Back to GetFilings.com



Table of Contents

 
 
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)    
Registrant’s 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 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.     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 Company’s 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
                 
Item        
Number        
         
 PART I
 1.    Business     2  
 2.    Properties     22  
 3.    Legal Proceedings     24  
 4.    Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders     29  
 
 PART II
 5.    Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholders Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities     29  
 6.    Selected Financial Data     30  
 7.    Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations     31  
 7A.    Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk     51  
 8.    Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data     52  
 9.    Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure     113  
 9A.    Controls and Procedures     113  
 9B.    Other Information     115  
 
 PART III
 10.    Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant     115  
 11.    Executive Compensation     117  
 12.    Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management     117  
 13.    Certain Relationships and Related Transactions     118  
 14.    Principal Accountant Fees and Services     118  
 
 PART IV
 15.    Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules     119  
 Signatures     121  
 Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules     121  
 Exhibit Index     124  
 EX-10.26: 1999 EQUITY AND PERFORMANCE PLAN
 EX-10.27: 1999 EQUITY PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE PLAN-EMPLOYEE
 EX-10.28: 1999 EQUITY PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE PLAN-DIRECTOR
 EX-10.29: 1999 EQUITY/PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE PLAN-COMMON STOCK
 EX-21.1: LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
 EX-23.1: CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
 EX-24.1: POWER OF ATTORNEY
 EX-31.1: CERTIFICATION-SECTION 302-CEO
 EX-31.2: CERTIFICATION-SECTION 302-CFO
 EX-32.1: CERTIFICATIONS-SECTION 906-CEO AND CFO
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


Table of Contents

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 management’s 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 Company’s 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


Table of Contents

      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 & Whitney’s 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 Aerojet’s 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 1990’s. 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 Aerojet’s programs, to grow as well, with annual forecasts continuing to show increases through 2009. While the ultimate distribution of the

3


Table of Contents

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 NASA’s 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 NASA’s 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 NASA’s 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 Aerojet’s 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


Table of Contents

      The principal end-user customers of our products and technology include agencies of the U.S. government. Since a majority of Aerojet’s sales are, directly or indirectly, to the U.S. government, funding for the purchase of Aerojet’s 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.
      Aerojet’s 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 Aerojet’s 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


Table of Contents

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


Table of Contents

selected Aerojet to provide de-orbit propulsion for the Hubble Space Telescope. These successes, coupled with NASA’s 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
      Aerojet’s top five programs accounted for less than 30% of fiscal 2004 net sales. No single program accounted for more than 10% of Aerojet’s fiscal 2004 net sales and most programs accounted for less than 5% of Aerojet’s 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 program’s development. Production contracts provide for the production and delivery of mature products for operational use. Aerojet’s contracts can generally be categorized as either “cost-reimbursable” or “fixed-price.” During fiscal 2004, approximately 57% of Aerojet’s total sales were achieved on fixed-price contracts, 41% on cost-reimbursable contracts, and 2% on other contract types.

7


Table of Contents

      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 customer’s 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
      Aerojet’s 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.
      Aerojet’s 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 Aerojet’s 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


Table of Contents

      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.
      Aerojet’s business is not subject to predictable seasonality. Primary factors affecting the timing of Aerojet’s sales include the timing of government awards, the availability of U.S. government funding, contractual product delivery requirements and customer acceptances.
Intellectual Property
      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 Aerojet’s 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 segment’s 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. Aerojet’s 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


Table of Contents

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.
Development Status
      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 project’s 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 Aerojet’s 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 Aerojet’s 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


Table of Contents

Land Currently Available for Development
Easton
      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 Cordova’s 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


Table of Contents

      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.
Aerojet Operations Land
      We believe that the Aerojet operations land is more than adequate for Aerojet’s 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


Table of Contents

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 Management’s 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


Table of Contents

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 Management’s 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 DoD’s 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


Table of Contents

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