.024 1.417 13.497 2.731 1.646 1.298 2.539 1.999 2012 74.893 13.920 1.619 1.239 15.489 1.838 56.869 5.182 952 793 747 743 468 279 265 240 204 82 76 71 51 29 27 14 11 6 5 4 3 9 148.262 2009 51.102 6.694 1.172 15.889 9.013 844 794 790 497 297 282 256 217 87 80 75 54 30 28 15 12 6 5 5 3 9 157.642 15.127 1.

Summary Tables: Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells 105 .

944 $3.486 $1.981 $5.768 $118.547 $1.162 $14.215 $38.398.007 $10.070 $9.313 $6.717 $27.133 $777 $327 $188 $129 $71 $66 $43 $114 $6.424 $20.634 $58.063 2009 $2.715 $14.990 $35.198 $96.252 $107.199 $20.133 $250.835 $3.941 $527.937 $3.217 $13.362 $7.547 $669.130.952 $2.871 $8.570 $5.213 $178.217 $232.320 $2.394 $14.686.056 $155.898 $51.599 $4.767 $257.023 $5.988 $361.292 $335.297 $1.546 $1.252 $37.580 $95.668 $3.979 $34.870 $35.583 $35.326 $3.702 $5.088 $1.957.483 $1.598 $1.176.742 $7.684 $25.768 $32.357.829 $20.461 $7.293.479.108 $86.962 $884 $767 $674 $462 $195 $112 $77 $42 $40 $25 $68 $3.899 $1.161 $19.373.805 $182.986 $10.056.154 $126.084 $29.910.517 $26.322 $190.250 $165.098 $1.389.014.082.943 $116.078 $709.763 $260 $694 $36.754 $35.395 $1.598 $96.711 $104.238 $32.059 $51.328 $8.600 $57.289 $1.245 $6.332 $2.087.097 $77.044 $175.644 $35.001 $164.644 $189.334.423 $106.386 $1.632 $931.376 $274.108 $45.853 $2.817 $601.519 $7.391 $1.386 $135.438 $10.148 $996 $875 $600 $253 $146 $99 $55 $51 $33 $88 $4.282.890 2011 $1.283 $26.519 $125.346 $199.557 $135.400 $9.213 $510 $294 $201 $111 $20.609 $1.359 $4.269 $11.188 $1.147 $783 $433 $20.156 $3.702 $152.181 $21.410 $214.430 Total $14.844 $6.425 $10.882 $248.462 $67 $178 $9.608 $51.486 $563.346 $19.938 $15.227 $841 $354 $204 $139 $77 $72 $46 $123 $6.022 $69.729 $1.521 $14.682 $54.571.218 $836 $352 $203 $138 $76 $72 $46 $123 $6.342 $238.170 $3.605 2010 $1.345 $22.293 $14.012 $1.283 $15.524.Table 32: Estimated Historical and Projected Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $2.484 $5.430 $15.672 $20.186 $16.632 $42.777 $12.835 $25.408.520 $10.709 $22.967 $45.990 $1.570 $1.606 $126.190 $3.793 Louisiana Texas Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Pennsylvania Illinois Arkansas Ohio Alaska Kansas Wyoming West Virginia Utah Indiana Virginia Kentucky Michigan New York Florida Montana North Dakota Tennessee Nebraska South Dakota Idaho New Jersey Missouri Wisconsin Nevada Other States Total 106 .069.015 $33.769 $1.885 $22.062 $5.116 $72.691 $38.044 $25.801 $24.567 $91.524 $202.180.224 $2.524 $5.999 2012 $2.116 $32.704 $2.148 $2.410 $9.379 $10.774.598 $3.182 $90.883 $76.550 $81.588 $889.273 $2.781 $19.764 $572.793 $3.158 $367.959 $137.392 $58.683 $151.981.901 $66.896 $4.045 $7.806 2013 $3.

009 $336.293 $10.392 $442.992.661 $138.045 $14.500 $35.133 $82.305 $2.078 $80.541 $20.738 $65.800 $180.899.676 $29.934.746 $1.475 $259.432 $83.182 $237.392 $3.686 $683.424 $46.084 $42.449 $1.311.072 $13.488 $664 $352 $186 $107 $20.375 $30.534 $190.906 $31.734 $1.955 $74 $216 $9.804 $26.605 $16.614 $2.393 $3.767 $12.553 $4.391 $1.647 $3.681 $132.089 $908.315 $1.847.217 $15.588 $91.981 $42.855.559 107 .208 $50.642 $29.101 2009 $2.996 $10.259 $5.508 $276.225 $10.810 $2.076 $177.735 $23.067 $215.053 $1.270 $42.246 $879 $737 $329 $174 $92 $53 $53 $37 $107 $3.653 $165.657 $5.277 $16.895 $10.120 $10.674.758 $277.582 $27.794.310 $5.670 $6.279 $5.985 $74.284 $3.825 $574.138 $953 $426 $225 $119 $69 $68 $47 $138 $6.084 2013 $3.254 $128.012 $4.153 $21.976 $22.822 $27.051 $5.348 Total $14.071 $960 $677 $567 $253 $134 $71 $41 $41 $28 $82 $3.198 $9.644 $1.589 $39.277 $3.430.949 $1.224 $1.626 $342.031 $29.177 $66.475 $850.634 $46.447 $29.627 $49.858 $21.932 $114.358 $2.610 $218.816 $6.497 $24.870 $58.869 $1.104.606 $80.891 $107.926 $5.078.803 $2.309 $233.037 $33.096 $191.526 $997.207 $10.518 $1.210 $61.197 $9.118 $82.612 $1.857 $6.031 $231.792 $64.631.734 $1.425 $7.755 $4.409 $23.689 2010 $1.232 $148.402.385 $2.032 $461 $244 $129 $74 $74 $51 $150 $5.111 $136.591 $1.235 $105.739 2012 $2.509 $49.916 $514.744 $42.646.155 $139.291 $3.193 $166.777 $1.253 $57.232 $1.446 $4.848.384 $7.506 $9.559 $1.800 $1.025 $458 $242 $128 $74 $73 $51 $149 $5.900 $60.372 $725 $417 $21.637 $1.493.279 $2.209 $32.031 $12.183 $9.017 $8.189 $42.564 $150.956 $9.222 $840.087 $166.011 $71.821 $29.710 $1.919 $106.263 $289 $842 $34.206 $2.338 $6.953 $584.960 $13.570 $91.288 $45.936 $1.375 $27.292 $16.665 $1.471 $17.093.114 $45.444 $3.345 $7.205 $3.025 $375.110 $25.Table 33: Estimated Historical and Projected Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells Spending by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) Louisiana Texas Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Pennsylvania Illinois Arkansas Alaska Ohio Kansas Wyoming West Virginia Utah Virginia Indiana Kentucky Michigan New York Florida Montana North Dakota Tennessee Nebraska South Dakota Idaho New Jersey Missouri Wisconsin Nevada Other States Total 2008 $2.617 $42.702.724 $4.107.823 $151.225 $149.973 $4.692 $95.568.442.843 $15.416 $1.440 2011 $1.379 $32.430.469.073 $216.398 $17.619 $19.

398 1.834 2012 24.271 1.559 12.112 2.993 1.461 1.334 3.084 6.236 2010 14.389 1.303 221 1.621 287 1.595 371 2.105 1.294 2.646 1.016 1.654 8.914 2011 15.158 1.402 5.640 402 2.Table 34: Estimated Historical and Projected Drilling Oil and Natural Gas Wells Employment by State (2008-2013) (In Jobs) 2008 Louisiana Texas Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Illinois Pennsylvania Arkansas Ohio Alaska Kansas Wyoming West Virginia Utah Indiana Virginia Kentucky Michigan Florida New York Montana North Dakota Tennessee Nebraska South Dakota Idaho New Jersey Other States Total 28.413 2009 23.728 5.228 19.291 881 937 449 378 280 278 187 154 152 121 95 66 52 42 24 16 13 10 8 3 3 1 3 69.349 108 .829 19.036 491 410 303 301 203 167 165 135 103 71 57 45 30 17 14 11 9 4 3 1 3 62.129 2013 37.557 3.504 706 591 437 434 292 241 238 195 149 102 82 65 42 25 20 16 13 5 4 2 4 95.572 1.762 579 3.282 2.030 487 407 301 299 201 166 164 134 102 71 56 45 30 17 14 11 9 4 3 1 3 61.662 3.186 870 769 587 567 269 225 167 165 111 92 91 73 57 39 31 25 16 10 7 6 5 2 2 1 2 35.144 1.540 1.103 1.635 30.562 1.547 399 2.310 2.129 998 829 746 351 292 216 215 145 119 118 97 74 51 41 32 22 12 10 8 6 3 2 1 2 40.582 1.141 1.189 11.321 23.

Summary Tables: Mining and Oil and Natural Gas Field Machinery Manufacturing 109 .

367 $43.035 $22.065 $97.653.887 $32.610 $25.060 $8.910 $13.393 $295.543 $37.701 $33.108 2012 $1.306 $12.185 $9.699 $39.746 $97.194 $3.028 $4.239 $4.258 $5.292 $206.146 $2.082 $37.453 $504.206 $76.238 $65.737 $389.369 $4.024 $32.466 $7.508 $482.629.230 $44.257 $46.524 $66.493 $344.403 $339 $288 $43 $10 $9 $14 $2.165 $4.952 $43.522 $8.991 $2.839 $7.941 $230.929 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi Ohio California Oklahoma Missouri Illinois Wisconsin Colorado Kentucky Pennsylvania Nebraska New Mexico Florida Indiana New Jersey Arkansas Alaska Michigan Kansas Wyoming Minnesota Utah West Virginia New York Virginia Tennessee North Dakota Idaho Nevada Oregon Other States Total 110 .175 $50.246 $21.159 $2.532 $24.360 $192 $163 $25 $6 $5 $8 $1.284 $342.458 $18.142 $15.370 $25.827 $47.325 $7.746 $7.Table 35: Estimated Historical and Projected Mining Oil and Natural Gas Field Machinery Manufacturing Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $1.090 $2.825 $707.901 $2.495.184 $2.497 $12.721 $3.606 $7.447 $8.692 $41.711 $419.993 $27.448 $3.009 $16.664 $745.329 $73.135 $12.252 $19.083 $2.189 $44.882 $406 $345 $52 $12 $11 $16 $2.294 $18.107.170 $3.625 $39.725 $113.399.751 $8.986 $75.814 $81.777 $5.715 Total $6.866 $89.088 $531.814 $5.050 $163.866 $12.028 $210.608 $80.679 $36.492 $114.755 $78.700 $4.774 $204.520.011 $4.788 $351.523 $18.573 $45.526 $3.274 $31.550 $2.321 $10.578 $5.898 $217.189 $4.754 2011 $1.239 $34.563.454 $64.211 $5.263 $33.915 $8.344 $18.051 $908.060 2010 $712.859 $58.269 $24.542 2009 $609.818 $11.811.391 $6.142 $73.569 $5.783 $247.242 $6.343 $7.166 $326 $77 $71 $103 $17.078 $11.654 $167.278 $321 $273 $41 $10 $9 $13 $2.357 $3.987 $45.003 $6.984 $65.691 $2.127 $7.411 $37.282 $27.271 $20.011 $67.098.663 $45.726 $70.850 $10.134 $583 $495 $75 $18 $16 $24 $3.718 $8.833 $1.505.976 $4.637 $744.350 $228.167 $14.686 $14.017.740 $42.172 $8.539 $19.246 $381.294 $79.403 $2.681 $55.639 $25.430 $76.025 $709 $602 $91 $21 $20 $29 $4.104.778 $31.626 $70.076 $3.751 2013 $1.196 $18.056 $88.070 $38.891 $197.355 $50.464 $3.822 $26.362 $4.214 $26.038.670 $24.971 $54.059 $1.637 $3.386 $42.977 $21.607 $2.934 $52.022 $6.493 $6.929.873 $67.744 $4.320 $151.481 $15.406 $1.993 $55.158 $49.571 $6.242 $28.385 $15.541 $4.873 $161.342.200 $35.868 $145.904 $214.413 $56.973 $85.323 $8.571 $9.770 $40.420 $5.751 $12.

528 2012 $973.137 $594 $532 $376 $376 $140 $128 $2.930 $250.290.331 $354.464 $4.297 $63.414 $42.096.900 $1.003 $37.470 $1.635 $3.960 $21.945 $3.969 $5.766 2010 $627.282 $68.498 $140.488 $8.850 2011 $1.982 $210.915 $875.179 $2.935 $78.531 $7.912 $20.790 $46.558.648 $49.101 $6.891 $2.025 $3.801 $57.435.573 $3.540 $5.118 $65.050 $218.394 $67.795 $65.014 $58.211 $25.960 $12.356 $2.121 $220.021 $220.186 $286.991 $101.382 $43.481 $69.113 $12.848 2013 $1.695 $28.774 $4.481 $280 $251 $0 $177 $66 $60 $1.166.113 $140.944 $5.142 $7.368 $48.095 $66.240 $8.353 $34.194 $68.488 $5.684 $56.841 $27.101 $14.084 $23.029 $16.241 $2.817 $37.600 $1.775 Total $5.732.897 $4.741 $7.038 $7.595 $3.436 $83.822 $247.793 $228.419 $32.134 $7.417 $83.705 $35.072 $12.178 $35.248 $874.897 $5.256 $19.085 $9.556 $15.482 $73.661 $16.747 $12.750 $83.841 $188.357 $63.137 $5.281 $20.925 $19.420 $7.642 $4.273 $1.356 $881 $802 $17.182.868 $76.584 $38.686 $14.021 $518.581 $37.517 $2.234 $34.134 $25.522 $60.594 2009 $537.423 $38.945 $66.574 $49.910 $3.467 $38.197 $75.360 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi Ohio California Oklahoma Missouri Wisconsin Colorado New Mexico Nebraska Kentucky Illinois Pennsylvania Florida Indiana New Jersey Arkansas Alaska Kansas Wyoming Michigan West Virginia Minnesota New York Utah Virginia Montana North Dakota Rhode Island Tennessee South Dakota Other States Total 111 .526 $37.279 $13.609 $4.035 $8.424 $1.456 $6.149 $15.093 $45.748 $80.952.546 $60.598 $7.588 $34.752 $15.707 $10.264 $4.297 $9.500 $852 $763 $539 $539 $201 $183 $3.436 $36.216 $392.426 $41.384 $516.338 $4.944 $27.339 $2.204 $8.018 $5.366 $56.575.413 $20.739 $42.198 $26.291 $36.688.067.036 $928 $655 $655 $245 $223 $4.983 $10.Table 36: Estimated Historical and Projected Mining Oil and Natural Gas Field Machinery Manufacturing Spending by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $975.480 $470 $421 $297 $297 $111 $101 $2.829.190 $492.219 $400.707 $8.424 $11.885 $7.182 $2.361 $79.311 $18.036.020 $24.495 $14.447 $157.776 $27.340 $64.737 $80.086 $37.726 $3.175 $110.906 $605.642.648 $4.187 $3.239 $29.755 $21.736 $6.229 $14.204 $12.165 $289.938 $66.032 $21.851 $366.110 $3.677 $36.196 $27.667 $22.524 $3.378 $162.074 $36.615 $495 $444 $313 $313 $117 $107 $2.666 $40.218 $8.477 $7.760 $567.122 $88.580 $105.483 $177.680 $72.896 $98.595 $288.028 $3.726 $4.263 $8.683 $3.117 $46.123 $19.034 $11.204 $10.692 $42.

988 10.115 964 903 958 891 830 860 552 330 312 334 228 192 161 114 125 74 95 85 60 58 8 7 2 50.921 77 624 559 422 46 40 58 51 293 273 37 527 485 297 125 219 63 53 126 41 103 31 28 33 19 3 2 1 21.139 112 .566 233 2.815 5.264 2012 13.026 10.957 1.460 128 1.940 7.404 1.340 1.062 135 1.995 13.786 2011 16.368 2010 9.117 831 633 414 469 233 195 249 151 188 115 103 75 70 10 8 3 62.Table 37: Estimated Historical and Projected Mining Oil and Natural Gas Field Machinery Manufacturing Employment by State (2008-2013) (In Jobs) 2008 Texas Louisiana Alabama Mississippi Ohio California Oklahoma Wisconsin Missouri Illinois Kentucky Colorado New Mexico Nebraska Pennsylvania Florida Indiana Arkansas New Jersey Alaska Kansas Michigan Wyoming Minnesota Utah West Virginia New York Virginia Tennessee North Dakota Other States Total 14.793 1.282 1.083 1.008 3.804 4.211 283 2.932 162 1.188 2013 20.417 2009 7.143 930 707 123 107 84 122 491 458 98 957 787 539 192 401 106 89 227 69 188 52 47 31 32 5 4 1 38.643 1.021 982 944 983 1.399 831 745 621 536 536 534 518 482 479 400 276 227 200 167 111 93 86 72 60 55 49 37 34 5 4 1 27.023 7.633 15.187 5.009 877 1.559 1.092 2.055 894 563 486 432 490 621 579 435 733 559 414 235 307 134 112 166 87 129 66 59 48 40 6 5 1 40.721 6.

Summary Tables: Construction 113 .

308 $43.045 $2.797.633.424.590 $8.781.346 $449.159 $44.699 $9.706 $54.041 $1.373 $2.818 $8.386 2010 $456.330 $568.177 $9.241 $14.428 $643 $517 $506 $378 $309 $199 $138 $78 $51 $29 $27 $18 $56 $2.241 $2.492 $62.094 $14.535 $3.991 $51.971 $1.386 $39.876 $199.835 $1.320 $20.350 $17.070 $8.865 $60.292 $7.979 $30.941 $347.574 2013 $919.475 $10.314 $1.598 $5.067 $2.947 $30.860 $6.181 $900 $406 $326 $319 $238 $195 $125 $87 $49 $32 $19 $17 $11 $35 $1.793 $71.647 $11.386 $2.636 $739.893 $2.083 $1.991 $65.578.828 $43.390 $26.878 $7.283 $7.019 $31.308 $2.129 $5.112 $418.543 $3.875 $71.861 $8.193 $5.228 $1.196 $2.890 $861.617 $4.143 $5.658 $218.185 $3.296 $61.056.672 $14.913 $9.282 $4.042 $490.786.044 $15.419 $6.829 $26.199 $59.414 $1.126 $7.585 $93.508 $48.091 $12.846 $64.817 $7.662 Total $4.256 $566 $455 $445 $332 $272 $175 $121 $69 $45 $26 $24 $15 $49 $2.200 $750.399 $630 $507 $496 $370 $303 $195 $135 $77 $50 $29 $27 $17 $55 $2.747 $49.914 $2.292 $91.871 $2.168.888 $24.828 $82.913 $3.000 $5.831 $37.440 $2.910 $69.145 $1.006 $9.141 $1.970 $38.851 2012 $666.217 $39.993 $24.024 $269.898 $6.673 $3.193 $58.219 $5.486 $5.718 $318.669 $955 $888 $798 $609 $274 $220 $216 $161 $132 $85 $59 $33 $22 $13 $12 $7 $24 $1.379 $4.771 $14.028 $16.830 $409.300 $8.151 $9.924 $4.407.289 $275.358 $6.505 $3.924 $10.836 $2.797 $3.379 $13.988 $2.121 $14.675 $519.381 $887 $615 $349 $226 $131 $123 $78 $251 $12.295 2011 $579.325 $1.121.621 $8.312 $6.776 $303.443 $1.259 $1.676 $12.118.345 $3.155 $12.647 $1.026 $782 $352 $283 $277 $207 $169 $109 $75 $43 $28 $16 $15 $10 $31 $1.832 $1.531 $3.Table 38: Estimated Historical and Projected Construction Contribution to GDP by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $1.855.293 $6.230 $4.061 $33.686 $1.835 Louisiana Texas Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Alaska Ohio Kansas Wyoming Pennsylvania West Virginia Utah Virginia Kentucky Illinois Michigan Florida Montana North Dakota Tennessee New York Nebraska Indiana South Dakota Idaho New Jersey Missouri Wisconsin Nevada Other States Total 114 .469 $1.454 $3.872 $1.635 $7.067 2009 $1.

342 $1.282 $8.717 2013 $837.527 $413.090 $60.318 $9.892 $274.301 $1.405 $2.817 $4.548 $1.814 $30.205.327 $38.963 $3.053 $4.310.237 $3.814 $14.478 $744 $660 $350 $185 $106 $106 $74 $214 $10.752.030 $2.276 $9.068 Louisiana Texas Alabama Mississippi California Oklahoma Colorado New Mexico Arkansas Alaska Ohio Kansas Wyoming West Virginia Pennsylvania Utah Virginia Kentucky Illinois Michigan Florida Montana North Dakota Tennessee New York Nebraska Indiana South Dakota Idaho New Jersey Missouri Wisconsin Nevada Other States Total 115 .079 $2.451 $42.509 $9.592 $327.007.539 $47.348 $2.117 $14.444 $6.982 $15.152 $3.714 $26.672 $2.537 $48.271 Total $4.772 $11.914 $14.Table 39: Estimated Historical and Projected Construction Spending by State (2008-2013) (US$ Thousands) 2008 $1.122 $5.290 $4.667 $340.407 $822 $673 $650 $511 $266 $239 $168 $155 $141 $71 $63 $33 $18 $10 $10 $7 $20 $976.599 $30.765.180 $3.817 $165.179 $45.011 2011 $527.309 $374.363 $8.365.354 $252.302 $1.264 $5.535 $9.469 $625.296 $13.230 $20.367 $5.319 $4.018.929 $1.288 $8.810 $5.321 $1.083 $1.201 $13.436 $40.525 $1.057 $865 $836 $656 $342 $307 $217 $199 $181 $91 $81 $43 $23 $13 $13 $9 $26 $1.487 $66.001 $2.726 $2.806 $1.041 $13.452 $6.210 $5.198 $625 $560 $395 $363 $331 $167 $148 $78 $41 $24 $24 $16 $48 $2.809 $1.198 $223.649 $377.334 $2.758 $407.957 $2.098 $537.383.398 $4.696 $1.052 $6.711 2009 $961.576 $214.748 $3.611 $7.598 $54.786 $13.619 $8.513 $47.405 $545.973 $60.719 $216.454 $5.481 $5.367.038 $9.998 $5.302 $47.500 $1.207 $24.796 2010 $415.103 $1.890 $1.450 $24.563 2012 $606.573 $73.069 $9.619 $1.217 $996 $962 $756 $394 $353 $249 $229 $209 $105 $93 $49 $26 $15 $15 $10 $30 $1.454 $3.038 $8.578 $26.054 $550 $493 $348 $319 $291 $147 $130 $69 $36 $21 $21 $14 $42 $2.878 $5.300 $71.791 $2.630 $5.495 $1.019 $14.099 $18.668 $42.580 $1.174 $613 $549 $387 $355 $324 $163 $145 $77 $41 $23 $23 $16 $47 $2.873 $42.741 $8.824 $10.764 $1.350 $6.389 $1.526 $10.205 $67.785 $31.481.264 $9.937 $64.904 $1.123 $42.477 $5.380 $4.561 $46.307 $26.931 $252.992 $7.448 $61.315 $4.239 $33.678 $20.236 $1.

148 160 791 739 547 527 173 124 124 90 80 58 56 56 33 23 17 16 14 8 5 5 3 3 2 2 1 2 27.187 879 847 278 199 199 145 129 93 89 89 53 36 27 26 22 12 8 8 5 4 3 2 1 3 42.850 8.923 11.561 2011 10.Table 40: Estimated Historical and Projected Construction Employment by State (2008-2013) (In Jobs) 2008 Louisiana Texas Alabama Mississippi Oklahoma California New Mexico Colorado Arkansas Alaska Ohio Kansas Wyoming Pennsylvania West Virginia Utah Virginia Kentucky Michigan Illinois Florida Montana North Dakota Tennessee Nebraska New York Indiana South Dakota Idaho Other States Total 20.599 9.670 2012 12.262 8.197 5.312 116 .436 11.426 2010 8.262 2013 16.833 257 1.597 286 1.983 5.373 292 1.444 1.409 5.684 7.813 124 616 575 426 410 135 96 96 70 63 45 43 43 26 18 13 12 11 6 4 4 2 2 1 1 1 1 20.323 979 943 310 222 221 162 144 104 100 99 59 40 31 28 24 13 9 8 5 5 3 3 2 3 46.415 1.237 2009 19.806 184 911 851 630 607 199 143 143 104 93 67 64 64 38 26 20 18 16 9 6 5 3 3 2 2 1 2 31.590 13.667 8.350 999 963 316 226 226 165 147 106 102 102 60 41 31 29 25 14 9 9 6 5 3 3 2 3 50.270 1.494 3.

Appendix 6: Employment Summary Table 117 .

791 266.326 76.556 19.Gulf Direct Total Non.152 83.915 2010 7.640 64.189 67.464 23.529 16.208 171.889 22.473 32.Gulf Indirect Total Non.385 62.920 68.278 177.635 18.524 62.040 237.419 170.818 57.840 219.736 115.363 531 1.315 205.727 107.Gulf Jobs Total Direct Total Indirect Total Jobs 2008 11.610 90.399 181.193 65.469 92.008 75.877 58.600 282.Table 41: Estimated Historical and Projected Employment Associated with GoM Oil and Natural Gas Industry Operations Summary Table (2008-2013) (In Jobs) AL Direct Al Indirect LA Direct LA Indirect MS Direct MS Indirect TX Direct TX Indirect Total Gulf Direct Total Gulf Indirect Total Gulf Jobs Total Non.943 685 1.773 265.085 229.256 228.918 242.354 27.459 20.404 429.443 64.876 156.803 89.158 26.689 60.851 24.680 214.990 69.804 64.030 306.760 79.870 2009 10.804 313.312 29.359 77.301 67.959 24.048 46.351 135.174 2013 14.383 356.606 23.371 25.023 2012 11.421 48.629 24.186 18.162 25.134 22.717 70.110 52.338 34.439 48.275 30.410 87.560 81.317 2011 9.658 20.796 237.682 82.938 311.947 648 1.751 42.066 57.208 118 .598 200.677 321.201 92.619 76.456 36.060 108.798 640 1.629 18.814 759 2.638 929 2.431 32.

Appendix 7: Selected Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Suppliers 119 .

Not All Inclusive State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Number of Companies 34 4 12 7 120 12 21 3 38 42 1 77 13 3 4 6 342 4 11 34 15 33 19 21 State Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Wisconsin Wyoming Total Companies Number of Companies 4 5 4 39 2 45 22 1 88 52 13 102 6 11 1 7 1.Index: Number of Companies per State.113 14 1 33 24 32 1 2.496 120 .

Inc DK Tech Corporation Gulf Coast Air & Hydraulics. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. Martin Energy Services Master Boat Builders.O. Metals Usa Plates And Shapes Midstream Fuel Service. Inc.. Offshore Inland Marine & Oilfield S&K Machineworks and Fabrication. Inc. Baldor Electric Company Bekaert Corporation Crow-Burlingame Company Triangle Engineering United Spectrographics. Analysts. LLC Motion Industries NOV Nudraulix. LLC CALIFORNIA 3M Advanced Joining Technologies. Capstone Turbine Corporation Cavins Oil Well Tools Celesco Transducer Products Ceradyne PetroCeram® Systems ChemEOR Clayton Industries Compass Water Solutions ConGlobal Industries Inc. Inc. Llc Alaska Valve And Fitting Company MRO Sales. Inc. Ideal Technical Services Industrial Training Consultants Inc Intergraph Corporation Lott Ship Agency. Aerospace & Marine International Ametek HCC Ametek Programmable Power Amron International Diving Supply Inc. Choice First Aid & Safety Inc. 121 . DH Instruments Pressure Products EMMEGI Heat Exchangers Inc. ShipConstructor Software Inc. Inc. Hill Marine Refrigeration. Anixter Inc Anritsu Company Applied Physics Systems Autodesk. Technical Specialties. ARIZONA Cont. Products US. Inc. ABS Americas Advanced Heat Treat Corp. Inc. Co. RJE International Inc ARIZONA AT&T Phoenix Digital Corporation Certex USA. Inc. Inc Consolidated Pipe & Supply Company Delta Rigging & Tools. Baker Tanks Gulf South Bal Seal Engineering Inc. ALASKA Alaska Instrument Company. Westcoast B. Inc ARKANSAS AmerCable Holdings LLC Applied Technology Group. (Mobile) BAE Systems BAE Systems Southeast Shipyards Alabama Barry Graham Oil Service Llc Bay Area Screw & Supply Co.Table 42: Selected Gulf of Mexico Oil and Natural Gas Industry Suppliers ALABAMA Aaron Oil Company ABC Applicators. Inc. HDA/SMC Healthy BACS LLC Ballast Technologies. Barksdale Control Products Behrens and Associates Inc BEI Sensors Berry Plastics BG System Inc Blacoh Fluid Control. Control Panel Corrpro Companies Inc. Tomar Electronics Valley Forge & Bolt Mfg. Inc. Inc. Inc.P. Aggreko LLC Airgas Alabama Drydock & Shipping Company Alabama Laser Alabama Metal Industries Atlantic Marine.

Inc. ESP Safety. Inc. International Rubber Products Interocean Systems. Insite Pacific. Hydro Tek Cleaning Equipment Mfg. Shanghai Nova Group Sidus Solutions LLC Solar Turbines South Bay Cable Corp. SeaBotix Inc. Pump R2Sonic LLC Remote Ocean System. Wellbore Navigation. Inc. Inc. Inc. Hewlett Packard Company Hydraulics International. (FCI) Foster Lubricants (Pro One Lubricants) Freedom Chemical Corporation Glenair. WETechnologies 122 . Environmental Systems Research Inst Epicor Software Corporation ESL Power Systems. Grandis Titanium Hammerhead Industries Inc Haskel International. Inc. ITT BIW Connector Systems JAE Electronics. Hyspan Precision Products. Proco Products. Lubrication Sciences International McCrometer. Pacific Crest Corporation Pacific West Coast Specialties And PacSeal Hydraulics. Inc. Inc. Panolin America. Kontron America Kuster Company L-3 Communications Linkquest Inc. Inc. Inc. Praxair Primary Steel. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. Parco Inc. Fluid Components Intl.CALIFORNIA Cryogenic Industries Crystal Engineering Corporation Danfoss Sea Recovery Deepsea Power & Light Digital Age Learning Discflo Corporation EFA Technologies Inc. Printrex. Trimble Turner Designs Hydrocarbon Instruments United Rentals University of Southern California Viterbi School Vacco Industries Vigilant Environmental Solutions Weartech International Inc. Reotemp Instruments Corporation Resources Global Professionals Rocket Science Acoustics Sanmar Supply Company Sanmina . Kepner Plastics Fabricators. Inc. McMaster-Carr Supply Company Mechanix Wear Membrane Tech & Research Inc Mil-Ram Technology. Inc. Inc.SCI Schilling Robotics. Fabco Automotive Flir Commercial Systems Inc. Inc. Seacon Advanced Products. Inc. Inc. Inc. Hawk Industries. PNP International Group Inc. Inc. Spencer Composites Corporation Statek Corporation Survival Systems International. Swedish Trade Council Tactical Survey Group Inc Teledyne Impulse Tension Member Technology TMT Laboratories Tri Tool Inc. Inc. LLC Seacon Global Production Separation Specialists. Inc. National Aeronautics & Space Admin NEI Software Nimsoft Inc Noren Products NOV Oracle America.

Hercules Sealing Products Hoerbiger Compression Technology KE Marine Inc/Worldwide Diesel Power Manown Engineering Co. Inc. Inc. Neptune Research. Inc DELAWARE C. Inc. Inc. Ltd W. LLC Belzona Citrix Systems. Inc. Inc. Worldwide Drilling Resource GEORGIA Adobe Equipment Houston. Baumer Ltd CS Unitec Flygt Global Dynamix Inc Lee Company Oceanweather Inc. World Fuel Services. Inc. AT&T BASF Corporation C C Jensen Inc Crane Control Systems Llc DCL Mooring & Rigging Dell Marketing L. Inc. Metallurgy& Exploration Sundyne Corporation CONNECTICUT Advanced Testing Systems. Inc. BVM Corporation CoorsTek Technical Ceramics Decision Point Associates. Gates Corporation Micro Motion PTI Group USA LLC Quadco Inc.. Ocean Motions Company Oceaneering Pensacola Testing Laboratories. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc American Boa. Inc.P. American Welding Society Artmark Products Corporation BAE Systems Southeast Shipyards Florida BellowsTech. DuPont Pole Star Space Applications Llc District of Columbia Schagrin Associates Maritime Administration FLORIDA A&E Systems LLC American Industrial Plastics. Society for Mining. Inc H G Harders & Sons. Inc. Enviro Voraxial Technology Global Satellite USA Gosan Crane Components Governor Control Systems. Marine Rescue Technologies Maritech Machine Inc. Quality Plus Services. American Steel Products FLORIDA Cont. Tiger Direct. Inc. Numara Software. SSI Service Base Florida Teledyne ODI Inc. W.COLORADO Atlas Copco BAND-IT IDEX. Ward Leonard Electric Company. Foster Usa. LLC Amerair Industries. CSX Tranportation Eastern Shipbuilding Group.. 123 . Southern Spring & Stamping Inc Stainless Structurals LLC Survival Systems International. Inc. Grainger. Inc Freewave Technologies Inc. OFS Fitel LLC Omega Engineering Inc Point Lighting Corporation Process Measurment & Controls Pro-Lock USA LLC Remote Automation Solutions RSCC (Rockbestos-Surprenant Cable Corp) Softex Solidification Products International Inc TUV Rheinland of North America Walz & Krenzer. Virtual Media Integration. Inc. APS Technology Ashcroft Inc. Inc. Miami Diver. Inc.

UPS Capital Weg Electric Corp. Executrain Filowire. MSC Industrial Supply Co. Inc. Integrated Project Resou ITH Engineering Joliet Equipment Corporation Joliet Technologies L. MyCelx Technologies Corporation Nexeo Solutions. Inc IFS Industrial Air Solutions. LLC Partex Marking Systems Inc 124 . Bosch Rexroth Corporation Burlington Northern And Cat Engine Caterpillar CDW Computer Centers Inc.C. CDW Direct CEJN Industrial Cintas Corporation LOC 543 Clements National Clifford-Jacobs Forging Clyde Union. Nutsteel. Electric. Inc. Inc. Nelson. Groves Industrial Supply Honeywell Analytics Howco Metals Management Llc Hydratight. LLC Nivis OBL PC Weather Products Rolls-Royce Commercial Marine Ronson Technical Products Sigma Thermal Inc.C. LLC Specialty Application Services. LLC Air Cycle Corporation Apex Engineering Products Corporation Appleton (EGS Electrical Group .S. Nitto Kohki USA Inc Nord-Lock Inc. Legrand Lillbacka USA Inc. Inc. Inc.Appleton. Inc. Dynapar Eaton Corporation Energy Alloys Inc Federal Signal Corporation Flodraulic Group.. Inc. LLC MacDermid Offshore Solutions LLC Metals Usa MOOG Mustang Computers & Supplies Inc. SolaHD) Applied Industrial Technologies AT&T Mobility II. Inc.L. O'Brien. Davis Instruments Dexter Magnetic Technologies. Hope Industrial Systems Inc ICE . LLC Autodesk Inc. Magnetrol International Magnet-Schultz Martin Engineering Mcmaster-Carr Supply Company Metropolitan Life Insurance Mijno Precision Gearing Mittal Steel Morgan Bronze Products. STW Technic LP Teledyne D. U. Norman Filter Company.G. Coleman Cable Inc Cortland Cable Co.GEORGIA Delta / KLM / Air France / Alitalia Det Norske Veritas Deutz Corporation Donovan Marine. Sikora International Corp SOTEC. Co. Headquarters WIKA Instrument Corporation HAWAII Structural Solutions ILLINOIS Ace Transportation Inc AFL Telecommunications. B & B Electronics Mfg.Italian Trade Commission Imes Inc Jas Worldwide Management JIT Warehousing & Logistics LLC Kongsberg M. ILLINOIS Cont.

P. Controls. Inc.O. ABS Americas Acadian Contractors. 125 . Llc NOV NRP-Jones Oerlikon Fairfield Piezo Technologies Sullair Corporation Trellborg Zokman Products Inc. Inc AMICO-Seasafe. Inc. Inc. Inc. A Gibralter Company Angel Air Repair & Specialty Co Inc Api Control System Solutions Inc Auto-Comm Engineering Corp AWC. IOWA Diversified Investment A Fisher Valves & Instruments John Deere Power Systems KANSAS Exline ITW Dymon (DYKEM® and SCRUBS®) Kmt Aqua-Dyne Taylor Forge Engineered Systems KENTUCKY Allied Waste Services General Cable Ideal Solutions Mubea Inc. B. Ace Transportation Llc Acme Machine & Welding.L. LLC Action Specialties Llc Advance Products & Systems Advanced Basket Rentals. American Diesel American Fire & Safety Llc American Polymer Products. Inc. Inc. Seabird Electronics Inc. Llc Acme Truck Line. Inc. Plymouth Engineered Shapes TopWorx LOUISIANA 2M Oilfield Group. Inc. Inc. SunSource Tech Cast. Inc. Siemens Water Technologies. ACP. A Honeywell Company Webco Industries. A & L Repair Services.Inc Advanced Fiberglass Aggreko. Air Logistics.C. Billet CNC. Inc. Llc AGI Industries Agi Industries. Inc. LLC Air Compressor Energy Systems. LLC Acadiana Crew Change Service Accurate Measurement Controls. Inc. Inc. L. Inc. LLC TMK IPSCO UL Universal Technical Systems.L. Allis-Chalmers Rental Ser. L. Inc Nahi. Smalley Steel Ring Company SMI Oilfield Services SMM North America SPX Bolting Systems / Power Team Ssab North American Div. UOP LLC. Acadiana Cooling & Heating. Kennametal Conforma Clad Keronite.ILLINOIS Pentair Piper Plastics. Corp. Llc ABL Fabricators. Accurate Weldment Testing. Poly One Corp. Sumitomo Metal Industries Ltd. Inc. Inc. Bilco Tools. Whiting Corporation Wichita Clutch Womack Machine Supply Company INDIANA Advanced Designs Corporation Endress & Hauser High Performance Alloys. Air & Process System Air and Process Services. Inc.C. Bayou and Socotherm Bayou Boeuf Electric Berard Transportation. Staples Advantage Stucchi.

LLC Francis Torque Service Frank's Casing Crew & Rental Tools. Global Manufacturing Inc Global X-Ray 126 .P. Donnie Williams Tool Co. Inc. LLC General Marine Leasing Global Industries Offshore. Llc Ess Support Services Essi Corporation Expeditors & Production Expert E&P Consultants Llc Expert Riser Solutions. Commercial Diving Supply.. Inc.P. LLC Fourchon Heavy Lift. Gauthiers Oilfield Rental. Era Helicopters. CORTEC Fluid Control C-Port. Inc Don Abney. Envirochem Environmental Drilling Solutions Enviro-Tech Systems L. Fitzgerald Inspection Inc Force Power Systems. Ene Consultants Llc Energy Pipe & Supply Inc. Llc Coastal Safety Management LLC Cochrane Technologies. Inc. Inc. Inc.L. LLC Broussard Brothers. Ed Roe's Welding Inc. Inc. Burner Fire Control C & C Technologies. Inc Brand Energy Solutions Llc Bristow U. Inc. Inc. Ductz Of South Louisiana Dynamic Industries Inc. Inc Downey Engineering Corp. Energy Technology/Technical Industries Engineering Dynamics. LLC Bourque Sales & Service. Inc. Inc. / A..C. Gaffey. Inc. Cutting Underwater Technologies D & D Machine Works. Central Boat Rentals Central Dispatch. LLC Creative Manufacturing Services LLC Crosby Tugs. LLC Bollinger Shipyards Lockport. L.P. Inc. Inc. CETCO Oilfield Services Charter Supply Company Checkpoint Process Pumps & Systems Chem Spray South Chet Morrison Contractors C-Innovations LLC Cleanblast. Delta Bolt Llc Delta's Missy's Supermarket. E.S. Fire Boss of Louisiana. Inc. Cad Oilfield Specialties Capital Valve & Fitting Co..I. Dryden Supply.LOUISIANA Bis Salamis Inc BNA Marine Services. E. Galvotec Corrosion Services Gator Tank Rentals. Danos & Curole Marine Data Technology Solutions Datacom DCL Mooring And Rigging Delmar Systems. Inc. Llc Cross Logistics. Inc. I. Llc Coastal Fire Protection Llc Coastal Risk Services. Inc. Inc. Edison Chouest Offshore LLC Elliott Technical Controls.L. LLC Digital And Electronic Resources Diversified Well Logging Inc Doerle Food Service Dolphin Dolphin Energy Equipment. LLC Connector Specialists. L. Inc. Inc. Cross Services. Inc. Fugro G T Michelli Company Inc Gachassin. Llc Express Printing & Forms Inc Falck Alford Federal Flange/A&B Fire & Safety Specialists.C.

John H. Inc. Inc. Knight Knight Manufacturing Knight Oil Tools K-Tek L & L Oil And Gas Services Lafayette Electrical & Marine Supply Inc Lafayette Power Sports Lafayette Steel Erector.LOUISIANA Grand Isle Shipyard Green Marine & Industrial Equipment Co.H Reeves Consulting Magnum Mud Equipment Co Inc Major Equipment & Remediation Services. Newpark Environmental 127 . Hydradyne Hydraulics. Jack Vilas & Associates. Metallurgical & Materials Technologies. Inc.L. Kidder. LLC Mark Tool Co. Louisiana Valve Source Inc M & M International. Inc. Forklift & Truck Service. McDermott Medi-Chest. Harvey Gulf International Marine HB Rentals Herbert Crappell Construction Hidalgo Ouellet Holdings Llc HLR Controls. Co. Inc. Marine Systems. New Century Fabricators New Industries. Menge & Company. LLC. Inc. Inc. Inc Halo Branded Solutions Inc Hanagriff'S Machine Shop. Inc. J. Llc IntegriCert J & J Metalworks. Lapeyre Stair. Gulfstream Services Inc H & E Equipment Services. Inc. LLC McDaniel Controls. Inc. Houma Armature Works & Supply. Inc Hose Specialty & Supply Co. Inc. Inc. LLC Industrial Instrument Works. M. Hornbeck Offshore Services.C. Lighthouse Lodge.. Inc. MMR Group. Inc Louisiana Crane & Electrical Louisiana Economic Development Louisiana Environmental Monitoring Louisiana International Marine LLC Louisiana Machinery Company. Inc. Inc. H. Fisk Company Jotun Paints Inc K & B Machine Works. Inc. Carter John W Stone Oil Distributor Llc John W. Inc. Inc Hadco Services. Inc Marine Technologies. Inc.C. M. Martin Holdings Llc Martin Terminal Max Welders.Inc. Gulf Island Fabricators Gulf Offshore Logistics. Inc. Inc LeBlanc & Associates. LLC Gulf South Marine Gulf States Engr. Inc. L. Maxim Evaporators Of America Llc MB Industries. Inc. Loadmaster Derrick & Equipment. Living Quarter Technology. Inc. Industrial Screw & Supply Company Industrial Solutions Group. MMR International Ltd Modern Engineered Products Moody International Inc Moody Price Morgan City Rentals NDT Repair Service & Supply. Llc Lirette Ford Lincoln Mercury.C. MM Plastics Mfg. Kevin Gros Consulting & Marine Keystone Machine Works. Inc. Greene's Energy Group Gulf Coast International. Huber. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. M. Gulf Coast Monitoring Gulf Coast Training Technologies Gulf Engine & Equipment. LLC Gulf Coast Marine Associates. Electric.

L. Inc. PAC Specialties. LLC Tanks-A-Lot. L. Southern Electronics Supply Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc Offshore Equipment Solutions Offshore Service Vessels Llc Offshore Towing. Inc. Paragon Industries Paragon Metalworks. Inc. NOV Nrec Power Systems NuTec.L. Surbo Tubular Services Survival Systems International. Inc. Inc. Ltd. Superior Energy Services Superior Supply & Steel Supreme Service & Specialty Co. North Pacific Crane Co. Inc. Inc. LLC Southern Technology & Services. Inc SPL INC Src Materials Testing LLC Stabil Drill Specialties LLC Stat Waste Stream Services Inc Stokes & Spiehler Intl Inc Stratos Offshore Service Co Sub Surface Tools. Inc. Swivel Joint Repair Synergy Resources. LLC Schat-Harding. L. Progressive Technical Services Pro-Log. Inc Taylors Industrial Specialties. Inc. Pacific Gulf Wire Rope. Pneumatics & Hydraulics Co. Lp Quality Construction And Quality Oil Tools. Inc.L. Scurlock Electric. Inc PermaPipe PESI Petrin Corporation Petroleum Helicopters Inc Petroleum Helicopters.C. Seacor Marine LLC Seal-Tite International Seatronics Inc.. Oil States Skagit Smatco Omega Omega Natchiq. Sherry Laboratories Of Louisiana Siemens Water Technologies Corp Solar Turbines Sonoco Sotec Southern Crane & Hydraulic. LLC Roclan RSM . Secorp Industries Shannon Hardware Co. Production Enhancement Systems LLC Progress Machine. Inc. Precision Tech LLC Preheat.L. Inc. Orion Instruments OrionCase L.L. Oil Center Research International. Inc.C.C. Inc Quail Tools. Rel Enterprises RigPower. Panalpina. Inc Redfish Rental. Southern Pride Fabrication. Ray'S Radiator Red Fox Environmental Services. Inc. Point Eight Power Power Specialties.Inc Southport Specialty Equipment Sales Specialty Rental Tools & Supply Spectro-Scan Spirit Marine Service Company. Offshore Cleaning Systems Llc Offshore Energy Services. Taylors International Services Inc Tech Oil Products 128 .LOUISIANA Norsafe Marine & Offshore Services. Inc. Inc.C. Pharma-Safe Industrial Services. LLC Parkway Mechanical Services LLC Paul R Daigle Consulting LLC People Haulers.CNC. Inc. Ralow Services Ralphs Industrial Electronic Supplies Ray Oil Tool Co.

Inc.. Inc. Water Weights Webb-RIte Safety. Turner Industries Group ULO Systems. Brookfield Engineering Laboratories Brookfield Wire Carousel Industries of N. Azonix Bluefin Robotics Corp. Inc. Inc Instruments And Controls. LLC.LOUISIANA Techcrane International Llc Teche Electric Supply. Safelok . Inc.A. Inc. Rowe Price MASSACHUSETTS Aanderaa Data Instruments. Cashman Equipment Corporation Chase Corporation (Chase & Sons) Comark Corporation Cuming Corporation Dassault Systèmes Dresser Rand Engineered Pressure Systems Inc EPSI Engineered Syntactic Systems Esco Tool Co. Advanced Marine Technology Center Fuji Trading America. Llc Techniques International Terrebonne Motor Co. Inc. Sauer Compressors T. Inc. Trinity Wire. LLC UV Logistics LLC Vapor Power International Variable Bore Rams Inc Variable Bore Rams. Inc. Wechem. Inc. LLC Triple H Chemicals. Village Marine Tec Wadleigh Energy Group Wartsila Automation North America. FIBA Technologies. Inc. Llc MAINE Diversified Business Communications Flotation Technologies Inc. Hayden Corporation Horizon Marine Hydroid Inc Jeppesen JinDun Holdings Group Kronos LEWA. Vartech Systems. Inc Whitco Supplies Worksite Lighting LLC Workstrings. Wet Tech Energy. Inc. Inc Marine Technology Society Rohde & Schwarz MARYLAND Cont. Inc. Inc Linden Photonics Inc Maxon Precision Motors. The L-H Printing Company. Dixon Valve & Coupling Company DRS Defense Solutions.USA. The Nacher Corporation Thomas Energy Services Inc Thomas Tools. Miller Lifting Products Nanmac Corporation Noise Control Engineering Inc Olympus Tekscan Inc United Electric Controls Vacuum Barrier Corporation Verrillon MICHIGAN Dow Chemical E C Korneffel Co Emag LLC ESI Group Focal Technologies Corporation Hexarmor 129 . Inc. Inc Asahi/America. Tidewater Marine. Venture Transport Logistics Llc Versabar Inc. Inc. Kardex Remstar WorkBoat MARYLAND Aerotek Energy Services Deltek Systems Inc. Inc. Wartsila North America. Inc. Inc..

Daily Equipment Company Dixie Glass & Trim Inc. Heatcraft/Luvata Industrial Maint & Machine Inc Ingalls Shipbuilding Jerry Pittman And Associates.MICHIGAN King Engineering Corporation Martin Fluid Power MTU NLB Corp Northwest Michigan Tooling Coalition QVS Inc. Inc. Asset Optimization Gemstar Manufacturing General Pump Holt Power Systems Honeywell (Sensing & Control) Infor Global Solutions. Wal-Mart Stores. Wanner Engineering Hydra-Cell Pumps Xiotech Corporation MISSISSIPPI Bosarge Diving Inc Colle Towing Co. Inc. Inc. Inc. Pieter Kiewit and Sons 130 . Inc Utility Optimization Group Llc Vmi . Inc.. Inc. Inc. Incorporated TURCK Inc. Pascagoula Bar Pilots Signal International Inc Southern Inspection Services The Anchor Works Tube-Mac Industries (Services). Solar Turbines Stratasys Super Radiator Coils Thern. Northern Technologies International Corporation Precision Powered Products Red Wing Shoe Company Rosemount Rotary Systems. Tubular Steel. Inc Wireco WorldGroup NEBRASKA Heritage Manufacturing Co Inc Lincoln Composites PayFlex Systems USA. Inc Millennium Industrial And Marine NNW Inc. Louis Pipe & Supply Inc. Inc. PAS Technologies Inc Shaughnessy St Louis Metallizing St. Gibson Electric Motor Gulf Sales & Supply. RF System Lab Rolled Alloys Spiralock MINNESOTA 3M Corporation Boerger LLC Camden Wire Co. Inc. Inc. Titanova Inc Tnemec Company.Vicksburg Marine MISSOURI Continental Disc Corporation EaglePicher Technologies LLC Emerson Electric Fike Corporation Grainger Heat Transfer Systems Holland Keegan Adams Executive Search Llc Killark LaBarge. Iracore International Inc Kato Engineering Kato Generator L&M Radiator Inc Mattracks. Inc Capital Safety Cat Pumps Control Panel Cortec Corporation Detector Electronics (Det-Tronics) Drill Pipe International LL Eaton Corporation Emerson Process Management. Stoody Company The Bayou Companies.

Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engrs.Com. 131 . Inc. Canty Inc. NEW HAMPSHIRE Bortech Corp Citadel Computer Corporation Skeie Industrial Equipment & services. Westfalia Separator Inc NEW MEXICO Flow Science Inc Murchison Drilling Schools NEW YORK AIChE S Amphenol Industrial Asiamet Inc 6 ATA New York Inc. Inc. Vita Motivator Company Inc. CD-adapco China Huayu Pipe Fitting Co Columbus McKinnon Corporation CWorks Systems Inc Daikin America Inc DSR Corp / DSR Wire Corp East Hills Instruments. GP:50 Knovel KRACHT CORP. Automated Dynamics Bamberger Polymers. Inc. Kiswire Trading Inc. Inc. A Division of Unex Identropy. Inc. Inc. LIGHTNIN. GE Energy Microsoft Licensing. Inc. Elsevier-Gulf Professional Publishing Enecon Corp Esm Group Inc Fiber Instrument Sales. T & T Marketing. Inc. Evonik Degussa Corporation Felman Trading Gaffney-Kroese Supply Corporation General Magnaplate Corporation GGB Bearing Technology Godwin Pumps Grignard Company. TDK-Lambda Americas NEW JERSEY Cont. LLC Helidex Offshore LLC Hilman Inc Hilman Rollers Incorporated Honeywell Hytorc. Inc. Lisk Company Global Strategic Communications. Mistras Group Inc Panasonic Solutions Company RathGibson LLC RIA Connect Ringfeder Corporation Seals Eastern Inc. NEW JERSEY Custom Alloys Dialight Corporation EMD Chemicals. IEEE/Oceanic Engineering Society ISP ISS Machinery Services John Wiley & Sons Kallman Worldwide. Gp RICE Hydro. Inc. Inc. LLC Sponge-Jet. Inc. Flexim Americas Corp G Bopp USA G. Titanium Industries United Arab Emirates Meeting Point Vass Pipe Versa Products Company. Inc. An SPX Brand Linuo Valve Medima Metro Marine Design Associates Inc.W. Inc. Leistritz Corporation USA Mimeo.NEVADA American Grating Llc Click Bond. BFG Marine Inc Blume Worldwide Services Busby Metals. Kulite Semiconductor Products. An SPX Brand Rotork Controls. Inc. National Response Corp Plenty Mixers.

Stemcor Usa Inc. Sprague Division De Mitta Iron & Metal Dilworth Machine Expo Technologies. a business unit of Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Ferrotrade Corporation Ferry Cap & Set Screw Giant Industries Inc. CSA International Cubbison Company Curtiss-Wright Flow Control. Connell Inc. Inc. The International Society of Automation Toromont Energy NORTH DAKOTA Revel Digital OHIO Adalet Advantech Akron Electric. C & K Industrial Svcs Inc Carboline Company CAS Dataloggers Cincinnati Gearing Systems Inc. American Waste Mgt Svcs Ametek Solid State Controls Amg Resources Corportion Ashtabula Iron & Metal Aubert & Duval OHIO Cont. Sumitomo Tech Products Tel-Tru Manufacturing Co. Inc. Inc. Inc. Farris Engineering. 132 . Mackay Marine. Control Transformer. MAR-TEST/Frishmuth Consulting Metalico Youngstown Inc. Honeywell Sensotec HydraTech Engineered Products Industrial Mill Maintena Interstate Shredding. Inc. Brush Wellman Inc. Doosan Infracore Portable Power Electroswitch Global Knowledge Intermediate HAWE Hydraulics Hoffer Flow Controls Inc. Inc. NORTH CAROLINA Best Pump Works Bucci Industries USA. Dimension Data North America. Lincoln Electric Company Lyden Oil Co. Inc. Inc. ITT Corporation James Tool. Machine & Engineering. Viatran Corporation VJ Technologies. Division of Mackay Communications MTS Sensors Saft America Inc. Middough Consulting Inc Middough Inc Midwest Industrial Contr Milliron Iron & Metal In Nelson Fastener Systems Nelson Stud Welding. Temper Companies Timco. American Augers.NEW YORK SPX Process Equipment . KRAL-USA. Inc. Inc. Scott Safety SOS Global Express Tandemloc. Inc. Glunt Industries Inc H&S Tool. Cavotec USA Inc. Avtron Industrial Automation Battelle Bearing Distributors Bearing Engineered Solut Bronx International Inc. Inc. Inc Kenexis Consulting Konecranes. Inc. Leser GmbH & Co KG Lord Corp. Clark-Reliance Cognis Corporation Compass Systems & Sales. Llc Ken Greco.Lightnin Stellar Technology Inc. Inc. Hammelmann Corp.

Inc. The Crosby Group Thompson Pump Company Toromont Energy Tulsa heaters Tulsa Power. Inc. Mathey Dearman. Inc Best Pump Works Bronco Manufacturing Llc BS&B Safety Systems. Richards Industries Rittal Corporation Rockwell Automation Safeguard Technology Inc. C&C Equipment Specialists Inc. Ohio Edison P M C Industries Corp Parker Hannifin Corporation Pepperl+Fuchs Pipe Line Development Company ./PetroSkills Kimray. Society of Exploration Geophysicists Specific Systems. Inc. L. Inc. Puffer Sweiven Republic Engineered Products RFD Beaufort Inc. Campbell & Co. LLC Reel-O-Matic Roxtec Inc. Ltd. Spentex® FR Technical Control System Teledrift. Solon Manufacturing Co Sprague Products SSP Swagelok Technical Translation Services The David J Joseph Co Timcal America TPC Wire & Cable Corp Tylok International. LLC Gunnebo Johnson Corp Hetronic USA Hilti. Inc. Vogelsang USA Wooster Products Inc Youngstown Water Dept OKLAHOMA AAPG Aceco Valve Inc. Petroleum Abstracts/The University of Tulsa Piper Valve Systems Primenergy Production Equipment. Inc. Oiltizer Inc.L. Niles Iron & Metal Compa Norbar Torque Tools. Inc.C. TWG U S Safety Sign & Decal Webco Industries.PLIDCO Presrite Corporation Protrade Steel Co Ltd PSC Metals Inc. John M. Scrap Dynamics Corporati Sherwin-Williams Snap-tite Inc. Inc.. Oilfield Improvements. Inc. Conley Corporation Continental Wire Cloth Den-Con Companies Double Life Corporation Engatech Inc GEFCO Geophysical Research Co. Oklahoma Forge. Inc. Callidus Technologies by Honeywell CESI Chemical . Inc. Noshok. Whitco Supply Woolslayer Companies. Inc ZEECO OREGON Allied Systems Company Columbia Industrial Products 133 .Flotek Company OKLAHOMA Cont. Inc. Service Pump & Compressor Shumate Energy Technologies. American Foundry Group Bertrem Products. Moore.OHIO Network Technologies Inc. A Woolslayer Company Mad. King Oil Tools Lee C. Inc.

Inc. Inc. GAI-Tronics Gamajet Cleaning Systems Inc GDF Suez Energy Resources NA GE Energy Inspection Technologies GEA PHE Systems North America General Dynamics Gottlieb Inc Haskel International. LMI / Milton Roy LTC. Latrobe Specialty Steel . Inc. The Ulven Companies Tinitron. Mecco Marking & Traceability Mercer Company Mercer Lime & Stone Co Metalico Assad Iron & Me Metalico Neville Recycli Milton Roy Company Oceaneering International Inc Oil & Gas Online PBM Inc Valve Solutions PEI-Genesis Penn United Technologies. Inc. Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Company Femco Machine Company Fiber-Line. Dominion Durameter Milton Roy EBC Industries Elizabeth Carbide Components Elliott Group PENNSYLVANIA Cont.OREGON Columbia Industries LLC Equipmentland FLIR Systems GasGun. Aker Construction. High Pressure Equipment Company HYDAC Technology Corporation Ice Qube Inc. Llc Carpenter Technology Corporation Chromalox Converteam. Inc. Inc. Inc. Anker Industries ANSYS. Inc. Inc. Dell Marketing L. Inc. Inc. Ims Systems Inc Innovative Pressure Technologies International Sos Assistance. Inc. Ensinger Inc EST Group. Inc IPT ITT Neodyne/Conoflow/Enedine Key Bellevilles. Inc. Inc. Kroff Chemical Company. National Association Pressure Products Industries. ASTM International Autoclave Engineers Fluid Components Div of Snap-tite Azcon Corporation Bedford Reinforced Plastics Billet Industries. Ulven Forging. Maxpro Technologies. Inc. Bodine Business Products Bolttech Mannings Bridon American Corporation C/G Electrodes.SPD Products Liberty Iron & Metal Linc Milton Roy Linde. Ellwood Group.Drilling Prod. Inc FORTA Corporation . Div. Inc. Copes-Vulcan.P. Inc. Milton Roy 134 . Phoenix Contact PNC Bank. Greenberry Industrial Skookum Sulzer Pumps Technical Marine Service. Alfa Laval AMETEK Ametek Drexelbrook Amg Resources Corp. An SPX Brand Core Furnace Systems Corp CP Industries Daisy Data Displays Inc. Wolf Steel Foundry PENNSYLVANIA Affival Inc AGC Chemicals Americas. Arkema.

TEXAS 2H Offshore. Metals & Materials Society) Torcup Inc Tube City. Inc Acute Technological Services. Admiralty Marine And Structural Adobe Equipment Advanced Welding Services. Inc. Inc. Inc. Airdyne Inc Airgas Southwest Aker Kvaerner Subsea Inc Aker Solutions Alamo Iron Works Alamo Transformer Supply Company Alan C. Llc. AER Supply Ltd. Control Panel Heatec. Llc Universal Refractories Usx Corportation Van Gas Technologies Victrex USA VideoRay LLC Voith Turbo. Schramm. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. Zeus Inc. WEC Equipment & Machining Solutions Zapp Precision Wire. Alatas Americas Inc. Inc. Inc. Grace Distributing InsulFab Life Cycle Engineering Staubli Corporation Tobul Accumulator. Inc. Accudata Systems. Inc. 135 . Able Infosat Communications. Schroeder Industries. Inc. Inc. Inc. Acme Cleaning Equipment Inc Acumen International. Inc. McClure Associates. Inc. Whitehill Manufacturing Williams Milton Roy RHODE ISLAND Alloy Wire International Bad Dog Tools Dellner Brakes AB igus. Inc Accuturn Manufacturing. Inc.Hak A/M Air Starters AADE AAR Incorporated ABB ABCO Products. Snap-tite Quick Disconnect & Valve Div. Thomas & Betts Corporation Tradequip International TS3 Technology. TE Connectivity TMS (The Minerals. Inc. Inc. Inc ABS Consulting ABS Nautical Systems ABSG Consulting Inc. Inc. KVH Industries. SOUTH CAROLINA AFL Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co CIRCOR Instrumentation Technologies. Snap-tite Inc. Inc. igus. A&B Valve A. LLC Science Application Int'l Corp Silcotek Corporation SKF USA. Agar Corporation Aggreko. 3M Oil and Gas Business 3Ps. Inc. AgilityDocs Agr Subsea Inc AIMS International Air Comfort Incorporated Air Starter Components. Software House International Specialty Bar Products Strongarm Designs Superbolt. SOUTH DAKOTA Sioux Corporation TENNESSEE Acme Truck Line Inc Bailey Parks Urethane.PENNSYLVANIA Rajant Corporation Sap America.

Alloy Products Corp. Balmoral Offshore Engineering Bardex Corporation Bardot Group Sa Bastion Technologies. Bemex International Bench Tree Bennex Subsea Houston. Inc. Amerjin Co. All-Pro Fasteners Alltrans Port Trucking Alpha Slip Rings. Bernard Controls Inc Best Pump Works Bestolife Corporation Beta International Billy Pugh Co. American Connectors American Red Cross American Shipping & Chartering American Solutions For Business AmeriMex Motor & Controls. Inc. Andon Specialties Ani Direct Lp Anixter. Arc Specialties. Inc Axiom Process Llc Axon Energy Products Aztec Manufacturing/Houst B & W Pipe Inc. Baker Hughes Baker Oil Tools Ball & Seat Specialties Co. Inc. Ltd.. Inc. Inc. Alexander/Ryan Marine & Safety Co.Belgian Trade Commission Bell Engineering. Belven. Inc.. Inc. Inc. Anson Flowline Equipment Inc Antares Datensysteme GmbH Anthelion Systems. Ameron International AmerRig Services Amosco Amtex Machine Products Analytical Systems Intl.. Inc ATCOM Athens Group Austin Lp Athens Group Holdings Llc Atlas Incinerator A/S Atsco Audubon Automatic Power. Anti-Stall Technology (A Tomax Company) Applied Energy Company. Llc Allamon Tool Allendorph Specialties Inc Allesco Allied Alloys Allied Electronics. LLC. Arefco Seals. Autronica Aveva. Inc Alloy Machine Works Alloy Metals & Tubes International. Inc. Argo International Corporation Argus Subsea ASME International Petroleum Technology Institute AssetNation Inc Astro Controls. Altex Electronics. Ambox Limited AMEC Paragon AmerCable Incorporated American Alloy Steel American Block American Clutch & Equipment Co American Completion Tools Inc. Alimak Hek Inc All Points Equipment Co./Keco R&D AnchorPipe International. Inc. Inc Bel Valves Belgian Pavilion . Inc. Inc. Inc Bates Reliable Solutions Llc Bauer-Pileco Inc Beacon Maritime Inc Bechtel Oil Gas Chemicals Beeco Motors & Controls. Inc. Inc. Applied Industrial Technologies Inc Applus RTD APS Hydraulic Services Aqua-Chem. Inc. 136 . Inc.TEXAS Alco Valves (US).

Gasket & Fastener. Citic Group . CDR Strainers & Filters. Central Bolt & Industrial Supplies. Canyon Manufacturing Services Inc Capital Process Management. Inc. Check 6 Training Systems Chem Oil Products UVI Chickasaw Distributors. BTI Services Burintekh USA LLC Burrow Global LLC Bush Hydraulics Business Security Solutions Llc Butcher Fabricators Butler Business Products. Llc Buxton Interests. Rod Tool Co. Inc. Control Panel Controlled Fluids Cool-A-Zone Cooper Industries Copper State Rubber Core Labs Cornerstone and WOM Cornerstone Valve 137 . BMT Reliability Consultants Ltd BMT Scientific Marine Services Inc. Continental ContiTech Continental Valve & Fittings.A. Certex Usa.W. Inc. C. China Petroleum Technology & Development Corp. Inc. Cameron Cameron Measurement Cam-Tech Products. Canrig Drilling Technology Ltd. Llc. Inc. Inc Chapel Steel Company Chase Controls. Richards & Associates. Inc. Inc. Inc Comptroller Of Public Ac Constellation Newenergy Construction Technical Svc Inc Containerhouse International Continental Airlines. Inc Cobore Cobra Rig Products Coflexip Drilling & Refining Div Commvault Systems. Inc Ceva CGG Veritas Services (Us) Inc Champion Technologies Inc Champions Pipe & Supply. Inc Coastal Power Systems Coastal Switchgear & Controls. CCC Group. CapRock Communications Castrol Offshore Catapult Systems Inc Cavo Drilling Motors C-B Gear & Machine Inc.. Bob Herbert Drilling Equipment Bodycote Bolton Alloys LC Bop Controls BOXX Modular/Nortex Modular Space Brandt Brasilamarras Bredero Shaw Bring Cargo. Inc. Clutchco International Inc Clydeunion C-Mar America. Inc. CDL CDQ International. Llc Control Flow. Inc. Inc. Inc. Black Angus Steel & Suppl Blackwell Plastics Blohm + Voss Oiltools LLC Bluewater Solutions. CMP Products Coade.TEXAS Bishop Lifting Products. Inc C.Xin Yegang Steel ClampOn Clearstream Wastewater Systems Inc.C. Clover Tool Co. Offshore and Energy Logistics Brown Book Shop Brown Corrosion Services. Inc. Inc. Cenergy International Services Llc Centerline Manufacturing Centerpoint Energy Gas R Cen-Tex Marine Fabricators.Lt C. Inc. Llc Contitech Beattie Corporation Control Automation Services.

Inc. Inc Drilling & Production Resources Drilling Controls. Inc. Inc. Dox Steel Doyles DPS Offshore. Inc Daryl Flood Warehouse & Movers Daytech Instruments Deansteel Manufacturing Co. Lp Crane Pro Parts Crawford Electric Supply Craymond Nigeria Limited Crispin Energy Inc CS&P Technologies CT Gasket & Polymer C'Treat Offshore Inc.P. Diamond Offshore Company Diamond Wire Spring Company DiaPac LLC Distribution Internatl Dixie Pipe Sales L.P. DNP-Americas Dockwise Donovan Law Office Dooley Tackaberry. Inc. Edgen Murray Corp. Inc. Dell Marketing L. Dutton'S Navigation Inc DWD International. LTD Corrosion Resistant Alloys Cortland Companies Corvalent COSCO Shipping Company Ltd. Inc. Dreco (National Oilwell) Drew Marine Usa. Cutting Tools. Drillmec Inc. Durmat Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. Dan-Loc Bolt & Gasket Danmar Industries. Cyclone Steel Services. Pllc Echometer Company Eckel International Inc Ecodyne MRM. Inc. Inc.TEXAS Cor-Pro Systems Operating. Det Norske Veritas (DNV) Devon Industries. Ecad. D Reynolds Company Llc D&S Machine Works. Doris Inc. L. Drilltec Technologies Corporation Dril-Quip. Cotech Irm Services Inc CPSI Production Co. Draco Spring Mfg. Inc. Ecom Instruments Inc.P. Inc Deep Trend Inc Deepwater Corrosion Services Inc. Inc. J. Dragados Offshore. Inc. Ecaregroup. Eew Steel Trading Llc Efird Corrosion International 138 .A. Draeger Safety. Drago Supply Co. Dragon Products/Tiger Offshore Draka Offshore DrawWorks L. Deco Plastics. Inc. Denso Derrick Equipment Company Design Staff. Inc. Inc. Dynacon E.P. Inc. DXP Sepco Dyna Torque Technologies. Deep Sea Development Services Inc Deep Sea Quality Consulting. Reynolds Company Eagle Electronics Resources Inc Eastham Forge. Inc. Delta Centrifugal Corporation Delta Steel. S. Co. Cubility Cudd Energy Services Custom Power Custom Safety Products. Inc DHL Global Forwarding DIAB Sales.. LTD DXP Enterprises. DTC International DTI Duramast Industries. Da Mid South Daniel Measurement and Control.

M. An SPX Brand GE Oil & Gas Gearench General Monitors Systems 139 . Fastenal Fastorq FBV Inc FCI Federal Flange/A&B Fibergrate Composite Structures Fielder Electric Supply Co. Inc. Inc Fire Protection Service. Inc Fishbone Safety Solutions Ltd Fisher Controls c/o Puffer Sweiven Five Star Metals. Forrester Research. Enduro Enerflex Energy Systems. Flare Industries. GAC Group Gagemaker LP Gai-Tronics Galvotec Alloys.V. Inc Fort Bend County/Chamber Of Commerc Forum Energy Technologies Forum Oilfield Technologies Forum Services Foster Wheeler Franklin Offshore Americas. Excell Battery Corporation Exmar Marine NV Exmar Offshore Company Expedited Logistics and Freight Services Expeditors International Expro Americas.A. Inc Ex One / ProMetal RCT Excel Engineering. Inc. Fusion Inc G A S Unlimited Inc G. Inc. F. Inc. Inc Energy Aviation LLC Energy Valve And Supply Company Llc Enertech Services International Inc Engineered Packaged Systems Inc Engineered Spring Products Enventure Global Technology Ep-Hvac Us Inc. Gartner Coatings. Inc. Forged Vessel Connections. Electronic Technical Services Corporation Eletec Global Offshore Ltd. Elite Precision Fabricators.A. LLC Flodraulic Group Inc Fluid Systems. Gateway International Transport. Inc. Electro Mechanical Industries. Inc. Inc. Flexible Lifeline Systems. Inc. LLP Friede & Goldman. Electronic Power Design. Inc. Inc. Inc Gaus Anodes International GB TUBULARS GBA-Corona GD Engineering. Llc Equipment Management Services LLC Equipment Resources Equipment Valve & Supply ES&H Consulting Services. Ltd. Inc. Inc Flo Trend Systems FloaTEC. Fluor Offshore Solutions FMC Technologies Forge USA Forged Components.TEXAS EGS Systems Inc. Frisa Forjadss S. Inc Eutex International.& Ocean Sciences Fugro Global Environmental & Ocean Furmanite America. Inc. Esco Products. Inc. Galvotec Companies Gardner Denver Inc. Llc Exterran E-Z Line. De C. Ellington & Associates Emd Services International (Emdsi) Emerson Process Management Co. EPI Materials Testing Group Epilogue Systems. Freeman & Curiel Engineers. Fugro Chance Inc Fugro Global Environ. Gartner Fann Instrument Company Farmers Copper Ltd. Inc.W. RecuHeat. Inc.

Inc. Inc. Inc. Hydril Company Hydril Pressure Control Hydrological Solutions. Hiller Offshore Services. Co. Gulf Coast Downhole Technologies Gulf Coast Engineered Solutions Gulf Copper & Manufacturing Gulf Electroquip Gulf Marine Fabricators Gulf Publishing Company Gulfex Gulfmark Americas Inc GX Technology Corp Hacker International Hagemeyer North America. Inc Hydradyne Hydraulics Hydraquip Distribution. Inc. Inc. Halliburton Energy Services Hallmark Office Products.. Holloway-Houston. GSM. Inc. Inc. Inc. Generon IGS Geoforce. Inc Hilti. Inc. Inc Grayloc Products Llc Griffin Americas GS-Hydro US. Iadc Publications ICS Triplex. Inc Goodwin International Gotco International GPS Integrated Systems. Hy-Lok USA Hytorc Of Texas I. Lp Houston Motor & Control. Hamilton Metals Ham-Let Advanced Control Technology Hampco Hamworthy Inc.TEXAS General Plastics Mfg. Gilmore Valve Company GL Noble Denton. Inc 140 . Inc. Holt Power Systems Honeywell Process Solutions Honghua America HongHua Group Ltd Hoover Materials Handling Group Hose & Fittings. Global Industries. Inc. Hunt Engine. Ind. Inc. Inc.S. Globaltech Motor & Controls. Hatfield and Company. Inc. Inc Houston Offshore Engineering Houston Pipe Benders Houston Steel Equipment Co. Inc Hot-Hed Inc. Ltd. Geophysical Pursuit Inc Geoscience Earth & Marine GE-Sensing GHX. Inc. Inc Hahn Equipment Co. Inc.. Global Oil Corporation Global Shop Solutions Global Thermoelectric Corp. Grant Prideco. Hannon Hydraulics Harris CapRock Communications Hart Energy Hart Heat Transfer Products Hastik-Baymont. HS Energy LLC Hufco Huisman-Intrepid Services. Inc. Global Fabrication Services. Hamanaka Chain USA. Hempel (USA) Inc. Inc. Lp Graybar Electric Co.T. Hi-Cad America High Performance Cables. Houghton Offshore Houston Blow Pipe a Division of AGI Houston Center Valve & Fitting. Gill Services. Hydratight-Cortland Hydraulic Equipment Service. Inc. Global Maritime Inc. Hawke International Hayata Hayes Industries Haynes Wire Rope HCL Clamping Solutions HDI Instruments. Llc.

Kennametal Kennedy Wire Rope & Sling Kentec Composites Keppel Offshore & Marine Usa. Lp. Industrial Solutions & Innovations LLC Infinity Marine Offshore. Inc. Eldridge Sales Company. Inc Lewis-Goetz And Company. Inc.C. Fields & Co. Laser Welding Solutions Laversab. Inc International Paint LLC Intertek Group plc Intervale Capital Intsel Steel Distributors Intsel Steel/Triple-S Steel IWS Gas & Supply of Texas J & J Technical Services. Inc Kemlon Products & Development KEM-TRON Technologies. LLC Impact Selector. Inc. LLC L & S Cryogenics. Logan Industries International.. Lp L. Inc. Inc. Llc Jireh Consulting Llc Joda Transportation Johnny'S Gauge & Meter Repairs Journal of Petroleum Technology (JPT) JT Oilfield Mfg. LHR Services and Equipment. Linco-Electromatic Lincoln Manufacturing. Inc Kalsi Bearings Kalsi Engineering. Inc. Inc. Llp Industrial Piping Special Industrial Scale Co. Inc Institute of Marine Engineering. Kalsi Seals Kana Energy Services Inc KBR Kefco Offshore. Lamons Gasket Company Lancaster Flow Automation Landscape Images Of Texas Landy Energy Services. Independent Propane Company InduMar Products. Industrial Air Tool. L D Systems. L/K Oil Field Products. Inc Kerger Marine Electric. KIDD PipeLine & Specialties Kinder Morgan Bulk Termi KLT Carbide Co. ImpactWeather. LLC J D Marine Llc J P Kenny. Jelec Usa. Jhump & Associates.. Inc.Inc. J.. Co. Inc. Inc. Lawson Products Inc LBO Inc Lebus International Inc Leecyn LeTourneau Technologies. Inc. Ltd. D. Inc. Ltd. Llc IHS Energy Group Log Services Impac Systems Engineering Impact Fluid Solutions. LA Recruitment Ltd. Science and Technology (IMarEST) INTECSEA/WorleyParsons Integrated Applications Engineering Inc Integrated Drive Systems LLC InterLink Controls InterMoor International Clamps. KnightHawk Engineering Incorporated Kobelco EDTI Compressors. Jet-Lube. Inc.TEXAS IEC Systems. Inc. Inc. Inc. Lloyd's Register Americas Loadcraft Industries. Inc JAS Distributing LLC JDR Cable Systems Inc. Jet Machine Works. Inc.Inc. Inc. Inc Inman Texas Company Innovative Electronics Insite Objects. Inc. Loadmaster Universal Rigs. Inc.Ray McDermott Jackup Structures Alliance. Koch Heat Transfer Company LPFM Kodiak-Terra USA Inc Kongsberg Oil & Gas Technologies L & L oil and Gas Services. Inc. K & K Insulation. J. 141 . Inc.

Lone Star Fasteners. Inc. Inc. Inc. Montgomery Westland Bunker . an AETI Company M&J Valve. Inc. Longwood Elastomers Loran International Sales. MicroTesla Magnetic Field Effects Mid-West Electric Co. LTS. Merpro Americas. Inc. Lp Master Flo Valve (USA). Inc Morris Metals Service. Inc. Merrick Systems. LP. Inc LSI Interest. Martin Midstream Partners . Mustang Engineering Mustang Power Systems Myrex Industries Nalco Namasco Nance International NASA Johnson Space Center NATCO National Bronze & Metals. MSI Kenny MSO Seals & Gaskets MTS Threaded Products Co Mud Technology International. Inc. Inc. Inc. National Instruments National K Works National Oilwell Varco National Service Alliance National Specialty Alloys. Inc. MasterWord Services. National Coupling Co. Logik Precision. Marine Medical. Lufthansa German Airlines M & F Gauge M & H Engineering M D Cowan Inc M G Maher & Co Inc M&I Electric Industries Inc. Inc. Inc. Midwest Hose & Specialty Inc. Ltd.. Mammoet MAN Diesel & Turbo North America Inc. Magtech Malin International Ship Repair & Drydock. An SPX Brand MacArtney Offshore. MCM Oiltools McNichols Company MCS Kenny MCT Brattberg Mechtec Corporation Meridian Equipment. Inc Macdermid Offshore Solutions Mackay Communications. Matthews-Daniel Company Maxim Silencers Inc McDermott International Mcdonough Marine Service McElroy Translation Company Mcjunkin Red Man Corporation Mckenzie Equipment Company. Mitsubishi Forklift Trucks of Houston MLC Cad Systems MODEC-SOFEC Moduspec Usa Inc.. Inc. Inc.Inc. Inc. Lonestar Deepwater Llc LoneStar Forklift. Metal Coatings Corp. LLC Marubeni-Itochu Tubulars American. Inc Marshall Machine. Of Texas Marine Computation Services Kenny ltd Marine Equipment. Metco-Materials Evaluations M-I SWACO Micron Eagle Hydraulics Inc Micro-Smart Systems. Mohr Engineering Division Monarch Stainless. Moss Seal Company Motion Industries. Inc.Data Center Moody International. Lone Star Heat Treating Corp. Merrimac Manufacturing. Inc. Lone Star Companies Lone Star Diving. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc Moulding Specialists. LLC 142 . Ltd LSPHE(US).TEXAS Logan International Inc. Manifold Valve Service Marine Aluminium Marine Chemists. Inc. Marine Salvage & Services. Inc. Louisiana Electric Rig Service. Inc.

. Noble Drilling (U S) Inc Norriseal Norson Services Llc North Shore Supply Co. L. Oceaneering International. Inc Offshore Rig Movers International Oglaend System Oil Guide Online Inc. PDS Bartech Pegasus International. Inc Okonite Company Oliver Valves Ltd. Inc. Port-A-Cool. Permenter Controls Service. Inc. Inc. Inc. Odessa Pumps & Equipment Company O'DRILL/MCM. Inc. Inc. AKA OTT A/S Open & Close Equipment OTC Brasil Outernet Management. Inc Pipe Distributors Inc Pipeco Service Lp Pipeline Pigging Products. Inc. Ltd. Probe Process Level Technology Ltd Process Solutions Production Management Proserv Offshore.C. Nova Forge Corp. L. Panolin Parker Cabbet Subsea Parker Seal Partin Ltd. Inc. Pileco. Pem-Tech. ODS-Petrodata OEM Components. Precision Powered Products Premium Welding.com Oildata Logging Services Limited Oilfield Equipment Marketing. OCS Group O-D Rentals. New Century Fabricators New Millennium Group Ltd New Orleans to Houston Oil Directory New Tech Systems Neway Valve Inc. Ltd. Lp Oxifree Metal Protection PAC Stainless. Petron Industries. Inc. OET Global. Inc Oilstates Oilwell Tubular Consultants.TEXAS Nedschroef Corporation Neptune Net Safety Monitoring Inc. Inc.P. Inc. OEMic Inc. Inc Petreco Petro Amigos PetroMaterials USA Inc. Powell Industries Precise Steel. Inc. Newpark Drilling Fluids Nick'Sfastener & Industrial Supply Nigerian Pavilion NMA Maritime & Offshore Contractors Noble Denton Marine. OilCareers. Inc. Powell Electronics Inc. Pivot City Corporation Plusco. Packard International Inc. Path Consulting. Inc. Precision Flamecutting and Steel. Inc. Inc. OceanWorks International Inc. Ods International Inc. PennWell Pentagon Freight Services Perkins Drilling Tools. Omron Oilfield & Marine Onsite Treatment Technologies Inc. Partnership Pason Offshore Corp. OES Oilfield Services (USA). Inc. Inc Phase Dynamics. Oil States Industries. Office Depot Inc Offshore Commissioning Solutions Offshore Marine Cable Specialists Offshore Oil Services. Llc Pro Box. Inc Pro-Tech Welding 143 . Premsol Specialized Services PressureLinks LP Prime Electrical Services. Inc.L. Oilfield Motor And Control. Inc.

Ranger Steel Supply Corp. Rigzone. Inc. Inc. S & N Pump Company Inc Sabine Pilots Sabine Universal Products. Inc Recruitment Partners Lp Redding Communications Redman Pipe & Supply Reed-Hycalog Lp Reliable Pumps Consultants Remora ASA Research Partnership to Secure Energy for America Retsco Rexel RG Petro-Machinery Group Rice Electronics Lp Rickmers-Linie Rig-A-Lite AZZ/RAL Right Angle Gear Rignet. Inc.P. Inc Sellers Sales Company. SEA CON Sea Technology Ltd Seacoast Electric Seals & Packings. Rawson RBG Usa. Quietaire R R Williams & Associates R&M Energy Systems Racor Division/Parker Filtration Radio Holland Usa. Ltd Ramtech Building Systems. RAPID-TORC Inc. Inc.com Ringers Gloves Riversand Technologies. Rock-Oilfield Group Lp Rolls-Royce Commercial Marine. QA Bearing Technologies Ltd. Inc. RTI Energy Systems RYCO Hydraulics. Inc Rongsheng Machinery Manufacture Ltd.TEXAS PSI Automation Process Safety & Reliability Group Puffer Sweiven Pulsar Process Measurement Ltd. Inc RigStat. Seaward Safety. Ram Winch & Hoist. Llc Quality Bit & Supply Quality Connector Systems. Simmons & Company International 144 . Inc. Roberts Production Tools Robsco. Inc. Rosemount Analytical Rotech Subsea Rowan Companies RPS Solutions RR Valve Inc. Inc.LLC Quest Integrity Group. Inc Safety Engineering Services PLLC Safety Rx Safety Savings & Environmental LLC Samson Santini Export Packing Corp. Inc. Seaquest Diving Llc Seatrax Marine Cranes Seatrax.. Inc Radoil. Seamar Divers. Inc. Schlumberger Scorpion Oil Tools. Sigma Solutions. Inc. QCI Marine Offshore. LLC Quest Offshore Resources Inc. Pumps & Equipment Semco Maritime US SENSEAR Texas Sepam Group Sercel Severn Trent DeNora Shanco Equipment Specialists Shaw Pipeline Services Shea Writing and Training Solutions Shell Offshore Inc Shermco Industries. SAS USA Saudi Aramco SBM Atlantia SC Pipe Services Inc Scana Offshore Services Scan-Pac Mfg. Inc. Inc. L.

Inc.. Subsea Technologies. Inc. Inc. Inc. Surface Techniques. Inc. Texas A&M at Galveston Texas A&M University Energy Engineering Institute Texas Bolt & Nut Company Ltd Texas Engineering Experiment Texas First Industrial Corp. Inc Southwest Research Institute Southwest Stainless. Texas Pipe &Supply Co Inc Texas Pipe Works. Lp SURF Subsea. Spectrum Batteries Inc.P. Inc. Inc. 145 . Inc. Ltd. SPET. Superior Threaded Products. Inc. Inc. Inc. Swds Slc. Southwest Wire Rope Lp Sparrows Offshore Llc Spartek Systems Spears Mfg Co Specialties Co/Copper State Rubber Specialties Company Specialty Rental Tools and Supply (STS) Specialty Steel Supply. Inc. Inc. STAHL Stainless Steel Custom Stallion Offshore Quarters Inc Stallion Oilfield Services Ltd Stewart & Stevenson StormGeo. Inc. Llc Systel Inc T H Hill Associates Inc T Rex Engineering & Construction Lc T. Tailwind Air Charters TALON Technical Sales. TAM International. Inc. STVA Scaffolding & Shoring STX US Marine Sub-Atlantic Subsea Solutions Llc Subsea Systems. Suzhou Viza Valve Co. L. Inc. STS Products. Inc T3 Energy Services.S. Ltd. Inc. Llc Swift Technical Services. Southern California Valve Southwest Electric Supply Inc Southwest Electronic Energy Group Southwest Materials Handling Co Southwest Ocean Services. Inc. Inc Technology And Calibration. Texas Institute Of Science. Spitzer Spring Bolt & Nut MFG SPT Group. Inc. Inc. Inc. Inc. TCR Inc. Southwest Oilfield Products. Inc. Inc Texas Nameplate Company. SPIR STAR Spir Star. A Unit of Robbins & Myers Inc. LP Source IEC South Coast Technology. Technical & Scientific Application Technip Technogenia.TEXAS SINOPEC Petroleum & Chemical Corporation SIPCO Mechanical Linkage Solutions Smith & Associates Smith International Inc SMU Cox School of Business Executive Education Society for Underwater Technology Society of Petroleum Engineers Sodexo Remote Sites Partnership SOFEC Solar Turbines Sonardyne Inc Sonica Supply Co Sooner Pipe. Teledyne TSS Limited Tenaris Tesco Corporation Tetra Technologies. Stratos Stress Engineering Services. Specific Equipment Company Spectra Sensors Spectrex. TEEX Tejas Completion Solutions Tejas Tubular Products. SunSource Superior Drillpipe Mfg. Moly-Lubricants. Stress Subsea. TechTrans International. Inc.

S. TTGM Tube Supply Inc. Inc Universal Bacteria Specialist. Turbofab Turner Oilfield Services TXY-Tech Inc. Inc. Inc. Trelleborg Offshore US. Inc Tri Wave. Tri-Elements Petroleum Products. VME Process Inc. LLC.Unique Air Cargo. TFT-Pneumatic/Safety Tools Allmet TGS The Artex Group.College of Technology University of Houston Energy Research Park and College of Engineering University of Phoenix Upstream. Inc. Francis Services. LLC Unitech International United Laboratories Univar Usa. Ltd. V & M Tube-Alloy Lp ValTek Industries Valwu International Inc Vam Drilling Usa. Total Safety Trademarks Promotional Products. Universal Steel America. Inc. Tyco Valves & Controls LP Type B Solutions. Inc.Div. Universe Technical Translation. Trionics. Ltd. Inc. Vetco Gray Inc. The Rochester Corporation The Subsea Company LLC The University Of Texas At Austin The Watermaker Co. Inc Thrustmaster of Texas. Bolt Manufacturing & TSP Inc U-Bolt-It. Ltd. Ultra Deep. Lp Translation Source Ltd.. VN & Unique Solutions. Inc Van Beest Vanco Ring Gasket Specialty. Llc U. VIKING Life-Saving Equipment Vimarc Inc.S. Inc. Inc. Tideland Signal Limited Houston Tiger Tanks Titan Specialties. Trendsetter Electronics Trendsetter Engineering. University of Houston . Inc Tristar Electronics Corporation TSC Offshore Group. Inc. Tuboscope Vetco International Tuboscope/Vetco Tubular Instrumentation And Tubular Perforating Manufacturing.A. VRcontext W & O Supply Inc Wach Subsea Wagner Plate Works 146 . Inc. The Nut Place. Vicinay Cadenas. TransPerfect Translations Tranter Tranter. Inc Vantran / Bolin Industrial Varel International Energy Services Velosi Versabar. Inc. Inc Voith Turbo Volga Dnepr . Inc.TEXAS Texas Steel Texma Petroleum Machinery TFE Company Inc. Inc. Inc. Torque Tools Inc Total Instrumentation & Controls Inc. The International Oil & Gas Newspaper Usx Corporation UTC Overseas Utex Industries. Vortex Ventures Inc. LLC The Eads Company The Harding Group. Titanium Engineers. Tiw Corporation Toolmen Corporation Toro Downhole Tools Toromont Energy Torq/Lite .

Warrior Rig USA Washing Equipment of Texas Waters International. / IPA Institute Inst. 147 Watkins & Associates Executive Search C Yida Special Steel Ltd Corp . Inc WorleyParsons Wozair (USA) Limited WPI Wellkin Inc. LLC Zentech. TEXAS Cont. YZ Systems / Milton Roy Zaetric Business Solutions. Chromalox ITT Acoustic Systems Pepcon Systems Power Innovations International Inc. VIRGINIA Aerial Machine and Tool Corp. Inc. Inc. Wild Well Control. Alfa Laval Inc American Heavy Industries American Society of Civil Engineer Anton Paar USA Approva Corporation Bauer Compressors. Ceramatec. Inc. Liberian Int'L Ship & Corp Registry Liebherr Nenzing Crane Co. UTAH Automation Products Group. Inc. Inc. Beijer Electronics. Inc. Weldinghouse. Inc WMCO Brandt Instruments. Quartzdyne Quartzdyne Electronics Rhotheta USA Inc Tanklogix Trans-System Logistics LLC US Synthetic Bearings Weather Hawk VERMONT Superior Technical Ceramics Corp. Wood Group Kenny Woodco Usa Dba World Supply Inc Worldwide Oilfield Machine. WMG Enterprises Ii. Inc. WGIM Whitco Supply Whitefield Plastics Wholesale Electric Supply Co. Inc. Inc. WM Healthcare Solutions.TEXAS Warner & Hughes Corp. WPT Power Corporation WT Well Testing Xodus Group Inc Yellow Freight System. Air Receiver Katec Inc. Westerngeco Llc Westney Consulting Group. Inc. Inc WOM Womack Machine Supply Co. Welldynamics Inc Wellhead Distributors International Welltec A/S West Engineering Services West Houston Valve & Fitting Western Data Systems Western Rubber & Mfg. Llc Weir SPM Welbor Technology. Weatherford Weiler Pipe. Wilkens Weather Technologies Wilson Industries Inc Wilson Supply Windlass Engineers W-Industries Winston / Royal Guard Winters Instruments Wireline Technologies Inc. Inc Zep Incorporated Zerl's Welding and Fabrication Inc. Inc. Inc. Blue Ridge Partners Management Consulting Coastal Training Technologies Corp DSM Dyneema Focal Independent Project Analysis.

VIRGINIA Marine Spill Response Corp. Inc. Thermal Transfer Products Twin Disc Incorporated Veolia VES Special Servies WAGO Corporation Waukesha Cherry WYOMING Grainger 148 . An SPX Brand Bran+Luebbe. Winshuttle. . Custom Sensor Design. Inc. Inc. An SPX Brand Safway Services SPX Flow Technology Team Industries. Llc Samson Schweitzer Engineering Laboratories SkoFlo Industries. Inc. Ellsworth Corporation Enerpac Fairbanks Morse Engine Frentzel Products. Inc Strongwell Syntech Technology. Mastergear USA Meltric Corporation NOV Petersen Products Plenty Mirrless Pumps. Inc. Inc. Mobil Industrial Lubricants MOOG NBB Controls. Marathon Electric Generators Marking Services. An SPX Brand Cordstrap USA Diesel & Gas Turbine Worldwide Durst Power Transmission Products Dynex/Rivett Inc. An SPX Brand Kabelschlepp America Inc. Elliott Bay Design Group Fluke Corporation Guido Perla & Associates. Gleason Reel Corp Hy-Safe Technology Inductotherm Group Johnson Pump. Inc WEST VIRGINIA Laser Processing Marsh Bellofram Group of Companies Mustang Sampling PCC Energy Group WISCONSIN A&A Manufacturing Co Appleton Marine. APV. Measurement Technology NW Mustang Survival PACCAR International Paine Electronics.Saudi Arabian Business Council W R Systems Weidmuller WASHINGTON Columbia Analytical Services Inc. Inc. Inc.S. Inc. Inc. SAIC SF Marina Systems USA Software Ag Usa. Markey Machinery Company. The Rochester Corporation Triple Canopy. Rapp Hydema AS Rasmussen Equipment Company Safeworks. U. LLC Paroscientific Inc. Optical Cable Corporation Par Marine Services Rosetta Stone Ltd. Inc. Smith Berger Marine. Inc.

149 .