Unapproved Change Orders, Claims and Estimated Recoveries of Claims Against Suppliers and Subcontractors | Unapproved Change Orders, Claims, and Estimated Recoveries of Claims Against Suppliers and Subcontractors The amounts of unapproved change orders, claims and estimated recoveries of claims against suppliers and subcontractors included in determining the profit or loss on contracts are as follows: Dollars in millions 2018 2017 Amounts included in project estimates-at-completion at January 1, $ 924 $ 294 Increase (decrease), including foreign currency effect 39 483 Approved change orders (4 ) (4 ) Amounts included in project estimates-at-completion at September 30, $ 959 $ 773 Amounts recognized over time based on progress at September 30, $ 922 $ 687 As of September 30, 2018 , the predominant component of the change orders, customer claims and estimated recoveries of claims against suppliers and subcontractors above relates to our proportionate share of unapproved change orders and claims associated with the Ichthys LNG Project discussed below. KBR intends to vigorously pursue approval and collection of amounts still due under all unapproved change orders and claims, as well as resolution of contingencies within reserved amounts with subcontractors and clients. Further, there are additional claims that KBR believes it is entitled to recover from its clients and from subcontractors which have been excluded from estimated revenues and profits at completion as appropriate under U.S. GAAP. These commercial matters may not be resolved in the near term. Our current estimates for the above unapproved change orders, customer claims and estimated recoveries of claims against suppliers and subcontractors may prove inaccurate and could result in significant changes to the estimated revenues, costs and profits at completion on the underlying projects. Ichthys LNG Project Project Status We have a 30% ownership interest in the JKC joint venture ("JKC"), which has contracted to perform the engineering, procurement, supply, construction and commissioning of onshore LNG facilities for a client in Darwin, Australia (the "Ichthys LNG Project"). The contract between JKC and its client is a hybrid contract containing both cost-reimbursable and fixed-price (including unit-rate) scopes. The Ichthys LNG Project is substantially complete on a cost-to-cost basis. All of the components of the plant, except for the combined cycle power plant ("Power Plant"), have been completed and handed over to the client. The Power Plant includes five gas turbine generators which are complete and handed over to the client, and three steam turbine generators (the "STGs") which are currently forecasted to be completed by the end of the second quarter 2019. At the current level of progress, which includes portions of the power plant already completed, the plant is capable of LNG production. Unapproved Change Orders and Claims JKC has entered into commercial contracts with multiple suppliers and subcontractors to execute various scopes of work on the project. Certain of these suppliers and subcontractors have made contract claims against JKC for recovery of costs and extensions of time in order to progress the works under the scope of their respective contracts due to a variety of issues related to changes to the scope of work, delays and lower than planned subcontractor productivity. In addition, JKC has incurred costs related to scope increases and other factors, and has made claims to its client for matters for which JKC believes reimbursement is entitled under the contract. JKC believes any amounts paid or payable to the suppliers and subcontractors in settlement of their contract claims related to cost-reimbursable scope are an adjustment to the contract price, and accordingly JKC has made claims for contract price adjustments under the reimbursable portion of the contract between JKC and its client. However, the client disputed some of these contract price adjustments and subsequently withheld certain payments. In order to facilitate the continuation of work under the contract while we worked to resolve this dispute, the client agreed to a contractual mechanism (“Funding Deed”) in 2016 providing funding in the form of an interim contract price adjustment to JKC and consented to settlement of subcontractor claims as of that date related to the cost-reimbursable scope. While the client reserved its rights under this funding mechanism, settlement funds (or interim contract price adjustment) have been paid by the client. JKC in turn settled these subcontractor claims which have been funded through the Funding Deed by the client. If JKC's claims against its client which were funded under the Funding Deed remain unresolved by December 31, 2020, JKC will be required to refund sums funded by the client under the terms of the Funding Deed. We, along with our joint venture partners, are jointly and severally liable to the client for any amounts required to be refunded. While JKC continued to pursue settlement of these disputes with the client, JKC initiated arbitration proceedings in 2017 and is planning other arbitrations against the client to resolve open claims. Our proportionate share of the total amount of the contract price adjustments under the Funding Deed included in the unapproved change orders and claims related to our unconsolidated affiliates discussed above is $163 million and $177 million as of September 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017 , respectively. The difference in these values is strictly due to exchange rate fluctuations. In September and October 2017, additional settlements pertaining to suppliers and subcontractors under the cost reimbursable portion of the contract were presented to the client. The client consented to these settlements and paid for them but reserved its rights. In reliance, JKC in turn settled these claims with the associated suppliers and subcontractors. The formal contract price adjustments for these settlements remained pending at September 30, 2018 , but unlike amounts funded under the Funding Deed, there is no requirement to refund these amounts to the client by a date certain. In October 2018, JKC received a favorable ruling from an arbitration tribunal. The ruling determined a contract interpretation in JKC's favour, to the effect that delay and disruption costs payable to subcontractors under the cost-reimbursable scope of the EPC contract are for the client's account. JKC contends this ruling resolves the reimbursability of the subcontractor settlement sums under the Funding Deed and additional settlements made in September and October 2017. Pursuant to this decision, JKC is undertaking steps for a formal contract adjustment to the reimbursable portion of the contract for these settlement claims of which $332 million are included in the recognized unapproved change orders as of September 30, 2018. There has been deterioration of paint on certain exterior areas of the plant. The client has requested, and has funded, paint remediation for a portion of the facilities. The client has requested a remediation plan for the remainder of the facilities, but JKC and its client have not resolved who is responsible for the paint defects and the manner in which it is to be remediated. JKC’s profit estimate at completion includes those revenues and costs for remediation activities that it has been directed to perform and are being funded by the client. JKC has also started proceedings against the paint manufacturer and made demands on insurance related to these issues. As discussed above, the additional costs associated with these various claims and related issues have been included in determining estimated profit at completion. Estimated recoveries associated with the additional change orders, customer claims, and claims against suppliers and subcontractors have also been included in determining estimated profit at completion. Our current estimates for the above unapproved change orders and customer claims may prove inaccurate and could result in significant changes to the estimated revenue, costs and profits at completion on the underlying projects. Other Matters JKC is entitled to an amount of profit and overhead (“TRC Fee”) which is a fixed percentage of the target reimbursable costs ("TRC") under the reimbursable component of the contract which was to be agreed by JKC and its client. At the time of the contract, JKC and its client agreed to postpone the fixing of the TRC until after a specific milestone in the project had been achieved. Although the milestone was achieved, JKC and its client have been unable to reach agreement on the TRC. This matter was taken to arbitration in 2017. A decision was issued in December 2017 which provided some further basis for determination of the TRC amount and the TRC Fee. JKC has included an estimate for the TRC Fee in its determination of profit at completion at December 31, 2017 based on the contract provisions and the decision from the December 2017 arbitration and terms of the EPC contract with the client. JKC has submitted the revised estimate of the TRC Fee to the client. The parties have not agreed the revised estimate. If the above matters are not resolved with the client for the amounts recorded, or to the extent JKC is unsuccessful in retaining amounts paid to it under the Funding Deed and other funding mechanisms used by the client, we would be responsible for our pro-rata portion of any additional costs and refunded sums in excess of the final adjusted contract price, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial position and cash flows. Additionally, to the extent the client does not provide adequate and proper funding for project activities prior to resolution of these matters, the joint venture partners will be required to fund working capital requirements of JKC in the near term which could have a material adverse effect on our financial position and cash flows. Combined Cycle Power Plant Pursuant to JKC's fixed-price scope of its contract with its client, JKC awarded a fixed-price EPC contract to a subcontractor for the design, construction and commissioning of a combined cycle power plant. The subcontractor was a consortium consisting of General Electric and GE Electrical International Inc. and a joint venture between UGL Infrastructure Pty Limited and CH2M Hill (collectively, the "Consortium"). On January 25, 2017, JKC received a Notice of Termination from the Consortium, and the Consortium ceased work on the Power Plant and abandoned the construction site. JKC believes the Consortium materially breached its subcontract and repudiated its obligation to complete the Power Plant, plus undertook actions making it more difficult and more costly for the works to be completed by others after the Consortium abandoned the site. Subsequently, the Consortium filed a request for arbitration with the ICC asserting that JKC repudiated the contract. The Consortium also sought an order that the Consortium validly terminated the subcontract. JKC has responded to this request, denying JKC committed any breach of its subcontract with the Consortium and restated its claim that the Consortium breached and repudiated its subcontract with JKC and is furthermore liable to JKC for all costs to complete the Power Plant. JKC prevailed in a legal action against the Consortium requiring the return of materials, drawings and tools following their unauthorized removal from the site. JKC discovered incomplete and defective engineering designs, defective workmanship on the site, missing, underreported and defective materials; and the improper termination of key vendors/suppliers. JKC's investigations also indicate that progress of the work claimed by the Consortium was over-reported. JKC has evaluated the cost to complete the Consortium's work, which significantly exceeds the awarded fixed-price subcontract value. JKC's cost to complete the Power Plant includes re-design efforts, additional materials and significant re-work. These costs represent estimated recoveries of claims against the Consortium and have been included in JKC's estimate to complete the Consortium's remaining obligations. JKC is pursuing recourse against the Consortium to recover all of the costs to complete the Power Plant, plus the additional interest, and/or general damages by all means inclusive of calling bank guarantees provided by the Consortium partners. In April 2018, JKC prevailed in its legal action to call the bank guarantees (bonds) and subsequently called the bonds of two of the Consortium members, receiving funds totaling $52 million . Each of the Consortium partners has joint and several liability with respect to all obligations under the subcontract. JKC intends to pursue recovery of all additional amounts due from the Consortium via various legal remedies available to JKC. Estimated costs to complete the Power Plant that have been determined to be probable of recovery from the Consortium under U.S. GAAP have been included as a reduction of cost in our estimate of profit at completion. The estimated recoveries exclude interest, liquidated damages and other related costs which JKC intends to pursue recovery from the Consortium. As of September 30, 2018 , JKC estimated claims against the Consortium were approximately $1.9 billion for recovery of these expected costs. The arbitration is likely to be set for hearing in the first half of 2020. JKC has also recently initiated suits against the parent companies of the Consortium members based on their payment and performance guarantees. To the extent JKC is unsuccessful in prevailing in the Arbitration or the Consortium members are unable to satisfy their financial obligations in the event of a decision favorable to JKC, we would be responsible for our pro-rata portion of unrecovered costs from the Consortium. This could have a material adverse impact on the profit at completion of the overall contract and thus on our consolidated statements of operations, financial position and cash flow. Additionally, to the extent JKC does not resolve this matter with the Consortium in the near term, the joint venture partners have been and will continue to be required to fund JKC's completion of the combined cycle power plant which could have a material adverse effect on our financial position and cash flows. Further, if our partners in JKC do not fulfill their obligations under the subcontract, we could be exposed to the full amount of those funding requirements and potential losses as a result of the nature of the JKC JV agreement. Ichthys Project Funding JKC has recorded significant unapproved change orders and claims with the client as well as estimated recoveries of claims against suppliers and subcontractors arising from issues related to changes to the work scope, delays and lower than planned subcontractor activity discussed above. As a result of the ongoing disputes with the client and pursuit of recoveries against the Consortium through arbitration, additional contributions from the JKC joint venture partners are required to fund the project. During the nine months ended September 30, 2018 , we made investment contribution to JKC of approximately $257 million to fund our proportionate share of the ongoing project execution activities. Our estimate of additional investment contributions increased by $100 million to approximately $250 million to complete the project, excluding future recoveries of claims and unapproved change orders. Liquidated damages Some of our hydrocarbons services contracts have schedule dates and performance obligations that, if not met, could subject us to penalties for liquidated damages. These generally relate to specified activities that must be completed by a set contractual date or by achievement of a specified level of output or throughput. Each contract defines the conditions under which a customer may make a claim for liquidated damages. However, in some instances, liquidated damages are not asserted by the customer, but the potential to do so is used in negotiating or settling claims and closing out the contract. Any accrued liquidated damages are recognized as a reduction in revenues in our condensed consolidated statements of operations. In addition to the accrued liquidated damages, it is possible that liquidated damages that have not been included in our estimates at completion in determining project income related to several projects totaling $9 million and $9 million at September 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017 |