Back to GetFilings.com
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
| |
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| |
| |
|
For the fiscal year ended November 30, 2004 |
| |
|
or |
| |
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
| |
| |
|
For the transition period
from to . |
Commission file number 1-1520
GenCorp Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| |
|
|
|
Ohio
|
|
34-0244000 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
| |
|
Highway 50 and Aerojet Road |
|
95742 |
|
Rancho Cordova, California |
|
(Zip Code) |
|
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
|
| |
|
P.O. Box 537012 |
|
95853-7012 |
|
Sacramento, California |
|
(Zip Code) |
|
(Mailing address) |
|
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code
(916) 355-4000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
| |
|
|
| Title of each class |
|
Name of each exchange on which registered |
| |
|
|
|
Common stock, par value of $0.10 per share
|
|
New York Stock Exchange and
Chicago Stock Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405
of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be
contained, to the best of the registrants 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. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated
filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Act). Yes þ No o
The aggregate market value of the voting common equity held by
nonaffiliates of the registrant as of May 28, 2004 was
approximately $503 million.
As of January 31, 2005, there were 54,519,818 outstanding
shares of the Companys Common Stock, $0.10 par value.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the 2005 Proxy Statement of GenCorp Inc. relating to
its annual meeting of shareholders scheduled to be held on
March 30, 2005 are incorporated by reference into
Part III of this Report.
GENCORP INC.
Annual Report on Form 10-K
For the Fiscal Year Ended November 30, 2004
Table of Contents
|
|
| * |
The information called for by Items 10, 11, 12, 13
and 14, to the extent not included in this document, is
incorporated herein by reference to the information to be
included under the captions Election of Directors,
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance, Board Committees, Executive
Compensation, Director Compensation,
Employment Contracts and Termination of Employment and
Change in Control Arrangements, Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation,
Report of the Organization and Compensation Committee of
the Board of Directors on Executive Compensation,
Performance Graph, Security Ownership of
Officers and Directors, and Ratification of
Registered Public Accounting Firm, in GenCorp Inc.s
2005 Proxy Statement, which is expected to be filed by
February 28, 2005. |
1
PART I
Item 1. Business
Unless otherwise indicated or required by the context, as
used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the terms
we, our and us refer to
GenCorp Inc. and all of its subsidiaries that are consolidated
in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States.
We are a technology-based manufacturer operating primarily in
the United States. Our continuing operations are organized into
two segments:
Aerospace and Defense includes the operations
of Aerojet-General Corporation, or Aerojet, which develops and
manufactures propulsion systems for defense and space
applications, armament systems for precision tactical weapon
systems and munitions applications. We are one of the largest
providers of both liquid and solid propulsion systems in the
United States. Primary customers served include major prime
contractors to the United States (U.S.) government, the
Department of Defense (DoD), and the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA).
Real Estate includes activities related to
the development, sale, and leasing of our real estate assets.
Through our Aerojet subsidiary, we own approximately 12,600
acres of land adjacent to U.S. Highway 50 between Rancho Cordova
and Folsom, California just east of Sacramento, which we refer
to as the Sacramento Land. We are currently in the process of
seeking zoning changes and other governmental approvals to allow
the development of a portion of the Sacramento Land to optimize
its value. We have filed applications with governmental and
regulatory authorities for approvals necessary to develop over
5,800 acres of the Sacramento Land.
During the second quarter of fiscal 2004, we announced plans to
sell our GDX Automotive (GDX) business which developed and
manufactured vehicle sealing systems for automotive original
equipment manufacturers. This decision was a result of declining
volumes and continued challenges in this market environment
including adverse customer pricing pressures, increased material
costs, high development and start-up costs and increased working
capital requirements. In accordance with our plan to sell the
GDX business, we classified our GDX business segment as a
discontinued operation during the second quarter of fiscal 2004.
During the third quarter of fiscal 2004, we completed the sale
of GDX to Cerberus Capital Management, L.P. for
$147 million, subject to adjustment, of which
$140 million had been received as of November 30,
2004. In addition, on October 15, 2004, we announced our
strategic decision to sell our Fine Chemicals business, which,
through Aerojet Fine Chemicals, is a custom manufacturer of
active pharmaceutical ingredients and registered intermediates
for pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. This plan was a
result of managements decision to focus our capital and
resources on our Aerospace and Defense and Real Estate
businesses. We will continue to operate our Fine Chemicals
business in the ordinary course of business pending any sale. We
classified our Fine Chemicals business segment as a discontinued
operation as of the third quarter of fiscal 2004.
We were incorporated in Ohio in 1915 and our principal executive
offices are located at Highway 50 and Aerojet Road, Rancho
Cordova, CA 95670. Our mailing address is P.O. Box 537012,
Sacramento, CA 95853-7012 and our telephone number is
916-355-4000.
Our Internet web site address is www.GenCorp.com. We have made
available through our Internet web site, free of charge, our
Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on
Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments
to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as
reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically
filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). We also make available on our Internet web
site our corporate governance guidelines and the charters for
each of the following committees of the Companys Board of
Directors: Audit; Corporate Governance and Nominating; Finance;
and Organization & Compensation. Our corporate governance
guidelines and such charters are also available in print to any
shareholder who requests them.
2
Our fiscal year ends on November 30 of each year. When we
refer to a fiscal year, such as fiscal 2004, we are referring to
the fiscal year ended on November 30 of that year.
Aerospace and Defense
For over 60 years, Aerojet has been an industry leader and
pioneer in the development of critical products and technologies
that have strengthened the U.S. military and enabled the
exploration of space. Aerojet focuses on creating military
defense systems, as well as military, civil and commercial space
systems, that address the needs of two broad industry sectors:
defense systems and space systems. Aerojet believes it is in a
unique competitive position, due to the diversity of its
propulsion technologies (solid, liquid, air-breathing and
electric) and synergy of its product lines to offer its
customers the most innovative and advanced solutions available
in the domestic propulsion market. Aerojet has historically been
able to capitalize on its strong technical capabilities to
become a critical provider of components and systems for major
propulsion programs. Aerojet propulsion systems have flown
prominently on manned and unmanned missions for NASA and the DoD
since the inception of the U.S. Space Program. Principal
customers include the DoD, NASA, The Boeing Company (Boeing),
Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed Martin) and Raytheon
Company (Raytheon).
|
|
|
| |
|
Defense systems Our defense systems
products include liquid, solid and air-breathing propulsion for
strategic and tactical missiles, precision strike missiles and
interceptors required for missile defense. In addition, Aerojet
is a leading supplier of armament systems to the DoD and its
prime contractors. Product applications for defense systems
include strategic and tactical missile motors, maneuvering
propulsion systems, attitude control systems and warhead
assemblies used in precision weapon systems and missile defense,
as well as advanced airframe structures required on the F-22
Raptor aircraft and fire suppression systems for military and
commercial vehicles. |
| |
| |
|
Space systems Our space systems
products include liquid, solid and electric propulsion systems
for launch vehicles, transatmospheric vehicles and spacecraft.
Product applications for space systems include liquid engines
for expendable and reusable launch vehicles, upper stage
engines, satellite propulsion, large solid boosters and
integrated propulsion subsystems. |
Aerojet has been proactively engaged in the consolidation of the
propulsion industry. In the third quarter of fiscal 2004,
Aerojet acquired from Pratt & Whitneys Chemical
Systems Division (CSD) certain intellectual property and
real property associated with several solid rocket motor
programs for a nominal amount. This transaction highlights a key
event in the continuing consolidation of the propulsion industry
because CSD has now exited the solid propulsion business. In the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2003, Aerojet acquired substantially
all of the assets of the propulsion business of Atlantic
Research Corporation (ARC) a subsidiary of Sequa
Corporation. This acquisition makes Aerojet a leading supplier
of solid rocket motors for tactical and missile defense
applications and complements Aerojets capabilities for
air-breathing and strategic systems. In fiscal 2002, Aerojet
acquired the assets of the General Dynamics Ordnance and
Tactical Systems Space Propulsion and Fire Suppression business
(Redmond, Washington operations), a leading supplier of
satellite propulsion systems for defense, civilian and
commercial applications. These acquisitions have strengthened
our market positions in both the defense systems and space
systems industry sectors, and have provided leadership positions
in the tactical and in-space propulsion market.
Industry Overview
Following a period of budget decreases in the post-Cold War era,
the U.S. defense budget, as appropriated by Congress, has
increased in recent years. Under the Bush Administration, the
defense budget has experienced the first double-digit increase
since the early 1990s. The national defense budget, which
totaled $350 billion in 2002, has risen steadily to over
$375 billion in 2004, $416 billion in 2005, and there
are proposals to increase it to $423 billion in 2006. We expect
the U.S. defense budgets for research, development, test and
evaluation, and procurement, the primary funding sources for
Aerojets programs, to grow as well, with annual forecasts
continuing to show increases through 2009. While the ultimate
distribution of the
3
defense budget remains uncertain, Aerojet is well positioned to
benefit from DoD investment in high priority transformational
systems that address contemporary war fighting needs and
requirements.
The United States is demonstrating renewed commitment to space
and planetary exploration. The Bush Administration has announced
plans, which are subject to Congressional approval, to increase
NASAs 2004 budget of $15.4 billion by an average of 5%
over the next three years and by approximately 1% in the two
subsequent years. Near-term activities included in NASAs
budget are development of a new manned vehicle (the Crew
Exploration Vehicle), robotic moon missions, and continued
development of propulsion technologies for deep space
exploration. We believe we are well-positioned to compete for
significant roles on these projects. Furthermore, as a result of
NASAs intention to retire the Space Shuttle from service
as early as 2010, and the limited time and funding to develop a
replacement vehicle, we believe that NASA will focus on
maneuvering and long-duration propulsion systems that are
flight-proven, which will present opportunities for existing
Aerojet systems.
Competition
Participation in the defense and space propulsion market is
capital intensive and requires long research and development
periods that represent significant barriers to entry. Aerojet
may partner on various programs with its major customers or
suppliers, some of whom are, from time to time, competitors on
other programs.
The table below lists the primary participants in the propulsion
market serving the U.S. government and its agencies:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Company |
|
Parent |
|
Propulsion Type |
|
Propulsion Application |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aerojet
|
|
GenCorp Inc. |
|
Solid, liquid, air- breathing, electric |
|
Launch, in-space, tactical, strategic, missile defense |
|
Alliant Techsystems
|
|
Alliant Techsystems Inc. |
|
Solid, air-breathing |
|
Launch, tactical, strategic, missile defense |
|
Astrium
|
|
European Aeronautics Defense and Space Company and
BAE Systems |
|
Solid, liquid |
|
In-space, tactical |
|
Northrop Grumman Space Technology (Formerly TRW)
|
|
Northrop Grumman Corporation |
|
Liquid |
|
Launch, in-space |
|
Pratt & Whitney Space Operations
|
|
United Technologies Corporation |
|
Liquid, air-breathing, electric |
|
Launch, in-space |
|
Rocketdyne
|
|
The Boeing Company |
|
Liquid |
|
Launch, in-space, missile defense |
Rocketdyne and Alliant Techsystems currently hold the largest
share of the launch market segment, largely due to their
sole-source production contracts for liquid (Rocketdyne) and
solid (Alliant) propulsion systems on the current NASA Space
Shuttle (now scheduled to be retired from service as early as
2010) and on the Delta family of expendable launch vehicles.
Aerojet believes it is in a unique competitive position, due to
the diversity of its technologies and synergy of its product
lines, to offer its customers the most innovative and advanced
solutions available in the domestic propulsion market. The basis
on which Aerojet competes in the aerospace and defense industry
varies by program, but generally is based upon price,
technology, quality and service. Although competition is
intensive for all of Aerojets products and services,
Aerojet believes it possesses adequate resources to compete
successfully.
Major Customers
As a merchant supplier to the aerospace and defense industry, we
do not align ourselves with any single prime contractor except
on a project-by-project basis. We believe that our position as a
merchant supplier has helped us become a trusted partner to our
customers, enabling us to maintain strong relationships with a
variety of prime contractors. Under each of our contracts, we
act either as a prime contractor, where we sell directly to the
end user, or as a subcontractor, where we sell our products to
other prime contractors.
4
The principal end-user customers of our products and technology
include agencies of the U.S. government. Since a majority of
Aerojets sales are, directly or indirectly, to the U.S.
government, funding for the purchase of Aerojets products
and services generally follows trends in U.S. defense spending.
However, individual government agencies, which include the
military services, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA), NASA, the Missile Defense Agency, and the prime
contractors that serve these agencies, exercise independent
purchasing power within budget top-line limits.
Therefore, sales to the U.S. government are not regarded as
sales to one customer and, accordingly, each contracting agency
is viewed as a separate customer. Thus, while we believe the DoD
and NASA budgets are generally relevant to our business outlook,
closer examination of the needs and priorities of the U.S.
government agencies provides a better indication of product area
stability and growth potential.
Aerojet contracts directly with a number of major prime
contractors and directly with agencies of the U.S. government.
During fiscal 2004, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Boeing
accounted for approximately 33%, 15%, and 10%, respectively, of
aerospace and defense segment sales.
Aerojets direct sales to the U.S. government and its
agencies, or government customers, and indirect sales to
government customers via direct sales to prime contractors
accounted for a total of approximately 85% of net sales, or
approximately $420 million, in fiscal 2004. The following
are approximate percentages of Aerojets net sales by
principal end user in fiscal 2004:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Army
|
|
|
32 |
% |
|
U.S. Air Force
|
|
|
28 |
% |
|
U.S. Navy
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
NASA
|
|
|
9 |
% |
|
Other government customers
|
|
|
1 |
% |
| |
|
|
|
|
Total government customers
|
|
|
85 |
% |
|
Commercial and international customers
|
|
|
15 |
% |
| |
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100 |
% |
| |
|
|
|
5
Major Programs
A subset of our key defense systems programs is listed below:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Program |
|
Primary Customer |
|
End Users |
|
Program Description |
|
Program Status |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS)
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Production |
|
F-22 Raptor Aircraft
|
|
Boeing |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Advanced electron beam welding for airframe structures |
|
Production |
|
Force Application and Launch from Continental United States
(FALCON)
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Advanced hypersonic (air-breathing) propulsion, solid rocket
motors |
|
Development |
|
Ground Based Mid-Course Defense (GMD) Exoatmospheric Kill
Vehicle Liquid Divert and Attitude Control Systems (DACS)
|
|
Raytheon |
|
Missile Defense Agency |
|
Liquid propulsion divert and attitude control propulsion systems |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Minuteman III
|
|
Northrop Grumman |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Liquid maneuvering propulsion |
|
Development/ Production |
|
HyFly (Hypersonic Flight)
|
|
Boeing |
|
U.S. Navy |
|
Dual combustion ramjet (air-breathing) |
|
Development |
|
Javelin
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Production |
|
Joint Common Missile (JCM)
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Development |
|
Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS)
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Army, International |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Production |
|
Non-Line of Sight Missile (NLOS)
|
|
Raytheon |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Development |
|
Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC)-3
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Army, Missile Defense Agency |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Tube-launched, Optically-tracked, Wire-guided Missile (TOW)
|
|
Raytheon |
|
U.S. Army |
|
Tactical solid rocket warheads |
|
Production |
|
Standard Missile
|
|
Raytheon |
|
U.S. Navy, Missile Defense Agency |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Small Diameter Bomb
|
|
Boeing |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Precision munitions |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD)
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Army, Missile Defense Agency |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors |
|
Development |
|
Supersonic Sea Skimming Target (SSST)
|
|
Orbital Sciences Corporation |
|
U.S. Navy |
|
Variable flow ducted rocket(air-breathing) |
|
Development |
|
Tomahawk
|
|
Raytheon |
|
U.S. Navy |
|
Tactical solid rocket motors and warheads |
|
Production |
|
Crown Victoria
|
|
Ford |
|
Law Enforcement |
|
Vehicle safety products |
|
Production |
Space Systems Programs Aerojet improved its
already strong market position in the space systems industry
segment in fiscal 2004 with several successful space exploration
missions including both the MARS Rover missions, Cassini,
Stardust and Mercury Messenger. In late 2004, Lockheed Martin
and NASA
6
selected Aerojet to provide de-orbit propulsion for the Hubble
Space Telescope. These successes, coupled with NASAs plans
to embark on the development of new manned and unmanned
missions, provide opportunities to grow our over 40 year
legacy of providing critical propulsion systems for the U.S.
space program.
A subset of our key space systems programs is listed below:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Program |
|
Primary Customer |
|
End Users |
|
Program Description |
|
Program Status |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A2100 Commercial Geostationary Satellite Systems
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
Various |
|
Electric and liquid spacecraft thrusters |
|
Production |
|
Mercury Messenger
|
|
Johns Hopkins Advanced Physics Lab (APL) |
|
NASA |
|
Liquid spacecraft propulsion system |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Advanced Extremely High Frequency MilSatCom
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
Electric and liquid spacecraft thrusters |
|
Development |
|
Hubble De-Orbit Module
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
NASA |
|
Maneuvering propulsion |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Atlas® V
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Air Force, Commercial |
|
Solid strap-on booster motors for this
medium-to-heavy lift launch vehicle |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Cassini Mission
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
NASA |
|
Liquid spacecraft thrusters |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Mars Rover Missions
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
NASA JPL |
|
Liquid spacecraft thrusters |
|
Development/ Production |
|
Delta II
|
|
Boeing |
|
NASA, U.S. Air Force, Commercial |
|
Upper stage pressure-fed liquid rocket engines |
|
Production |
|
Titan IV
|
|
Lockheed Martin |
|
U.S. Air Force |
|
First and second stage liquid rocket booster engines |
|
Production |
|
Upper Stage Engine Technology
|
|
U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory |
|
NASA, U.S. Air Force |
|
Develop design tools for future upper stage liquid engines |
|
Development |
|
Telkom
|
|
Orbital Sciences Corp |
|
Commercial |
|
Liquid spacecraft thrusters |
|
Production |
|
Time History of Events and Macroscale Interactions During
Substorms (THEMIS)
|
|
Swales Aerospace |
|
NASA |
|
Liquid spacecraft propulsion system |
|
Development/ Production |
Aerojets top five programs accounted for less than 30% of
fiscal 2004 net sales. No single program accounted for more than
10% of Aerojets fiscal 2004 net sales and most programs
accounted for less than 5% of Aerojets fiscal 2004 net
sales.
Contract Types
Under each of its contracts, Aerojet acts either as a prime
contractor, where it sells directly to the end user, or as a
subcontractor, selling its products to other prime contractors.
Research and development contracts are awarded during the
inception stage of a programs development. Production
contracts provide for the production and delivery of mature
products for operational use. Aerojets contracts can
generally be categorized as either cost-reimbursable
or fixed-price. During fiscal 2004, approximately
57% of Aerojets total sales were achieved on fixed-price
contracts, 41% on cost-reimbursable contracts, and 2% on other
contract types.
7
Cost-reimbursable contracts are typically (i) cost plus
fixed fee, (ii) cost plus incentive fee, or (iii) cost
plus award fee contracts. For cost plus fixed fee contracts,
Aerojet typically receives reimbursement of its costs, to the
extent the costs are allowable under contractual provisions, in
addition to receipt of a fixed fee. For cost plus incentive fee
contracts and cost plus award fee contracts, Aerojet receives
adjustments in the contract fee, within designated limits, based
on its actual results as compared to contractual targets for
factors such as cost, performance, quality, and schedule.
Fixed-price contracts are typically (i) fixed-price,
(ii) fixed-price-incentive, or (iii) fixed-price level
of effort contracts. For fixed-price contracts, Aerojet performs
work for a fixed price and realizes all of the profit or loss
resulting from variations in costs of performance. For
fixed-price-incentive contracts, Aerojet receives increased or
decreased fees or profits based upon actual performance against
established targets or other criteria. For fixed-price level of
effort contracts, Aerojet generally receives a structured fixed
price per labor hour, dependent upon the customers labor
hour needs. All fixed-price contracts present the risk of
unreimbursed cost overruns.
Many programs under contract have product lifecycles exceeding
10 years, such as the Delta, Standard Missile, and Tomahawk
programs. It is typical for U.S. government propulsion contracts
to be relatively small ($2.5 million a year on average)
during development phases that can last from five to seven
years, followed by low-rate and then full-rate production, where
annual funding can grow as high as $30 million a year over
many years.
Backlog
Aerojets contract backlog as of November 30, 2004 was
$879 million compared to $830 million as of
November 30, 2003. Funded backlog, which includes only the
amount for which money has been directly authorized by the U.S.
Congress, or for which a purchase order has been received from a
commercial customer, was $538 million as of
November 30, 2004, compared to funded backlog of
$425 million on November 30, 2003. Overall, backlog
growth reflects contract awards in excess of sales on both
production and development programs.
Research and
Development
Aerojet views its research and development efforts as critical
to maintain its leadership positions in markets in which it
competes. We maintain an active research and development effort
supported primarily by customer funding. Customer-funded
research and development expenditures are funded under contract
specifications, typically research and development contracts,
several of which we believe will become key programs in the
future. Historically, over 90% of our research and development
expenditures were customer funded. We believe customer-funded
research and development activities are vital to our ability to
compete for contracts and to enhance our technology base.
Aerojets company-funded research and development effort
include expenditures for technical activities that are vital to
the development of new products, services, processes or
techniques, as well as those expenses for significant
improvements to existing products or processes.
The following table summarizes Aerojets research and
development expenses during the past three fiscal years:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Year Ended | |
| |
|
November 30, | |
| |
|
| |
| |
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
(In millions) | |
|
Customer-funded
|
|
$ |
132 |
|
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
Company-funded
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Total research and development expenses
|
|
$ |
140 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
$ |
104 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
The ARC acquisition in October 2003 contributed an additional
$30 million in customer-funded research and development
expense in fiscal 2004 as compared to fiscal 2003 (see
Note 11 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements).
Raw Materials, Suppliers and
Seasonality
Availability of raw materials and supplies to Aerojet is
generally sufficient. Aerojet is sometimes dependent, for a
variety of reasons, upon sole-source suppliers for procurement
requirements but has experienced no significant difficulties in
meeting production and delivery obligations because of delays in
delivery or reliance on such suppliers.
Aerojets business is not subject to predictable
seasonality. Primary factors affecting the timing of
Aerojets sales include the timing of government awards,
the availability of U.S. government funding, contractual product
delivery requirements and customer acceptances.
Where appropriate, Aerojet obtains patents in the U.S. and other
countries covering various aspects of the design and manufacture
of its products. We consider these patents to be important to
Aerojet as they illustrate Aerojets innovative design
ability and product development capabilities. We do not believe
the loss or expiration of any single patent would have a
material adverse effect on the business or financial results of
Aerojet or on our business as a whole.
Real Estate
Through our Aerojet subsidiary, we own approximately 12,600
acres of land (Sacramento Land), located 15 miles northeast of
downtown Sacramento, along U.S. Highway 50, a key growth
corridor in the region. Our Real Estate segments primary
activity is the development of a substantial portion of the
Sacramento Land, which is one of the largest single owner land
tracts in the Sacramento region. The Sacramento Land was
acquired by Aerojet in the early 1950s for the manufacturing and
testing of propulsion products. Most of the Sacramento Land was
never used for production or testing purposes; rather, most of
such land was used to provide safe buffer zones for testing
propulsion products. Aerojets testing operations now
require a much smaller industrial footprint within the
Sacramento Land as a result of recent aerospace and defense
acquisitions and their testing capabilities, advances in
manufacturing processes, propulsion technologies, and increased
use of government testing facilities.
|
|
|
Sacramento Real Estate Market |
Demand for residential real estate in the Sacramento area has
grown dramatically in recent years due to population and
non-agricultural employment growth, increases in household
income and continued low mortgage interest rates. The result of
this demand has led to substantial appreciation in the value of
raw land, residentially-zoned land, and new homes in the
Sacramento area.
We believe the compelling demographic and real estate dynamics
in the Sacramento area provide an opportunity to create value by
developing a substantial portion of the Sacramento Land for a
wide variety of uses, including residential, office, and
commercial/retail. Developed as contemplated, we expect that the
Sacramento Land will have significantly greater value than as
currently zoned.
|
|
|
Government and Regulatory Approvals |
Despite limited acreage that was used for propulsion testing and
production, much of the Sacramento Land is encumbered by
environmental restrictions imposed by federal and state
regulatory agencies. These restrictions were imposed because of
the historical propulsion activities of our Aerospace and
Defense segment. Until these restrictions are released, we will
be unable to develop those portions of the Sacramento Land. In
1997, state regulators released 1,115 acres of the Sacramento
Land from environmental restrictions. This land was sold to a
regional homebuilder in fiscal 2001. In fiscal 2002, state and
federal regulators released
9
environmental restrictions on an additional 2,600 acres of the
Sacramento Land. Additionally, the development process requires
various governmental and regulatory approvals. We have made
applications for general plan amendments and zoning changes for
the initial portions of the Sacramento Land to be developed.
Descriptions of those portions of the Sacramento Land and
additional information regarding the government and regulatory
approval process are included below.
We have filed applications with government and regulatory
authorities for approvals necessary to develop over 5,800 acres
of the Sacramento Land, of which over 3,300 acres are restricted
by environmental regulations. Under California law, these
government and regulatory authorities are required to determine
if an Environment Impact Report (EIR) is necessary and, if
necessary, what, if any, impacts a project will have on the
environment. In the preparation of this report, the authority
must consider numerous elements. One important element is the
projects source of water. We have attempted to address
this critical element with our 2003 settlement agreement with
Sacramento County (the County). Pursuant to the agreement with
the County, Aerojet agreed to transfer all of its remediated
groundwater to the County. Subject to various provisions in the
agreement with the County, including approval under the
California Environmental Quality Act, the County will assume
Aerojets responsibility for providing replacement water to
impacted water purveyors up to the amount of remediated water
Aerojet transfers to the County. If the amount of Aerojets
transferred water is in excess of the replacement water provided
to the impacted water purveyors, the County has committed to
make such water available for the development of the Sacramento
Land in an amount equal to the excess.
The table below summarizes the Sacramento Land by use and by
environmental status (in acres):
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
As of November 30, 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Environmentally | |
|
Environmentally | |
|
|
| |
|
Unrestricted | |
|
Restricted(1) | |
|
Total | |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
Land Currently Available for Development(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Easton(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Rio Del Oro
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,724 |
|
|
|
2,724 |
|
| |
|
Glenborough and Easton Place
|
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
1,382 |
|
| |
|
Westborough and Easton Place
|
|
|
1,388 |
|
|
|
277 |
|
|
|
1,665 |
|
| |
|
Office Park/ Auto Mall
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Total for Easton
|
|
|
2,496 |
|
|
|
3,340 |
|
|
|
5,836 |
|
|
Land Available for Future Development
|
|
|
1,525 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
1,628 |
|
|
Aerojet Operations Land
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
5,108 |
|
|
|
5,132 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Total Sacramento Land
|
|
|
4,045 |
|
|
|
8,551 |
|
|
|
12,596 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (1) |
Land is subject to federal and/or state environmental
restrictions that must be lifted before development on that land
can proceed (see Note 13(c) in Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements). |
| |
| (2) |
In addition to the lifting of environmental restrictions,
various government and regulatory approvals, such as general
plan amendments and zoning changes, as more fully described
below, are necessary to further this development. |
| |
| (3) |
Our initial applications identified two development projects,
Easton and Rio Del Oro. In connection with our most recent
application submission, we have decided to use the
Easton name for all of our development activities on
the Sacramento Land. |
10
|
|
|
Land Currently Available for Development |
Rio Del Oro In fiscal 2002, we filed an
application for general plan amendments and requests for
rezoning of a 2,724 acre development project called Rio Del Oro,
which is now part of the City of Rancho Cordova (Rancho Cordova)
which was incorporated in fiscal 2003. Rio Del Oro is planned as
a mixed-use master-planned community that includes office and
industrial uses, retail and support services, recreational
opportunities, and a broad range of housing types. This project
has extensive areas of habitat for certain species on the
Federal Endangered Species List and these areas will be
preserved as part of the development. Our application was
submitted in conjunction with an application by a regional
homebuilder for the property the homebuilder owns west and
adjacent to the Rio del Oro land. We have granted a regional
homebuilder the right to purchase 400 acres of Rio Del Oro.
Rancho Cordova is having an EIR prepared for this project and it
is expected that the first draft of the EIR will be ready for
review by Rancho Cordova in April 2005. Rancho Cordovas
approval of our application is not expected before late fiscal
2006. For development to proceed, certain state environmental
restrictions must be lifted. We are working with state
regulators to determine actions necessary to remove these
restrictions. We believe the first portions of the Rio Del Oro
land should have environmental restrictions lifted at
approximately the same time that our general plan amendment and
zoning application is approved.
Glenborough and Easton Place In early fiscal
2004, we announced plans for an approximately 1,400 acre master
planned community originally called Easton (and now referred to
as Glenborough and Easton Place) and filed applications with the
County for general plan amendments and rezoning requests. The
Glenborough plan comprised of approximately 1,250 acres,
incorporates a wide mix of residential, commercial and
recreational uses, including an approximate 300-acre regional
open space along Alder Creek. Easton Place, consisting of
approximately 150 acres, is planned as a high-density mixed-use
urban hub connecting Glenborough and Westborough. Easton Place
will take full advantage of a new light rail station, the
existing Aerojet employment center and its location on the
Highway 50 corridor.
We expect the County to commence the EIR for Glenborough and
Easton Place during the first half of fiscal 2005. This project
has extensive habitat for an invertebrate on the Federal
Endangered Species List. We expect to be required to mitigate
for any incidental takings of habitat associated with the
development of the project. To that end, we are working with
federal agencies to develop a comprehensive mitigation plan that
will provide suitable alternative habitat. This mitigation plan
will be part of the approval of the application. We expect
County approval of this project to be granted in late fiscal
2007 or thereafter.
Portions of the land designated for this project totaling
approximately 330 acres are subject to state and federal
environmental restrictions, which must be released before
development of those acres can proceed. We are working with
state and federal agencies to determine and carry out the
actions necessary to ensure the successful delisting of those
portions of the project. We believe that restrictions covering
some areas of this project will be removed about the same time
as the Glenborough and Easton Place general plan amendment and
zoning application is approved by the County. Although we expect
that some areas will remain subject to environmental
restrictions for a period of time after receipt of County
approval, we do not expect any delays in our development
schedule as development of those portions of the project are not
expected to begin for several years.
Westborough and Easton Place In November
2004, we filed an application with Rancho Cordova for a general
plan amendment for a 1,665 acre project named Westborough at
Easton. We are currently working with Rancho Cordova to expand
the application to include the rezoning of the property. A
portion of this project will be a 150-acre expansion to Easton
Place (discussed above), and the balance will be known as
Westborough. The Easton Place expansion will be consistent with
the plans for the balance of Easton Place (as discussed above).
We intend Westborough to have a wide mix of residential,
business, community and recreational uses. We have granted a
regional homebuilder the right to purchase 100 acres of
Westborough at Easton.
11
During 2005, we will be working with Rancho Cordova to determine
the scope of the project so that Rancho Cordova may commence the
EIR for Westborough and Easton Place during 2006. Since the EIR
takes approximately one year to prepare, we do not expect that
Rancho Cordova will complete a first draft of the EIR for review
until 2007. This project has extensive habitat for an
invertebrate on the Federal Endangered Species List. We are
working with federal agencies to develop a comprehensive
mitigation plan that will provide suitable alternative habitat
in connection with any incidental taking of habitat associated
with the development of the project. This mitigation plan will
be part of the approval of the application. We expect Rancho
Cordova approval of this project during 2008.
Approximately 280 acres of this project are subject to federal
environmental restrictions which we do not expect to be removed
for several years. Although we expect that some areas will
remain subject to environmental restrictions for a period of
time after receipt of Rancho Cordova approval, we do not expect
any delays in our development schedule as development of those
portions of the project are not expected to begin for several
years.
Office Park and Auto Mall We are preparing a
subdivision application for submittal to the County for
approximately 55 acres of the Sacramento Land. We intend to
develop this land as an office park. The previously announced
joint venture in March 2003 with a local real estate developer
will be part of this subdivision.
We have submitted an application to the County for a conditional
use permit to allow the sale of new cars on approximately
30-acres of the land, a portion of which was sold to two
automobile dealers in fiscal 2003. We expect the County to
approve this application in 2005.
|
|
|
Land Available for Future Development |
We believe it will be several years before any of the 1,628
acres of our Sacramento Land will be ready for development.
Portions of such land are far from existing infrastructure,
making it uneconomical to develop at this time. Other parts of
such land will go through a lengthy annexation process and
development will not occur until that process is completed.
We believe that the Aerojet operations land is more than
adequate for Aerojets long-term needs, and as a result,
portions of this area may be available for development in the
future.
|
|
|
Other Projects and Fiscal 2004 Transactions |
In addition to the projects described above, we currently lease
to third parties approximately 330,000 square feet of office
space and 10 acres of land. These leasing activities generated
$6 million in revenue in fiscal 2004.
In fiscal 2004, we concluded a property usage agreement with
Sacramento Regional Transit and a mining agreement with Granite
Construction Company, both of which support our goal of
enhancing the value of our real estate assets. Initial proceeds
received in fiscal 2004 total $9 million for these
transactions.
As we work toward the development of the Sacramento Land, we
will continue to explore other alternatives to enhance the value
of our real estate assets, including outright sales, and/or
joint ventures with real estate developers or other third
parties.
Environmental Matters
Our operations are subject to and affected by federal, state,
local and foreign environmental laws and regulations relating to
the discharge, treatment, storage, disposal, investigation and
remediation of certain materials, substances and wastes. Our
policy is to conduct our businesses with due regard for the
preservation and protection of the environment. We continually
assess compliance with these regulations and management
12
of environmental matters. We believe our operations are in
substantial compliance with all applicable environmental laws
and regulations.
Operation and maintenance costs associated with environmental
compliance and management of contaminated sites are a normal,
recurring part of our operations. These costs are not
significant relative to total operating costs and most such
costs are incurred by our Aerospace and Defense segment and are
generally allowable costs under contracts with the U.S.
government.
Under existing U.S. environmental laws a Potentially Responsible
Party (PRP) is jointly and severally liable, and therefore
we are potentially liable to the government or third parties for
the full cost of remediating the contamination at our facilities
or former facilities or at third-party sites where we have been
designated as a PRP by the Environmental Protection Agency or a
state environmental agency. The nature of environmental
investigation and cleanup activities often makes it difficult to
determine the timing and amount of any estimated future costs
that may be required for remediation measures. However, we
review these matters and accrue for costs associated with
environmental remediation when it becomes probable that a
liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability,
usually based on proportionate sharing, can be reasonably
estimated. These liabilities have not been discounted to their
present value as the timing of cash payments is not fixed or
reliably determinable. See Managements Discussion and
Analysis in Part II, Item 7 of this Report for
additional information.
Employees
As of November 30, 2004, excluding employees of our
discontinued operations, approximately 17% of our 2,857
employees were covered by collective bargaining or similar
agreements all of which are due to expire within one year. We
believe that our relations with employees are good.
Executive Officers of the Registrant
See Part III, Item 10 of this Report for information
about Executive Officers of the Company.
13
Risk Factors
Set forth below are the risks that we believe are material to
our investors. This section contains forward-looking statements.
You should refer to the explanation of the qualifications and
limitations on forward-looking statements set forth in
Managements Discussion and Analysis in Part II,
Item 7 of this Report.
|
|
|
The cancellation or material modification of one or more
significant contracts could have a material adverse effect on
our ability to realize anticipated sales and profits. |
Sales, directly and indirectly, to the U.S. government and its
agencies accounted for approximately 85% of our Aerospace and
Defense segment net sales and 84% of our total net sales from
continuing operations in fiscal 2004. Our contracts typically
permit the U.S. government to unilaterally modify or terminate a
contract or to discontinue funding for a particular program at
any time. The cancellation of one or more significant contracts
could have a material adverse effect on our ability to realize
anticipated sales and profits. The cancellation of a contract,
if terminated for cause, could also subject us to liability for
the excess costs incurred by the U.S. government in procuring
undelivered items from another source. If terminated for
convenience, our recovery of costs would be limited to amounts
already incurred or committed, and our profit would be limited
to work completed prior to termination.
The Under Secretary of the Air Force has indicated that in 2005
the DoD intends to revise the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle
(EELV) program, under which we provide propulsion systems for
the Atlas V rocket, to address cost pressures resulting from
continued low commercial launch activity. Details of the form
and terms of the anticipated changes are unknown at this time;
however, we cannot assure you that any significant change to the
program will lead to a satisfactory resolution for launch
vehicle manufacturers. The cancellation or material modification
of the EELV program could adversely affect our revenues from
that program and our ability to recover the costs we have
incurred to date under the program.
|
|
|
Future reductions or changes in U.S. government spending
could negatively affect our revenues. |
Our primary aerospace and defense customers include the DoD and
its agencies, the government prime contractors that supply
products to these customers, and NASA. As a result, we rely on
particular levels of U.S. government spending on propulsion
systems for defense and space applications and armament systems
for precision tactical weapon systems and munitions
applications, and our backlog depends, in large part, on
continued funding by the U.S. government for the programs in
which we are involved. These spending levels are not generally
correlated with any specific economic cycle, but rather follow
the cycle of general political support for this type of
spending. The overall U.S. defense budget declined from the
mid-1980s through the early 1990s. Although the DoD currently
forecasts continued defense budget increases through its fiscal
year 2009, which is the remainder of the DoDs detailed
forecast period, future levels of defense spending may not
increase and could decrease. Moreover, although our contracts
often contemplate that our services will be performed over a
period of several years, Congress usually must approve funds for
a given program each government fiscal year and may
significantly reduce or eliminate funding for a program. A
decrease in U.S. military expenditures, or the elimination or
curtailment of a material program in which we are involved,
could negatively affect our revenues.
|
|
|
A significant percentage of our aerospace and defense
contracts are fixed-price contracts. If we experience cost
overruns on these contracts, we would have to absorb the excess
costs and our profitability would be adversely affected. |
Our aerospace and defense contracts generally can be categorized
as either fixed-price or
cost-reimbursable contracts. Under fixed-price
contracts, we agree to perform specified work for a fixed price
and realize all of the profit or loss resulting from variations
in the costs of performing the contract. As a result, all
fixed-price contracts involve the inherent risk of unreimbursed
cost overruns. To the extent we were to incur unanticipated cost
overruns on a program or platform subject to a fixed-price
contract, our profitability would be adversely affected. For
example, our Atlas V program contract is a fixed-price contract
that has not been profitable for us to date in part as a result
of unexpected costs of development and production. During fiscal
14
2004, we recorded an inventory write-down of $16 million
related to the Atlas V program. The write-down relates to
unanticipated transition costs from the development phase to the
production phase of the contract and the value of materials
rendered obsolete by a decision to proceed with qualification
and production of an enhanced motor configuration. As of
November 30, 2004, the Atlas V inventory balance was
$128 million. The current contract provides for production
of 44 motors over a number of years and for the order