Manager of Construction - Project Execution
About the job
- A high school diploma or GED is required.
- At least 12 years of construction, inspection, or commissioning experience with power plants, major power generation, and/or energy infrastructure projects in the oil and gas or related industry is required.
- A bachelor's degree in Engineering or Construction Science is preferred.
- At least 15 years of construction, inspection, or commissioning experience with natural gas pipelines, gas processing plants, transmission compressor stations, major power generation, high-voltage power plants, or gas gathering projects is preferred.
- Up to 75% travel is required.
- Demonstrated organizational and interpersonal skills and prioritization of safety are required.
- A broad understanding of engineering, estimating, and construction management is required.
- Proficiency in Microsoft Office applications, especially Excel, PowerPoint, Word, and Teams, is required.
- Knowledge of construction contracts, contractor procedures, and construction work sequences for plants, stations, and pipelines is required.
- A solid understanding of codes and standards such as ASME, DOT, API, OSHA, and AWS inspection procedures is required.
- Experience and knowledge of earned value, schedule of values, Primavera P6 schedules, and progress reporting are required.
- Previous managerial or supervisory experience is preferred.
- FERC project experience is preferred.
- High-voltage electrical experience, such as 345 kV, is preferred.
- Knowledge of high-voltage direct current systems, high-voltage electrical, and high-voltage systems is required.
- Supervise all construction-related activities, including front-end development, planning, design and engineering, construction bid package development, bidding and contractor selection, and construction kickoff.
- Review scopes of work, schedules, cost estimates, drawings, execution plans, and contracts during project development; identify risks and suggest mitigation strategies.
- Provide support, direction, and leadership to project construction teams, and hold teams accountable for completing work according to construction specifications, procedures, and standards.
- Provide input on contracting strategy and participate in contractor selection, qualification, capabilities assessments, and vetting of key contractor personnel.
- Establish ongoing working relationships with construction departments to ensure interface processes operate properly, and collaborate to resolve problems or issues.
- Facilitate implementation of the quality assurance and quality control inspection program to ensure satisfactory quality results and adherence to contract terms and requirements.
- Ensure project construction teams adhere to construction contracts and assist in resolving quality, staffing, and change-order issues.
- Coordinate workforce planning and career development for direct employees; delegate and coordinate the work of others.
- Assign construction team members to projects based on skills, experience, and project requirements; train and develop team members.
- Review quality assurance and quality control staffing plans, construction execution plans, cost and schedule management, and construction reporting plans for business partners.
- Establish clear expectations for safety and environmental compliance with construction management teams, inspection teams, and third-party contractors.
- Evaluate team resource requirements and recommend changes as needed to support the business; manage costs through accurate planning, budgeting, forecasting, and scheduling, with a focus on safety, high reliability, environmental compliance, and regulatory compliance.
- Maintain knowledge of current industry trends and outlooks pertaining to natural gas infrastructure construction.
About the company
Williams owns and operates energy infrastructure assets, primarily natural gas pipelines and gathering/processing facilities in the United States. Its core business is to connect natural gas supplies to markets by charging fees for the use of its pipelines and processing assets, creating a stable, fee-based revenue stream less exposed to commodity prices. The company also has a significant presence in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico, where it ranks among the largest gatherers and processors of natural gas. Williams differentiates itself through a large, fixed-asset network that provides critical midstream services to utilities, local distribution companies, and industrial users, helping to move gas efficiently from supply sources to demand centers. The company’s goal is to reliably connect gas supplies to markets while maintaining steady cash flow from its pipeline and processing services and expanding its fee-based midstream footprint.
Company Size
5,001-10,000
Company Stage
IPO
Headquarters
Tulsa, Oklahoma
Founded
1908
Get referred to Williams
See people who can refer or advise you
Simplify's Take
What believers are saying
- September 3, 2026 Momentum acquisition expands LNG, power, and industrial customer reach in Haynesville.
- Q2 2026 EBITDA rose 6%; management raised 2026 EBITDA guidance to $8.3-$8.5 billion.
- Delta Access and Shelby Connector target early 2029 and first-half 2028 in-service dates.
What critics are saying
- September 9, 2026 Third Circuit vacated NESE’s New Jersey water permit, reopening years of delay.
- Constitution Pipeline remains unbuilt; New York and New Jersey regulators have repeatedly rejected it.
- Williams’ shift into power projects invites execution slippage, permitting fights, and capital strain.
What makes Williams unique
- Williams controls Transco, the dominant East Coast gas highway, plus Haynesville-to-LNG corridors.
- September 2026 Momentum Midstream adds 4,000 miles and 6 Bcf/d of gathering capacity.
- Power Innovation links pipelines to data-center generation, including Socrates South and Neo projects.
Help us improve and share your feedback! Did you find this helpful?
Benefits
Health Insurance
Dental Insurance
Vision Insurance
Life Insurance
Disability Insurance
401(k) Retirement Plan
401(k) Company Match
Unlimited Paid Time Off
Flexible Work Hours
Remote Work Options
Paid Vacation
Wellness Program
Family Planning Benefits
Fertility Treatment Support
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
Educational reimbursement
Employee Assistance Programs
Growth & Insights and Company News
6 month growth
↑ 8%1 year growth
↑ 8%2 year growth
↑ 8%Williams (WMB) vs Kinder Morgan (KMI): which is a better stock to buy? Williams earns almost the same profit from two thirds of the sales, but Kinder Morgan costs 2.20 times book against 6.77 and funds its distribution from cash rather than borrowing. Published October 6, 2026 at 3:53 pm EDT The Williams Companies, Inc. (NYSE:WMB) was trading at around $71 on October 5, and Kinder Morgan, Inc. (NYSE:KMI) at around $32. Both own pipelines and charge for moving gas through them. Neither produces the gas or sets its price. When two companies collect tolls on similar assets, the comparison comes down to how much they collect per dollar of revenue and what they paid for the pipe. Williams collects more on every dollar: Start with what each company keeps from a dollar of toll. Williams produced $3.07 billion of net profit from $12.32 billion of revenue. Kinder Morgan produced $3.45 billion from $17.96 billion. Almost the same profit from two-thirds of the sales. For two businesses charging for the same service, that gap has to come from which pipelines they own and what sits at either end of them. The margins put a number on it, at 39.54% operating against 30.07%. Nine points between two toll collectors is not noise. Return on equity doubles the point, at 21.50% against 10.99%, and earnings grew 51.50% last quarter against 21.30%. On every measure of how well the asset converts, Williams is the better business. Kinder Morgan costs far less for the same tolls: Then you look at what each one costs, and the ranking inverts. Williams trades at 6.77 times book value. Kinder Morgan trades at 2.20 times. For a business whose value is literally pipe in the ground, book value is the measure that matters, and Williams costs three times as much per dollar of recorded asset. The gap narrows once debt is counted, to 14.85 times enterprise value to EBITDA against 13.21 times, because Williams carries debt-to-equity of 200.37% against 98.62%. Cash flow is where it stops being about price at all. Kinder Morgan produced $1.08 billion of levered free cash flow. Williams produced negative $1.52 billion. That is the better margin funding construction rather than owners. Williams is building pipe, and the building currently costs more than the tolls bring in, which is also why it yields 2.98% against 3.80%. Both are held for the distribution, so the comparison that matters is against other payers. We ranked this year's best performers here. The valuation case: Williams traded near $71 on October 5 after rising 10.95% over twelve months. Kinder Morgan traded near $32, up 11.24%. Sustainability is identical and sits outside both. Pipelines earn while gas flows, and neither management decides how much gas there is. On price, Kinder Morgan is cheaper on book value and on enterprise value. It also pays more and funds that distribution from cash it generated. Williams answers with nine more points of margin, double the return on equity, and faster earnings growth. A PEG ratio of 2.07 at Williams against 3.19 at Kinder Morgan is the one measure pointing back the other way. Ten stocks positioned for high returns in 2026 are named here. Conclusion: Kinder Morgan is the better of the two. It costs 2.20 times book against 6.77 times for assets doing the same job, pays 3.80% against 2.98%, and funds that distribution from $1.08 billion it generated rather than from borrowing. However, Williams converts a dollar of toll into far more profit, earning nine more points of operating margin and double the return on equity. Its negative $1.52 billion is construction rather than deterioration. The number to watch at Williams is free cash flow, because it turns positive the moment the building slows. Market sentiment: The Williams Companies, Inc. was held by 79 hedge funds with a combined stake value of about $2.13 billion at the end of Q2 2026 in the Insider Monkey database. This is down from 84 hedge fund holders with a cumulative investment value of around $2.14 billion in the previous quarter. Kinder Morgan, Inc. was held by 60 hedge funds with a combined stake value of about $1.92 billion at the end of the same quarter. This is down from 62 hedge fund holders with a cumulative investment value of around $2.28 billion three months earlier.
Williams Companies has raised $2.75 billion through a multi-tranche senior notes offering, with maturities ranging from 2029 to 2056 and coupons between 5.000% and 6.400%. The new long-dated unsecured debt reshapes the company's funding mix and provides clearer visibility on fixed interest costs. Despite the fresh debt layer, Williams trades at a discount to both analyst targets and intrinsic estimates. The most followed narrative places fair value at $85.25 against a last close of $71.65, implying meaningful upside. Williams' connectivity to LNG export terminals positions it to capture throughput gains as US LNG exports grow. However, the company trades at a P/E of 28.5x, well above the US Oil and Gas industry average of 13.2x.
Energy Transfer and Williams Companies, two major US midstream operators, are both positioned to benefit from surging natural gas demand driven by power-hungry data centres and AI infrastructure. According to the International Energy Agency, natural gas accounts for over 40% of grid electricity consumed by US data centres. However, Williams emerges as the stronger AI play. The company generates all its adjusted EBITDA from natural gas operations through Transco, the largest natural gas pipeline system in the US. Energy Transfer, whilst transporting roughly 30% of US natural gas production, only derives about 40% of its adjusted EBITDA from natural gas assets. Williams trades at 14 times this year's adjusted EBITDA versus Energy Transfer's 7 times. Energy Transfer offers a higher forward yield of 6.5% compared to Williams' 2.9%.
Court vacates New Jersey's permit for $1 billion Northeast gas pipeline. PUBLISH DATE 10 Sep, 2026 at 2:39 pm The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on Sep. 8 vacated New Jersey's water quality certification for the $1 billion Northeast Supply Enhancement natural gas pipeline, ruling that the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection failed to adequately demonstrate the project would comply with state water quality standards before issuing the permit. The decision sends the certification back to the agency for further review, creating another regulatory hurdle for one of the region's largest natural gas infrastructure projects. The proposed project, developed by Williams Companies through Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, would expand an existing interstate natural gas system by adding a new pipeline beneath Raritan Bay to transport additional gas from Pennsylvania to New York. The appeals court found that the department improperly deferred key monitoring and corrective measures until after issuing the certification and did not sufficiently explain how dredging contaminated bay sediments would meet New Jersey's environmental standards. The ruling follows years of regulatory reversals. New Jersey denied the project's certification in 2019 after concluding that the developer had not demonstrated compliance with water quality requirements and rejected another application in 2020 after New York denied a related permit. The department later approved a revised application in November 2025, prompting lawsuits from environmental organizations that argued unresolved concerns over contaminated sediments, monitoring requirements, and dredging impacts remained largely unchanged. The court did not permanently block the pipeline, leaving the department free to conduct additional analysis and issue a revised certification if it can adequately support its findings. Williams Companies maintained that the decision does not undermine the project's environmental case and continues to target a late-2027 completion while working with state regulators to address the court's concerns. The decision drew contrasting reactions across the energy sector. The Natural Resources Defense Council welcomed the ruling as an important safeguard for New Jersey waterways, arguing that stronger protections are needed before dredging can proceed in Raritan Bay. Meanwhile, the New Jersey Business & Industry Association described the decision as a procedural setback rather than a permanent rejection, emphasizing that the project remains eligible for further state review and continues to be viewed as an important investment in regional energy infrastructure. EnerKnol Pulses like this one are powered by the EnerKnol Platform - the first comprehensive database for real-time energy policy tracking. Sign up for a free trial below for access to key regulatory data and deep industry insights across the energy spectrum.
Williams Companies loses key environmental permit for Northeast pipeline project. Market News 10 Sep 2026 Seeking Alpha The Williams Companies, Inc. recently faced a court ruling that revoked an important environmental permit for its pipeline project in the Northeast. This setback affects their plans to supply lower-cost natural gas to the energy-constrained Northeast region. Despite this, the company continues to grow through acquisitions like Momentum Midstream and access to Gulf exports, supported by strong Q2 earnings and multiple ongoing projects. The regulatory challenges in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic have been persistent, but changing political realities may influence future developments.