UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

 

 

 

Commission file number 1-16411

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

1840 Century Park East, Los Angeles, California 90067 (310) 553-6262

(Address and telephone number of principal executive offices)

 

Securities registered pursuant to section 12(b) of the Act:

 

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act.

 

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 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 if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

 

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.

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).

 

As of June 30, 2008, the aggregate market value of the common stock (based upon the closing price of the stock on the New York Stock Exchange) of the registrant held by non-affiliates was approximately $22,160 million.

 

As of February 6, 2009, 327,180,490 shares of common stock were outstanding.

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

Portions of Northrop Grumman Corporation’s Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 14A for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K.

 

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

HISTORY AND ORGANIZATION

 

History

Northrop Grumman Corporation (“Northrop Grumman” or the “company”) is an integrated enterprise consisting of businesses that cover the entire defense spectrum, from undersea to outer space and into cyberspace. The companies that have become part of today’s Northrop Grumman achieved historic accomplishments, from transporting Charles Lindbergh across the Atlantic to carrying astronauts to the moon’s surface and back.

 

The company was originally formed in California in 1939 and was reincorporated in Delaware in 1985. From 1994 through 2002, the company entered a period of significant expansion through acquisitions of other businesses, most notably:

 

 

The acquisition of these and other businesses have shaped the company into its present position as a premier provider of technologically advanced, innovative products, services and solutions in information and services, aerospace, electronics and shipbuilding. As prime contractor, principal subcontractor, partner, or preferred supplier, Northrop Grumman participates in many high-priority defense and commercial technology programs in the U.S. and abroad. The company conducts most of its business with the U.S. Government, principally the Department of Defense (DoD). The company also conducts business with local, state, and foreign governments and domestic and international commercial customers. For a description of the company’s foreign operations, see Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A.

 

Organization

On December 31, 2008, the company was aligned into seven reporting segments categorized into four primary businesses. The Mission Systems, Information Technology, and Technical Services segments are presented as Information & Services. The Integrated Systems and Space Technology segments are presented as Aerospace. The Electronics and Shipbuilding segments are each presented as separate businesses.

 

The company, from time to time, acquires or disposes of businesses, and realigns contracts, programs or business areas among and within its operating segments that possess similar customers, expertise, and capabilities. Internal realignments are designed to more fully leverage existing capabilities and enhance development and delivery of

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

products and services. The operating results for all periods presented have been revised to reflect these changes made through December 31, 2008.

 

During the second quarter of 2008, the company transferred certain programs and assets from the missiles business in the Mission Systems segment to the Space Technology segment. This transfer allows Mission Systems to focus on the rapidly growing command, control, communications, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C3ISR) business. The missiles business will be an integrated element of the company’s Aerospace business growth strategy.

 

In January 2008, the Newport News and Ship Systems businesses were realigned into a single operating segment called Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding. Previously, these businesses were separate operating segments which were aggregated into a single reporting segment for financial reporting purposes. In addition, certain Electronics businesses were transferred to Mission Systems during the first quarter of 2008.

 

Subsequent Realignments – In January 2009, the company streamlined its organizational structure by reducing the number of reporting segments from seven to five. The five segments are Aerospace Systems, which combines the former Integrated Systems and Space Technology segments; Electronic Systems; Information Systems, which combines the former Information Technology and Mission Systems segments; Shipbuilding and Technical Services. The creation of the Aerospace Systems and Information Systems segments strengthens alignment with customers, improves the company’s ability to execute on programs and win new business, and enhances cost competitiveness. This subsequent realignment is not reflected in any of the accompanying financial information.

 

INFORMATION & SERVICES

 

Mission Systems

The Mission Systems segment, headquartered in Reston, Virginia, is a leading global systems integrator of complex, mission-enabling systems for government, military, and commercial customers. Products and services are focused on the fields of command, control, communications, computers and intelligence (C4I), missile and air defense, airborne reconnaissance, intelligence management and processing, and decision support systems. The segment consists of two areas of business: Command, Control and Communications (C3); and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR).

 

Command, Control and Communications – C3 supports the DoD, aerospace prime contractors, and other customers. Offerings include operational and tactical command and control systems; communications solutions and network management; tactical data link communications products and integration; network services; software defined radios; decision support and management information systems; system engineering and integration; land forces and global combat support; intelligence support to operations, mission planning and management applications; critical infrastructure security and force protection; logistics automation; robotic systems; homeland security solutions; naval systems engineering support and integration; command centers integration; and missile defense battle management and fire control systems.

 

Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance – ISR supports the intelligence community, the DoD, and other federal agencies. Offerings include large systems integration; net-centric signals intelligence; airborne reconnaissance; payload control; sensor tasking and data collection; satellite ground stations; data collection and storage; information analysis and knowledge integration; computer network operations; information operations and information assurance; analysis and visualization tools; environmental and weather systems; special intelligence; and sustainment services.

 

Information Technology

The Information Technology segment, headquartered in McLean, Virginia, is a premier provider of information technology (IT) systems engineering and systems integration for the DoD, national intelligence, federal, civilian, state and local agencies, and commercial customers. The segment consists of four areas of business: Intelligence; Civilian Agencies; Commercial, State & Local; and Defense.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Intelligence – Intelligence provides IT systems, services and solutions primarily to the U.S. Intelligence Community, which includes customers in national agencies, DoD, homeland security, and other agencies at the federal, state and local level. This business area also collaborates with other Information Technology business areas by providing specialized technology solutions in areas such as information security, secure wireless communications, secure cross agency information-sharing and geospatial information systems. Services and solutions span the entire mission life cycle from requirements and technology development through processing and data analysis to information delivery.

 

Civilian Agencies – Civilian Agencies provides IT systems, services and solutions primarily for federal civilian agencies, as well as government and commercial healthcare customers. Civilian Agencies customers include the departments of Homeland Security, Treasury, Justice, Transportation, State, Interior, and the U.S. Postal Service. Homeland Security offerings include secure networking, criminal justice systems, and identity management. Healthcare customers include the Department of Health and Human Services, DoD Health Affairs, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and a number of pharmaceutical manufacturers. Healthcare offerings include enterprise architecture, systems integration, infrastructure management, document management, human capital management, case management, and specialized health IT solutions in electronic medical records pertaining to public health, bio-surveillance, benefits, and clinical research.

 

Commercial, State & Local – Commercial, State & Local provides IT systems, services and solutions primarily for state and local agencies and commercial customers. The commercial business centers on managed IT services both as a prime contractor and partner in addition to specialized solutions that address specific business needs. The state and local focus includes public safety, secure wireless solutions, human services, and managed IT services. This business area provides IT outsourcing services on a “service level agreement” basis, where contractual terms are based on infrastructure volume and service levels. Services include management of data centers, networks, desktops, storage, security, help desk, and applications. Specialized state and local offerings include systems for police/fire/medical emergency dispatch, public safety command centers, biometric identification, and human services.

 

Defense – Defense provides IT systems, services and solutions to all elements of the DoD including the Air Force, Navy, Army, Marines, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Unified Combatant Commands. Offerings include business applications and systems integration related to human capital and business management, logistics, transportation, supply chain, and combat systems support. Other offerings consist of IT and network infrastructures, including modernization, architecture, design and capacity modeling. Defense also provides solutions and services for defense technology laboratories and research and development centers, system program offices, operational commands, education and training commands, test centers, and other defense agencies.

 

Technical Services

The Technical Services segment, headquartered in Herndon, Virginia, 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 provides infrastructure management and maintenance, training and preparedness, and logistics and life cycle management in a wide array of operating environments. Technical Services consists of three areas of business: Systems Support; Training and Simulation; and Life Cycle Optimization and Engineering.

 

Systems Support – Systems Support provides infrastructure and base operations management, including base support and civil engineering work, military aerial and ground range operations, support functions which include space launch services, construction, combat vehicle maintenance, protective and emergency services, and range-sensor-instrumentation operations. Primary customers include the Department of Energy, the DoD, the Department of Homeland Security, and the U.S. Intelligence community, in both domestic and international locations.

 

Training and Simulation – Training and Simulation provides realistic and comprehensive training to senior military leaders and peacekeeping forces, designs and develops future conflict training scenarios, and provides

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

U.S. warfighters and international allies with live, virtual, and constructive training programs. This business area also offers diverse training applications ranging from battle command to professional military education. Primary customers include the DoD, Department of State and Department of Homeland Security.

 

Life Cycle Optimization and Engineering – Life Cycle Optimization and Engineering provides complete life cycle product support and weapons system sustainment. This business area is focused on providing Performance Based Logistical support to the warfighter including supply chain management services, warehousing and inventory transportation, field services and mobilization, sustaining engineering, maintenance, repair and overhaul supplies, and on-going weapon maintenance and technical assistance. The group specializes in rebuilding essential parts and assemblies. Primary customers include the DoD as well as international military and commercial customers.

 

AEROSPACE

 

Integrated Systems

The Integrated Systems segment, headquartered in El Segundo, California, is a leader in the design, development, and production of airborne early warning, electronic warfare and surveillance systems, and battlefield management systems, as well as manned and unmanned tactical and strike systems. The segment designs, develops, produces, and supports fully missionized integrated systems and subsystems in the areas of battlespace awareness, command and control systems, integrated combat systems, and airborne ground surveillance.

 

Integrated Systems is involved in several manned vehicle programs such as subcontractor work on the F/A-18 and F-35 programs and prime contract work on the B-2 program and the Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program (MP-RTIP). For the F/A-18, Integrated Systems is responsible for the full integration of the center and aft fuselage and vertical tail sections and associated subsystems. For the F-35, Integrated Systems is responsible for the detailed design and integration and production of the center fuselage and weapons bay, systems engineering, mission system software, autonomic logistics and global sustainment, ground and flight test support, signature/low observables development, and support of modeling and simulation activities. Integrated Systems is the prime systems integration contractor for the MP-RTIP, which will provide advanced radar capabilities for the Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV). Integrated Systems is working on a radar and avionics upgrade program for the B-2 bomber and is a prime integrator for all logistics support activities including program depot maintenance.

 

Integrated Systems is also a leader in unmanned vehicle programs such as the Global Hawk, the Unmanned Combat Air System Carrier Demonstration (UCAS-D), Aerial Targets, and the Fire Scout. Integrated Systems is the prime contractor for these product lines with the exception of the Army version of Fire Scout for Future Combat Systems (FCS). The Global Hawk is a high altitude long endurance unmanned aerial reconnaissance system. UCAS-D is a development/demonstration program that will design, build and test two demonstration vehicles that will conduct a carrier demonstration. The technology demonstrations are to show carrier control area operations, catapult launch, and an arrested landing of a low observable unmanned aerial combat vehicle. Aerial Targets has two primary models, the BQM-74 and the BQM-34 and is the prime contractor on multiple domestic and international contracts. Fire Scout is a vertical takeoff and landing tactical UAV system in development and consists of two versions – the Vertical Takeoff and Landing Unmanned Air Vehicle (VTUAV) for the U.S. Navy and the FCS Class IV UAV for the U.S. Army.

 

The E-2 Hawkeye is the U.S. Navy’s airborne battle management command and control mission system platform providing airborne early warning detection, identification, tracking, targeting, and communication capabilities. The company is currently performing on a follow-on multi-year contract for eight E-2C aircraft to be delivered to the U.S. Navy through 2009 (two aircraft were delivered in each of 2006, 2007, and 2008). The company is also developing the next generation capability including radar, mission computer, vehicle, and other system enhancements called the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye under a System Design and Development (SDD) contract with the U.S. Navy. Pilot Production of three aircraft was authorized in 2007 and long-lead funding for the first lot of Low Rate Initial Production, consisting of two aircraft, was received in December 2007.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Joint STARS (Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System) detects, locates, classifies, tracks, and targets potentially hostile ground movement in all weather conditions. It is designed to operate around the clock in constant communication through secure data links with U.S. Air Force command posts, U.S. Army mobile ground stations, or centers for military analysis far from the point of conflict. The Joint STARS fleet has flown for more than 40,000 hours for Operation Iraqi Freedom over the last 6 years. The program is currently developing system and airframe performance upgrades under an ongoing Systems Improvement Program contract, including improvements in surveillance systems and sensor processing, battlement management capability, interoperability, and communication suite. Fleet sustainment is performed by Northrop Grumman through the Total Systems Support Responsibility contract, currently in its ninth year of performance, with a contract term that extends through 2021. In 2007, an initial non-recurring contract was awarded to design and re-engine the Joint STARS fleet with more reliable, powerful and fuel efficient engines. Follow-on nonrecurring and initial recurring shipsets were awarded in May 2008. In December 2008, the program’s re-engined test aircraft successfully made its maiden flight. Risk reduction contracts for an upcoming Joint STARS Radar Modernization program were initiated in 2008.

 

The BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance) Unmanned Aircraft System SDD contract was awarded in 2008 and leverages the Global Hawk platform but integrates maritime requirements including sensors, communications, mission control systems and platform enhancements to provide a persistent maritime Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) data collection and dissemination capability to the U.S. Navy. The BAMS Unmanned Aircraft System contract includes options for Low Rate Initial Production and for furnishing the BAMS Unmanned Aircraft System to Australia.

 

The EA-6B Prowler is currently the armed services’ primary offensive tactical radar jamming aircraft. Integrated Systems has developed the next generation mission system for this aircraft under the Increased Capacity (ICAP) III contract and has completed the final test and evaluation phase. The company completed the low-rate initial production for ICAP III Kits during 2006, and has been awarded follow-on contracts for ICAP III Kits & Spares, with deliveries through 2011. In addition, the company is performing on a contract to incorporate the ICAP III mission system into an F/A-18 platform, designated the EA-18G. Integrated Systems is the principal subcontractor to Boeing for this program, which is currently in the SDD phase. Northrop Grumman has been awarded contracts for Low Rate Initial Production I and II with hardware deliveries that commenced in the second quarter of 2008.

 

Other Integrated Systems programs include the Littoral Combat Ship Mission Package Integration contract and Mine Counter Measures contracts with multiple customers that focus on detecting and neutralizing in-land, coastal and water surface/subsurface mines.

 

Space Technology

The Space Technology segment, headquartered in Redondo Beach, California, develops and integrates a broad range of systems at the leading edge of space, defense, and electronics technology. The segment supplies products primarily to the U.S. Government that are critical to maintaining the nation’s security and leadership in science and technology. Space Technology’s business areas focus on the design, development, manufacture, and integration of spacecraft systems and subsystems, electronic and communications payloads, intercontinental ballistic missile systems, and high energy laser systems and subsystems. Products and services are grouped into the following areas of business: Civil Systems; Military Systems; Missile Systems; National Systems; and Technology & Emerging Systems (Technology).

 

Civil Systems  – The Civil Systems business area produces and integrates space-based systems, instruments, and services primarily for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and other governmental agencies. These systems are primarily used for space science, earth observation and environmental monitoring, and exploration missions. A variety of systems and services are provided, including mission and system engineering services, satellite and instrument systems, mission operations, and propulsion systems. Major programs include National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Satellite System (NPOESS), the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), and the legacy Chandra space telescope and Earth Observing System programs.

 

Military Systems – Military Systems produces and integrates spiral development programs and operational programs associated with the U.S. Air Force, Missile Defense Agency (MDA), and other military customers. Responsibilities include study design, build integration, launch, and operations of major U.S. military space systems. Programs include the Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF) payload, Space Tracking and Surveillance System (STSS), and the communication payload for the legacy Milstar program, currently in operation. The Defense Support Program is a contract for monitoring ballistic missile launches for the U.S. Air Force.

 

Missile Systems – Missile Systems supports the U.S. Air Force Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) program, the MDA Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) program and other large missile customers. Offerings include air and missile system engineering and integration; modeling and simulation; program management; system test and integration; development and deployment; missile system sustainment and modernization services; and development and test activities for complex missile systems.

 

National Systems  – The National Systems business area gives the nation’s monitoring systems a global reach and enhanced national security. Addressing requirements in space-based intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance systems, National Systems provides mission and system engineering, satellite systems, and mission operations. Customers are predominantly restricted, as are the major programs.

 

Technology & Emerging Systems – Technology performs government funded research and development in support of the four business areas above. Programs include the Airborne Laser (ABL), other directed energy programs and advanced concepts programs.

 

ELECTRONICS

 

The Electronics segment, headquartered in Linthicum, Maryland, designs, develops, produces, integrates, and supports high performance sensors, intelligence processing, navigation systems, test and simulation systems, and weapons operating in all environments from undersea to outer space and cyberspace. It also develops, produces, integrates, and supports power, power control, and ship control systems for commercial and naval ships in domestic and international markets. In select markets it performs as a prime contractor, integrating multiple subsystems to provide complete systems to meet customers’ solution requirements. The segment is composed of seven areas of business: Aerospace Systems; Defensive Systems; Government Systems; Land Forces; Naval & Marine Systems; Navigation Systems; and Space & Intelligence, Surveillance, & Reconnaissance (ISR) Systems.

 

Aerospace Systems – Aerospace Systems provides sensors, sensor processing, integrated sensor suites, and radar countermeasure systems for military surveillance and precision-strike; missile tracking and warning; and radio frequency electronic warfare. Fire control radars include systems for the F-16, F-22A, F-35, and B-1B. Navigation radars include commercial and military systems for transport and cargo aircraft. Surveillance products include the Airborne Warning and Control System radar, the Multi-role Electronically Scanned Array (MESA) radar, the MP-RTIP, the ship-board Cobra Judy Replacement radar, and multiple payloads on the P-8A. Radio frequency electronic warfare products include radar warning receivers, self-protection jammers, and integrated electronic warfare systems for aircraft such as the EA-6B, EA-18, F-16, and F-15.

 

Defensive Systems – Defensive Systems provides systems that support combat aviation by protecting aircraft and helicopters from attack, by providing capabilities for precise targeting and tactical surveillance, by improving mission availability through automated test systems, and by improving mission skills through advanced simulation systems. A wide variety of fixed wing and helicopter protection systems include threat detection and laser-based countermeasures systems to defeat ground-launched infrared-guided missiles. Defensive Systems’ countermeasures systems are currently installed on over 40 types of aircraft, many of which are conducting combat operations in the Global War on Terror. Targeting systems utilize lasers for target designation and precision weapon delivery, image processing, and target acquisition, identification, and tracking. The LITENING targeting pod system is

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

combat-proven on the AV-8B, A-10A/C, B-52H, F-15E, F-16, and F/A-18A/C/D. Test systems include systems to test electronic components of combat aircraft on the flight line and in repair facilities. Defensive Systems also provides advanced simulators for use on test ranges and training facilities to emulate threats of potential adversaries. Customers include the U.S. government and a wide variety of international allies.

 

Government Systems – Government Systems provides products and services to meet the needs of governments for improvements in the effectiveness of their civil and military infrastructure and of their combat and counter-terrorism operations. This includes systems and system integration of products and services for postal automation, for the detection and alert of Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosive material, and for homeland defense, communications, and enterprise management. Key programs include: Flats Sequencing System; International Sorting Centers; U.S. Postal Service bio-detection systems; and national level command and control, integrated air and missile defense and homeland defense systems for international customers.

 

Land Forces – Land Forces provides a full range of warfighting system solutions for the “digital battlefield,” including fire control systems for airborne and tracked vehicles, air and ground sensors to detect enemy movement, tactical range finding and precise laser designation, and systems that detect and defend against enemy fire. These solutions include precision guided munitions for manned and unmanned air vehicle delivery, laser designators and rangefinders, ground-based tactical radars for warning of missile and artillery attack, situational awareness sensors, unattended sensor systems, ground vehicle communication networks, and compact, lightweight Synthetic Aperture Radar / Ground Moving Target Indicator (SAR/GMTI) radars for unmanned/rotary wing aircraft. Sensor technologies provided include radio frequency, infrared, and electro-optical. Principal programs include the Longbow Weapons System for the Apache attack helicopter, the Lightweight Laser Designator Rangefinder, the Viper Strike precision guided munitions, the Vehicular Intercommunication System (VIS), the Firefinder counter-battery integrated radar system, the Ground/Air Task Oriented Radar System (G/ATOR), and the lightweight STARLite SAR/GMTI for unmanned air vehicles.

 

Naval & Marine Systems – Naval and Marine Systems provides major subsystems and subsystem integration for sensors, sensor processing, missile launching, ship controls and power generation. It provides systems to military surface and subsurface platforms, and bridge and machinery control systems for commercial maritime applications. Principal programs include: radars for navigation; radars for gun fire control and cruise missile defense; bridge management and control systems; power generation systems for aircraft carriers; power and propulsion systems for the Virginia-class submarine; launch systems for Trident submarines and the KEI program; the Advanced SEAL Delivery System mini-submarine; and unmanned semi-autonomous naval systems.

 

Navigation Systems – Navigation Systems provides advanced navigation, avionics systems, and command and control centers for military and commercial applications. Its products are used in military air, land, sea, and space systems as well as commercial space and aircraft in both U.S. and international markets. Its subsidiaries, Northrop Grumman LITEF (Freiburg, Germany) and Northrop Grumman Italia (Pomezia, Italy), are leading European inertial sensors and systems suppliers. Key programs and applications include: integrated avionics for the U.S. Marine Corps attack and utility helicopters and U.S. Navy E-2 aircraft; military navigation and positioning systems for the F-16 fighter, F-22A fighter/attack aircraft, Eurofighter, and U.S. Navy MH-60 helicopter; navigation systems for commercial aircraft; navigation systems for military and civil space satellites and deep space exploration. Navigation Systems also develops and produces fiber-optic acoustic systems for underwater surveillance for Virginia-class submarines and the AN/TYQ-23 multi-service mobile tactical command centers for the U.S. Marine Corps and U.S. Air Force.

 

Space & ISR Systems – Space & ISR Systems provides space-based sensor and exploitation systems for civil, military, and intelligence community customers, as well as ground/surface based command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR) solutions to process, exploit, and disseminate multi-sensor data. Capabilities include space-based payloads, radar, Overhead Non-Imaging Infrared sensors, electro-optic & multi/hyper-spectral sensors, passive microwave sounders, mission processing solutions, and Service-Oriented open architecture C4ISR systems. The current portfolio of programs includes

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Spaced-Based Infrared System as the lead for the payload and mission processing systems, the Distributed Common Ground System Army as the system integrator, as well as a variety of civil space and restricted programs.

 

SHIPBUILDING

 

The Shipbuilding segment, headquartered in Newport News, Virginia, is the nation’s sole industrial designer, builder, and refueler of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and one of only two companies capable of designing and building nuclear-powered submarines for the U.S. Navy. Shipbuilding is also one of the nation’s leading full service providers for the design, engineering, construction, and life cycle support of major programs for the U.S. Navy, U.S. Coast Guard, international navies, and for commercial vessels. The segment includes the following areas of business: Aircraft Carriers; Expeditionary Warfare; Surface Combatants; Submarines; Coast Guard & Coastal Defense; Fleet Support; Commercial; and Services & Other.

 

Aircraft Carriers – The U.S. Navy’s newest carrier and the last of the Nimitz class, the USS George H. W. Bush, was commissioned in January 2009. Advanced design and preparation efforts have been ongoing for the new generation carrier, the Ford class, which will incorporate transformational technologies that will result in manning reductions, improved war fighting capability, and a new nuclear propulsion plant design. In September 2008, Shipbuilding received a $5.1 billion contract award for construction of the first ship of the class, the Gerald R. Ford, which is scheduled for delivery in 2015. The company also provides ongoing maintenance for the U.S. Navy aircraft carrier fleet through overhaul, refueling, and repair work. Shipbuilding is currently performing the refueling and complex overhaul of the USS Carl Vinson with redelivery to the U.S. Navy anticipated in early 2009. Planning for the USS Theodore Roosevelt refueling and complex overhaul began in the fall of 2006 and the ship is expected to arrive at Newport News, Virginia in the summer of 2009.

 

Expeditionary Warfare – Expeditionary Warfare programs include the design and construction of amphibious assault ships for the U.S. Navy, including the LHD 1 WASP class and the San Antonio LPD 17 class. Shipbuilding is the sole provider for the LHD class of large-deck, 40,500-ton multipurpose amphibious assault ships, which serve as the centerpiece of an Amphibious Ready Group. Currently, the LHD-8 is under construction and is a significant upgrade from the preceding seven ships of its class. The LHD-8 is scheduled for delivery in mid-2009. In 2007, the construction contract for LHA 6, the first in a new class of enhanced amphibious assault ships, was awarded. The ship is scheduled for delivery in 2013. Shipbuilding is also the sole provider of the LPD 17 class of ships, which function as amphibious transports. The initial four ships were delivered in 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008, and five LPD 17 ships are currently under construction.

 

Surface Combatants – Surface Combatants includes the design and construction of the Arleigh Burke DDG 51 class Aegis guided missile destroyers, and the design and construction of DDG 1000 (previously DD(X)), the Navy’s future transformational surface combatant class. Shipbuilding is one of two prime contractors designing and building DDG 51 class destroyers, which provide primary anti-aircraft and anti-missile ship protection for the U.S. Navy fleet. Three Arleigh Burke class destroyers are currently under construction. In 2006, Shipbuilding was awarded Phase IV detailed design and long lead construction funding for the initial DDG 1000. The construction award for the second ship in the class, DDG 1001, was received in 2008. The contract establishes a joint work share between Shipbuilding and General Dynamics’ Bath Iron Works (which will produce the first ship in the class) for detailed design and construction of the DDG 1000 class of ships. The advanced technologies developed for the DDG 1000 are anticipated to be incorporated into the next generation guided missile cruiser CG(X).

 

Submarines – Northrop Grumman is one of only two U.S. companies capable of designing and building nuclear-powered submarines. In February 1997, the company and Electric Boat, a wholly owned subsidiary of General Dynamics Corporation, reached an agreement to cooperatively build Virginia class nuclear attack submarines. The initial four submarines in the class were delivered in 2004, 2006, and 2008. Electric Boat and Shipbuilding were awarded a construction contract in August 2003 for the second block of six Virginia class submarines, the first of which was delivered by Electric Boat in August 2008. Construction on the remaining five submarines is

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

underway, with the last scheduled to be delivered in 2014. In December 2008, Shipbuilding and Electric Boat were awarded a construction contract for the third block of eight Virginia class submarines. The multi-year contract allows Shipbuilding and its teammate to proceed with the construction of one submarine per year in 2009 and 2010, and two submarines per year from 2011 to 2013. The eighth submarine to be procured under this contract is scheduled for delivery in 2019.

 

Coast Guard & Coastal Defense – Shipbuilding is a joint venture partner along with Lockheed Martin for the Coast Guard’s Deepwater Modernization Program. Shipbuilding has design and production responsibility for surface ships. In 2006, the Shipbuilding/Lockheed Martin joint venture was awarded a 43-month contract extension for the Deepwater program. The first National Security Cutter (NSC), USCGC Berthoff, was delivered to the Coast Guard in 2008. Currently the Waesche (NSC2) and Stratton (NSC3) are in construction, and long lead procurement is underway for NSC4.

 

Fleet Support – Shipbuilding provides after-market services, including on-going maintenance and repair work, for a wide array of naval and commercial vessels. The company has ship repair facilities in the U.S. Navy’s largest homeports of Norfolk, Virginia, and San Diego, California.

 

Commercial – Under the Polar Tanker program, Shipbuilding was under contract to produce five double-hulled tankers. These tankers each transport one million barrels of crude oil from Alaska to west coast refineries and are fully compliant with the Oil Pollution Act of 1990. The last ship under this program was delivered in mid-2006.

 

Services & Other – Shipbuilding provides various services to commercial nuclear and non-nuclear industrial customers. In January 2008, Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, a joint venture among Shipbuilding, Fluor Corporation, and Honeywell, was awarded a contract for site management and operations of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in Aiken, South Carolina. In October 2008, Shipbuilding announced the formation of a joint venture with AREVA NP to build a new manufacturing and engineering facility in Newport News, Virginia, to help supply the growing American nuclear energy sector.

 

Corporate

The company’s principal executive offices are located at 1840 Century Park East, Los Angeles, California 90067. The company’s telephone number is (310) 553-6262. The company’s home page on the Internet is www.northropgrumman.com. References to the company’s website in this report are provided as a convenience and do not constitute, and should not be viewed as, incorporation by reference of the information contained on, or available through, the website. Therefore, such information should not be considered part of this report.

 

SUMMARY SEGMENT FINANCIAL DATA

 

For a more complete understanding of the company’s segment financial information, see Segment Operating Results in Part II, Item 7, and Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8.

 

CUSTOMERS AND REVENUE CONCENTRATION

 

The company’s primary customer is the U.S. Government. Revenue from the U.S. Government accounted for approximately 90 percent of total revenues in 2008, 2007, and 2006. No other customer accounted for more than 10 percent of total revenue during any period presented. No single product or service accounted for more than 10 percent of total revenue during any period presented. See Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

PATENTS

 

The following table summarizes the number of patents the company owns or has pending as of December 31, 2008:

 

 

Patents developed while under contract with the U.S. Government may be subject to use by the U.S. Government. In addition the company licenses intellectual property to, and from, third parties. Management believes the company’s ability to conduct its operations would not be materially affected by the loss of any particular intellectual property right.

 

SEASONALITY

 

No material portion of the company’s business is considered to be seasonal. The timing of revenue recognition is based on several factors including the timing of contract awards, the incurrence of contract costs, cost estimation, and unit deliveries. See Revenue Recognition in Part II, Item 7.

 

BACKLOG

 

At December 31, 2008, total backlog was $78.1 billion compared with $63.7 billion at the end of 2007. Approximately 65 percent of the $37.4 billion funded backlog at December 31, 2008, is expected to be converted into sales in 2009.

 

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. For backlog by segment see Backlog in Part II, Item 7.

 

RAW MATERIALS

 

The most significant raw material required by the company is steel, used primarily for shipbuilding. The company has mitigated supply risk by negotiating long-term agreements with a number of steel suppliers. In addition, the company has mitigated price risk related to its steel purchases through certain contractual arrangements with the U.S. Government. While the company has generally been able to obtain key raw materials required in its production processes in a timely manner, a significant delay in receipt of these supplies by the company could have a material adverse effect on the company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. See Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A.

 

GOVERNMENT REGULATION

 

The company’s business is affected by numerous laws and regulations relating to the award, administration and performance of U.S. Government contracts. See Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A.

 

Certain programs with the U.S. Government that are prohibited by the customer from being publicly discussed in detail are referred to as “restricted” in this Form 10-K. The consolidated financial statements and financial information contained within this Form 10-K reflect the operating results of restricted programs under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP). See Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

 

Company-sponsored research and development activities primarily include independent research and development (IR&D) efforts related to government programs. IR&D expenses are included in general and administrative expenses and are generally allocated to U.S. Government contracts. Company-sponsored research and development expenses totaled $576 million, $534 million, and $569 million in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively. Expenses for research and development sponsored by the customer are charged directly to the related contracts.

 

EMPLOYEE RELATIONS

 

The company believes that it maintains good relations with its 123,600 employees, of which approximately 18 percent are covered by 36 collective bargaining agreements. The company expects to re-negotiate seven of its collective bargaining agreements in 2009. It is not expected that the results of these negotiations will, either individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the company’s results of operations. See Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

 

Federal, state, and local laws relating to the protection of the environment affect the company’s manufacturing operations. The company has provided for the estimated cost to complete environmental remediation where the company has determined 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 estimates may change given the inherent difficulty in estimating environmental cleanup costs to be incurred in the future due to the uncertainties regarding the extent of the required cleanup, determination of legally responsible parties, and the status of laws, regulations, and their interpretations.

 

In order to assess the potential impact on the company’s financial statements, management estimates the possible remediation costs that reasonably could be incurred by the company on a site-by-site basis. Such estimates take into consideration the professional judgment of the company’s environmental engineers and, when necessary, consultation with outside environmental specialists. In most instances, only a range of reasonably possible costs can be estimated. However, in the determination of accruals, the most probable amount is used when determinable, and the minimum is used when no single amount is more probable. The company records accruals for environmental cleanup costs in the accounting period in which the company’s responsibility is established and the costs can be reasonably estimated. The company does not anticipate and record insurance recoveries before it has determined that collection is probable.

 

Management estimates that at December 31, 2008, the range of reasonably possible future costs for environmental remediation sites is $186 million to $279 million, of which $231 million is accrued in other current liabilities in the consolidated statements of financial position. Environmental accruals are recorded on an undiscounted basis. At sites involving multiple parties, the company provides environmental accruals based upon its expected share of liability, taking into account the financial viability of other jointly liable parties. Environmental expenditures are expensed or capitalized as appropriate. Capitalized expenditures relate to long-lived improvements in currently operating facilities. In addition, 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, which could have a material effect on the company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. The company has made the investments it believes necessary in order to comply with environmental laws. 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 company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

COMPETITIVE CONDITIONS

 

Northrop Grumman, along with Lockheed Martin Corporation, The Boeing Company, Raytheon Company, and General Dynamics Corporation are among the largest companies in the U.S. defense industry at this time. Northrop Grumman competes against these and other companies for a number of programs, both large and small. Intense competition and long operating cycles are both key characteristics of Northrop Grumman’s business and the defense industry. It is common in this industry for work on major programs to be shared among a number of companies. A company competing to be a prime contractor may, upon ultimate award of the contract to another party, turn out to be a subcontractor for the ultimate prime contracting party. It is not uncommon to compete for a contract award with a peer company and, simultaneously, perform as a supplier to or a customer of such competitor on other contracts. The nature of major defense programs, conducted under binding contracts, allows companies that perform well to benefit from a level of program continuity not common in many industries.

 

The company’s success in the competitive defense industry depends upon its ability to develop and market its products and services, as well as its ability to provide the people, technologies, facilities, equipment, and financial capacity needed to deliver those products and services with maximum efficiency. It is necessary to maintain, as the company has, sources for raw materials, fabricated parts, electronic components, and major subassemblies. In this manufacturing and systems integration environment, effective oversight of subcontractors and suppliers is as vital to success as managing internal operations.

 

Similarly, there is intense competition among many companies in the information and services markets, which are generally more labor intensive with competitive margin rates over contract periods of shorter duration. Competitors in the information and services markets include the defense industry participants mentioned above as well as many other large and small entities with expertise in various specialized areas. The company’s ability to successfully compete in the information and services markets depends on a number of factors; most important is the capability to deploy skilled professionals, many requiring security clearances, at competitive prices across the diverse spectrum of these markets. Accordingly, various workforce initiatives are in place to ensure the company is successful in attracting, developing and retaining sufficient resources to maintain or improve its competitive position within these markets. See Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A.

 

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

 

See Part III, Item 10, for information about executive officers of the company.

 

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

 

Throughout this Form 10-K, the company incorporates by reference information from parts of other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC allows the company to disclose important information by referring to it in this manner, and you should review this information in addition to the information contained herein.

 

The company’s annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and proxy statement for the annual shareholders’ meeting, as well as any amendments to those reports, are available free of charge through the company’s web site as soon as reasonably practicable after electronic filing of such material with the SEC. You can learn more about the company by reviewing the company’s SEC filings on the company’s web site. The company’s SEC reports can be accessed through the investor relations page of the company’s web site at www.northropgrumman.com.

 

The SEC also maintains a web site at www.sec.gov that contains reports, proxy statements and other information regarding SEC registrants, including Northrop Grumman. The public may read and copy any materials filed by the company with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

The company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows are subject to various risks, many of which are not exclusively within the company’s control, that may cause actual performance to differ materially from historical or projected future performance. The company urges investors to carefully consider the risk factors described below in evaluating the information contained in this report.

 

 

Approximately 91 percent of the company’s revenues during 2008 were derived from products and services ultimately sold to the U.S. Government and are therefore affected by, among other things, the federal budget process. The company is a supplier, either directly or as a subcontractor or team member, to the U.S. Government and its agencies as well as foreign governments and agencies. These contracts are subject to the respective customers’ political and budgetary constraints and processes, changes in customers’ short-range and long-range strategic plans, the timing of contract awards, and in the case of contracts with the U.S. Government, the congressional budget authorization and appropriation processes, the U.S. Government’s ability to terminate contracts for convenience or for default, as well as other risks such as contractor suspension or debarment in the event of certain violations of legal and regulatory requirements. The termination or failure to fund one or more significant contracts by the U.S. Government could have a material adverse effect on the company’s results of operations or prospects. Current or future economic conditions could result in the reprioritization of or reduction in future U.S. Government defense spending levels.

 

In the event of termination for the government’s convenience, contractors are normally protected by provisions covering reimbursement for costs incurred. The company is involved as a plaintiff in a lawsuit concerning a contract terminated for convenience. See Other Matters in Part I, Item 3. Termination resulting from the company’s default could expose the company to liability and have a material adverse effect on its ability to compete for contracts.

 

In addition, a material amount of the company’s revenues and profits is derived from programs that are subject to security classification restrictions (restricted business), which could limit the company’s ability to discuss details about these programs, their risks or any disputes or claims relating to such programs. As a result, investors might have less insight into the company’s restricted business than other businesses of the company or could experience less ability to evaluate fully the risks, disputes or claims associated with restricted business.

 

The company’s success in the competitive defense industry depends upon its ability to develop and market its products and services, as well as its ability to provide the people, technologies, facilities, equipment, and financial capacity needed to deliver those products and services with maximum efficiency. A loss of business to the company’s competitors could have a material adverse affect on the company’s ability to generate favorable financial results and maintain market share.

 

 

The company designs, develops and manufactures technologically advanced and innovative products and services applied by its 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 the company from achieving contractual requirements.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

In addition, the company’s products cannot be tested and proven in all situations and are otherwise subject to unforeseen problems. Examples of unforeseen problems which could negatively affect revenue and profitability include loss on launch of spacecraft, premature failure, problems with quality, country of origin, delivery of subcontractor components or services, and unplanned 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 previously received by the company.

 

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 for less than a specified period of time. Under such terms, the company could be required to forfeit fees previously recognized and/or collected. The company has not experienced any material losses in the last decade in connection with such contract performance incentive provisions. However, if the company were to experience launch failures or complete satellite system failures in the future, such events could have a material adverse impact on the company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

 

 

Operating income is adversely affected when contract costs that cannot be billed to customers are incurred. This cost growth can occur if estimates to complete increase due to technical challenges 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 and productivity of labor, the nature and complexity of the work to be performed, the effect of change orders, the availability of materials, 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 effect on the company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

 

Due to their nature, fixed-price contracts inherently have more risk than flexibly priced contracts and therefore generally carry higher profit margins. Approximately 30 percent of the company’s annual revenues are derived from fixed-price contracts – see Contracts in Part II, Item 7. Flexibly priced contracts may carry risk to the extent of their specific contract terms and conditions relating to performance award fees, including cost sharing agreements, and negative performance incentives. The company typically enters into fixed-price contracts where costs can be reasonably estimated based on experience. In addition, certain contracts other than fixed-price contracts have provisions relating to cost controls and audit rights. Should the terms specified in those contracts not be met, then profitability may be reduced. Fixed-price development work comprises a small portion of the company’s 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 fixed-price development contracts which include production units is subject to the company’s ability to control 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. Examples of the company’s significant fixed-price development contracts include the F-16 Block 60 combat avionics program and the MESA radar system program for the Wedgetail and Peace Eagle contracts, both of which are performed by the Electronics segment. It is also not unprecedented in the shipbuilding business for the company to

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

negotiate fixed-price production follow-on contracts before the development effort has been completed and learning curves fully realized on existing flexibly priced development contracts.

 

 

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 the company’s 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 company initiated efficiency initiatives and cost reduction efforts. Incentives, 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 judgments 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.

 

 

The company has thousands of contracts and operations in many parts of the world subject to U.S. and foreign laws and regulations. Prime contracts with various agencies of the U.S. Government and subcontracts with other prime contractors are subject to numerous procurement regulations, including the False Claims Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations promulgated under the Arms Export Control Act, with noncompliance found by any one agency possibly resulting in fines, penalties, debarment, or suspension from receiving additional contracts with all U.S. Government agencies. Given the company’s dependence on U.S. Government business, suspension or debarment could have a material adverse effect on the company.

 

In addition, international business subjects the company 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 the company or its 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 the company’s export privileges, which could have a material adverse effect on the company. Changes in regulation or political environment may affect the company’s ability to conduct business in foreign markets including investment, procurement, and repatriation of earnings.

 

The company operates in a highly regulated environment and is routinely audited by the U.S. Government and others. On a regular basis, the company monitors its policies and procedures with respect to its contracts to ensure consistent application under similar terms and conditions and to assess compliance with all applicable government regulations. Negative audit findings could result in termination of a contract, forfeiture of profits, or suspension of payments. From time to time the company is subject to U.S. Government investigations relating to its operations. Government contractors that are found to have violated the law such as the False Claims Act or the Arms Export Control Act, or are indicted or convicted for violations of other federal laws, or are found not to have acted responsibly as defined by the law, may be subject to significant fines. Such convictions could also result in suspension or debarment from government

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

contracting for some period of time. Given the company’s dependence on government contracting, suspension or debarment could have a material adverse effect on the company.

 

 

The company may be affected by delivery or performance issues with key suppliers and subcontractors, as well as other factors that may cause operating results to be adversely affected. Changes in inventory requirements or other production cost increases may also have a negative effect on the company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

 

Performance failures by a subcontractor of the company or difficulty in maintaining complete alignment of the subcontractor’s obligations with the company’s prime contract obligations may adversely affect the company’s ability to perform its obligations on the prime contract, which could reduce the company’s 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 the company’s ability to compete for future contracts. If the recent period of adverse economic conditions and credit market volatility continues, the company’s profitability may be negatively impacted by the inability of certain of the company’s subcontractors and key suppliers to continue providing their products and/or services.

 

Operating results are heavily dependent upon the company’s ability to attract and retain sufficient personnel with requisite skill sets and/or security clearances. The successful negotiation of collective bargaining agreements and avoidance of organized work stoppages are also critical to the ongoing operations of the company.

 

The company has significant operations located in regions of the U.S. that may be exposed to damaging storms and other natural disasters. While preventative measures typically help to minimize harm to the company, the damage and disruption resulting from certain storms or other natural disasters may be significant. Although no assurances can be made, the company believes it can recover costs associated with natural disasters through insurance or its contracts.

 

Natural disasters such as storms and earthquakes can disrupt electrical and other power distribution networks and cause adverse effects on profitability and performance, including computer and internet operation and accessibility. Computer viruses and similar harmful software programs, as well as network outages, disruptions and attacks also may have a material adverse effect on the company’s profitability and performance unless quarantined or otherwise prevented.

 

 

As part of its overall strategy, the company will, from time to time, acquire a minority or majority interest in a business. These investments are made upon careful target 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. After acquisition, unforeseen issues could arise which adversely affect the anticipated returns or which are otherwise not recoverable as an adjustment to the purchase price. Even after careful integration efforts, actual operating results may vary significantly from initial estimates. Goodwill accounts for approximately half of the company’s recorded total assets. The company evaluates 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 and the resulting decline in market multiples and the company’s stock price led to a

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

non-cash, after-tax charge of $3.1 billion for impairment of goodwill at Shipbuilding and Space Technology. If the current economic conditions continue to deteriorate causing further decline in the company’s stock price, additional impairments to one or more businesses could occur in future periods whether or not connected to the annual impairment analysis. The company will continue to monitor the recoverability of the carrying value of its goodwill and other long-lived assets. See Critical Accounting Policies, Estimates, and Judgments in Part II, Item 7.

 

 

The size and complexity of the company’s business make it highly susceptible to claims and litigation. The company is subject to environmental claims, income tax matters and other litigation, which, if not resolved within established accruals, could have a material adverse effect on the company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. See Legal Proceedings in Part I, Item 3, and Critical Accounting Policies, Estimates, and Judgments in Part II, Item 7.

 

 

A substantial portion of the company’s current and retired employee population is covered by pension and post-retirement benefit plans, the costs of which are dependent upon the company’s 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 the company’s 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 the company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. Recent volatility in the financial markets has resulted in lower than expected returns on the company’s pension plan assets, resulting in potentially higher pension costs in future periods.

 

 

The company endeavors to identify and obtain in established markets insurance agreements to cover significant risks and liabilities (including, among others, natural disasters, product liability and business interruption). Not every risk or liability can be protected against 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. In some, but not all, circumstances the company may receive indemnification from the U.S. Government. Because of the limitations in overall available coverage referred to above, the company may have to bear substantial costs for uninsured losses that could have an adverse effect upon its consolidated results of operations and its overall consolidated financial position. Additionally, disputes with insurance carriers over coverage may affect the timing of cash flows and, where litigation with the carrier becomes necessary, an outcome unfavorable to the company may have a material adverse effect on the company’s consolidated results of operations. See Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8.

 

 

The company, like others in the defense industry, is aware of a potential problem presented by strict compliance with the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement preference for enumerated specialty metals sourced domestically or from certain foreign countries. Subcontractors and lower-tier suppliers have made disclosures indicating inability to comply with the rule as written. Subject to limitations,

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

inability to certify that all enumerated specialty metals in a product comply with sourcing requirements can lead to U.S. Government customers preventing delivery of materiel and products critical to national defense.

 

 

The capital and credit markets have been experiencing extreme volatility and disruption in late 2008 and early 2009. Historically, the company has 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, the company may not be able to obtain capital market financing or credit availability on similar terms, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on the company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.

 

 

The United States and global economies are currently experiencing a period of substantial economic uncertainty with wide-ranging effects, including the current disruption in global financial markets. Possible effects of these economic events are described in the preceding risk factors, including those relating to U.S. Government defense spending, business disruptions caused by suppliers or subcontractors, impairment of goodwill and other long-lived assets, pension costs and access to capital and credit markets. Although governments worldwide, including the U.S. Government, have initiated sweeping economic plans, the company is unable to predict the impact, severity, and duration of these economic events, which could have a material effect on the company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

 

The company has no unresolved comments from the SEC.

 

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND PROJECTIONS

 

Statements in this Form 10-K that are in the future tense, and all statements accompanied by terms such as “believe,” “project,” “expect,” “trend,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “assume,” “intend,” “plan,” “target,” “guidance,” “anticipate,” “outlook,” “preliminary,” and variations thereof and similar terms are intended to be “forward-looking statements” as defined by federal securities law. Forward-looking statements are based upon assumptions, expectations, plans and projections that are believed valid when made, but that are subject to the risks and uncertainties identified under Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A, that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements.

 

The company intends that all forward-looking statements made will be subject to safe harbor protection of the federal securities laws pursuant to Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

 

Forward-looking statements are based upon, among other things, the company’s assumptions with respect to:

 

 

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

You should 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. As noted above, these forward-looking statements speak only as of the date when they are made. The company does not undertake any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect events, circumstances, changes in expectations, or the occurrence of unanticipated events after the date of those statements. Moreover, in the future, the company, through senior management, may make forward-looking statements that involve the risk factors and other matters described in this Form 10-K as well as other risk factors subsequently identified, including, among others, those identified in the company’s filings with the SEC on Form 10-Q and Form 8-K.

 

At December 31, 2008, the company had approximately 57 million square feet of floor space at approximately 526 separate locations, primarily in the U.S., for manufacturing, warehousing, research and testing, administration and various other uses. At December 31, 2008, the company leased to third parties approximately 696,000 square feet of its owned and leased facilities, and had vacant floor space of approximately 648,000 square feet.

 

At December 31, 2008, the company had major operations at the following locations:

 

Information & Services – Huntsville, AL; Carson, McClellan, Rancho Carmel, Redondo Beach, San Diego, and San Jose, CA; Aurora and Colorado Springs CO; Washington D.C.; Warner Robins, GA; Lake Charles, LA; Elkridge and Columbia, MD; and Chantilly, Chester, Fairfax, Herndon, McLean, and Reston, VA.

 

Aerospace – Carson, El Segundo, Manhattan Beach, Mojave, Palmdale, Redondo Beach, and San Diego, CA; Melbourne and St. Augustine, FL; Bethpage, NY; and Clearfield, UT.

 

Electronics – Huntsville, AL; Azusa, Sunnyvale and Woodland Hills, CA; Norwalk, CT; Apopka, FL; Rolling Meadows, IL; Annapolis, Baltimore, Elkridge, Hagerstown, Linthicum and Sykesville, MD; Williamsville, NY; Cincinnati, OH; Salt Lake City, UT; and Charlottesville, VA. Locations outside the U.S. include France, Germany, and Italy.

 

Shipbuilding – Avondale, Harahan, New Orleans and Tallulah, LA; Gulfport and Pascagoula, MS; and Hampton, Newport News, and Suffolk, VA.

 

Corporate and other locations – Los Angeles, CA; Irving, TX; York, PA; and Arlington, VA. Locations outside the U.S. include the United Kingdom and Canada.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

The following is a summary of the company’s floor space at December 31, 2008:

 

 

The company believes its properties are well maintained and in good operating condition and that the productive capacity of the company’s properties is adequate to meet current contractual requirements and those for the foreseeable future.

 

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 or compensatory or treble damages. 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 an operating division or subdivision. Suspension or debarment could have a material adverse effect on the company because of its reliance on government contracts.

 

As previously disclosed, in October 2005, the U.S. Department of Justice and a restricted U.S. Government customer apprised the company of potential substantial claims relating to certain microelectronic parts produced by the Space and Electronics Sector of former TRW Inc., now a part of the company. In the third quarter of 2006, the company proposed to settle the claims and any associated matters and recognized a pre-tax charge of $112.5 million to cover the cost of the settlement proposal and associated investigative costs. The U.S. Government has advised the company that if continuing settlement discussions are not successful it will pursue its claims through litigation. On November 26, 2008, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a Notice of Intervention in a False Claims Act case that remains under seal in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Because of the highly technical nature of the issues involved and their restricted status, because of the significant disagreement of the company with the allegations of the underlying qui tam complaint, and because of the significant disagreement between the company and the U.S. Government as to the U.S. Government’s theories of liability and damages (including a material difference between the U.S. Government’s damage theories and the company’s offer), final resolution of this matter could take a considerable amount of time, particularly if litigation should ensue. If the U.S. Government were to be ultimately successful on its theories of liability and damages, which could be trebled under the Federal False Claims Act, the effect upon the company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations, and cash flows would materially exceed the amount provided by the company. Based upon the information available to the company to date, the company believes that it has substantive defenses but can give no assurance that its views will prevail. Accordingly, the ultimate disposition of this matter cannot presently be determined.

 

As previously disclosed, in the second quarter of 2007, the U.S. Coast Guard issued a revocation of acceptance under the Deepwater Program for eight converted 123-foot patrol boats (the vessels) based on alleged “hull buckling and shaft alignment problems” and alleged “nonconforming topside equipment” on the vessels. The company submitted a written response that argued that the revocation of acceptance was improper, and in late December 2007, the Coast Guard advised Integrated Coast Guard Systems (the contractors’ joint venture for performing the Deepwater Program) that the Coast Guard is seeking $96.1 million from the Joint Venture as a

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

result of the revocation of acceptance of the eight vessels delivered under the 123-foot conversion program. The majority of the costs associated with the 123-foot conversion effort are associated with the alleged structural deficiencies of the vessels, which were converted under contracts with the company and a subcontractor to the company. In May 2008, the Coast Guard advised the Joint Venture that the Coast Guard would support an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice of the Joint Venture and its subcontractors instead of pursuing its $96.1 million claim independently. The Department of Justice had previously issued subpoenas related to the Deepwater Program, pursuant to which the company has provided responsive documents. The company recently learned that a civil False Claims Act complaint naming it as a defendant was filed under seal. The relationship between the allegations in the complaint and the U.S. Department of Justice’s investigation is unclear to the company. Based upon the information available to the company to date, the company believes that it has substantive defenses to any potential claims but can give no assurance that its views will prevail.

 

In August 2008, the company disclosed to the Antitrust Division of the U.S. 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 company’s 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 government’s investigation and its agreement to make restitution if the government was harmed by the violations.

 

Based upon the available information regarding matters that are subject to U.S. Government investigations, other than as set out above, the company believes, but can give no assurance, 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.

 

Litigation – Various claims and legal proceedings arise in the ordinary course of business and are pending against the company and its properties. Based upon the information available, the company believes that the resolution of any of these various claims and legal proceedings would not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

 

As previously disclosed, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California consolidated two separately filed Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuits, which the plaintiffs seek to have certified as class actions, into the In Re Northrop Grumman Corporation ERISA Litigation. On August 7, 2007, the Court denied plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, and the plaintiffs appealed the Court’s decision on class certification to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. On October 11, 2007, the Ninth Circuit granted appellate review, which delayed the commencement of trial previously scheduled to begin January 22, 2008. The company believes that the outcome of these matters would not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

 

Other Matters

In the event of contract termination for the government’s convenience, contractors are normally protected by provisions covering reimbursement for costs incurred under the contract. As previously disclosed, the company received a termination for convenience notice on the Tri-Service Standoff Attack Missile (TSSAM) program in 1995. In December 1996, the company filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Government in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims seeking the recovery of approximately $750 million for uncompensated performance costs, investments and a reasonable profit on the program. Prior to 1996, the company had charged to operations in excess of $600 million related to this program. The company is unable to predict whether it will realize some or all of its TSSAM claims, none of which are recorded on its consolidated statement of financial position.

 

As previously disclosed, the company is pursuing legal action against an insurance provider arising out of a disagreement concerning the coverage of certain losses related to Hurricane Katrina (see Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8). The company commenced the action against Factory Mutual Insurance Company (FM Global) on November 4, 2005, which is now pending in the U.S. District Court for

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

the Central District of California, Western Division. In August 2007, the district court issued an order finding that the excess insurance policy provided coverage for the company’s Katrina-related loss. In November 2007, FM Global filed a notice of appeal of the district court’s order. On August 14, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the earlier summary judgment order in favor of the company, holding that the FM Global excess policy unambiguously excludes damage from the storm surge caused by Hurricane Katrina under its “Flood” exclusion. The Court of Appeals remanded the case to the district court to determine whether the California efficient proximate cause doctrine affords the company coverage under the policy even if the Flood exclusion of the policy is unambiguous. The company filed a Petition for Rehearing En Banc, or in the Alternative, For Panel Rehearing with the Court of Appeals on August 27, 2008. On January 6, 2009, the Court of Appeals ordered FM Global to respond to the Petition for Rehearing by January 30, 2009. FM Global filed its opposition to the Petition for Rehearing and the company now awaits the Court of Appeal’s decision. Based on the current status of the assessment and claim process, no assurances can be made as to the ultimate outcome of this matter.

 

No items were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2008.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Northrop Grumman Corporation will be held on May 20, 2009, at the Space Technology Presentation Center, One Space Park, Redondo Beach, California 90278.

 

 

COMPARISON OF FIVE-YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN

AMONG NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION, S&P 500 INDEX

AND S&P AEROSPACE/DEFENSE INDEX

 

 

 

 

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

 

The table below summarizes the company’s repurchases of common stock during the three months ended December 31, 2008.

 

 

 

Share repurchases take place at management’s 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.

 

 

For a description of securities authorized under the company’s equity compensation plans, see Note 18 of the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

The data presented in the following table is derived from the audited financial statements and other company information adjusted to reflect the current application of discontinued operations. See also Business Acquisitions and Business Dispositions in Part II, Item 7.

 

Selected Financial Data

 

 

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

Business

Northrop Grumman provides technologically advanced, innovative products, services, and integrated solutions in information and services, aerospace, electronics, and shipbuilding to its global customers. As a prime contractor, principal subcontractor, partner, or preferred supplier, Northrop Grumman participates in many high-priority defense and commercial technology programs in the U.S. and abroad. Northrop Grumman conducts most of its business with the U.S. Government, principally the DoD. The company also conducts business with local, state, and foreign governments and has domestic and international commercial sales.

 

Notable Events

Certain notable events or activity affecting the company’s 2008 consolidated financial results included the following:

 

Financial highlights

 

Notable events

 

Outlook

The United States and global economies are currently undergoing a period of substantial economic uncertainty, and the related financial markets are experiencing unprecedented volatility. If the future economic environment continues to be less favorable than it has been in recent years, the company could experience difficulties if the financial viability of certain of its subcontractors and key suppliers is impaired. In addition, the volatility in the financial markets has affected the valuation of the company’s pension assets, resulting in higher pension costs in future periods. Adverse equity market conditions and the resulting decline in market multiples and the company’s stock price have led to a non-cash, after-tax charge of $3.1 billion for impairment of goodwill at Shipbuilding and Space Technology. If the financial markets continue to deteriorate causing further decline in the company’s stock price and market capitalization, further impairments of goodwill and other long-lived assets may become necessary.

 

The company’s business is conducted primarily with U.S. Government customers under long-term contracts and there have been no material changes to the company’s product and service offerings due to the current economic conditions. The U.S. Government’s budgetary processes give the company good visibility regarding future

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

spending and the threat areas that they are addressing. Management believes that the company’s current contracts, and its strong backlog of previously awarded contracts are well aligned with the direction of its customer’s future needs, and this provides the company with good insight regarding future cash flows from its businesses. Nonetheless, management recognizes that no business is completely immune to the current economic situation and these economic conditions and the transition to a new presidential administration could adversely affect future defense spending levels which could lead to lower than expected revenues for the company in future years. Certain programs in which the company participates may be subject to potential reductions due to a slower rate of growth in the U.S. Defense Budget forecasts and funds being utilized to support the on-going Global War on Terrorism.

 

Despite the trend of slower growth rates in the U.S. defense budget, the company believes that its portfolio of technologically advanced, innovative products, services, and integrated solutions will generate revenue growth in 2009 and beyond. Based on total backlog (funded and unfunded) of approximately $78 billion as of December 31, 2008, the company expects sales in 2009 of approximately $34.5 billion. The major industry and economic factors that may affect the company’s future performance are described in the following paragraphs.

 

Industry Factors

Northrop Grumman is subject to the unique characteristics of the U.S. defense industry as a monopsony, and by certain elements peculiar to its own business mix. Northrop Grumman, along with Lockheed Martin Corporation, The Boeing Company, Raytheon Company, and General Dynamics Corporation are among the largest companies in the U.S. defense industry at this time. Northrop Grumman competes against these and other companies for a number of programs, both large and small. Intense competition and long operating cycles are both key characteristics of Northrop Grumman’s business and the defense industry. It is common in this industry for work on major programs to be shared among a number of companies. A company competing to be a prime contractor may, upon ultimate award of the contract to another party, turn out to be a subcontractor for the ultimate prime contracting party. It is not uncommon to compete for a contract award with a peer company and simultaneously perform as a supplier to or a customer of such competitor on other contracts. The nature of major defense programs, conducted under binding contracts, allows companies that perform well to benefit from a level of program continuity not common in many industries.

 

The company’s success in the competitive defense industry depends upon its ability to develop and market its products and services, as well as its ability to provide the people, technologies, facilities, equipment, and financial capacity needed to deliver those products and services with maximum efficiency. It is necessary to maintain, as the company has, sources for raw materials, fabricated parts, electronic components, and major subassemblies. In this manufacturing and systems integration environment, effective oversight of subcontractors and suppliers is as vital to success as managing internal operations.

 

Similarly, there is intense competition among many companies in the information and services markets which is generally more labor intensive with competitive margin rates over contract periods of shorter duration. Competitors in the information and services markets include the defense industry participants mentioned above as well as many other large and small entities with expertise in various specialized areas. The company’s ability to successfully compete in the information and services markets depends on a number of factors; most important is the capability to deploy skilled professionals, many requiring security clearances, at competitive prices across the diverse spectrum of these markets. Accordingly, various workforce initiatives are in place to ensure the company is successful in attracting, developing and retaining sufficient resources to maintain or improve its competitive position within these markets.

 

Liquidity Trends – In light of the current economic situation, the company has also evaluated its future liquidity needs, both from a short-term and long-term basis. The company believes that cash on hand plus cash generated from operations along with cash available under credit lines are expected to be sufficient in 2009 to service debt, finance capital expansion projects, pay federal, foreign, and state income taxes, fund pension and other post-retirement benefit plans, and continue paying dividends to shareholders. The company has a committed

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

$2 billion revolving credit facility, with a maturity date of August 10, 2012, that can be accessed on a same-day basis.

 

To provide for long-term liquidity, the company believes it can obtain additional capital, if necessary, from such sources as the public or private capital markets, the sale of assets, sale and leaseback of operating assets, and leasing rather than purchasing new assets. The company has an effective shelf registration on file with the SEC.

 

Recent Developments in U.S. Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Pension Recovery Rules – On September 2, 2008, the CAS Board published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that if adopted would provide a framework to partially harmonize the CAS rules with the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA) requirements. The proposed CAS rule includes provisions for a transition period from the existing CAS requirement to a partially harmonized CAS requirement. After the PPA effective date for “eligible government contractors” (including Northrop Grumman), which were granted a delay in their PPA effective date, the proposed rule would partially mitigate the near-term mismatch between PPA-amended ERISA minimum contribution requirements which would not yet be recoverable under CAS. However, unless the final rule is revised, government contractors maintaining defined benefit pension plans in general would still experience a timing mismatch between required contributions and the CAS recoverable pension costs. It is anticipated that contractors will be entitled to seek an equitable adjustment to prices of previously negotiated contracts subject to CAS for increased contract costs which result from mandatory changes required by the final rule. The CAS Board is required to issue its final rule no later than January 1, 2010.

 

Economic Opportunities, Challenges, and Risks

The defense of the U.S. and its allies requires the ability to respond to one or more regional conflicts, terrorist acts, or threats to homeland security and is increasingly dependent upon early threat identification. National responses to those threats may require unilateral or cooperative initiatives ranging from dissuasion, deterrence, active defense, security and stability operations, or peacekeeping. The company believes that the U.S. Government will continue to place a high priority on the protection of its engaged forces and citizenry and on minimizing collateral damage when force must be applied in pursuit of national objectives. As a result, the U.S. and its military coalitions increasingly rely on sophisticated systems providing long-range surveillance and intelligence, battle management, and precision strike capabilities combined with the ability to rapidly deploy effective force to any region. Accordingly, defense procurement spending is expected to be weighted toward the development and procurement of military platforms and systems demonstrating the stealth, long-range, survivability, persistence and standoff capabilities that can overcome such obstacles to access. Additionally, advanced electronics and software that enhance the capabilities of individual systems and provide for the real-time integration of individual surveillance, information management, strike, and battle management platforms will also be required.

 

While the upward trend in overall defense spending may slow, the company does not expect defense requirements to change significantly in the foreseeable future. Many allied countries are focusing their development and procurement efforts on advanced electronics and information systems capabilities to enhance their interoperability with U.S. forces. The size of future U.S. and international defense budgets is expected to remain responsive to the international security environment. While the political environment currently does not allow for a thorough insight into the fiscal 2010 budget, it is expected defense spending will continue to grow in the near term, though probably more modestly than in the past. It is possible the new Administration’s proposed budget will include reductions in certain programs in which the company participates or for which the company expects to compete, however the company believes that spending on recapitalization and modernization of homeland security and defense assets will continue to be a national priority, with particular emphasis on areas involving intelligence, persistent surveillance, cyber space, energy-saving technologies and non-conventional warfare capabilities.

 

U.S. Government programs in which the company either participates, or strives to participate, must compete with other programs for consideration during the U.S. budget formulation and appropriation processes. Budget

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

decisions made in this environment will have long-term consequences for the size and structure of the company and the entire defense industry.

 

Substantial new competitive opportunities for the company include the next-generation long-range bomber, space radar, unmanned vehicles, satellite communications systems, restricted programs, technical services and information technology contracts, and numerous international and homeland security programs. In pursuit of these opportunities, Northrop Grumman continues to focus on operational and financial performance for continued growth in 2010 and beyond.

 

Northrop Grumman has historically concentrated its efforts in high technology areas such as stealth, airborne and space surveillance, battle management, systems integration, defense electronics, and information technology. The company has a significant presence in federal and civil information systems; the manufacture of combatant ships including aircraft carriers and submarines; space technology; C4ISR; and missile systems. The company believes that its programs are a high priority for national defense. Nevertheless, under budgetary pressures, there remains the possibility that one or more of them may be reduced, extended, or terminated by the company’s U.S. Government customers.

 

The company provides certain product warranties that require repair or replacement of non-conforming items for a specified period of time. Most of the company’s product warranties are provided under government contracts, the costs of which are generally incorporated into contract pricing.

 

Prime contracts with various agencies of the U.S. Government and subcontracts with other prime contractors are subject to numerous procurement regulations, including the False Claims Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations promulgated under the Arms Export Control Act, with noncompliance found by any one agency possibly resulting in fines, penalties, debarment, or suspension from receiving additional contracts with all U.S. Government agencies. Given the company’s dependence on U.S. Government business, suspension or debarment could have a material adverse effect on the company.

 

See Risk Factors located in Part I, Item 1A for a more complete description of risks faced by the company and the defense industry.

 

2008 – In October 2008, the company acquired 3001 International, Inc. (3001) for approximately $92 million in cash. 3001 provides geospatial data production and analysis, including airborne imaging, surveying, mapping and geographic information systems for U.S. and international government intelligence, defense and civilian customers. The operating results of 3001 are reported in the Information Technology segment from the date of acquisition. The consolidated financial statements reflect preliminary estimates of the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed and the related allocation of the purchase price for the entities acquired. Management does not expect adjustments to these estimates, if any, to have a material effect on the company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

 

2007 – During the third quarter of 2007, the company acquired Xinetics Inc., reported in the Space Technology segment, and the remaining 61 percent of Scaled Composites, LLC, reported in the Integrated Systems segment, for an aggregate amount of approximately $100 million in cash.

 

In July 2007, the company and Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) reorganized the AMSEC, LLC joint venture (AMSEC), by dividing AMSEC along customer and product lines. AMSEC is a full-service supplier that provides engineering, logistics and technical support services primarily to Navy ship and aviation programs. Under the reorganization plan, the company retained the ship engineering, logistics and technical service businesses under the AMSEC name (the AMSEC Businesses) and, in exchange, SAIC received the aviation, combat systems and strike force integration services businesses from AMSEC (the Divested Businesses). This reorganization was treated as a step acquisition for the acquisition of SAIC’s interests in the AMSEC Businesses, with the company recognizing a pre-tax gain of $23 million for the effective sale of its interests in the

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Divested Businesses. From the date of this reorganization, the operating results of the AMSEC Businesses, and transaction gain, have been reported on a consolidated basis in the Shipbuilding segment. Prior to the reorganization, the company accounted for AMSEC, LLC under the equity method.

 

In January 2007, the company acquired Essex Corporation (Essex) for approximately $590 million in cash, including the assumption of debt totaling $23 million. Essex provides signal processing services and products, and advanced optoelectronic imaging for U.S. government intelligence and defense customers. The operating results of Essex are reported in the Mission Systems segment.

 

2006 – There were no significant acquisitions during 2006.

 

2008 – In April 2008, the company sold its Electro-Optical Systems (EOS) business for $175 million in cash to L-3 Communications Corporation and recognized a gain of $19 million, net of taxes of $39 million. EOS, formerly a part of the Electronics segment, produces night vision and applied optics products. Sales for this business in the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006, were approximately $53 million, $190 million, and $122 million, respectively. Operating results of this business are reported as discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income for all periods presented.

 

2007 – During the second quarter of 2007, management announced its decision to exit the remaining Interconnect Technologies (ITD) business reported within the Electronics segment. Sales for this business in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, were $14 million and $35 million, respectively. The shut-down was completed during the third quarter of 2007 and costs associated with the shut-down were not material. The results of this business are reported as discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income for all periods presented.

 

2006 – During the second quarter of 2006, the Enterprise Information Technology (EIT) business, formerly reported in the Information Technology segment, was shut down and costs associated with the exit activities were not material. The results of operations of this business are reported as discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income for all periods presented.

 

The company sold the assembly business unit of ITD during the first quarter of 2006 and Winchester Electronics (Winchester) during the second quarter of 2006 for net cash proceeds of $26 million and $17 million, respectively, and recognized after-tax gains of $4 million and $2 million, respectively, in discontinued operations. Each of these business units was associated with the Electronics segment. The results of operations of the assembly business unit of ITD are reported as discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income. The results of operations of Winchester were not material to any of the periods presented and have therefore not been reclassified as discontinued operations.

 

The majority of the company’s business is generated from long-term government contracts for development, production, and service activities. Government contracts typically include the following cost elements: direct material, labor and subcontracting costs, and certain indirect costs including allowable general and administrative costs. Unless otherwise specified in a contract, costs billed to contracts with the U.S. Government are determined under the requirements of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) regulations as allowable and allocable costs. Examples of costs incurred by the company and not billed to the U.S. Government in accordance with the requirements of the FAR and CAS regulations include, but are not limited to, certain legal costs, lobbying costs, charitable donations, and advertising costs.

 

The company’s long-term contracts typically fall into one of two broad categories:

 

Flexibly Priced Contracts – Includes both cost-type and fixed-price incentive contracts. Cost-type contracts provide for reimbursement of the contractor’s allowable costs incurred plus a fee that represents profit. Cost-type

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

contracts generally require that the contractor use its best efforts to accomplish the scope of the work within some specified time and some stated dollar limitation. Fixed-price incentive contracts also provide for reimbursement of the contractor’s allowable costs, but are subject to a cost-share limit which affects profitability. Fixed-price incentive contracts effectively become firm fixed-price contracts once the cost-share limit is reached.

 

Firm Fixed-Price Contracts – A firm fixed-price contract is a contract in which the specified scope of work is agreed to for a price that is a pre-determined, negotiated amount and not generally subject to adjustment regardless of costs incurred by the contractor. Time-and-materials contracts are considered firm fixed-price contracts as they specify a fixed hourly rate for each labor hour charged.

 

The following table summarizes 2008 revenue recognized by contract type and customer:

 

 

Contract Fees – Negotiated contract fee structures, for both flexibly priced and fixed-price contracts include, but are not limited to: fixed-fee amounts, cost sharing arrangements to reward or penalize for either under or over cost target performance, positive award fees, and negative penalty arrangements. Profit margins may vary materially depending on the negotiated contract fee arrangements, percentage-of-completion of the contract, the achievement of performance objectives, and the stage of performance at which the right to receive fees, particularly under incentive and award fee contracts, is finally determined.

 

Positive Award Fees – Certain contracts contain provisions consisting of award fees based on performance criteria such as: cost, schedule, quality, and technical performance. Award fees are determined and earned based on an evaluation by the customer of the company’s performance against such negotiated criteria. Fees that can be reasonably assured and reasonably estimated are recorded over the performance period of the contract. Award fee contracts are widely used throughout the company’s operating segments. Examples of significant long-term contracts with substantial negotiated award fee amounts are the KEI, F-35 SDD, Global Hawk Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD), LPD, DDG-1000 programs and the majority of satellite contracts.

 

Compliance and Monitoring – On a regular basis, the company monitors its policies and procedures with respect to its contracts to ensure consistent application under similar terms and conditions as well as compliance with all applicable government regulations. In addition, costs incurred and allocated to contracts with the U.S. Government are routinely audited by the Defense Contract Audit Agency.

 

Revenue Recognition

Overview – The majority of the company’s business is derived from long-term contracts for the construction of facilities, production of goods, and services provided to the federal government, which are accounted for under the provisions of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 45 – Accounting for Long-Term Construction-Type Contracts, American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Statement of Position (SOP) No. 81-1 – Accounting for Performance of Construction-Type and Certain Production-Type Contracts, and the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide, Audits of Federal Government Contractors. The company classifies contract revenues as product sales or service revenues depending on the predominant attributes of the relevant underlying contracts. The company also enters into contracts that are not associated with the federal government, such as contracts to provide certain services to non-federal government customers. The company accounts for those contracts in accordance with the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition, and other relevant revenue recognition accounting literature.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

The company considers the nature of these contracts and the types of products and services provided when it determines the proper accounting method for a particular contract.

 

Percentage-of-Completion Accounting – The company generally recognizes revenues from its long-term contracts under the cost-to-cost and the units-of-delivery measures of the percentage-of-completion method of accounting. The percentage-of-completion method recognizes income as work on a contract progresses. For most contracts, sales are calculated based on the percentage of total costs incurred in relation to total estimated costs at completion of the contract. For certain contracts with large up-front purchases of material, primarily in the Shipbuilding segment, sales are generally calculated based on the percentage that direct labor costs incurred bear to total estimated direct labor costs. The units-of-delivery measure is a modification of the percentage-of-completion method, which recognizes revenues as deliveries are made to the customer generally using unit sales values in accordance with the contract terms. The company estimates profit as the difference between total estimated revenue and total estimated cost of a contract and recognizes that profit over the life of the contract based on deliveries.

 

The use of the percentage-of-completion method depends on the ability of the company to make reasonably dependable cost estimates for the design, manufacture, and delivery of its products and services. Such costs are typically incurred over a period of several years, and estimation of these costs requires the use of judgment. Sales under cost-type contracts are recorded as costs are incurred.

 

Many contracts contain positive and negative profit incentives based upon performance relative to predetermined targets that may occur during or subsequent to delivery of the product. These incentives take the form of potential additional fees to be earned or penalties to be incurred. Incentives and award fees that can be reasonably assured and reasonably estimated are recorded over the performance period of the contract. Incentives and award fees that cannot be reasonably assured and reasonably estimated are recorded when awarded or at such time as a reasonable estimate can be made.

 

Other changes in estimates of contract sales, costs, and profits are recognized using the cumulative catch-up method of accounting. This method recognizes in the current period the cumulative effect of the changes on current and prior periods. Hence, the effect of the changes on future periods of contract performance is recognized as if the revised estimate had been the original estimate. A significant change in an estimate on one or more contracts could have a material effect on the company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations.

 

Certain Service Contracts – Revenue under contracts to provide services to non-federal government customers are generally recognized when services are performed. Service contracts include operations and maintenance contracts, and outsourcing-type arrangements, primarily in the Information and Services business. Revenue under such contracts is generally recognized on a straight-line basis over the period of contract performance, unless evidence suggests that the revenue is earned or the obligations are fulfilled in a different pattern. Costs incurred under these service contracts are expensed as incurred, except that direct and incremental set-up costs are capitalized and amortized over the life of the agreement. Operating profit related to such service contracts may fluctuate from period to period, particularly in the earlier phases of the contract.

 

Service contracts that include more than one type of product or service are accounted for under the provisions of Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 00-21 – Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables. Accordingly, for applicable arrangements, revenue recognition includes the proper identification of separate units of accounting and the allocation of revenue across all elements based on relative fair values.

 

Cost Estimation – The cost estimation process requires significant judgment and is based upon the professional knowledge and experience of the company’s engineers, program managers, and financial professionals. Factors that are considered in estimating the work to be completed and ultimate contract recovery include the availability and productivity of labor, the nature and complexity of the work to be performed, the effect of change orders, the availability of materials, the effect of any delays in performance, availability and timing of funding from the

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

customer, and the recoverability of any claims included in the estimates to complete. A significant change in an estimate on one or more contracts could have a material effect on the company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations. Contract cost estimates are updated at least annually and more frequently as determined by events or circumstances. Cost and revenue estimates for each significant contract are generally reviewed and reassessed quarterly.

 

When estimates of total costs to be incurred on a contract exceed estimates of total revenue to be earned, a provision for the entire loss on the contract is recorded to cost of sales in the period the loss is determined. Loss provisions are first offset against costs that are included in inventoried assets, with any remaining amount reflected in liabilities.

 

Purchase Accounting and Goodwill

Overview – The purchase price of an acquired business is allocated to the underlying tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed based upon their respective fair market values, with the excess recorded as goodwill. Such fair market value assessments require judgments and estimates that can be affected by contract performance and other factors over time, which may cause final amounts to differ materially from original estimates. For acquisitions completed through December 31, 2008, adjustments to fair value assessments are recorded to goodwill over the purchase price allocation period (typically not exceeding twelve months). Adjustments related to income tax uncertainties, which may have extended beyond the purchase price allocation period, through December 31, 2008, were also recorded to goodwill.

 

Acquisition Accruals – The company has established certain accruals in connection with indemnities and other contingencies from its acquisitions and divestitures. These accruals and subsequent adjustments have been recorded during the purchase price allocation period for acquisitions and as events occur for divestitures. The accruals were determined based upon the terms of the purchase or sales agreements and, in most cases, involve a significant degree of judgment. Management has recorded these accruals in accordance with its interpretation of the terms of the purchase or sale agreements, known facts, and an estimation of probable future events based on management’s experience.

 

Goodwill – The company performs impairment tests for goodwill as of November 30th of each year, or when evidence of potential impairment exists.  When it is determined that impairment has occurred, a charge to operations is recorded. In order to test for potential impairment, the company uses a discounted cash flow analysis, corroborated by comparative market multiples where appropriate. Adverse equity market conditions and the resulting decline in current market multiples and the company’s stock price as of November 30, 2008, have led to a goodwill impairment charge totaling $3.1 billion at Shipbuilding and Space Technology. The company will continue to monitor the recoverability of the carrying value of its goodwill and other long-lived assets.

 

The principal factors used in the discounted cash flow analysis requiring judgment are the projected results of operations, weighted average cost of capital (WACC), and terminal value assumptions. The WACC takes into account the relative weights of each component of the company’s consolidated capital structure (equity and debt) and represents the expected cost of new capital adjusted as appropriate to consider lower risk profiles associated with longer term contracts and barriers to market entry. The terminal value assumptions are applied to the final year of the discounted cash flow model.

 

Due to the many variables inherent in the estimation of a business’s fair value and the relative size of the company’s recorded goodwill, differences in assumptions may have a material effect on the results of the company’s impairment analysis.

 

Litigation, Commitments, and Contingencies

Overview – The company is subject to a range of claims, lawsuits, environmental and income tax matters, and administrative proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. Estimating liabilities and costs associated with these matters requires judgment and assessment based upon professional knowledge and experience of management and its internal and external legal counsel. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Standards (SFAS) No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, amounts are recorded as charges to earnings when management, after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of each matter, including any settlement offers, has determined that it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The ultimate resolution of any such exposure to the company may vary from earlier estimates as further facts and circumstances become known.

 

Environmental Accruals – The company is subject to the environmental laws and regulations of the jurisdictions in which it conducts operations. The company records an accrual to provide for the costs of expected environmental obligations when management becomes aware that an expenditure will be incurred and the amount of the liability can be reasonably estimated. Factors which could result in changes to the company’s assessment of probability, range of loss, and environmental accruals include: modification of planned remedial actions, increase or decrease in the estimated time required to remediate, discovery of more extensive contamination than anticipated, results of efforts to determine legally responsible parties, changes in laws and regulations or contractual obligations affecting remediation requirements, and improvements in remediation technology. 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 company’s financial position, results of operation, or cash flows.

 

Litigation Accruals – Litigation accruals are recorded as charges to earnings when management, after taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of each matter, including any settlement offers, has determined that it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. The ultimate resolution of any exposure to the company may vary from earlier estimates as further facts and circumstances become known. Based upon the information available, the company believes that the resolution of any of these various claims and legal proceedings would not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

 

Uncertain Tax Positions – Effective January 1, 2007, the company measures and records uncertain tax positions in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. (FIN) 48 – Accounting for Uncertainty in income Taxes – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109. FIN 48 prescribes a threshold for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. Only tax positions meeting the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold may be recognized or continue to be recognized in the financial statements. The timing and amount of accrued interest is determined by the applicable tax law associated with an underpayment of income taxes. If a tax position does not meet the minimum statutory threshold to avoid payment of penalties, the company recognizes an expense for the amount of the penalty in the period the tax position is claimed in the tax return of the company. The company recognizes interest accrued related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense. Penalties, if probable and reasonably estimable, are recognized as a component of income tax expense. See Note 13 to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8. Prior to 2007, the company recorded accruals for tax contingencies and related interest when it determined that it was probable that a liability had been incurred and the amount of the contingency could be reasonably estimated based on specific events such as an audit or inquiry by a taxing authority. Under existing U.S. GAAP, prior to January 1, 2009, changes in accruals associated with uncertainties arising from the resolution of pre-acquisition contingencies of acquired businesses were charged or credited to goodwill; effective January 1, 2009, such changes will be recorded to income tax expense. Adjustments to other tax accruals are generally recorded in earnings in the period they are determined.

 

Retirement Benefits

Overview – Assumptions used in determining projected benefit obligations and the fair values of plan assets for the company’s pension plans and other postretirement benefits plans are evaluated annually by management in consultation with its outside actuaries. In the event that the company determines that plan amendments or changes in the assumptions are warranted, future pension and postretirement benefit expenses could increase or decrease.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Assumptions – The principal assumptions that have a significant effect on the company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations are the discount rate, the expected long-term rate of return on plan assets, and the health care cost trend rates. For certain plan assets where the fair market value is not readily determinable, such as real estate, private equity, and hedge funds, estimates of fair value are determined using the best information available.

 

Discount Rate – The discount rate represents the interest rate that is used to determine the present value of future cash flows currently expected to be required to settle the pension and postretirement benefit obligations. The discount rate is generally based on the yield on high-quality corporate fixed-income investments. At the end of each year, the discount rate is primarily determined using the results of bond yield curve models based on a portfolio of high quality bonds matching the notional cash inflows with the expected benefit payments for each significant benefit plan. Taking into consideration the factors noted above, the company’s weighted-average pension composite discount rate was 6.25 percent at December 31, 2008, and 6.22 percent at December 31, 2007. Holding all other assumptions constant, and since net actuarial gains and losses stayed within the 10 percent accounting corridor (as was the case for the 2008 expense measurement period), an increase or decrease of 25 basis points in the discount rate assumption for 2008 would have decreased or increased pension and postretirement benefit expense for 2008 by approximately $30 million and decreased or increased the amount of the benefit obligation recorded at December 31, 2008, by approximately $750 million. The effects of hypothetical changes in the discount rate for a single year may not be representative and may be asymmetrical or nonlinear for future years because of the application of the accounting corridor. The accounting corridor is a defined range within which amortization of net gains and losses is not required. Due to adverse capital market conditions the company’s pension plan assets experienced a negative return of approximately 16 percent in 2008. As a result, substantially all of the company’s plans have experienced net actuarial losses outside the 10 percent accounting corridor at the end of 2008, thus requiring accumulated gains and losses to be amortized to expense. As a result of this condition, sensitivity of net periodic costs to changes in the discount rate will be much higher in the near future than was the case in 2008.

 

Expected Long-Term Rate of Return – The expected long-term rate of return on plan assets represents the average rate of earnings expected on the funds invested in a specified target asset allocation to provide for anticipated future benefit payment obligations. For 2008 and 2007, the company assumed an expected long-term rate of return on plan assets of 8.5 percent. An increase or decrease of 25 basis points in the expected long-term rate of return assumption for 2008, holding all other assumptions constant, would increase or decrease the company’s pension and postretirement benefit expense for 2008 by approximately $60 million.

 

Health Care Cost Trend Rates – The health care cost trend rates represent the annual rates of change in the cost of health care benefits based on estimates of health care inflation, changes in health care utilization or delivery patterns, technological advances, and changes in the health status of the plan participants. For 2008, the company assumed an expected initial health care cost trend rate of 7.5 percent and an ultimate health care cost trend rate of 5 percent reached in 2014. In 2007, the company assumed an expected initial health care cost trend rate of 8 percent and an ultimate health care cost trend rate of 5 percent reached in 2012.

 

Differences in the initial through the ultimate health care cost trend rates within the range indicated below would have had the following impact on 2008 postretirement benefit results:

 

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

Selected financial highlights are presented in the table below.

 

 

Sales and Service Revenues

Sales and service revenues consist of the following:

 

 

2008 – Revenues for principal product businesses in Integrated Systems, Space Technology, Electronics, and Shipbuilding during 2008 grew at a combined rate of approximately 6 percent over 2007, reflecting sales growth at all four reporting segments. Revenue for principal services businesses in Information & Services during 2008 grew approximately 8 percent over 2007 due largely to double digit growth at Mission Systems, resulting from increased volume on contracts newly awarded in 2007 and 2008 and increased activity on other contracts.

 

2007 – Revenues for principal product businesses in Aerospace, Electronics, and Shipbuilding during 2007 grew at a combined rate of approximately 3 percent over 2006, reflecting sales growth in Electronics and Shipbuilding, partially offset by reduced sales in Aerospace. The sales growth at Electronics and Shipbuilding is due to volume improvements across most business areas, while the sales reduction in Aerospace was anticipated as a number of contracts transitioned from development to production in 2007. Revenue for principal services businesses in Information & Services during 2007 grew approximately 11 percent over 2006 due largely to double digit growth at Information Technology and Technical Services, resulting from increased volume on contracts that were newly awarded in 2006 and increased activity on other contracts.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Cost of Sales and Service Revenues

 

Cost of sales and general and administrative expenses are comprised of the following:

 

 

Cost of Product Sales and Service Revenues

2008 – Cost of product sales during 2008 increased $1.2 billion, or 8 percent, over 2007 and increased 170 basis points as a percent of product sales over the same period due largely to the sales volume increase described above. The increase in cost of product sales as a percentage of product sales is primarily due to cost growth at the Gulf Coast shipyards. In the first quarter of 2008, the company recorded a $326 million pre-tax charge on LHD-8 and other Shipbuilding programs, and in the third quarter of 2008, the company recorded additional costs for work delays at a subcontractor on the LPD program as a result of Hurricane Ike. The LHD-8 program achieved several important risk retirement milestones toward its planned delivery date, and as a result $63 million of the first quarter 2008 charge was reversed in the second half of 2008.

 

Cost of service revenues during 2008 increased $911 million, or 8 percent, over 2007 and increased 40 basis points as a percent of service revenues over the same period due primarily to the sales volume increase described above. The increase in cost of service revenues as a percentage of service revenues is primarily due to lower performance in the Commercial, State & Local business area in Information Technology.

 

2007 – Cost of product sales during 2007 increased $65 million over 2006 while decreasing 80 basis points as a percentage of product sales over the same period. The increase in cost of product sales is due largely to the sales volume increase described above while the margin rate improvement is primarily driven by improved program performance at Aerospace and Shipbuilding.

 

Cost of service sales during 2007 increased $1.1 billion, or 11 percent, over 2006 while decreasing 210 basis points as a percentage of service sales over the same period. Cost of service revenues in 2007 increased over 2006 primarily due to higher sales volume at Information & Services.

 

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 primarily relate to segment operations. General and administrative expenses as a percentage of total sales and service revenues decreased from 10 percent in 2007 to 9.6 percent in 2008 primarily as a result of costs remaining relatively constant while revenues increased over the same period in 2007. General and administrative expenses remained at a constant rate of approximately 10 percent of sales in 2007 and 2006.

 

Goodwill Impairment – In the fourth quarter of 2008, the company recorded a non-cash charge totaling $3.1 billion at Shipbuilding and Space Technology for the impairment of goodwill. In accordance with

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

SFAS No. 142 – Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, the company performed its required annual impairment test for goodwill using a discounted cash flow analysis supported by comparative market multiples to determine the fair values of its businesses versus their book values. The test as of November 30, 2008, indicated that the book values for Shipbuilding and Space Technology exceeded the fair values of these businesses. The impairment charge is primarily driven by adverse equity market conditions that caused a decrease in current market multiples and the company’s stock price as of November 30, 2008, compared with the test performed as of November 30, 2007. The charge reduces goodwill recorded in connection with acquisitions made in 2001 and 2002 and does not impact the company’s normal business operations.

 

Prior to recording the goodwill impairment charges at Shipbuilding and Space Technology, the company tested the purchased intangible assets and other long-lived assets at both of these businesses as required by SFAS No. 144 – Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-lived Assets, and the carrying value of these assets were determined not to be impaired.

 

Operating (Loss) Income

The company considers operating income to be an important measure for evaluating its operating performance and, as is typical in the industry, defines operating income as revenues less the related cost of producing the revenues and general and administrative expenses. Operating income for the company is further evaluated for each of the business segments in which the company operates.

 

Management of the company internally manages its operations by reference to “segment operating income.” Segment operating income is defined as operating income before unallocated expenses and net pension adjustment, both of which do not affect the segments, and the reversal of royalty income, which is classified as other income for financial reporting purposes. Segment operating income is one of the key metrics management uses to evaluate operating performance. Segment operating income is not, however, a measure of financial performance under U.S. GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by other companies in the same manner.

 

 

Segment Operating (Loss) Income

2008 – Segment operating loss for the year ended December 31, 2008, was $145 million as compared with segment operating income of $3.1 billion in 2007. The decrease was primarily due to the goodwill impairment charge totaling $3.1 billion at Shipbuilding and Space Technology. See the Segment Operating Results section below for further information.

 

2007 – Segment operating income for the year ended December 31, 2007, increased $278 million, or 10 percent, as compared with 2006. Total segment operating income was 9.8 percent and 9.5 percent of total sales and service revenues for the years ended December 31, 2007, and 2006, respectively. See the Segment Operating Results section below for further information.

 

Unallocated Expenses

2008 – Unallocated expenses for the year ended December 31, 2008, decreased $47 million, or 23 percent, as compared with the same period in 2007. The decrease was primarily due to $88 million in higher legal and investigative provisions recorded in 2007, partially offset by an increase in environmental, health and welfare, and other unallocated corporate costs in 2008.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

2007 – Unallocated expenses for the year ended December 31, 2007, decreased $81 million, or 28 percent, as compared with 2006. The decrease was primarily due to $98 million in lower post-retirement benefit costs determined under GAAP as a result of a plan design change in 2006 and $36 million lower legal and investigative provisions, partially offset by an increase in other costs including $18 million in higher litigation expenses. During the third quarter 2006, the company recorded a $112.5 million pre-tax provision for its settlement offer to the U.S. Department of Justice and a restricted customer.

 

Net Pension Adjustment – The net pension adjustment reflects the difference between pension expense determined in accordance with SFAS No. 87 – Employer’s Accounting for Pensions (U.S. GAAP pension expense) and the pension expense allocated to the operating segments under CAS. The net pension adjustment increased income by $263 million and $127 million in 2008 and 2007, respectively, as compared with an expense of $37 million in 2006. The income in 2008 and 2007 was due to decreased U.S. GAAP pension expense primarily resulting from better than estimated investment returns and higher discount rate assumptions.

 

Due to adverse capital market conditions the company’s pension plan assets experienced a negative return of approximately 16 percent in 2008 compared with a long-term estimated return of 8.5 percent. As a result of 2008 actual plan returns, the company estimates U.S. GAAP pension expense of $839 million in 2009, a substantial increase over the 2008 expense of $225 million. The 2009 estimate is based on a 6.25 discount rate and a long-term rate of return of 8.5 percent.

 

Interest Expense

2008 – Interest expense decreased $41 million, or 12 percent, in 2008 as compared with 2007. The decrease is primarily due to the conversion and redemption of the mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock in April 2008, which reduced the related dividends paid during the 2008 periods (which were recorded as interest expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive (loss) income in Part II, Item 8). Lower LIBOR rates on the interest rate swap agreements also contributed to the decrease in interest expense.

 

2007 – Interest expense decreased $11 million, or 3 percent, in 2007 as compared with 2006. The decrease is primarily due to a lower average debt balance.

 

Other, net

2008 – Other, net for the year ended December 31, 2008 was $38 million income, an increase of $22 million, as compared with 2007, primarily due to $59 million in royalty income from patent infringement settlements at Electronics in 2008, partially offset by negative mark to market adjustments on investments in marketable securities used as a funding source for non-qualified employee benefits.

 

2007 – Other, net for the year ended December 31, 2007 was $16 million income, a decrease of $153 million, as compared with 2006. During 2006, the company sold its remaining 9.7 million TRW Automotive (TRW Auto) shares, generating pre-tax gains of $111 million.

 

Federal and Foreign Income Taxes

2008 – The company’s effective tax rate on earnings from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2008, was 33.9 percent (excluding the non-cash, non-deductible goodwill impairment charge of $3.1 billion at Shipbuilding and Space Technology) as compared with 32.9 percent in 2007. During 2008, the company recognized net tax benefits of $35 million, primarily attributable to a settlement reached with the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation with respect to the IRS audit of TRW tax returns for the years 1999-2002.

 

2007 – The company’s effective tax rate on earnings from continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2007, was 32.9 percent compared with 31.2 percent in 2006. During 2007, the company reached a partial settlement agreement with the IRS regarding its audit of the company’s tax years ended 2001-2003 resulting in a tax benefit of $22 million.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Diluted (Loss) Earnings Per Share

2008 – Diluted loss per share from continuing operations for 2008 was $3.83 per share, as compared with $5.18 diluted earnings per share in 2007. Earnings per share are based on weighted-average diluted shares outstanding of 334.5 million for 2008 and 354.3 million for 2007. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the potential dilutive effect of 7.1 million shares from stock options, stock awards, and the mandatorily redeemable preferred stock were excluded from the computation of weighted average diluted common shares outstanding as the shares would have had an anti-dilutive effect. The goodwill impairment charge of $3.1 billion at Shipbuilding and Space Technology reduced the company’s diluted earnings per share from continuing operations by $9.04 per share.

 

2007 – Diluted earnings per share from continuing operations for 2007 was $5.18 per share, an increase of 15 percent from $4.51 per share in 2006. Earnings per share are based on weighted-average diluted shares outstanding of 354.3 million for 2007 and 358.6 million for 2006. Diluted earnings per share from continuing operations and the weighted-average diluted shares outstanding include the dilutive effects of stock options, stock awards and the mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock. All of the mandatorily redeemable convertible preferred stock was converted into common stock by April 2008. See Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8.

 

Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities

2008 – Net cash provided by operating activities in 2008 increased $321 million as compared with 2007 and reflects lower income tax payments and continued trade working capital reductions. Pension plan contributions totaled $320 million in 2008, of which $200 million was voluntarily pre-funded, and were comparable to 2007.

 

Net cash provided by operating activities for 2008 included $113 million of federal and state income tax refunds and $23 million of interest income.

 

2007 – Net cash provided by operating activities in 2007 increased $1.1 billion as compared with 2006, and reflects lower pension contributions, higher net earnings, and continued trade working capital reductions. Pension plan contributions totaled $342 million in 2007, of which $200 million was voluntarily pre-funded, compared with contributions of $1.2 billion in 2006, of which $800 million was voluntarily pre-funded.

 

Net cash provided by operating activities for 2007 included the receipt of $125 million of insurance proceeds related to Hurricane Katrina, $52 million of federal and state income tax refunds, and $21 million of interest.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

 

Realignments – The company, from time to time, acquires or disposes of businesses, and realigns contracts, programs or business areas among or within its operating segments that possess similar customers, expertise, and capabilities. These realignments are designed to more fully leverage existing capabilities and enhance development and delivery of products and services. During the second quarter of 2008, the company transferred certain programs and assets from the missiles business in the Mission Systems segment to the Space Technology segment. In January 2008, the Newport News and Ship Systems businesses were realigned into a single segment called Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding. Previously, these businesses were separate operating segments which were aggregated into a single segment for financial reporting purposes. In addition, certain Electronics businesses were transferred to Mission Systems during the first quarter of 2008. The operating results for all periods presented have been revised to reflect these changes. See a description of the segment business areas and specific realignments located in Part I, Item 1.

 

Subsequent Realignments – In January 2009, the company streamlined its organizational structure by reducing the number of reporting segments from seven to five. The five segments are Aerospace Systems, which combines the former Integrated Systems and Space Technology segments; Electronic Systems; Information Systems, which combines the former Information Technology and Mission Systems segments; Shipbuilding and Technical Services. The creation of the Aerospace Systems and Information Systems segments strengthens alignment with customers, improves the company’s ability to execute on programs and win new business, and enhances cost competitiveness. This subsequent realignment is not reflected in any of the accompanying financial information.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

 

Operating Performance Assessment and Reporting

The company manages and assesses the performance of its businesses based on its 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 on page 32. Based on this approach and the nature of the company’s operations, the discussion of consolidated results of operations generally focuses around the company’s seven reporting segments versus distinguishing between products and services. Product sales are predominantly generated in the Electronics, Integrated Systems, Space Technology and Shipbuilding segments, while the majority of the company’s service revenues are generated by the Information Technology, Mission Systems and Technical Services segments.

 

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 due to varying production activity levels, delivery rates, or service levels on individual contracts. Volume changes will typically carry a corresponding income change based on the margin rate for a particular contract.

 

Segment Operating Income

Segment operating income reflects the performance of segment contracts. 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 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. 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.

 

Operating income may also be affected by, among other things, the effects of workforce stoppages, the effects of 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.

 

For a more complete understanding of each segment’s product and services, see the business descriptions in Part I, Item 1.

 

Program Descriptions

For convenience, a brief description of certain programs discussed in this Form 10-K are included in the “Glossary of Programs” beginning on page 55.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

INFORMATION & SERVICES

 

 

Sales and Service Revenues

Mission Systems

2008 – Mission systems revenue increased $563 million, or 11 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase was due to $337 million in higher sales in Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) and $200 million in higher sales in Command, Control and Communications (C3). The increase in ISR is primarily due to the ramp up of certain restricted programs and the Navstar Global Positioning System Operational Control Segment (Navstar GPS OCX), partially offset by lower volume on the wind down of the Space Based Surveillance System (SBSS) program. The increase in C3 is due to higher volume across various programs, including the Counter-Rocket Artillery Mortar (CRAM), Command Post Platform (CPP) and Joint National Integration Center Research & Development (JRDC), partially offset by lower deliveries and development activities in the F-22 and F-35 Lightning II (F-35) programs.

 

2007 – Mission Systems revenue increased $373 million, or 8 percent, as compared with 2006. The increase was due to $279 million in higher sales in ISR and $118 million in higher sales in C3. The increase in ISR is principally due to the acquisition of Essex. The increase in C3 is due to higher volume in several programs, including the Force XXI Battle Brigade and Below (FBCB2) I-Kits program and international commercial businesses and increased scope and funding levels in the JRDC program. These increases were partially offset by lower volume in the F-35 development program as hardware development in 2006 winds down in 2007 and reduced scope and deliveries accelerated into 2006 in the F-22 program.

 

Information Technology

2008 – Information Technology revenue increased $32 million, or 1 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase was primarily due to $130 million in higher sales in Intelligence, and $62 million in higher sales in Defense, partially offset by $84 million in lower sales in Civilian Agencies and $52 million in lower sales in Commercial, State & Local (CS&L). The increase in Intelligence is due to new restricted programs and growth on existing programs, along with the acquisition of 3001 in the fourth quarter of 2008 while the increase in Defense is associated with higher volume in the Network Centric Solutions program. The decreases in Civilian Agencies and CS&L are primarily due to the ending of programs from the previous year and a more disciplined approach to obtaining new business in the CS&L area.

 

2007 – Information Technology revenue increased $524 million, or 13 percent, as compared with 2006. The increase was primarily due to $275 million in higher sales in CS&L, $222 million in higher sales in Intelligence, and $133 million in higher sales in Defense, partially offset by $73 million in lower sales in Civilian Agencies. The increase in CS&L is associated with the effect of a full year of sales from new programs awarded in 2006, including the New York City Wireless (NYCWiN), Virginia IT outsourcing, and San Diego County IT outsourcing programs. The increase in Intelligence is due to new restricted program wins and higher volume on existing programs. The increase in Defense is due to increased volume on various existing programs and new

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

business wins. The decrease in Civilian Agencies is primarily due to customer program budget reductions and program completions.

 

Technical Services

2008 – Technical Services revenue increased $119 million or 5 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase is primarily due to $113 million in higher sales in Life Cycle Optimization & Engineering (LCOE) and $28 million in higher sales in Training & Simulation (TSG), partially offset by $26 million in lower sales in Systems Support (SSG). The increase in LCOE is associated with higher volume in the Hunter CLS and B-2 Stealth Bomber (B-2) programs. The increase in TSG is primarily due to higher sales volume from various new training and simulation program awards. The decrease in SSG is associated with the completion of the Joint Base Operations Support program and decreased activity on the Nevada Test Site program.

 

2007 – Technical Services revenue increased $319 million or 17 percent, as compared with 2006. The increase is primarily due to $248 million and $66 million in higher sales in SSG and LCOE, respectively. The increase in SSG is primarily driven by $252 million from the effects of a full year of sales for the Nevada Test Site program in 2007 as compared to six months of revenue in 2006. The increase in LCOE is due to increased demand for F-15 repairs at the Warner Robins Regional Repair Service Center, increased demand on the Hunter CLS program and increased work on the B-2 programs.

 

Segment Operating Income

Mission Systems

2008 – Operating income at Mission Systems was comparable with 2007. The increase in operating income due to higher sales volume was offset by $51 million in lower performance results. The decrease in operating income as a percentage of sales reflects lower performance for command, control and communications programs, including higher planned internal investment for a new business opportunity, and final allocation of current and prior year overhead items.

 

2007 – Mission Systems operating income increased $57 million, or 13 percent, in 2007 as compared with 2006. The increase is driven by $37 million from the higher sales volume described above and $20 million in net performance improvements. The increase in operating income as a percentage of sales is due to cost improvements achieved based on increases in customer order quantities in the FBCB2 I-Kits program, final negotiation of award fee earned on the National Team Battle Management Command and Control (BMC2) program, lower labor costs and favorable pricing of supplier procured materials in the CPP program and elimination of risk associated with hardware obsolescence in the Ground-Based Midcourse Defense Fire Control and Communications (GFC/C) program. Net performance improvements were partially offset by $12 million in higher amortization of purchased intangibles.

 

Information Technology

2008 – Information Technology operating income decreased $24 million, or 7 percent, as compared with 2007. The decrease in operating income was primarily driven by lower performance results in CS&L, primarily due to a $57 million negative performance adjustment in the NYCWiN program recorded in the third quarter of 2008. The adjustment includes provisions related to a key supplier as well as a revised estimate of cost to complete the program.

 

2007 – Information Technology operating income decreased $13 million, or 4 percent, as compared with 2006. The decrease in operating income is due to $51 million in lower net performance results, partially offset by $38 million from the higher sales volume described above. The decrease in operating income as a percentage of sales was driven by $28 million in increased amortization of deferred and other outsourcing costs on large IT outsourcing programs compared to the prior period, and $22 million in discretionary spending for internal information systems infrastructure expected to yield future cost improvements.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Technical Services

2008 – Technical Services operating income increased $1 million, or 1 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase in operating income due to higher sales volume was partially offset by a higher level of planned internal investment and final allocation of current and prior year overhead items.

 

2007 – Technical Services operating income was comparable with 2006. The increase in operating income due to higher sales volume was offset by the effects of performance improvements taken in the prior year and favorable 2006 margin adjustments to reflect risk reduction on contracts for spares production on fixed price contracts. A lower margin mix from the Nevada Test Site program also contributed to offsetting the volume increase.

 

AEROSPACE

 

 

Sales and Service Revenues

Integrated Systems

2008 – Integrated Systems revenue increased $437 million, or 9 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase was primarily due to higher volume associated with Unmanned Combat Air System Carrier Demonstration (UCAS-D), Global Hawk High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE) Systems, B-2, Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System (Joint STARS), Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) Unmanned Aircraft System, and restricted programs, partially offset by lower volume in the E-2 programs, Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program (MP-RTIP), F-35, and E-10A programs.

 

2007 – Integrated Systems revenue decreased $433 million, or 8 percent, as compared with 2006. Approximately $325 million of the decrease was a result of the transition of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, F-35 and EA-18G development programs to their early production phases. Also contributing to the reduction in revenue was approximately $160 million from the effects of significant customer-directed scope reductions associated with the E-10A platform and related MP-RTIP efforts. These reductions were partially offset by higher volume of $69 million for the F/A-18 Multi-Year Procurement (MYP) and $77 million for the Global Hawk programs.

 

Space Technology

2008 – Space Technology revenue increased $160 million, or 4 percent, in 2008 as compared with 2007. The increase is primarily due to $202 million higher sales in National Systems, $104 million higher sales in Civil Systems, and $68 million higher sales in Missile Systems, partially offset by $206 million lower sales in Military Systems. The increase in National Systems is due to higher volume on restricted programs, partially offset by the termination of the Space Radar program in the second quarter of 2008. The increase in Civil Systems is due to higher volume associated with the JWST and NPOESS programs. The increase in Missile Systems is due to higher volume associated with the KEI program. The decrease in Military Systems is due to lower volume associated with the AEHF and STSS programs.

 

2007 – Space Technology revenue increased $307 million, or 8 percent, in 2007 as compared with 2006. The increase was primarily due to $187 million higher sales in National Systems, $97 million higher sales in Missile Systems, and $49 million higher sales in Technology & Emerging Systems. The increase in National Systems is due to higher volume on restricted programs and the Space Radar program. The increase in Technology &

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Emerging Systems is due to higher volume on restricted programs. The increase in Missile Systems is due to higher volume associated with the KEI program.

 

Segment Operating (Loss) Income

Integrated Systems

2008 – Integrated Systems operating income increased $22 million, or 4 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase in operating income reflects $49 million from the higher sales volume described above, partially offset by the impact of a $27 million favorable adjustment in 2007 related to the settlement of prior years’ overhead costs.

 

2007 – Integrated Systems operating income increased $40 million, or 7 percent, as compared with 2006. The increase in operating income is due to $91 million in net performance improvements, partially offset by $51 million in the lower sales volume described above. The increase in operating income as a percentage of sales is primarily due to risk reduction achieved on the Global Hawk, E-2 and B-2 programs and the favorable settlement of a prior year’s overhead costs.

 

Space Technology

2008 – Space Technology operating loss was $196 million as compared with operating income of $329 million in 2007. The decrease is due to a goodwill impairment charge of $570 million (see Goodwill Impairment on page 33), partially offset by the higher sales volume described above, and $31 million in net performance improvements. The net performance improvements are associated with risk retirement in several key programs including KEI, ICBM, ABL and various restricted programs.

 

2007 – Space Technology operating income increased $18 million, or 6 percent, as compared with 2006. The increase is due to $24 million in the higher sales volume described above, partially offset by $6 million in lower performance results.

 

ELECTRONICS

 

 

Sales and Service Revenues

2008 – Electronics revenue increased $562 million, or 9 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase was primarily due to $222 million in higher sales in Aerospace Systems, $165 million in higher sales in Land Forces, $69 million in higher sales in Navigation Systems, and $60 million in higher sales in Defensive Systems. The increase in Aerospace Systems is due to higher deliveries of upgraded F-16 international fire control radar systems and increased volume on the MESA Korea program. The increase in Land Forces is due to higher volume on vehicular intercommunication systems and the G/ATOR radar program. The increase in Navigation Systems is due to higher volume associated with Inertial Navigation programs. The increase in Defensive Systems is due to higher deliveries associated with the Large Aircraft Infrared Countermeasures (LAIRCM) IDIQ program.

 

2007 – Electronics revenue increased $261 million, or 4 percent, as compared with 2006, reflecting $169 million higher sales in Land Forces, $133 million higher sales in the Space & ISR Systems, and $97 million in Naval & Marine Systems (NMD), partially offset by $136 million lower sales in Aerospace Systems. The increase in Land Forces sales is primarily due to higher deliveries on communication and weapons & sensor programs. The increase in Space & ISR Systems sales is primarily attributable to increases in intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance programs. The increase in NMS sales is primarily due to higher volume on a restricted program. The lower Aerospace Systems sales are primarily due to the effect of declining volume on fixed price development programs.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Segment Operating Income

2008 – Electronics operating income increased $139 million, or 17 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase in operating income is primarily due to $75 million from the higher sales volume described above and $59 million in royalty income resulting from patent infringement settlements at Navigation Systems. The 2008 operating income includes a pre-tax charge of $20 million for the company’s Wedgetail MESA program associated with potential liquidated damages arising from the prime contractor’s announced schedule delay in completing the program. The 2007 operating income includes a pre-tax charge of $27 million for the F-16 Block 60 fixed-price development combat avionics program.

 

2007 – Electronics operating income increased $27 million, or 3 percent, as compared with 2006. The increase in operating income is largely attributable to higher volume, primarily in Government Systems, Defensive Systems, and Naval & Marine Systems. Operating income included a $27 million pre-tax charge for the F-16 Block 60 fixed-price development combat avionics program to reflect a higher estimate of software integration costs to complete the Falcon Edge electronic warfare suite. The 2006 operating income includes $121 million in pre-tax charges primarily for the MESA and Advanced Self Protection Integrated Suite (ASPIS) II programs. The 2007 operating income also includes $14 million in consolidation costs related to the closure of several facilities as a result of a continuing focus on effective infrastructure management and $18 million in provisions for settled and outstanding legal matters.

 

SHIPBUILDING

 

 

Sales and Service Revenues

2008 – Shipbuilding revenues increased $357 million, or 6 percent, as compared with 2007. The increase is primarily due to $254 million higher sales in Aircraft Carriers, $178 million higher sales in Surface Combatants, and $112 million higher sales in Fleet Support, partially offset by $184 million lower sales in Expeditionary Warfare. The increase in Aircraft Carriers is primarily due to higher sales volume on the Gerald R. Ford, USS Enterprise Extended Docking Selected Restricted Availability (EDSRA), and USS Roosevelt Refueling and Complex Overhaul (RCOH), partially offset by lower volume on the USS Carl Vinson. The increase in Surface Combatants is primarily due to higher sales volume in the DDG 51 and DDG 1000 programs. The increase in Fleet Support is primarily due to the consolidation of AMSEC in the 2008 period. Expeditionary Warfare sales were negatively impacted by a contract adjustment of $134 million on the LHD-8 program in the first quarter of 2008 and the Hurricane Gustav impact in the third quarter of 2008, partially offset by higher sales in the LPD program. In 2007, all programs at the Pascagoula, Mississippi facility were negatively impacted by a labor strike.

 

2007 – Shipbuilding revenues increased $467 million, or 9 percent as compared with 2006. The increase was primarily due to $252 million in higher sales in Expeditionary Warfare, $92 million in higher sales in Fleet Support, $81 million in higher sales in Coast Guard and Coastal Defense, $53 million in higher sales in Submarines, $52 million in higher sales in Aircraft Carriers, partially offset by $33 million in lower sales in Surface Combatants, and $25 million in lower sales in Services, Commercial & Other. The increase in Expeditionary Warfare was primarily due to higher sales volume in the LPD and LHA programs due to production ramp-ups, partially offset by lower sales volume in the LHD program as a result of a labor strike at the Pascagoula, Mississippi shipyard. The increase in Fleet Support was due to the reorganization of AMSEC. The increase in Coast Guard and Coastal Defense was due to higher sales volume in the NSC program. The decrease in Surface Combatants was due to lower sales in the DDG 1000 program and the impacts of the labor strike.

 

NORTHROP GRUMMAN CORPORATION

 

Segment Operating (Loss) Income

2008 – Operating loss at Shipbuilding was $2.3 billion as compared with operating income of $538 million in the same period of 2007. The decrease is due to a goodwill impairment charge of $2.5 billion (see Goodwill Impairment on page 33), and $366 million in net lower performance results, partially offset by the higher sales volume described above. The decrease in net performance results is primarily due to a $326 million pre-tax charge on LHD-8 and other programs in the first quarter of 2008, cost growth and schedule delays on several LPD ships resulting primarily from the effects of Hurricane Ike on an LPD subcontractor (see Note 16 to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8), and the effect of reductions in contract booking rates resulting from management taking a more conservative approach in its risk assessment on programs throughout the Gulf Coast Shipyards. The LHD-8 program achieved several important risk retirement milestones toward its planned delivery date, and as a result, $63 million of the first quarter 2008 charge was reversed in the second half of 2008.

 

2007 – Operating income at Shipbuilding increased $145 million, or 37 percent, as compared with 2006. The increase is primarily due to $43 million from the higher sales volume described above, $62 million for recovery of lost profits from a settlement of a portion of the Katrina insurance claim, and a $23 million pre-tax gain resulting from the reorganization of AMSEC, partially offset by $55 million for a contract earnings rate adjustment on LHD-8 associated with a schedule extension resulting from manpower constraints in critical crafts (electrical and pipefitting) following the strike at the Pascagoula shipyard in 2007.

 

Total backlog at December 31, 2008, was approximately $78 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 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.

 

The following table presents funded and unfunded backlog by segment at December 31, 2008 and 2007: