NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (UNAUDITED)

1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

For more than a century, Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. (“HII” or the “Company”) has been designing, building, overhauling and repairing ships primarily for the U.S. Navy and the U.S. Coast Guard. HII is organized into two operating segments, Ingalls and Newport News, which also represent its reportable segments. Through its Ingalls segment, HII is the sole supplier and builder of amphibious assault and expeditionary ships to the U.S. Navy, the sole builder of National Security Cutters for the U.S. Coast Guard, and one of only two companies that builds the U.S. Navy's current fleet of DDG-51 Arleigh Burke -class destroyers. Through its Newport News segment, HII is the nation's sole industrial designer, builder, and refueler of nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, and one of only two companies currently designing and building nuclear-powered submarines for the U.S. Navy. HII is one of the nation's leading full-service providers for the design, engineering, construction, and life cycle support of major surface ship programs for the U.S. Navy. As prime contractor, principal subcontractor, team member or partner, HII participates in many high-priority U.S. defense technology programs. The Company conducts substantially all of its business with the U.S. Government, principally the Department of Defense (“DoD”).

On March 29, 2011, HII entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement (the “Separation Agreement”) with its former parent company, Northrop Grumman Corporation (“Northrop Grumman”), and Northrop Grumman's subsidiaries (Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. and Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation), pursuant to which HII was legally and structurally separated from Northrop Grumman.

Pursuant to the terms of the Separation Agreement, (i) Northrop Grumman completed a corporate reorganization to create a new holding company structure, (ii) HII and Northrop Grumman effected certain transfers of assets and assumed certain liabilities so that each of HII and Northrop Grumman retained both the assets of and liabilities associated with their respective businesses, (iii) subject to certain exceptions, all agreements, arrangements, commitments and undertakings, including all intercompany accounts payable or accounts receivable, including intercompany indebtedness and intercompany work orders between HII and Northrop Grumman, were terminated or otherwise satisfied, effective no later than March 31, 2011 (the “Distribution Date”), (iv) HII and Northrop Grumman agreed to share certain gains and liabilities and (v) on the Distribution Date, Northrop Grumman distributed, on a pro rata basis, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of HII to Northrop Grumman's stockholders via a pro rata dividend (the “spin-off”). One share of HII common stock was distributed for every six shares of Northrop Grumman common stock held by a holder of Northrop Grumman common stock as of the record date for the distribution, March 30, 2011. The shares of common stock of HII began regular way trading on the New York Stock Exchange on March 31, 2011, under the ticker symbol “HII.”

Following the spin-off, HII and Northrop Grumman began operating independently of each other, and neither has any ownership interest in the other. In order to govern certain ongoing relationships between HII and Northrop Grumman following the spin-off and to provide mechanisms for an orderly transition, HII and Northrop Grumman entered into agreements pursuant to which certain services will be provided and certain rights and obligations have been addressed following the spin-off. The material agreements entered into with Northrop Grumman in connection with the spin-off include the following: the Separation Agreement; Employee Matters Agreement; Insurance Matters Agreement; Intellectual Property License Agreement; Tax Matters Agreement; Transition Services Agreement; and Ingalls Guaranty Performance, Indemnity and Termination Agreement.

In connection with the spin-off, HII entered into new borrowing arrangements designed to provide the Company with adequate liquidity and to fund a $ 1,429 million contribution to Northrop Grumman. Specifically, HII issued $ 1,200 million in senior notes and entered into the HII Credit Facility (“Credit Facility”) with third-party lenders that includes a $ 650 million revolver and a $ 575 million term loan. See Note 10: Debt. The spin-off from Northrop Grumman was a transaction under common control; therefore, no change in the historical basis of HII's assets or liabilities was recorded as part of the spin-off.

2. BASIS OF PRESENTATION

Principles of Consolidation - The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of HII and its subsidiaries have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) and the instructions to Form 10-Q of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). All intercompany transactions

and balances are eliminated in consolidation. For classification of current assets and liabilities related to its long-term production contracts, the Company uses the duration of these contracts as its operating cycle, which is generally longer than one year.

These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include all adjustments of a normal recurring nature considered necessary by management for a fair presentation of the unaudited condensed consolidated financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company's audited consolidated financial statements included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 .

The quarterly information is labeled using a calendar convention; that is, first quarter is consistently labeled as ending on March 31, second quarter as ending on June 30, and third quarter as ending on September 30. It is management's long-standing practice to establish interim closing dates using a “fiscal” calendar, which requires the businesses to close their books on a Friday near these quarter-end dates in order to normalize the potentially disruptive effects of quarterly closings on business processes. The effects of this practice only exist for interim periods within a reporting year.

Accounting Estimates - The preparation of the Company's consolidated financial statements requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingencies at the date of the financial statements as well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Estimates have been prepared on the basis of the most current and best available information and actual results could differ materially from those estimates.

The Company recognizes changes in estimates of contract sales, costs, and profits using the cumulative catch-up method of accounting. This method recognizes in the current period the cumulative effect of the changes on current and prior periods. Hence, the effect of the changes on future periods of contract performance is recognized as if the revised estimate had been the original estimate. For the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 , net cumulative catch-up adjustments increased (decreased) operating income by $ 14 million and $ (4) million , respectively, and diluted earnings per share by $ 0.18 and $ (0.05) , respectively.

3. ACCOUNTING STANDARDS UPDATES

Accounting standards updates issued but not effective until after March 31, 2012 , are not expected to have a significant effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

4. AVONDALE WIND DOWN

In July 2010, plans were announced to consolidate the Company's Ingalls operations by winding down and subsequently closing the Avondale, Louisiana facility in 2013 after completing LPD-class ships currently under construction at this facility. The Company intends to build future LPD-class ships in a single production line at the Company's Pascagoula, Mississippi facility. The consolidation is intended to reduce costs, increase efficiency, and address shipbuilding overcapacity. HII expects to incur higher costs to complete ships currently under construction in Avondale due to anticipated reductions in productivity.

In connection with and as a result of the decision to wind down shipbuilding operations at the Avondale, Louisiana facility, the Company began incurring and paying related employee severance and incentive compensation liabilities and expenditures, asset retirement obligation liabilities that became reasonably estimable, and amounts owed for not meeting certain requirements under its cooperative endeavor agreement with the State of Louisiana. The Company anticipates that it will incur substantial other restructuring and facilities shutdown related costs, including, but not limited to, severance expense, relocation expense, and asset write-downs related to the Avondale facilities. These costs are expected to be allowable expenses under government accounting standards and thus should be recoverable in future years' overhead costs. These future costs could approximate $ 271 million , based on management's current estimate. Such costs should be recoverable under existing flexibly-priced contracts or future negotiated contracts in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) provisions relating to the treatment of restructuring and shutdown related costs. The Company is currently in discussions with the U.S. Navy regarding its cost submission to support the recoverability of these costs under the FAR and applicable contracts, and this submission is subject to review and acceptance by the U.S. Navy. The Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”), a DoD agency, prepared an initial audit report on the Company's cost proposal for restructuring and shutdown related costs of $ 310 million , which stated that the proposal was not adequately supported for the DCAA to reach a

conclusion and questioned approximately $ 25 million , or 8% , of the costs submitted by the Company. Accordingly, the DCAA did not accept the proposal as submitted. The Company has submitted a revised proposal to address the concerns of the DCAA and to reflect a revised estimated total cost of $ 271 million . Should the Company's revised proposal be challenged by the U.S. Navy, the Company would likely pursue prescribed dispute resolution alternatives to resolve the challenge. That process, however, would create uncertainty as to the timing and eventual allowability of the costs related to the wind down of the Avondale facility.

Ultimately, the Company anticipates these discussions with the U.S. Navy will result in an agreement that is substantially in accordance with management's cost recovery expectations. Accordingly, HII has treated these costs as allowable costs in determining the earnings performance on its contracts in process. The actual restructuring expenses related to the wind down may be greater than the Company's current estimate, and any inability to recover such costs could result in a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

The Company also evaluated the effect that the wind down of the Avondale facilities might have on the benefit plans in which HII employees participate. HII determined that the potential impact of a curtailment in these plans was not material to its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

The table below summarizes the changes in the Company's liability for restructuring and shutdown related costs associated with winding down the Avondale facility during the three months ended March 31, 2011 , and the three months ended March 31, 2012 . These costs are comprised primarily of employee severance and retention and incentive bonuses. These amounts were capitalized in inventoried costs, and will be recognized as expenses in cost of product sales beginning in 2014.

The diluted share amount presented above for the three months ended March 31, 2012 , excludes the effects of 0.7 million shares that would have been antidilutive. Of these shares, 0.2 million shares relate to stock options and 0.5 million shares relate to restricted stock rights (“RSRs”).

Also excluded from the diluted share amount presented above for the three months ended March 31, 2012 , are potentially dilutive shares related to Restricted Performance Stock Right (“RPSRs”) to the extent that the performance conditions have not been satisfied. RPSRs are only included in the calculation of diluted shares when performance targets are achieved based on actual results at the end of each reporting period. As of March 31, 2012 , 0.6 million RPSRs were outstanding and subject to continued performance targets with ultimate vesting between 48% and 182% of this number to the extent that performance conditions are satisfied. As of March 31, 2012 , based on the Company's estimate of achievement of performance targets, 0.4 million of these RPSRs were excluded from the diluted share amount. As of March 31, 2012 , 1.0 million RPSRs issued under the Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. 2011 Long Term Incentive Stock Plan were outstanding with ultimate vesting between 0% and 200% of this number to the extent that performance conditions are satisfied. As of March 31, 2012 , the minimum performance target under these awards had not been satisfied and therefore these shares are excluded from the calculation of diluted shares.

On March 30, 2011, the record date of the stock distribution associated with the spin-off, approximately 48.8 million shares of $0.01 par value HII common stock were distributed to Northrop Grumman stockholders. This share amount was utilized for the calculation of basic and diluted earnings per common share for the three months ended March 31, 2011, and all prior periods, as no common stock of the Company existed prior to March 30, 2011, and the impact of dilutive securities in the three months ended March 31, 2011 , was not meaningful.

FAS/CAS Adjustment - The FAS/CAS Adjustment reflects the difference between expenses for pension and other postretirement benefits determined in accordance with GAAP and the expenses for these items included in segment operating income in accordance with U.S. Cost Accounting Standards (“CAS”).

7. INVENTORIED COSTS, NET

Inventoried costs were composed of the following:

8. GOODWILL AND OTHER PURCHASED INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Goodwill

HII performs impairment tests for goodwill as of November 30 of each year, or when evidence of potential impairment exists. Goodwill is tested for impairment between annual impairment tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of the Company's reporting units below their carrying value.

Accumulated goodwill impairment losses at both March 31, 2012 , and December 31, 2011 , were $2,780 million . The accumulated goodwill impairment losses for Ingalls at both March 31, 2012 , and December 31, 2011 , were $1,568 million . The accumulated goodwill impairment losses for Newport News at both March 31, 2012 , and December 31, 2011 , were $1,212 million .

The Company's remaining purchased intangible assets are subject to amortization and are being amortized on a straight-line basis over an aggregate weighted-average period of 40 years. Remaining unamortized intangible assets consist principally of amounts pertaining to nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and submarine contract intangibles whose useful lives have been estimated based on the long life cycle of the related programs. Aggregate amortization expense was $ 5 million for each of the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011.

Expected amortization for purchased intangibles is approximately $ 20 million annually for the next five years.

9. INCOME TAXES

The Company's earnings are entirely domestic and its effective tax rate on earnings from operations for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 , was 34.0% and 35.7% , respectively. The Company's effective tax rate differs from the federal statutory rate as a result of nondeductible expenditures, the research and development credit and the domestic manufacturing deduction.

For current state income tax purposes, the stand-alone tax amounts have been computed as if they were allowable costs under the terms of the Company's existing contracts in the applicable period and, accordingly, are included in general and administrative expenses.

Net deferred tax assets as presented in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of financial position are as follows:

Credit Facility - In connection with the spin-off, the Company entered into the Credit Facility with third-party lenders. The Credit Facility is comprised of a five-year term loan facility of $ 575 million , which was funded on March 30, 2011, and a revolving credit facility of $ 650 million , which may be drawn upon during a period of five years from the date of the funding. The revolving credit facility includes a letter of credit subfacility of $ 350 million , and a swingline loan subfacility of $ 100 million . The term loan and revolving credit facility have a variable interest rate on outstanding borrowings based on the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus a spread based upon the Company's leverage ratio. The current spread as of March 31, 2012, was 2.5% and may vary between 2.0% and 3.0% . The revolving credit facility also has a commitment fee rate on the unutilized balance based on the Company's leverage ratio. The current fee rate as of March 31, 2012, was 0.5% and may vary between 0.35% and 0.5% . As of March 31, 2012, approximately $137 million of letters of credit were issued but undrawn, and the remaining $513 million was unutilized.

The term loan facility is subject to amortization in three-month intervals from the funding date, expected to be in an aggregate amount equal to 5% during each of the first year and the second year, 10% during the third year, 15% during the fourth year, and 65% during the fifth year, of which 5% is payable on each of the first three quarterly payment dates during such year, and the balance is payable on the term maturity date.

Senior Notes - In connection with the spin-off, the Company issued $ 600 million aggregate principal amount of 6.875% senior notes due March 15, 2018, and $ 600 million aggregate principal amount of 7.125% senior notes due March 15, 2021, in a private offering, at par, under an indenture dated March 11, 2011, between HII and The Bank of New York Mellon, as trustee. Pursuant to the terms of the registration rights agreement entered into in connection with the issuance of these senior notes, the Company completed on February 3, 2012, an exchange of $ 600 million aggregate principal amount of 6.875% senior notes due March 15, 2018, and $ 600 million aggregate principal amount of 7.125% senior notes due March 15, 2021, that are registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, for all of the then outstanding unregistered senior notes.

Mississippi Economic Development Revenue Bonds - As of March 31, 2012, the Company had $ 83.7 million outstanding from the issuance of Industrial Revenue Bonds issued by the Mississippi Business Finance Corporation. These bonds accrue interest at a fixed rate of 7.81% per annum (payable semi-annually) and mature in 2024.

Gulf Opportunity Zone Industrial Development Revenue Bonds - As of March 31, 2012, the Company had $ $21.6

million outstanding from the issuance of Gulf Opportunity Zone Industrial Development Revenue Bonds (“GO Zone IRBs”) issued by the Mississippi Business Finance Corporation. These bonds accrue interest at a fixed rate of 4.55% per annum (payable semi-annually), and mature in 2028.

The Company's debt arrangements contain customary affirmative and negative covenants, including a maximum total leverage ratio and a minimum interest coverage ratio. The Company was in compliance with all debt covenants as of March 31, 2012.

The estimated fair value of the Company's total long-term debt, including current portions, at March 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, was $1,968 million and $1,864 million , respectively. The fair value of the total long-term debt was calculated based on recent trades for most of the Company's debt instruments or based on interest rates prevailing on debt with substantially similar risks, terms and maturities.

11. BUSINESS ARRANGEMENTS

HII periodically enters into business arrangements with non-affiliated entities. These arrangements generally consist of business ventures designed to deliver collective capabilities that would not have been available to the venture's participants individually, and provide a single point of contact during contract performance to the entity's principal customer. In some arrangements, each equity participant receives a subcontract from the business venture for a pre-determined scope of work. In other cases, the arrangements rely primarily on the assignment of key personnel to the venture from each equity participant rather than subcontracts for a specific work scope. Based on the terms of these arrangements and the relevant GAAP related to consolidation accounting for such entities, the Company does not consolidate the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of these entities into its unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, but accounts for them under the equity method. HII has recorded operating income related to earnings from equity method investees of $2 million and $4 million in its results of operations within the cost of service revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 , respectively. To the extent HII acts as a subcontractor in these arrangements, HII's subcontract activities are recorded in the same manner as sales to non-affiliated entities.

In May 2007, the Company signed a joint venture agreement with Fluor Federal Services, Inc. and Honeywell International Inc. for a nominal initial investment, whereby Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, LLC (“SRNS”) was formed to manage and operate the Savannah River Site for the Department of Energy and the National Nuclear Security Administration. As of March 31, 2012 , and December 31, 2011 , the Company's ownership interest was approximately 34% , with carrying amounts of $ 5 million and $ 6 million , respectively. The investment in SRNS is being accounted for using the equity method and the total investment is classified as miscellaneous other assets in the Company's unaudited condensed consolidated statements of financial position. During the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 , the Company received cash dividends from SRNS in the amounts of $ 3 million and zero , respectively, which were recorded as reductions in the Company's investment in SRNS.

The following table presents summarized financial information for the Company's equity method investments:

12. INVESTIGATIONS, CLAIMS, AND LITIGATION

The Company is involved in legal proceedings before various courts and administrative agencies, and is periodically subject to government examinations, inquiries and investigations. Pursuant to the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") Accounting Standards Codification 450 Contingencies, the Company has accrued for losses associated with investigations, claims and litigation when, and to the extent that, loss amounts related to the investigations, claims and litigation are probable and can be reasonably estimated.  The actual losses that might be incurred to resolve such investigations, claims and litigation may be higher or lower than the amounts accrued. For

matters where a material loss is probable or reasonably possible and the amount of loss cannot be reasonably estimated, but the Company is able to reasonably estimate a range of possible losses, such estimated range is required to be disclosed in these notes. This estimated range would be based on information currently available to the Company and would involve elements of judgment and significant uncertainties. This estimated range of possible loss would not represent the Company's maximum possible loss exposure. For matters as to which the Company is not able to reasonably estimate a possible loss or range of loss, the Company is required to indicate the reasons why it is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss. For matters not specifically described in these notes, the Company does not believe, based on information currently available to it, that it is reasonably possible that the liabilities, if any, arising from such investigations, claims and litigation will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company has, in certain cases, provided disclosure regarding certain matters for which the Company believes at this time that the likelihood of material loss is remote.

False Claims Act Complaint - On January 31, 2011, the U. S. Department of Justice first informed the Company through Northrop Grumman of a False Claims Act complaint that the Company believes was filed under seal by one or more plaintiff(s) (relator(s)) in mid-2010 in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The redacted copy of the complaint that the Company received (“Complaint”) alleges that through largely unspecified fraudulent means, Northrop Grumman and the Company obtained federal funds that were restricted by law for the consequences of Hurricane Katrina, and used those funds to cover costs under certain shipbuilding contracts that were unrelated to Katrina and for which Northrop Grumman and the Company were not entitled to recovery under the contracts. The Complaint seeks monetary damages of at least $ 835 million , plus penalties, attorneys' fees and other costs of suit. Damages under the False Claims Act may be trebled upon a finding of liability.

The Company has agreed to cooperate with the government investigation relating to the False Claims Act Complaint. Until the case is unsealed, the Company will not know the Department of Justice's decision on intervention. Based upon a review to date of the information available to the Company, the Company believes that it has substantive defenses to the allegations in the Complaint. The Company believes that the claims as set forth in the Complaint evidence a fundamental lack of understanding of the terms and conditions in the Company's shipbuilding contracts, including the post-Katrina modifications to those contracts, and the manner in which the parties performed in connection with the contracts. Based upon a review to date of the information available to the Company, the Company believes that the claims as set forth in the Complaint lack merit and will not result in a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The Company intends vigorously to defend the matter, but the Company cannot predict what new or revised claims might be asserted or what information might come to light and can give no assurances regarding the ultimate outcome.

U.S. Government Investigations and Claims - Departments and agencies of the U.S. Government have the authority to investigate various transactions and operations of the Company, and the results of such investigations may lead to administrative, civil or criminal proceedings, the ultimate outcome of which could be fines, penalties, repayments or compensatory or treble damages. U.S. Government regulations provide that certain findings against a contractor may lead to suspension or debarment from future U.S. Government contracts or the loss of export privileges for a company or an operating division or subdivision. Suspension or debarment could have a material effect on the Company because of its reliance on government contracts.

In the second quarter of 2007, the U.S. Coast Guard issued a revocation of acceptance under the Deepwater Modernization Program for eight converted 123-foot patrol boats (the "vessels") based on alleged "hull buckling and shaft alignment problems" and alleged "nonconforming topside equipment" on the vessels. The Company submitted a written response that argued that the revocation of acceptance was improper. The U.S. Coast Guard advised Integrated Coast Guard Systems, LLC ("ICGS"), which was formed by the Company and Lockheed Martin to perform the Deepwater Modernization Program, that it was seeking $ 96 million from ICGS as a result of the revocation of acceptance. The majority of the costs associated with the conversion effort are associated with the alleged structural deficiencies of the vessels, which were converted under contracts with the Company and one of its subcontractors. In 2008, the U.S. Coast Guard advised ICGS that the U.S. Coast Guard would support an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice of ICGS and its subcontractors instead of pursuing its $ 96 million claim independently. The Department of Justice conducted an investigation of ICGS under a sealed False Claims Act complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas and decided in early 2009 not to intervene at that time. In February 2009, the District Court unsealed the complaint filed by Michael J. DeKort, a former Lockheed Martin employee, against us, ICGS, and Lockheed Martin Corporation relating to the vessel conversion effort. Damages under the False Claims Act are subject to trebling. Following the resolution of certain claims between the relator and a co-defendant, the District Court entered a final judgment in March 2011,

dismissing the relator's remaining claims. The relator appealed the dismissal of the remaining claims to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The parties filed their respective briefs and are awaiting further proceedings with the Fifth Circuit. The Company does not believe that this litigation will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows, but the Company cannot predict what new or revised claims or litigation might be asserted or what information might come to light and can, therefore, give no assurances regarding the ultimate outcome.

Asbestos Related Claims - HII and its predecessors-in-interest are defendants in a longstanding series of cases filed in numerous jurisdictions around the country, wherein former and current employees and various third-party persons allege exposure to asbestos containing materials while on or associated with HII premises or while working on vessels constructed or repaired by HII. The cases allege various injuries, including those associated with pleural plaque disease, asbestosis, cancer, mesothelioma and other alleged asbestos related conditions. In some cases, several of HII's former executive officers are also named as defendants. In some instances, partial or full insurance coverage is available to the Company for its liability and that of its former executive officers. Although the Company believes the ultimate resolution of these cases will not have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows, it cannot predict what new or revised claims or litigation might be asserted or what information might come to light and can, therefore, give no assurances regarding the ultimate outcome of asbestos related litigation.

Litigation - Various claims and legal proceedings arise in the ordinary course of business and are pending against the Company and its properties. Although the Company believes that the resolution of any of these various claims and legal proceedings will not have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows, it cannot predict what new or revised claims or litigation might be asserted or what information might come to light and can, therefore, give no assurances regarding the ultimate outcome of these matters.

13. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Contract Performance Contingencies - Contract profit margins may include estimates of revenues not contractually agreed to between the customer and the Company for matters such as settlements in the process of negotiation, contract changes, claims and requests for equitable adjustment for previously unanticipated contract costs. These estimates are based upon management's best assessment of the underlying causal events and circumstances, and are included in determining contract profit margins to the extent of expected recovery based on contractual entitlements and the probability of successful negotiation with the customer. As of March 31, 2012 , the recognized amounts related to claims and requests for equitable adjustment are not material individually or in aggregate.

Guarantees of Performance Obligations - From time to time in the ordinary course of business, HII may enter into joint ventures, teaming and other business arrangements to support the Company's products and services as described in Note 11: Business Arrangements. The Company generally strives to limit its exposure under these arrangements to its investment in the arrangement, or to the extent of obligations under the applicable contract. In some cases, however, HII may be required to guarantee performance of the arrangement and, in such cases, generally obtains cross-indemnification from the other members of the arrangement. As of March 31, 2012 , the Company was not aware of any existing event of default that would require HII to satisfy any of these guarantees.

Quality Issues - In 2009, the Company received notice of an investigation regarding work performed by its Ingalls shipyards on the LPD class of ships and, following the discovery of leaks in the LPD-17 USS San Antonio 's lube oil system, performed a review of the design, engineering and production processes at Ingalls. As a result, the Company became aware of quality issues relating to certain pipe welds on ships under production at Ingalls at the time, as well as ships that had previously been delivered. Since that discovery, the Company has been working with its customer to determine the nature and extent of the pipe weld issue and its possible impact on related shipboard systems. This effort has resulted in the preparation of a technical analysis of the problem, additional inspections on the ships, a rework plan for ships previously delivered and in various stages of production, and modifications to the work plans for ships being placed into production, all of which has been done with the knowledge and support of the U.S. Navy. Incremental costs associated with the anticipated resolution of these matters that are the responsibility of the Company have been reflected in the financial performance analysis and contract booking rates since the second quarter of 2009.

In the fourth quarter of 2009, certain bearing wear and debris were found in the lubrication system of the Main Propulsion Diesel Engines (“MPDE”) installed on LPD-21. The Company is participating with the U.S. Navy and other industry participants involved with the MPDEs in a review panel to examine the MPDE lubrication system's

design, construction, operation and maintenance for the LPD-17 San Antonio -class of ships. To date, the review has identified several potential system improvements for increasing the reliability of the system. Certain changes are being implemented on ships currently under construction. Incremental costs that the Company anticipates incurring in connection with the resolution of these matters have been reflected in the financial performance analysis and contract booking rates of the relevant contracts.

The Company and the U.S. Navy continue to work in partnership to investigate and identify any additional corrective actions to address quality issues, and the Company will implement appropriate corrective actions consistent with its contractual and legal obligations. The Company does not believe that the ultimate resolution of the matters described above will have a material effect upon its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

The Company has also encountered various quality issues on its aircraft carrier construction and overhaul programs and its Virginia -class submarine construction program at its Newport News location. These primarily involve matters related to filler metal used in pipe welds identified in 2007, and issues associated with non-nuclear weld inspection and the installation of weapons handling equipment on certain submarines, and certain purchased material quality issues identified in 2009. The Company does not believe that resolution of these issues will have a material adverse effect upon its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Environmental Matters -The estimated cost to complete environmental remediation has been accrued where it is probable that the Company will incur such costs in the future to address environmental conditions at currently or formerly owned or leased operating facilities, or at sites where it has been named a Potentially Responsible Party (“PRP”) by the Environmental Protection Agency, or similarly designated by another environmental agency, and these costs can be estimated by management. These accruals do not include any litigation costs related to environmental matters, nor do they include amounts recorded as asset retirement obligations. To assess the potential impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements, management estimates the range of reasonably possible remediation costs that could be incurred by the Company, taking into account currently available facts on each site as well as the current state of technology and prior experience in remediating contaminated sites. These estimates are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect changes in facts and technical and legal circumstances. Management estimates that as of March 31, 2012 , the probable future cost for environmental remediation is $ 3 million , which is accrued in other current liabilities. Factors that could result in changes to the Company's estimates include: modification of planned remedial actions, increases or decreases in the estimated time required to remediate, changes to the determination of legally responsible parties, discovery of more extensive contamination than anticipated, changes in laws and regulations affecting remediation requirements, and improvements in remediation technology. Should other PRPs not pay their allocable share of remediation costs, the Company may have to incur costs exceeding those already estimated and accrued. In addition, there are certain potential remediation sites where the costs of remediation cannot be reasonably estimated. Although management cannot predict whether new information gained as projects progress will materially affect the estimated liability accrued, management does not believe that future remediation expenditures will have a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Financial Arrangements - In the ordinary course of business, HII uses standby letters of credit issued by commercial banks and surety bonds issued by insurance companies principally to support the Company's self-insured workers' compensation plans. As of March 31, 2012 , there were $ 137 million of standby letters of credit issued but undrawn and $ 297 million of surety bonds outstanding related to HII.

U.S. Government Claims - From time to time, the U.S. Government advises the Company of claims and penalties concerning certain potential disallowed costs. When such findings are presented, the Company and U.S. Government representatives engage in discussions to enable HII to evaluate the merits of these claims as well as to assess the amounts being claimed. The Company does not believe that the outcome of any such matters will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

14. IMPACTS FROM HURRICANES

In August 2005, the Company's Ingalls operations were significantly impacted by Hurricane Katrina, and the Company's shipyards in Louisiana and Mississippi sustained significant windstorm damage from the hurricane. As a result of the storm, the Company incurred costs to replace or repair destroyed or damaged assets, suffered losses under its contracts, and incurred substantial costs to clean up and recover its operations. At the time of the storm, the Company had a comprehensive insurance program that provided coverage for, among other things, property

damage, business interruption impact on net profitability, and costs associated with clean-up and recovery. The Company has recovered a portion of its Hurricane Katrina claim, including $ 62 million in recovery of lost profits in 2007. In November 2011, the Company recovered an additional $ 18.8 million from Munich-American Risk Partners (“Munich Re”), one of its two remaining insurers with which a resolution had not been reached, in connection with settlement of an arbitration proceeding. The Company expects that its remaining claim will be resolved separately with the remaining insurer, Factory Mutual Insurance Company (“FM Global”). See Note 15: Hurricane Katrina Insurance Recoveries.

The Company has full entitlement to any insurance recoveries related to business interruption impacts on net profitability resulting from these hurricanes. However, because of uncertainties concerning the ultimate determination of recoveries related to business interruption claims, in accordance with Company policy no such amounts are recognized until the underlying claims are resolved with the insurers. Furthermore, due to the uncertainties with respect to the Company's disagreement with FM Global in relation to the Hurricane Katrina claim, no receivables for insurance recoveries from FM Global have been recognized by the Company in its unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In accordance with U.S. Government cost accounting regulations affecting the majority of the Company's contracts, the cost of insurance premiums for property damage and business interruption coverage, other than “coverage of profit,” is an allowable expense that may be charged to contracts. Because a substantial portion of the Company's long-term contracts is flexibly-priced, the U.S. Government customer would benefit from a portion of insurance recoveries in excess of the net book value of damaged assets and clean-up and restoration costs paid by the Company. When such insurance recoveries occur, the Company is obligated to return a portion of these amounts to the U.S. Government. The U.S. Navy has verbally expressed its intention to challenge the allowability of certain post-Katrina depreciation costs charged or expected to be charged on contracts under construction in the Ingalls shipyards. It is premature to estimate the amount, if any, that the U.S. Navy will ultimately challenge. The Company believes that all of the replacement costs are recoverable under its insurance coverage and the amounts in question are included in the insurance claim. However, if HII is unsuccessful in its insurance recovery, the Company believes there are specific rules in the CAS and FAR that would still render the depreciation on those assets allowable and recoverable through its contracts with the U.S. Navy. The Company believes that its depreciation practices are in conformity with the FAR, and, if the U.S. Navy were to challenge the allowability of such costs, the Company will be able to successfully resolve this matter with no material impact to its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

15. HURRICANE KATRINA INSURANCE RECOVERIES

The Company is pursuing legal action against an insurance provider, FM Global, arising out of a disagreement concerning the coverage of certain losses related to Hurricane Katrina. See Note 14: Impacts from Hurricanes. The case was commenced against FM Global on November 4, 2005, and is now pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Western Division. In an interlocutory appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the FM Global excess policy unambiguously excludes damage from the storm surge caused by Hurricane Katrina under its "Flood" exclusion and remanded the case to the District Court to determine whether the California efficient proximate cause doctrine afforded coverage under the policy, even if the Flood exclusion of the policy is unambiguous. In August 2010, the District Court granted FM Global's motion for summary judgment based upon California's doctrine of efficient proximate cause and denied FM Global's motion for summary judgment based upon breach of contract, finding that triable issues of fact remained as to whether and to what extent the Company sustained wind damage apart from the hurricane storm surge. In September 2011, the District Court granted FM Global's motion for summary judgment to dismiss Northrop Grumman's claims for bad faith damages and for contract reformation. The Company intends to continue to pursue the breach of contract action against FM Global. In addition, in January 2011, Northrop Grumman, as the Company's predecessor-in-interest, filed suit against Aon, which acted as the Company's broker in connection with the policy with FM Global, in Superior Court in California, seeking damages for breach of contract, professional negligence and negligent misrepresentation, as well as for declaratory relief. No assurances can be made as to the ultimate outcome of these matters. If, however, either of these claims is successful, the potential impact to the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows would be favorable.

The Company's cash contributions for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 , were as follows:

(a) Qualified pension plans only.

The Company expects its full year 2012 cash contributions to its qualified defined benefit pension plans to be approximately $ 212 million ($ 149 million minimum; $ 63 million discretionary). In 2011, the Company made no contributions to its qualified defined benefit pension plans.

Accumulated comprehensive income (loss) consists of two components: net earnings (loss) and other comprehensive income (loss). Other comprehensive income (loss) refers to gains and losses recorded as an element of stockholders' equity but excluded from net earnings (loss). The accumulated other comprehensive loss as of March 31, 2012 , and December 31, 2011 , was comprised of unamortized benefit plan costs of $ 834 million (net of tax benefits of $ 544 million ) and $ 849 million (net of tax benefits of $ 553 million ), respectively.

In the three months ended March 31, 2012 , the Company issued new equity awards as follows:

Restricted Performance Stock Rights - On February 27, 2012, the Company granted 0.6 million rights at a share price of $ 35.92 . These rights are subject to cliff vesting based on service over 2 years and 10 months from the date of grant, as well as the achievement of performance based targets at the end of the same period. Based upon the Company's results measured against such targets, between 0% and 200% of the original stated grant will ultimately vest.

Stock Rights - On January 3, 2012, the Company granted an aggregate of 6,000 stock rights to its non-employee directors. The stock rights are fully vested on the grant date. Shares to settle vested stock rights are issued at the end of the non-employee directors' respective board terms.

A summary of the status of the Company's outstanding stock awards at March 31, 2012 is presented below:

Compensation Expense

Total stock-based compensation recorded by HII for the value of the awards granted to Company employees and non-employee members of the Board of Directors for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 , was $ 8 million and $ 8 million , respectively.

Tax benefits recognized in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations for stock-based compensation during the three months ended March 31, 2012 and 2011 , were $ 4 million and $ 4 million , respectively.

Unrecognized Compensation Expense

At March 31, 2012 and 2011 , there was less than $ 1 million and $ 1 million , respectively, of unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested stock option awards, which will be recognized over a weighted average period of 0.9 years and 1.6 years, respectively.

In addition, at March 31, 2012 , there was $ 17 million of unrecognized compensation expense associated with the 2011 RSRs, which will be recognized over a period of two years, and $ 42 million of unrecognized expense associated with the RPSRs, which will be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.9 years.