UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

x                                 ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended March 31, 2006

o                                   TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                  to                

Commission File Number 1-8533

DRS Technologies, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)

 

(973) 898-1500

(Telephone No.)

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

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x  No o

Indicate by check mark if the registrant in not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 of Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o  No x

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 x  No o

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large Accelerated filer x  Accelerated filer o  Non-accelerated filer o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o  No x

The market value of shares of common stock held by non-affiliates as of the last business day of the registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter was $1,370.9 million. The number of shares of common stock outstanding as of June 7, 2006 was 39,930,367.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the definitive proxy statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held August 3, 2006 have been incorporated herein by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

				Page
PART I
Item 1.		Business		3
Item 1A.		Risk Factors		14
Item 1B.		Unresolved Staff Comments		24
Item 2.		Properties		25
Item 3.		Legal Proceedings		27
Item 4.		Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders		29
PART II
Item 5.		Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities		30
Item 6.		Selected Financial Data		31
Item 7.		Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		34
Item 7A.		Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk		61
Item 8.		Financial Statements and Supplementary Data		63
Item 9.		Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure		128
Item 9A.		Controls and Procedures		128
Item 9B.		Other Information		130
PART III
Item 10.		Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant		130
Item 11.		Executive Compensation		130
Item 12.		Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholders Matters		130
Item 13.		Certain Relationships and Related Transactions		130
Item 14.		Principal Accountant Fees and Services		130
PART IV
Item 15.		Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules		131
Signatures				132

 

2

Item 1.                    Business

References in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “DRS Technologies,” “DRS,” “the Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to DRS Technologies, Inc., its wholly-owned subsidiaries and majority-owned partnership.

General

DRS is a leading supplier of defense electronic products and systems and military support services. We provide high-technology products and services to all branches of the U.S. military, major aerospace and defense prime contractors, government intelligence agencies, international military forces and industrial markets. We focus on several key areas of importance to the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), such as intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, power management, advanced communications and network systems. Incorporated in 1968, we have served the defense industry for over 37 years. We are a leading provider of thermal imaging devices, combat display workstations, electronic sensor systems, power systems, battlefield digitization systems, air combat training systems, mission recorders, deployable flight incident recorders, environmental and telecommunication systems, aircraft loaders, military trailers and shelters, and integrated logistics support services. Our products are deployed on a wide range of high-profile military platforms, such as DDG-51 Aegis destroyers, M1A2 Abrams Main Battle Tanks, M2A3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, OH-58D Kiowa Warrior helicopters, AH-64 Apache helicopters, F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-16 Fighting Falcon jet fighters, F-15 Eagle tactical fighters, C-17 Globemaster II and C-130 Hercules cargo aircraft, Ohio, Los Angeles and Virginia class submarines, and on several other platforms for military and non-military applications. We also have contracts that support future military platforms, such as the CVN-78 next generation aircraft carrier, Littoral Combat Ship and Future Combat System. In addition, as a result of our recent acquisition of Engineered Support Systems, Inc. DRS provides sustainment products that support military forces, such as environmental control systems, power generators, water and fuel distribution systems, chemical/biological decontamination shelters and heavy equipment transport systems. We also provide support services to the military, including security and asset protection system services, telecommunication and information technology services, training and logistics support services for all branches of the U.S. armed forces and certain foreign militaries, homeland security forces, and selected government and intelligence agencies.

Available Information

The address of our principal executive office is 5 Sylvan Way, Parsippany, New Jersey 07054, and our telephone number is (973) 898-1500. Our web address is http://www.drs.com. We are subject to the informational requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and, in accordance therewith, file reports and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Such reports and other information can be inspected and copied at the Public Reference Room of the SEC, located at 100 F Street N.E., Washington D.C. 20549. Copies of such material can be obtained from the Public Reference Room of the SEC at prescribed rates. You may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. Such material also may be accessed electronically by means of the SEC’s home page on the Internet at http://www.sec.gov or at www.drs.com.

We provide free of charge on our web site, under the heading “Investor Info,” our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to reports filed or furnished, pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such material with, or furnish it to, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The corporate governance information in our web site includes our Code of Ethics and Code of Business Conduct for all employees of DRS, including senior financial personnel and our Board

3

---

of Directors. In addition, amendments to and waivers granted to our directors and executive officers under our Code of Ethics, if any, will be posted in this area of our web site. These corporate governance documents can be accessed by visiting our web site and clicking on the “Corporate Info” link followed by the “Ethics Program” link. You can request a copy of our Code of Ethics at no cost by contacting Investor Relations at (973) 898-1500.

Company Organization

We operate in three principal operating segments on the basis of products and services offered. Each operating segment is comprised of separate and distinct businesses. Our segments are: the Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) Group, the Surveillance & Reconnaissance (SR) Group and the Sustainment Systems & Services (S3) Group. All other operations, primarily our Corporate Headquarters, are grouped in Other.

On January 31, 2006, we acquired all of the outstanding stock of Engineered Support Systems, Inc. (ESSI) forming our third operating segment, the S3 Group. The total transaction value was approximately $1.93 billion. The acquisition is more fully described in Fiscal 2006 Acquisitions below.

On March 10, 2005, we completed the sale of two of our operating units, DRS Weather Systems, Inc. (DRS Weather) and DRS Broadcast Technology (DRS Broadcast). The operating units were acquired in connection with our fiscal 2004 acquisition of Integrated Defense Technologies, Inc. (IDT). The results of operations of DRS Weather and DRS Broadcast for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2005 and for the period from the date of acquisition through March 31, 2004 are included in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings as “Earnings from discontinued operations” which includes the gain on their sale. The cash flows of the discontinued operations also are presented separately in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended March 31, 2005 and 2004.

A summary of the operating results of the discontinued operations for the years ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 is more fully described under Note 1.A., in our Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended March 31, 2006.

Financial information on our reportable business segments is presented in Note 14 to our Consolidated Financial Statements, which are included in this Form 10-K. See Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. Additional financial data and commentary on the results of operations for the operating segments are included in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, which also is included in this Form 10-K. See Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. The data and comments should be referred to in conjunction with the summary description of our operating segments, which follows.

C4I Group

The C4I Group is comprised of the following business areas: Command, Control and Communications (C3), which includes naval display systems, ship communications systems, radar systems, technical support, electronic manufacturing and system integration services, and secure voice and data communications; Power Systems, which includes naval and industrial power generation, conversion, propulsion, distribution and control systems; Intelligence Technologies, which includes signals intelligence, communications intelligence, data collection, processing and dissemination equipment; and Tactical Systems, which includes battle management tactical computer systems and peripherals.

4

Surveillance & Reconnaissance Group

The SR Group is comprised of the following business areas: Reconnaissance, Surveillance & Target Acquisition (RSTA), which develops and produces electro-optical sighting, targeting and weapon sensor systems, high-speed digital data and imaging systems, aircraft weapons alignment systems, mission and flight recorders and image intensification (I2) night vision, combat identification and laser aimers/illuminator products, and provides electronic manufacturing services; Training & Control Systems, which develops and produces air combat training, and unmanned vehicles, electronic warfare and network systems; and Test & Energy Management, which develops and produces electronic test, diagnostics and vehicle electronics.

Sustainment Systems & Services Group

The S3 Group is comprised of the following business areas: Sustainment Systems, which designs, engineers and manufactures integrated military electronics and other military support equipment, primarily for the DoD, as well as related heat transfer and air handling equipment and power generation and distribution equipment for domestic commercial and industrial users; and Support Services, which provides engineering services, logistics and training services, advanced technology services, asset protection systems and services, telecommunication systems integration and information technology services, and vehicle armor kits for military, humanitarian, disaster recovery and emergency responder applications.

Other.   “Other” includes the activities of DRS Corporate Headquarters and certain of our non-operating subsidiaries.

Industry Background

The U.S. military has worked to meet the changing threats that have evolved since the mid-1980s with a focus on lighter, faster and more intelligent weapons and an emphasis on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. This change in focus, the end of the Cold War and the subsequent reduction in defense spending led to consolidation in the defense industry. Today, we believe the industry is dominated by five domestic prime contractors and a few large European defense companies with an increasing presence in the U.S. markets. These large prime contractors have shifted their business strategies to focus on platforms and systems integration and consequently subcontract the development of many systems and subsystems.

Events of the last five years, including the global war on terrorism, Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, have altered the defense and homeland security environment of the United States. We believe these events will likely continue to have a significant impact on the markets for defense and advanced technology products for the next several years. The DoD continues to focus on both supporting ongoing operations and transforming our military to confront future threats. We believe that the current business, political and global environments will create new opportunities for mid-tier defense companies like DRS to develop strategic relationships with the government and prime contractors. Through these relationships, we believe we can provide new systems and subsystems, which are capable of meeting the military’s evolving requirements.

Business Strategy

Our goal is to continually improve our position as a leading supplier of defense electronics products and systems. Our strategies to achieve our objectives include:

·       Leverage Incumbent Relationships.   We intend to leverage our relationships with government and industry decision-makers by continuing to deliver high levels of performance on our existing contracts. Our experience has shown that strong performance on existing contracts enhances our ability to obtain additional business with our existing

5

---

customer base. To accomplish this, we intend to continue to position ourselves as a “best value” provider for our customers. “Best value” is a DoD contracting theme which focuses supplier selection on a variety of criteria, including supplier’s past performance, instead of solely on lowest price.

·       Develop and Expand Existing Technologies.   Through a combination of customer-funded research and development and our own internal research and development efforts, we intend to continue to focus on the development of our technology. Customer-funded development contracts enable us to work with our customers to design and manufacture new systems and components, while decreasing our financial risk.

·       Leverage Combination of Service and Product Capabilities to Better Serve Customers.   We intend to leverage the combination our product portfolio and service capabilities to better serve our military customers. As our S3 Group becomes fully integrated into DRS, our new contract bidding efforts will emphasize the benefits of an integrated products and services offering to our customers.

·       Continue to React Quickly to the Changing Defense Environment.    In addition to being well positioned for conventional warfare roles, we intend to continue to adapt our products, such as thermal imaging, ruggedization and communication products, to address evolving military requirements, such as rapid deployment and containment of non-conventional threats including terrorism.

·       Capitalize on the Department of Defense’s Emphasis on Transformation and Modernization.   The DoD has emphasized its goal to transform the U.S. military into a nimble, light and network-centric force. We believe our expertise in electro-optics, power management, training and test, signals intelligence, rugged computers, advanced communications, network systems and sustainment systems and services fits well into the DoD’s technological focus. We also intend to continue to supply upgrades for force modernization of the current force through back fit and forward fit initiatives.

·       Pursue Strategic Acquisitions.    We plan to continue our participation in the ongoing consolidation of the aerospace and defense industry. Through selective acquisitions, we aim to broaden our existing product base, build on our existing customer relationships and enhance our ability to enter new markets.

Fiscal 2006 Acquisitions

On January 31, 2006, we completed our acquisition of Engineered Support Systems, Inc. (ESSI). In the transaction, a wholly-owned subsidiary of DRS was merged with ESSI, with the ESSI operating units forming DRS’s third operating segment—the S3 Group.

ESSI, headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, is a supplier of integrated military electronics, support equipment and technical services focused on advanced sustainment and logistics support solutions for all branches of the U.S. armed services, major prime defense contractors, certain international militaries, homeland security forces and selected government and intelligence agencies. ESSI also produces specialized equipment and systems for commercial and industrial applications. We believe ESSI will contribute a significant base of systems, products and services focused on military force sustainment, technical and logistics support, integrated military electronics and field support equipment. The results of ESSI have been included in our financial statements since the date of acquisition.

6

The purchase price was $43.00 per share of ESSI common stock, which was comprised of $30.10 in cash and a fraction of a share of DRS common stock valued at $12.90. The stock component of the consideration included 11.7 million shares of DRS common stock and was valued using the average stock price of DRS common stock on the measurement date of the merger, January 27, 2006, and two days before and after the measurement date, which approximated $587.3 million. Total consideration for the acquisition was $2.0 billion, and the assumption of approximately $78.5 million of ESSI’s debt at closing. In addition to the purchase price, the estimated costs related to the acquisition approximated $25.5 million.

We financed the cash portion of the acquisition by utilizing existing cash on hand, revolving credit borrowings, $275.0 million in term debt and $900 million of new debt securities, including $350 million aggregate principal amount of 65¤8% senior notes due 2016, $250 million aggregate principal amount of 75¤8% senior subordinated notes due 2018 and $300 million aggregate principal amount of 2.0% convertible senior notes due 2026 (with a 20% conversion premium).

On June 27, 2005, we acquired WalkAbout Computer Systems, Inc. (WalkAbout) in a stock purchase transaction for approximately $13.8 million in cash, with additional consideration payable of up to $5.0 million upon achievement of certain revenue targets for a period of two and a half years. Approximately $0.2 million of additional consideration was accrued in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2006, as a result of achieving certain revenue targets. In addition to the purchase price, we recorded approximately $0.2 million for acquisition-related costs. The results of WalkAbout have been included in our financial statements since the date of acquisition.

WalkAbout, located in West Palm Beach, Florida, is a manufacturer of several lines of rugged, mobile tablet PCs, serving industrial, municipal, military and government markets. We believe that the acquisition of WalkAbout has enhanced our position in the tactical computer systems business by broadening our product offerings. WalkAbout is being managed as part of our C4I Group.

On April 15, 2005, we acquired Codem Systems, Inc. (Codem) in a stock purchase transaction for approximately $31.6 million in cash, with additional consideration payable of up to $5.0 million upon achievement of certain annual bookings targets for a period of three years. Approximately $0.3 million of additional consideration was accrued in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2006, as a result of achieving certain bookings targets. In addition to the purchase price, we recorded approximately $0.3 million for acquisition-related costs. The results of Codem’s operations have been included in our financial statements since the date of acquisition.

Codem, located in Merrimack, New Hampshire, is a provider of signals intelligence (SIGINT) systems, network interface modules and high-performance antenna control systems. Management believes that the addition of Codem has enhanced our existing intelligence product base. Codem is being managed as a part of our C4I Group.

Customers

We sell a significant portion of our products to agencies of the U.S. government, primarily the DoD, to international government agencies and to prime contractors and their subcontractors. Approximately 87%, 84% and 85% of total consolidated revenues for fiscal 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively, were derived directly or indirectly from defense contracts for end use by the U.S. government and its agencies. Export sales accounted for approximately 10%, 14% and 12% of total consolidated revenues in the fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

7

---

Backlog

The following table sets forth our backlog by major product group (including enhancements, modifications and related logistics support) at the dates indicated. “Backlog” refers to the aggregate revenues remaining to be earned at a specified date under contracts held by us, including U.S. government contracts, to the extent the funded amounts under such a contract have been appropriated by Congress and allotted to the contract by the procuring government agency. Our backlog does not include the full value of contract awards nor does it include the sales value of unexercised options that may be exercised in the future. Backlog also includes all firm orders for commercial products. Fluctuations in backlog generally relate to the timing and amount of defense contract awards.

 

We expect to record as revenues approximately 74% of our funded backlog as of March 31, 2006 during fiscal 2007. However, there can be no assurance that our entire funded backlog will become revenues in future periods.

Research and Development

We conduct research and development programs to maintain and advance our technology base. Our research and development efforts are funded by both internal sources and by part of customer-funded development contracts.

We recorded revenues for customer-sponsored research and development of approximately $106.1 million, $93.1 million and $74.4 million for fiscal 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Such customer-sponsored activities are primarily the result of contracts directly or indirectly with the U.S. government. We also invest in internal research and development. Expenditures for internal research and development amounted to approximately $47.6 million, $38.9 million and $27.4 million for fiscal 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

Contracts

A significant portion of our revenue is derived from long-term programs and from programs for which we are the incumbent supplier or have been the sole or dual supplier for many years. A large percentage of our revenue is derived from programs that are in the production phase.

No single program represented more than 10% of revenues for the years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004. We have a diverse business mix with limited dependence on any single program.

The percentages of revenues during fiscal 2006, 2005 and 2004 attributable to our contracts by contract type were as follows:

 

8

---

Our contracts are normally for production, services or development. Production contracts are typically of the fixed-price variety with development contracts of the cost-type variety. We believe continued predominance of fixed-price contracts is reflective of the fact that production contracts comprise a significant portion of our U.S. government contract portfolio. Fixed-price contracts may provide for a fixed price or they may be fixed-price incentive contracts. Under the fixed-price contracts, we agree to perform for an agreed-upon price. Accordingly, we derive benefits from cost savings, but bear the risk of cost overruns. Under the fixed-price incentive contracts, if actual costs incurred in the performance of the contracts are less than estimated costs for the contracts, the savings are apportioned between the customer and us. If actual costs under such a contract exceed estimated costs, however, excess costs are apportioned between the customer and us, up to a ceiling. We bear all costs that exceed the ceiling, if any.

Cost-type contracts typically provide for reimbursement of allowable costs incurred plus a fee (profit). Unlike fixed-price contracts in which we are committed to deliver without regard to cost, cost-type contracts normally obligate us to use our best efforts to accomplish the scope of work within a specified time and a stated contract dollar limitation. In addition, U.S. government procurement regulations mandate lower profits for cost-type contracts because of our reduced risk. Under cost-plus-incentive-fee contracts, the incentive may be based on cost or performance. When the incentive is based on cost, the contract specifies that we are reimbursed for allowable incurred costs plus a fee adjusted by a formula based on the ratio of total allowable costs to target cost. Target cost, target fee, minimum and maximum fee and adjustment formulae are agreed upon when the contract is negotiated. In the case of performance-based incentives, we are reimbursed for allowable incurred costs plus an incentive, contingent upon meeting or surpassing stated performance targets. The contract provides for increases in the fee to the extent that such targets are surpassed and for decreases to the extent that such targets are not met. In some instances, incentive contracts also may include a combination of both cost and performance incentives. Under cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, we are reimbursed for costs and receive a fixed fee, which is negotiated and specified in the contract. Such fees have statutory limits.

We negotiate for and generally receive progress payments from our customers of between 75-90% of allowable costs incurred on the previously described contracts. Included in our reported revenues are certain amounts, which we have not billed to customers. These amounts consist of costs and related profits, if any, in excess of progress payments for contracts on which revenues are recognized on a percentage-of-completion basis.

Under generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP), contract costs, including applicable general and administrative expenses on certain long-term government contracts, are charged to work-in-progress inventory and are written off to costs and expenses as revenues are recognized. The Federal Acquisition Regulations, incorporated by reference in U.S. government contracts, provide that internal research and development costs are allowable general and administrative expenses. To the extent that general and administrative expenses are included in inventory, research and development costs also are included. Unallowable costs, pursuant to the Federal Acquisition Regulations, are excluded from costs accumulated on U.S. government contracts. Work-in-process inventory includes general and administrative costs (which include internal research and development costs, and bid and proposal costs) of $63.9 million and $47.4 million at March 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.

Our defense contracts and subcontracts are subject to audit, various profit and cost controls, and standard provisions for termination at the convenience of the customer. The Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) performs these audits on behalf of the U.S. government. The DCAA has the right to perform audits on our incurred costs on all contracts on a yearly basis. Approval of an incurred cost submission can take from one to three years from the date of the submission of the contract cost.

9

---

Under the Truth in Negotiations Act of 1962 (Negotiations Act), the U.S. government has the right for three years after final payment on certain negotiated contracts, subcontracts and modifications, to determine whether DRS furnished the U.S. government with complete, accurate and current cost or pricing data as defined by the Negotiations Act. If DRS fails to satisfy this requirement, the U.S. government has the right to adjust a contract or subcontract price by the amount of any overstatement, as defined by the Negotiations Act.

U.S. government contracts are, by their terms, subject to termination by the U.S. government for either convenience or default by the contractor. Fixed-price contracts provide for payment upon termination for items delivered to and accepted by the U.S. government and, if the termination is for convenience, for payment of fair compensation of work performed plus the costs of settling and paying claims by terminated subcontractors, other settlement expenses and a reasonable profit on the costs incurred. Cost-plus contracts provide that, upon termination, the contractor is entitled to reimbursement of its allowable costs and, if the termination is for convenience, a total fee proportionate to the percentage of the work completed under the contract. If a contract termination is for default, however, the contractor is paid an amount agreed upon for completed and partially completed products and services accepted by the U.S. government. In these circumstances, the U.S. government is not liable for excess costs incurred by us in procuring undelivered items from another source.

In addition to the right of the U.S. government to terminate, U.S. government contracts are conditioned upon the continuing availability of Congressional appropriations. Congress usually appropriates funds for a given program on a September 30 fiscal year basis, even though contract performance may take many years. Consequently, at the outset of a major program, the contract usually is funded partially, and additional monies normally are committed to the contract by the procuring agency only as appropriations are made by Congress for future fiscal years.

Competition

Our products are sold in markets in which several of our competitors are substantially larger than we are, devote substantially greater resources to research and development, and, generally, have greater financial resources. We face a variety of competitors, including BAE Systems PLC, Raytheon Company and L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc. Certain competitors are also our customers and suppliers. The extent of competition for any single project generally varies according to the complexity of the product and the dollar value of the anticipated award. We believe that we compete on the basis of:

·       The performance, flexibility and price of our products;

·       Reputation for prompt and responsive contract performance;

·       Accumulated technical knowledge and expertise; and

·       Breadth of our product lines.

Our future success will depend in large part upon our ability to improve existing product lines and to develop new products and technologies in the same or related fields.

In the military sector, we compete with large and mid-tier defense contractors on the basis of product performance, cost, overall value, delivery and reputation. As a number of consolidations and mergers of defense suppliers has occurred, the number of participants in the defense industry has decreased in recent years. We expect this consolidation trend to continue. As the industry consolidates, the large defense contractors are narrowing their supplier base, awarding increasing portions of projects to strategic mid- and lower-tier suppliers, and, in the process, are becoming oriented more toward systems integration and assembly. We believe that we have benefited from this defense industry trend.

10

---

In addition to the military sector, we compete with a large number of suppliers to commercial and industrial air handling customers on the basis of both performance and price.

Patents and Licenses

We have patents on certain of our commercial and data recording products, semiconductor devices, rugged computer related items, electro-optical and focal plane array products, in addition to other products. We and our subsidiaries have certain registered trademarks, none of which are considered material to our current operations. We believe our patent position and intellectual property portfolio in the aggregate are valuable to our operations. We do not believe that the conduct of our business as a whole is materially dependent on any single patent, trademark or copyright.

When we work on U.S. government contracts, the U.S. government may have contractual rights to data for our “core” technologies, source codes and other developments associated with such government contracts. Records of our data rights are maintained in order to claim these rights as our proprietary technology, but it may not always be possible to delineate our proprietary developments from those developed under U.S. government contracts. The protection of our data from use by other U.S. government contractors is subject to negotiation from time to time between us and the U.S. government. The extent of the government’s data rights in any particular product generally depends upon whether the product was developed under a government contract and the degree of government funding for the development of such product.

Manufacturing and Supplies

Our manufacturing processes for most of our products include the assembly of purchased components and testing of products at various stages in the assembly process. Purchased components include integrated circuits, circuit boards, sheet metal fabricated into cabinets, resistors, capacitors, semiconductors, silicon wafers and other conductive materials and insulated wire and cables. In addition, many of our products use machine castings and housings, motors, and recording and reproducing heads.

Many of the purchased components are fabricated to our designs and specifications. The manufacturing process for certain of our optic products includes the grinding, polishing and coating of various optical materials and the machining of metal components.

Although materials and purchased components generally are available from a number of different suppliers, several suppliers are our sole source of certain components. If a supplier should cease to deliver such components, other sources probably would be available; however, added cost and manufacturing delays might result. We have not experienced significant production delays attributable to supply shortages, but occasionally experience quality and other related problems with respect to certain components, such as semiconductors and connectors. In addition, with respect to our optical products, certain materials, such as germanium, zinc sulfide and cobalt, may not always be readily available.

International Operations and Export Sales

We currently sell several of our products and services internationally, such as to Canada, the United Kingdom, Israel, Spain and Australia, as well as other countries. International sales of DRS’s U.S. products and services are subject to export licenses granted on a case-by-case basis by the U.S. Department of State and Department of Commerce. In addition, the U.S. government prohibits or restricts the export of some of DRS’s products. Our international contracts generally are payable in U.S. dollars. Export sales accounted for approximately 10%, 14% and 12% of total revenues in the fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.

11

---

There are two principal contracting methods used by DRS for export sales: Direct Foreign Sales (DFS) and the U.S. government’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS). In a DFS transaction, the contractor sells directly to the foreign country and assumes all the risks in the transaction. In a FMS transaction, the sale is funded by, contracted by and made to the U.S. government, which in turn sells the product to the foreign country.

We currently operate in Canada through our C4I Group, SR Group and S3 Group and in the United Kingdom through our C4I Group.

Our international operations involve additional risks for us, such as exposure to currency fluctuations, future investment obligations and changes in international economic and political environments. In addition, international transactions frequently involve increased financial and legal risks arising from stringent contractual terms and conditions and widely different legal systems, customs and practices in foreign countries.

Seasonality

No material portion of our business is considered to be seasonal. Various factors can affect the distribution of our revenue between accounting periods, including the timing of government awards, the availability of government funding, product deliveries and customer acceptance.

Environmental Matters

The Company’s operations include the use, generation and disposal of hazardous materials. The Company is subject to various U.S. federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment, including those governing the discharge of pollutants into the air and water, the management and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes, the clean up of contaminated sites and the maintenance of a safe workplace. Except as described under Item 3, Legal Proceedings, we believe that we have been and are in material compliance with environmental laws and regulations and that we have no liabilities under environmental requirements that would be expected to have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

12

---

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CERTAIN OTHER OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

Executive Officers

The names of our executive officers, their positions and offices with us, and their ages are set forth below:

Name				Age		Position
Mark S. Newman				56		Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
Vice Admiral Michael L. Bowman, USN (Ret.)				62		Executive Vice President, Washington Operations
Nina Laserson Dunn				59		Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
Robert F. Mehmel				43		Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer
Richard A. Schneider				53		Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer

 

Mark S. Newman is Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer. He joined us in 1973, four years after our founding, and became President and CEO in 1994, after serving many years as our Chief Financial Officer. He was named a director in 1988, and in 1995, was elected Chairman of the Board. He is active with many important professional organizations. He is a member of the Board of Governors of the Aerospace Industries Association and is a director on the boards of Business Executives for National Security, the Commerce and Industry Association of New Jersey and the New Jersey Technology Council. He also serves as a member of the Navy League of the United States, the National Defense Industrial Association, the Association of the U.S. Army and the Surface Navy Association, among other professional affiliations. He is a past chairman of the American Electronics Association. He is also a director of Congoleum Corporation, Refac Optical Group and EFJ, Inc.

Vice Admiral Michael L. Bowman, USN (Ret.) has been our Executive Vice President, Washington Operations since June 2005. He served as our Senior Vice President, Washington Operations from the time he joined us in March 2001 until June 2005. Prior to that, he served for 35 years with the U.S. Navy, including a number of assignments in the Washington, D.C. area involving Congressional relations in support of Navy and Marine Corps defense issues. Initially heading the Senate Liaison Office of the Secretary of the Navy, he later was appointed Chief of Legislative Affairs, responsible for the coordination of all Department of the Navy issues in the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate.

Nina Laserson Dunn joined us as Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary in July 1997. Prior to joining DRS, Ms. Dunn was a Director in the corporate law department of Hannoch Weisman, a Professional Corporation, where she served as our outside legal counsel. Ms. Dunn is admitted to practice law in New York and New Jersey and is a member of the American, New York State and New Jersey State Bar Associations.

13

Robert F. Mehmel is Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer since May 11, 2006. He joined us as Executive Vice President, Business Operations and Strategy in January 2001. Before joining DRS, he was Director, Corporate Development, at Jabil Circuit, Inc. Prior to that, he was Vice President, Planning, at L-3 Communications Corporation from its inception in April 1997 until June 2000. Earlier, Mr. Mehmel held various positions in divisional and corporate financial management with Lockheed Martin Corporation, Loral Corporation and Lear Siegler, Inc. He is also a member of the Board of Directors of United Industrial Corporation.

Richard A. Schneider joined us in 1999 as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. He also served as our Treasurer until November 20, 2002. He held similar positions at NAI Technologies, Inc. (NAI) and was a member of its board of directors prior to its acquisition by us in February 1999. Mr. Schneider has over 30 years of experience in corporate financial management.

Employees

As of March 31, 2006, we had approximately 9,800 employees, approximately 9,400 of whom are located in the United States. There is a continuing demand for qualified technical personnel, and we believe that our future growth and success will depend upon our ability to attract, train and retain such personnel. Approximately 92 of our employees at DRS Power & Control Technologies are represented by a labor union and are covered by a collective bargaining agreement through March 2009. Two DRS Power & Control Technologies employees are represented by a separate labor union and are covered by a collective bargaining agreement through October 2006. Approximately 130 employees from DRS Test & Energy Management, Inc. are represented by a union and are covered by a collective bargaining agreement that expires in May 2009. Approximately 304 of our employees at DRS Systems & Electronics are covered under a collective bargaining agreement that expires in March 2008. We believe that our relations with our employees generally are good.

Item 1A.   Risk Factors

The Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows are subject to various risks, many of which are not exclusively within the Company’s control that may cause actual performance to differ materially from historical or projected future performance. Information in this Form 10-K should be considered carefully by investors in light of the risk factors described below.

Our revenues depend on our ability to maintain our level of government business. The loss of our contracts with domestic and non-U.S. government agencies could adversely affect our revenues.

We derive the substantial majority of our revenues from contracts or subcontracts with domestic and non-U.S. government agencies. A significant reduction in the purchase of our products by these agencies would have a material adverse effect our business. For the fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, approximately 87%, 84% and 85%, respectively, of our revenues were derived directly or indirectly from defense-industry contracts with the U.S. government and its agencies. In addition, for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, approximately 9%, 12% and 10% of our revenues were derived directly or indirectly from sales to foreign governments, respectively. Therefore, the development of our business in the future will depend upon the continued willingness of the U.S. government and its prime contractors to commit substantial resources to defense programs and, in particular, upon the continued purchase of our products, and other products which incorporate our products, by the U.S. government. In particular, the current funding demands on the U.S. government combined

14

---

with a potential reduction of forces in Iraq, may lead to lower levels of government defense spending.

The risk that governmental purchases of our products may decline stems from the nature of our business with the U.S. government, in which the U.S. government may:

·       terminate contracts at its convenience;

·       terminate, reduce or modify contracts or subcontracts if its requirements or budgetary constraints change;

·       cancel multi-year contracts and related orders if funds become unavailable;

·       shift its spending priorities;

·       adjust contract costs and fees on the basis of audits done by its agencies; and

·       inquire about and investigate business practices and audit compliance with applicable rules and regulations.

In addition, as defense businesses, we are subject to the following risks in connection with government contracts:

·       the frequent need to bid on programs prior to completing the necessary design, which may result in unforeseen technological difficulties and/or cost overruns;

·       the difficulty in forecasting long-term costs and schedules and the potential obsolescence of products related to long-term fixed-price contracts;

·       the risk of fluctuations or a decline in government expenditures due to any changes in the DoD budget or appropriation of funds;

·       when we act as a subcontractor, the failure or inability of the prime contractor to perform its prime contract may result in an inability to obtain payment of fees and contract costs;

·       restriction or potential prohibition on the export of products based on licensing requirements; and

·       government contract wins can be contested by other contractors.

Our revenues will be adversely affected if we fail to receive renewal or follow-on contracts.

Renewal and follow-on contracts are important because our contracts are for fixed terms. These terms vary from shorter than one year to over five years, particularly for contracts with options. The typical term of our contracts with the U.S. government is between one and three years. The loss of revenues from our possible failure to obtain renewal or follow-on contracts may be significant because our U.S. government contracts account for a substantial portion of our revenues.

Our operating results may fluctuate.

Our results of operations have fluctuated in the past and may continue to fluctuate in the future as a result of a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include:

·       the termination of a key government contract;

·       the size and timing of new contract awards to replace completed or expired contracts; and

·       changes in DoD policies, budgetary priorities and allocation of funding.

15

---

We may not be successful in implementing our growth strategy if we are unable to identify, acquire and finance suitable acquisition targets.

Finding and consummating acquisitions is an important component of our growth strategy. Our continued ability to grow by acquisition is dependent upon the availability of acquisition candidates at reasonable prices and our ability to obtain additional acquisition financing on acceptable terms. We experience competition in making acquisitions from larger companies with significantly greater resources. We are likely to use significant amounts of cash, issue additional equity securities or incur additional debt in connection with future acquisitions, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business. There can be no assurance that we will be able to procure the necessary funds to effectuate our acquisition strategy on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. In addition, as our revenue growth has been historically attributable largely to our successful acquisition strategy, failure to identify, consummate or integrate suitable acquisitions could lead to a reduced rate of revenue growth, operating income and net earnings in the future.

Integration of the operations of recent acquisitions will be complex, time-consuming and expensive and may adversely affect the results of our operations after the acquisition.

The anticipated benefits of our acquisitions will depend in part on whether we can integrate our operations in an efficient, timely and effective manner. Integrating our acquisitions will be a complex, time-consuming and expensive process. Our acquisition of Engineered Support Systems, Inc. (ESSI) on January 31, 2006 represents our largest and most significant acquisition to date. Successful integration will require, among other things, combining the companies’:

·       business development efforts;

·       key personnel;

·       geographically separate facilities; and

·       business processes and cultures.

We may not accomplish this integration successfully and may not realize the benefits contemplated by combining the operations of both companies. In the course of our due diligence investigation of ESSI, we determined that ESSI and various of its subsidiaries may not have adequate export authorizations. Accordingly, we may be required to make disclosures to governmental agencies and may be subject to fines and penalties as a result of ESSI’s actions or inaction prior to the acquisition. We expect to make changes to ESSI’s export compliance program, and we may be required to alter the business practices of ESSI in order to comply with our business practices and standards or applicable federal, state, local and foreign laws. Any remedial efforts that we take may require significant management attention and resources and may delay production or require modification to existing products and programs. The diversion of our attention to the integration effort and any difficulty encountered in combining operations could cause the interruption of, or a loss of momentum in, the activities of our business.

16

---

If we are unable to successfully integrate ESSI and other companies we acquire into our operations on a timely basis, our profitability could be negatively affected.

We expect that our acquisition of ESSI will result in certain business opportunities and growth prospects. We, however, may never realize these expected business opportunities and growth prospects. We may experience increased competition that limits our ability to expand our business. Our assumptions underlying estimates of expected cost savings may be inaccurate, or general industry and business conditions may deteriorate. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including, but not limited to:

·       difficulties in assimilating and integrating the operations, technologies and products acquired;

·       the diversion of our management’s attention from other business concerns;

·       current operating and financial systems and controls may be inadequate to deal with our growth;

·       the risk that we will be unable to maintain or renew any of the government contracts of businesses we acquire;

·       the risks of entering markets in which we have limited or no prior experience; and

·       the loss of key employees.

If these factors limit our ability to integrate the operations of our acquisitions, including ESSI, successfully or on a timely basis, our expectations of future results of operations may not be met. In addition, our growth and operating strategies for businesses we acquire, including ESSI, may be different from the strategies that such business currently is pursuing. If our strategies are not the proper strategies for a company we acquire, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, there can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain or enhance the profitability of any acquired business or consolidate the operations of any acquired business to achieve cost savings.

In addition, there may be liabilities that we fail or are unable to discover in the course of performing due diligence investigations on each company or business we have already acquired or may acquire in the future. Such liabilities could include those arising from employee benefits contribution obligations of a prior owner or non-compliance with or liability pursuant to applicable federal, state or local environmental requirements by prior owners for which we, as a successor owner, may be responsible. In addition, there may be additional costs relating to acquisitions, including, but not limited to, possible purchase price adjustments. We cannot assure you that rights to indemnification by sellers of assets to us, even if obtained, will be enforceable, collectible or sufficient in amount, scope or duration to fully offset the possible liabilities associated with the business or property acquired. Any such liabilities, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Failure to anticipate technical problems, estimate costs accurately or control costs during performance of a fixed-price contract may reduce our profit or cause a loss.

We provide our services primarily through two types of contracts: fixed-price and cost-type contracts. Approximately 83%, 81% and 82% of our total revenues for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively, were derived from fixed-price contracts, which require us to perform services under a contract at a stipulated price. We derived approximately 17%, 19% and 18% of our revenues for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively, from cost-type contracts by which we are reimbursed for incurred costs and receive a

17

---

fee that, depending on the contract, is either dependent on cost savings and/or performance or is a fixed fee which is negotiated but limited by statutes.

We assume greater financial risk on fixed-price contracts than on cost-type contracts. Failure to anticipate technical problems, estimate costs accurately or control costs during performance of a fixed-price contract will reduce our profit or cause a loss. In particular, because of their inherent uncertainties and consequent cost overruns, development contracts have historically been less profitable than production contracts. Although we believe that adequate provision for our costs of performance is reflected in our consolidated financial statements, we can give no assurance that this provision is adequate or that losses on fixed-price and cost-type contracts will not occur in the future. We also cannot assure you that current cost-type contracts will not be changed to fixed-price contracts.

We may experience production delays if suppliers fail to deliver materials to us.

Our manufacturing process for certain products consists primarily of the assembly of purchased components and testing of the product at various stages in the assembly process.

Although we can obtain materials and purchase components for these products from a number of different suppliers, several suppliers are our sole source of certain components. If a supplier should cease to deliver such components, we believe that we would probably find other sources; however, this could result in added cost and manufacturing delays. We have not experienced significant production delays attributable to supply shortages, but we occasionally experience procurement problems with respect to certain components, such as semiconductors and connectors. In addition, with respect to our electro-optical products, certain materials, such as germanium, zinc sulfide and cobalt, may not always be readily available.

Our backlog is subject to reduction and cancellation, which could negatively impact our revenues and results of operations.

Backlog represents products or services that our customers have committed by contract to purchase from us. Our total funded backlog as of March 31, 2006 was approximately $2.4 billion. Backlog is subject to fluctuations and is not necessarily indicative of future sales. Moreover, cancellations of purchase orders or reductions of product quantities in existing contracts could substantially and materially reduce backlog and, consequently, future revenues. Our failure to replace canceled or reduced backlog could negatively impact our revenues and results of operations.

Our international operations expose us to risks of losses.

Approximately 9%, 12% and 10% of our revenues for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively, were derived from sales to foreign governments. We are exploring the possibility of expansion into additional international markets, and our acquisition of ESSI may provide entry into additional international markets. We cannot assure you that we will maintain significant operations internationally or that any such operations will be successful. Any international operations we establish will be subject to risks similar to those affecting our U.S. operations in addition to a number of other risks, including:

·       political and economic instability in foreign markets;

·       inconsistent product regulation by foreign agencies or governments;

·       imposition of product tariffs and burdens;

18

---

·       cost of complying with a wide variety of international and U.S. export laws and regulatory requirements, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the Export Administration Act and the Arms Export Control Act (and the regulations promulgated thereunder);

·       lack of local business experience;

·       foreign currency fluctuations;

·       difficulty in enforcing intellectual property rights; and

·       language and other cultural barriers.

We face competition in the military electronics and services industries.

The military electronics and services industries in which we participate are highly competitive and characterized by rapid technological change. Our potential inability to improve existing product lines and develop new products and technologies could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, our competitors could introduce new products with greater capabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. We also compete with these entities with respect to identifying targets and consummating our acquisition strategy.

There are many competitors in the markets in which we sell our products. Many of these competitors are substantially larger than us, devote substantially greater resources to research and development, and generally have greater financial and other resources. Consequently, these competitors may be better positioned to take advantage of economies of scale and develop new technologies. Some of these competitors are also our suppliers and customers.

In the military sector, we compete with many large and mid-tier defense contractors on the basis of performance, cost, overall value, delivery and reputation. As U.S. defense spending decreased in the early 1990s, the industry experienced substantial consolidation, increasing the market share of certain companies.

We are dependent in part upon our relationships and alliances with industry participants in order to generate revenue.

We rely on the strength of our relationships with military industry organizations to form strategic alliances. Some of our industry partners assist us in the development of some of our products through teaming arrangements. Under these teaming arrangements, our industry partners usually have borne a portion of the expenses associated with our research and development of new and existing products, which are the subject of such agreements. We cannot assure you that our industry partners will continue to bear these expenses in the future. If any of our existing relationships with our industry partners were impaired or terminated, we could experience significant delays in the development of our new products ourselves, and we would incur additional development costs. We would need to fund these costs internally or identify new industry partners.

Some of our likely industry partners are also potential competitors, which may impair the viability of new strategic relationships. While we must compete effectively in the marketplace, our future alliances may depend on our industry partners’ perception of us. Our ability to win new and/or follow-on contracts may be dependent upon our relationships within the military industry.

19

---

The U.S. government’s right to use technology developed by us limits our intellectual property rights.

We seek to protect the competitive benefits we derive from our patents, proprietary information and other intellectual property. However, we do not have the right to prohibit the U.S. government from using certain technologies developed by us or to prohibit third party companies, including our competitors, from using those technologies in providing products and services to the U.S. government. The U.S. government has the right to royalty-free use of technologies that we have developed under U.S. government contracts. We are free to commercially exploit those government funded technologies and may assert our intellectual property rights to seek to block other non-government users thereof, but we cannot assure you we could successfully do so.

We are subject to government regulation, which may require us to obtain additional licenses and could limit our ability to sell our products outside the United States.

The sale of certain of our products outside the United States is subject to compliance with the United States Export Administration Regulations and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Our failure to obtain the requisite licenses, meet registration standards or comply with other government export regulations, may affect our ability to export such products or to generate revenues from the sale of our products outside the United States, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Compliance with government regulations also may subject us to additional fees and costs. The absence of comparable restrictions on competitors in other countries may adversely affect our competitive position.

In order to sell our products in European Union countries, we must satisfy certain registrations and technical requirements. If we were unable to comply with those requirements with respect to a significant quantity of our products, our sales in Europe could be restricted, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We are subject to environmental laws and regulations, and our ongoing operations may expose us to environmental liabilities.

Our operations, like those of other companies engaged in similar businesses, are subject to federal, state, foreign and local environmental and health and safety laws and regulations. As a result, we have been involved from time to time in administrative or legal proceedings relating to environmental matters. We cannot assure you that the aggregate amount of future clean-up costs and other environmental liabilities will not be material. We can be subject to potentially significant fines or penalties, including criminal sanctions, if we fail to comply with these requirements. We have made and will continue to make capital and other expenditures in order to comply with these laws and regulations. However, the requirements of these laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and could become more stringent in the future. We cannot predict what environmental legislation or regulations will be enacted in the future, how existing or future laws or regulations will be administered or interpreted or what environmental conditions may be found to exist. Also, in the future, contamination may be found to exist at our current or former facilities or at off-site locations to which we or certain companies that we have acquired may have sent waste, including the Orphan Mine site in the Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, which is currently subject to a government investigation. We could be held liable for such contamination. The remediation of such contamination, or the enactment of more stringent laws or regulations or more strict interpretation of existing laws and regulations may require us to make additional expenditures, some of which could be material.

20

---

ESSI currently is subject to investigations by the Enforcement Division of the SEC and the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, each of which could require significant management attention and legal resources and could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

In December 2004, ESSI, prior to its acquisition by us, was notified by the Enforcement Division of the SEC of the issuance of a formal order directing a private investigation captioned In the Matter of Engineered Support Systems, Inc., and in September 2005, ESSI received notice that the SEC staff had expanded the scope of its investigation to include ESSI’s disclosure of a November 2004 stop-work order relating to ESSI’s Deployable Power Generation and Distribution Systems program (“DPGDS”). In connection with the investigation, ESSI and certain of its directors and officers have received subpoenas and provided information and testimony to the SEC and one former director, officer and consultant has received a so-called Wells notice. ESSI continues to furnish information required by the SEC and otherwise to cooperate in connection with the investigation.

In January 2006, ESSI was informed that the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri was initiating an investigation into ESSI’s disclosure of the DPGDS stop-work order and into trading in ESSI stock by ESSI insiders which preceded such disclosure. The U.S. Attorney’s office advised ESSI that although it considered it to be a subject of its investigation, ESSI was not a target.  In connection with this investigation, the U.S. Attorney’s office issued ESSI a subpoena requesting specified information, which ESSI continues to furnish.

In May 2006, we were advised that the Enforcement Division of the SEC and the U.S. Attorney’s office had each expanded its investigation to include possible “backdating” of the timing of option grants at ESSI prior to the time we acquired it.  Although ESSI continues to be a subject of the U.S. Attorney’s office’s investigation, the U.S. Attorney’s office has advised us that ESSI is not a target.  Because the events being investigated occurred prior to the time of our acquisition of ESSI, the U.S. Attorney’s office has further advised us that it considers the Company to be a witness, not a subject or target of its investigation.

The Company is committed to full cooperation with regard to the foregoing investigations.  We are unable to determine at this time either the timing of the investigations or the impact, if any, which the investigations could have on the Company. See Item 3. “Legal Proceedings.”

A failure to attract and retain technical and other key personnel could reduce our revenues and our operational effectiveness.

There is a continuing demand for qualified technical and other key personnel, and we believe that our future growth and success will depend upon our ability to attract, train and retain such personnel. Competition for personnel in the military industry is intense, and there is a limited number of persons with knowledge of and experience in this industry. Although we currently experience relatively low rates of turnover for our technical personnel, the rate of turnover may increase in the future. An inability to attract or maintain a sufficient number of technical and other key personnel could have a material adverse effect on our contract performance or on our ability to capitalize on market opportunities.

Our operations involve rapidly evolving products and technological change.

The rapid change of technology is a key feature of the market for our defense applications. To succeed, we will need to design, develop, manufacture, assemble, test, market and support new products and enhancements on a timely and cost-effective basis. Historically, our technology has been developed through customer-sponsored research and development, as well as from

21

---

internally funded research and development. We cannot guarantee that we will continue to maintain comparable levels of research and development. In the past, we have allocated substantial funds to capital expenditures, and we intend to continue to do so in the future. Even so, we cannot assure you that we will successfully identify new opportunities and continue to have the needed financial resources to develop new products in a timely or cost-effective manner. At the same time, products and technologies developed by others may render our products and systems obsolete or non-competitive.

Our level of indebtedness could limit cash flow available for our operations and could adversely affect our ability to service our debt or obtain additional financing, if necessary. We may incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future.

Our total debt outstanding as of March 31, 2006 was approximately $1.8 billion. Our level of indebtedness could restrict our operations and make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations. For example, our levels of indebtedness could, among other things:

·       limit our ability to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and general corporate purposes or make such financing more costly;

·       require us to dedicate all or a substantial portion of our cash flow to service our debt, which will reduce funds available for other business purposes, such as capital expenditures, research and development, dividends or acquisitions;

·       limit our flexibility in planning for or reacting to changes in the markets in which we compete;

·       place us at a competitive disadvantage relative to our competitors with less indebtedness;

·       render us more vulnerable to general adverse economic and industry conditions; and

·       make it more difficult for us to satisfy our financial obligations.

In addition, the indentures governing the Senior Notes and the Senior Subordinated Notes, our amended and restated senior secured credit facility and the terms of the agreements governing our other outstanding indebtedness contain or will contain financial and other restrictive covenants that will limit our ability to engage in activities that may be in our long-term best interests. Our failure to comply with those covenants could result in an event of default which, if not cured or waived, could result in the acceleration of all of our debts.

Despite current indebtedness levels, we and our subsidiaries still may be able to incur substantially more debt. This could further exacerbate the risks associated with our substantial leverage.

We and our subsidiaries may be able to incur substantial additional indebtedness in the future. The terms of the indentures governing our notes do not fully prohibit us or our subsidiaries from doing so. Our amended and restated senior secured credit facility permits additional borrowing under such facility.

Our ability to service our debt and meet our cash requirements depends on many factors, some of which are beyond our control.

Although there can be no assurances, we believe that the level of borrowings available to us, combined with cash provided by our operations, will be sufficient to provide for our cash requirements for the foreseeable future. However, our ability to satisfy our obligations will depend on our future operating performance and financial results, which will be subject, in part, to factors beyond our control, including interest rates and general economic, financial and

22

---

business conditions. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow to service our debt, we may be required to:

·       refinance all or a portion of our debt;

·       obtain additional financing;

·       sell some of our assets or operations;

·       reduce or delay capital expenditures and/or acquisitions; or

·       revise or delay our strategic plans.

If we are required to take any of these actions, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. In addition, we cannot assure you that we would be able to take any of these actions, that these actions would enable us to continue to satisfy our capital requirements or that these actions would be permitted under the terms of our various debt instruments, including our amended and restated senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing our notes.

The covenants in our amended and restated senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing our notes impose restrictions that may limit our ability and the ability of most of our subsidiaries to take certain actions.

The covenants in our amended and restated senior secured credit facility and the indentures governing our notes restrict our ability and the ability of our restricted subsidiaries to, among other things:

·       incur additional debt;

·       pay dividends and make other restricted payments;

·       make certain investments, loans and advances;

·       create or permit certain liens;

·       issue or sell capital stock of restricted subsidiaries;

·       use the proceeds from sales of assets and subsidiary stock;

·       create or permit restrictions on the ability of our restricted subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other distributions to us;

·       enter into transactions with affiliates;

·       enter into sale and leaseback transactions;

·       engage in certain business activities; and

·       consolidate or merge or sell all or substantially all of our assets.

Our amended and restated senior secured credit facility contains other covenants customary for credit facilities of this nature, including requiring us to meet specified financial ratios and financial tests. Our ability to borrow under our amended and restated senior secured credit facility will depend upon satisfaction of these covenants. Events beyond our control can affect our ability to meet those covenants.

If we are unable to meet the terms of our financial covenants, or if we break any of these covenants, a default could occur under one or more of these agreements. A default, if not waived by our lenders, could result in the acceleration of our outstanding indebtedness and cause our debt to become immediately due and payable. If acceleration occurs, we would not be

23

---

able to repay our debt, and it is unlikely that we would be able to borrow sufficient funds to refinance our debt. Even if new financing is made available to us, it may not be on terms acceptable to us.

Some of our debt, including borrowings under our amended and restated senior secured credit facility, is based on variable rates of interest, which could result in higher interest expenses in the event of an increase in interest rates.

As of March 31, 2006, 18% of our total debt is exposed to fluctuations in variable interest rates. This increases our exposure to fluctuations in market interest rates. If we borrow additional amounts under the revolving portion of our amended and restated senior secured credit facility, the interest rates on those borrowings may vary depending on the prime rate, federal funds rate or Eurodollar Rate (LIBOR). If these interest rates rise, the interest rate on our variable rate debt also may increase. Therefore, an increase in these interest rates may increase our interest payment obligations and have a negative effect on our cash flow and financial position.

Item 1B    Unresolved Staff Comments

None

24

---

Item 2.     Properties

The table below provides information about our significant facilities and properties at March 31, 2006.

We leased the following properties:

Location

Activities

Operating Segment

Approximate Square Footage

Lease Expiration

Parsippany, New Jersey

Corporate Headquarters

Corporate

50,800

Fiscal 2013

Arlington, Virginia

Administrative

Corporate

4,300

Month to month

Washington, D.C.

Administrative

Corporate

3,400

Fiscal 2008

Allendale, NJ.

Administrative

Corporate

5,200

Fiscal 2011

Gaithersburg, Maryland

Administrative, Engineering and

Product Development

C4I

42,500

Month to month

Administrative, Engineering and Product Development

C4I

21,800

Fiscal 2010

Chesapeake, Virginia.

Field Service and Engineering Support

C4I

19,600

Fiscal 2010

San Diego, California

Engineering Support Services

C4I

7,200

Fiscal 2010

Johnstown, Pennsylvania

Administrative and Manufacturing

C4I

130,000

Fiscal 2011

Farnham, Surrey, United Kingdom

Administrative, Engineering and

Manufacturing

C4I

26,000

Fiscal 2015

Colorado Springs, Colorado

Administrative, Engineering and

Manufacturing

C4I

21,600

Fiscal 2012

Columbia, Maryland

Administrative and Manufacturing

C4I

11,600

Fiscal 2007

Administrative

C4I

2,700

Fiscal 2012

Danbury, Connecticut

Administrative, Engineering and

Manufacturing

C4I

21,000

Fiscal 2007

Dayton, Ohio

Administrative, Manufacturing and Field Service

C4I

20,100

Fiscal 2009

Administrative and Manufacturing

C4I

16,100

Fiscal 2010

Fitchburg, Massachusetts

Administrative and Engineering

C4I

64,000

Month to month

Administrative, Engineering and Manufacturing

C4I

22,000

Fiscal 2021

Kanata, Ontario, Canada

Administrative and Engineering

C4I

62,900

Fiscal 2012

Morgan Hill, California

Engineering, Manufacturing and

Research

C4I

52,100

Fiscal 2007

Merrimack, New Hampshire

Administrative and Marketing

C4I

20,800

Fiscal 2010

Administrative and Marketing

C4I

22,000

Fiscal 2011

Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania

Administrative and Manufacturing

C4I

92,000

Fiscal 2008

Melbourne, Florida

Administrative and Marketing

C4I

105,300

Fiscal 2016

West Palm Beach, Florida

Administrative and Marketing

C4I

19,900

Fiscal 2007

Oakland, New Jersey

Administrative, Engineering and Manufacturing

SR

61,300

Fiscal 2008

Palm Bay, Florida

Administrative, Engineering and Manufacturing

SR

93,400

Fiscal 2011

Melbourne, Florida

Administrative, Engineering and Manufacturing

SR

141,300

Fiscal 2011

 

25

 

We own the following properties:

26

---

 

 

We believe that all of our facilities are in good condition, adequate for our intended use and sufficient for our immediate needs. It is not certain whether we will negotiate new leases as existing leases expire. Such determinations will be made as existing leases approach expiration and will be based on an assessment of our requirements at that time. Further, we believe that we can obtain additional space, if necessary, based on prior experience and current real estate market conditions.

The Company has a mortgage note payable that is secured by a lien on its facility in Palm Bay, Florida.

Item 3.     Legal Proceedings

We are party to various legal actions and claims arising in the ordinary course of our business. In our opinion, we have adequate legal defenses for each of the actions and claims.

Various legal actions, claims, assessments and other contingencies arising in the normal course of our business, including certain matters described below, are pending against us and certain of our subsidiaries. These matters are subject to many uncertainties, and it is possible that some of these matters could be ultimately decided, resolved or settled adversely. We have recorded accruals totaling $4.5 million and $10.3 million at March 31, 2006 and March 31, 2005, respectively, for losses related to those matters that we consider to be probable and that can be reasonably estimated (certain legal and environmental matters are discussed in detail below). Although the ultimate amount of liability at March 31, 2006 that may result from those matters for which we have recorded accruals is not ascertainable, we believe that any amounts exceeding our recorded accruals should not materially affect our financial condition or liquidity. It is possible, however, that the ultimate resolution of those matters could result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations for a particular reporting period.

Some environmental laws, such as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (also known as CERCLA or the Superfund law) and similar state statutes, can impose liability for the entire cost of the clean up of contaminated sites upon any of the current or former site owners or operators (or upon parties who send waste to these sites), regardless of the lawfulness of the original activities that led to the contamination. In July 2000, prior to its acquisition by IDT, and prior to our acquisition of IDT, Tech-Sym Corporation received a Section 104(e) Request for Information from the National Park Service

27

---

(NPS), pursuant to CERCLA, regarding a site known as the Orphan Mine site in the Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona, which is the subject of an NPS investigation regarding the presence of residual radioactive materials and contamination. A corporation of which Tech-Sym is an alleged successor operated this uranium mine from 1956 to 1967. In 1962, the land was sold to the U.S. government and the alleged predecessor of Tech-Sym was given a 25-year mining lease. In 1967, the mining rights were transferred to a third party by a trustee in bankruptcy, and we believe that the mine was operated by such third party until approximately 1969. We understand that there are other companies in the chain of title to the mining rights subsequent to Tech-Sym’s alleged predecessor, and, accordingly, that there are other potentially responsible parties (PRPs) for the environmental conditions at the site, including the U.S. government as owner, operator and arranger at the site. During its period of ownership, IDT retained a technical consultant in connection with this matter, who conducted a limited, preliminary review of site conditions and communicated with the NPS regarding actions that may be required at the site by all of the PRPs. On February 6, 2005, the NPS sent us an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis Work Plan (the “NPS EE/CA”) under CERCLA (the ‘‘CERCLA Letter’’) with regards to Operable Unit 1 of the Orphan Mine site. In our view, the NPS EE/CA included additional clean up not covered by CERCLA. The CERCLA Letter also requested (a) payment of $0.5 million for costs incurred by the NPS related to the Orphan Mine, and (b) a ‘‘good faith offer’’ to conduct the response activity outlined by the NPS and to reimburse the NPS for future costs. The NPS advised that a similar letter has been sent to another PRP. We initiated discussions with the other PRP and with NPS, and engaged a technical consultant to evaluate the existing documentation and the site in depth. As a result, on September 29, 2005, the technical consultant submitted to the NPS, on behalf of us and the other PRP, an alternative Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis Work Plan (the “alternative EE/CA”) with regards to Operating Units 1 and 2 of the Orphan Mine Site.

On December 6, 2005, the PRPs and NPS met to discuss the alternative EE/CA. The meeting focused on the technical merits of the alternative EE/CA and certain differences between the alternative EE/CA and the NPS EE/CA provided with the CERCLA Letter. The differences included an alternative sampling technique and the inclusion of Operable Unit 2 (the lower mine area) in the alternative EE/CA. Since that meeting in late 2005, the parties have also discussed certain legal issues relating to the process for implementing the alternative EE/CA and entering into a Settlement Agreement that would memorialize the parties’ intent  The potential liability associated with implementation of an EE/CA can change substantially due to such factors as additional information on the nature or extent of contamination, methods of remediation that might be recommended or required, changes in the apportionment of costs among the responsible parties and other actions by governmental agencies or private parties.

In connection with the ESSI acquisition, we have been made aware of certain legal actions, claims, assessments and other contingencies, certain of which are described below.

In December 2004, ESSI was notified by the Enforcement Division of the SEC of the issuance of a formal order directing a private investigation captioned In the Matter of Engineered Support Systems, Inc. and was notified that the SEC had issued subpoenas to various individuals associated with ESSI to produce certain documents. The SEC staff also requested that ESSI produce certain documents in connection with the investigation. The subpoenas related to trading in ESSI stock around ESSI’s earnings releases in 2003 and to the adequacy of certain disclosures made by ESSI regarding related-party transactions in 2002 and 2003 involving insurance policies placed by ESSI through an insurance brokerage firm in which an ESSI director was a principal at the time of the transactions.

On or about September 23, 2005, the SEC staff advised ESSI’s counsel that it had issued a subpoena directed to ESSI and expanded its investigation to include ESSI’s disclosure of a November 2004 stop work order relating to ESSI’s Deployable Power Generation and Distribution

28

---

Systems (“DPGDS”) program for the U.S. Air Force, and relating to trading in ESSI stock by certain individuals associated with ESSI.

In connection with the foregoing SEC investigation, ESSI and certain of its directors and officers have provided information and/or testimony to the SEC. On November 14, 2005, ESSI was informed by the Enforcement Division that one of ESSI’s former directors and officers, and subsequently a consultant to ESSI, had been issued a so-called Wells notice informing him that the staff of the SEC was considering recommending that the SEC bring a civil injunctive action against him in connection with the SEC’s investigation into trading in ESSI common stock in 2003. A Wells notice provides prospective defendants with an opportunity to respond to the SEC staff members before the staff makes a formal recommendation on whether the SEC should pursue disciplinary action against them. ESSI, itself, has not received a Wells notice and continues to cooperate with the investigation.

In January 2006, ESSI was informed that the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri was initiating an investigation into ESSI’s disclosure of the DPGDS stop-work order and into trading in ESSI stock by ESSI insiders which preceded such disclosure. The U.S. Attorney’s office advised ESSI that although it considered it to be a subject of its investigation, ESSI was not a target.  In connection with this investigation, the U.S. Attorney’s office issued ESSI a subpoena requesting specified information, which ESSI continues to furnish.

In May 2006, we were advised that the Enforcement Division of the SEC and the U.S. Attorney’s office had each expanded its investigation to include possible “backdating” of the timing of option grants at ESSI prior to the time we acquired it.  Although ESSI continues to be a subject of the U.S. Attorney’s office’s investigation, the U.S. Attorney’s office has advised us that ESSI is not a target.  Because the events being investigated occurred prior to the time of our acquisition of ESSI, the U.S. Attorney’s office has further advised us that it considers us to be a witness, not a subject or target of its investigation. 

We are committed to full cooperation with regard to the foregoing investigations.  We are unable to determine at this time either the timing of the SEC or U.S. Attorney’s office investigations or the impact, if any, which the investigations could have on us.

Item 4.     Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

On January 30, 2006, we held a Special Meeting of Stockholders at our Corporate Offices at 5 Sylvan Way, Parsippany, NJ 07054. The following matters were submitted to a vote of stockholders:

i.                  To approve the issuance of shares of DRS common stock pursuant to the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of September 21, 2005, by and among DRS Technologies, Inc., Maxco, Inc. a wholly-owned subsidiary of DRS Technologies, Inc., and Engineered Support Systems, Inc.

ii.              To approve the amendment to our certificate of incorporation to increase the number of authorized shares of common stock from 50,000,000 shares to 100,000,000 shares.

 

29

PART II

Item 5.                    Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

On May 11, 2006, the Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.03 per share on our common stock. The dividend is payable on June 30, 2006 to stockholders of record as of the close of business on June 15, 2006. Our credit facility was amended to allow the payment of dividends or make other distributions on our common stock. Any future declaration of dividends will be subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. The timing, amount and form of any future dividends will depend, among other things, on our results of operations, financial condition, cash requirements, plans for expansion, limitations imposed by our amended and restated credit agreement and indentures governing our notes and other factors deemed relevant by our Board of Directors.

The following table shows the high and low sale prices per share of our common stock and dividends paid during fiscal 2006 and 2005, as reported on the NYSE.

 

 

The closing sale price of our common stock as reported by the New York Stock Exchange on June 7, 2006 was $50.12 per share. As of that date there were approximately 1,462 holders of record of our common stock.

On January 31, 2006, in connection with our acquisition of Engineered Support Systems, Inc. (ESSI), we sold $300 million aggregate principal amount of 2% Senior Convertible Notes (Convertible Notes) in a private placement pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act. On February 8, 2006, we sold an additional $45 million in Convertible Notes, pursuant to an over-allotment option exercised by the initial purchasers of the Convertible Notes. The net proceeds of the offering of the Convertible Notes, including the over-allotment option, were $337.2 million after deducting $7.8 million in commissions and fees related to the offering. The Convertible Notes are contingently convertible into shares of DRS Common Stock at an initial conversion price of $59.70, subject to adjustment in certain circumstances.

We did not repurchase any equity securities during the period covered by this report.

30

---

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The table below sets forth information about shares of DRS Technologies, Inc. common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plans as of March 31, 2006.

(a)            Includes 50,000 shares of common stock, the issuance and receipt of which were deferred by Mr. Newman following the exercise of certain options.

(b)           Represents stock options granted to Mr. Newman by the board on October 26, 1998. Such stock options were granted to Mr. Newman by the board in its discretion and not pursuant to any equity compensation plan.

See information with respect to shares of DRS common stock that may be issued under our equity compensation plan as of March 31, 2006 in our definitive proxy statement, relating to the fiscal 2006 annual meeting of stockholders, which definitive proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year to which this report relates.

Item 6.                    Selected Financial Data

In the following table, we provide you with our selected historical consolidated financial and operating data as of and for the fiscal years indicated. The selected summary of earnings data, earnings per-share data from continuing operations and certain of the other data for the years ended March 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 and the selected balance sheet data as of March 31, 2006 and 2005 presented below are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The selected summary of earnings data, earnings per-share data from continuing operations and certain of the other data for the years ended March 31, 2003 and 2002 and selected balance sheet data as of March 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 presented below are derived from our consolidated financial statements, which are not included in this Form 10-K.

31

---

When you read this selected historical financial data, it is important that you also read along with it our historical consolidated financial statements and related notes included in this Form 10-K, as well as “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

(1)            DRS’s selected financial data includes the effect of the following purchase business combinations and divestitures from their date of acquisition or divestiture by fiscal year:

a)               Fiscal Year 2006: Engineered Support Systems, Inc.—Acquired January 31, 2006, WalkAbout Computer Systems, Inc.—Acquired June 27, 2005, Codem Systems, Inc.—Acquired April 15, 2005.

b)               Fiscal Year 2005: Night Vision Equipment Co., Inc. and Affiliate—Acquired December 14, 2004.

c)                 Fiscal Year 2004: Integrated Defense Technologies, Inc.—Acquired November 4, 2003.*

*                   Two operating units acquired in connection with the IDT acquisition were sold in fiscal 2005.

d)               Fiscal Year 2003: The U.S.-based Unmanned Aerial Vehicle business of Meggitt Defense Systems—Texas, Inc.—Acquired April 11, 2002; The Navy Controls Division of Eaton Corporation—Acquired July 1, 2002; DKD, Inc.—Acquired October 15, 2002; Paravant Inc.—Acquired November 27, 2002; the Electromagnetics Development Center of Kaman Corporation—Acquired January 15, 2003; and

32

---

Power Technology Incorporated—Acquired February 14, 2003; DRS Advanced Programs, Inc.—Sold November 22, 2002; DRS Ahead Technology, Inc.—Sold May 27, 2002.

e)               Fiscal Year 2002: The Electro Mechanical Systems unit of Lockheed Martin Corporation—Acquired August 22, 2001; and the Sensors and Electronic Systems business of The Boeing Company—Acquired September 28, 2001.

(2)            Per-share data includes the weighted average impact of the January 31, 2006 issuance of 11,727,566 shares of common stock in connection with the ESSI acquisition, the November 4, 2003 issuance of 4,323,172 shares of common stock in connection with the IDT acquisition, the December 20, 2002 issuance of 5,462,500 shares of common stock in a public offering and the December 19, 2001 issuance of 3,755,000 of common stock in a public offering.

(3)            DRS declared cash dividends of $0.03 per common share on June 30, 2005, September 30, 2005, December 30, 2005 and March 30, 2006 to stockholders of record on June 15, 2005, September 15, 2005, December 15, 2005 and March 15, 2006, respectively. There were no cash dividends paid in fiscal 2005 or prior.

(4)            Earnings from continuing operations before extraordinary item, net interest and related expenses (primarily amortization of debt issuance costs), income taxes and depreciation and amortization (EBITDA). See Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures.

(5)            Net cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations less capital expenditures. See Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures.

33