Table of Contents

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

For the fiscal year ended November 30, 2013

or

For the transition period from                     to                    .

Commission file number 1-1520

GenCorp Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code

(916) 355-4000

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  ¨      No  þ

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨      No  þ

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  þ      No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  þ      No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

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

The aggregate market value of the voting common equity held by nonaffiliates of the registrant as of May 31, 2013 was approximately $815 million.

As of January 14, 2014, there were 61.3 million outstanding shares of the Company’s Common Stock, including redeemable common stock and unvested common shares, $0.10 par value.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the 2014 Proxy Statement of GenCorp Inc. relating to its annual meeting of shareholders scheduled to be held on March 20, 2014 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Report.

Table of Contents

GENCORP INC.

Annual Report on Form 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended November 30, 2013

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

PART I

Unless otherwise indicated or required by the context, as used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the terms “we,” “our,” and “us” refer to GenCorp Inc. and all of its subsidiaries that are consolidated in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S.”).

Certain information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K should be considered “forward-looking statements” as defined by Section 21E of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements in this report other than historical information may be deemed forward-looking statements. These statements present (without limitation) the expectations, beliefs, plans, and objectives of management and future financial performance and assumptions underlying, or judgments concerning, the matters discussed in the statements. The words “believe,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “project” and “expect,” and similar expressions, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve certain risks, estimates, assumptions, and uncertainties, including with respect to future sales and activity levels, cash flows, contract performance, the outcome of litigation and contingencies, environmental remediation, availability of capital, and anticipated costs of capital. A variety of factors could cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those expected and expressed in our forward-looking statements. Important risk factors that could cause actual results or outcomes to differ from those expressed in the forward-looking statements are described in the section “Risk Factors” in Item 1A of this Report. Additional risk factors may be described from time to time in our future filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

We are a manufacturer of aerospace and defense products and systems with a real estate segment that includes activities related to the re-zoning, entitlement, sale, and leasing of our excess real estate assets. We develop and manufacture propulsion systems for defense and space applications, and armaments for precision tactical and long range weapon systems applications. Our continuing operations are organized into two segments:

Aerospace and Defense — includes the operations of our wholly-owned subsidiary Aerojet Rocketdyne, Inc. (“Aerojet Rocketdyne”), a leading technology-based designer, developer and manufacturer of aerospace and defense products and systems for the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense (“DoD”), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (“NASA”), major aerospace and defense prime contractors as well as portions of the commercial sector. Aerojet Rocketdyne is a world-recognized engineering and manufacturing company that specializes in the development and production of propulsion systems for defense and space applications, armament systems for precision tactical systems and munitions, and is considered a domestic market leader in launch propulsion, in-space propulsion, missile defense propulsion, tactical missile propulsion and hypersonic propulsion systems.

Real Estate — includes the activities of our wholly-owned subsidiary Easton Development Company, LLC related to the re-zoning, entitlement, sale, and leasing of our excess real estate assets. We own approximately 11,900 acres of land adjacent to U.S. Highway 50 between Rancho Cordova and Folsom, California east of Sacramento (“Sacramento Land”). We are currently in the process of seeking zoning changes and other governmental approvals on a portion of the Sacramento Land to optimize its value.

Sales, segment performance, total assets, and other financial data for our segments for fiscal 2013, 2012, and 2011 are set forth in Note 11 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, included in Item 8 of this Report. Fiscal 2013 results include 5 ¹/₂ months of the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne division (the “Rocketdyne Business”) operating results (see below).

In July 2012, we signed a stock and asset purchase agreement (the “Original Purchase Agreement”) with United Technologies Corporation (“UTC”) to acquire the Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne division (the “Rocketdyne Business”) from UTC for $550 million (the “Acquisition”). On June 10, 2013, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced that it closed its investigation into the Acquisition under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended. On June 12, 2013, we entered into an amended and restated stock and asset purchase agreement, (the “Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement”) with UTC, which amended and restated the Original Purchase Agreement, as amended. On June 14, 2013, we completed the

1

Table of Contents

acquisition of substantially all of the Rocketdyne Business pursuant to the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement. The aggregate consideration to UTC was $411 million, paid in cash, which represents the initial purchase price of $550 million reduced by $55 million relating to the pending future acquisition of UTC’s 50% ownership interest of RD Amross, LLC (“RD Amross” a joint venture with NPO Energomash of Khimki, Russia which sells RD-180 engines to RD Amross), and the portion of the UTC business that markets and supports the sale of RD-180 engines (the “RDA Acquisition”). The acquisition of UTC’s 50% ownership interest of RD Amross and UTC’s related business is contingent upon certain conditions including receipt of certain Russian governmental regulatory approvals, which may not be obtained. Pursuant to the terms of the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement, either party to such agreement may terminate the obligations to consummate the RDA Acquisition on or after June 12, 2015; provided, however, that such termination date may be extended for up to four additional periods of three months each (with the final termination date extended until June 12, 2016). Subject to the terms of Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement, in order to extend the termination date, either party may request the extension by providing written notice to the other party at least five business days prior to the termination date, provided that the requesting party must have a reasonable belief at the time such notice is given that a certain authorization for completion of the RDA Acquisition from the Russian government will be forthcoming. The purchase price was further adjusted for advance payments on contracts, capital expenditures and other net assets, and is subject further to post-closing adjustments. See Note 4 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The Rocketdyne Business was the largest liquid rocket propulsion designer, developer, and manufacturer in the U.S. as the primary propulsion system provider to the U.S. government, specifically NASA and the DoD through United Launch Alliance (“ULA”). ULA is a joint venture of The Boeing Company (“Boeing”) and Lockheed Martin Corporation (“Lockheed Martin”) which provide spacecraft launch services to the U.S. government. The Rocketdyne Business was considered to be a leader in liquid launch propulsion and hypersonic systems. For more than 50 years, the Rocketdyne Business has set the standard in launch propulsion design, development and manufacturing. The Rocketdyne Business has powered nearly all of NASA’s human-rated launch vehicles to date and has recorded more than 1,600 space launches. The Rocketdyne Business propulsion systems have powered missions to nearly every planet in the solar system and have been a cornerstone to the U.S. Space Program since its inception. Additionally, the Rocketdyne Business propulsion systems are vital to the launch of astronauts and cargo required for space exploration and for U.S. military and commercial satellites.

We believe the Rocketdyne Business acquisition provides strategic value for the country, our customers, and our stakeholders. We anticipate that the combined enterprise will be better positioned to compete in a dynamic, highly competitive marketplace, and provide more affordable products for our customers. In addition, this transaction is expected to transform our business and provide additional growth opportunities as we build upon the complementary capabilities of each legacy company.

Our fiscal year ends on November 30 of each year. When we refer to a fiscal year, such as fiscal 2013, we are referring to the fiscal year ended on November 30 of that year. The fiscal year of our subsidiary, Aerojet Rocketdyne, ends on the last Saturday of November. As a result of the 2013 calendar, we had 53 weeks of operations in fiscal 2013 compared to 52 weeks of operations in fiscal 2012 and 2011. The additional week of operations, which occurred in the first quarter of fiscal 2013, accounted for $27.8 million in additional net sales.

We were incorporated in Ohio in 1915 and our principal executive offices are located at 2001 Aerojet Road, Rancho Cordova, CA 95742.

Our Internet website address is www.GenCorp.com. We have made available through our Internet website, free of charge, our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. We also make available on our Internet web site our corporate governance guidelines and the charters for each of the following committees of our Board of Directors: Audit; Corporate Governance & Nominating; and Organization & Compensation. Our corporate governance guidelines and such charters are also available in print to anyone who requests them.

2

Table of Contents

Aerospace and Defense

Through Aerojet Rocketdyne, we are a leading technology-based designer, developer and manufacturer of aerospace and defense products and systems for the U.S. government, including the DoD and NASA, major aerospace and defense prime contractors and the commercial sector. We believe we are the only domestic provider of all four propulsion types (liquid, solid, air-breathing, and electric) for space and defense applications and we maintain leading positions in a number of the market segments that apply these technologies. Aerojet Rocketdyne is a world-recognized engineering and manufacturing company that develops and produces specialized propulsion systems for defense, space and commercial applications, as well as armament systems for precision tactical systems and munitions, and is considered a leader in liquid launch propulsion, missile defense, in-space, tactical and hypersonics propulsion systems. Through Aerojet Rocketdyne, we design, develop, and produce propulsion systems ranging in thrust size from a few grams to several hundred thousand pounds. We have participated in all of NASA’s manned and NASA Discovery missions to date. Our propulsion systems have powered spacecraft to nearly every planet in the solar system and have been a cornerstone of the U.S. space program since its inception. For more than 70 years, Aerojet Rocketdyne has been a trusted supplier of highly sophisticated products and systems for military, civil and commercial customers and we maintain strong market positions across several product lines that are mission-critical to national defense and U.S. access to space. Our revenues are diversified across multiple programs, prime contractors and end users and we believe we are well positioned to benefit from spending in the DoD priorities of access to space and missile defense. Principal customers include the DoD, NASA, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Orbital Sciences Corporation (“Orbital”), Raytheon Company (“Raytheon”), and ULA.

Product Lines and Major Programs

Our capabilities and resources are aligned with our customers and markets and position us for long-term growth with improved efficiency. The product lines and key programs we serve are:

Tactical Systems. Aerojet Rocketdyne is a designer, developer, and producer of propulsion and warhead systems for tactical missile systems. Our commitment to researching and developing safe, effective and affordable products enables us to provide our customers with optimal tactical propulsion and warhead solutions. Our tactical products have been successfully fielded on numerous active U.S. and international weapon system platforms.

During fiscal 2013, we were competitively selected to continue production of the Tube-launched Optically Wire-guided (“TOW”) 2A/2B and Tomahawk WDU-36 warhead systems. The year also included achievement of significant production milestones including the delivery of the 2,000^th Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (“PAC-3”) shipset (1 Solid Rocket Motor and 180 Attitude Control Motors) and the 25,000^th Guided Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (“GMLRS”) rocket motor. Key research and development achievements include advances in composite case and propellant technologies that drove successful validation tests of candidate insensitive munitions technology for future upgrades to the GMLRS and Hellfire propulsion systems.

A subset of our key tactical missile propulsion systems programs is listed below:

3

Table of Contents

Missile Defense Systems. Aerojet Rocketdyne manufactures divert and attitude control propulsion systems and boosters. These systems power and provide directional control for critical missile defense interceptor applications. Aerojet Rocketdyne manufactures content for two of the three phases of ballistic missile flight (boost, mid-course and terminal) in support of the MDA’s priorities to develop and field an integrated, layered, ballistic missile defense system in defense against all ranges of enemy ballistic missiles in all phases of flight.

We achieved awards on several critical missile defense propulsion systems for fiscal 2013 including boosters and divert and attitude control systems (“DACS”) for the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (“THAAD”) interceptor system; Throttling DACS awards for the Standard Missile — 3 IB (“SM3”) interceptor and SM-3 IIA programs and were awarded the Development and Sustainment Contract (“DSC”) for the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle (“EKV”) Liquid DACS system which is part of the Ground-based Missile Defense (“GMD”) system. We also received a significant award to develop the third stage solid rocket motor which will potentially be used for the ground based strategic modernization program.

A subset of our key missile defense systems programs is listed below:

Defense Advanced Programs. Aerojet Rocketdyne’s defense advanced programs activity supports the entire breadth of propulsion and energetic products within the defense products portfolio by developing robust processes and technologies demanded by our customers as well as new capabilities required in next generation weapon systems. Franchise technology demonstration programs and new product development efforts are optimized to effectively transition new products and technologies to full-scale development and production within our core business units. Our capabilities include an expanded highly skilled hypersonic propulsion team with decades of experience pioneering the development of liquid and solid fueled propulsion technologies for supersonic and hypersonic systems. We maintain key positions on ground-breaking government hypersonic propulsion programs such as the Triple Target Terminator (“T3”) program, the Robust Scramjet Program and successfully completed the X-51A program for government customers including the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (“DARPA”) and the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory (“AFRL”). We are also actively developing a low cost propulsion solution to support Operationally Responsive Space applications, leveraging the experience and talent of our workforce to deliver affordable small payload launch solutions to low earth orbit. Additional research and development work continues to advance the next generation of propulsion enablers in tactical, strategic, and adjacent energetic markets.

4

Table of Contents

A subset of our key defense advanced programs is listed below:

Space Launch Systems. For over half a century, Aerojet Rocketdyne has been a domestic provider of launch vehicle propulsion systems to multiple prime contractors providing launch services to the DoD, NASA, and other commercial customers. Our propulsion systems have flown on every manned mission since the inception of the U.S. space program. Products include a broad market offering of both liquid propellant engines and solid rocket motors required for launch vehicle applications in the defense, civil and commercial propulsion markets. Capabilities range across the entire spectrum of product maturation from technology demonstration through development, production, and flight support operations.

Our space launch systems have a long, successful history with the DoD where we currently project strong support related to National Security Space requirements for communications, navigation, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance activities. Aerojet Rocketdyne provides booster and upper stage propulsion for ULA’s Delta IV and Atlas V launch vehicles in support of the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (“EELV”) Program. Additionally, we provide booster propulsion for Orbital’s Antares launch vehicle which is now providing cargo transportation services to the International Space Station (“ISS”) through the NASA Cargo Resupply Services (“CRS”) contract.

During fiscal 2013, we completed price negotiations for five major multiyear contracts with ULA supporting the EELV program, securing significant contract backlog which will be conducted over the next five plus years. This provides significant program stability during that time period. Additionally, the Antares program achieved multiple milestones including a successful vehicle Flight Readiness Firing at the Wallops Island Launch facility, a successful first launch, and a second successful demonstration cargo launch that capped Orbital Sciences Commercial Orbital Transportation Systems program, all paving the way to regular cargo transfer missions as part of NASA’s CRS contract.

5

Table of Contents

A subset of our key space launch systems programs is listed below:

Space Advanced Programs. Aerojet Rocketdyne’s space advanced programs activity supports the entire breadth of propulsion products within its space propulsion portfolio by developing next generation propulsion solutions, robust processes and technologies demanded by our customers. Franchise technology demonstration programs and new product development efforts are featured to transition effectively our products to our core markets.

NASA Human Exploration — Aerojet Rocketdyne was awarded a contract modification for the development of the J-2X upper stage engine and for adaptation and integration of the RS-25 core stage engine to power the heavy lift Space Launch System (“SLS”). The J-2X, an upgraded and modernized version of the original Apollo moon mission engine, progressed into hot fire testing of the third development engine and continues to meet technical and performance objectives. The RS-25 core stage engines are reusable engines repurposed from the Space Shuttle program to provide a highly reliable, low cost solution for the initial SLS missions. RS-25 adaptation and integration activities met and supported the completion of the SLS preliminary design review, a key decision gate for NASA. Aerojet Rocketdyne also continued early engineering development and risk reduction for advance boosters which may replace the current SLS boosters with increased performance and payload capability. Aerojet Rocketdyne completed qualification and delivery of the reaction control thrusters for the Orion crew module, planned to be flown on a SLS program-related test flight in 2014.

NASA Commercial Crew — Aerojet Rocketdyne continued the development of propulsion and power systems for the next generation of crew vehicles that will provide human transportation to and from the ISS. Boeing’s CST-100 incorporates Aerojet Rocketdyne’s reaction control thrusters, propulsion system and propellant tanks. Sierra Nevada’s Dreamchaser utilizes Aerojet Rocketdyne’s non-hypergolic reaction control engines and the electric power subsystem. Implementation of commercial crew providers is envisioned to lower the cost of crew transportation for NASA as well as stimulate the commercial market for access to low earth orbit.

Advanced In-Space Propulsion and Power — Next generation satellites and spacecraft for commercial, NASA, and DoD missions will require higher performance and lower cost propulsion and power systems. Aerojet Rocketdyne is developing high power solar electric propulsion, green monopropellant and bi-propellant engines and systems, lower cost modular propulsion systems, and advanced solar and nuclear space power systems to support these growing markets.

6

Table of Contents

Additive Manufacturing — Aerojet Rocketdyne’s investment into this manufacturing technology has progressed to demonstrations for system level rocket engine tests, complex geometry performance validation during component tests, and laboratory tests to refine design safety margins. Maturation of this technology is expected to provide significant cost and schedule savings over traditional manufacturing techniques with application to all Aerojet Rocketdyne products.

A subset of our key space advanced programs is listed below:

Space Systems. Aerojet Rocketdyne is a supplier of high performance, highly reliable satellite and spacecraft propulsion products for low thrust engines and systems for domestic and international markets. Aerojet Rocketdyne is considered an industry leader in the design, development, and production of high performance electric, monopropellant and bi-propellant components, and systems. As with space launch vehicle systems, Aerojet Rocketdyne’s key satellite and spacecraft propulsion capabilities cover the entire spectrum required by its customers including requirements definition and trade studies, design and development, fabrication and assembly, test and post-delivery support.

In fiscal 2013, we received a contract award to provide arcjet electric propulsion systems to a major communications satellite provider. This represented the start of a large movement in both commercial and military satellites toward the expanded use of electric propulsion. It is anticipated that in the coming year, additional prime contractors in both the U.S. and Europe will seek to take advantage of the operational advantages of electric propulsion for their satellite bus upgrades.

We launched a new international subsidiary, European Space Propulsion (“ESP”), which is located in Belfast, Northern Ireland. This subsidiary produces monopropellant thrusters and will expand into other propulsion technologies to enable penetration into the European satellite and spacecraft propulsion market. The European market is highly geo-political and requires European country geo-return as a prerequisite for contract awards. ESP also leverages significant political support from the United Kingdom government and European Space Agency. ESP received its first contract in fiscal 2013 for 19 MR-103 monopropellant thrusters for the Formosat 7 satellite from Surrey Satellite Technology Limited.

7

Table of Contents

A subset of our key space systems programs is listed below:

Our Competitive Strengths

Leadership in Propulsion — Our success is due in part to our ability to focus on the design, development and manufacture of products utilizing innovative, mission-enabling technology. For over 70 years, we have demonstrated a legacy of successfully meeting the most challenging missions by producing some of the world’s most technologically advanced propulsion systems for our customers. For example, our propulsion systems have flown on every NASA Discovery mission as well as every manned space mission since the inception of the U.S. Space Program. We also have powered nearly all of NASA’s human-rated launch vehicles to date and powered space probes to nearly every planet in the solar system and have been a cornerstone to the U.S. space program since its inception. In addition, we have been a major supplier of a wide range of propulsion products to the DoD since the 1940s when we successfully developed and produced the first jet-assisted take off rockets for U.S. aircraft during World War II. We believe that Aerojet Rocketdyne is the only domestic provider of all four propulsion types (liquid, solid, air-breathing, and electric) for space, defense and commercial applications.

Diversified and Well Balanced Portfolio — We have been and continue to be a pioneer in the development of many crucial technologies and products that have strengthened multiple branches of the U.S. military and enabled the exploration of space. We believe Aerojet Rocketdyne maintains a unique competitive position due to a strategic focus on creating and maintaining a broad spectrum of propulsion and energetic products assisted by the growing market demand for its innovative energy management technologies. Our propulsion systems power almost all of today’s medium and large payload rocket systems. We are the sole provider of both the liquid upper and boost stage engines on the SLS, Delta IV, and Atlas V launch vehicle systems. We have further capitalized on this foundation by bringing together “solid” and “liquid” propulsion teams and “cross-pollinating” critical product features and capabilities, thus exploiting potential product line synergies that enable us to offer our customers innovative, highly advanced solutions.

High Visibility of Revenue with Multi-year Contracts and Sizable Backlog — A strong focus on our customers’ highest priorities has been a critical factor in maintaining an enduring portfolio of products throughout major market cycles. The highly visible nature of our revenue comes from the long-term nature of the programs with which we are involved, our diverse and attractive contract base and our deep customer relationships. A substantial portion of our sales are derived from multi-year contract awards from major aerospace and defense prime contractors. In many cases, we operate under sole source contracts, some of which are follow-on contracts to contracts initially completed years ago and others have been sole source contracts since inception. High renewal

8

Table of Contents

rates, supported by our market leading technology provide us with a highly stable business base from which to grow. Our contract backlog (funded and unfunded) was $2.5 billion as of November 30, 2013 and our funded backlog, which includes only amounts for which money has been directly appropriated by the U.S. Congress or for which a purchase order has been received from a commercial customer, totaled $1.7 billion.

Significant Barriers to Entry — Our business is characterized by significant barriers to entry including highly specialized technologies, customer emphasis on risk avoidance and a resulting reliance on existing, proven products, highly skilled workforces, the necessary infrastructure for potentially hazardous and technically sensitive work, long research and development periods, and considerable capital cost expense for necessary facilities and equipment. In conjunction with these barriers to entry, the long-term nature of government programs and associated requalification costs and/or incurred termination costs if a program is moved to another supplier limit the government’s ability to change suppliers easily.

Additionally, we benefit from significant customer funding of research and development activities, which helps us position for future long-term production contracts on government products. A substantial portion of our business, including many of our contracts with major prime contractors to the U.S. government, the DoD and NASA, also require lengthy customer certification and qualification processes, which creates significant obstacles for potential competitors. As a result, we are the sole providers on the majority of our contracts. In addition, the capture of new programs and platforms favor suppliers that have extensive industry experience and a reputation for superior performance.

Exceptional Long-Term Industry Relationships — We serve a broad set of customers and are major suppliers of propulsion products to top original equipment manufacturers such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Orbital, Raytheon and ULA, as well as to the DoD, NASA and other U.S. government agencies. We have a long history of partnering with their respective prime contractors and have developed close relationships with key decision-makers while working for a combined total of more than a century in the rocket and missile propulsion markets. We are, in many instances, approached by multiple prime contractors in bidding processes, which is a testament to the strength of our relationships and technological leadership in the industry. We believe these long-term relationships and our reputation for performance enhance customer loyalty and provide us with key competitive advantages in winning new contracts for new programs as well as follow-on and derivative contracts for existing programs.

Competition

As a well-diversified supplier of all four propulsion types — liquid, solid, air-breathing, and electric — we believe that we are in a unique competitive position.

The nature of the markets in which we operate varies. In some market segments, the market is characterized by a few large, long-term programs, intermittent new program starts (with new buys spread further out in periods of declining budgets) and, therefore, relatively few new competitive awards. In these markets there tend to be few participants each with long-standing legacy positions. Thus, as noted above, the majority of our revenues are derived from sole source contracts where we are the long-term provider.

In other markets, the dynamics can be different, with more numerous, but smaller awards and a larger number of competitors. The basis on which we compete in the Aerospace and Defense industry varies by program, but generally is based upon technology, quality, service, and price. Although market competition in certain sectors can be intense, we believe we possess innovative and advanced propulsion and armament solutions, combined with adequate resources to continue to compete successfully.

9

Table of Contents

The table below lists primary participants in the propulsion market:

Industry Overview

Our primary aerospace and defense customers include the DoD and its agencies, NASA, and the prime contractors that supply products to these customers. We are seeing more opportunities for commercial in-launch and in-space business. In addition, sales to our aerospace and defense customers that provide products to international customers continue to grow. However, we rely on particular levels of U.S. government spending on propulsion systems for defense, space and armament systems for precision tactical weapon systems and munitions applications, and our backlog depends, in a large part, on continued funding by the U.S. government for the programs in which we are involved. These spending levels are not generally correlated with any specific economic cycle, but rather follow the cycle of general public policy and political support for this type of spending. Moreover, although our contracts often contemplate that our services will be performed over a period of several years, the U.S. President must propose and Congress must appropriate funds for a given program each government fiscal year (“GFY”) and may significantly change, increase, reduce or eliminate, funding for a program. A decrease in DoD and/or NASA expenditures, the elimination or curtailment of a material program in which we are involved, or changes in payment patterns of our customers as a result of changes in U.S. government spending, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 set overall discretionary spending levels for GFY 2014 and eased sequestration cuts to the DoD and other federal agencies (e.g., NASA) for GFY 2014 and 2015, paving the way for an eventual agreement on GFY 2014 Appropriations for all federal agencies. In relatively short order, Congress was able to pass the Consolidated (so-called “Omnibus”) Appropriation bill for GFY 2014. The Defense portion of the bill was below the President’s requested level of funding for GFY 2014 but roughly the same as the post-sequester GFY 2013 DoD Appropriation levels. Funding for NASA was also below the President’s Budget Request for GFY 2014 but up from the post-sequester GFY 2013 NASA Appropriation level.

Despite overall U.S. government budget spending pressures, we believe we are well-positioned to benefit from spending in DoD and NASA priority areas. This view reflects the DoD’s strategic guidance report released in January 2012 which affirms support for many of our core programs and points toward continued DoD investment in: access to space — in order to ensure access to this highly congested and contested “global commons”; missile defense — in order to protect the homeland, counter weapons of mass destruction and enhance space-based capabilities; and power projection by tactical missile systems.

During 2013, Congress began consideration of a new NASA Authorization Act, authorizing NASA funding for the next several years, starting with GFY 2014. Ultimately, Congress did not complete action on a new NASA Authorization in 2013, but will likely resume consideration in 2014. In 2010, the NASA Authorization

10

Table of Contents

Act, which remains in effect, impacted GFYs 2011-2013. NASA has identified the SLS program as one of its top priorities in the NASA portion of the GFY 2014 President’s Budget Request. The SLS program also enjoys wide bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress. We maintain a strong relationship with NASA and our propulsion systems have been powering NASA launch vehicles and spacecraft since the inception of the U.S. Space Program. Our booster and upper stage propulsion systems are currently baselined on the new SLS vehicle and both upper stage and booster engines are in development for future SLS variants. Due to the retirement of the space shuttle fleet, U.S. astronauts are now dependent on Russian Soyuz flights for access to the ISS for the better part of this decade. NASA has indicated that it is working to re-establish U.S. manned space capability as soon as possible through development of the commercial cargo and crew ISS resupply capability and the heavy lift SLS designed for manned deep space exploration. In both instances, we have significant propulsion content.

Major Customers

As a supplier to the Aerospace and Defense industry, we align ourselves with prime contractors on a project-by-project basis. We believe that our position as a merchant supplier has helped us become a trusted partner to our customers, enabling us to maintain strong, long-term relationships with a variety of prime contractors. Under each of our contracts, we act either as a prime contractor, where we sell directly to the end user, or as a subcontractor, where we sell our products to other prime contractors. The principal end user customers of our products and technologies are agencies of the U.S. government.

Customers that represented more than 10% of net sales for the fiscal years presented are as follows:

Direct sales to the U.S. government and its agencies, or government customers, and indirect sales to U.S. government customers via direct sales to prime contractors accounted for a total of approximately 95% of sales in fiscal 2013. Sales to our aerospace and defense customers that provide to international customers continue to grow. The following are percentages of net sales by principal end user in fiscal 2013:

Contract Types

Under each of its contracts, Aerojet Rocketdyne acts either as a prime contractor, where it sells directly to the end user, or as a subcontractor, selling its products to other prime contractors. Research and development contracts are awarded during the inception stage of a program’s development. Production contracts provide for the production and delivery of mature products for operational use. Aerojet Rocketdyne’s contracts are largely categorized as either “fixed-price” or “cost-reimbursable.” During fiscal 2013, approximately 46% of our net sales were from fixed-price contracts, 49% from cost-reimbursable contracts, and 5% from other sales including commercial contracts and real estate activities.

11

Table of Contents

Fixed-price contracts are typically (i) fixed-price, (ii) fixed-price-incentive fee, or (iii) fixed-price level of effort contracts. For fixed-price contracts, Aerojet Rocketdyne performs work for a fixed price and realizes all of the profit or loss resulting from variations in costs during contract performance. For fixed-price-incentive contracts, Aerojet Rocketdyne receives increased or decreased fees or profits based upon actual performance against established targets or other criteria. For fixed-price level of effort contracts, Aerojet Rocketdyne generally receives a structured fixed price per labor hour, dependent upon the customer’s labor hour needs. All fixed-price contracts present the risk of unreimbursed cost overruns potentially resulting in losses.

Cost-reimbursable contracts are typically (i) cost plus fixed fee, (ii) cost plus incentive fee, or (iii) cost plus award fee contracts. For cost plus fixed fee contracts, Aerojet Rocketdyne typically receives reimbursement of its costs, to the extent the costs are allowable under contractual and regulatory provisions, in addition to receiving a fixed fee. For cost plus incentive fee contracts and cost plus award fee contracts, Aerojet Rocketdyne receives adjustments to the contract fee, within designated limits, based on actual results as compared to contractual targets for factors such as cost, performance, quality, and schedule.

Some programs under contract have product life cycles exceeding ten years. It is typical for U.S. government propulsion contracts to be of relatively small contract value during development phases that can last from two to five years, followed by low-rate and then full-rate production, where annual funding can grow significantly.

Government Contracts and Regulations

U.S. government contracts generally are subject to Federal Acquisition Regulations (“FAR”), agency-specific regulations that supplement FAR, such as the DoD’s Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations, and other applicable laws and regulations. These regulations impose a broad range of requirements, many of which are unique to government contracting, including various procurement, import and export, security, contract pricing and cost, contract termination and adjustments, mandatory disclosure, and audit requirements. A contractor’s failure to comply with these regulations and requirements could result in reductions of the value of contracts, contract modifications or termination, inability to bill and collect receivables from customers, and the assessment of penalties and fines that could lead to suspension or debarment from government contracting or subcontracting. In addition, government contractors are also subject to routine audits, reviews, and investigations by the Defense Contract Audit Agency (“DCAA”), the Defense Contract Management Agency, and other similar U.S. government agencies. Such reviews include but are not limited to a contractor’s contract performance, compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and standards as well as the review of the adequacy of a contractor’s accounting systems, purchasing systems, property management systems, estimating systems, earned value management systems, and material management and accounting system.

Regulations for U.S. government contracts provide for the cost of restructuring activities occurring after a business combination as unallowable costs unless, we can demonstrate through an external restructure cost and savings proposal that the savings as a result of the business combination will be at least twice the external restructuring costs.

The U.S. government’s ability to unilaterally modify or terminate a contract or to discontinue funding for a particular program at any time could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows. The cancellation of a contract, if terminated for cause, could also subject us to liability for the excess costs incurred by the U.S. government in procuring undelivered items from another source. If terminated for convenience, our recovery of costs would be limited to amounts already incurred or committed (including severance costs for terminated employees), and our profit would be limited based on the work completed prior to termination.

12

Table of Contents

Backlog

A summary of our backlog is as follows:

Total backlog includes both funded backlog (unfilled orders for which funding is authorized, appropriated and contractually obligated by the customer) and unfunded backlog (firm orders for which funding has not been appropriated). Indefinite delivery and quantity contracts and unexercised options are not reported in total backlog. Backlog is subject to funding delays or program restructurings/cancellations which are beyond our control. Of our November 30, 2013 total contract backlog, approximately 51%, or approximately $1,293 million, is expected to be filled within one year.

Seasonality

Appropriations bills for both DoD and NASA have become increasingly difficult for Congress to pass by the start of the GFY resulting in funding delays to many of our customers and, in turn, delays in contract awards received by us. This generally leads to a decrease in the number of new and follow-on awards in the first half of the fiscal year and an increase during the second half, which translate to varying levels of uncertainty in the timing of annual awards received by Aerojet Rocketdyne.

Research and Development

We view research and development efforts as critical to maintaining our leadership position in markets in which we compete. We maintain an active research and development effort supported primarily by customer funding. We believe that some customer-funded research and development expenditures that are subject to contract specifications may become key programs in the future. We believe customer-funded research and development activities are vital to our ability to compete for contracts and to enhance our technology base and future revenue growth.

Our company-funded research and development efforts include expenditures for technical activities that are vital to the development of new products, services, processes or techniques, as well as those expenses for significant improvements to existing products or processes.

The following table summarizes our research and development expenditures during the past three fiscal years:

Suppliers, Raw Materials and Seasonality

The national aerospace supply base continues to consolidate due to economic, environmental, and marketplace circumstances beyond our control. The loss of key qualified suppliers of technologies, components, and materials can cause significant disruption to our program performance and cost.

13

Table of Contents

Availability of raw materials and supplies has been generally sufficient. We sometimes are dependent, for a variety of reasons, upon sole-source or qualified suppliers and have, in some instances in the past, experienced difficulties meeting production and delivery obligations because of delays in delivery or reliance on such suppliers. We closely monitor sources of supply to ensure adequate raw materials and other supplies needed in our manufacturing processes are available. Further, as a U.S. government contractor, we are often required to procure materials from suppliers capable of meeting rigorous customer and government specifications. As market conditions change for these companies, they often discontinue materials with low sales volumes or profit margins. We are often forced to either qualify new materials or pay higher prices to maintain the supply. Although to date we have been successful in establishing replacement materials and securing customer funding to address specific qualification needs of the programs, we may be unable to continue to do so.

The supply of ammonium perchlorate, a principal raw material used in solid propellant, is limited to a single source that supplies the entire domestic solid propellant industry and actual pricing is based on the total industry demand. The slowdown and final close out of the Space Shuttle Program has reduced the total national demand, resulting in significant unit price increases. Pricing has stabilized with recent decisions from NASA to continue the Space Launch System Heavy Lift Vehicle program and the DoD to require the use of domestic ammonium perchlorate. In the majority of our contracts, we anticipated this price increase and incorporated abnormal escalation pricing language into our proposals and contracts.

We are also impacted, as is the rest of the industry, by fluctuations in the prices and lead-times of raw materials used in production on various fixed-price contracts, particularly on multi-year programs. We continue to experience volatility in the price and lead-times of certain commodity metals, primarily steel and aluminum. The pricing of titanium mill products have reduced recently but remain well above historical levels. Additionally, we may not be able to continue to negotiate with our customers for economic and/or price adjustment clauses tied to commodity indices to reduce program impact. The DoD also continues to rigorously enforce the provisions of the “Berry Amendment” which imposes a requirement to procure certain strategic materials critical to national security only from U.S. sources. While availability has not been a significant issue, cost remains a concern as this industry continues to quote “price in effect” at time of shipment terms, increasing the cost risk to our programs.

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

Intellectual Property

Where appropriate, Aerojet Rocketdyne obtains patents in the U.S. and other countries for new and useful processes, machines, manufacture or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvements thereof relating to its products and services. We use patents selectively both (i) to protect from unauthorized third party making, using, selling, offering to sell and importing the claimed inventions of the patents, where the inventions might be accessible to competitors, such as mechanical designs or structures and (ii) to establish that we have made inventions in particular areas of relevant technologies and thus can prevent competitors from successfully claiming exclusive rights in the claimed inventions. A patent is maintained as long as the underlying invention has value in the market which we compete. A patented invention incorporated into a product sold will typically be maintained to its expiration, which typically is approximately 20 years. We also rely on trade secret protection for financial, technical and personnel information that provides an economic competitive advantage in the markets in which we compete. Trade secrets that are protected under applicable state and federal laws are maintained in perpetuity. We rely more extensively on trade secrets to protect specific information whose detail are not readily accessible to competitors, such as business strategies, manufacturing procedures, and personnel information. As our products and services typically embody complex systems that include many technologies, no single patent or trade secret is material to us.

Real Estate

We own approximately 11,900 acres of land in the Sacramento metropolitan area which we refer to as the Sacramento Land. Acquired in the early 1950s for our aerospace and defense operations, there were large portions used solely to provide safe buffer zones around hazardous operations. Modern changes in propulsion tech-

14

Table of Contents

nology coupled with the relocation of certain of our propulsion operations led us to determine large portions of the Sacramento Land were no longer needed for operations. Consequently, our plan has been to reposition this excess Sacramento Land, re-entitle it for new uses, and explore various opportunities to optimize its value.

Approximately 6,000 acres have been deemed excess, and we are in the process of entitling this excess land for new development opportunities under the brand name “Easton”. Within Easton, we currently have approximately 1,450 acres that are fully entitled and approximately 2,940 acres have received “limited entitlements.” Our entitlement efforts are expected to increase the land value over its current value. The term “entitlements” is generally used to denote the set of regulatory approvals required to allow land to be zoned for new requested uses. Required regulatory approvals vary with each jurisdiction and each zoning proposal and may include permits, land use master plans, zoning designations, state and federal environmental documentation, and other regulatory approvals unique to the land.

Easton Development Company, LLC continues to execute entitlement and pre-development activities, and to explore how to maximize value from Easton. Value enhancement may include outright sales, and/or joint ventures with real estate developers, residential builders, and/or other third parties. Those parcels of land that have obtained the necessary entitlements for development or are otherwise suitable for sale were transferred to this subsidiary. Additional land may be transferred in the future as these or other requirements are achieved.

Easton is located 15 miles east of downtown Sacramento, California along U.S. Highway 50, a key growth corridor in the region. We believe Easton has several competitive advantages over other areas, including several miles of freeway accessible frontage, one of the largest single-owner land tracts suitable for development in the Sacramento region, and desirable “in-fill” location surrounded by residential and business properties. The master plan reflects our efforts to make Easton one of the finest master-planned communities in the country. Easton will include a broad range of housing, office, industrial, retail, and recreational uses. This broad range of land uses will ensure long-term value enhancement of our excess land.

We are continuing to work with the City of Folsom on completing the balance of the required entitlements for the Hillsborough at Easton project, including the final finance program, total impact fees and development agreement. These efforts were substantially completed in 2013, and the finance plan and total impact fees were approved by the Folsom City Council in late January 2014. These terms will be incorporated in final approvals by the Folsom City Council and are expected in early 2014.

In 2013, we also continued our efforts to entitle our remaining Easton project with the City of Rancho Cordova, Westborough at Easton, which comprises 1,659 acres. These efforts will continue in 2014. During 2013, we also made important strides in discussions with the City of Rancho Cordova regarding total impact fees and final terms surrounding a final development agreement for the Rio del Oro at Easton project.

The new housing market and local economy in the Sacramento region are in recovery and we expect this trend to continue. We believe the long-term prospect for the Sacramento region represents an attractive and affordable alternative to the San Francisco Bay Area and other large metropolitan areas of California. We believe the Sacramento area demographics and the long-term real estate market fundamentals support our objective of creating value through new entitlements and the creation of Easton.

15

Table of Contents

The Sacramento Land, including Easton, is summarized below (in acres):

Leasing & Other Real Estate

We currently lease approximately 370,000 square feet of office space in Sacramento to various third parties. These leasing activities generated $5.7 million in revenue in fiscal 2013.

We also own approximately 580 acres of land in Chino Hills, California. This property was used for the manufacture and testing of ordnance. With the sale of our ordnance business in the mid-1990s, we closed this facility and commenced clean-up of the site. We continue to work with state regulators and the City of Chino Hills to complete those efforts.

Environmental Matters

Our current and former business operations are subject to, and affected by, federal, state, local, and foreign environmental laws and regulations relating to the discharge, treatment, storage, disposal, investigation, and

16

Table of Contents

remediation of certain materials, substances, and wastes. Our policy is to conduct our business with due regard for the preservation and protection of the environment. We continually assess compliance with these regulations and we believe our current operations are in compliance with all applicable environmental laws and regulations.

A summary of our environmental reserves, recoverable amounts, and range of liability as of November 30, 2013 is presented below:

Operation and maintenance costs associated with environmental compliance and management of contaminated sites are a normal, recurring part of operations. Most of our environmental costs are incurred by our Aerospace and Defense segment, and certain of these costs are allowable and allocable as reimbursable general and administrative costs allocated to our contracts with the U.S. government or reimbursable by Northrop, subject to annual and cumulative limitations. See Note 8(d) in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

On January 12, 1999, Aerojet Rocketdyne and the U.S. government implemented the October 1997 Agreement in Principle (“Global Settlement”) resolving certain prior environmental and facility disagreements, with retroactive effect to December 1, 1998. Under the Global Settlement, Aerojet Rocketdyne and the U.S. government resolved disagreements about an appropriate cost-sharing ratio with respect to the cleanup costs of the environmental contamination at the Sacramento and Azusa sites. The Global Settlement cost-sharing ratio does not have a defined term over which costs will be recovered. Additionally, in conjunction with the sale of the EIS business in 2001, Aerojet Rocketdyne entered into an agreement with Northrop (the “Northrop Agreement”) whereby Aerojet Rocketdyne is reimbursed by Northrop for a portion of environmental expenditures eligible for recovery under the Global Settlement, subject to annual and cumulative limitations. As of November 30, 2013, $72.0 million remained for future cost reimbursements from Northrop and the current annual billing limitation to Northrop is $6.0 million.

Pursuant to the Global Settlement, prior to the third quarter of fiscal 2010, approximately 12% of environmental costs related to Aerojet Rocketdyne’s Sacramento site and its former Azusa site were charged to the consolidated statements of operations. Subsequent to the third quarter of fiscal 2010, because our estimated environmental costs have reached the reimbursement ceiling under the Northrop Agreement, approximately 37% of such costs will not be reimbursable and were therefore directly charged to the consolidated statements of operations. However, we are seeking to amend our agreement with the U.S. government to increase the amount allocable to U.S. government contracts. There can be no assurances that we will be successful in this pursuit.

Allowable environmental costs are charged to our contracts as the costs are incurred. Aerojet Rocketdyne’s mix of contracts can affect the actual reimbursement made by the U.S. government. Because these costs are recovered through forward-pricing arrangements, the ability of Aerojet Rocketdyne to continue recovering these costs from the U.S. government depends on Aerojet Rocketdyne’s sustained business volume under U.S. government contracts and programs and the relative size of Aerojet Rocketdyne’s commercial business. Under the Global Settlement agreement, environmental costs are allocable to the newly acquired business. Additionally, we are reviewing the percentage of Global Settlement environmental costs allocable to our Aerojet Rocketdyne business and Northrop. Any change in the percentage allocable will require approval from the U.S. government and if received, this change may materially and favorably affect our results of operations in the period received along with future periods.

The inclusion of such environmental costs in our contracts with the U.S. government does impact our competitive pricing and earnings. We believe that this impact is partially mitigated by driving improvements and efficiencies across our operations and growing our manufacturing base as well as our ability to deliver innovative and quality products to our customers.

17

Table of Contents

Under existing U.S. environmental laws, a Potentially Responsible Party (“PRP”) is jointly and severally liable, and therefore we are potentially liable to the government or other third parties for the full cost of remediating the contamination at our facilities or former facilities or at third-party sites where we have been designated as a PRP by the Environmental Protection Agency or state environmental agencies. The nature of environmental investigation and cleanup activities requires significant management judgment to determine the timing and amount of any estimated future costs that may be required for remediation measures. Further, environmental standards change from time to time. However, we perform quarterly reviews of these matters and accrue for costs associated with environmental remediation when it becomes probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the liability, usually based on proportionate sharing, can be reasonably estimated. These liabilities have not been discounted to their present value as the timing of cash payments is not fixed or reliably determinable.

We did not incur material capital expenditures for environmental control facilities in fiscal 2013 nor do we anticipate any material capital expenditures in fiscal 2014 and 2015. See Management’s Discussion and Analysis in Part II, Item 7 “Environmental Matters” of this Report for additional information.

Additional information on the risks related to environmental matters can be found under “Risk Factors” in Item 1A. of this Report, including the material effects on compliance with environmental regulations that may impact our competitive position and operating results.

Employees

As of November 30, 2013, 14% of our 5,386 employees were covered by collective bargaining agreements. We believe that our relations with our employees and unions are good.

Future reductions or changes in U.S. government spending could adversely affect our financial results.

Our primary aerospace and defense customers include the DoD and its agencies, NASA, and the prime contractors that supply products to these customers. We are seeing more opportunities for commercial in-launch and in-space business. In addition, sales to our aerospace and defense customers that provide products to international customers continue to grow. However, we rely on particular levels of U.S. government spending on propulsion systems for defense, space and armament systems for precision tactical weapon systems and munitions applications, and our backlog depends, in a large part, on continued funding by the U.S. government for the programs in which we are involved. These spending levels are not generally correlated with any specific economic cycle, but rather follow the cycle of general public policy and political support for this type of spending. Moreover, although our contracts often contemplate that our services will be performed over a period of several years, the U.S. President must propose and Congress must appropriate funds for a given program each GFY and may significantly change, increase, reduce or eliminate, funding for a program.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 set overall discretionary spending levels for GFY 2014 and eased sequestration cuts to the DoD and other federal agencies (e.g., NASA) for GFY 2014 and 2015, paving the way for an eventual agreement on GFY 2014 Appropriations for all federal agencies. In relatively short order, Congress was able to pass the Consolidated (so-called “Omnibus”) Appropriation bill for GFY 2014. The Defense portion of the bill was below the President’s requested level of funding for GFY 2014 but roughly the same as the post-sequester GFY 2013 DoD Appropriation levels. Funding for NASA was also below the President’s Budget Request for GFY 2014 but up from the post-sequester GFY 2013 NASA Appropriation level.

Despite overall U.S. government budget spending pressures, we believe we are well-positioned to benefit from spending in DoD and NASA priority areas. This view reflects the DoD’s strategic guidance report released in January 2012 which affirms support for many of our core programs and points toward continued DoD investment in: access to space — in order to ensure access to this highly congested and contested “global commons”; missile defense — in order to protect the homeland, counter weapons of mass destruction and enhance space-based capabilities; and power projection by tactical missile systems.

During 2013, Congress began consideration of a new NASA Authorization Act, authorizing NASA funding for the next several years, starting with GFY 2014. Ultimately, Congress did not complete action on a new

18

Table of Contents

NASA Authorization in 2013, but will likely resume consideration in 2014. In 2010, the NASA Authorization Act, which remains in effect, impacted GFYs 2011-2013. NASA has identified the SLS program as one of its top priorities in the NASA portion of the GFY 2014 President’s Budget Request. The SLS program also enjoys wide bipartisan support in both chambers of Congress. We maintain a strong relationship with NASA and our propulsion systems have been powering NASA launch vehicles and spacecraft since the inception of the U.S. Space Program. Our booster and upper stage propulsion systems are currently baselined on the new SLS vehicle and both upper stage and booster engines are in development for future SLS variants. Due to the retirement of the space shuttle fleet, U.S. astronauts are now dependent on Russian Soyuz flights for access to the ISS for the better part of this decade. NASA has indicated that it is working to re-establish U.S. manned space capability as soon as possible through development of the commercial cargo and crew ISS resupply capability and the heavy lift SLS designed for manned deep space exploration. In both instances, we have significant propulsion content.

A decrease in DoD and/or NASA expenditures, the elimination or curtailment of a material program in which we are involved, or changes in payment patterns of our customers as a result of changes in U.S. government spending, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

The cancellation or material modification of one or more significant contracts could adversely affect our financial results.

Sales, directly and indirectly, to the U.S. government and its agencies accounted for approximately 95% of our total net sales in fiscal 2013. Our contracts typically permit the U.S. government to unilaterally modify or terminate a contract or to discontinue funding for a particular program at any time. The cancellation of a contract, if terminated for cause, could also subject us to liability for the excess costs incurred by the U.S. government in procuring undelivered items from another source. If terminated for convenience, our recovery of costs would be limited to amounts already incurred or committed (including severance costs for terminated employees), and our profit would be limited based on the work completed prior to termination.

Our business could be adversely affected by a negative audit by the U.S. government.

U.S. government agencies, including the DCAA and various agency Inspectors General, routinely audit and investigate government contractors. These agencies review a contractor’s performance under its contracts, cost structure, and compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and standards. The U.S. government also reviews the adequacy of, and a contractor’s compliance with, its internal control systems and policies, including the contractor’s accounting systems, purchasing systems, property management systems, estimating systems, earned value management systems, and material management system. Any costs found to be misclassified may be subject to repayment. If an audit or investigation uncovers improper or illegal activities, we may be subject to civil or criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines, and suspension or prohibition from doing business with the U.S. government. In addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against us.

If we experience cost overruns on our contracts, we would have to absorb the excess costs which could adversely affect our financial results and our ability to win new contracts.

In fiscal 2013, approximately 46% of our net sales were from fixed-price contracts, most of which are in mature production mode. Under fixed-price contracts, we agree to perform specified work for a fixed price and realize all of the profit or loss resulting from variations in the costs of performing the contract. As a result, all fixed-price contracts involve the inherent risk of unreimbursed cost overruns. To the extent we were to incur unanticipated cost overruns on a program or platform subject to a fixed-price contract, our profitability would be adversely affected. Future profitability is subject to risks including the ability of suppliers to deliver components of acceptable quality on schedule and the successful implementation of automated tooling in production processes.

In fiscal 2013, approximately 49% of our net sales were from cost reimbursable contracts. Under cost reimbursable contracts, we agree to be reimbursed for allowable costs and be paid a fee. If our costs are in excess of the final target cost, fees, and our margin may be adversely affected. If our costs exceed authorized contract funding or they do not qualify as allowable costs under applicable regulations, we will not be reimbursed for those costs. Cost overruns may adversely affect our financial performance and our ability to win new contracts.

19

Table of Contents

If our subcontractors or suppliers fail to perform their contractual obligations, our contract performance and our ability to win new contracts may be adversely affected.

We rely on subcontractors to perform a portion of the services we agree to provide our customers and on suppliers to provide raw materials and component parts for our contract performance. A failure by one or more of our subcontractors or suppliers to satisfactorily provide on a timely basis the agreed-upon services or supplies may affect our ability to perform our contractual obligations. Deficiencies in the performance of our subcontractors and suppliers could result in our customer terminating our contract for default. A termination for default could expose us to liability and adversely affect our financial performance and our ability to win new contracts.

Our success and growth in our Aerospace and Defense segment depends on our ability to execute long-standing programs and periodically secure new contracts in a competitive environment.

Aerojet Rocketdyne’s revenue is primarily derived from long-standing contracts (often sole source) where Aerojet Rocketdyne is the long-term incumbent. The challenge for Aerojet Rocketdyne is to successfully utilize its technical, engineering, manufacturing, and management skills to execute these programs for the customer, to continue to innovate and refine its solutions, and to offer the customer increasing affordability in an era of fiscal restraint. If Aerojet Rocketdyne is unable to successfully execute these long-standing programs, our ability to retain existing customers and attract new customers may be impaired.

In addition, in sectors where there is competition, it can be intense. Many of our competitors have financial, technical, production, and other resources substantially greater than ours. Although the downsizing of the defense industry in the early 1990s resulted in a reduction in the aggregate number of competitors, the consolidation has also strengthened the capabilities of some of the remaining competitors. The U.S. government also has its own manufacturing capabilities in some areas. We may be unable to compete successfully with our competitors and our inability to do so could result in a decrease in sales, profits, and cash flows that we historically have generated from certain contracts. Further, the U.S. government may open to competition programs on which we are currently the sole supplier, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

Our Aerospace and Defense segment is subject to procurement and other related laws and regulations inherent in contracting with the U.S. government, non-compliance with which could adversely affect our financial results.

In the performance of contracts with the U.S. government, we operate in a highly regulated environment and are routinely audited and reviewed by the U.S. government and its agencies, such as the DCAA. These agencies review performance under our contracts, our cost structure and our compliance with applicable laws, regulations and standards, as well as the adequacy of, and our compliance with, our internal control systems and policies. Systems that are subject to review include, but are not limited to, our accounting systems, purchasing systems, property management systems, estimating systems, earned value management systems, and material management and accounting system. Any costs ultimately found to be unallowable or improperly allocated to a specific contract will not be reimbursed or must be refunded if already reimbursed. If an audit uncovers improper or illegal activities, we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties, sanctions or suspension or debarment from doing business with the U.S. government. Whether or not illegal activities are alleged, the U.S. government also has the ability to decrease or withhold certain payments when it deems systems subject to its review to be inadequate. In addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against us. If such actions were to result in suspension or debarment, this could have a material adverse effect on our business.

These laws and regulations provide for ongoing audits and reviews of incurred costs as well as contract procurement, performance and administration. The U.S. government may, if it deems appropriate, conduct an investigation into possible illegal or unethical activity in connection with these contracts. Investigations of this nature are common in the aerospace and defense industry, and lawsuits may result. In addition, the U.S. government and its principal prime contractors periodically investigate the financial viability of its contractors and subcontractors as part of its risk assessment process associated with the award of new contracts. If the U.S. government or one or more prime contractors were to determine that we were not financially viable, our ability to continue to act as a government contractor or subcontractor would be impaired.

20

Table of Contents

Aerojet Rocketdyne’s international sales are subject to applicable laws relating to export controls, the violation of which could adversely affect its operations.

A portion of the Aerojet Rocketdyne activities are subject to export control regulation by the U.S. Department of State under the U.S. Arms Export Control Act and International Traffic in Arms Regulations (“ITAR”). The export of certain defense-related products, hardware, software, services and technical data is regulated by the State Department’s Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance (“DTCC”) under ITAR. DTCC administers the State Department’s authority under ITAR to impose civil penalties and other administrative sanctions for violations, including debarment from engaging in the export of defense articles or defense services. Violations of ITAR could result in significant sanctions including fines, more onerous compliance requirements, debarments from export privileges or loss of authorizations needed to conduct aspects of the Aerojet Rocketdyne’s international business.

In November 2011, DTCC informed UTC that it considers certain of UTC’s voluntary disclosures filed since 2005 to reflect deficiencies warranting penalties and sanctions. On June 28, 2012, UTC entered into a Consent Agreement (the “UTC Consent Agreement”) with DTCC to resolve a Proposed Charging Letter that references approximately 45 of UTC’s previous disclosures. The UTC Consent Agreement, which applies to the Rocketdyne Business, has a four-year term, and provides that UTC will: (1) pay a civil penalty of up to $55 million; (2) appoint, subject to DTCC approval, an outside special compliance official to oversee the compliance by UTC and its subsidiaries and divisions, including the Rocketdyne Business, with the UTC Consent Agreement and ITAR; (3) continue and undertake additional remedial actions to strengthen ITAR compliance, with emphasis on human resources and organization, training, automation, and security of electronic data; and (4) sponsor two outside ITAR compliance audits for UTC and its subsidiaries and divisions, including the Rocketdyne Business, during the term of the UTC Consent Agreement.

In connection with the Acquisition, the DTCC agreed to release the Rocketdyne Business from the UTC Consent Agreement upon consummation of the Acquisition on the condition that we agreed to provide to the DTCC (i) our plan to integrate the Rocketdyne Business into our ITAR compliance program and (ii) an audit of the integration one year after closing the Acquisition. Further, UTC has agreed to reimburse us for any and all costs we incur to comply with these requirements. In connection with the closing of the Acquisition, we provided to the DTCC a letter committing to the DTCC’s conditions. However, there can be no assurance that we will be successful in integrating the Rocketdyne Business into our ITAR compliance program or to prevent any further ITAR violations. A future violation of ITAR could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The acquisition of the 50% ownership of RD Amross is subject to a number of conditions which could delay or materially adversely affect the timing of its completion, or prevent it from occurring.

On June 12, 2013, GenCorp and UTC entered into the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement, which amended and restated the Original Purchase Agreement, pursuant to which GenCorp and UTC agreed to the Acquisition, subject to the terms and conditions therein. The Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement modified the Original Purchase Agreement to provide, among other things, that (i) GenCorp is not obligated to acquire the 50% membership interest of RD Amross, a Delaware limited liability company owned by UTC or the portion of the UTC business that markets and supports the sale of RD 180 engines (the “RDA Acquisition”) until certain conditions have been met, and (ii) $55 million of the Acquisition purchase price shall be payable to UTC upon such time as the RDA Acquisition may occur. Pursuant to the terms of the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement, either party to such agreement may terminate the obligations to consummate the RDA Acquisition on or after June 12, 2015; provided, however, that such termination date may be extended for up to four additional periods of three months each (with the final termination date extended until June 12, 2016). Subject to the terms of Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement, in order to extend the termination date, either party may request the extension by providing written notice to the other party at least five business days prior to the termination date, provided that the requesting party must have a reasonable belief at the time such notice is given that a certain authorization for completion of the RDA Acquisition from the Russian government will be forthcoming.

In addition, RD Amross is the subject of an investigation by the FTC into the exclusivity arrangements relating to the sales and purchases of the RD180 engine between RD Amross and its customer, ULA. Orbital has also

21

Table of Contents

sued RD Amross and ULA in the Eastern District of Virginia, Orbital Sciences Corporation v. United Launch Alliance, LLC and RD Amross, LLC, Case No. 1:13CV753-LMB, alleging unfair competition and restraint of trade based on those exclusivity arrangements. Orbital seeks a permanent injunction against the exclusivity arrangements and alleges damages of at least $515 million, which it is seeking to treble up to $1.5 billion. Under the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement, we have received a limited indemnity from UTC for the FTC investigation and Orbital lawsuit. If GenCorp completes the acquisition of RD Amross, an adverse outcome in either or both of these proceedings that results in liability in excess of the indemnification coverage under the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

There are a number of risks and uncertainties relating to the RDA Acquisition. The RDA Acquisition may not be consummated in the time frame or manner currently anticipated, if at all, including the receipt of certain Russian governmental regulatory approvals. There can be no assurance that such approvals will be obtained.

We may face integration difficulties and may be unable to integrate the Rocketdyne Business into our existing operations successfully or realize the anticipated benefits of the Acquisition.

We have devoted and will continue to devote significant management attention and resources to integrating the operations and business practices of the Rocketdyne Business with our existing operations and business practices. Potential difficulties we may encounter as part of the integration process include the following:

These potential difficulties could adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with customers, suppliers, employees and other constituencies and the ability to achieve the anticipated benefits of the Acquisition, and could reduce our earnings or otherwise adversely affect our operations and our financial results.

Our ability to operate our business effectively may suffer if we do not in a timely and cost effective manner establish our own financial, administrative, and other support functions, related to the acquisition of the Rocketdyne Business and we cannot assure you that the transitional services UTC agreed to provide us will be sufficient for our needs.

In connection with the acquisition of the Rocketdyne Business, we have entered into a transition services agreement with UTC under which UTC is providing certain transitional services to us, including supply chain, information technology, accounting, human resources, treasury, and other services for a period of time. These services may not be sufficient to meet our needs. After our agreement with UTC expires, if we have not established our own support services related to the Acquisition, we may not be able to obtain these services at as favorable prices or on as favorable terms, if at all.

22

Table of Contents

Any failure or significant downtime in UTC’s financial, administrative, or other support systems during the transitional period could negatively impact our results of operations or prevent us from paying our suppliers and employees, or performing administrative or other services on a timely basis, which could negatively affect our results of operations.

Our future results could suffer if we cannot effectively manage our expanded operations as a result of the Acquisition.

The size of our operations has increased significantly following the Acquisition. Our future success depends, in part, upon our ability to manage the expanded operations, which will pose substantial challenges for management, including challenges related to the management and monitoring of new operations and associated increased costs and complexity. There can be no assurance that we will be successful or that we will realize any operating efficiencies, cost savings, revenue enhancements or other benefits currently anticipated from the Acquisition.

We have incurred substantial expenses related to the Acquisition and may incur significant expenses in the future related to the integration of the Rocketdyne Business.

We have already incurred substantial expenses in connection with the Acquisition of the Rocketdyne Business. We have incurred $31.6 million of expenses related to the Acquisition through November 30, 2013. There are a large number of processes, policies, procedures, operations, technologies and systems that must be integrated, including purchasing, accounting and finance, sales, payroll, pricing, marketing and benefits. While we have assumed that a certain level of expenses will be incurred, there are many factors beyond our control that could affect the total amount or the timing of the integration expenses. Moreover, many of the expenses that will be incurred are, by their nature, difficult to estimate. These integration expenses may result in us taking significant charges against earnings in future periods related to the Acquisition, and the amount and timing of such charges are uncertain at present.

The increase in our leverage and debt service obligations as a result of the Acquisition may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We have incurred additional indebtedness in order to finance the Acquisition. On January 28, 2013, we issued $460.0 million in aggregate principal amount of our 7.125% Second-Priority Senior Secured Notes (“7  ¹/₈% Notes”). The 7  ¹/₈% Notes were sold to qualified institutional buyers in accordance with Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) and outside the U.S. in accordance with Regulation S under the Securities Act. We used the net proceeds of the 7 ¹/₈% Notes offering to fund, in part, the Acquisition, and to pay related fees and expenses. See Note 6 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Following the Acquisition, we have $699.2 million of outstanding indebtedness as of November 30, 2013, an increase of $450.5 million as compared with our level of outstanding indebtedness as of November 30, 2012. Our maintenance of higher levels of indebtedness could have adverse consequences including impairing our ability to obtain additional financing in the future.

Our ability to meet our expenses and debt obligations will depend on our future performance, which will be affected by financial, business, economic, regulatory and other factors. Furthermore, our operations may not generate sufficient cash flows to enable us to meet our expenses and service our debt. As a result, we may need to enter into new financing arrangements to obtain the necessary funds. If we determine that it is necessary to seek additional funding for any reason, we may not be able to obtain such funding or, if funding is available, obtain it on acceptable terms. If we fail to make a payment on our debt, we could be in default on such debt, and this default could cause us to be in default on our other outstanding indebtedness.

23

Table of Contents

We may expand our operations through acquisitions, which may divert management’s attention and expose us to unanticipated liabilities and costs. Also, acquisitions may increase our non-reimbursable costs. We may experience difficulties integrating any acquired operations, and we may incur costs relating to acquisitions that are never consummated.

Our business strategy may lead us to expand our Aerospace and Defense segment through acquisitions. However, our ability to consummate any future acquisitions on terms that are favorable to us may be limited by government regulations, the number of attractive acquisition targets, internal demands on our resources, and our ability to obtain financing. Our success in integrating newly acquired businesses will depend upon our ability to retain key personnel, avoid diversion of management’s attention from operational matters, integrate general and administrative services and key information processing systems and, where necessary, re-qualify our customer programs. In addition, future acquisitions could result in the incurrence of additional debt, costs, and/or contingent liabilities. We may also incur costs and divert management attention to acquisitions that are never consummated. Integration of acquired operations may take longer, or be more costly or disruptive to our business, than originally anticipated.

Although we undertake a due diligence investigation of each business that we have acquired or may acquire, there may be liabilities of the acquired companies that we fail to, or were unable to, discover during the due diligence investigation and for which we, as a successor owner, may be responsible. In connection with acquisitions, we generally seek to minimize the impact of these types of potential liabilities through indemnities and warranties from the seller. However, these indemnities and warranties, if obtained, may not fully cover the liabilities due to limitations in scope, amount or duration, financial limitations of the indemnitor or warrantor, or other reasons.

Our inability to adapt to rapid technological changes could impair our ability to remain competitive.

The aerospace and defense industry continues to undergo rapid and significant technological development. Our competitors may implement new technologies before us, allowing them to provide more effective products at more competitive prices. Future technological developments could:

Our business and operations would be adversely impacted in the event of a failure of our information technology infrastructure or adversely impacted by a successful cyber-attack.

We rely upon the capacity, reliability and security of our information technology hardware and software infrastructure and our ability to expand and update this infrastructure in response to our changing needs. We are constantly updating our information technology infrastructure. Any failure to manage, expand and update our information technology infrastructure or any failure in the operation of this infrastructure could harm our business.

Despite our implementation of security measures, our systems are vulnerable to damages from cyber-attacks, computer viruses, natural disasters, unauthorized access and other similar disruptions. Any system failure, successful cyber-attack, accident or security breach could result in disruptions to our operations. To the extent that any disruptions or security breach results in a loss or damage to our data, inappropriate disclosure of confidential information, or negative publicity, it could harm our business. In addition, we may be required to incur significant costs to protect against damage caused by these disruptions or security breaches in the future.

24

Table of Contents

The integration of the Rocketdyne Business into our ERP system may adversely affect our business and results of operations or the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.

ERP integrations are complex and very time-consuming projects that involve substantial expenditures on system software and activities. If we do not effectively integrate the ERP system or if the system does not operate as intended, it could adversely affect financial reporting systems, our ability to produce financial reports, and/or the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. The integration of the Rocketdyne Business into our ERP solution is scheduled to be complete by January 1, 2015. Any extension beyond January 1, 2015 will result in us incurring additional implementation costs and require fees be paid to UTC for additional transitional services costs.

We may experience warranty claims for product failures, schedule delays or other problems with existing or new products and systems.

Many of the products we develop and manufacture are technologically advanced systems that must function under demanding operating conditions. Even though we believe that we employ sophisticated and rigorous design, manufacturing and testing processes and practices, we may not be able to successfully launch or manufacture our products on schedule or our products may not perform as intended.

If our products fail to perform adequately, some of our contracts require us to forfeit a portion of our expected profit, receive reduced payments, provide a replacement product or service or reduce the price of subsequent sales to the same customer. Performance penalties may also be imposed if we fail to meet delivery schedules or other measures of contract performance. We do not generally insure against potential costs resulting from any required remedial actions or costs or loss of sales due to postponement or cancellation of scheduled operations or product deliveries.

The release or explosion of dangerous materials used in our business could disrupt our operations and could adversely affect our financial results.

Our business operations involve the handling and production of potentially explosive materials and other dangerous chemicals, including materials used in rocket propulsion and explosive devices. Despite our use of specialized facilities to handle dangerous materials and intensive employee training programs, the handling and production of hazardous materials could result in incidents that temporarily shut down or otherwise disrupt our manufacturing operations and could cause production delays. It is possible that a release of these chemicals or an explosion could result in death or significant injuries to employees and others. Material property damage to us and third parties could also occur. The use of these products in applications by our customers could also result in liability if an explosion or fire were to occur. Any release or explosion could expose us to adverse publicity or liability for damages or cause production delays, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

Disruptions in the supply of key raw materials, difficulties in the supplier qualification process or increases in prices of raw materials could adversely affect our financial results.

We use a significant quantity of raw materials that are subject to market fluctuations and government regulations. Further, as a U.S. government contractor, we are often required to procure materials from suppliers capable of meeting rigorous customer and government specifications. As market conditions change for these companies, they often discontinue materials with low sales volumes or profit margins. We are often forced to either qualify new materials or pay higher prices to maintain the supply. Although to date we have been successful in establishing replacement materials and securing customer funding to address specific qualification needs of the programs, we may be unable to continue to do so.

The supply of ammonium perchlorate, a principal raw material used in solid propellant, is limited to a single source that supplies the entire domestic solid propellant industry and actual pricing is based on the total industry demand. The slowdown and final close out of the Space Shuttle Program has reduced the total national demand, resulting in significant unit price increases. Pricing has stabilized with recent decisions from NASA to continue the Space Launch System Heavy Lift Vehicle program and the DoD to require the use of domestic ammonium perchlorate. In the majority of our contracts, we anticipated this price increase and incorporated abnormal escalation pricing language into our proposals and contracts.

25

Table of Contents

We are also impacted, as is the rest of the industry, by fluctuations in the prices and lead-times of raw materials used in production on various fixed-price contracts, particularly on multi-year programs. We continue to experience volatility in the price and lead-times of certain commodity metals, primarily steel and aluminum. The schedules and pricing of titanium mill products have reduced recently but remain well above historical levels. Additionally, we may not be able to continue to negotiate with our customers for economic and/or price adjustment clauses tied to commodity indices to reduce program impact. The DoD also continues to rigorously enforce the provisions of the “Berry Amendment” which imposes a requirement to procure certain strategic materials critical to national security only from U.S. sources. While availability has not been a significant issue, cost remains a concern as this industry continues to quote “price in effect” at time of shipment terms, increasing the cost risk to our programs.

Prolonged disruptions in the supply of any of our key raw materials, difficulty qualifying new sources of supply, implementing use of replacement materials or new sources of supply, and/or a continuing volatility in the prices of raw materials could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

Our pension plans are currently underfunded and we expect to be required to make cash contributions in future periods, which may reduce the cash available for our businesses.

In November 2008, we decided to amend the defined benefit pension and benefits restoration plans to freeze future accruals under such plans. Effective February 1, 2009 and July 31, 2009, future benefit accruals for non-collective bargaining-unit employees and collective bargaining-unit employees were discontinued, respectively.

As of the last measurement date at November 30, 2013, our total defined benefit pension plan assets and unfunded pension obligation for our tax-qualified pension plan were approximately $1,258.4 million and $261.7 million, respectively. We do not expect to make any significant cash contributions to our government contractor business segment tax-qualified defined benefit pension plan until fiscal 2015, which are recoverable through our U.S government contracts (see below). Additionally, we do not expect to make any significant cash contributions to the GenCorp tax-qualified defined benefit pension plan until fiscal 2018 or later, which are not recoverable through our U.S. government contracts.

Further, with the Office of Federal Procurement Policy issuance of the final rule harmonizing Cost Accounting Standard (“CAS”) 412, Composition and Measurement of Pension Cost, and CAS 413, Adjustment and Allocation of Pension Cost, with the Pension Protection Act (the “PPA”), we will recover portions of any required pension funding through our government contracts. Approximately 91% of our unfunded pension benefit obligation as of November 30, 2013 is related to our government contracting Aerospace and Defense segment.

The PPA requires underfunded pension plans to improve their funding ratios based on the funded status of the plan as of specified measurement dates through contributions or application of prepayment credits. As of November 30, 2013, we have accumulated $30.6 million in prepayment credits as a result of advanced funding.

On July 6, 2012, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (“MAP-21”) was signed into law by the U.S. government. MAP-21, in part, provides temporary relief for employers who sponsor defined benefit pension plans related to funding contributions under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. Specifically, MAP-21 implemented a 25-year average interest rate corridor around the 24 month interest rate used for purposes of determining minimum funding obligations. This relief is expected to defer cash contributions until fiscal 2015.

The funded status of our pension plans may be adversely affected by the investment experience of the plans’ assets, by any changes in U.S. law and by changes in the statutory interest rates used by tax-qualified pension plans in the U.S. to calculate funding requirements. Accordingly, if the performance of our plans’ assets does not meet our assumptions, if there are changes to the Internal Revenue Service regulations or other applicable law or if other actuarial assumptions are modified, our future contributions to our underfunded pension plans could be higher than we expect.

The level of returns on retirement benefit plan assets, changes in interest rates, changes in legislation, and other factors affects our financial results.

The timing of recognition of pension expense or income in our financial statements differs from the timing of the required pension funding under PPA or the amount of funding that can be recorded in our overhead rates

26

Table of Contents

through our government contracting business. Our earnings are positively or negatively impacted by the amount of expense or income we record for our employee retirement benefit plans. We calculate the expense for the plans based on actuarial valuations. These valuations are based on assumptions that we make relating to financial market and other economic conditions. Changes in key economic indicators result in changes in the assumptions we use. The key assumptions used to estimate retirement benefit plan expense for the following year are the discount rate and expected long-term rate of return on plan assets. Our pension expense or income can also be affected by legislation and other government regulatory actions.

Although some of our environmental expenditures may be recoverable and we have established reserves, given the many uncertainties involved in assessing liability for environmental claims, our reserves may not be sufficient, which could adversely affect our financial results and cash flows.

As of November 30, 2013, the aggregate range of our estimated future environmental obligations was $171.3 million to $289.8 million and the accrued amount was $171.3 million. We believe the accrued amount for future remediation costs represents the costs that could be incurred by us over the contractual term, if any, or the next fifteen years of the estimated remediation, to the extent they are probable and reasonably estimable. However, in many cases the nature and extent of the required remediation has not yet been determined. Given the many uncertainties involved in assessing liability for environmental claims, our reserves may prove to be insufficient. We evaluate the adequacy of those reserves on a quarterly basis, and adjust them as appropriate. In addition, the reserves are based only on known sites and the known contamination at those sites. It is possible that additional sites needing remediation may be identified or that unknown contamination at previously identified sites may be discovered. It is also possible that the regulatory agencies may change clean-up standards for chemicals of concern such as ammonium perchlorate and trichloroethylene. This could lead to additional expenditures for environmental remediation in the future and, given the uncertainties involved in assessing liability for environmental claims, our reserves may prove to be insufficient.

Most of our environmental costs are incurred by our Aerospace and Defense segment, and certain of these costs are allowed to be included in our contracts with the U.S. government or reimbursable by Northrop. Prior to the third quarter of fiscal 2010, approximately 12% of environmental reserve adjustments related to our Sacramento site and our former Azusa site were charged to the consolidated statements of operations. Subsequent to the third quarter of fiscal 2010, because we reached the reimbursement ceiling under the Northrop Agreement on an accrual basis, approximately 37% of environmental reserve adjustments are expensed to the consolidated statements of operations. We are seeking to amend our agreement with the U.S. government to increase the amount allocable to our U.S. government contracts; however, there can be no assurances that we will be successful in this pursuit.

Our environmental expenses related to non-Aerojet Rocketdyne sites are generally not recoverable and a significant increase in these estimated environmental expenses could have a significant adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

Our operations and properties are currently the subject of significant environmental liabilities, and the numerous environmental and other government requirements to which we are subject may become more stringent in the future.

We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations that, among other things, require us to obtain permits to operate and install pollution control equipment and regulate the generation, storage, handling, transportation, treatment, and disposal of hazardous and solid wastes. These requirements may become more stringent in the future. Additional regulations dictate how and to what level we remediate contaminated soils and the level to which we are required to clean contaminated groundwater. These requirements may also become more stringent in the future. We may also be subject to fines and penalties relating to the operation of our existing and formerly owned businesses. We have been and are subject to toxic tort and asbestos lawsuits as well as other third-party lawsuits, due to either our past or present use of hazardous substances or the alleged on-site or off-site contamination of the environment through past or present operations. We may incur material costs in defending these claims and lawsuits and any similar claims and lawsuits that may arise in the future. Contamination at our current and former properties is subject to investigation and remediation requirements under federal, state and

27

Table of Contents

local laws and regulations, and the full extent of the required remediation has not yet been determined. Any adverse judgment or cash outlay could have a significant adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

We are from time to time subject to significant litigation, the outcome of which could adversely affect our financial results.

We and our subsidiaries are subject to material litigation. We may be unsuccessful in defending or pursuing these lawsuits or claims. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can be very costly and can divert management’s efforts. Adverse outcomes in litigation could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

We face certain significant risk exposures and potential liabilities that may not be adequately covered by indemnity or insurance.

A significant portion of our business relates to developing and manufacturing propulsion systems for defense and space applications, and armament systems for precision tactical weapon systems and munitions applications. New technologies may be untested or unproven. In addition, we may incur significant liabilities that are unique to our products and services. In some, but not all, circumstances, we may receive indemnification from the U.S. government. While we maintain insurance for certain risks, the amount of our insurance coverage may not be adequate to cover all claims or liabilities, and it is not possible to obtain insurance to protect against all operational risks and liabilities. Accordingly, we may be forced to bear substantial costs resulting from risks and uncertainties of our business, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

Our inability to protect our patents and proprietary rights could adversely affect our businesses’ prospects and competitive positions.

We seek to protect proprietary technology and inventions through patents and other proprietary-right protection. If we are unable to obtain or maintain these protections, we may not be able to prevent third parties from using our proprietary rights. In addition, we may incur significant expense in protecting our intellectual property.

We also rely on trade secrets, proprietary know-how and continuing technological innovation to remain competitive. We have taken measures to protect our trade secrets and know-how, including the use of confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants and advisors. These agreements may be breached and remedies for a breach may not be sufficient to compensate us for damages incurred. We generally control and limit access to our product documentation and other proprietary information. Other parties may independently develop our know-how or otherwise obtain access to our technology.

Business disruptions could seriously affect us.

Our business may be affected by disruptions including, but not limited to: threats to physical security of our facilities and employees, including senior executives; terrorist acts; information technology attacks or failures; damaging weather or other acts of nature; and pandemics or other public health crises. The costs related to these events may not be fully mitigated by insurance or other means. Disruptions could affect our internal operations or services provided to customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

If our operating subsidiaries do not generate sufficient cash flow or if they are not able to pay dividends or otherwise distribute their cash to us, or if we have insufficient funds on hand, we may not be able to service our debt.

All of the operations of our Aerospace and Defense and Real Estate segments are conducted through subsidiaries. Consequently, our cash flow and ability to service our debt obligations will be largely dependent upon the earnings and cash flows of our operating subsidiaries and the distribution of those earnings to us, or upon loans, advances or other payments made by these subsidiaries to us. The ability of our subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other payments or advances to us will depend upon their operating results and cash flows and will be subject to applicable laws and any contractual restrictions contained in the agreements governing their debt, if any.

28

Table of Contents

We have a substantial amount of debt. Our ability to operate is limited by the agreements governing our debt.

We have a substantial amount of debt for which we are required to make interest and principal payments. Interest on long-term financing is not a recoverable cost under our U.S. government contracts. As of November 30, 2013, we had $699.2 million of debt. Subject to the limits contained in some of the agreements governing our outstanding debt, we may incur additional debt in the future. Our maintenance of higher levels of indebtedness could have adverse consequences including impairing our ability to obtain additional financing in the future.

Our level of debt places significant demands on our cash resources, which could:

If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow to service our debt and fund our operating costs, our liquidity may be adversely affected.

We are obligated to comply with financial and other covenants outlined in our debt indentures and agreements that could restrict our operating activities. A failure to comply could result in a default under our senior credit facility entered into on November 18, 2011 (the “Senior Credit Facility”) with the lenders identified therein and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as administrative agent, which would, if not waived by the lenders which likely would come with substantial cost, accelerate the payment of our debt. A payment default under the Senior Credit Facility could result in cross defaults on our 7 ¹/₈% Notes and our 4.0625% Convertible Subordinated Debentures (“4 ¹/₁₆% Debentures”).

Our debt instruments generally contain various restrictive covenants which include, among others, provisions which may restrict our ability to:

Our secured debt also contains other customary covenants, including, among others, provisions:

29

Table of Contents

In addition, certain covenants in our bank facility require that we maintain certain financial ratios.

Based on our existing debt agreements, we were in compliance with our financial and non-financial covenants as of November 30, 2013. Any of the covenants described in this risk factor may restrict our operations and our ability to pursue potentially advantageous business opportunities. Our failure to comply with these covenants could also result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, could result in the acceleration of the Senior Credit Facility, the 7 ¹/₈% Notes, and the 4 ¹/₁₆% Debentures. In addition, our failure to pay principal and interest when due is a default under the Senior Credit Facility, and in certain cases, would cause cross defaults on the 7 ¹/₈% Notes and 4 ¹/₁₆% Debentures. We have limited collateral available for additional financing due to the fact that our indebtedness under the Senior Credit Facility is secured by (i) all equity interests owned or held by the Company, including interests in Easton and 66% of the voting stock (and 100% of the non-voting stock) of all present and future first-tier foreign subsidiaries of the Company and Aerojet Rocketdyne and (ii) substantially all of the tangible and intangible personal property and assets of the Company. In addition, our indebtedness under the Senior Credit Facility is secured by certain real property owned by the Company located in Orange, Virginia and Redmond, Washington. Except for certain real property located in Canoga Park, California acquired in connection with the Acquisition, the Company’s real property located in California, including the real estate holdings of Easton, is excluded from the collateral securing the Senior Credit Facility.

The real estate market involves significant risk, which could adversely affect our financial results.

Our real estate activities involve significant risks, which could adversely affect our financial results. We are subject to various risks, including the following:

Substantially all of our excess real estate, that we are in the process of entitling for new opportunities, is located in Sacramento County, California making us vulnerable to changes in economic and other conditions in that particular market.

As a result of the geographic concentration of our properties, our long-term real estate performance and the value of our properties will depend upon conditions in the Sacramento region, including:

30

Table of Contents

If unfavorable economic or other conditions continue in the region, our plans and business strategy could be adversely affected.

We may incur additional costs related to past or future divestitures, which could adversely affect our financial results.

In connection with our divestitures of the Fine Chemicals and GDX Automotive businesses in fiscal 2005 and fiscal 2004, respectively, we have incurred and may incur additional costs, including costs related to the closure of a manufacturing facility in Chartres, France. As part of these and other divestitures, we have provided customary indemnification to the purchasers for such matters as claims arising from the operation of the businesses prior to disposition, including income tax matters and the liability to investigate and remediate certain environmental contamination existing prior to disposition. These additional costs and the indemnification of the purchasers of our former or current businesses may require additional cash expenditures, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition, and/or cash flows.

In order to be successful, we must attract and retain key employees.

Our business has a continuing need to attract large numbers of skilled personnel, including personnel holding security clearances, to support the growth of the enterprise and to replace individuals who have terminated employment due to retirement or for other reasons. To the extent that the demand for qualified personnel exceeds supply, we could experience higher labor, recruiting, or training costs in order to attract and retain such employees, or could experience difficulties in performing under our contracts if our needs for such employees were unmet. In addition, our inability to appropriately plan for the transfer or replacement of appropriate intellectual capital and skill sets critical to us could result in business disruptions and impair our ability to achieve business objectives.

A strike or other work stoppage, or our inability to renew collective bargaining agreements on favorable terms, could adversely affect our financial results.

As of November 30, 2013, 14% of our 5,386 employees were covered by collective bargaining agreements. In the future, if we are unable to negotiate acceptable new agreements with the unions, upon expiration of the existing contracts, we could experience a strike or work stoppage. Even if we are successful in negotiating new agreements, the new agreements could call for higher wages or benefits paid to union members, which would increase our operating costs and could adversely affect our profitability. If our unionized workers were to engage in a strike or other work stoppage, or other non-unionized operations were to become unionized, we could experience a significant disruption of operations at our facilities or higher ongoing labor costs. A strike or other work stoppage in the facilities of any of our major customers or suppliers could also have similar effects on us.

Due to the nature of our business, our sales levels may fluctuate causing our quarterly operating results to fluctuate.

Our quarterly and annual sales are affected by a variety of factors that may lead to significant variability in our operating results. In our Aerospace and Defense segment, sales earned under long-term contracts are recognized either on a cost basis, when deliveries are made, or when contractually defined performance milestones are achieved. The timing of deliveries or milestones may fluctuate from quarter to quarter. In our Real Estate segment, sales of property may be made from time to time, which may result in variability in our operating results and cash flows.

31

Table of Contents

Failure to maintain effective internal controls in accordance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 could negatively impact the market price of our common stock. “Out of period” adjustments could require us to restate or revise previously issued financial statements.

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and to effectively prevent fraud. We rely on numerous manual processes to manage our business, which increases our risk of having an internal control failure. The SEC, as directed by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, adopted rules requiring public companies to include a report by management on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in our Annual Reports on Form 10-K. In addition, our independent registered public accounting firm must report on the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting. Although we review our internal control over financial reporting in order to ensure compliance with the Section 404 requirements, if we or our independent registered public accounting firm is not satisfied with our internal control over financial reporting or the level at which these controls are documented, designed, operated or reviewed, or if our independent registered public accounting firm interprets the requirements, rules and/or regulations differently from our interpretation, then they may issue a report that is qualified. This could result in an adverse reaction in the financial marketplace due to a loss of investor confidence in the reliability of our financial statements, which ultimately could negatively impact our stock price.

In addition, we have in the past recorded, and may in the future record, out of period adjustments to our financial statements. In making such adjustments we apply the analytical framework of SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 99, “Materiality” (“SAB 99”), to determine whether the effect of any out of period adjustment to our financial statements is material and whether such adjustments, individually or in the aggregate, would require us to restate or revise our financial statements for previous periods. Under SAB 99, companies are required to apply quantitative and qualitative factors to determine the “materiality” of particular adjustments. We recorded out of period adjustments in fiscal 2013 and other prior periods, and in each instance determined that the adjustments were not material to the period in which the error originated or was corrected. In the future we may identify further out of period adjustments impacting our interim or annual financial statements. Depending upon the complete qualitative and quantitative analysis, this could result in us restating or revising previously issued financial statements.

None.

Significant operating, manufacturing, research, design, and/or marketing locations are set forth below.

Facilities

Corporate Headquarters

GenCorp Inc.

2001 Aerojet Road

Rancho Cordova, California 95742

32

Table of Contents

Operating/Manufacturing/Research/Design/Marketing Locations

We believe each of the facilities is adequate for the business conducted at that facility. The facilities are suitable and adequate for their intended purpose and taking into account current and planned future needs.

Groundwater Litigation

In December 2011, Aerojet Rocketdyne received notice of a lawsuit, Sun Ridge LLC, et al. v. Aerojet-General Corporation, et al., Case No. 34-2011-00114675, filed in Sacramento County Superior Court. The complaint, which also names McDonnell Douglas Corporation (now Boeing), was filed by owners of properties adjacent to the Aerojet Rocketdyne property in Rancho Cordova, California and alleges damages attributable to contamination of groundwater including diminution of property value and increased costs associated with ensuring water supplies in connection with real estate development. That matter was dismissed without prejudice and the parties entered into settlement discussions through which a settlement was reached. As of November 30, 2013, the Company has accrued $0.2 million, which represents its share of the settlement. Expenditures associated with this matter are partially recoverable.

Natural Resource Damage (“NRD”) Assessment Claim

The Company previously manufactured products for the automotive industry at a Toledo, Ohio site, which was adjacent to the Ottawa River. This facility was divested in 1990 and the Company indemnified the buyer for claims and liabilities arising out of certain pre-divestiture environmental matters. In August 2007, the Company, along with numerous other companies, received from the United States Department of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service a notice of a NRD Assessment Plan for the Ottawa River and Northern Maumee Bay. A group of PRPs, including the Company, was formed to respond to the NRD assessment and to pursue funding from the Great Lakes Legacy Act for primary restoration. The restoration project performed by the group consisted of river dredging and land-filling river sediments with a total project cost in the range of approximately $47 million to $49 million, one half of which was funded through the Great Lakes Legacy Act and the net project costs to the PRP group was estimated at $23.5 million to $24.5 million. The dredging of the river that began in December 2009 has been completed. In February 2011, the parties reached an agreement on allocation. Still unresolved at

33

Table of Contents

this time is the actual NRD Assessment itself. In August 2013, the PRPs voted to accept the State and Federal Trustees’ proposal resolving the NRD Assessment and other claims which increased the Company’s share by $0.1 million. A Consent Decree must be negotiated and approved before the settlement becomes final. As of November 30, 2013, the estimated range of the Company’s share of anticipated costs for the NRD matter was $0.2 million to $0.5 million. None of the expenditures related to this matter are recoverable.

Textileather, Inc. (“Textileather”)

In 2008, Textileather, the current owner of the former Toledo, Ohio site, filed a lawsuit against the Company claiming, among other things, that the Company failed to indemnify and defend Textileather for certain contractual environmental obligations. A second suit related to past and future Resource Conservation Recovery Act (“RCRA”) closure costs was filed in late 2009. On May 5, 2010, the District Court granted the Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment, thereby dismissing the claims in the initial action. Textileather appealed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. On September 11, 2012, the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s decision with respect to Textileather’s Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) cost recovery claims, but reversed the decision to dismiss its breach of contract claims. The case was remanded to the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the opinion of the Court of Appeals. On September 10, 2013, the parties executed the definitive settlement agreement resolving the dispute for a release for all non-polychlorinated biphenyl (“PCB”) related environmental issues for $4.3 million to be paid in two payments in the 2013 calendar year. The Company has a reserve of $2.7 million for the settlement and PCB related environmental issues as of November 30, 2013. None of the expenditures related to this matter are recoverable.

Asbestos Litigation

The Company has been, and continues to be, named as a defendant in lawsuits alleging personal injury or death due to exposure to asbestos in building materials, products, or in manufacturing operations. The majority of cases are pending in Texas and Pennsylvania. There were 129 asbestos cases pending as of November 30, 2013.

Given the lack of any significant consistency to claims (i.e., as to product, operational site, or other relevant assertions) filed against the Company, the Company is unable to make a reasonable estimate of the future costs of pending claims or unasserted claims. Accordingly, no estimate of future liability has been accrued for such contingencies.

In 2011, Aerojet Rocketdyne received a letter demand from AMEC, plc, (“AMEC”) the successor entity to the 1981 purchaser of the business assets of Barnard & Burk, Inc., a former Aerojet Rocketdyne subsidiary, for Aerojet Rocketdyne to assume the defense of sixteen asbestos cases, involving 271 plaintiffs, pending in Louisiana, and reimbursement of over $1.7 million in past legal fees and expenses. AMEC is asserting that Aerojet Rocketdyne retained those liabilities when it sold the Barnard & Burk assets and agreed to indemnify the purchaser therefor. Under the relevant purchase agreement, the purchaser assumed only certain, specified liabilities relating to the operation of Barnard & Burk before the sale, with Barnard & Burk retaining all unassumed pre-closing liabilities, and Aerojet Rocketdyne agreed to indemnify the purchaser against unassumed liabilities that are asserted against it. Based on the information provided, Aerojet Rocketdyne declined to accept the liability and requested additional information from AMEC pertaining to the basis of the demand. On April 3, 2013, AMEC filed a complaint for breach of contract against Aerojet Rocketdyne in Sacramento County Superior Court, AMEC Construction Management, Inc. v. Aerojet-General Corporation, Case No. 342013001424718. Although AMEC served the complaint on Aerojet Rocketdyne, Aerojet Rocketdyne was granted an open extension of time in which to file a response in order to facilitate additional sharing of information and potential settlement negotiations. No estimate of liability has been accrued for this matter as of November 30, 2013.

34

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth information related to asbestos litigation:

Legal and administrative fees for the asbestos cases for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 was $0.4 million for all years presented.

None.

35

Table of Contents

PART II

As of January 14, 2014, there were 7,567 holders of record of the common stock. On January 14, 2014, the last reported sale price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange was $17.93 per share.

Our Senior Credit Facility (described in Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations under the caption “Liquidity and Capital Resources”) restricts the payment of dividends and we do not anticipate paying cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

Information concerning long-term debt, including material restrictions relating to payment of dividends on our common stock appears in Part II, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations under the caption “Liquidity and Capital Resources” and in Part II, Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data at Note 6 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Information concerning securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans appears in Part III, Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters under the caption “Equity Compensation Plan Information.”

Common Stock

Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading symbol “GY.” The following table lists, on a per share basis for the periods indicated, the high and low sale prices for the common stock as reported by the New York Stock Exchange:

36

Table of Contents

Stock Performance Graph

The following graph compares the cumulative total shareholder returns, calculated on a dividend reinvested basis, on $100 invested in our Common Stock in November 2008 with the cumulative total return of (i) the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Price Index (“S&P 500 Index”), and (ii) the Standard & Poor’s 500 Aerospace & Defense Index. The stock price performance shown on the graph is not necessarily indicative of future performance.

Comparison of Cumulative Total Shareholder Return

Among GenCorp, S&P 500 Index, and the S&P 500 Aerospace & Defense Index,

November 2008 through November 2013

Comparison of Cumulative Five Year Total Return

37

Table of Contents

The following selected financial data is qualified by reference to and should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements, including the Notes thereto in Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, and Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

38

Table of Contents

Unless otherwise indicated or required by the context, as used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the terms “we,” “our” and “us” refer to GenCorp Inc. and all of its subsidiaries that are consolidated in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”).

We begin Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations with an overview of our business and operations, followed by a discussion of our results of operations, including results of our operating segments, for the past three fiscal years. We then provide an analysis of our liquidity and capital resources, including discussions of our cash flows, debt arrangements, sources of capital, and contractual obligations. In the next section, we discuss the critical accounting policies that we believe are important to understanding the assumptions and judgments incorporated in our reported financial results.

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the other sections of this Report, including the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto appearing in Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Report, the risk factors appearing in Item 1A. Risk Factors of this Report, and the disclaimer regarding forward-looking statements appearing at the beginning of Item 1. Business of this Report. Historical results set forth in Item 6. Selected Financial Data and Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Report should not be taken as indicative of our future operations.

Overview

We are a manufacturer of aerospace and defense products and systems with a real estate segment that includes activities related to the re-zoning, entitlement, sale, and leasing of our excess real estate assets. We develop and manufacture propulsion systems for defense and space applications, and armaments for precision tactical and long range weapon systems applications. Our continuing operations are organized into two segments:

Aerospace and Defense — includes the operations of our wholly-owned subsidiary Aerojet Rocketdyne, a leading technology-based designer, developer and manufacturer of aerospace and defense products and systems for the U.S. government, including the DoD, NASA, major aerospace and defense prime contractors as well as portions of the commercial sector. Aerojet Rocketdyne is a world-recognized engineering and manufacturing company that specializes in the development and production of propulsion systems for defense and space applications, armament systems for precision tactical systems and munitions, and is considered a domestic market leader in launch propulsion, in-space propulsion, missile defense propulsion, tactical missile propulsion and hypersonic propulsion systems.

Real Estate — includes the activities of our wholly-owned subsidiary Easton related to the re-zoning, entitlement, sale, and leasing of our excess real estate assets. We own approximately 11,900 acres of land adjacent to U.S. Highway 50 between Rancho Cordova and Folsom, California east of Sacramento. We are currently in the process of seeking zoning changes and other governmental approvals on a portion of the Sacramento Land to optimize its value.

A summary of the significant financial highlights for fiscal 2013 which management uses to evaluate our operating performance and financial condition is presented below.

39

Table of Contents

We provide Non-GAAP measures as a supplement to financial results based on GAAP. A reconciliation of the Non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is presented later in this Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations under the heading “Operating Segment Information” and “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”

In July 2012, we signed the Original Purchase Agreement with UTC to acquire the Rocketdyne Business from UTC for $550 million. On June 10, 2013, the FTC announced that it closed its investigation into the Acquisition under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended. On June 12, 2013, we entered into the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement with UTC, which amended and restated the Original Purchase Agreement, as amended. On June 14, 2013, we completed the acquisition of substantially all of the Rocketdyne Business pursuant to the Amended and Restated Purchase Agreement. The aggregate consideration to UTC was $411 million, paid in cash, which represents the initial purchase price of $550 million reduced by $55 million relating to the pending future acquisition of UTC’s 50% ownership interest of RD Amross (a joint venture with NPO Energomash of Khimki, Russia which sells RD-180 engines to RD Amross), and the portion of the UTC business that markets and supports the sale of RD-180 engines. The acquisition of UTC’s 50% ownership interest of RD Amross and UTC’s related business is contingent upon certain conditions including receipt of certain Russian governmental regulatory approvals, which may not be obtained. The purchase price was further adjusted for advance payments on contracts, capital expenditures and other net assets, and is subject further to post-closing adjustments. See Note 4 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The Rocketdyne Business was the largest liquid rocket propulsion designer, developer, and manufacturer in the United States. As the primary propulsion system provider to the U.S. government, specifically NASA and the DoD through ULA, Rocketdyne was considered to be a leader in liquid launch propulsion and hypersonic systems. For more than 50 years, Rocketdyne has set the standard in space propulsion design, development and manufacturing. Rocketdyne has powered nearly all of NASA’s human-rated launch vehicles to date and has recorded more than 1,600 space launches. Rocketdyne propulsion systems have powered missions to nearly every planet in the solar system and have been a cornerstone to the U.S. Space Program since its inception. Additionally, Rocketdyne propulsion systems are vital to the launch of astronauts and cargo required for space exploration and for U.S. military and commercial satellites.

We believe the Rocketdyne Business acquisition provides strategic value for the country, our customers, and our stakeholders. We anticipate that the combined enterprise will be better positioned to compete in a dynamic, highly competitive marketplace, and provide more affordable products for our customers. In addition, this transaction is expected to transform our business and provide additional growth opportunities as we build upon the complementary capabilities of each legacy company.

40

Table of Contents

The unaudited pro forma information for the periods set forth below gives effect to the Acquisition as if it had occurred at the beginning of each respective fiscal year. These amounts have been calculated after applying our accounting policies and adjusting the results of the Rocketdyne Business to reflect depreciation and amortization that would have been charged assuming the fair value adjustments to property, plant and equipment and intangible assets had been applied as at the beginning of each respective year, together with the tax effects, as applicable. The pro forma information is presented for informational purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of the results of operations that actually would have been achieved had the Acquisition been consummated as of that time or that may result in the future.