MDR McDermott International Inc

Item 1. Consolidated Financial Statements

See accompanying Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

1

See accompanying Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

2

See accompanying Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

3

See accompanying Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

4

See accompanying Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

5

6

McDERMOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC.

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(continued)

NOTE 1—BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Nature of Operations

McDermott International, Inc. (“MDR”), a corporation incorporated under the laws of the Republic of Panama in 1959, is a leading provider of integrated engineering, procurement, construction and installation (“EPCI”), front-end engineering and design (“FEED”) and module fabrication services for upstream field developments worldwide.  We deliver fixed and floating production facilities, pipeline installations and subsea systems from concept to commissioning for complex offshore and subsea oil and gas projects. Operating in approximately 20 countries across Americas, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia and Australia, our integrated resources include a diversified fleet of marine vessels, fabrication facilities and engineering offices. We support our activities with comprehensive project management and procurement services, while utilizing our fully integrated capabilities in both shallow water and deepwater construction. Our customers include national, major integrated and other oil and gas companies, and we operate in most major offshore oil and gas producing regions throughout the world. We execute our contracts through a variety of methods, principally fixed-price, but also including cost reimbursable, cost-plus, day-rate and unit-rate basis or some combination of those methods. In these Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements, unless the context otherwise indicates, “we,” “us” and “our” mean MDR and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements are unaudited and have been prepared from our books and records in accordance with Rule 10-1 of Regulation S-X for interim financial information. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and notes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”) for complete financial statements. In the opinion of our management, all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. The results of operations for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of results of operations for a full year. These Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included in our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on April 25, 2016 (the “April 25 Form 8-K”).

Classification

Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified for consistency with the current year presentation. Previously reported Consolidated Financial Statements have been adjusted to reflect those changes.

In addition, in the first quarter of 2017, we implemented certain changes to our financial reporting structure. Corporate expenses, certain centrally managed initiatives (such as restructuring charges), impairments, year-end mark-to-market pension actuarial gains and losses, costs not attributable to a particular reportable segment, and unallocated direct operating expenses associated with the underutilization of vessels, fabrication facilities and engineering resources, are no longer apportioned to our reportable segments. Those expenses are reported under “Corporate and Other”. Previously reported segment financial information has been adjusted to reflect this change, see Note 16, Segment Reporting .

Accounting Guidance Issued But Not Adopted as of March 31, 2017

Pension and Postretirement Benefits— In March 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Updates (“ASU”) ASU 2017-07, Compensation—Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit . This ASU requires bifurcation of certain components of net pension and postretirement benefit cost (“benefit costs”) in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. The service cost components are required to be presented in operating income and the remaining components are required to be presented outside of operating income. This ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted.  Upon future adoption of this guidance, benefit costs, excluding service costs component, will be included in Other non-operating income (expense), net in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Currently, all components of benefit costs are reported in Selling, general and administrative expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Operations .

7

Income Taxes— In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory .  This ASU requires entities to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-e ntity transfer of an asset other than inventory when the transfer occurs.  The ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017.  Early adoption is permitted.  The application of this amendment is not expected to have a mat erial impact on our future Consolidated Financial Statements and related disclosures.

Financial Instruments —In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments—Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments . This ASU will require a financial asset measured at amortized cost basis to be presented at the net amount expected to be collected. A valuation account, allowance for credit losses, will be deducted from the amortized cost basis of the financial asset to present the net carrying value at the amount expected to be collected on the financial asset. This ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019. We are currently assessing the impact of this guidance on our future Consolidated Financial Statements and related disclosures.

Leases —In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02 , Leases (Topic 842) . The ASU will require entities that lease assets—referred to as “lessees”—to recognize on the balance sheet the assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by leases with lease terms of more than 12 months. Consistent with current U.S. GAAP, the recognition, measurement and presentation of expenses and cash flows arising from a lease by a lessee primarily will depend on its classification as a finance or operating lease. However, unlike current U.S. GAAP—which requires only capital leases to be recognized on the balance sheet—the new ASU will require both types of leases to be recognized on the balance sheet. This ASU is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted. We are currently assessing the impact of this ASU on our future Consolidated Financial Statements and related disclosures.

Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)— In May 2014, the FASB issued a new standard related to revenue recognition which supersedes most of the existing revenue recognition requirements in U.S. GAAP and will require entities to recognize revenue at an amount that reflects the consideration to which an entity expects to be entitled in exchange for transferring goods or services to a customer. It also requires significantly expanded disclosures regarding the qualitative and quantitative information of an entity’s nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers.

The FASB has issued several amendments to the standard, including clarification on accounting for licenses of intellectual property, identifying performance obligations, reporting gross versus net revenue and narrow-scope improvements and practical expedients.

The guidance permits two methods of adoption: retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented (“full retrospective method”), or retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying the guidance recognized at the date of initial application (“modified retrospective application”).

We are currently assessing the impact of this ASU and the amendments on our future Consolidated Financial Statements and related disclosures. Adoption may affect the manner in which the company determines the unit of account for its projects and estimates revenue associated with unapproved change orders and claims. We intend to adopt the new standard on January 1, 2018 (the “initial application” date):

This standard could have a significant impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements and related disclosures.

NOTE 2—REVENUE RECOGNITION

Unapproved Change Orders

As of March 31, 2017, total unapproved change orders included in our estimates at completion aggregated approximately $118 million, of which approximately $12 million was included in backlog. As of March 31, 2016, total unapproved change orders included in our estimates at completion aggregated approximately $122 million, of which approximately $20 million was included in backlog.

8

Claims Revenue

The amount of revenues included in our estimates at completion (i.e., contract values) associated with claims was $10 million and $16 million as of March 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively, all in our Middle East segment. These amounts are determined based on various factors, including our analysis of the underlying contractual language and our experience in making and resolving claims. Our unconsolidated joint ventures did not include any material claims revenue or associated costs in their financial results for the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and 2016.  

None of the claims included in our estimates at completion at March 31, 2017 were the subject of any litigation proceedings. We continue to actively engage in negotiations with our customers on our outstanding claims. However, these claims may be resolved at amounts that differ from our current estimates, which could result in increases or decreases in future estimated contract profits or losses.  

Loss Recognition

For all ongoing contracts, we have provided for estimated costs to complete. If a current estimate of total contract cost indicates a loss, the projected loss is recognized in full immediately and reflected in cost of operations in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. However, it is possible that current estimates could change due to unforeseen events, which could result in adjustments to overall contract costs. Variations from estimated contract performance could result in material adjustments to operating results for any fiscal quarter or year.

For loss projects, it is possible that our estimates of gross profit could increase or decrease based on changes in productivity, actual downtime and the resolution of change orders and claims with the customers. In our Consolidated Balance Sheets, the provision for estimated losses on all active uncompleted projects is included in “Advance billings on contracts”.

As of March 31, 2017, KJO Hout, an EPCI project in our MEA segment, was in an overall $7 million loss position. That project is expected to be complete in the second quarter of 2017.

As of March 31, 2016, two significant active projects in our AEA segment were in loss positions. PB Litoral, an EPCI project, in Mexico, which was completed in the first quarter of 2016, and the five-year Agile vessel charter project in Brazil which was terminated in the second quarter of 2016.

As of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the remaining provision for estimated losses, to be recognized, on all active uncompleted projects in our Consolidated Balance Sheets was not material.

NOTE 3—USE OF ESTIMATES

The following is a discussion of our most significant changes in estimates that impacted segment operating income for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016.

Three months ended March 31, 2017

Segment operating income for the three months ended March 31, 2017 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $47 million across all segments.

Americas, Europe and Africa Segment (“AEA”) — This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $5 million on multiple projects, none of which individually were material. 

Middle East Segment (“MEA”) — This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $16 million, primarily due to productivity improvements and associated cost savings on Saudi Aramco projects.

Asia Segment (“ASA”) — This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $26 million, primarily as a result of improved cost estimates associated with efficient project execution, including productivity improvements on our marine vessels and associated cost savings achieved, on our active projects.

At December 31, 2016, on our Ichthys project in Australia, we reported a $34 million increase in our estimated costs at completion and a $10 million possible additional increase due to a failure identified in a supplier-provided subsea-pipe connector component which we had previously installed. We discussed various options for replacing components with the customer and developed a

9

remediation plan. At March 31, 2017, we believe the increase in estimated costs at completion for the project, as a whole, to replace the components will be approximately $35 million.  During the qua rter, we began to mitigate this risk and now believe the range of reasonably possible additional increase in costs has decreased to $5 million as compared to $10 million at December 31, 2016. We expect the project to remain in an overall profitable positio n.

Three months ended March 31, 2016

Segment operating income for the three months ended March 31, 2016 was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates totaling approximately $40 million across all segments.

AEA — This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $16 million, primarily due to:

MEA — This segment was positively impacted by net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $7 million, primarily due to:

ASA — This segment had net favorable changes in estimates aggregating approximately $17 million driven by:

NOTE 4— RESTRUCTURING

Restructuring initiatives are driven and managed by our corporate management. These costs are not allocated to our reportable segments and are reported under Corporate and Other.

Restructuring expenses are reported as a component of Other operating (income) expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Previously, restructuring expenses were presented separately in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.

10

The following table presents restructuring costs incurred in the first quarter of 2016 and from inception, by major cost type. No restructuring costs were incurred in the first quarter of 2017.

A majority of our restricted cash balances serve as collateral for letters of credit, discussed in Note 9, Debt .

11

Contract retainages generally represent amounts withheld by our customers until project completion, in accordance with the terms of the applicable contracts. The following is a summary of retainages on our contracts:

NOTE 8—SALE LEASEBACK

In January 2017, we purchased the pipelay and construction vessel, the Amazon , for a total cash consideration of approximately $52 million. Following the purchase, we sold the Amazon to an unrelated third party for total cash consideration of $52 million and simultaneously entered into an 11-year bareboat charter agreement with the purchaser. The bareboat charter agreement provides us with options to purchase the Amazon , at a predetermined value periodically over the charter term.  We accounted for the transaction as a sale leaseback and are treating the bareboat charter agreement as an operating lease.  As the proceeds from the sale equaled the carrying value of the vessel, no gain or loss was recognized.  The annual charter obligation is $3 million through 2018, when it will increase to $8 million annually for the remainder of the charter term.

Letter of Credit Facility and Term Loan

In April 2014, we entered into a credit agreement (as amended to date, the “Credit Agreement”), which initially provided for a $400 million (subsequently amended to $450 million) first-lien, first-out three-year letter of credit facility (the “LC Facility”), scheduled to mature in 2019, and a $300 million first-lien, second-out five-year term loan (the “Term Loan”), scheduled to mature in 2019. The

12

indebtedness and other obligations under the Credit Agreement are unconditionally guaranteed on a senior secured basis by substantially all of our wholly owned subsidiaries, other than our captive insurance subsidiary (collectively , the “Guarantors”). The aggregate face amount of letters of credit issued under the LC Facility, as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, was $372 million and $442 million, respectively.

The LC Facility permits us to deposit up to $300 million with letter of credit issuers to cash collateralize letters of credit issued on a bilateral basis outside the credit facility. As of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, we had an aggregate face amount of approximately $15 million and $16 million of such letters of credit outstanding supported by cash collateral. We have included the supporting cash collateral in restricted cash and cash equivalents in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The LC Facility is secured on a first-lien, first-out basis (with relative priority over the Term Loan) by pledges of the capital stock of all the Guarantors and mortgages on, or other security interests in, substantially all the tangible and intangible assets of our company and the Guarantors, subject to specific exceptions.

The LC Facility contains various customary affirmative covenants, as well as specific affirmative covenants, including specific reporting requirements. The LC Facility also requires compliance with various negative covenants, including limitations with respect to the incurrence of other indebtedness and liens, restrictions on acquisitions, capital expenditures and other investments, restrictions on sale leaseback transactions and restrictions on prepayments of other indebtedness.

The Term Loan is secured on a first-lien, second-out basis (with the LC Facility having relative priority over the Term Loan) by pledges of the capital stock of all the Guarantors and mortgages on, or other security interests in, substantially all tangible and intangible assets of our company and the Guarantors, subject to specific exceptions.

The Term Loan requires mandatory prepayments from: (1) the proceeds from the sale of assets, as well as insurance proceeds, in each case subject to certain exceptions, to the extent such proceeds are not reinvested in our business within 365 days of receipt; (2) net cash proceeds from the incurrence of indebtedness not otherwise permitted under the Credit Agreement; and (3) 50% of amounts deemed to be “excess cash flow,” subject to specified adjustments. The Term Loan requires $750,000 quarterly payments of principal.

The Term Loan requires compliance with various customary affirmative and negative covenants. We are required to maintain a ratio of “ownership adjusted fair market value” of marine vessels to the sum of (1) the outstanding principal amount of the Term Loan and (2) the aggregate principal amount of unreimbursed drawings and advances under the LC Facility of at least 1.75:1.00. As of March 31, 2017, the actual ratio was 5.53 to 1.0.  

As of March 31, 2017 we were in compliance with all of the financial covenants under the Credit Agreement.

For additional information relating to the Credit Agreement, see Note 10, Debt , to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the April 25 Form 8-K.

Senior Notes

In April 2014, we issued $500 million in aggregate principal amount of 8.00% senior secured notes due 2021 (the “Notes”) in a private placement in accordance with Rule 144A and Regulation S under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. Interest on the Notes is payable semi-annually in arrears on May 1 and November 1 of each year, beginning on November 1, 2014. The Notes are scheduled to mature on May 1, 2021.  The Notes are unconditionally guaranteed on a senior secured basis by the Guarantors, and the Notes are secured on a second-lien basis by pledges of capital stock of certain of our subsidiaries and mortgages and other security interests covering (1) specified marine vessels owned by certain of the Guarantors and (2) substantially all the other tangible and intangible assets of our company and the Guarantors, subject to exceptions for certain assets.  The indenture governing the Notes contains covenants that, among other things, limit our ability and the ability of our restricted subsidiaries to: (1) incur or guarantee additional indebtedness or issue preferred stock; (2) make investments or certain other restricted payments; (3) pay dividends or distributions on capital stock or purchase or redeem subordinated indebtedness; (4) sell assets; (5) create restrictions on the ability of our restricted subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other payments to us; (6) create certain liens; (7) sell all or substantially all of our assets or merge or consolidate with or into other companies; (8) enter into transactions with affiliates; and (9) create unrestricted subsidiaries. Many of those covenants would become suspended if the Notes were to attain an investment grade rating from both Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. and Standard and Poor’s Ratings Services and no default has occurred.  For additional information relating to the Notes, see Note 10, Debt , to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in the April 25 Form 8-K.

13

North Ocean Financing

NO 105 ―On September 30, 2010, MDR, as guarantor, and North Ocean 105 AS, in which we have a 75% ownership interest, as borrower, entered into a financing agreement to finance a portion of the construction costs of the NO 105. Borrowings under the agreement are secured by, among other things, a pledge of all of the equity of North Ocean 105 AS, a mortgage on the NO 105 , and a lien on substantially all of the other assets of North Ocean 105 AS. Under the current Credit Agreement, we are required to exercise our option under the North Ocean 105 AS joint venture agreement to purchase Oceanteam ASA’s 25% ownership interest in the vessel-owning company during the second quarter of 2017 and repay the outstanding NO 105 debt during the third quarter of 2017.

Tangible Equity Units (“TEUs”)

In April 2014, we issued 11,500,000 6.25% TEUs, each with a stated amount of $25. Each TEU consists of (1) a prepaid common stock purchase contract and (2) a senior amortizing note due April 1, 2017 (each an “Amortizing Note”) that had an initial principal amount of $4.1266 per Amortizing Note and bore interest at a rate of 7.75% per annum and had a final scheduled installment payment date of April 1, 2017.

The prepaid common stock purchase contracts were accounted for as capital in excess of par value totaling $240 million in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Each prepaid common stock purchase contract automatically settled on or about April 3, 2017. On or about that date, we delivered 40.8 million shares of our common stock to holders of the TEU prepaid common stock purchase contracts, based on the settlement rate of 3.5496 shares per unit.

Receivables Factoring Facility

In February 2017, J. Ray McDermott de Mexico, S.A. de C.V. (“JRM Mexico”), one of our indirectly 100% owned subsidiaries, entered into a 364 day, $50 million committed revolving receivables purchase agreement which provides for the sale, at a discount rate of LIBOR plus an applicable margin of 4.25%, of certain receivables to a designated purchaser without recourse.  The facility provides for customary representations and warranties and compliance with customary covenants. JRM Mexico’s obligations in connection with the receivables purchase agreement are guaranteed by McDermott International, Inc.

During the first quarter of 2017, we sold approximately $2 million of receivables.

Vendor Equipment Financing

In February 2017, JRM Mexico entered into a 21-month loan agreement for equipment financing in the amount of $47 million. Borrowings under the loan agreement bear interest at a fixed rate of 5.75%. JRM Mexico’s obligations in connection with this equipment financing are guaranteed by McDermott International Management, S. de RL., one of our 100% owned subsidiaries. The equipment financing agreement contains various customary affirmative covenants, as well as specific affirmative covenants, including the pledge of specific equipment.  The equipment financing agreement also requires compliance with various negative covenants, including restricted use of the proceeds. At March 31, 2017, the total borrowing outstanding under this facility was approximately $16 million.

Unsecured Bilateral Lines of Credit

MDR has uncommitted lines of credit in place with Middle Eastern banks in support of our contracting activities in the Middle East. Bank guarantees issued under these agreements totaled $452 million and $359 million, as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. As of March 31, 2017, overall capacity under these arrangements totaled $625 million.

Surety Bonds

As of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, surety bonds issued under general agreements of indemnity in favor of surety underwriters in support of contracting activities of our subsidiaries JRM Mexico and McDermott, Inc. totaled $80 million and $79 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2017, overall uncommitted capacity under these arrangements totaled $300 million.

14

NOTE 11—DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

We enter into derivative financial instruments primarily to hedge certain firm purchase commitments and forecasted transactions denominated in foreign currencies. We record these contracts at fair value on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Depending on the hedge designation at the inception of the contract, the related gains and losses on these contracts are either: (1) deferred as a component of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“AOCI”) until the hedged item is recognized in earnings; (2) offset against the change in fair value of the hedged firm commitment through earnings; or (3) recognized immediately in earnings. At inception and on an ongoing basis, we assess the hedging relationship to determine its effectiveness in offsetting changes in cash flows or fair value attributable to the hedged risk. We exclude from our assessment of effectiveness the portion of the fair value of the forward contracts attributable to the difference between spot exchange rates and forward exchange rates. The ineffective portion of a derivative’s change in fair value and any portion excluded from the assessment of effectiveness are immediately recognized in earnings. Gains and losses on derivative financial instruments that are immediately recognized in earnings are included as a component of Other non-operating income (expense), net in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.

As of March 31, 2017, the majority of our foreign currency forward contracts were designated as cash flow hedging instruments. In addition, we deferred approximately $23 million of net losses on those derivative financial instruments in AOCI, and we expect to reclassify approximately $5 million of deferred losses out of AOCI by March 31, 2018, as hedged items are recognized. The notional value of our outstanding derivative contracts totaled $294 million at March 31 2017, with maturities extending through February 2018. Of this amount, approximately $148 million is associated with various foreign currency expenditures we expect to incur on one of our ASA segment’s EPCI projects. These instruments consist of contracts to purchase or sell foreign-denominated currencies. As of March 31, 2017, the fair value of these contracts was in a net liability position totaling approximately $2 million. The fair value of outstanding derivative instruments is determined using observable financial market inputs, such as quoted market prices, and is classified as Level 2 in nature.

The following tables summarize our derivative financial instruments:

Asset and Liability Derivatives  

15

The carrying value of all non-derivative financial instruments included in current assets (including cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash and accounts receivable) and current liabilities (including accounts payable but excluding short-term debt) approximates the applicable fair value due to the short maturity of those instruments.

We used the following methods and assumptions in estimating our fair value disclosures for our other financial instruments:

Short-term and long-term debt— The fair value of debt instruments valued using a market approach based on quoted prices for similar instruments traded in active markets is classified as Level 2 within the fair value hierarchy.

Quoted prices were not available for the amortizing notes included within the TEUs or the NO 105 financing. The income approach was used to value these instruments based on the present value of future cash flows discounted at estimated borrowing rates for similar debt instruments or on estimated prices based on current yields for debt issues of similar quality and terms. These instruments are classified as Level 3 within the fair value hierarchy.

Forward contracts . The fair value of forward contracts is classified as Level 2 within the fair value hierarchy and is valued using observable market parameters for similar instruments traded in active markets. Where quoted prices are not available, the income approach is used to value forward contracts, which discounts future cash flows based on current market expectations and credit risk.

Fair Value Disclosure of Non-financial Assets

During the first quarter of 2016, we impaired our Agile vessel upon termination of it’s then-current charter in May 2016, given the lack of opportunities for that vessel. In connection with that decision, we recognized a non-cash impairment charge of $32 million during the first quarter of 2016, which equaled the vessel’s carrying value, in accordance with ASC 360-10, Property, Plant and Equipment .

16

These are reported as a component of Other operating (income) expenses in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Previously, Impairment loss was presented separately in our Consolidated Statements of Operations.

The following table presents the components of AOCI and the amounts that were reclassified during the periods indicated:

17

Approximately 1.7 million and 2.6 million shares underlying outstanding stock-based awards were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively, because inclusion of such shares would have been antidilutive in each of those periods. 

For the three months ended March 31, 2016, potentially dilutive common stock for the settlement of our common stock purchase contracts, a component of our TEUs, of 40.9 million shares were considered in the calculation of fully diluted common stock. Restricted stock units (“RSUs”) and restricted stock awards (“RSAs”) totaling 4.8 million were also considered in the calculation of diluted weighted average shares for the three months ended March 31, 2016. However, due to our net loss position in that period, shares underlying TEUs, RSUs, and RSAs have not been reflected in the diluted earnings per share, because inclusion of those shares would have been antidilutive.

The common stock purchase contracts under the TEUs were settled on or about April 3, 2017, see Note 9, Debt.

NOTE 15—COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Investigations and Litigation

We co-own interests in several entities (collectively “FloaTEC”) with Keppel Corporation (including its subsidiaries, “Keppel”).  We have conducted an internal investigation in connection with allegations by a former Petrobras employee that Keppel’s agent made improper payments to secure project awards from Petrobras on a number of Keppel affiliated projects in Brazil, including a FloaTEC project on which we were also a subcontractor.  Keppel’s agent subsequently entered into a plea arrangement with the Brazilian authorities and admitted to having made improper payments on behalf of Keppel to former Petrobras employees on projects unrelated to FloaTEC.  We voluntarily contacted the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) to advise it of the preliminary results of our internal investigation, which identified no evidence to indicate any improper payments were made by us or FloaTEC or that any of our or FloaTEC’s employees authorized, had knowledge of, or direction or control over, any such payments.  We have responded to the DOJ’s requests for additional information.   If in the future, the DOJ determines that violations of applicable law have occurred involving us, we could be subject to civil or criminal sanctions, including monetary penalties, which could be material.   However, based on the preliminary results of our investigation, we do not expect this matter to have a material adverse effect on us or our operations. 

Additionally, due to the nature of our business, we and our affiliates are, from time to time, involved in litigation or subject to disputes or claims related to our business activities, including, among other things:

18

Based upon our prior ex perience, we do not expect that any of these other litigation proceedings, disputes and claims will have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows; however, because of the inherent uncertainty of litigation and other dispute resolution proceedings and, in some cases, the availability and amount of potentially applicable insurance, we can provide no assurance that the resolution of any particular claim or proceeding to which we are a party will not have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows for the fiscal period in which that resolution occurs.

Environmental Matters

We have been identified as a potentially responsible party at various cleanup sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”). CERCLA and other environmental laws can impose liability for the entire cost of cleanup on any of the potentially responsible parties, regardless of fault or the lawfulness of the original conduct. Generally, however, where there are multiple responsible parties, a final allocation of costs is made based on the amount and type of wastes disposed of by each party and the number of financially viable parties, although this may not be the case with respect to any particular site. We have not been determined to be a major contributor of waste to any of these sites. On the basis of our relative contribution of waste to each site, we expect our share of the ultimate liability for the various sites will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in any given year.

In 2013, we established a $6 million environmental reserve in connection with our plan to discontinue the utilization of our Morgan City fabrication facility.  We have incurred approximately $4 million for remediation activities. Based on our completed remediation activities, as well as our internal assessment, we believe no environmental remediation liability exists with respect to the Morgan City site. As a result, in 2016, we reversed our remaining environmental remediation obligation accrual.  

Assets Retirement Obligations

Asset retirement obligations (“ARO”) are recorded at the present value of the estimated costs to retire the asset at the time the obligation is incurred.

At some sites, we are contractually obligated to decommission our fabrication facilities upon site exit. Currently, we are unable to estimate any ARO due to the indeterminate life of our fabrication facilities.  We regularly review the optimal future alternatives for our facilities. Any decision to retire one or more facilities will result in recording the present value of such obligations. As of March 31, 2017, no ARO is recorded.

Contracts Containing Liquidated Damages Provisions

Some of our contracts contain provisions that require us to pay liquidated damages if we are responsible for the failure to meet specified contractual milestone dates and the applicable customer asserts a claim under those provisions. Those contracts define the conditions under which our customers may make claims against us for liquidated damages. In many cases in which we have historically had potential exposure for liquidated damages, such damages ultimately were not asserted by our customers. As of March 31, 2017, we had approximately $29 million of potential liquidated damages exposure, however no liability is recorded in our Consolidated Financial Statements. We believe we will be successful in obtaining schedule extensions or other customer-agreed changes that should resolve the potential for these liquidated damages. However, we may not achieve relief on some or all of the issues involved and as a result, could be subject to future liquidated damages.

NOTE 16—SEGMENT REPORTING

We disclose the results of each of our reportable segments in accordance with ASC 280, Segment Reporting . Each of the reportable segments is separately managed by a senior executive who is a member of our Executive Committee (“EXCOM”).  EXCOM is led by our Chief Executive Officer, who is the chief operating decision maker. Discrete financial information is available for each of the segments, and the EXCOM uses the operating results of each of the reportable segments for performance evaluation and resource allocation.

We manage reportable segments along geographic lines consisting of (1) AEA, (2) MEA and (3) ASA. We also report certain corporate and other non-operating activities under the heading “Corporate and Other.”

Corporate and Other primarily reflects c orporate expenses, certain centrally managed initiatives (such as restructuring charges), impairments, year-end mark-to-market (“MTM”) pension actuarial gains and losses, costs not attributable to a particular reportable segment and unallocated direct operating expenses associated with the underutilization of vessels, f abrication facilities and engineering resources .

19

We account for intersegment sales at prices that we generally establish by reference to similar transactions with unaffiliated customers. Reporting segments are measured based on operating income, which is defined as revenues reduced by total costs and expenses and equity in loss of unconsolidated affiliates.

Summarized financial information is shown in the following tables: