And please note that except to the extent required by applicable law, McDermott undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement. Let me now turn the call over to Steve Johnson, McDermott's Chairman, President and CEO, for his remarks on our fourth quarter results, the full year and his views on the business and operational environment.Stephen M. Johnson Thanks, Jay, and good morning, everyone. To state the obvious, our fourth quarter was disappointing. The Atlantic projects in Mexico and Brazil, that also impacted our third quarter, offset otherwise good performance on the rest of our project portfolio. My objective this morning is to provide an overview of the quarter, the challenges we faced on the lost projects and probably more importantly, our outlook for the coming year. There's an important positive to this story. We don't anticipate full year 2012 to look like the second half of 2011. With the loss projects, we have one advantage with the fourth quarter results and the later reporting cycle, in that we are able to reflect the actual experience we had on these projects during January and February of 2012 into yesterday's reported financial statements. Also, in our press release yesterday, we indicated that at this time, we view the current range of analyst estimates as reasonable book-ends for your expectations of McDermott this year. Our plan is right in that range and we believe it's achievable. For your modeling, we expect the first quarter to be the low point of 2012, with the improvement to come in subsequent periods. But before getting too far ahead, let me return my comments to a review of yesterday's news. I'll let Perry cover the financials and the details thereof shortly. But as pointed out, we had a number of items going both ways in the fourth quarter.
In total, the net impact was about $66 million negative. None of the items had a taxable impact, so the operating income effect dropped straight to the bottom line. Clearly, the 2 major negatives were the Atlantic projects that we discussed in some detail in late October. They represent over 90% of the gross charges this quarter, so they are worth talking about further. As you may recall, both our marine projects entered into during 2011 that are utilizing previously-idled vessels, and the work on this projects hadn't begun as of the third quarter last year. Beyond that, the issues are largely unique to each project so let me take them one at a time.The largest negative impact this quarter was the pipelay project in Mexico under contract to PEMEX. In addition to our DB16 vessel, we also have a subcontracted dynamically-positioned support vessel working with us. As you may recall, the project was awarded in the early spring of 2011 and we were expecting to complete it by the fall of that year. Before the difficult weather that is characteristic of the winter months, unfortunately, we experienced delays beginning the project due to a summer tropical storm, combined with customs clearance and site access issues in Mexico. This delay moved the project into challenging weather months. As such, in our third quarter results, we increased the expected marine days necessary to complete the job by over 50% for our DB16 pipeline barge. However, in late October 2011, our vessel still hadn't begun pipelay work. We started in mid-November. And as it turns out, the weather we experienced was worse than the third quarter forecast. Further, the repeated starting and stopping associated with the weather downtime resulted in productivity at subpar levels. With actual time and experience now under our belts on the project, we have again increased the days expected to be necessary to finish out this project. This time, more substantially reflecting our actual experience on the project through mid-February, as well as our expectations for the remainder of the project. Read the rest of this transcript for free on seekingalpha.com