PRICES AND SPENDING

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

AUGUST 2013 • VOLUME 2/ NUMBER 20

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 1 www.bls.gov

Highlights of the 2013 PPI User Survey

Authors: Antonio Lombardozzi and Joseph Kelley

From December 2012 to May 2013, the Bureau of Labor 

Statistics (BLS) Producer Price Index (PPI) program 

conducted a user survey of its stakeholders in order to 

learn more about the program’s data users and how they utilize 

PPI data. The survey was sent by email to more than 42,000 PPI 

contacts who had a preexisting relationship with the PPI, as either 

a survey respondent, a subscriber to a data product, or a user 

who had contacted the PPI program for technical information. 

To increase awareness, BLS highlighted the survey on the PPI 

website and announced it in the U.S. Federal Register. The survey 

resulted in a total of 3,790 responses. 

Survey findings

The typical user of PPI data is a manager in a business that 

generates more than $500 million in annual revenue and who 

Related articles

More information on how the PPI is used is 

available at the following links:

y “The behavior of the Producer price Index 

in a global economy,” Monthly Labor Review, 

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2012/09/

art2full.pdf.

y Escalation Guide for Contracting Parties, 

http://www.bls.gov/ppi/ppiescalation.

htm.
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 2 www.bls.gov

BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

uses the PPI monthly as a general indicator of inflation and 

for price trend analysis. But there is more to the results 

than the profile of the typical user. 

Who are PPI data users? 

PPI data users are primarily businesses (58 percent), with 

individuals/private citizens ranked second (6 percent), and 

industry/trade associations, the federal government, and 

academia tied for third (5 percent each). Having businesses 

as the primary user isn’t surprising, because PPI data 

provide information on industrial prices, which typically 

are used by commercial establishments for comparative 

price analysis, forecasting, and contract escalation.

On the basis of their organization’s annual revenue, data 

users exhibited a fairly broad-based distribution, with 

33 percent of the respondents working in organizations 

with more than $500 million in annual revenue and 20 

percent working in firms with annual revenue less than 

$10 million. (See chart 1.) In contrast, U.S. Census data 

show that the distribution of U.S. businesses by size is 

skewed heavily toward small business, with 97 percent 

of domestic firms having less than $10 million in annual 

revenue.1

 A major factor in small businesses’ proportionally 

low level of representation among PPI data users seems 

to be familiarity of use, with 33 percent of the small firms 

surveyed stating that they are unfamiliar with the ways the 

PPI is used. Larger firms, which, in absolute numbers, have 

a small representation in the Census data, make up a much 

higher proportion of PPI data users, typically because such 

firms are financially more complex and historically have 

had more specialized needs for forecasting price change, 

accounting for contract escalation, and analyzing inflation.

From an occupational standpoint, data users classified 

themselves most often as managers (20 percent), 

economists (12 percent), controllers/finance officers (10 

percent), and business owners (9 percent). Business owners 

were identified as the most frequent data users in small 

business, and managers were most common among the 

users in large organizations.

What PPI data are used, and how? 

PPI data most often are used as a general indicator of 

inflation, for price trend analysis and forecasting, for 

contract escalation, and for price comparisons of a 

company’s products with those of its competitors. (See chart 

2.) According to the user survey results, the value of the 

average contract escalated by the PPI is $115 million dollars. 

This outcome illustrates the importance of the proper use 

of the PPI as a contract escalator, because a 1-percent error 

in the escalation of a $115 million contract would result 

in more than a $1-million adjustment. A majority of data 

users (55 percent) access both preliminary and final PPI 

data, about 25 percent use preliminary data exclusively, and 

about 10 percent use final data exclusively. A majority (53 

percent) indicated that they use seasonally adjusted data. 

Most users (40 percent) access PPI data on a monthly basis, 

with quarterly use ranking second (24 percent). 

Feedback from data users 

Survey results reveal that PPI data users are satisfied with 

the quality of the data, the level of detail presented, and the 

customer service offered whenever they contact PPI staff. 

Data users find the data to be of high quality (79 percent), 

published at a sufficient periodicity (89 percent) and at 

< $10 

(20%) $10 < $50 

(16%)

$50 < $100 

(8%)

$100 < $500 

$500 > (16%)

(33%)

Do not know 

(7%)

Source:U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

What is the size of your business, based

on annual revenue in millions of dollars?

Chart 1

What is the size of your business, based on annual

revenue in millions of dollars?
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 3 www.bls.gov

BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

a level of detail satisfactory to their needs (80 percent). 

More than 90 percent of data users who contacted PPI 

staff agreed that staff members are easily accessible, are 

knowledgeable, and reply in a timely manner. The top areas 

requested for additional PPI coverage are price indexes 

for highway, street, and bridge construction; education; 

computer systems design; lessors of residential buildings 

(residential rents); and professional, scientific, and technical 

services. These areas will be explored for future inclusion in 

the PPI as funds and other resources permit.

Comparison with the previous user 

survey

The previous user survey was conducted in 1977.2

Since that time, the United States has transitioned from 

a primarily manufacturing-based to a service-based 

economy and there have been correspondingly large 

changes in the PPI data available (such as the introduction 

of industry-based data, an expansion in coverage of 

the service sector of the economy, and an emphasis on 

stage-of-processing classification structures) and in data 

dissemination methods (such as email and the Internet). 

Also, changes in technology have resulted in a vastly 

different means of conducting user surveys. The 1977 

survey was conducted via U.S. mail to more than 20,000 PPI 

stakeholders. By contrast, the 2013 survey was distributed 

electronically, via email, to 42,000 stakeholders. 

The 1977 survey found that the top three uses of PPI data, 

in descending order, were to forecast price change, for 

citations in escalating contracts,3

 and to measure price 

trends. The 2013 survey found the top three uses to be 

as a general indicator of inflation, for price trend analyses 

or forecasting, and for contract escalation. These results 

indicate little change in how PPI data were used in 1977 

versus 2013, although it is reasonable to assume that some 

of the increased use of the PPI for inflation analysis and 

forecasting is due to the greater availability of personal 

computers and statistical software.

In the 1977 survey, most users indicated that they 

compared data on a month-to-month basis. Year to year 

was the second most chosen periodicity. In the 2013 

survey, month-to-month comparisons were again the 

most frequently chosen and quarterly comparisons ranked 

second. This continued use of short-term comparisons 

illustrates the ongoing use of PPI data as a measure of 

inflation and for forecasting short-term price movements.

In the 1977 survey, the most frequently used data source 

was the Wholesale Prices and Price Indexes Detailed Report,

followed by the WPI news release and the Monthly Labor 

Review. With the advent of electronic communication, the 

2013 survey produced a predictably different result, with 

users citing the BLS website and Email subscription service 

as their most frequently used data sources.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Percent

Chart 2

5.5

52.7

14.5

21.8

28.6

4.4

51.7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Classroom instruction

General indicator of inflation

Comparison to my input costs

Comparison to prices charged by my company for 

goods/services

Contract escalation (nominal price deflator)

Inventory valuation

Price trend analysis/forecasting

How do you use PPI data? (Check all that apply)

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

How do you use PPI data? (Check all that apply)

goods/services
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 4 www.bls.gov

BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

Comparing the results from the two surveys reveals that 

PPI data use has remained surprising constant throughout 

the last 40 years, even with structural changes in the 

economy and the expansion and change in emphasis 

of the PPI. This constancy reflects both the efforts the 

PPI program has made to continue to provide pertinent 

economic information on the U.S. economy and users’ 

reliance on the program’s unbiased economic data. These 

efforts have been enhanced through electronic access to 

PPI information. 

Price trends: producer inflation 

mixed in second quarter of 2013, 

energy goods move higher

After inching up 0.2 percent in the first quarter of 2013, 

the PPI for finished goods advanced 0.6 percent in the 

second quarter.4

 This faster rate of inflation is attributable 

to finished energy goods prices, which climbed 1.6 percent 

from March to June, following a 1.0-percent decrease for 

the 3 months ended in March. In contrast, the index for 

finished consumer foods was unchanged in the second 

quarter, following a 0.8-percent rise from December to 

March, while prices for finished goods other than foods 

and energy moved up at a slightly slower rate than in the 

preceding quarter. (See chart 3.) At the earlier stages of 

processing, prices received by producers of intermediate 

materials, supplies, and components edged down 0.2 

percent in the second quarter after advancing 0.3 percent 

in the first quarter. This reversal is attributable to prices for 

core intermediate goods, which also turned down from 

March to June. In contrast, the indexes for intermediate 

energy goods and intermediate foods and feeds moved 

higher in the second quarter, following declines in the 

previous quarter. A sharp upturn in prices for crude energy 

materials from March to June sent the index for crude 

materials for further processing up 1.7 percent, compared 

with a 1.8-percent drop over the previous 3-month period. 

In contrast, larger declines in prices for core crude goods

and for crude foodstuffs and feedstuffs partially offset the 

overall impact of the upturn in the crude energy goods 

index.5

Economic background

Across the stages of processing, the rise in the indexes 

for energy goods was dominated by climbing prices 

for natural gas. Wellhead natural gas prices surged 21.3 

percent from March to June after falling 7.4 percent in the 

first quarter. For the 12 months ended in June, the natural 

0.2

0.8

-1.0

0.5 0.6

0.0

1.6

0.3

-2.0

-1.5

-1.0

-0.5

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

Overall Food Energy Core

Percent change

Dec 2012– Mar 2013 Mar 2013–June 2013

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Three-month percent change in PPI for overall, food, energy, and core finished goods, seasonally 

adjusted, first quarter 2013 and second quarter 2013

Chart 3
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 5 www.bls.gov

BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

gas index was 67.5 percent above its level a year before. In 

early to-mid-2012, natural gas prices were falling at a steep 

12-month rate. Higher prices for natural gas lifted inflation 

rates for utility natural gas and utility electric power in the 

first half of 2013.

Beginning in late 2011 and continuing through late 2012, 

working natural gas in underground storage consistently 

remained at the top of its 5-year historical range. However, 

working gas in underground storage returned to a 

level in line with its 5-year average, 2,605 billion cubic 

feet (Bcf) as of June 28, 2013.6

 From 2008 to 2012, both 

natural gas production (dry natural gas) and natural gas 

consumption climbed—19.4 percent and 9.6 percent, 

respectively. (Imports fell nearly 50 percent over that 

period.) Through the first 4 months of 2013, dry natural 

gas production leveled off to slightly more than 7,900 Bcf, 

while consumption increased to 9,870 Bcf.7

 Electric utility 

demand for natural gas has remained relatively strong, 

with 26.0 percent of electric power generation derived 

from natural gas in April 2013.8

In the second quarter, inflation remained low to 

nonexistent for both unprocessed core goods and 

processed core goods for business demand, as well as 

more highly processed core finished goods.

9

 Data from 

the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System 

show that, as of May 2013, industrial production was 1.6 

percent higher than a year earlier while capacity utilization 

was 77.6 percent, 0.2 percent below its level in May 2012 

and 2.6 percent below its long-term average (from 1972 

to 2012).10 The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported 

that gross domestic product (GDP) grew at a 1.8-percent 

seasonally adjusted annual rate in the first quarter of 

2013, following an increase of 2.2 percent for all of 2012. 

According to Eurostat, European Union GDP declined 0.4 

percent in 2012 and is forecasted to inch down again in 

the first quarter of 2013. Chinese GDP grew 7.7 percent for 

the 12 months ended in the first quarter of 2013; however, 

quarterly data show a slowdown in growth over the most 

recent six quarters ending March 2013.11

Finished goods

For the 3 months ended in June, prices of finished energy 

goods advanced 1.6 percent, subsequent to a 1.0-percent 

decrease from December to March. Accounting for more 

than 60 percent of this upturn, the index for gasoline

rose 2.2 percent from March to June, compared with 

a 2.3-percent decline in the preceding quarter. Prices 

for finished lubricants also turned up after falling from 

December to March. The index for residential natural gas

rose more than it had in the 3 months ended in March, 

while prices for diesel fuel fell less than in the first quarter. 

Conversely, the increase in the index for residential electric 

power slowed to 0.1 percent in the second quarter, from 

0.7 percent in the previous 3-month period. Prices for 

liquefied petroleum gas decreased more than they had in 

the first quarter. 

The index for finished consumer foods was unchanged 

from March to June, following a 0.8-percent increase in 

the first quarter. For the 3 months ended in June, prices 

for fresh vegetables (except potatoes) turned down 

17.3 percent, compared with a 53.8-percent jump from 

December to March. Indexes for soft drinks and eggs for 

fresh use also fell in the second quarter after rising in the 

preceding quarter. In contrast, the meats index turned up 

2.9 percent for the 3 months ended in June, subsequent 

to a 2.8-percent decline in the previous 3-month period. 

Prices for dairy products also moved up from March to June 

after decreasing in the first quarter. The index for potatoes

advanced more than it had from December to March. 

Price advances for finished goods less foods and energy

slowed to 0.3 percent in the second quarter, compared 

with a 0.5-percent advance from December to March. Most 

of this slower rate of increase can be traced to the index for 

pharmaceutical preparations, which moved up 1.4 percent 

from March to June after rising 3.2 percent a quarter 

earlier. Similarly, prices for civilian aircraft and plastic 

products advanced at slower rates than they had in the 

previous 3-month period. In contrast, prices for light motor 

trucks turned up 0.4 percent subsequent to a 0.2-percent 

decrease in the first quarter. Indexes for commercial 

furniture and semiconductor manufacturing equipment

also rose after falling in the previous 3-month period.

Intermediate goods

The PPI for intermediate materials, supplies, and 

components moved down 0.2 percent for the 3-month 
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 6 www.bls.gov

BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

period ended in June subsequent to a 0.3-percent 

advance in the 3 months ended in March. The downturn 

in the second quarter of 2013 can be traced to prices for 

intermediate goods less foods and energy, which fell, 

following a first-quarter rise. Conversely, the indexes for 

intermediate energy goods and for intermediate foods and 

feeds both increased in the second quarter after declining 

from December to March. (See chart 4.)

Prices for intermediate goods less foods and energy

declined 0.5 percent in the second quarter, compared with 

a 1.3-percent rise from December to March. The index 

for basic organic chemicals led the downturn, falling 3.5 

percent from March to June, subsequent to a 7.0-percent 

increase in the first quarter. Prices for thermoplastic resins 

and materials, lumber, and custom compounded plastic 

resins also decreased in the 3 months ended in June, after 

rising in the previous quarter. The index for nonferrous 

mill shapes fell more from March to June than in the first 

quarter. By contrast, the index for parts for manufacturing 

from plastics advanced 4.8 percent in the second quarter, 

following a 0.1-percent decline in the first quarter. 

The index for intermediate energy goods turned up 

0.4 percent for the 3 months ended in June, following 

a 2.0-percent decrease in the previous quarter. Prices 

for industrial electric power climbed 1.8 percent from 

March to June, after falling 6.6 percent in the preceding 

quarter. The index for gasoline also turned up in the 

3 months ended in June, following a decline in the 3 

months ended in March. Prices for utility natural gas rose 

more in the second quarter, while the index for diesel 

fuel fell less than it had from December to March. In 

contrast, the index for jet fuel turned down 12.1 percent 

for the 3 months ended in June, following a 4.6-percent 

advance in the first quarter. Prices for lubricating oil base 

stocks also fell after increasing over the previous 

3 months. 

The index for intermediate foods and feeds climbed 0.9 

percent for the 3 months ended in June, after moving 

down 1.2 percent in the first quarter. Nearly half of the 

second-quarter upturn can be attributed to prices for 

soybean cake and meal, which rose 12.4 percent after 

falling 5.1 percent in the first quarter. The indexes for 

meats, dairy products, and flour and flour base mixes and 

doughs increased following decreases from December 

to March. Conversely, the index for meat and bone meal

turned down 10.2 percent in the second quarter, after 

0.3

-1.2

-2.0

1.3

-0.2

0.9

0.4

-0.5

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

Overall Food Energy Core

Percent change

Dec 2012– Mar 2013 Mar 2013–June 2013

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Three-month percent change in PPI for overall, food, energy, and core intermediate goods, seasonally 

adjusted, first quarter 2013 and second quarter 2013

Chart 4
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 7 www.bls.gov

BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

jumping 22.8 percent in the 3 months ended in March. 

Prices for unprocessed and packaged fish rose less than in 

the first quarter. 

Crude goods

The index for crude materials for further processing rose 

1.7 percent in the second quarter, after falling 1.8 percent 

from December to March. This reversal is attributable to 

prices for crude energy materials, which turned up after 

declining in the first quarter. In contrast, prices for crude 

nonfood materials less energy and crude foodstuffs and 

feedstuffs fell more in the second quarter than in the 

previous 3-month period. (See chart 5.)

The index for crude energy materials jumped 9.2 percent 

from March to June, following a 4.0-percent drop in the 

first quarter. More than half of the upturn can be traced 

to the natural gas index, which jumped 21.3 percent from 

March to June, following a decrease of 7.4 percent in the 

preceding quarter. Prices for crude petroleum and coal also 

moved higher in the second quarter, following declines in 

the first quarter. 

The index for crude nonfood materials less energy fell 4.9 

percent from March to June, after declining 0.9 percent in 

the previous quarter. About three-quarters of this faster 

rate of decrease is attributable to the index for carbon steel 

scrap, which dropped 9.9 percent in the second quarter, 

compared with a 3.5-percent increase from December 

to March. Prices for recyclable plastics and high grade 

wastepaper also turned down for the 3 months ended in 

June. The nonferrous metal ores index decreased in the 

second quarter, following no change over the previous 

quarter. In contrast, the decline in prices for nonferrous 

scrap slowed to 1.4 percent, from 6.7 percent in the first 

quarter. The index for iron ores also fell less than it had 

from December to March.

The index for crude foodstuffs and feedstuffs moved down 

0.9 percent for the 3 months ended in June, compared with 

a 0.6-percent decline for the 3 months ended in March. 

Prices for slaughter steers and heifers fell 4.4 percent in the 

second quarter, following a 1.8-percent advance in the first 

quarter. The indexes for fresh vegetables (except potatoes), 

slaughter poultry, and unprocessed finfish also turned down 

after rising over the previous quarter. Prices for corn fell 

more in the second quarter than in the first. In contrast, the 

index for slaughter hogs surged 27.0 percent from March to 

June, following a 13.6-percent drop in the first quarter. 

-1.8

-0.6

-4.0

-0.9

1.7

-0.9

9.2

-4.9

-8.0

-4.0

0.0

4.0

8.0

12.0

Overall Food Energy Core

Percent change

Dec 2012–Mar 2013 Mar 2013–June 2013

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Three-month percent change in PPI for overall, food, energy, and core crude goods, seasonally 

adjusted, first quarter 2013 and second quarter 2013

Chart 5
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 8 www.bls.gov

BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

Trade industries

The PPI for the net output of total trade industries moved 

up 0.2 percent for the 3 months ended June 2013, 

after edging up 0.1 percent from December to March. 

(Trade indexes measure changes in margins received by 

wholesalers and retailers.) In the second quarter, higher 

prices received by merchant wholesalers of durable goods, 

women’s clothing stores, and electronics stores slightly 

outweighed lower prices received by family clothing stores, 

warehouse clubs and supercenters, discount department 

stores, and merchant wholesalers of nondurables goods.

Transportation and warehousing industries

The PPI for the net output of transportation and 

warehousing industries decreased 0.3 percent in the 

second quarter of 2013, compared with a 1.8-percent 

rise in the first quarter. Accounting for about 40 percent 

of the downturn, prices received by the scheduled air 

transportation industry group declined 0.5 percent from 

March to June, subsequent to a 3.5-percent advance in 

the previous quarter. Similarly, the indexes for couriers 

and express delivery services, long distance general freight 

trucking (by the truckload), and local specialized freight 

trucking of new goods turned down in the second quarter 

of 2013. Prices received by the U.S. Postal Service and 

line-haul railroads were unchanged after increasing from 

December to March. By contrast, the index for 

freight transportation arrangement advanced 1.3 percent 

in the second quarter, following a 0.5-percent rise in the 

first quarter. 

Services less trade, transportation, and warehousing

The PPI for services less trade, transportation, and 

warehousing advanced 0.8 percent in the second quarter, 

after rising 0.4 percent in the first quarter. About half of 

this acceleration can be traced to prices received by the 

depository credit intermediation industry group, which 

increased 1.6 percent from March to June, following a 

1.1-percent decline from December to March. The indexes 

for investment banking and securities dealing and for 

wireless telecommunications carriers also turned up in 

the second quarter of 2013. Prices received by portfolio 

managers advanced at a faster rate, compared with the rate 

for the 3 months ended in March. In contrast, the index for 

offices of lawyers edged down 0.1 percent from March to 

June, subsequent to a 2.4-percent increase from December 

to March. Prices received by general medical and surgical 

hospitals also fell in the second quarter, after rising over the 

previous quarter. 

The price trends section of this BEYOND THE NUMBERS 

article was prepared by Lana Borgie, Brian Hergt, Joseph 

Kowal, and Antonio Lombardozzi, economists in the 

Producer Price Index program. Email: ppi-info@bls.gov

Telephone: 202-691-7705. 

Upon request, information in this article will be made 

available to individuals with sensory impairments. Voice 

phone: (202) 691-5200. Federal Relay Service: 1-800-877-

8339. This article is in the public domain and may be 

reproduced without permission.

Suggested citation: 

Joseph Kelley and Antonio Lombardozzi, 

“Highlights of the 2013 PPI User Survey,” Beyond 

the Numbers: Prices and Spending, vol. 2, no. 20 

(U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, August 2013 

http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/volume-2/highlightsof-the-2013-ppi-user-survey.htm.

Upcoming articles

y Measures of gasoline price change

y Death on the job: fatal work injuries in 2011

y Long-term unemployment over men's careers

Visit our online archives to access past publications at

http://www.bls.gov/opub/btn/archive/home.htm.
BEYOND THENUMBERS PRICES AND SPENDING

U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS | AUGUST 2013 9 www.bls.gov

1. Statistics about Business Size (including Small Business) from the U.S. Census Bureau (U.S. Census Bureau, 2012), table 2a,

http://www.census.gov/econ/smallbus.html.

2. The BLS Industrial Price Program: A Survey of Users, Report 509 (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1977). 

3. “Escalating clauses are included in long-term sale or purchase contracts as a means to protect the buyer and the seller from 

unanticipated surges or drops in prices.” See http://www.bls.gov/ppi/ppiescalation.htm for the BLS article titled “Escalation 

Guide for Contracting Parties.”

4. PPI price movements described in this article include preliminary data for the period from March 2013 through June 2013. All 

PPI data are recalculated 4 months after their original publication, to reflect late data received from survey respondents. In 

addition, seasonally adjusted PPIs are recalculated on an annual basis for 5 years, to reflect more recent seasonal patterns.

5. Within the PPI stage-of-processing structure, indexes for goods other than foods and energy commonly are referred to as core 

indexes.

6. Working gas in underground storage is defined as the volume of total natural gas in storage that is available for withdrawal. 

That volume reflects usable inventory, because natural gas stockpiles require permanent inventory (referred to as base gas) 

to maintain adequate reservoir pressure and ensure deliverability. (See Natural Gas: Definitions, Sources, and Explanatory Notes

(U.S. Energy Information Administration), http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/TblDefs/ng_stor_wkly_tbldef2.asp; see also Weekly 

Natural Gas Storage Report (U.S. Energy Information Administration, July 18, 2013), http://ir.eia.gov/ngs/ngs.html, and, for 

archived information, see Natural Gas (U.S. Energy Information Administration), http://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/reports.cfm.

7. See Natural Gas Monthly (U.S. Energy Information Administration, June 2013), http://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/monthly/

pdf/ngm_all.pdf; and, for archived information, Natural Gas: Natural Gas Monthly (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 

June 28, 2013), http://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/monthly/. The data cited are from the April 2013 report. (See Table 1, p. 3.)

8. For data on net electricity generation by energy source, see Electricity (U.S. Energy Information Administration), 

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data.cfm; see also “Year-to-date natural gas use for electric power generation is down 

from 2012,” Today in Energy ((U.S. Energy Information Administration, April 11, 2013), http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/

detail.cfm?id=10771.

9. More highly processed intermediate and finished goods commonly exhibit price movements that are somewhat different from 

price movements for less processed goods because basic material costs tend to be a smaller portion of total costs for producers 

of more highly processed goods than for manufacturers of less processed goods. Contracts and escalation agreements also can 

delay or mitigate the pass-through effect of early-stage price volatility at successive stages of processing.

10. Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization - G.17 (Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 14, 2013), 

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/G17/20130614/.

11. "Gross Domestic Product: First Quarter 2013 (Third Estimate)--Corporate Profits: First Quarter 2013 (Revised Estimate)," BEA 13-30,

Bureau of Economic Analysis, June 26, 2013, at http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2013/pdf/gdp1q13_3rd.pdf, 

table 1, page 6. For European GDP data from Eurostat, visit their homepage at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/

page/portal/eurostat/home. A link in the left-hand sidebar labeled “Real GDP growth rate” takes the user to a table of GDP 

figures for the entire Euro zone. For data from the National Bureau of Statistics of China, visit http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/. 

Chinese GDP data are available by linking to http://www.stats.gov.cn/english/statisticaldata/Quarterlydata/.

Notes