Good morning. And welcome to the Third Quarter 2013 Earnings Release Conference Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speakers’ remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. (Operator Instructions) Thank you, Mr. Stavros, you may now begin.

Thank you, [Tamica]. Good morning, everyone. And thank you for participating in Occidental Petroleum’s third quarter 2013 earnings conference call. On the call with us this morning from Los Angeles are Steve Chazen, Oxy’s President and Chief Executive Officer; Cynthia Walker, our Chief Financial Officer; Willie Chiang, Oxy’s Vice President of Operations and Head of our Midstream Business; Sandy Lowe, President of our International Oil and Gas Operations; Bill Albrecht, President of Oxy Oil and Gas in the Americas; and Vicki Hollub, Executive Vice President of Oxy’s U.S. Oil and Gas Operations. In just a moment, I’ll turn the call over to our CFO, Cynthia Walker, who will review our financial and operating results for this year’s third quarter and provide some guidance for the current quarter. Sandy Lowe will then provide a brief overview of our Oil and Gas operations in the Middle East focusing on key countries for Oxy, as well as our strategic objectives for the region. Steve Chazen will then follow with a decision of our strategic initiatives and some of our growth opportunities. As a reminder, today’s conference call contains projections and other forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ from those expressed or implied in these statements and our filings. Our third quarter 2013 earnings press release, Investor Relations supplemental schedules and conference call presentation slides, which refer to our prepared remarks, can be downloaded off of our website at www.oxy.com. I’ll now turn the call over to Cynthia. Cynthia, please go ahead.

Thank you, Chris, and good morning, everyone. My comments will reference several slides in the conference call materials that, Chris, referenced are available on our website. Overall, in the third quarter, we continued the solid execution seen in the first half. Total company production was 767,000 BOE per day and importantly, we produced 267,000 barrels of oil domestically. This is on track to achieve our second half growth objectives. In addition, with three quarters of successful execution behind us, we are confident that we will exceed the goals we set for the year for operating cost and capital efficiency. We had core earnings of $1.6 billion or $1.97 per diluted share and for the first nine months of 2013 we generated $9.4 billion of cash flow from continuing operations before changes in working capital and enter the quarter with $3.8 billion of cash on our balance sheet. If you turn to slide three, you will see a summary of our earnings for the quarter. Core income was approximately $1.6 billion or $1.97 per diluted share. As you can see, this is an improvement over both of the prior quarters. Compared to the second quarter of 2013, the current quarter results reflected improved Oil and Gas segment earnings, driven by higher realized oil prices and domestic volumes, as well as higher core earnings in the Chemical segment and improve performance in the Midstream segment, driven by higher margins in the marketing and trading businesses, largely due to commodity price movement. Now I will discuss the segment performance for the Oil and Gas business and begin with earnings on slide four. Oil and Gas earnings for the third quarter of 2013 were $2.4 billion, an increase over both the second quarter of 2013 and the third quarter of 2012. On a sequential…

Thank you, Cynthia. As you are aware we’ve had a successful involvement in the Middle East, North Africa region for over 40 years. We are active in key major oil producing countries in the region and have formed excellent relationships with all of them. The countries in which we operate include Oman, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Yemen. We have a diverse set of projects in the region and manage all of our projects by safety standards creating local jobs and development opportunities for people in those communities. Our current producing operations have generated over $20 billion net free cash flow in the past 15 years and our currently generating annual free cash flow of around $1.6 billion excluding Al Hosn Gas project capital which is currently running in about $1 billion annually. We recently expected that our Middle East business would generate over $2 billion free cash flow annually once the Al Hosn Gas project becomes operational. We have invested $9 billion of capital in the Middle East region since 2010. 75% of which has been spent in Oman, Abu Dhabi and Qatar. We have drilled over 2500 wells in the region during this time and currently have 37 drilling rigs running. We have also spent $300 million on exploration since 2010. Our projects make a significant contribution to the economies of these countries employing around 15,000 full time employees and contractors, outstanding workforce at the Al Hosn Gas project which is currently over 34,000. We have drilled several types of wells throughout the region. These include onshore oil wells in Oman, offshore wells in Qatar and soar wells onshore Abu Dhabi. The production from our wells ranges from 200 to 4500 barrels of oil per day and our gas rates are as high as 120…

Thank you, Sandy. Earlier this month, we announced the initial phase of the company’s strategic review as part of an effort to streamline and focus our operations, in order to better execute the company’s long-term strategy and enhanced value for our shareholders. As a result of the initial actions, Oxy’s Board of Directors has authorized the following, to pursue a sale of minority interest in the Middle East/North Africa operations in a financially efficient manner that Sandy just discussed, pursue strategic alternatives for selective Mid-continent assets including our oil and gas interests in the Williston, Hugoton, Piceance Basin and other Rocky Mountain assets and the completed sale of a portion of our 35% interest in general partner of Plains All-American Pipeline. This resulted in pre-tax proceeds of $1.4 billion. This initial sale process is concluded and we’ve received the proceeds. Our cash balance of $3.8 billion at end of the quarter does not include these proceeds. Oxy’s remaining interest in the Plains All-American Pipeline, based on the IPO price, is valued at approximately $3.3 billion. As we indicated, these are our first formal steps in our effort to streamline the business, concentrate in areas where we have depth and scale and improve overall profitability. Our goal is to become a somewhat smaller company with more manageable exposure to political risk. We will continue to seek additional strategic alternatives for the company to maximize total returns to our shareholders. These actions are expected to generate a significant amount of proceeds together with the excess cash on the company’s balance sheet. These funds will largely be used to reduce Oxy’s capitalization. While we expect to use a substantial and a vast majority of these proceeds to repurchase our shares, we also anticipate paying down some of our debt on a proportional basis.…

Tamica, can you please poll the line for questions?

(Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from the line of Doug Leggate, Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

Thanks. Good morning, everybody. Steve, I’ve got a couple if I may. Good morning. Starting with the Middle East, there has been a lot of speculation over the potential value that may or may not be associated with this asset. I know you can’t give specifics, but could you frame for us given the relative lack of transparency in terms of -- you’ve done a good job today of laying out the businesses, but reserve bookings and so on are still somewhat lacking transparency. So, could you help frame for us what you think a realistic acceptable range of volume might be and whether or not the Midstream would be part of that? I’ve got a couple of follow-ups, please.

Yeah. The Dolphin Project would be part of the sale process. So that piece of our Midstream business would be part of that sale. There are confidentiality agreements between the three -- in each of the countries. So we can’t actually give you more transparency without violating the confidentiality agreements. So, for example, we can’t tell you the details in Oman or Qatar or Abu Dhabi. I think it’s fair to say that we book only to the life of the lease and as the extensions come obviously more research come. We also appreciate basically over the [lease] of the earnings that someone understated. I think if you look at the cash, we view it as an ongoing business, that is to say it’s not a pile of asset that we’re going to deplete. The extensions on ongoing business we expect receive a price of reflexive value with ongoing business not really price of a depleting asset or the reserves or necessarily the reserves are there. The countries can see the long term reserves, so I don’t think there’s a lot of issue with them not understanding what the long term outcome is. I don’t really get -- we don’t really want them to negotiate with myself on the values.

Okay. A related question then Steve on the buybacks, the potential -- I mean there’s been a number of bond that they run in the pass of $8 billion from Middle East, but like to see the amount is reasonable. I believe there’s some tight issues around what you can bring back as a -- on optimum level, but if you then look at claims on potential mid coincident sale, can you help frame for us what you see the scales, the buyback like would be and (inaudible) coming to this acquisitions in the Permian Basin seems to have slowed down I guess probably in relation (inaudible) to do that, you’re generating a lot of cash. So how should we think about buybacks on a go forward basis to maybe enhance your per share growth?

I think buybacks have been important not only though for share growth in the next -- to certainly next few months. We have a lot of cash in the balance sheet. We had $3.8 at the end of the quarter plus the money from the sale of the midstream assets. We would expect to begin a repurchase of some shares too shortly. As far as the scale goes, we’re not going to build cash. We’re not going to pay down the debt reduction to be proportional. So if we sell 10% of the assets maybe the debt will go down 10%. We only have about of $7 billion of debt, so approximately a big looser, these projects will not probably allow us to still stay within our cash from operations next year. This is probably not going to drain a lot as far as acquisition is concerned. I think the issue in the Permian is about -- you’re just not allowed for sale and that which is for sale is not that interesting. Companies -- we have a lot of acreage are just highlighted, now just one small area where we’re doing well, a lot of acreage. And so the need to drive the business through large scale acquisitions is pretty modest at this point. So you should expect the bulk of the proceeds to go towards share repurchases and else we’re not going to build cash. So I think you should -- I can’t tell you exactly the number and one of the reasons why we’re -- once we could frame this more fairly, as to how much money is involved and we can talk about the last steps in this, but I think we’re going to see where we are. Our goals are really two fold. We’ll make sure we continue to operate well because that’s really good price value and we need to execute the things we’ve announced. So I think that’s what we’re trying to do but once we get that leased and safe then we’ll talk about further restructuring stats.

Okay. Last one for me so far…

(Inaudible) or not.

I guess we’re locking specific Steve, so obviously I think market is kind of telling you to the locking specific. So I guess we’ll have to wait until you can give more color, but if I could try one final one if I may. In your press release the other day, sales dimension in California, it continues to be a dragon, frankly see it under performer I guess in the end of the market. What are the parameters that you think may or may not contribute to your decision on whether or not California can do better on its own, I think that is clearly one of the key gating items for the mark issue on the restructuring on a go forward basis. I’ll leave it there, thanks.

Yeah, I think, if you go back to the question about where we -- you could come up with a very high number without me telling you exactly, what it is or for a share repurchase, I mean, so you might be of a $1 billion or$2 billion. If that’s about all of then you could use the numbers that are floating around up there. If you could guess what the proceeds from the Mid-Continent sale would be or within a few $100 million, then obviously you would we see how much cash we have now. I don’t think anybody should be off very much in computing how much the share repurchased would be as the debt reduction and the other stuff is not large in comparison to that. As far as California is concerned, the fundamental question is can it operate better as a standalone business with a different model? The different model, if you are just going to operate just like it does now and it might be better off staying where it is. But if it operates better with the different model than as a higher capital model and basically literally no dividends and with a more entrepreneurial background then I think that it would be better separated from the company. More to the point, I think is that separating California from the rest, could enhance visibility and attractiveness of the remaining business. And I think that’s -- I think they are enough for now. Once we get some slightly better numbers on the proceeds of these two various areas that we are working on now then we can size California. We are going to do it appropriately.

Thanks for taking my questions, Steve.

Okay.

The next question comes from the line Doug Terreson with ISI.

Good morning, everybody. Congratulation on your results.

Thank you.

Yeah. Steve, you do highlighted on some of the strategic review slides, a major change in strategy in the Permian today. It’s going to be driven by this new exploitation team and on this point I want to say whether you could provide some color or whatever color you might have on this new unconventional drilling group in the Permian. And also -- you also just mentioned a few minutes ago about the Plains All-American position and the question there is, whether there is any strategic or operating rationale as to why the remainder may not be divested in the future? So, two questions.

The second one is easier to say. It will be divested in the future.

Thank you.

So there is no -- when we entered into it, it was a private business.

Yeah.

And I don’t have any problem investing in a private business if shareholders can’t access if I think it makes sense for us. Once it becomes public and you can duplicate the ownership with yourself there is no reason for us to hold it. I’m going to let, Vicki answer the question about the operational group.

Okay. First, I would like to say thanks to our current Permian unconventional team that’s gotten us to where we are today, because currently we are running seven horizontal rigs. We expect to ramp that up to 16 next year. So we are now being more aggressive with our properties in the Permian because we now understand them a little bit better. This exploitations team is going to be one that we have developed to get us into a position where we are more entrepreneurial and much more aggressive in the way that we attack our entrepreneurial opportunities in the Permian. So this group, we expect to start helping us to more accelerate those opportunities, so within two to three years out in our typical development schedules. This team also will focus on ensuring that we provide the technical support to the business unit to make sure that we are spacing our wells correctly, that we are adequately drilling our horizontal wells and the correct direction and spacing. So the bottom line is we just expect this to be a technical support to help us get more aggressive.

Great. Thanks a lot.

Your next question comes from the line of Ed Westlake with Credit Suisse.

Yes. Good morning, Steve.

Good morning.

There is a statement in your slides, on Slide 35, saying, expect to complete strategic review in the coming months. Is that a statement just around the overall thinking about the business, or is that around the timing that you might expect for making some of the disposals in the Mid-Continent and valorization in the Mid-East that you’ve discussed?

And the decision about California, right.

Okay.

That’s intended to -- so that’s intended to be as soon as I didn’t get clarity about the proceeds.

All right. Okay.

And then very disruptive and I don’t know people don’t understand it. We put out the announcements so we could go do the work because you can’t go secretly go sell 9% of your assets. Once that’s done then we’ll look at the next step what we need to do, but you can’t just (inaudible) disrupt the whole organization all at once with sort of this massive idea without some pretty specific numbers.

And then a question that maybe you’ll be able to answer on the Middle East, obviously, there -- seems like there’s a decent amount of growth still to go for and thanks for the slides? Is there some sort of recovery factors that you can give on these fields at present to give us some kind of a geological understanding, you think you can’t talk about reserve bookings that could help us think about the long-term for these fields, particularly Oman…

Yeah. Unfortunately -- yeah, unfortunately that’s part of what we’re supposed to keep secret. They’re very high recoveries by U.S. there or by current U.S. mandates. They’re like fields that we started with the U.S. in the ‘30s not the like fields that were discovered last few years.

Okay. And then the final one, the (inaudible) chemical cracker, I mean, world scale is sort of $5 billion to $7 billion, is that the right ballpark for your…

No, no. Nowhere near that. This is under $1 billion of our share.

Okay. Great. Thanks very much.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from the line of Leo Mariani with RBC.

Hey. Just question on the Permian here, just looking at your oil production, it’s kind of been flattish there for the last handful of quarters. Clearly, you’re accelerating activity in 2014 talked about an incremental 500 million to drill horizontal largely unconventional. You guys also talked about clearly significant proceeds coming in the door soon, I mean, ballpark it’s probably if it could get to something like 10 billion type of number, should we expect that is, if you guys have success as we get through 2014 that 2015 and ‘16 can see a lot more incremental capital on the Permian given how big your acreage position is here?

Yeah. Certainly hope so. If it isn’t then it hasn’t been successful, but we expect Permian to be self-funding because there’s so much cash coming out of CO2 business.

Okay. I guess, in terms of your activity there, you kind of mentioned that acquisitions were didn’t seem like they were as paramount. I mean, do you think there is still potential for that down the road if stuff becomes available that looks more attractive to you guys or do you think you have enough acreage to really drill this aggressively for many years to come?

I don’t think we need to do any acquisitions, no, no, obviously something attractive comes along that’s different, but we shall not going to press acquisitions.

Okay.

We’re better off, frankly, buying the shares with the money than doing the acquisitions.

Okay. Thanks a lot. Appreciate it.

Your next question comes from the line of Paul Sankey with Deutsche Bank.

Hi. Good morning, everyone. Steve do you think you can complete the Middle East deal by the end of the year?

Complete, no, there is we got sign a lot of factors, factors probably fill a room. So I think that, we’ll -- I expect we will have clarity as to the proceeds by the end of the year and probably signing on completion in the first quarter.

And when you talk about a minority, I think the previous guidance was 25% sale is that still…

I think you should think of it as being focused on how much money we can bring back in efficient manner rather than the exact percentage.

Yeah. And that’s being reported as sort of…

Some amount of money, there is a sizeable number that we can bring back in an efficient manner. The Middle East business generates a sizable amount of foreign tax credits. So we have a probable those that we could use. It will continue to generate foreign tax credits. It’s a shelter of the income going forward. So if you exceed what you have you pay taxes, U.S. taxes on money that you would otherwise not be tax assigned. So we are mindful of that and this rate.

I understand.

I know that sounds more confusing but

No. I think people have been talking about $8 billion type numbers being the ultimate proceeds in the work around percentage share towards that. And then I think the year-end guidance that you’ve kind of given, at least, what more matters is the numbers is in line with what we’re hoping?

We’re not going to give exact numbers. (inaudible) that’s useful, again, negotiate with ourselves on the phone.

Yes. I understand and the options of California, is that a spin IPO what are you thinking there? Thanks.

We really haven’t decided what the options are. Generally, simpler is better. Increased complexity is probably not something I must up for at this point.

So would that imply a spin then?

What’s the simplest thing to do. There are two simple things to do. And only two simple -- everything else requires lot of brainpower and we’re perhaps short of that right now.

Fair enough. I think I’ll leave it there. Thanks Steve.

Thank you.

The next question comes from the line of Sven del Pozzo with IHS.

Good morning. We’ve seen a big run-up in Delaware Basin stocks over recent months. And I know you guys have lot of acreage there. So do you think that -- I think it is based on a relatively small number of successes in horizontal Wolfcamp such as you had mention on your call. I’m wondering where do you think we stand in making this play more repeatable in the Delaware basin?

Vicki, do you want to take a shot at that. That’s true. There are relatively few wells. We are encouraged about what’s going on? So I’ll let Vicki talk here.

And again that’s part of what the exploitation teams will be doing, working with our current business units, that is to look at the data in the Delaware. We do believe that there is potential there and it is repeatable. And one of the things that we’re going to focus on trying to do is determine what drives the variations within the reservoir. This team has the skill sets we believe to work with the business units to accomplished that. And so it’s just a variability that we want to understand a little bit better but we do believe that success is repeatable.

In your opinion, is it more upside in the Wolfcamp formation or Bone Springs or equal, just as an idea. And then secondly, Wolfcamp and the Midland Basin, how would you compare the two, kind of, answering the question the same way, just like you did now?

I think that the upside in both Wolfcamp and the Bone Springs will be ultimately pretty equal and the Wolfcamp and the Midland Basin, certainly we’ve had some recent success there that -- but based on information we see from a couple of wells, we’re drilling now and from offset operators where we’re starting that that’s going to be very successful.

Thank you. Then moving over to Bakken for a moment, most of your drilling, as I think it’s been in Southwestern Dunn county. Is that to hold the acreage by production or is that just your own choice because you’ve got a lot of acreage outside of that area as well. And I’m just wondering what your plans are. We’re developing that under acreage?

We’ve been focused on holding the production -- holding it by production?

Okay. And then ….

The majority of the drilling is done for that purpose.

Okay. Thanks. And then Pronghorn Sand in Bakken, you mentioned that in your last press release, have you had any successful wells in Pronghorn Sand. I know that there is offset operators that have had success there. I’m wondering when you guys plan to drill Pronghorn Sand or if you have already?

Bill is going to answer that.

Yes. We’ve build a -- we’ve build a couple of Pronghorn wells. We’ve been very pleased with the success that we’ve seen so far. So I think you could expect more of that.

Okay. And then finally, just a little bit of data points, if you could help me what the Dolphin project equity income. I know you have disclosed that in the past, but as a while back and just to bring me up the speed on what that is on an annualized basis and if that equity income number -- if it’s a pre-tax number or post-tax number, and you can get me that later if you want to, if you know, I would appreciate it?

Roughly 60% of the income in the Midstream business is split between Dolphin Midstream pipeline and the Plains interest. So if you take our Midstream income for a year, I wouldn’t use any quarter numbers. For a year, about 60% comes from those two and, it’s maybe quite equally divided but something like that.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Your next question comes from the line of Faisel Khan with Citigroup.

Hi. Good morning.

Good morning.

On the $2 billion of annual free cash flow, you expect to generate the MENA portfolio after the -- closing the startup, can you discuss if that free cash flow number sort of assumes that you continue to spend the capital on growth projects and if -- you can also discuss if that the CapEx number has embedded in that free cash flow number if that’s enough to sort of replace reserves?

The answer is, we continue to expend it on growth projects and it would be enough to replace reserves.

So it includes that some of the projects you are looking at in the UAE and in Oman, some of the…

It includes projects that are in hand now that we think we have. If we want to do something brand new, they might have a different effect. But that’s -- but if you look at what we have in hand and projects in Qatar and Oman and Abu Dhabi, that sort of includes all of that. But if you said well, you can have some projects some other place. It’s radically different than -- maybe different outcome. But this includes enough to replace production.

Okay. Understood. And then your comments on the sort of favorable permitting environment in California, is that a result of the law that was signed into or the legislation that was signed to law by Jerry Brown or was it -- is there something else that’s going on in terms of how you are lining up the permitting process in the state?

Vicki, you can answer that, I think.

Yes. I would say that the division of Oil and Gas and Geothermal Resources for the State of California has been trying diligently to ensure that there is more certainty around the permitting process. And so they have been processing permit applications as quickly as they can, granted, it still takes a while in the States because of their personnel resources. But recently we’ve also been trying to anticipate if the application of details from Senate Bill 4 that was just passed and we are trying to ensure that we stay ahead of the anticipated specific requirements of that bill to ensure that we are not negatively impacted by that.

So the Senate bill, does it help provide more transparency to the process or does it make the permitting process more difficult?

It will provide more transparency, but it will also require more monitoring from the operator standpoint, also more reporting and we are hoping that the requirements are not so stringent as they overload the staff at DOGGR. And that’s the degradation for us is that increased permitting requirements is going to be a load on their staff.

Okay. Okay. Thanks for that color. And just last question from me, could you give us the sort of what you envision the capital cost being for the ethylene plant, the gross cost?

Well, as I said that half of that would be under $1 billion dollars.

Okay. And so…

And more -- So whether it’s $750 million or $800 million or something like that, that’s sort of the range. We’re half of it.

Okay. And are -- Do you have all the permits in hand, the air permits and the CO2 permits?

Yes. I think we are about set to go.

Okay. Great. I appreciate the time. Thank you.

We will be spending -- we’ll be spending some money this year but it will build up in 2014, ‘15 and ‘16.

Okay. Understood. Thank you for the time.

Thanks.

We do have time for one more question. Your final question comes from the line of John Herrlin with Societe Generale.

Hi. Two quick ones. Given more of an unconventional focus, should we expect to see your PUD count go up in the U.S., Steve?

PUDs as a percentage of proven…

I understood.

Okay. The actual PUD count is very large, how much they actually, but there were always very reluctant to book PUDs and you’ve got to put a gun to their head to get them to book PUDs. So I would suggest that the PUDs are likely not to change very much as a percentage. It doesn’t mean there aren’t PUDs but just. They feel, I mean, just to tell you why, they feel they’re borrowing from next year’s program. So if they book a PUD, they book the barrels now and the money gets funded next year. So they are afraid of just hurting their F&D costs next year. So basically that you have the steady state of PUDs and [PEP] adds and therefore your F&D costs are from perspective of deeply being more predictable. We can argue with them but there is more PUDs out there but they tend to take a very conservative view of it. I don’t think there is any question about that, not the end of the world or worse things you could do.

Okay. That’s fine. I just was wondering whether you’re going to be more like your peers because you are more conservative about that?

No. I think it requires brain surgery and we are not up for that as part of my liabilities that get older.

Okay. On the bottom these are peeping, next question. With California you’re spending more on J&J and you said your rent do more unconventionally. Are you going to be outside existing areas for your unconventional activities, what I’m trying to get out is, in terms of volume recruitment will production activities be more protected if you’re not within your existing field areas or TVD?

I think we are going to build out from our field areas rather than go off, part of building efficiency is to build out from your existing infrastructure and one keys to the next year or so is to keep the efficiency strong, so we will build out from where we are.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

Thank you. Chris?

Please give us a call if you have any questions, further questions here in New York and thanks for joining us today.

Thank you.

Thank you. And this concludes the third quarter 2013 earnings release conference call. Thank you for joining. You may now disconnect your line.