e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
|
|
|
x
|
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
For the Quarterly Period Ended
March 31, 2011
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
Commission File Number 1-16411
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
DELAWARE
|
|
80-0640649
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
1840 Century Park East, Los Angeles, California 90067
www.northropgrumman.com
(Address of principal executive
offices and internet site)
(310) 553-6262
(Registrants telephone
number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted
electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T
(§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such files).
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in Rule
12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated
filer x
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
|
Smaller
reporting
company o
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act).
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the
issuers classes of common stock, as of the latest
practicable date.
As of April 25, 2011, 292,720,412 shares of common stock
were outstanding.
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
i
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
PART I.
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1.
Financial Statements
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions, except per share
amounts
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Sales and Service Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
3,863
|
|
|
$
|
4,024
|
|
Service revenues
|
|
|
2,871
|
|
|
|
2,890
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total sales and service revenues
|
|
|
6,734
|
|
|
|
6,914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Sales and Service Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
|
2,842
|
|
|
|
2,990
|
|
Cost of service revenues
|
|
|
2,513
|
|
|
|
2,621
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
568
|
|
|
|
624
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
811
|
|
|
|
679
|
|
Other (expense) income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
Other, net
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
758
|
|
|
|
609
|
|
Federal and foreign income taxes
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings from continuing operations
|
|
|
496
|
|
|
|
410
|
|
Earnings from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
$
|
530
|
|
|
$
|
469
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic Earnings Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
1.70
|
|
|
$
|
1.36
|
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
.12
|
|
|
|
.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share
|
|
$
|
1.82
|
|
|
$
|
1.55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares outstanding, in millions
|
|
|
291.8
|
|
|
|
302.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted Earnings Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
1.67
|
|
|
$
|
1.34
|
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
.12
|
|
|
|
.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
$
|
1.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average diluted shares outstanding, in millions
|
|
|
296.9
|
|
|
|
306.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings (from above)
|
|
$
|
530
|
|
|
$
|
469
|
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cumulative translation adjustment
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
(28
|
)
|
Change in unrealized gain on marketable securities and cash flow
hedges, net of tax
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Change in unamortized benefit plan costs, net of tax
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
$
|
576
|
|
|
$
|
481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
-1-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL POSITION
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
4,019
|
|
|
$
|
3,701
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of progress payments
|
|
|
3,563
|
|
|
|
3,329
|
|
Inventoried costs, net of progress payments
|
|
|
859
|
|
|
|
896
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
417
|
|
|
|
419
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
244
|
|
Assets of discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
9,071
|
|
|
|
13,801
|
|
Property, plant, and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation
of $3,781 in 2011 and $3,712 in 2010
|
|
|
3,046
|
|
|
|
3,045
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
12,376
|
|
|
|
12,376
|
|
Other purchased intangibles, net of accumulated amortization of
$1,622 in 2011 and $1,613 in 2010
|
|
|
183
|
|
|
|
192
|
|
Pension and post-retirement plan assets
|
|
|
333
|
|
|
|
320
|
|
Long-term deferred tax assets
|
|
|
691
|
|
|
|
722
|
|
Miscellaneous other assets
|
|
|
1,090
|
|
|
|
1,075
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
26,790
|
|
|
$
|
31,531
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable to banks
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
774
|
|
Trade accounts payable
|
|
|
1,347
|
|
|
|
1,573
|
|
Accrued employees compensation
|
|
|
944
|
|
|
|
1,146
|
|
Advance payments and billings in excess of costs incurred
|
|
|
1,899
|
|
|
|
1,969
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
1,932
|
|
|
|
1,763
|
|
Liabilities of discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,792
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
6,161
|
|
|
|
10,027
|
|
Long-term debt, net of current portion
|
|
|
3,939
|
|
|
|
3,940
|
|
Pension and post-retirement plan liabilities
|
|
|
3,097
|
|
|
|
3,089
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
916
|
|
|
|
918
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
14,113
|
|
|
|
17,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $1 par value; 800,000,000 shares
authorized; issued and outstanding: 2011
292,599,308; 2010 290,956,752
|
|
|
293
|
|
|
|
291
|
|
Paid-in capital
|
|
|
5,934
|
|
|
|
7,778
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
8,637
|
|
|
|
8,245
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(2,187
|
)
|
|
|
(2,757
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
|
12,677
|
|
|
|
13,557
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
26,790
|
|
|
$
|
31,531
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
-2-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Operating Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sources of Cash Continuing Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash received from customers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Progress payments
|
|
$
|
1,035
|
|
|
$
|
902
|
|
Collections on billings
|
|
|
5,427
|
|
|
|
5,216
|
|
Other cash receipts
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total sources of cash continuing operations
|
|
|
6,469
|
|
|
|
6,119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uses of Cash Continuing Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid to suppliers and employees
|
|
|
(6,202
|
)
|
|
|
(6,326
|
)
|
Interest paid, net of interest received
|
|
|
(96
|
)
|
|
|
(127
|
)
|
Income taxes paid, net of refunds received
|
|
|
(46
|
)
|
|
|
(111
|
)
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
Other cash payments
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total uses of cash continuing operations
|
|
|
(6,357
|
)
|
|
|
(6,571
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in) continuing operations
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
(452
|
)
|
Cash used in discontinued operations
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
(79
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
(531
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to property, plant, and equipment
|
|
|
(122
|
)
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
Payments for outsourcing contract costs and related software
costs
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
Decrease in restricted cash
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Contribution received from the spin-off of Shipbuilding business
|
|
|
1,429
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other investing activities, net
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in) investing activities by continuing
operations
|
|
|
1,344
|
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
Cash used in investing activities by discontinued operations
|
|
|
(63
|
)
|
|
|
(32
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
1,281
|
|
|
|
(135
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net borrowings under lines of credit
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
|
|
(750
|
)
|
|
|
(89
|
)
|
Proceeds from exercises of stock options and issuances of common
stock
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
(137
|
)
|
|
|
(129
|
)
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Common stock repurchases
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(507
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(843
|
)
|
|
|
(648
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
318
|
|
|
|
(1,314
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
|
|
3,701
|
|
|
|
3,275
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
4,019
|
|
|
$
|
1,961
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
-3-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Reconciliation of Net Earnings to Net Cash Used in Operating
Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
$
|
530
|
|
|
$
|
469
|
|
Net earnings from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
(59
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile to net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
Amortization of assets
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
(Increase) decrease in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
(245
|
)
|
|
|
(713
|
)
|
Inventoried costs, net
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
(87
|
)
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
Increase (decrease) in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accruals
|
|
|
(627
|
)
|
|
|
(455
|
)
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
289
|
|
|
|
163
|
|
Retiree benefits
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
Other non-cash transactions, net
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in) continuing operations
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
(452
|
)
|
Cash used in discontinued operations
|
|
|
(232
|
)
|
|
|
(79
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities
|
|
$
|
(120
|
)
|
|
$
|
(531
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Cash Investing and Financing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures accrued in accounts payable
|
|
$
|
20
|
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
Capital expenditures accrued in liabilities from discontinued
operations
|
|
$
|
30
|
|
|
$
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
-4-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS
EQUITY
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions, except per
share
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At beginning of period
|
|
$
|
291
|
|
|
$
|
307
|
|
Common stock repurchased
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
Employee stock awards and options
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At end of period
|
|
|
293
|
|
|
|
301
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid-in Capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At beginning of period
|
|
|
7,778
|
|
|
|
8,657
|
|
Common stock repurchased
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
(477
|
)
|
Employee stock awards and options
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
Spin-off of Shipbuilding business
|
|
|
(1,887
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At end of period
|
|
|
5,934
|
|
|
|
8,264
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained Earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At beginning of period
|
|
|
8,245
|
|
|
|
6,737
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
530
|
|
|
|
469
|
|
Dividends declared
|
|
|
(138
|
)
|
|
|
(129
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At end of period
|
|
|
8,637
|
|
|
|
7,077
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At beginning of period
|
|
|
(2,757
|
)
|
|
|
(3,014
|
)
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Spin-off of Shipbuilding business
|
|
|
524
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At end of period
|
|
|
(2,187
|
)
|
|
|
(3,002
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity
|
|
$
|
12,677
|
|
|
$
|
12,640
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends declared per share
|
|
$
|
.47
|
|
|
$
|
.43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
-5-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
NOTES TO
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Principles of Consolidation The unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts
of Northrop Grumman Corporation and its subsidiaries (Northrop
Grumman or the company). All material intercompany accounts,
transactions, and profits are eliminated in consolidation.
The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial
statements of the company have been prepared by management in
accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). These statements include all adjustments of
normal recurring nature considered necessary by management for a
fair presentation of the condensed consolidated financial
position, results of operations, and cash flows. The results
reported in these financial statements are not necessarily
indicative of results that may be expected for the entire year.
These financial statements should be read in conjunction with
the audited consolidated financial statements, including the
notes thereto; contained in the companys Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010.
The quarterly information is labeled using a calendar
convention; that is, first quarter is consistently labeled as
ending on March 31, second quarter as ending on
June 30, and third quarter as ending on September 30.
It is managements long-standing practice to establish
actual interim closing dates using a fiscal
calendar, which requires the businesses to close their books on
a Friday near these quarter-end dates in order to normalize the
potentially disruptive effects of quarterly closings on business
processes. The effects of this practice only exist within a
reporting year.
Spin-off of Shipbuilding Segment Effective as
of March 31, 2011, the company completed the spin-off to
its shareholders of Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. (HII), a
wholly owned subsidiary. HII now operates the business that was
previously the companys Shipbuilding business
(Shipbuilding). The spin-off was the culmination of the
companys strategic decision to explore strategic
alternatives for Shipbuilding as it was determined to be in the
best interests of shareholders, customers, and employees by
allowing both the company and Shipbuilding to more effectively
pursue their respective opportunities to maximize value. As a
result of the spin-off, the assets, liabilities and results of
operations for the Shipbuilding segment have been reclassified
as discontinued operations for all periods presented. See
Note 5 for further information.
Accounting Estimates The accompanying
unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). The preparation
thereof requires management to make estimates and judgments that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingencies at the date of the financial
statements as well as the reported amounts of revenues and
expenses during the reporting period. Estimates have been
prepared on the basis of the most current and best available
information and actual results could differ materially from
those estimates.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss The
components of accumulated other comprehensive loss are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Cumulative translation adjustment
|
|
$
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gain on marketable securities and cash flow
hedges, net of tax expense of $3 as of March 31, 2011, and
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
Unamortized benefit plan costs, net of tax benefit of $1,446 as
of March 31, 2011, and $1,800 as of December 31, 2010
|
|
|
(2,217
|
)
|
|
|
(2,762
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
$
|
(2,187
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,757
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The changes in the unamortized benefit plan costs, net of tax,
were $21 million and $40 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively, and are
included in other comprehensive income in the
-6-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
condensed consolidated statements of operations. As a result of
the spin-off of Shipbuilding, the company reduced accumulated
other comprehensive loss by $524 million as of
March 31, 2011 for the after-tax actuarial loss amounts
related to Shipbuilding pension and other post-retirement plan
assets and liabilities. Unamortized benefit plan costs consist
primarily of net after-tax actuarial loss amounts totaling
$2,267 million and $2,771 million as of March 31,
2011, and December 31, 2010, respectively. Net actuarial
gains or losses principally arise from gains or losses on plan
assets due to variations in the fair market value of the
underlying assets and changes in the benefit obligation due to
changes in actuarial assumptions. Net actuarial gains or losses
are amortized to expense when they exceed ten percent of the
greater of the plan assets or projected benefit obligations by
benefit plan. The excess of gains or losses over the ten percent
threshold are subject to amortization over the average future
service period of employees of approximately ten years.
|
|
2.
|
ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS UPDATES
|
Accounting
Standards Updates Not Yet Effective
Accounting standards updates not effective until after
March 31, 2011, are not expected to have a significant
effect on the companys consolidated financial position or
results of operations.
|
|
3.
|
DIVIDENDS
ON COMMON STOCK
|
Dividends on Common Stock In May 2010, the
companys board of directors approved an increase to the
quarterly common stock dividend, from $0.43 per share to $0.47
per share, for shareholders of record as of June 1, 2010.
Subsequent Events In April 2011, the
companys board of directors approved an increase to the
quarterly common stock dividend, from $0.47 per share to $0.50
per share, for shareholders of record as of May 31, 2011.
Also in April 2011, the board of directors authorized an
increase in the authorization under the companys share
repurchase program that will raise the outstanding authorization
to $4.0 billion.
Basic Earnings Per Share Basic earnings per
share amounts from both continuing operations and discontinued
operations are calculated by dividing the respective earnings by
the weighted-average number of shares of common stock
outstanding during each periods:
Diluted Earnings Per Share Diluted earnings
per share include the dilutive effect of stock options and other
stock awards granted to employees under stock-based compensation
plans. The dilutive effect of these securities totaled
5.1 million shares and 3.6 million shares for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
The weighted-average diluted shares outstanding for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, exclude
anti-dilutive stock options to purchase approximately
2.8 million and 2.7 million shares, respectively,
because such options have exercise prices in excess of the
average market price of the companys common stock during
the period.
Share Repurchases The table below summarizes
the companys share repurchases during the periods:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Repurchased
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Total Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
Repurchase Program
|
|
|
Authorized
|
|
|
Price Per
|
|
|
Retired
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
March 31
|
Authorization Date
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Share(2)
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Completed
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
December 19, 2007
|
|
|
$
|
3,600
|
|
|
|
$
|
59.82
|
|
|
|
|
60.2
|
|
|
|
|
August 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
June 16,
2010(1)
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
|
60.10
|
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-7-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On June 16, 2010, the companys board of directors
authorized a share repurchase program of up to $2 billion
of the companys common stock. As of March 31, 2011,
the company had $1.76 billion remaining under this
authorization for share repurchases. See Note 3 for action
taken by the board of directors in April 2011 to increase this
authorization. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes commissions paid and calculated as the average price
paid per share under the respective repurchase program. |
Share repurchases take place at managements discretion or
under pre-established non-discretionary programs from time to
time, depending on market conditions, in the open market, and in
privately negotiated transactions. The company retires its
common stock upon repurchase and has not made any purchases of
common stock other than in connection with these publicly
announced repurchase programs.
Spin-off of Shipbuilding Business On
March 31, 2011, the company completed the spin-off to its
shareholders of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HII), a wholly
owned subsidiary. HII will continue to operate the business that
was previously the companys Shipbuilding segment prior to
the spin-off. The company made a pro rata distribution to its
shareholders of one share of HII common stock for every six
shares of the companys common stock held on the record
date of March 30, 2011, or 48.8 million shares of HII
common stock. There was no gain or loss recognized by the
company as a result of the spin-off transaction. In connection
with the spin-off, HII issued $1,200 million in senior
notes and entered into a credit facility with third-party
lenders that includes a $650 million revolver and a
$575 million term loan. HII used a portion of the proceeds
of the debt and credit facility to fund a $1,429 million
cash contribution to the company.
Prior to the completion of the spin-off, the company and HII
entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement (SDA) dated
March 29, 2011 and several other agreements that will
govern the post-separation relationship. These agreements
generally provide that each party will be responsible for its
respective assets, liabilities and obligations following the
spin-off, including employee benefits, intellectual property,
information technology, insurance and tax-related assets and
liabilities. The agreements also describe the companys
future commitments to provide HII with certain transition
services for up to one year and the costs incurred for such
services that will be reimbursed by HII.
In connection with the spin-off, the company incurred
$23 million and $5 million of non-deductible
transaction costs for the three months ended March 31, 2011
and 2010, respectively, which have been included in discontinued
operations. The company has incurred total transaction costs to
date in connection with the spin-off of approximately
$55 million.
National Security Technologies Deconsolidation
Effective January 1, 2011, the company reduced its
participation in the National Security Technologies joint
venture (NSTec). As a result of the reduced participation in the
joint venture, the company no longer consolidates NSTecs
results in the companys financials. NSTecs sales
that were included in the companys consolidated sales and
service revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2010
were $136 million.
In December 2009, the company sold its Advisory Services
Division (ASD) for $1.65 billion in cash to an investor
group led by General Atlantic, LLC, and affiliates of Kohlberg
Kravis Roberts & Co. L.P., and recognized a gain of
$15 million, net of taxes. During the three months ended
March 31, 2010, an additional $7 million gain, net of
taxes, was recorded to reflect the purchase price adjustment
called for under the sale agreement. ASD was a business unit
comprised of the assets and liabilities of TASC, Inc., its
wholly-owned subsidiary TASC Services Corporation, and certain
contracts carved out from other Northrop Grumman businesses also
in the Information Systems segment that provide systems
engineering technical assistance and other analysis and advisory
services.
-8-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Discontinued Operations Earnings for the
Shipbuilding business and gains from previous divestitures,
reported as discontinued operations, are presented in the
following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
$
|
1,646
|
|
|
$
|
1,718
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings from discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
$
|
83
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings, net of tax
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
Gain on divestitures, net of tax expense of $1 and $4 as of
March 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
$
|
34
|
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The major classes of assets and liabilities included in
discontinued operations for the Shipbuilding business are
presented in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
$ in millions
|
|
2010
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
1,315
|
|
Property, plant, and equipment, net
|
|
|
1,997
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
1,141
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
759
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets of discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
5,212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Trade accounts payable
|
|
$
|
274
|
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
955
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
1,229
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
1,563
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities of discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
2,792
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The company is aligned into four reportable segments: Aerospace
Systems, Electronic Systems, Information Systems, and Technical
Services.
-9-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
The following table presents segment sales and service revenues
for the three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aerospace Systems
|
|
$
|
2,736
|
|
|
$
|
2,696
|
|
Electronic Systems
|
|
|
1,808
|
|
|
|
1,882
|
|
Information Systems
|
|
|
2,025
|
|
|
|
2,064
|
|
Technical Services
|
|
|
688
|
|
|
|
763
|
|
Intersegment eliminations
|
|
|
(523
|
)
|
|
|
(491
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total sales and service revenues
|
|
$
|
6,734
|
|
|
$
|
6,914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents segment operating income reconciled
to total operating income for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aerospace Systems
|
|
$
|
301
|
|
|
$
|
296
|
|
Electronic Systems
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
Information Systems
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
183
|
|
Technical Services
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
Intersegment eliminations
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total segment operating income
|
|
|
721
|
|
|
|
706
|
|
Non-segment factors affecting operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unallocated corporate expenses
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
Net pension adjustment
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Royalty income adjustment
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating income
|
|
$
|
811
|
|
|
$
|
679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unallocated Corporate Expenses Unallocated
corporate expenses generally include the portion of corporate
expenses not considered allowable or allocable under applicable
United States (U.S.) Government Cost Accounting Standards (CAS)
regulations and the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and
therefore not allocated to the segments, for costs related to
management and administration, legal, environmental, certain
compensation costs and retiree benefits, and other expenses.
Net Pension Adjustment The net pension
adjustment reflects the difference between pension expense
determined in accordance with GAAP and pension expense allocated
to the operating segments determined in accordance with CAS.
Royalty Income Adjustment Royalty income is
included in segment operating income and reclassified to other
income for financial reporting purposes.
-10-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
The companys effective tax rates on income from continuing
operations were 34.6 percent and 32.7 percent for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
For 2010, the companys effective tax rates differ from the
statutory federal rate primarily due to manufacturing deductions.
The company recognizes accrued interest and penalties related to
uncertain tax positions in federal and foreign income tax
expense. The company files income tax returns in the
U.S. federal jurisdiction, and various state and foreign
jurisdictions. The IRS is currently conducting an examination of
the companys tax returns for the years 2007 through 2009.
Open tax years related to state and foreign jurisdictions remain
subject to examination but are not considered material.
|
|
8.
|
GOODWILL
AND OTHER PURCHASED INTANGIBLE ASSETS
|
Goodwill
The carrying amounts of goodwill at March 31, 2011, and
December 31, 2010, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aerospace
|
|
|
Electronic
|
|
|
Information
|
|
|
Technical
|
|
|
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
Systems
|
|
|
Systems
|
|
|
Systems
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Total
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
$
|
3,801
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,402
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,248
|
|
|
|
$
|
925
|
|
|
|
$
|
12,376
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated goodwill impairment losses at March 31, 2011,
and December 31, 2010, totaled $570 million at the
Aerospace Systems segment.
Purchased
Intangible Assets
The table below summarizes the companys aggregate
purchased intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Carrying
|
$ in millions
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amortization
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amortization
|
|
Amount
|
Contract and program intangibles
|
|
$
|
1,705
|
|
|
$
|
(1,539
|
)
|
|
$
|
166
|
|
|
$
|
1,705
|
|
|
$
|
(1,531
|
)
|
|
$
|
174
|
|
Other purchased intangibles
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
(82
|
)
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,805
|
|
|
$
|
(1,622
|
)
|
|
$
|
183
|
|
|
$
|
1,805
|
|
|
$
|
(1,613
|
)
|
|
$
|
192
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The companys purchased intangible assets are subject to
amortization and have been amortized on a straight-line basis
over an original aggregate weighted-average period of
18 years. Aggregate amortization expense for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, was $9 million
and $18 million, respectively.
-11-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
The table below shows expected amortization for purchased
intangibles for the remainder of 2011 and for the next five
years:
|
|
|
|
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
Year ending December 31
|
|
|
|
|
2011 (April 1 - December 31)
|
|
|
28
|
|
2012
|
|
|
36
|
|
2013
|
|
|
29
|
|
2014
|
|
|
16
|
|
2015
|
|
|
15
|
|
2016
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.
|
FAIR
VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
|
Investments in Marketable Securities The
company holds a portfolio of marketable securities, primarily
consisting of equity securities that are classified as either
trading or
available-for-sale
and can be liquidated without restriction. These assets are
recorded at fair value, substantially all of which are based
upon quoted market prices for identical instruments in active
markets (Level 1 inputs). As of March 31, 2011, and
December 31, 2010, respectively, there were marketable
equity securities of $72 million and $68 million
included in prepaid expenses and other current assets and
$244 million and $262 million of marketable equity
securities included in miscellaneous other assets in the
condensed consolidated statements of financial position.
Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging
Activities The company utilizes derivative
financial instruments in order to manage exposure to interest
rate risk and foreign currency exchange rate risk. The company
does not use derivative financial instruments for trading or
speculative purposes, nor does it use leveraged financial
instruments. Foreign currency forward contracts are used to
manage foreign currency exchange rate risk related to receipts
from customers and payments to suppliers denominated in foreign
currencies.
Derivative financial instruments are recognized as assets or
liabilities in the financial statements and measured at fair
value, substantially all of which are based on active or
inactive markets for identical of similar instruments or
model-derived valuations whose inputs are observable
(Level 2 inputs). Where model-derived valuations are
appropriate, the company utilizes the income approach to
determine fair value and uses the applicable London Interbank
Offered Rate (LIBOR) swap rate as the discount rate. Changes in
the fair value of derivative financial instruments that qualify
and are designated as fair value hedges are recorded in earnings
from continuing operations, while the effective portion of the
changes in the fair value of derivative financial instruments
that qualify and are designated as cash flow hedges are recorded
in other comprehensive income. Credit risk related to derivative
financial instruments is considered minimal and is managed by
requiring high credit standards for counterparties and through
periodic settlements of positions.
For derivative financial instruments not designated as hedging
instruments as well as the ineffective portion of cash flow
hedges, gains or losses resulting from changes in the fair value
are reported in Other, net in the condensed consolidated
statements of operations. Unrealized gains or losses on cash
flow hedges are reclassified from other comprehensive income to
earnings from continuing operations upon the recognition of the
underlying transactions.
As of March 31, 2011, there were no outstanding interest
rate swaps. Foreign currency purchase and sale forward contract
agreements with notional values of $49 million and
$133 million, respectively, were designated for hedge
accounting. The remaining notional values outstanding at
March 31, 2011, under foreign currency purchase and sale
forward contracts of $8 million and $76 million,
respectively, were not designated for hedge accounting.
As of December 31, 2010, an interest rate swap with a
notional value of $200 million, and foreign currency
purchase and sale forward contract agreements with notional
values of $52 million and $86 million, respectively,
-12-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
were designated for hedge accounting. The remaining notional
values outstanding at December 31, 2010, under foreign
currency purchase and sale forward contracts of $12 million
and $75 million, respectively, were not designated for
hedge accounting.
The derivative fair values and related unrealized gains and
losses at March 31, 2011, and December 31, 2010, were
not material.
There were no material transfers of financial instruments
between the three levels of fair value hierarchy during the
three months ended March 31, 2011.
Cash Surrender Value of Life Insurance Policies
The company maintains whole life insurance policies on a
group of executives which are recorded at their cash surrender
value as determined by the insurance carrier. Additionally, the
company has split-dollar life insurance policies on former
officers and executives from acquired businesses which are
recorded at the lesser of their cash surrender value or premiums
paid. The policies are utilized as a partial funding source for
deferred compensation and other non-qualified employee
retirement plans. As of March 31, 2011, and
December 31, 2010, respectively, the carrying values
associated with these policies of $263 million and
$257 million were recorded in miscellaneous other assets.
Long-Term Debt As of March 31, 2011, and
December 31, 2010, the carrying values of long-term debt
were $4.0 billion and $4.7 billion, respectively, and
the related estimated fair values were $4.3 billion and
$5.1 billion, respectively. The fair value of long-term
debt is calculated based on interest rates available for debt
with terms and maturities similar to the companys existing
debt arrangements. In February 2011, the company repaid
notes with a face value of $750 million and an interest
rate of 7.125% upon their maturity.
The carrying amounts of all other financial instruments not
discussed above approximate fair value due to their short-term
nature.
|
|
10.
|
INVESTIGATIONS,
CLAIMS AND LITIGATION
|
Spin-off of Shipbuilding Business Under the
previously disclosed SDA with HII in Note 5, from and after
the spin-off transaction, HII assumed responsibility for certain
investigations, claims and litigation matters related to the
Shipbuilding business. The company has therefore excluded from
this report previously disclosed Shipbuilding-related
investigations, claims and litigation matters now assumed by
HII. As a result, the company does not believe these matters are
likely to have a material adverse effect on its consolidated
financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
U.S. Government Investigations and
Claims Departments and agencies of the
U.S. Government have the authority to investigate various
transactions and operations of the company, and the results of
such investigations may lead to administrative, civil or
criminal proceedings, the ultimate outcome of which could be
fines, penalties, repayments, compensatory or treble damages or
non-monetary relief. U.S. Government regulations provide
that certain findings against a contractor may lead to
suspension or debarment from future U.S. Government
contracts or the loss of export privileges for a company or a
division or subdivision. Suspension or debarment could have a
material adverse effect on the company because of its reliance
on government contracts and authorizations.
In August 2008, the company disclosed to the Antitrust Division
of the Department of Justice possible violations of federal
antitrust laws in connection with the bidding process for
certain maintenance contracts at a military installation in
California. In February 2009, the company and the Department of
Justice signed an agreement admitting the company into the
Corporate Leniency Program. As a result of the companys
acceptance into the Program, the company will be exempt from
federal criminal prosecution and criminal fines relating to the
matters the company reported to the Department of Justice if the
company complies with certain conditions, including its
continued cooperation with the governments investigation
and its agreement to make restitution if the government was
harmed by the violations.
-13-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Based upon the available information regarding the foregoing
matter that is subject to a U.S. Government investigation,
the company does not believe that the outcome of such matter is
likely to have a material adverse effect on its consolidated
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Litigation Various claims and legal
proceedings arise in the ordinary course of business and are
pending against the company and its properties. Among them:
The company is one of several defendants in litigation brought
by the Orange County Water District in Orange County Superior
Court in California on December 17, 2004, for alleged
contribution to volatile organic chemical contamination of the
Countys shallow groundwater. The lawsuit includes counts
against the defendants for violation of the Orange County Water
District Act, the California Super Fund Act, negligence,
nuisance, trespass and declaratory relief. Among other things,
the lawsuit seeks unspecified damages for the cost of
remediation, payment of attorney fees and costs, and punitive
damages. The defendants motion for summary judgment on the
tort claims is scheduled to be heard on May 10, 2011.
On March 27, 2007, the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California consolidated two Employee
Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuits that had been
separately filed on September 28, 2006, and January 3,
2007, into In Re Northrop Grumman Corporation ERISA Litigation.
The plaintiffs filed a consolidated Amended Complaint on
September 15, 2010, alleging breaches of fiduciary duties
by the Administrative Committees and the Investment Committees
(as well as certain individuals who served on or supported those
Committees) for two 401(k) Plans sponsored by Northrop Grumman
Corporation. The company is not a defendant in the lawsuit. The
plaintiffs claim that these alleged breaches of fiduciary duties
caused the Plans to incur excessive administrative and
investment fees and expenses to the detriment of the Plans
participants. On August 6, 2007, the District Court denied
plaintiffs motion for class certification, and the
plaintiffs appealed the District Courts decision on class
certification to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit. On September 8, 2009, the Ninth Circuit vacated
the Order denying class certification and remanded the issue to
the District Court for further consideration. As required by the
Ninth Circuits Order, the case was also reassigned to a
different judge. The plaintiffs renewed motion for class
certification was rejected on a procedural basis, and they
re-filed on January 14, 2011. The District Court postponed
the trial date of April 12, 2011 to an as yet undetermined
date after resolution of the then pending class certification
motion and summary judgment motions. By order dated
March 29, 2011, the District Court granted the
plaintiffs motion for class certification. All briefing on
the summary judgment motions is to be completed by May 2,
2011, with the hearing scheduled for May 16, 2011.
On June 22, 2007, a putative class action was filed against
the Northrop Grumman Pension Plan and the Northrop Grumman
Retirement Plan B and their corresponding administrative
committees, styled as Skinner et al. v. Northrop Grumman
Pension Plan, etc., et al., in the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California. The putative class
representatives alleged violations of ERISA and breaches of
fiduciary duty concerning a 2003 modification to the Northrop
Grumman Retirement Plan B. The modification relates to the
employer funded portion of the pension benefit available during
a five-year transition period that ended on June 30, 2008.
The plaintiffs dismissed the Northrop Grumman Pension Plan, and
in 2008 the District Court granted summary judgment in favor of
all remaining defendants on all claims. The plaintiffs appealed,
and in May 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit reversed the decision of the District Court and remanded
the matter back to the District Court for further proceedings,
finding that there was ambiguity in a 1998 summary plan
description related to the employer-funded component of the
pension benefit. After the remand, the plaintiffs filed a motion
to certify a class. The parties also filed cross-motions for
summary judgment. On January 26, 2010, the District Court
granted summary judgment in favor of the Plan and denied
plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. The District Court
also denied plaintiffs motion for class certification and
struck the trial date of March 23, 2010 as unnecessary
given the District Courts grant of summary judgment for
the Plan. Plaintiffs appealed the District Courts order to
the Ninth Circuit.
-14-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Based upon the information available, the company does not
believe that the resolution of any of these specific claims and
legal proceedings listed above is likely to have a material
adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results
of operations or cash flows.
|
|
11.
|
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES
|
Contract Performance Contingencies Contract
profit margins may include estimates of revenues not
contractually agreed to between the customer and the company for
matters such as settlements in the process of negotiation,
contract changes, claims and requests for equitable adjustment
for previously unanticipated contract costs. These estimates are
based upon managements best assessment of the underlying
causal events and circumstances, and are included in determining
contract profit margins to the extent of expected recovery based
on contractual entitlements and the probability of successful
negotiation with the customer. As of March 31, 2011, the
recognized amounts related to claims and requests for equitable
adjustment are not material individually or in the aggregate.
Guarantees of Subsidiary Performance
Obligations From time to time in the ordinary
course of business, the company guarantees performance
obligations of its subsidiaries under certain contracts. In
addition, the companys subsidiaries may enter into joint
ventures, teaming and other business arrangements (collectively,
Business Arrangements) to support the companys products
and services in domestic and international markets. The company
generally strives to limit its exposure under these arrangements
to its subsidiarys investment in the Business
Arrangements, or to the extent of such subsidiarys
obligations under the applicable contract. In some cases,
however, the company may be required to guarantee performance by
the Business Arrangements and, in such cases, the company
generally obtains cross-indemnification from the other members
of the Business Arrangements. At March 31, 2011, the
company is not aware of any existing event of default that would
require it to satisfy any of these guarantees.
Environmental Matters The estimated cost
to complete remediation has been accrued where it is probable
that the company will incur such costs in the future to address
environmental impacts at currently or formerly owned or leased
operating facilities, or at sites where it has been named a
Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) by the Environmental
Protection Agency, or similarly designated by other
environmental agencies. These accruals do not include any
litigation costs related to environmental matters, nor do they
include amounts recorded as asset retirement obligations. To
assess the potential impact on the companys consolidated
financial statements, management estimates the range of
reasonably possible remediation costs that could be incurred by
the company, taking into account currently available facts on
each site as well as the current state of technology and prior
experience in remediating contaminated sites. These estimates
are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect changes in
facts and technical and legal circumstances.
Management estimates that as of
March 31, 2011, the range of reasonably possible future
costs for environmental remediation sites is $286 million to
$703 million, of which $106 million is accrued in other
current liabilities and $210 million is accrued in other
long-term liabilities. A portion of the environmental
remediation costs is expected to be recoverable through overhead
charges on government contracts and, accordingly, such amounts
are deferred in inventoried costs (current portion) and
miscellaneous other assets (non-current portion). Factors that
could result in changes to the companys estimates include:
modification of planned remedial actions, increases or decreases
in the estimated time required to remediate, changes to the
determination of legally responsible parties, discovery of more
extensive contamination than anticipated, changes in laws and
regulations affecting remediation requirements, and improvements
in remediation technology. Should other PRPs not pay their
allocable share of remediation costs, the company may have to
incur costs in addition to those already estimated and accrued.
In addition, there are some potential remediation sites where
the costs of remediation cannot be reasonably estimated.
Although management cannot predict whether new information
gained as projects progress will materially affect the estimated
liability accrued, management does not anticipate that future
remediation expenditures will have a material adverse effect on
the companys consolidated financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
-15-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Financial Arrangements In the ordinary course
of business, the company uses standby letters of credit and
guarantees issued by commercial banks and surety bonds issued
principally by insurance companies to guarantee the performance
on certain contracts and to support the companys
self-insured workers compensation plans. At March 31,
2011, there were $269 million of stand-by letters of credit,
$198 million of bank guarantees, and $151 million of surety
bonds outstanding.
A subsidiary of the company has guaranteed HIIs
outstanding $84 million Economic Development Revenue Bonds
(Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc. Project), Taxable Series 1999A.
In conjunction with the spinoff of HII, the fair value of this
guarantee was recorded in other long-term liabilities and is not
a material amount at March 31, 2011. In addition, HII and
the company entered into an agreement by which HII assumed the
responsibility for the payment and performance of all
outstanding indebtedness, obligations and liabilities of the
company under this guarantee, and has agreed to indemnify the
company against all liabilities that may be incurred in
connection with this guarantee.
Indemnifications The company has retained
certain warranty, environmental, income tax, and other potential
liabilities in connection with certain of its divestitures. The
settlement of these liabilities is not expected to have a
material adverse effect on the companys consolidated
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
U.S. Government Cost Claims From time to
time, the company is advised of claims and penalties concerning
certain potential disallowed costs. When such findings are
presented, the company and the U.S. Government
representatives engage in discussions to enable the company to
evaluate the merits of these claims as well as to assess the
amounts being claimed. Where appropriate, provisions are made to
reflect the companys expected exposure to the matters
raised by the U.S. Government representatives and such
provisions are reviewed on a quarterly basis for sufficiency
based on the most recent information available. The company
believes that the outcome of any such matters would not have a
material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position,
results of operations or cash flows.
Operating Leases Rental expense for operating
leases, excluding discontinued operations, was $105 million
and $118 million for the three months ended March 31,
2011, and 2010, respectively. These amounts are net of
immaterial amounts of sublease rental income.
Related Party Transactions For all periods
presented, the company had no material related party
transactions.
Spin-off of Shipbuilding Business Under the
previously mentioned SDA with HII in Note 5, from and after
the spin-off transaction, HII assumed responsibility for certain
commitments and contingencies related to the Shipbuilding
business and agreed to indemnify the company for loss related to
these commitments and contingencies. The company has therefore
excluded from this report previously disclosed
Shipbuilding-related commitments and contingencies now assumed
by HII.
-16-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
The cost of the companys pension plans and medical and
life benefits plans is shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31
|
|
|
Pension
|
|
Medical and
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
Life Benefits
|
$ in millions
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Components of Net Periodic Benefit Cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$
|
130
|
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
305
|
|
|
|
304
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
(423
|
)
|
|
|
(380
|
)
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
Amortization of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior service cost (credit)
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
Net loss from previous years
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$
|
59
|
|
|
$
|
117
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined contribution plans cost
|
|
$
|
85
|
|
|
$
|
80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employer Contributions The companys
required minimum funding in 2011 for its pension plans and its
medical and life benefit plans are approximately
$59 million and $123 million, respectively. For the
three months ended March 31, 2011, contributions of
$34 million and $11 million have been made to the
companys pension plans and its medical and life benefit
plans, respectively.
Defined Contribution Plans The company also
sponsors 401(k) defined contribution plans in which most
employees are eligible to participate, including certain
bargaining unit employees. Company contributions for most plans
are based on a cash-matching of employee contributions up to
4 percent of compensation. In addition to the 401(k)
defined contribution benefit plan, non- represented employees
hired after June 30, 2008, are eligible to participate in a
defined contribution program in lieu of a defined benefit
pension plan.
Spin-off of Shipbuilding Business As a result
of the previously mentioned spin-off of HII, the company
transferred certain pension and other post-retirement benefit
plans related exclusively to Shipbuilding employees and the
Shipbuilding portion of Northrop Grumman pension and other
post-retirement benefit plans that included Shipbuilding
employees. A re-measurement of plan assets and liabilities was
performed for those plans that included both Shipbuilding and
Northrop Grumman employees as of March 31, 2011. The effect
of this re-measurement on the companys consolidated
financial position, results of operations and cash flows was not
material.
|
|
13.
|
STOCK
COMPENSATION PLANS
|
At March 31, 2011, Northrop Grumman had stock-based
compensation awards outstanding under the following plans: the
2001 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan, which is applicable to
employees, and the 1993 Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors
and 1995 Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors, as amended. All
of these plans were approved by the companys shareholders.
Share-based awards under the employee plans consist of stock
option awards and restricted stock awards.
As a result of the spin-off of Shipbuilding, the share amounts
for outstanding stock-based compensation awards and the strike
price for option awards were adjusted to maintain the aggregate
intrinsic value of the grants at the date of the spin-off
pursuant to the terms of the companys applicable
stock-based compensation plans, and taking into account the
change in the value of the companys common stock as a
result of the distribution of the HII shares to the
companys shareholders. The share amounts and the option
strike price for outstanding stock-based compensation awards
have been restated for all periods presented to reflect the
results of this adjustment.
-17-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Compensation
Expense
Total pre-tax stock-based compensation expense for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, was $28 million
and $34 million, respectively, of which $4 million and
$8 million related to stock options and $24 million
and $26 million related to stock awards, respectively. Tax
benefits recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of
operations for stock-based compensation during the three months
ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, were $11 million and
$14 million, respectively. In addition, the company
realized tax benefits of $6 million and $6 million
from the exercise of stock options and $32 million and
$29 million from the issuance of stock awards in the three
months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
At March 31, 2011, there was $265 million of
unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested awards
granted under the companys stock-based compensation plans,
of which $23 million relates to stock options and
$242 million relates to stock awards. These amounts are
expected to be charged to expense over a weighted-average period
of 1.6 years.
Stock Options
The fair value of each of the companys stock option awards
is estimated on the date of grant using a Black-Scholes
option-pricing model that uses the assumptions noted in the
table below. The fair value of the companys stock option
awards is expensed on a straight-line basis over the vesting
period of the options, which is generally three to four years.
Expected volatility is based on an average of
(1) historical volatility of the companys stock and
(2) implied volatility from traded options on the
companys stock. The risk-free rate for periods within the
contractual life of the stock option award is based on the yield
curve of a zero-coupon U.S. Treasury bond on the date the
award is granted with a maturity equal to the expected term of
the award. The company uses historical data to estimate future
forfeitures. The expected term of awards granted is derived from
historical experience under the companys stock-based
compensation plans and represents the period of time that awards
granted are expected to be outstanding.
The significant weighted-average assumptions relating to the
valuation of the companys stock options granted during the
three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
2010
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
2.7
|
%
|
|
|
2.9
|
%
|
Volatility rate
|
|
|
25
|
%
|
|
|
25
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
2.4
|
%
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
Expected option life (years)
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The company grants stock options primarily to executives, and
the expected term of six years is based on these employees
exercise behavior. In 2009, the company granted stock options to
non-executives and assigned an expected term of five years for
valuing these stock options. The company believes that this
stratification of expected terms best represents future expected
exercise behavior between the two employee groups. The shorter
expected life of employee stock options had an insignificant
effect on the weighted average expected option life for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010.
The weighted-average grant date fair value of stock options
granted during the three months ended March 31, 2011, and
2010, was $14 and $11 per share, respectively.
-18-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Stock option activity for the three months ended March 31,
2011, was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
under Option
|
|
Average
|
|
Remaining
|
|
Intrinsic Value
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
Contractual Term
|
|
($ in millions)
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2011
|
|
|
13,155
|
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
|
|
3.8 years
|
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
805
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(762
|
)
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled and forfeited
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2011
|
|
|
13,164
|
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
|
3.8 years
|
|
|
$
|
158
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested and expected to vest in the
future at March 31, 2011
|
|
|
13,044
|
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
|
3.8 years
|
|
|
$
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at March 31, 2011
|
|
|
10,347
|
|
|
$
|
51
|
|
|
|
3.3 years
|
|
|
$
|
135
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for grant at March 31, 2011
|
|
|
6,427
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during the
three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, was
$14 million and $15 million, respectively. Intrinsic
value is measured as the excess of the fair market value at the
date of exercise (for stock options exercised) or at
March 31, 2011 (for outstanding options), over the
applicable exercise price.
Stock Awards
Compensation expense for stock awards is measured at the grant
date based on fair value and recognized over the vesting period,
generally three years. The fair value of performance-based stock
awards is determined based on the closing market price of the
companys common stock on the grant date. The fair value of
market-based stock awards is determined at the grant date using
a Monte Carlo simulation model. For purposes of measuring
compensation expense, the amount of shares ultimately expected
to vest is estimated at each reporting date based on
managements expectations regarding the relevant
performance criteria.
Stock award activity for the three months ended March 31,
2011, is presented in the tables below. Vested awards include
stock awards fully vested during the year and net adjustments to
reflect the final performance measure for issued shares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Contractual Term
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2011
|
|
|
4,042
|
|
|
$
|
48
|
|
|
|
1.5 years
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,609
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(40
|
)
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(101
|
)
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2011
|
|
|
5,510
|
|
|
$
|
53
|
|
|
|
1.7 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for grant at March 31, 2011
|
|
|
275
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There were 2.4 million stock awards granted in the three
months ended March 31, 2010, with a weighted-average grant
date fair value of $54 per share. The company issued
1.2 million and 1.2 million shares to employees in
settlement of prior year stock awards that were fully vested,
which had total fair values at issuance of $77 million and
$67 million and grant date fair values of $89 million
and $82 million during the three months ended
March 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively. The differences
between the fair values at issuance and the grant date fair
values reflect the effects of performance adjustments (described
above) and changes in the fair market value of the
companys common stock.
-19-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Los Angeles, California
We have reviewed the accompanying condensed consolidated
statement of financial position of Northrop Grumman Corporation
and subsidiaries as of March, 31, 2011, and the related
condensed consolidated statements of operations, cash flows and
changes in shareholders equity for the three-month periods
ended March 31, 2011 and 2010. These interim financial
statements are the responsibility of the Corporations
management.
We conducted our reviews in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A
review of interim financial information consists principally of
applying analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons
responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is
substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in
accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is the
expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements
taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.
Based on our reviews, we are not aware of any material
modifications that should be made to such condensed consolidated
interim financial statements for them to be in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.
We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of
the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
the consolidated statement of financial position of Northrop
Grumman Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31,
2010, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
cash flows and changes in shareholders equity for the year
then ended prior to reclassification for the discontinued
operations described in Note 5 to the accompanying
condensed consolidated interim financial statements (not
presented herein); and in our report dated February 8,
2011, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated
financial statements. We also audited the adjustments described
in Note 5 that were applied to reclassify the
December 31, 2010 consolidated statement of financial
position of Northrop Grumman Corporation and subsidiaries for
discontinued operations. In our opinion, such adjustments are
appropriate and have been properly applied to the previously
issued consolidated statement of financial position as of
December 31, 2010.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Los Angeles, California
April 26, 2011
-20-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
Item 2.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
OVERVIEW
Northrop Grumman Corporation (herein referred to as
Northrop Grumman, the company,
we, us, or our) provides
technologically advanced, innovative products, services, and
integrated solutions in aerospace, electronics, information and
services to our global customers. We participate in many
high-priority defense and government services technology
programs in the United States (U.S.) and abroad as a prime
contractor, principal subcontractor, partner, or preferred
supplier. We conduct most of our business with the
U.S. Government, principally the Department of Defense
(DoD). We also conduct business with local, state, and foreign
governments and domestic and international commercial customers.
The following discussion should be read along with the unaudited
condensed consolidated financial statements included in this
Form 10-Q,
as well as our Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which provides a more
thorough discussion of our products and services, industry
outlook, and business trends. See discussion of consolidated
operating results starting on page 23 and discussion of
segment operating results starting on page 27.
Business Outlook and Operational Trends
Except as discussed below under Economic Opportunities,
Challenges, and Risks, there have been no material changes
to our products and services, industry outlook, or business
trends from those disclosed in our 2010
Form 10-K
other than the spin-off of Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc.
(HII) to our shareholders.
Economic Opportunities, Challenges, and Risks
The U.S. continues to face a complex and changing national
security environment, and domestic economic challenges, such as
unemployment, federal budget deficits and the growing national
debt. The U.S. Governments investment in capabilities
that respond to our evolving security threats is considered
along with other spending priorities and domestic economic and
fiscal challenges. We believe that the U.S. Government will
continue to place a high priority on defense spending and
national security, as well as economic challenges, and will
continue to invest in sophisticated systems providing long-range
surveillance and intelligence, battle management, precision
strike, and strategic agility.
The U.S. Government faces the additional challenge of
recapitalizing equipment and rebuilding readiness while also
pursuing modernization and reducing overhead and inefficiency.
The DoD has announced several initiatives to improve efficiency,
refocus priorities and enhance DoD business practices including
those used to procure goods and services from defense
contractors.
These DoD initiatives are organized into five major areas:
affordability and cost growth; productivity and innovation;
competition; services acquisition; and processes and
bureaucracy. Initial plans resulting from these initiatives were
announced in early 2010 and the DoD has said it expects that
these initiatives will generate $100 billion in savings. On
January 6, 2011, Secretary Gates provided initial details
on fiscal year 2012 defense budget and programmatic plans and
elaborated on the allocation of the $100 billion in
expected savings from efficiency initiatives. The Secretary
described plans to allocate $28 billion for increased
operating costs and $70 billion for investment in high
priority capabilities. In addition to the efficiency savings,
the DoD has said it plans to reduce defense spending from its
prior plans by $78 billion over the next five fiscal years.
On April 15, 2011, President Obama signed into law a budget
for fiscal year 2011. The Congressional Budget Office estimates
the budget deal trims $38 billion relative to fiscal year
2010 spending levels. This provides a budget for the DoD of
$671 billion for fiscal year 2011. This is approximately
$4 billion more than the actual fiscal year 2010 DoD budget
of $667 billion. However, it is about $17 billion less
than the $688 billion in the Presidents fiscal year
2011 budget request. Total non-security discretionary spending
for fiscal year 2011 will be about $42 billion less than in
2010 with the Departments of Housing and Transportation as well
as Commerce, Justice and Science taking the bulk of the
reductions.
On April 13, 2011, the President unveiled his framework for
reducing $4 trillion in deficit spending between fiscal
years 2012 and 2023. This proposal includes an additional
$400 billion in savings from Security Spending
-21-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
over 12 years. At the date of this report, it is not clear
whether the President intends for these cuts to come from the
DoD budget or from broader national security spending that
includes activities from the Departments of State, Energy and
Homeland Security. In addition, it is unclear what benchmark the
Administration is using to calculate savings.
However, the Presidents proposal is not the last word on
future spending and we anticipate continued spirited debate over
defense spending in 2011 as part of a larger dialog around the
federal deficit and potential cuts in government spending.
Budget decisions made in this environment could have long-term
consequences for our company and the entire defense industry.
Although reductions to certain programs in which we participate
or for which we expect to compete are always possible, we
believe that spending on recapitalization, modernization and
maintenance of defense and homeland security assets will
continue to be a national priority. Future defense spending is
expected to include the development and procurement of new
manned and unmanned military platforms and systems along with
advanced electronics and software to enhance the capabilities of
individual systems and provide for the real-time integration of
individual surveillance, information management, strike, and
battle management platforms. Given the current era of irregular
warfare, we expect an increase in investment in persistent
awareness with intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance
(ISR) systems, cyber warfare, and expansion of information
available for the war fighter to make timely decisions. Other
significant new competitive opportunities are expected to
include long range strike, directed energy applications, missile
defense, satellite communications systems, restricted programs,
cybersecurity, technical services and information technology
contracts, as well as international and homeland security
programs.
Green Initiatives We could be affected by
future laws or regulations related to climate change concerns
and other actions known as green initiatives. We
recently established a goal of reducing our greenhouse gas
emissions over a five-year period through December 31,
2014. To comply with existing green initiatives and our
greenhouse gas emissions goal, we expect to incur capital and
operating costs, but at this time, we do not expect that such
costs will have a material adverse effect upon our financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
Recent Developments in U.S. Government Cost Accounting
Standards (CAS) Pension Recovery Rules On
May 10, 2010, the CAS Board published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) that if adopted would provide a framework to
partially harmonize the CAS rules with the Pension Protection
Act of 2006 (PPA) funding requirements. The NPRM would
harmonize by mitigating the mismatch between CAS
costs and
PPA-amended
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) minimum funding
requirements. Until the final rule is published, and to the
extent that the final rule does not completely eliminate
mismatches between ERISA funding requirements and CAS pension
costs, government contractors maintaining defined benefit
pension plans will continue to experience a timing mismatch
between required contributions and pension expenses recoverable
under CAS. The final rule is expected to be issued in 2011 and
to apply to contracts starting the year following the award of
the first CAS covered contract after the effective date of the
new rule. This would mean the rule would apply to our contracts
in 2012. We anticipate that contractors will be entitled to an
equitable adjustment for any additional CAS contract costs
resulting from the final rule.
Notable Events Notable events or activities
during the three months ended March 31, 2011, included the
following:
|
|
|
|
n
|
We completed the spin-off of HII. Our Shipbuilding segment is
now reported as discontinued operations.
|
|
|
n
|
In connection with the spin-off of HII, we received a cash
contribution of $1,429 million.
|
|
|
n
|
We reduced our participation in the NSTec joint venture, which
resulted in a $1,745 million reduction in contract backlog.
|
|
|
|
n
|
We repaid notes with a face value of $750 million.
|
-22-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES, ESTIMATES, AND JUDGMENTS
There have been no material changes to our critical accounting
policies, estimates, or judgments from those discussed in our
2010
Form 10-K.
CONSOLIDATED
OPERATING RESULTS
Selected financial highlights are presented in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions, except per
share
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
|
$
|
6,734
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,914
|
|
Cost of sales and service revenues
|
|
|
|
5,355
|
|
|
|
|
5,611
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
|
568
|
|
|
|
|
624
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
|
811
|
|
|
|
|
679
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
|
(77
|
)
|
Federal and foreign income tax expense
|
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
|
199
|
|
Discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
59
|
|
Diluted earnings per share from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
1.67
|
|
|
|
|
1.34
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
|
(452
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Performance Assessment and Reporting
We manage and assess the performance of our businesses based on
our performance on individual contracts and programs obtained
generally from government organizations using the financial
measures referred to below, with consideration given to the
Critical Accounting Policies, Estimates, and Judgments described
in our 2010
Form 10-K.
Our portfolio of long-term contracts is largely flexibly-priced,
which means that sales tend to fluctuate in concert with costs
across our large portfolio of active contracts, with operating
income being a critical measure of operational performance. Due
to the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) rules that govern
our business, most types of costs are allowable, and we do not
focus on individual cost groupings (such as cost of sales or
general and administrative costs) as much as we do on total
contract costs, which are a key factor in determining contract
operating income. As a result, in evaluating our operating
performance, we look primarily at changes in sales and service
revenues, and operating income, including the effects of
significant changes in operating income as a result of changes
in contract estimates and the use of the cumulative
catch-up
method of accounting in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP).
Unusual fluctuations in operating performance driven by changes
in a specific cost element across multiple contracts, however,
are described in our analysis. Based on this approach and the
nature of our operations, the discussion of results of
operations generally focuses around our four segments versus
distinguishing between products and services. Our Aerospace
Systems and Electronic Systems segments generate predominantly
product sales, while the Information Systems and Technical
Services segments generate predominantly service revenues.
-23-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Sales and Service Revenues
Sales and service revenues consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Product sales
|
|
|
$
|
3,863
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,024
|
|
Service revenues
|
|
|
|
2,871
|
|
|
|
|
2,890
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
|
$
|
6,734
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and service revenues for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, decreased $180 million, as compared
with the same period in 2010, reflecting lower sales in the
Technical Services, Electronic Systems, and Information Systems
segments. See Segment Operating Results below for
further information.
Cost of Sales and Service Revenues and General and
Administrative Expenses
Cost of sales and service revenues and general and
administrative expenses are comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Cost of sales and service revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
|
$
|
2,842
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,990
|
|
% of product sales
|
|
|
|
73.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
74.3
|
%
|
Cost of service revenues
|
|
|
|
2,513
|
|
|
|
|
2,621
|
|
% of service revenues
|
|
|
|
87.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
90.7
|
%
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
|
568
|
|
|
|
|
624
|
|
% of total sales and service revenues
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
9.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales and service revenues and general and
administrative expenses
|
|
|
$
|
5,923
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Product Sales and Service Revenues
The decrease in cost of product sales as a percentage of product
sales for the three months ended March 31, 2011, as
compared with the same period in 2010, is primarily due to
performance improvements in Electronic Systems.
The decrease in cost of service revenues as a percentage of
service revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2011,
as compared with the same period in 2010, is primarily due to
performance improvements in Technical Services and Information
Systems.
General and Administrative Expenses In
accordance with industry practice and the regulations that
govern the cost accounting requirements for government
contracts, most general corporate expenses incurred at both the
segment and corporate locations are considered allowable and
allocable costs on government contracts. For most components of
the company, these costs are allocated to contracts in progress
on a systematic basis and contract performance factors include
this cost component as an element of cost. General and
administrative expenses as a percentage of total sales and
service revenues decreased to 8.4 percent for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, from 9.0 percent for the
comparable period in 2010, primarily due to lower independent
research and development, and bid and proposal costs.
-24-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Operating Income
We consider operating income to be an important measure for
evaluating our operating performance and, as is typical in the
industry, we define operating income as revenues less the
related cost of producing the revenues and general and
administrative expenses. We also further evaluate operating
income for each of the business segments in which we operate.
We internally manage our operations by reference to
segment operating income. Segment operating income
is defined as operating income before unallocated corporate
expenses and net pension adjustment, neither of which affect the
operating results of segments, and the reversal of royalty
income, which is classified as other, net for
financial reporting purposes. Segment operating income is one of
the key metrics we use to evaluate operating performance.
Segment operating income is not, however, a measure of financial
performance under GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by
other companies in the same manner.
The table below reconciles segment operating income to total
operating income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Segment operating income
|
|
|
$
|
721
|
|
|
|
$
|
706
|
|
Unallocated corporate expenses
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
Net pension adjustment
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Royalty income adjustment
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating income
|
|
|
$
|
811
|
|
|
|
$
|
679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment Operating Income Segment operating
income for the three months ended March 31, 2011, increased
$15 million, or 2 percent, as compared with the same
period in 2010. Segment operating income was 10.7 percent
and 10.2 percent of sales and service revenues for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
The increase in segment operating income is primarily due to
improved performance in the Electronic Systems, Information
Systems, and Technical Services segments. See Segment
Operating Results below for further information.
Unallocated Corporate Expenses Unallocated
corporate expenses generally include the portion of corporate
expenses not considered allowable or allocable under applicable
CAS and FAR rules, and therefore not allocated to the segments,
such as management and administration, legal, environmental,
certain compensation and retiree benefits, and other expenses.
Unallocated corporate expenses for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, decreased by $15 million as compared
to the same period in 2010, primarily due to changes in our
estimated recoveries of prior year overhead expenses.
Net Pension Adjustment Net pension adjustment
reflects the difference between pension expense determined in
accordance with GAAP and pension expense allocated to the
operating segments determined in accordance with CAS. For the
three months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, the net
pension adjustment was income of $103 million and
$2 million, respectively. The increase in net pension
adjustment for 2011 is primarily due to improved return on plan
assets in 2010.
Royalty Income Adjustment Royalty income is
included in segment operating income and reclassified to other
income for financial reporting purposes.
Interest Expense
Interest expense for the three months ended March 31, 2011,
decreased $19 million, as compared with the same period in
2010, primarily due to a lower weighted average interest rate
resulting from our debt refinancing in November 2010.
-25-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Federal and Foreign Income Tax Expense
Our effective tax rate on earnings from continuing operations
for the three months ended March 31, 2011, was
34.6 percent compared with 32.7 percent for the same
period in 2010. For 2010, our effective tax rates differ from
the statutory federal rate primarily due to manufacturing
deductions.
Discontinued Operations
Earnings from discontinued operations for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, and 2010 were primarily attributable to the
Shipbuilding business, which was spun off to our shareholders in
March 2011. Earnings from discontinued operations decreased
$25 million as compared with the same period in 2010,
primarily due to non tax-deductible transaction costs associated
with the spin-off of Shipbuilding in 2011.
Earnings from discontinued operations for the three months ended
March 31, 2010, also include an adjustment to the gain on
the December 2009 sale of our Advisory Services Division to
reflect purchase price adjustments and the utilization of
additional capital loss carry-forwards.
Diluted Earnings Per Share From Continuing Operations
Diluted earnings per share from continuing operations for the
three months ended March 31, 2011, were $1.67 per share, as
compared with $1.34 per share for the same period in 2010.
Earnings per share are based on weighted average diluted shares
outstanding of 296.9 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, and 306.1 million for the same period
in 2010. See Note 4 to the condensed consolidated financial
statements in Part I, Item 1.
Net Cash Provided By (Used in) Continuing Operations
For the three months ended March 31, 2011, net cash
provided by continuing operations was $112 million as
compared with cash used of $452 million for the same period
in 2010. The increase of $564 million reflects lower
working capital requirements.
-26-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
SEGMENT
OPERATING RESULTS
Basis of Presentation
We are aligned into four reportable segments: Aerospace Systems,
Electronic Systems, Information Systems, and Technical Services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Sales and Service Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aerospace Systems
|
|
|
$
|
2,736
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,696
|
|
Electronic Systems
|
|
|
|
1,808
|
|
|
|
|
1,882
|
|
Information Systems
|
|
|
|
2,025
|
|
|
|
|
2,064
|
|
Technical Services
|
|
|
|
688
|
|
|
|
|
763
|
|
Intersegment eliminations
|
|
|
|
(523
|
)
|
|
|
|
(491
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total sales and service revenues
|
|
|
$
|
6,734
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,914
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aerospace Systems
|
|
|
$
|
301
|
|
|
|
$
|
296
|
|
Electronic Systems
|
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
Information Systems
|
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
|
183
|
|
Technical Services
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
Intersegment eliminations
|
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
|
(48
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Segment Operating Income
|
|
|
|
721
|
|
|
|
|
706
|
|
Non-segment factors affecting operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unallocated corporate expenses
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
Net pension adjustment
|
|
|
|
103
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Royalty income adjustment
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating income
|
|
|
$
|
811
|
|
|
|
$
|
679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales and Service Revenues
Period-to-period
sales reflect performance under new and ongoing contracts.
Changes in sales and service revenues are typically expressed in
terms of volume. Unless otherwise described, volume generally
refers to increases (or decreases) in reported revenues incurred
due to varying production activity levels, delivery rates, or
service levels on individual contracts. Volume changes will
typically carry a corresponding operating income change based on
the margin rate for a particular contract.
Segment Operating Income Segment operating
income reflects the aggregate performance results of contracts
within a business area or segment. Excluded from this measure
are certain costs not directly associated with contract
performance, including the portion of corporate expenses such as
management and administration, legal, environmental, certain
compensation costs and other retiree benefits, and other
expenses not considered allowable or allocable under applicable
CAS regulations and the FAR, and therefore not allocated to the
segments. Changes in segment operating income are typically
expressed in terms of volume, as discussed above, or
performance. Performance refers to changes in contract margin
rates for the period. These changes typically relate to profit
recognition associated with revisions to total estimated costs
at completion of the contract (EAC) that reflect improved (or
deteriorated) operating performance on a particular contract.
Operating income changes are accounted for on a cumulative to
date basis at the time an EAC change is recorded.
-27-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Operating income may also be affected by, among other things,
the effects of workforce stoppages, natural disasters (such as
hurricanes and earthquakes), resolution of disputed items with
the customer, recovery of insurance proceeds, and other discrete
events. At the completion of a long-term contract, any
originally estimated costs not incurred or reserves not fully
utilized (such as warranty reserves) could also impact contract
earnings. Where such items have occurred, and the effects are
material, a separate description is provided.
Contract Descriptions
For convenience, a brief description of certain programs
discussed in this
Form 10-Q
is included in the Glossary of Programs beginning on
page 34.
AEROSPACE
SYSTEMS
Business Description
Aerospace Systems is a premier developer, integrator, producer
and supporter of manned and unmanned aircraft, spacecraft, high-
energy laser systems, microelectronics and other systems and
subsystems critical to maintaining the nations security
and leadership in technology. Aerospace Systems customers,
which are primarily government agencies, use these systems in
many different mission areas including intelligence,
surveillance and reconnaissance; communications; battle
management; strike operations; electronic warfare; missile
defense; earth observation; space science; and space
exploration. The segment consists of four business areas:
Strike & Surveillance Systems (S&SS); Space
Systems (SS); Battle Management & Engagement Systems
(BM&ES); and Advanced Programs & Technology
(AP&T).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
|
$
|
2,736
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,696
|
|
Segment operating income
|
|
|
|
301
|
|
|
|
|
296
|
|
As a percentage of segment sales
|
|
|
|
11.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
11.0
|
%
|
Sales and Service Revenues
Aerospace Systems revenue for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, increased $40 million, or
1 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010. The
increase is primarily due to higher sales in BM&ES,
partially offset by lower sales in SS. The higher sales in
BM&ES are primarily due to increased activity on Long
Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle (LEMV), higher volume on
Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) and Joint Surveillance
Target Attack Radar System (Joint STARS), partially offset by
lower volume on the
E-2 Hawkeye
programs. The decrease at SS is primarily due to lower volume on
National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite
System (NPOESS) due to a program restructure, lower volume on
Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) programs, and lower
volume due to a program re-plan on James Webb Space Telescope
(JWST), partially offset by higher volume on restricted programs.
Segment Operating Income
Operating income at Aerospace Systems for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, increased $5 million, or
2 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010 and
operating income as a percentage of sales was 11.0 percent,
unchanged from the same period in 2010. The increase is
primarily due to lower amortization of purchased intangibles and
other costs and the higher sales volume discussed above, offset
by unfavorable program performance in S&SS.
-28-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
ELECTRONIC
SYSTEMS
Business Description
Electronic Systems is a leader in the design, development,
manufacture, and support of solutions for sensing,
understanding, anticipating, and controlling the environment for
our global military, civil, and commercial customers and their
operations. Electronic Systems provides a variety of defense
electronics and systems, airborne fire control radars,
situational awareness systems, early warning systems, airspace
management systems, navigation systems, communications systems,
marine systems, space systems, and logistics services. The
segment consists of five business areas: Intelligence,
Surveillance & Reconnaissance Systems;
Land & Self Protection Systems; Naval &
Marine Systems; Navigation Systems; and Targeting Systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
|
$
|
1,808
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,882
|
|
Segment operating income
|
|
|
|
237
|
|
|
|
|
226
|
|
As a percentage of segment sales
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
12.0
|
%
|
Sales and Service Revenues
Electronic Systems revenue for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, decreased $74 million, or
4 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010. The
decrease is primarily due to $143 million lower sales in
Land & Self Protection Systems, partially offset by
$55 million higher sales in Targeting Systems. The decrease
in Land & Self Protection Systems is due to fewer
deliveries on the Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures
(LAIRCM) and Vehicular Intercommunications Systems (VIS)
programs. The increase in Targeting Systems is due to higher
deliveries on a restricted program and the LITENING Gen 4
program.
Segment Operating Income
Operating income at Electronic Systems for the three months
ended March 31, 2011, increased $11 million, or
5 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010 and
operating income as a percentage of sales increased to
13.1 percent from 12.0 percent in the same period in
2010. The higher operating income and increase as a percentage
of sales is primarily due to performance improvements on
Land & Self Protection Systems programs and better
performance on postal automation programs, partially offset by
the lower sales volume discussed above.
INFORMATION
SYSTEMS
Business Description
Information Systems is a leading global provider of advanced
solutions for the DoD, intelligence, federal civilian, state and
local agencies, and international customers. Products and
services are focused on the fields of command, control,
communications, computers and intelligence; air and missile
defense; airborne reconnaissance; intelligence processing;
decision support systems; cybersecurity; information technology;
and systems engineering and systems integration. The segment
consists of three business areas: Defense Systems, Intelligence
Systems, and Civil Systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
|
$
|
2,025
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,064
|
|
Segment operating income
|
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
|
183
|
|
As a percentage of segment sales
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
8.9
|
%
|
-29-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Sales and Service Revenues
Information Systems revenue for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, decreased $39 million, or
2 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010. The
decrease is primarily due to $24 million in lower sales in
Intelligence Systems and $13 million in lower sales in
Defense Systems. The decrease in Intelligence Systems is
primarily driven by lower volume on the Counter Narco-Terrorism
Program Office (CNTPO) and a restricted program, partially
offset by higher volume on other restricted programs. The
decrease in Defense Systems is primarily driven by lower volume
on F-22, Multi-Role Tactical Command Data Link (MRTCDL), and
several other programs, partially offset by program growth on
Joint National Integration Center Research and Development
Contract (JRDC) and Encore II.
Segment Operating Income
Operating income at Information Systems for the three months
ended March 31, 2011, increased $11 million, or
6 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010 and
operating income as a percentage of sales increased to
9.6 percent from 8.9 percent for the same period in
2010. The higher operating income and increase as a percentage
of sales is due to improved performance on Virginia PPEA IT
Outsource (VITA) and favorable performance on several other
programs, partially offset by the lower sales volume discussed
above.
TECHNICAL
SERVICES
Business Description
Technical Services is a leading provider of logistics,
infrastructure, and sustainment support, while also providing a
wide array of technical services including training and
simulation. The segment consists of three areas of business:
Defense and Government Services Division (DGSD); Training
Solutions Division (TSD); and Integrated Logistics and
Modernization Division (ILMD).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Sales and service revenues
|
|
|
$
|
688
|
|
|
|
$
|
763
|
|
Segment operating income
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
As a percentage of segment sales
|
|
|
|
7.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
%
|
Sales and Service Revenues
Technical Services revenue for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, decreased $75 million, or
10 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010 and
operating income as a percentage of sales increased to
7.8 percent from 6.4 percent for the same period in
2010. The decrease is primarily due to $139 million lower
sales in DGSD, partially offset by $80 million higher sales
in ILMD. The decrease in DGSD was associated with the reduced
participation in the National Security Technologies (NSTec)
joint venture. Effective January 1, 2011, the company
reduced its participation in this joint venture, and as a result
no longer consolidates sales for the joint venture in the three
months ended March 31, 2011, as compared with sales of
$136 million for the same period in 2010. The higher volume
in ILMD was primarily due to increased activity on the KC-10
Contractor Logistics Support program, which began in February
2010.
Segment Operating Income
Operating income at Technical Services for the three months
ended March 31, 2011, increased $5 million, or
10 percent, as compared with the same period in 2010 and
operating income as a percentage of sales increased to
7.8 percent from 6.4 percent for the same period in
2010. The higher operating income is primarily due to improved
program performance across various programs. The improvement in
the operating income as a percentage of sales is primarily due
to the effects of the change in participation in the NSTec joint
venture.
-30-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
BACKLOG
Definition
Total backlog at March 31, 2011, was approximately
$43.7 billion. Total backlog includes both funded backlog
(firm orders for which funding is contractually obligated by the
customer) and unfunded backlog (firm orders for which funding is
not currently contractually obligated by the customer). Unfunded
backlog excludes unexercised contract options and unfunded
indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) orders. For
multi-year services contracts with non-federal government
customers having no stated contract values, backlog includes
only the amounts committed by the customer. Backlog is converted
into sales as work is performed or deliveries are made.
Backlog consisted of the following at March 31, 2011, and
December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2011
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
$ in millions
|
|
Funded
|
|
Unfunded
|
|
Backlog
|
|
Funded
|
|
Unfunded
|
|
Backlog
|
Aerospace Systems
|
|
$
|
8,829
|
|
|
$
|
11,324
|
|
|
$
|
20,153
|
|
|
$
|
9,185
|
|
|
$
|
11,683
|
|
|
$
|
20,868
|
|
Electronic Systems
|
|
|
7,904
|
|
|
|
1,825
|
|
|
|
9,729
|
|
|
|
8,093
|
|
|
|
2,054
|
|
|
|
10,147
|
|
Information Systems
|
|
|
4,498
|
|
|
|
5,954
|
|
|
|
10,452
|
|
|
|
4,711
|
|
|
|
5,879
|
|
|
|
10,590
|
|
Technical Services
|
|
|
2,561
|
|
|
|
831
|
|
|
|
3,392
|
|
|
|
2,763
|
|
|
|
2,474
|
|
|
|
5,237
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total backlog
|
|
$
|
23,792
|
|
|
$
|
19,934
|
|
|
$
|
43,726
|
|
|
$
|
24,752
|
|
|
$
|
22,090
|
|
|
$
|
46,842
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New Awards
The estimated value of contract awards included in backlog
during the three months ended March 31, 2011, was
$5.3 billion. Significant new awards during this period
include $401 million for the Global Hawk HALE program, and
$362 million for the B-2 Stealth Bomber programs.
Backlog Adjustment
Total backlog as of March 31, 2011 was reduced by
$1,745 million to reflect a change in the companys
participation in the NSTec joint venture. Effective
January 1, 2011, NSTec joint venture results are no longer
consolidated in the companys financial statements.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
We endeavor to ensure the most efficient conversion of operating
results into cash for deployment in growing our businesses and
maximizing shareholder value. We actively manage our capital
resources through working capital improvements, capital
expenditures, strategic business acquisitions and divestitures,
debt issuance and repayment, required and voluntary pension
contributions, and returning cash to our shareholders through
dividend payments and repurchases of common stock.
We use various financial measures to assist in capital
deployment decision-making, including net cash provided by
operations, free cash flow, net
debt-to-equity,
and net
debt-to-capital.
We believe these measures are useful to investors in assessing
our financial performance.
-31-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
The table below summarizes key components of cash flow provided
by (used in) continuing operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
$
|
530
|
|
|
|
$
|
469
|
|
Net earnings from discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
(34
|
)
|
|
|
|
(59
|
)
|
Other non-cash
items(1)
|
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
|
174
|
|
Retiree benefit funding less than expense
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
Trade working capital increase
|
|
|
|
(582
|
)
|
|
|
|
(1,121
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations
|
|
|
$
|
112
|
|
|
|
$
|
(452
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes depreciation and amortization, stock-based compensation
expense, and deferred income taxes. |
Free Cash Flow From Continuing Operations
Free cash flow from continuing operations represents cash from
continuing operations less capital expenditures and outsourcing
contract and related software costs. Outsourcing contract and
related software costs are similar to capital expenditures in
that the contract costs represent incremental external costs or
certain specific internal costs that are directly related to the
contract acquisition and transition/set-up. These outsourcing
contract and related software costs are deferred and expensed
over the contract life. We believe free cash flow from
continuing operations is a useful measure for investors to
consider. This measure is a key factor in our planning for and
consideration of strategic acquisitions, stock repurchases and
the payment of dividends.
Free cash flow from continuing operations is not a measure of
financial performance under GAAP, and may not be defined and
calculated by other companies in the same manner. This measure
should not be considered in isolation, as a measure of residual
cash flow available for discretionary purposes, or as an
alternative to operating results presented in accordance with
GAAP as indicators of performance.
For 2011 and beyond, cash generated from continuing operations
supplemented by borrowings under credit facilities
and/or in
the capital markets, if needed, is expected to be sufficient to
service debt and contract obligations, finance capital
expenditures, fund required and voluntary pension contributions,
continue acquisition of shares under our share repurchase
program, and continue paying dividends to our shareholders.
The table below reconciles net cash provided by (used in)
continuing operations to free cash flow provided by continuing
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31
|
$ in millions
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
Net cash provided by (used in) continuing operations
|
|
|
$
|
112
|
|
|
|
$
|
(452
|
)
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
|
(122
|
)
|
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
Outsourcing contract and related software costs
|
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free cash flow from continuing operations
|
|
|
$
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
(558
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-32-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Cash Flows
The following is a discussion of our major continuing
operations, investing and financing activities for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, and 2010, respectively, as
classified in the condensed consolidated statements of cash
flows located in Part I, Item 1.
Operating Activities Net cash provided by
continuing operations for the three months ended March 31,
2011, was $112 million as compared with cash used of
$452 million for the same period in 2010. The increase of
$564 million in net cash provided by continuing operations
is primarily due to lower working capital requirements.
Investing Activities Net cash provided by
investing activities by continuing operations for the three
months ended March 31, 2011, was $1,344 million as
compared with cash used of $103 million in the same period
of 2010. The $1,447 million increase in net cash provided
by investing activities by continuing operations is primarily
due to the spin-off of the Shipbuilding business.
Financing Activities Net cash used in
financing activities for the three months ended March 31,
2011, was $843 million as compared with $648 million
in the same period of 2010. The $195 million increase in
net cash used in financing activities is primarily due to higher
debt repayments partially offset by lower common stock
repurchases.
ACCOUNTING
STANDARDS UPDATES
See Note 2 to the condensed consolidated financial
statements in Part I, Item 1 for information related
to accounting standards updates.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS AND PROJECTIONS
Statements in this
Form 10-Q
and the information we are incorporating by reference, other
than statements of historical fact, constitute
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as
expect, intend, plan,
project, forecast, believe,
estimate, outlook,
anticipate, trends and similar
expressions generally identify these forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions,
expectations, plans and projections that are believed valid when
made. These statements are not guarantees of future performance
and inherently involve a wide range of risks and uncertainties
that are difficult to predict. Specific factors that could cause
actual results to differ materially from those expressed or
implied in the forward-looking statements include, but are not
limited to, those identified under Risk Factors in Part II,
Item 1A and other important factors disclosed in this
report and from time to time in our other filings with the SEC.
You are urged to consider the limitations on, and risks
associated with, forward-looking statements and not unduly rely
on the accuracy of predictions contained in such forward-looking
statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of
the date of this report or, in the case of any document
incorporated by reference, the date of that document. We
undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any
forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new
information, future events or otherwise, except as required by
applicable law.
CONTRACTUAL
OBLIGATIONS
There have been no material changes to our contractual
obligations from those discussed in our 2010
Form 10-K
other than these items related to the spin-off of the
Shipbuilding business: $105 million of long-term debt,
$105 million of interest payments on long-term debt,
$137 million of operating leases, $1,972 million of
purchase obligations and $587 million of other long-term
liabilities. Other long-term liabilities primarily consist of
total accrued workers compensation reserves, deferred
compensation, and other miscellaneous liabilities.
-33-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
GLOSSARY
OF PROGRAMS
Listed below are brief descriptions of the programs mentioned in
this
Form 10-Q.
|
|
|
Program Name
|
|
Program Description
|
|
|
|
|
Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF)
|
|
Provide the communication payload for the nations next
generation military strategic and tactical satellite relay
systems that will deliver survivable, protected communications
to U.S. forces and selected allies worldwide.
|
|
|
|
B-2 Stealth Bomber
|
|
Maintain strategic, long-range multi-role bomber with
war-fighting capability that combines long range, large payload,
all-aspect stealth, and near-precision weapons in one aircraft.
|
|
|
|
Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) Unmanned Aircraft System
|
|
A maritime derivative of the Global Hawk that provides
persistent maritime Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance (ISR) data collection and dissemination
capability to the Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance Force.
|
|
|
|
Counter Narco-Terrorism Program Office (CNTPO)
|
|
Counter Narco-Terrorism Program Office provides support to the
U.S. Government, coalition partners, and host nations in
Technology Development and Application Support; Training;
Operations and Logistics Support; and Professional and Executive
Support. The program provides equipment and services to
research, develop, upgrade, install, fabricate, test, deploy,
operate, train, maintain, and support new and existing federal
Government platforms, systems, subsystems, items, and
host-nation support initiatives.
|
|
|
|
E-2 Hawkeye
|
|
The U.S. Navys airborne battle management command and
control mission system platform providing airborne early warning
detection, identification, tracking, targeting, and
communication capabilities. The company is developing the next
generation capability including radar, mission computer,
vehicle, and other system enhancements, to support the U.S Naval
Battle Groups and Joint Forces, called the E-2D Advanced
Hawkeye. Recently the Navy approved Milestone C for Low Rate
Initial Production.
|
|
|
|
Encore II
|
|
Provide Military Agencies, DoD, and other agencies of the
Federal Government IT services and associated enabling products
to satisfy IT activities at all operating levels, including
hardware and software incidental to an overall IT solution.
|
|
|
|
F-22
|
|
Joint venture with Raytheon to design, develop and produce the
F-22 radar system. Northrop Grumman is responsible for the
overall design of the AN/APG-77 and AN/APG-77(V) 1 radar
systems, including the control and signal processing software
and responsibility for the AESA radar systems integration and
test activities. In addition, Northrop Grumman is responsible
for overall design and integration of the F-22 Communication,
Navigation, and Identification (CNI) system.
|
|
|
|
Global Hawk High-Altitude Long-Endurance (HALE) Systems
|
|
Develop, deliver and sustain the Global Hawk HALE unmanned
aerial system and its derivatives to both domestic and
international customers for intelligence, reconnaissance, and
surveillance, including deployment of assets to support the
global war on terror. The Global Hawk system has a central role
in ISR missions supporting operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
|
|
|
|
James Webb Space Telescope (JWST)
|
|
Design, develop, integrate and test a space-based infrared
telescope satellite to observe the formation of the first stars
and galaxies in the universe.
|
-34-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
|
Program Name
|
|
Program Description
|
|
|
|
|
Joint National Integration Center Research and Development
contract (JRDC)
|
|
Support the development and application of modeling and
simulation, war-gaming, test and analytic tools for air and
missile defense.
|
|
|
|
Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (Joint STARS)
|
|
Joint STARS detects, locates, classifies, tracks and targets
hostile ground movements, communicating real-time information
through secure data links with U.S. Air Force and Army command
posts.
|
|
|
|
KC-10 Contractor Logistics Support
|
|
Contractor Logistics Services (CLS) contract supporting the U.S.
Air Force KC-10 tanker fleet including depot maintenance, supply
chain management, maintenance and management at locations in the
United States and worldwide.
|
|
|
|
Large Aircraft Infrared Counter-measures (LAIRCM)
|
|
Infrared countermeasures systems for C-17 and C-130 aircraft.
The IDIQ contract will further allow for the purchase of LAIRCM
hardware for foreign military sales and other government
agencies.
|
|
|
|
LITENING targeting pod system (LITENING)
|
|
A self-contained, multi-sensor weapon aiming system that enables
fighter pilots to detect, acquire, auto-track and identify
targets for highly accurate delivery of both conventional and
precision-guided weapons.
|
|
|
|
Long Endurance Multi-Intelligence Vehicle (LEMV)
|
|
Contract awarded by the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense
Command for the development, fabrication, integration,
certification and performance of one LEMV system. It is a
state-of-the-art, lighter-than-air airship designed to provide
ground troops with persistent surveillance. Development and
demonstration of the first airship is scheduled to be completed
December 2011. The contract also includes options for two
additional airships and in-country support.
|
|
|
|
Multi-Role Tactical Common Data Link (MRTCDL)
|
|
Provide war fighters with critical real-time networking
connectivity by enabling extremely fast exchange of data via
ground, airborne and satellite networks.
|
|
|
|
National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite
System (NPOESS)
|
|
Design, develop, integrate, test, and operate an integrated
system comprised of two satellites with mission sensors and
associated ground elements for providing global and regional
weather and environmental data.
|
|
|
|
National Security Technologies (NSTec)
|
|
Participate in a joint venture that manages and operates the
Nevada National Security Site, providing infrastructure support,
including oversight of the nuclear explosives safety team,
supporting hazardous chemical spill testing, emergency response
training and conventional weapons testing.
|
|
|
|
Vehicular Intercommunications Systems (VIS)
|
|
Provide clear and noise-free communications between crewmembers
inside combat vehicles and externally over as many as six combat
net radios for the U.S. Army. The active noise-reduction
features of VIS provide significant improvement in speech
intelligibility, hearing protection, and vehicle crew
performance.
|
|
|
|
Virginia PPEA IT Outsource (VITA)
|
|
Provide high-level IT consulting, IT infrastructure and services
to Virginia state and local agencies including data center, help
desk, desktop, network, applications and cross-functional
services.
|
-35-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Item 3. Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Interest Rates We are exposed to market risk,
primarily related to interest rates and foreign currency
exchange rates. Financial instruments subject to interest rate
risk include variable-rate short-term borrowings under the
credit agreement and short-term investments. At March 31,
2011, substantially all outstanding borrowings were fixed-rate
long-term debt obligations of which a significant portion are
not callable until maturity. Our sensitivity to a 1 percent
change in interest rates is tied to our $2 billion credit
agreement, which had no balance outstanding at March 31,
2011, or December 31, 2010. See Note 9 to the
condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I,
Item 1.
Derivatives We do not hold or issue
derivative financial instruments for trading purposes. We may
enter into interest rate swap agreements to manage our exposure
to interest rate fluctuations. At March 31, 2011, we had no
interest rate swap agreements in effect and at December 31,
2010, we had one interest rate swap agreement in effect. See
Note 9 to the condensed consolidated financial statements
in Part I, Item 1.
Foreign Currency We enter into foreign
currency forward contracts to manage foreign currency exchange
rate risk related to receipts from customers and payments to
suppliers denominated in foreign currencies. At March 31,
2011, and December 31, 2010, the amount of foreign currency
forward contracts outstanding was not material. We do not
consider the market risk exposure related to foreign currency
exchange to be material to the condensed consolidated financial
statements. See Note 9 to the condensed consolidated
financial statements in Part I, Item 1.
Item 4. Controls
and Procedures
Disclosure
Controls and Procedures
Our principal executive officer (Chief Executive Officer and
President) and principal financial officer (Corporate Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer) have evaluated the
companys disclosure controls and procedures as of
March 31, 2011, and have concluded that these controls and
procedures are effective to ensure that information required to
be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 USC § 78a
et seq) is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within
the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange
Commissions rules and forms. These disclosure controls and
procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures
designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in
the reports that we file or submit is accumulated and
communicated to management, including the principal executive
officer and the principal financial officer, as appropriate to
allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Changes
in Internal Controls over Financial Reporting
During the three months ended March 31, 2011, no change
occurred in our internal controls over financial reporting that
materially affected, or is likely to materially affect, our
internal controls over financial reporting.
-36-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
PART II.
OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal
Proceedings
We have provided information about certain legal proceedings in
which we are involved in Note 10 to the condensed
consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1.
The legal proceedings disclosed in Note 15 to the
consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8,
of our 2010
Form 10-K,
included matters relating to our former Shipbuilding business.
As disclosed elsewhere in this report, we completed a spin-off
of HII effective as of March 31, 2011, and our Shipbuilding
business is now reported as discontinued operations. In
connection with the spin-off transaction, we entered into a
number of agreements with our former subsidiary HII setting
forth certain rights and obligations of the company and HII
after the spin-off transaction, including a Separation and
Distribution Agreement dated March 29, 2011. Under those
Agreements, from and after the spin-off transaction, HII assumed
responsibility for certain liabilities related to the
Shipbuilding business, and we have therefore excluded from this
report previously disclosed Shipbuilding-related investigations,
claims and litigation matters assumed by HII. We have agreed to
provide certain support to HII in connection with various legal
matters, including to help ensure an orderly transition
following the distribution. In addition to the matters disclosed
in Note 10, we are a party to various investigations,
lawsuits, claims and other legal proceedings that arise in the
ordinary course of our business. Based on information available
to us, we do not believe at this time that any of such
additional proceedings will individually, or in the aggregate,
have a material adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operations or cash flows. For further information on
the risks we face from existing and future investigations,
lawsuits, claims and other legal proceedings, please see Risk
Factors in Part II, Item 1A, of this report.
Item 1A. Risk
Factors
The risk factors described in Item 1A
Risk Factors in our 2010
Form 10-K
included risks that specifically related to our Shipbuilding
business. As disclosed elsewhere in this report, we completed a
spin-off transaction of HII effective as of March 31, 2011,
and our Shipbuilding business is now reported as discontinued
operations. We have amended the risk factors presented in our
Form 10-K
and replaced them in their entirety with the risk factors
presented below to reflect changes resulting from the spin-off
transaction as well as changes to other risk factors applicable
to us. These risk factors should be read in conjunction with the
information described in this report and our
Form 10-K.
Our consolidated financial position, results of operations and
cash flows are subject to various risks, many of which are not
exclusively within our control, that may cause actual
performance to differ materially from historical or projected
future performance. We urge you to carefully consider the risk
factors described below in evaluating the information contained
in this report.
Risks
Related to Our Business
|
|
n |
We depend heavily on a single customer, the
U.S. Government, for a substantial portion of our business,
including programs subject to security classification
restrictions on information. Changes in this customers
priorities and changes affecting its ability to do business with
us could have a material adverse effect on our financial
position, results of operations, or cash flows.
|
Our primary customer is the U.S Government, from which we
derived approximately 91% of our total revenues during the past
several years. The federal government is considering significant
changes to defense spending and other programs. We cannot
predict the impact of potential changes in priorities due to
military transformation and planning
and/or the
nature of war-related activity on existing, follow-on or
replacement programs. A shift of government priorities to
programs in which we do not participate
and/or
reductions in funding for or the termination of programs in
which we do participate, unless offset by other programs and
opportunities, could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
-37-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
In addition, the U.S. Government generally has the ability
to terminate contracts, in whole or in part, without prior
notice, for convenience or for default based on performance. In
the event of termination for the U.S. Governments
convenience, contractors are generally protected by provisions
covering reimbursement for costs incurred on the contracts and
profit on those costs but not the anticipated profit that would
have been earned had the contract been completed. In the rare
circumstance where a U.S. government contract does not have
such termination protection, we attempt to mitigate the
termination risk through other means. To the extent such means
are unavailable or do not fully address the costs incurred or
profit on those costs, we could face significant losses from the
termination for convenience of a contract that lacks termination
protection. Termination by the U.S. Government of a
contract for convenience could also result in the cancellation
of future work on that program. Termination by the
U.S. Government of a contract due to our default could
require us to pay for re-procurement costs in excess of the
original contract price, net of the value of work accepted from
the original contract. Termination of a contract due to our
default may expose us to liability and could have a material
adverse effect on our ability to compete for contracts.
|
|
n |
Continuing uncertainty about the funding of the federal
government and the 2012 and subsequent budgets may negatively
impact our business and programs and could have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations
or cash flows.
|
The funding of U.S. Government programs is subject to
congressional budget authorization and appropriation processes.
For many programs, Congress appropriates funds on a fiscal year
basis even though a program may extend over several fiscal
years. Consequently, programs are often only partially funded
initially and additional funds are committed only as Congress
makes further appropriations. We cannot predict the extent to
which total funding
and/or
funding for individual programs will be included, increased or
reduced as part of the 2012 and subsequent budgets ultimately
approved by Congress or be included in the scope of separate
supplemental appropriations. The impact, severity and duration
of the current U.S. economic situation, the sweeping
economic plans adopted by the U.S. Government, and
pressures on the federal budget could also adversely affect the
total funding
and/or
funding for individual programs. In the event that
appropriations for any of our programs becomes unavailable, or
is reduced or delayed, our contract or subcontract under such
program may be terminated or adjusted by the
U.S. Government, which could have a material adverse effect
on our future sales under such program, and on our financial
position, results of operations,
and/or cash
flows.
|
|
n |
As a U.S. Government contractor, we are subject to a
number of procurement regulations and could be adversely
affected by changes in regulations or any negative findings from
a U.S. Government audit or investigation.
|
U.S. Government contractors must comply with many
significant procurement regulations and other requirements.
These regulations and requirements, although customary in
government contracts, increase our performance and compliance
costs. If any such regulations or procurement requirements
change, our costs of complying with them could increase and
reduce our margins.
We operate in a highly regulated environment and are routinely
audited and reviewed by the U.S. Government and its
agencies such as the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) and
Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). These agencies review
our performance under our contracts, our cost structure and our
compliance with applicable laws, regulations and standards, as
well as the adequacy of, and our compliance with, our internal
control systems and policies. Systems that are subject to review
include, but are not limited to, our accounting systems,
purchasing systems, billing systems, property management and
control systems, cost estimating systems, compensation systems
and management information systems. Any costs found to be
unallowable or improperly allocated to a specific contract will
not be reimbursed or must be refunded if already reimbursed. If
an audit uncovers improper or illegal activities, we may be
subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative
sanctions, which may include termination of contracts,
forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines and
suspension, or prohibition
-38-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
from doing business with the U.S. Government. Whether or
not illegal activities are alleged, the U.S. Government
also has the ability to decrease or withhold certain payments
when it deems systems subject to its review to be inadequate. In
addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if
allegations of impropriety were made against us.
The U.S. Government, from time to time, recommends to its
contractors that certain contract prices be reduced, or that
costs allocated to certain contracts be disallowed. These
recommendations can involve substantial amounts. In the past, as
a result of such audits and other investigations and inquiries,
we have on occasion made adjustments to our contract prices and
the costs allocated to our government contracts.
We are also, from time to time, subject to U.S. Government
investigations relating to our operations, and we are subject to
or expected to perform in compliance with a vast array of
federal laws, including but not limited to the Truth in
Negotiations Act, the False Claims Act, the Procurement
Integrity Act, Cost Accounting Standards, the International
Traffic in Arms Regulations promulgated under the Arms Export
Control Act, the Close the Contractor Fraud Loophole Act and the
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. If we are convicted or otherwise
found to have violated the law, or are found not to have acted
responsibly as defined by the law, we may be subject to
reductions of the value of contracts, contract modifications or
termination and the assessment of penalties and fines,
compensatory or treble damages, which could have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations,
or cash flows. Such findings or convictions could also result in
suspension or debarment from government contracting. Given our
dependence on government contracting, suspension or debarment
could have a material adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operations, or cash flows.
|
|
n |
The Department of Defense is implementing plans for
significant changes to its business practices that could have a
significant effect on its overall procurement process and impact
our current programs and potential new awards.
|
In September 2010, the DoD announced its Better Buying
Power Initiative designed to gain efficiencies, refocus
priorities and enhance business practices used by the DoD,
including those used to procure goods, services and solutions
from defense contractors. These initiatives are organized into
five major areas: affordability and cost growth; productivity
and innovation; competition; services acquisition; and processes
and bureaucracy. These new initiatives could have a significant
impact on the contracting environment in which we do business.
They are expected to impact current programs as well as new DoD
business opportunities. In his January 6, 2011,
announcement regarding future plans, the Secretary of Defense
implemented some of these initiatives to reduce costs and free
up resources for reinvestment. For example, he directed using
multi-year procurement of Navy aircraft, streamlining
information technology infrastructure, reducing outsourcing,
consolidating operating centers and staffs, improving depot and
supply chain processes, downsizing intelligence organizations,
and eliminating some elements of the DoDs bureaucracy.
Changes to the DoD acquisition system and contracting models can
affect whether we pursue certain opportunities and the terms
under which we are able to do so. These initiatives are still
fairly new and the full impact to our business remains uncertain
and subject to the manner in which the DoD implements them.
|
|
n |
Competition within our markets and an increase in bid
protests may reduce our revenues and market share.
|
We operate in highly competitive markets and our competitors may
have more extensive or more specialized engineering,
manufacturing and marketing capabilities than we do in some
areas. We anticipate increased competition in some of our core
markets as a result of the reduction in budgets for many
U.S. Government agencies and fewer new program starts. In
addition, as discussed in more detail above, projected
U.S. defense spending levels for periods beyond the
near-term are uncertain and difficult to predict. Changes in
U.S. defense spending may limit certain future market
opportunities. We are also facing increasing competition in our
domestic and international markets from foreign and
multinational firms. Additionally, some customers, including the
DoD, may turn to commercial contractors, rather than traditional
defense contractors, for information technology and other
support work. If we are unable to continue to compete
-39-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
successfully against our current or future competitors, we may
experience declines in revenues and market share, which could
negatively impact our financial position, results of operations,
or cash flows.
The competitive environment can also be affected by bid protests
from unsuccessful bidders on new program awards. Bid protests
could result in the award decision being overturned, requiring a
re-bid of the contract. Even where a bid protest does not result
in a re-bid, the resolution can extend the time until the
contract activity can begin, and delay potential earnings.
|
|
n |
Our future success depends, in part, on our ability to
develop new products and new technologies and maintain
technologies, facilities, equipment and a qualified workforce to
meet the needs of current and future customers.
|
Many of the markets in which we operate are characterized by
rapidly changing technologies. The product, program and service
needs of our customers change and evolve regularly. Our success
in the competitive defense industry depends upon our ability to
develop and market our products and services, as well as our
ability to provide the people, technologies, facilities,
equipment and financial capacity needed to deliver those
products and services with maximum efficiency. If we fail to
maintain our competitive position, we could lose a significant
amount of future business to our competitors, which would have a
material adverse effect on our ability to generate favorable
financial results and maintain market share.
Operating results are heavily dependent upon our ability to
attract and retain sufficient personnel with requisite skills
and/or
security clearances. If qualified personnel become scarce, we
could experience higher labor, recruiting or training costs in
order to attract and retain such employees or could experience
difficulty in performing under our contracts if the needs for
such employees are unmet.
Approximately 3,700 of our 79,000 employees are covered by
an aggregate of 19 collective bargaining agreements. We expect
to re-negotiate renewals of four of our collective bargaining
agreements in 2011. Collective bargaining agreements generally
expire after three to five years and are subject to
renegotiation at that time. We may experience difficulties with
renewals and renegotiations of existing collective bargaining
agreements. If we experience such difficulties, we could incur
additional expenses and work stoppages. Any such expenses or
delays could adversely affect programs served by employees who
are covered by collective bargaining agreements.
|
|
n |
Many of our contracts contain performance obligations that
require innovative design capabilities, are technologically
complex, require
state-of-the-art
manufacturing expertise or are dependent upon factors not wholly
within our control. Failure to meet these obligations could
adversely affect our profitability and future prospects.
|
We design, develop and manufacture technologically advanced and
innovative products and services applied by our customers in a
variety of environments. Problems and delays in development or
delivery as a result of issues with respect to design,
technology, licensing and patent rights, labor, learning curve
assumptions or materials and components could prevent us from
achieving contractual requirements.
In addition, our products cannot be tested and proven in all
situations and are otherwise subject to unforeseen problems.
Examples of unforeseen problems that could negatively affect
revenue and profitability include loss on launch of spacecraft,
premature failure of products that cannot be accessed for repair
or replacement, problems with quality and workmanship, country
of origin, delivery of subcontractor components or services and
degradation of product performance. These failures could result,
either directly or indirectly, in loss of life or property.
Among the factors that may affect revenue and profits could be
unforeseen costs and expenses not covered by insurance or
indemnification from the customer, diversion of management focus
in responding to unforeseen problems, loss of follow-on work,
and, in the case of certain contracts, repayment to the
government customer of contract cost and fee payments we
previously received.
Certain contracts, primarily involving space satellite systems,
contain provisions that entitle the customer to recover fees in
the event of partial or complete failure of the system upon
launch or subsequent deployment
-40-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
for less than a specified period of time. Under such terms, we
could be required to forfeit fees previously recognized
and/or
collected. We have not experienced any material losses in the
last decade in connection with such contract performance
incentive provisions. However, if we were to experience launch
failures or complete satellite system failures in the future,
such events could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
|
|
n |
Contract cost growth on fixed-price and other contracts
that cannot be justified as an increase in contract value due
from customers exposes us to reduced profitability and the
potential loss of future business.
|
Our operating income is adversely affected when we incur certain
contract costs or certain increases in contract costs that
cannot be billed to customers. This cost growth can occur if
estimates to complete increase due to technical challenges,
manufacturing difficulties or delays, or workforce-related
issues, or if initial estimates used for calculating the
contract cost were incorrect. The cost estimation process
requires significant judgment and expertise. Reasons for cost
growth may include unavailability or reduced productivity of
labor, the nature and complexity of the work to be performed,
the timelines and availability of materials, major subcontractor
performance and quality of their products, the effect of any
delays in performance, availability and timing of funding from
the customer, natural disasters and the inability to recover any
claims included in the estimates to complete. A significant
change in cost estimates on one or more programs could have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position,
results of operations or cash flows.
Most of our contracts are firm fixed-price contracts or flexibly
priced contracts. Our risk varies with the type of contract.
Flexibly priced contracts include both cost-type and fixed-price
incentive contracts. Due to their nature, firm fixed-price
contracts inherently have more risk than flexibly priced
contracts. Approximately 41 percent of our annual revenues
are derived from firm fixed-price contracts. We typically enter
into firm fixed-price contracts where costs can be reasonably
estimated based on experience. In addition, our contracts
contain provisions relating to cost controls and audit rights.
Should the terms specified in our contracts not be met, then
profitability may be reduced. Fixed-price development work
comprises a small portion of our firm fixed-price contracts and
inherently has more uncertainty as to future events than
production contracts and therefore more variability in estimates
of the costs to complete the development stage. As work
progresses through the development stage into production, the
risks associated with estimating the total costs of the contract
are generally reduced. In addition, successful performance of
firm fixed-price development contracts that include production
units is subject to our ability to control some cost growth in
meeting production specifications and delivery rates. While
management uses its best judgment to estimate costs associated
with fixed-price development contracts, future events could
result in either upward or downward adjustments to those
estimates.
Under a fixed-price incentive contract, the allowable costs
incurred by the contractor are subject to reimbursement, but are
subject to a cost-share limit, which affects profitability.
Under a cost-type contract, the allowable costs incurred by the
contractor are also subject to reimbursement plus a fee that
represents profit. We typically enter into cost-type contracts
for development programs with complex design and technical
challenges. These cost-type programs typically have award or
incentive fees that are subject to uncertainty and may be earned
over extended periods. In these cases, the associated financial
risks are primarily in lower profit rates or program
cancellation if cost, schedule, or technical performance issues
arise.
|
|
n |
Our earnings and margins depend, in part, on our ability
to perform under contracts.
|
When agreeing to contractual terms, our management makes
assumptions and projections about future conditions and events,
many of which extend over long periods. These projections assess
the productivity and availability of labor, the complexity of
the work to be performed, the cost and availability of
materials, the impact of delayed performance, and the timing of
product deliveries. If there is a significant change in one or
more of these circumstances or estimates, or if we face
unanticipated contract costs, the profitability of one or more
of these contracts may be adversely affected.
-41-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
n |
Our earnings and margins depend, in part, on subcontractor
performance as well as raw material and component availability
and pricing.
|
We rely on other companies to provide raw materials and major
components for our products and rely on subcontractors to
produce hardware elements and
sub-assemblies
and perform some of the services that we provide to our
customers. Disruptions or performance problems caused by our
subcontractors and vendors could have an adverse effect on our
ability to meet our commitments to customers. Our ability to
perform our obligations as a prime contractor could be adversely
affected if one or more of the vendors or subcontractors are
unable to provide the
agreed-upon
products or materials or perform the
agreed-upon
services in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Our costs may increase over the term of our contracts. Through
cost escalation provisions contained in some of our
U.S. Government contracts, we may be protected from
increases in material costs to the extent that the increases in
our costs are in line with industry indices. However, the
difference in basis between our actual material costs and these
indices may expose us to cost uncertainty even with these
provisions. A significant delay in supply deliveries of our key
raw materials required in our production processes could have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, results of
operations, or cash flows.
In connection with our government contracts, we are required to
procure certain materials, components and parts from supply
sources approved by the U.S. Government. There are
currently several components for which there may be only one
supplier. The inability of a sole source supplier to meet our
needs could have a material adverse effect on our financial
position, results of operations, or cash flows.
|
|
n |
Our business is subject to disruption caused by natural
disasters, environmental disasters and other factors that could
adversely affect our profitability and our overall financial
position.
|
We have significant operations located in regions of the
U.S. that may be exposed to damaging storms and other
natural disasters, such as earthquakes and environmental
disasters. Although preventative measures may help to mitigate
damage, the damage and disruption resulting from natural and
environmental disasters may be significant. Should insurance or
other risk transfer mechanisms be unavailable or insufficient to
recover all costs, we could experience a material adverse effect
on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
Our suppliers and subcontractors are also subject to natural
disasters that could affect their ability to deliver or perform
under a contract. Performance failures by our subcontractors due
to natural and environmental disasters may adversely affect our
ability to perform our obligations on the prime contract, which
could reduce our profitability due to damages or other costs
that may not be fully recoverable from the subcontractor or from
the customer and could result in a termination of the prime
contract and have an adverse effect on our ability to compete
for future contracts.
Natural disasters can also disrupt our workforce, electrical and
other power distribution networks, including computer and
internet operation and accessibility, and the critical
industrial infrastructure needed for normal business operations.
These disruptions could cause adverse effects on our
profitability and performance.
|
|
n |
We use estimates when accounting for contracts. Changes in
estimates could affect our profitability and our overall
financial position.
|
Contract accounting requires judgment relative to assessing
risks, estimating contract revenues and costs, and making
assumptions for schedule and technical issues. Due to the size
and nature of many of our contracts, the estimation of total
revenues and costs at completion is complicated and subject to
many variables. For example, assumptions have to be made
regarding the length of time to complete the contract because
costs also include expected increases in wages and prices for
materials. Similarly, assumptions have to be made regarding the
future impact of our self-imposed efficiency initiatives and
cost reduction efforts. Incentives,
-42-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
awards or penalties related to performance on contracts are
considered in estimating revenue and profit rates, and are
recorded when there is sufficient information to assess
anticipated performance.
Because of the significance of the judgment and estimation
processes described above, it is possible that materially
different amounts could be obtained if different assumptions
were used or if the underlying circumstances were to change.
Changes in underlying assumptions, circumstances or estimates
may have a material adverse effect upon future period financial
reporting and performance. See Critical Accounting Policies,
Estimates, and Judgments in Part II, Item 7.
|
|
n |
Our international business exposes us to additional
risks.
|
Our international business is not substantial, but is subject to
numerous U.S. and foreign laws and regulations, including,
without limitation, regulations relating to import-export
control, technology transfer restrictions, repatriation of
earnings, exchange controls, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
and the anti-boycott provisions of the U.S. Export
Administration Act. Failure by us or our sales representatives
or consultants to comply with these laws and regulations could
result in administrative, civil, or criminal liabilities and
could, in the extreme case, result in suspension or debarment
from government contracts or suspension of our export
privileges, which could have a material adverse effect on us.
Changes in regulation or political environment may affect our
ability to conduct business in foreign markets, including
investment, procurement and repatriation of earnings.
The services and products we provide internationally, including
through the use of subcontractors, are sometimes in countries
with unstable governments, in areas of military conflict or at
military installations. This increases the risk of an incident
resulting in damage or destruction to our products or resulting
in injury or loss of life to our employees, subcontractors or
other third parties. We maintain insurance to mitigate risk and
potential liabilities related to our international operations,
but our insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover these
claims and liabilities and we may be forced to bear substantial
costs arising from those claims. (See additional discussion of
possible inadequacy of our insurance coverage below). In
addition, any accidents or incidents that occur in connection
with our international operations could result in negative
publicity for the company, which may adversely affect our
reputation and make it more difficult for us to compete for
future contracts or result in the loss of existing and future
contracts. The impact of these factors is difficult to predict,
but one or more of them could adversely affect our financial
position, results of operations, or cash flows.
|
|
n |
Our reputation and our ability to do business may be
impacted by the improper conduct of employees, agents or
business partners.
|
We have implemented extensive compliance controls, policies and
procedures to prevent misconduct by employees, agents or
business partners that would violate the laws of the
jurisdictions in which we operate, including laws governing
payments to government officials, the protection of export
controlled or classified information, cost accounting and
billing, competition and data privacy. However, we cannot ensure
that we will prevent all such criminal acts committed by our
employees, agents or business partners. Any improper actions
could subject us to civil or criminal investigations and
monetary and non-monetary penalties that could negatively impact
our reputation and ability to conduct business and could have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
|
|
n |
Our business could be negatively impacted by security
threats and other disruptions.
|
As a defense contractor, we face various security threats,
including threats to the operation of our information technology
infrastructure; threats from unlawful attempts to gain access to
our proprietary or classified information; threats to the safety
of our directors, officers, and employees; threats to the
security of our facilities; and threats from terrorist acts.
These threats could lead to losses of critical infrastructure,
personnel or capabilities, essential to our operations and could
have a material adverse effect on our financial position,
results of operations, or cash flows.
-43-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
We also manage information technology systems for various
customers. While we maintain information security policies and
procedures for managing these systems, we generally face the
same security threats for these systems as for our own systems.
Computer viruses, attempts to gain access to our customers
data or other electronic security breaches could lead to
disruptions in mission critical systems for our customers,
unauthorized release of confidential or personally identifiable
information and corruption of customer data. These events could
damage our reputation and lead to financial losses from remedial
actions we must take, potential liability to customers and
litigation expenses.
|
|
n |
Our nuclear-related operations subject us to various
environmental, regulatory, financial and other risks.
|
Our nuclear-related operations subject us to various risks,
including potential liabilities relating to harmful effects on
the environment and human health that may result from
nuclear-related operations and the storage, handling and
disposal of radioactive materials. We are also subject to
reputational harm and potential liabilities arising out of a
nuclear incident, whether or not it is within our control. The
U.S. Government and certain of our prime contractors
provide indemnity protection under our contracts pursuant to or
in connection with Public Law
85-804 and
the Price-Anderson Nuclear Industries Indemnity Act for certain
of our nuclear-related risks. If there was a nuclear incident
and that indemnity protection was not available to cover our
losses and liabilities, it could have a material adverse effect
on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
|
|
n |
Unforeseen environmental costs could have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations,
or cash flows.
|
Our operations are subject to and affected by a variety of
federal, state, local and foreign environmental protection laws
and regulations. In addition, we could be affected by future
laws or regulations, including those imposed in response to
climate change concerns and other actions commonly referred to
as green initiatives. Compliance with current and
future environmental laws and regulations currently requires and
is expected to continue to require significant operating and
capital costs.
Environmental laws and regulations can impose substantial fines
and criminal sanctions for violations, and may require the
installation of costly pollution control equipment or
operational changes to limit pollution emissions or discharges
and/or
decrease the likelihood of accidental hazardous substance
releases. We also incur, and expect to continue to incur, costs
to comply with current federal and state environmental laws and
regulations related to the cleanup of pollutants previously
released into the environment. In addition, if we were found to
be in violation of the Federal Clean Air Act or the Clean Water
Act, the facility or facilities involved in the violation could
be placed by the EPA on the Excluded Parties List
maintained by the General Services Administration. The listing
would continue until the EPA concludes that the cause of the
violation had been cured. Listed facilities cannot be used in
performing any U.S. Government contract while they are
listed by the EPA.
The adoption of new laws and regulations, stricter enforcement
of existing laws and regulations, imposition of new cleanup
requirements, discovery of previously unknown or more extensive
contamination, litigation involving environmental impacts, our
ability to recover such costs under previously priced contracts
or financial insolvency of other responsible parties could cause
us to incur costs in the future that would have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations,
or cash flows.
|
|
n |
We are subject to various claims and litigation that could
ultimately be resolved against us. Resolution of these matters
may require material future cash payments
and/or
future material charges against our operating income.
|
The size, type and complexity of our business make us highly
susceptible to claims and litigation. We are and may become
subject to various environmental claims, income tax matters,
compliance matters and other litigation, which, if not resolved
within established reserves, could have a material adverse
effect on our
-44-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. Any claims and litigation, even if fully indemnified or
insured, could negatively impact our reputation among our
customers and the public, and make it more difficult for us to
compete effectively or obtain adequate insurance in the future.
|
|
n |
We may be unable to adequately protect our intellectual
property rights, which could affect our ability to
compete.
|
We own many U.S. and foreign patents, trademarks,
copyrights, and other forms of intellectual property. The
U.S. Government has certain rights to use certain
intellectual property that we develop in performance of
government contracts, and it may use or authorize others to use
such intellectual property. Our intellectual property is subject
to challenge, invalidation, misappropriation or circumvention by
third parties.
We also rely significantly upon proprietary technology,
information, processes and know-how that are not protected by
patents. We seek to protect this information through trade
secret or confidentiality agreements with our employees,
consultants, subcontractors and other parties, as well as
through other measures. These agreements and other measures may
not provide protection for our unpatented proprietary
information. In the event of an infringement of our intellectual
property rights, a breach of a confidentiality agreement or
divulgence of proprietary information, we may not have adequate
legal remedies to maintain our intellectual property. Litigation
to determine the scope of intellectual property rights, even if
ultimately successful, could be costly and could divert
managements attention away from other aspects of our
business. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become
known or be independently developed by competitors.
In some instances, we have licensed the proprietary intellectual
property of others, but we may be unable in the future to secure
the necessary licenses to use such intellectual property on
commercially reasonable terms.
|
|
n |
Our insurance coverage may be inadequate to cover all of
our significant risks or our insurers may deny coverage of
material losses we incur, which could adversely affect our
profitability and overall financial position.
|
We endeavor to identify and obtain in established markets
insurance agreements to cover significant risks and liabilities
(including, for example, natural disasters and product
liability). Not every risk or liability can be protected by
insurance, and, for insurable risks, the limits of coverage
reasonably obtainable in the market may not be sufficient to
cover all actual losses or liabilities incurred, including for
example, a catastrophic earthquake claim.
Additionally, disputes with insurance carriers over coverage may
affect the timing of cash flows and, if litigation with the
carrier becomes necessary, an outcome unfavorable to us may have
a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of
operations, or cash flows.
|
|
n |
Changes in future business conditions could cause business
investments
and/or
recorded goodwill to become impaired, resulting in substantial
losses and write-downs that would reduce our operating
income.
|
As part of our overall strategy, we may, from time to time,
acquire a minority or majority interest in a business. These
investments are made upon careful analysis and due diligence
procedures designed to achieve a desired return or strategic
objective. These procedures often involve certain assumptions
and judgment in determining acquisition price. Even after
careful integration efforts, actual operating results may vary
significantly from initial estimates. Goodwill accounts for
approximately half of our recorded total assets. We evaluate
goodwill amounts for impairment annually, or when evidence of
potential impairment exists. The annual impairment test is based
on several factors requiring judgment. Principally, a
significant decrease in expected cash flows or changes in market
conditions may indicate potential impairment of recorded
goodwill. Adverse equity market conditions that result in a
decline in market multiples and our stock price could result in
an impairment of goodwill
and/or other
intangible assets. We continue to monitor the recoverability of
the carrying value of our goodwill and other long-lived assets.
-45-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
n |
Anticipated benefits of mergers, acquisitions, joint
ventures, spin-offs or strategic alliances may not be
realized.
|
As part of our overall strategy, we may, from time to time,
merge with or acquire businesses, dispose of businesses, form
joint ventures or create strategic alliances. Whether we realize
the anticipated benefits from these transactions depends, in
part, upon the integration between the businesses involved, the
performance of the underlying products, capabilities or
technologies and the management of the transacted operations.
Accordingly, our financial results could be adversely affected
from unanticipated performance issues, transaction-related
charges, amortization of expenses related to intangibles,
charges for impairment of long-term assets and partner
performance. Although we believe that we have established
appropriate and adequate procedures and processes to mitigate
these risks, there is no assurance that these transactions will
be successful.
|
|
n |
Market volatility and adverse capital and credit market
conditions may affect our ability to access cost-effective
sources of funding and expose us to risks associated with the
financial viability of suppliers and the ability of
counterparties to perform on financial instruments.
|
The financial and credit markets in 2008 and 2009 experienced
high levels of volatility and disruption, reducing the
availability of credit for certain issuers. Historically, we
have occasionally accessed these markets to support certain
business activities, including acquisitions, capital expansion
projects, refinancing existing debt and issuing letters of
credit. In the future, we may not be able to obtain capital
market financing or bank financing when needed on favorable
terms, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on
our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
A tightening of credit could also adversely affect our
suppliers ability to obtain financing. Delays in
suppliers ability to obtain financing, or the
unavailability of financing, could cause us to be unable to meet
our contract obligations and could adversely affect our
financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. The
inability of our suppliers to obtain financing could also result
in the need for us to transition to alternate suppliers, which
could result in significant incremental cost and delay.
We have executed transactions with counterparties in the
financial services industry, including brokers and dealers,
commercial banks, investment banks and other institutional
parties. These transactions expose us to potential credit risk
in the event of counterparty default.
|
|
n |
Pension and medical expenses associated with our
retirement benefit plans may fluctuate significantly depending
upon changes in actuarial assumptions, future market performance
of plan assets, future trends in health care costs and
legislative or other regulatory actions.
|
A substantial portion of our current and retired employee
population is covered by pension and post-retirement benefit
plans, the costs of which are dependent upon our various
assumptions, including estimates of rates of return on benefit
related assets, discount rates for future payment obligations,
rates of future cost growth and trends for future costs. In
addition, funding requirements for benefit obligations of our
pension and post-retirement benefit plans are subject to
legislative and other government regulatory actions.
Variances from these estimates could have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash
flows. For example, the recent volatility in the financial
markets resulted in lower than expected returns on our pension
plan assets in 2008, which resulted in higher pension costs in
subsequent years.
Additionally, due to government regulations, pension plan cost
recoveries under our government contracts may occur in different
periods from when those pension costs are accrued for financial
statement purposes or when pension funding is made. Timing
differences between pension costs accrued for financial
statement purposes or when pension funding occurs compared to
when such costs are recoverable as allowable costs under our
government contracts could have a material adverse effect on our
cash flow from operations. In May 2010, the U.S. Cost
Accounting Standards (CAS) Board published a Notice
of Proposed Rulemaking
-46-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
(NPRM) that, if adopted, would provide a framework
to partially harmonize the CAS rules with the Pension Protection
Act of 2006 (PPA) funding requirements. As with the
Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that
was issued on September 2, 2008, the NPRM would
harmonize by partially mitigating the mismatch
between CAS costs and
PPA-amended
ERISA minimum funding requirements. Compared to the ANPRM, the
NPRM simplifies the rules and the transition process, and
results in an acceleration of allowable CAS pension costs over
the next five years as compared with our current CAS pension
costs. Until the final rule is published, and to the extent that
the final rule does not completely eliminate mismatches between
ERISA funding requirements and CAS pension costs, government
contractors maintaining defined benefit pension plans will
continue to experience a timing mismatch between required
contributions and pension expenses recoverable under CAS. The
CAS Board may issue its final rule in 2011. The final rule is
expected to apply to contracts starting the year following the
award of the first CAS covered contract after the effective date
of the new rule. This would mean the rule would most likely
apply to our contracts in 2012. We anticipate that contractors
will be entitled to an equitable adjustment for any additional
CAS contract costs resulting from the final rule.
|
|
n |
Unanticipated changes in our tax provisions or exposure to
additional income tax liabilities could affect our profitability
and cash flow.
|
We are subject to income taxes in the U.S. and many foreign
jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining
our worldwide provision for income taxes. In the ordinary course
of business, there are many transactions and calculations where
the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. In addition, timing
differences in the recognition of income from contracts for
financial statement purposes and for income tax regulations can
cause uncertainty with respect to the timing of income tax
payments, which can have a significant impact on cash flow in a
particular period. Furthermore, changes in applicable domestic
or foreign income tax laws and regulations, or their
interpretation, could result in higher or lower income tax rates
assessed or changes in the taxability of certain sales or the
deductibility of certain expenses, thereby affecting our income
tax expense and profitability. The final determination of any
tax audits or related litigation could be materially different
from our historical income tax provisions and accruals.
Additionally, changes in our tax rate as a result of a change in
the mix of earnings in countries with differing statutory tax
rates, changes in our overall profitability, changes in tax
legislation, changes in the valuation of deferred tax assets and
liabilities, changes in differences between financial reporting
income and taxable income, the results of audits and the
examination of previously filed tax returns by taxing
authorities and continuing assessments of our tax exposures
could impact our tax liabilities and affect our income tax
expense, profitability and cash flow.
Risks
Relating to the Spin-Off
We face the following risks in connection with the spin-off of
HII, which we completed in March 2011:
|
|
n |
If all or any portion of the spin-off transaction or
certain internal transactions undertaken in anticipation of the
spin-off transaction are determined to be taxable for
U.S. federal income tax purposes, we and our shareholders
that are subject to U.S. federal income tax may incur
significant U.S. federal income tax liabilities.
|
A letter ruling from the IRS and an opinion of counsel were
obtained confirming that we and our shareholders will not
recognize any taxable income, gain or loss for U.S. federal
income tax purposes as a result of the merger, the internal
reorganization or the distribution, except that our shareholders
who receive cash in lieu of fractional shares will recognize
gain or loss with respect to such cash. The ruling and the
opinion rely on certain facts, assumptions, representations and
undertakings from us and HII regarding the past and future
conduct of the companies respective businesses and other
matters.
We are not aware of any facts or circumstances that would cause
any such factual statements or representations in the IRS ruling
or the opinion to be incomplete or untrue or cause the facts on
which the IRS ruling or the opinion is based, to be materially
different from the facts at the time of the spin-off
transaction. If any of the factual statements or representations
in the IRS ruling or the opinion are
-47-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
incomplete or untrue, or if the facts upon which the IRS ruling
or the opinion is based are materially different from the facts
at the time of the spin-off, we and our shareholders may not be
able to rely on the IRS ruling or the opinion and could be
subject to significant tax liabilities.
Even if the spin-off transaction otherwise qualifies as tax-free
for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the internal
reorganization and distribution may be taxable to us (but not to
our shareholders) if certain events occur, including, if within
two years following the spin-off there are one or more
acquisitions (including issuances) of the stock of either us or
HII, representing 50% or more of the then-outstanding stock of
either corporation and the acquisition or acquisitions are
deemed to be part of a plan or series of related transactions
that include the distribution; we cease to engage in the conduct
of a substantial part of our existing business; or, we or HII
repurchase shares in excess of specified levels (which
substantially exceed our historical repurchase activity level).
If such tax were incurred, the tax liability would be
substantial. HII has agreed not to undertake transactions that
could reasonably be expected to trigger such tax, and we intend
to avoid any such transactions.
|
|
n |
The spin-off transaction may expose us to potential claims
and liabilities.
|
In connection with the spin-off transaction, we entered into a
number of agreements with HII setting forth certain rights and
obligations of the parties after the separation. For example,
under the Separation and Distribution Agreement, from and after
the spin-off transaction, each of HII and us will be responsible
for the debts, liabilities and other obligations related to the
business or businesses that it owns and operates following the
consummation of the spin-off. It is possible that a court would
disregard the allocation agreed to between the parties, and
require that we assume responsibility for obligations allocated
to HII (for example, tax
and/or
environmental liabilities), particularly if HII were to refuse
or were unable to pay or perform the subject allocated
obligations.
In addition, third parties could seek to hold us responsible for
any of the liabilities or obligations for which HII has agreed
to be responsible
and/or to
indemnify us. The indemnity rights we have under our agreements
with HII may not be sufficient to protect us against such
liabilities. Even if we ultimately succeed in recovering from
HII any amounts for which we are held liable, we may be required
to record these losses ourselves until such time as the
indemnity contribution is paid. In addition, indemnities that we
may be required to provide HII are not subject to any cap, may
be significant, and could negatively impact our business. These
risks could negatively affect our business and could have a
material adverse effect our financial position, results of
operations or cash flows.
|
|
n |
We may be unable to achieve some or all of the benefits
that we expect to achieve as a result of the spin-off
transaction.
|
We undertook the spin-off of our Shipbuilding business because
we believe that the spin-off will result in benefits to our
shareholders. The anticipated benefits include greater strategic
focus of investment resources and management efforts, tailored
customer focus, direct and differentiated access to capital
markets, enhanced investor choices and facilitating better
management of our cost structure. Delays or failures in
achieving some or all of these expected benefits could
negatively affect our business and have a material adverse
effect on our financial position results of operations or cash
flows.
-48-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
Item 2. Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Purchases of Equity Securities The table
below summarizes our repurchases of common stock during the
three months ended March 31, 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dollar Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Numbers
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
that May
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased
|
|
Yet Be
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
as Part
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Publicly
|
|
Under the
|
|
|
Total Number
|
|
Average Price
|
|
Announced
|
|
Plans or
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
Paid per
|
|
Plans or
|
|
Programs
|
Period
|
|
Purchased(1)
|
|
Share(2)
|
|
Programs
|
|
($ in millions)
|
January 1 through January 31, 2011
|
|
|
99,069
|
|
|
$
|
66.19
|
|
|
|
99,069
|
|
|
$
|
1,755
|
|
February 1 through February 28, 2011
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
68.01
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
1,755
|
|
March 1 through March 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,755
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
99,169
|
|
|
$
|
66.19
|
|
|
|
99,169
|
|
|
$
|
1,755
|
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On June 16, 2010, the companys board of directors
authorized a share repurchase program of up to $2 billion
of the companys common stock. As of March 31, 2011,
the company had $1.76 billion remaining under this
authorization for share repurchases. See Note 3 to the
condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I,
Item 1 for action taken by the board of directors in
April 2011 to increase this authorization. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes commissions paid and calculated as the average price
per share since the repurchase program authorization date. |
Share repurchases take place at managements discretion or
under pre-established non-discretionary programs from time to
time, depending on market conditions, in the open market, and in
privately negotiated transactions. The company retires its
common stock upon repurchase and has not made any purchases of
common stock other than in connection with these publicly
announced repurchase programs.
Item 3. Defaults
Upon Senior Securities
No information is required in response to this item.
Item 5. Other
Information
In anticipation of the spin-off of HII, we completed a holding
company reorganization on March 30, 2011 to create a new
holding company named Northrop Grumman Corporation. In
connection with the spin-off of HII, we entered into
supplemental indentures to each of our outstanding indentures to
substitute the new Northrop Grumman Corporation for the former
Northrop Grumman Corporation. These supplemental indentures are
filed as Exhibits 4.1 to 4.10 to this
Form 10-Q.
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
.1
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger among Titan II, Inc. (formerly
Northrop Grumman Corporation), Northrop Grumman Corporation
(formerly New P, Inc.) and Titan Merger Sub Inc., dated
March 29, 2011 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to
Form 8-K
dated March 29, 2011 and filed April 4, 2011)
|
|
2
|
.2
|
|
Separation and Distribution Agreement dated as of March 29,
2011, among Titan II, Inc. (formerly Northrop Grumman
Corporation), Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly New P,
Inc.), Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc., Northrop Grumman
Shipbuilding, Inc., and Northrop Grumman Corporation
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
Form 8-K
dated March 29, 2011 and filed April 4, 2011)
|
-49-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
*3
|
.1
|
|
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Northrop Grumman
Corporation
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Certificate of Amendment of Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly New P.,
Inc.), dated March 30, 2011 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.1 to
Form 8-K
dated March 29, 2011 and filed April 4, 2011)
|
|
*3
|
.3
|
|
Restated Bylaws of Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly New P,
Inc.)
|
|
*4
|
.1
|
|
First Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011 by
and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, The Bank of New
York Mellon (successor trustee to JPMorgan Chase Bank and The
Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.), Titan II, Inc. (formerly known as
Northrop Grumman Corporation), and Titan Holdings II, L.P., to
Indenture dated as of October 15, 1994, between Northrop
Grumman Corporation (now Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation)
and The Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., Trustee (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 8-K
dated October 20, 1994 and filed October 25, 1994)
|
|
*4
|
.2
|
|
Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011 by
and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation, The Bank of New
York Mellon (successor trustee to JPMorgan Chase Bank and The
Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.), Titan Holdings II, L.P., and
Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly known as New P, Inc.), to
Indenture dated as of October 15, 1994, between Northrop
Grumman Corporation (now Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation)
and The Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., Trustee (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 8-K
dated October 20, 1994 and filed October 25, 1994)
|
|
*4
|
.3
|
|
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011 by
and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
(successor-in-interest
to Litton Industries, Inc.), The Bank of New York Mellon
(formerly known as The Bank of New York) as trustee, Titan II,
Inc. (formerly known as Northrop Grumman Corporation), and Titan
Holdings II, L.P., to Indenture dated April 13, 1998,
between Litton Industries, Inc. and The Bank of New York, as
trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 10-Q
of Litton Industries, Inc. for the quarter ended April 30,
1998, filed June 15, 1998)
|
|
*4
|
.4
|
|
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011 by
and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
(successor-in-interest
to Litton Industries, Inc.), The Bank of New York Mellon
(formerly known as The Bank of New York) as trustee, Titan
Holdings II, L.P., and Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly
known as New P., Inc.), to Indenture dated April 13, 1998,
between Litton Industries, Inc. and The Bank of New York, as
trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 10-Q
of Litton Industries, Inc. for the quarter ended April 30,
1998, filed June 15, 1998)
|
|
*4
|
.5
|
|
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011 by
and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
(successor-in-interest
to Litton Industries, Inc.), The Bank of New York Mellon
(formerly known as The Bank of New York), as trustee, Titan II,
Inc. (formerly known as Northrop Grumman Corporation), and Titan
Holdings II, L.P., to Senior Indenture dated December 15,
1991, among Litton Industries, Inc., Northrop Grumman
Corporation, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation and The Bank
of New York, as trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 10-Q
of Litton Industries, Inc. for the quarter ended April 30,
1996, filed June 11, 1996)
|
|
*4
|
.6
|
|
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011 by
and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
(successor-in-interest
to Litton Industries, Inc.), The Bank of New York Mellon
(formerly known as The Bank of New York) as trustee, Titan
Holdings II, L.P., and Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly
known as New P, Inc.), to Senior Indenture dated
December 15, 1991, among Litton Industries, Inc., Northrop
Grumman Corporation, Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation and
The Bank of New York, as trustee (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 10-Q
of Litton Industries, Inc. for the quarter ended April 30,
1996, filed June 11, 1996)
|
-50-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
*4
|
.7
|
|
Tenth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011, by
and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
(successor-in-interest
to Northrop Grumman Space & Mission Systems Corp. and
TRW, Inc.), The Bank of New York Mellon, as successor trustee to
JPMorgan Chase Bank and to Mellon Bank, N.A., Titan II Inc.
(formerly known as Northrop Grumman Corporation), and Titan
Holdings II, L.P., to Indenture between TRW Inc. and Mellon
Bank, N.A., as trustee, dated as of May 1, 1986
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2 to the
Form 8-A
Registration Statement of TRW Inc. dated July 3, 1986)
|
|
*4
|
.8
|
|
Eleventh Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011,
by and among Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation
(successor-in-interest
to Northrop Grumman Space & Mission Systems Corp. and
TRW Inc.), The Bank of New York Mellon, as successor trustee to
JPMorgan Chase Bank and to Mellon Bank, N.A., Titan Holdings II,
L.P., and Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly known as New P,
Inc.) to Indenture between TRW Inc. and Mellon Bank, N.A., as
trustee, dated as of May 1, 1986 (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 2 to the
Form 8-A
Registration Statement of TRW Inc. dated July 3, 1986)
|
|
*4
|
.9
|
|
Third Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011, by
and among Titan II, Inc. (formerly known as Northrop Grumman
Corporation), The Bank of New York Mellon, as successor trustee
to JPMorgan Chase Bank, and Titan Holdings II, L.P., to
Indenture dated as of November 21, 2001 between Northrop
Grumman Corporation and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as trustee
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 8-K
dated and filed November 21, 2001)
|
|
*4
|
.10
|
|
Fourth Supplemental Indenture dated as of March 30, 2011,
by and among Titan Holdings II, L.P., The Bank of New York
Mellon, as successor trustee to JPMorgan Chase Bank, and
Northrop Grumman Corporation (formerly known as New P., Inc.),
to Indenture dated as of November 21, 2001 between Northrop
Grumman Corporation and JPMorgan Chase Bank, as trustee
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to
Form 8-K
dated and filed November 21, 2001)
|
|
+10
|
.1
|
|
Form of Agreement for 2011 Stock Options granted under the
Northrop Grumman 2001 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan (As amended
through December 19, 2007) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 of
Form 8-K
dated February 15, 2011 and filed February 22, 2011)
|
|
+10
|
.2
|
|
Form of Agreement for 2011 Restricted Performance Stock Rights
granted under the Northrop Grumman 2001 Long-Term Incentive
Stock Plan (As amended through December 19, 2007)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of
Form 8-K
dated February 15, 2011 and filed February 22, 2011)
|
|
+10
|
.3
|
|
Form of Agreement for 2011 Restricted Stock Rights granted under
the Northrop Grumman 2001 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan (As
amended through December 19, 2007) (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.3 of
Form 8-K
dated February 15, 2011 and filed February 22, 2011)
|
|
+10
|
.4
|
|
Terms and Conditions Applicable to Special 2011 Restricted Stock
Rights granted to Gary W. Ervin under the Northrop Grumman 2001
Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan, (As amended through
December 19, 2007) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 of
Form 8-K
dated February 15, 2011 and filed February 22, 2011)
|
|
+10
|
.5
|
|
Appendix I to the Northrop Grumman Supplemental Plan 2
(Amended and Restated Effective as of January 1, 2009):
Officers Supplemental Executive Retirement Program II
(Amended and Restated Effective as of January 1, 2011)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(i)(v) to
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed
February 9, 2011)
|
|
+10
|
.6
|
|
Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems Executive Pension Plan
(Amended and Restated Effective as of January 1, 2011)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10(l) to
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed
February 9, 2011)
|
|
+10
|
.7
|
|
Northrop Grumman Deferred Compensation Plan (Amended and
Restated Effective as of January 1, 2011) (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10(u) to
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed
February 9, 2011)
|
|
+10
|
.8
|
|
Northrop Grumman Savings Excess Plan (Amended and Restated
Effective as of January 1, 2011) (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10(x) to
Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010, filed
February 9, 2011)
|
-51-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
+10
|
.9
|
|
Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers (Named Executive
Officers) for 2010 (incorporated by reference to
Item 5.02(e) of
Form 8-K
dated February 15, 2011 and filed February 22, 2011)
|
|
*12(a)
|
|
|
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
|
|
*15
|
|
|
Letter from Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
*31
|
.1
|
|
Rule 13a-15(e)/15d-15(e)
Certification of Wesley G. Bush (Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
|
|
*31
|
.2
|
|
Rule 13a-15(e)/15d-15(e)
Certification of James F. Palmer (Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
|
|
**32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Wesley G. Bush pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
**32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of James F. Palmer pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
**101
|
|
|
Northrop Grumman Corporation Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, formatted in XBRL
(Extensible Business Reporting Language); (i) the Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations, (ii) Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Financial Position,
(iii) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows,
(iv) Condensed Consolidated Statements of Changes in
Shareholders Equity, and (v) Notes to Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+
|
|
|
Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement
|
|
*
|
|
|
Filed with this Report
|
|
**
|
|
|
Furnished with this Report
|
-52-
NORTHROP
GRUMMAN CORPORATION
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on
its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION
(Registrant)
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/
Kenneth N. Heintz
|
Kenneth N. Heintz
Corporate Vice President, Controller and Chief
Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
Date: April 26, 2011
-53-