UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10 – K/A

Amendment No. 110-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20112014

OR

For the transition period from                     to                    

Commission File Number 001-34658

THE BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code:(704) 625-4900

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  ¨þ    No  x¨

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

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  xþ    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 (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  xþ    No  ¨

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

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 definition 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 Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  xþ

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by nonaffiliates of the registrant on the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter (based on the closing sales price on the New York Stock Exchange on June 30, 2011)2014) was approximately $3.2$3.6 billion.

The number of shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding at January 31, 20122015 was 118,147,466.121,586,254.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement for the 20122014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

THE BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY

INDEX - FORM 10-K

i

ii

Explanatory Note

WeStatements we make in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which express a belief, expectation or intention, as well as those that are filingnot historical fact, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are subject to various risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those to which we refer under the headings “Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in Items 1 and 1A of Part I of this Amendment No. 1 to ourreport. In this annual report on Form 10-K, unless the context otherwise indicates, “we,” “us” and “our” mean The Babcock & Wilcox Company (“B&W” or “Company”) and its consolidated subsidiaries.

PART I

General

B&W is a leading technology innovator in power generation systems, a specialty constructor of nuclear components and a premier service provider, with an operating history of more than 145 years. We provide a variety of products and services to customers in the power and other steam-using industries, including electric utilities and other power generators, industrial customers in various other industries, and the United States Government. While we provide a wide range of products and services, our business segments are heavily focused on major projects. At any given time, a relatively small number of projects can represent a significant part of our operations.

We are a successor to a business founded in 1867, which was acquired by McDermott International, Inc. (“MII”) in 1978. In July 2010, MII spun-off the businesses that comprised its then power generation systems and government operations segments into B&W, a separate independent public company that was incorporated in Delaware, through the distribution of shares of B&W common stock to holders of MII common stock. B&W’s common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading symbol BWC.

Business Segments

We operate in five business segments: Power Generation, Nuclear Operations, Technical Services, Nuclear Energy and mPower. For financial information regarding each of our segments, financial information regarding geographic areas and additional information regarding the change to our segments, see Note 16 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report. For further details regarding each segment’s facilities, see Item 2, “Properties.” In general, we operate in capital-intensive industries and rely on large contracts for a substantial amount of our revenues.

Power Generation

Through this segment, we provide advanced fossil and renewable power generation equipment for capital projects with a broad suite of boiler products and environmental systems. In addition, we provide a comprehensive platform of aftermarket services to a large installed base of power generation facilities. On June 20, 2014, we acquired MEGTEC Holdings, Inc. (“MEGTEC”). MEGTEC designs, engineers, manufactures and services air pollution control systems and coating / drying equipment for a variety of industrial applications and complements our environmental products and solutions offerings. As a result of this acquisition, we now provide technology and services in the growing market for industrial environmental systems.

This segment specializes in engineering, manufacturing, procurement, erection of equipment and technology used in the power generation industry and various other industries, as well as the provision of related services, including:

Our Power Generation segment’s overall activity depends significantly on the capital expenditures and operations and maintenance expenditures of global electric power generating companies, other steam-using industries and industrial facilities with environmental compliance needs. Several factors influence these expenditures, including:

Customer demand is heavily affected by the variations in our customers’ business cycles and by the overall economies and energy and environmental policies of the countries in which they operate.

Nuclear Operations

Through this segment, we engineer, design and manufacture precision naval nuclear components and reactors for the U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”)/National Nuclear Security Administration’s (“NNSA”) Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program.

Our Nuclear Operations segment specializes in the design and manufacture of close-tolerance and high-quality equipment for nuclear applications. In addition, we are a leading manufacturer of critical nuclear components, fuels and assemblies for government and limited other uses. We have supplied nuclear components for DOE programs since the 1950s, and we are the largest domestic supplier of research reactor fuel elements for colleges, universities and national laboratories. We also convert or downblend high-enriched uranium into low-enriched fuel for use in commercial reactors to generate electricity. In addition, we have over 100 years of experience in supplying components for defense applications.

We work closely with the DOE-supported nuclear non-proliferation program. Currently, this program is assisting in the development of a high-density, low-enriched uranium fuel required for high-enriched uranium test reactor conversions. We have also been a leader in the receipt, storage, characterization, dissolution, recovery and purification of a variety of uranium-bearing materials. All phases of uranium downblending and uranium recovery are performed at our Lynchburg, Virginia and Erwin, Tennessee sites.

The demand for nuclear components by the U.S. Government determines a substantial portion of this segment’s backlog. We expect that orders for nuclear components will continue to be a significant part of backlog for the foreseeable future; however, such orders may be subject to Department of Defense budget constraints.

On June 13, 2014, a uranium conversion company filed suit against the Secretary of Energy seeking, among other things, to enjoin the DOE from transferring portions of its excess uranium stockpile to support non-proliferation and other national security initiatives, as well as fund environmental clean-up work and other initiatives. On July 29, 2014, a motion for preliminary injunction was denied. However, the suit may still be successful in preventing the DOE’s transfer of excess uranium, which could adversely impact results in our Nuclear Operations and Technical Services segments. These activities contributed approximately $16.2 million and $4.6 million of operating income to our Nuclear Operations and Technical Services segments, respectively, during the year ended December 31, 2014.

Technical Services

Through this segment, we provide various services to the U.S. Government, including uranium processing, environmental site restoration services and management and operating services for various U.S. Government-owned facilities. These services are provided to the Department of Defense and the DOE, including the NNSA, the Office of Nuclear Energy, the Office of Science and the Office of Environmental Management.

This segment’s principal operations include:

Our Technical Services segment’s overall activity primarily depends on authorized spending levels of the Department of Defense and the DOE, including the NNSA, the Office of Nuclear Energy, the Office of Science and the Office of Environmental Management. We manage and operate complex, high-consequence nuclear and national security operations for the DOE and the NNSA, primarily through our joint ventures, as further discussed under the caption “Joint Ventures” below.

On January 8, 2013, we were notified that our joint venture, Nuclear Production Partners, LLC, was not selected to lead the NNSA’s combined Management and Operating contract for the Y-12 National Security Complex and Pantex Plant. Subsequently, we filed multiple protests with the Government Accountability Office in relation to the selection decision. On February 27, 2014, we received notification that our last protest was dismissed. As of June 30, 2014, the transition of these facilities to the NNSA’s new contractor was completed.

Nuclear Energy

Through this segment, we design, license, manufacture and deliver commercial nuclear steam generators, pressure vessels, reactor components, heat exchangers and other auxiliary equipment, including containers for the storage of spent nuclear fuel. In addition, this segment offers a full spectrum of services for steam generators and balance of plant equipment, as well as nondestructive examination and tooling/repair solutions for other plant systems and components. This segment also offers engineering and licensing services for new nuclear plant designs.

This segment specializes in performing full scope, prototype design work coupled with manufacturing integration. The design, engineering and other capabilities of this segment include:

Our Nuclear Energy segment’s overall activity primarily depends on the demand and competitiveness of nuclear energy. A significant portion of our Nuclear Energy segment’s operations depend on the timing of maintenance outages primarily in the Canadian market and the cyclical nature of capital expenditures and major refurbishments for nuclear utility customers which could cause variability in our financial results.

mPower

This segment is developing the B&W mPower^TM reactor and the associated mPower Plant through its majority-owned joint venture, Generation mPower LLC (“GmP”). Its activity is a function of research and development efforts for the B&W mPower™ reactor and the potential orders to be generated from various mPower Plant deployment initiatives. It also depends on the continued demand for and competitiveness of nuclear energy and

identification of additional investors and funding sources. As part of this initiative, we were selected to receive funding and signed a Cooperative Agreement with the DOE under its Small Modular Reactor Licensing Technical Support Program (the “Funding Program”). The Funding Program is a cost-sharing award that allowed us to use the DOE funds to cover small modular reactor (“SMR”) licensing and engineering development costs associated with SMR design certification and generic design activities. At December 31, 2014, the DOE had provided $111 million of the $150 million in financial assistance originally awarded to us in the Cooperative Agreement.

On April 14, 2014, we announced our plans to restructure the mPower program to reduce spending and focus on technology development. Beginning in the third quarter of 2014, we slowed the pace of development and intend to invest no more than $15 million on an annual basis while we continue to search for additional investors in the mPower program. We intend to continue working with the DOE to further the program. At this time, the latest extension to the Cooperative Agreement has expired and the DOE funding has been suspended. If a mutually agreeable plan is not identified, future amounts may not be made available to us under the Funding Program.

Spin-off

On November 5, 2014, we announced plans to separate our Power Generation business from our Government & Nuclear Operations business, which includes the Nuclear Operations, Technical Services, Nuclear Energy and mPower segments, through a spin-off, creating a new independent, publicly traded power generation company, Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc. (“BW”). Concurrent with the spin-off, the Company will change its name to BWX Technologies, Inc. (“BWXT”). We plan to effect the separation through a tax-free spin-off transaction.

Global Competitiveness Initiative and Other Restructuring Activities

We launched the Global Competitiveness Initiative (“GCI”) in the third quarter of 2012 to enhance competitiveness, better position B&W for growth, and improve profitability. We have identified a wide range of cost reduction activities, including operational and functional efficiency improvements, organizational design changes and manufacturing optimization. Once fully executed, these actions are expected to produce at least $75 million in annual savings. The majority of the annual savings are expected to result from efficiency improvements that were completed in 2013 and 2014. The balance of the cost savings relates to manufacturing initiatives that are expected to be completed in 2015. In order to achieve these savings, we expect to incur total restructuring charges (cash and non-cash) of approximately $60 million. We incurred $3.3 million and $39.6 million of costs associated with GCI for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.

We continue to focus on structural changes in our Power Generation and Nuclear Energy segments’ operating models to drive significant margin improvement. We are targeting initiatives that we expect, in conjunction with our GCI initiatives, to drive margin improvement in our Power Generation segment by 200 to 300 basis points and allow us to achieve a minimum 10% operating margin in our Nuclear Energy segment by the end of 2015. We expect to incur total restructuring charges (cash and non-cash), as well as produce annual savings once these initiatives are fully implemented, in the range of $35 million to $50 million. We incurred $26.8 million of costs associated with these initiatives for the year ended December 31, 2014. We expect these actions to result in additional restructuring charges.

In addition, in the year ended December 31, 2014, we incurred $10.6 million and $0.4 million of costs associated with the restructuring of our mPower program and our Technical Services segment, respectively.

Acquisitions and Dispositions

We are currently exploring growth strategies across our segments through acquisitions to expand and complement our existing businesses. As we pursue these opportunities, we expect they would be funded by cash on hand, external financing (including debt), equity or some combination thereof.

Acquisitions

MEGTEC Holdings, Inc. On June 20, 2014, we completed the acquisition of MEGTEC for $142.8 million, net of cash acquired. MEGTEC designs, engineers, manufactures and services air pollution control systems and coating/drying equipment for a variety of industrial applications and complements our environmental products and solutions offerings.

Ebensburg Power Company. On May 21, 2014, we acquired the remaining outstanding interest in Ebensburg Power Company for a purchase price of $1.3 million. As part of the transaction, we acquired cash of $16.4 million and property, plant and equipment with a fair value of $16.1 million.

Dispositions

Nuclear Projects Business Disposition. In the first quarter of 2014, we announced that we would exit our Nuclear Energy segment’s Nuclear Projects business as it had lower margins and higher financial risks. Run-off operations for remaining projects were completed during the second quarter of 2014.

Contracts

We execute our contracts through a variety of methods, including fixed-price, cost-plus, target price cost incentive, cost-reimbursable or some combination of these methods. Contracts are usually awarded through a competitive bid process. Factors that customers may consider include price, plant or equipment availability, technical capabilities of equipment and personnel, efficiency, safety record and reputation.

Fixed-price contracts are for a fixed amount to cover all costs and any profit element for a defined scope of work. Fixed-price contracts entail more risk to us because they require us to predetermine both the quantities of work to be performed and the costs associated with executing the work. For further specification see “Risk Factors Related to Our Business – We are subject to risks associated with contractual pricing in our industries, including the risk that, if our actual costs exceed the costs we estimate on our fixed-price contracts, our profitability will decline, and we may suffer losses” as outlined in Item 1A of this report.

We have contracts that extend beyond one year. Most of our long-term contracts have provisions for progress payments. We attempt to cover anticipated increases in labor, material and service costs of our long-term contracts either through an estimate of such changes, which is reflected in the original price, or through risk-sharing mechanisms, such as escalation or price adjustments for items such as labor and commodity prices.

We generally recognize our contract revenues and related costs on a percentage-of-completion basis. Accordingly, we review contract price and cost estimates regularly as the work progresses and reflect adjustments in profit proportionate to the percentage of completion in the period when we revise those estimates. To the extent that these adjustments result in a reduction or an elimination of previously reported profits with respect to a project, we would recognize a charge against current earnings, which could be material. For parts orders and certain aftermarket services activities, we recognize revenues as goods are delivered and work is performed.

Our contracts with the U.S. Government are subject to annual funding determinations. In addition, contracts between the U.S. Government and its prime contractors usually contain standard provisions for termination at the convenience of the U.S. Government or the prime contractor. As a U.S. Government contractor, we are subject to federal regulations under which our right to receive future awards of new federal contracts would be unilaterally suspended or barred if we were convicted of a crime or indicted based on allegations of a violation of specific federal statutes. In addition, some of our contracts with the U.S. Government require us to provide advance notice in connection with any contemplated sale or shut down of the relevant facility. In each of those situations, the U.S. Government has an exclusive right to negotiate a mutually acceptable purchase of the facility. The contracts for the management and operation of U.S. Government facilities are awarded through a complex and protracted procurement process. These contracts are generally structured as five-year contracts with five-year renewal options, which are exercisable by the customer, or include provisions whereby the contract durations can be extended as a result of the achievement of certain performance metrics. These are cost-reimbursement contracts with a U.S.

Government credit line with some corporate-funded working capital required. However, many new contracts currently in the bidding process and recently awarded have a different structure. While such contracts remain cost-reimbursement contracts, the contractor may be required to supply working capital and be reimbursed by the U.S. Government through regular invoicing. These contracts include a fee primarily based on performance, which is evaluated annually.

Our arrangements with customers frequently require us to provide letters of credit, bid and performance bonds or guarantees to secure bids or performance under contracts, which may involve significant amounts for contract security.

In the event of a contract deferral or cancellation, we generally would be entitled to recover costs incurred, settlement expenses and profit on work completed prior to deferral or termination. Significant or numerous cancellations could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Backlog

Backlog represents the dollar amount of revenue we expect to recognize in the future from contracts awarded and in progress. Not all of our expected revenue from a contract award is recorded in backlog for a variety of reasons, including that some projects are awarded and completed within the same fiscal quarter.

Backlog is not a measure defined by generally accepted accounting principles. It is possible that our methodology for determining backlog may not be comparable to methods used by other companies. We are subject to the budgetary and appropriations cycle of the U.S. Government as it relates to our Nuclear Operations and Technical Services segments. Backlog may not be indicative of future operating results, and projects in our backlog may be cancelled, modified or otherwise altered by customers.

We generally include expected revenue from contracts in our backlog when we receive written confirmation from our customers authorizing the performance of work and committing the customer to payment for work performed. Accordingly, we exclude from backlog orders or arrangements that have been awarded but that we have not been authorized to begin performance.

Our backlog at December 31, 2014 and 2013 was as follows:

We do not include the value of our unconsolidated joint venture contracts in backlog. These unconsolidated joint ventures are primarily included in our Power Generation and Technical Services segments. See Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report for financial information on our equity method investments.

Of the December 31, 2014 backlog, we expect to recognize revenues as follows:

As of December 31, 2014, Power Generation backlog with the U.S. Government was $20.2 million, all of which was fully funded.

As of December 31, 2014, Nuclear Operations backlog with the U.S. Government was $2,776.8 million, of which $242.6 million had not yet been funded.

As of December 31, 2014, Technical Services backlog with the U.S. Government was $2.6 million, all of which was fully funded.

As of December 31, 2014, Nuclear Energy and mPower had no backlog with the U.S. Government.

During the year ended December 31, 2014, the U.S. Government awarded us new orders of approximately $1,692.9 million, $1,617.3 million of which pertains to our Nuclear Operations segment. Major new awards from the U.S. Government are typically received during the fourth quarter of each year, following congressional approval of the budget for the government’s next fiscal year, which starts October 1. Due to events associated with the government shutdown and delayed budget approvals, approximately $700 million of awards anticipated in the fourth quarter of 2013 were delayed until the first quarter of 2014.

Competition

The competitive environments in which each segment operates are described below.

Power Generation. With more than 145 years of experience, we provide advanced steam generating equipment, emissions control equipment and services. Having supplied worldwide capacity of more than 300,000 MW and some of the world’s largest and most efficient steam generating systems, we have a competitive advantage in our experience and technical capability to reliably convert a wide range of fuels to steam. Our strong, installed base in North America also yields competitive advantages in after-market services, although this segment of the market is highly competitive and price sensitive. Through this segment, we compete with a number of domestic and foreign-based companies specializing in steam generating systems technology, equipment and services, including Alstom S.A., Doosan Babcock, Babcock Power, Inc., Amec Foster Wheeler plc, and Hitachi, Ltd.; a variety of engineering and construction companies with respect to the installation of steam-generating systems; a number of additional companies in the markets for environmental control equipment and related specialized industrial equipment and in the independent power-producing business; and other suppliers of replacement parts, repair and alteration services and other services required to retrofit and maintain existing steam systems. The primary bases of competition for this segment are price, technical capabilities, quality, timeliness of performance, breadth of products and services and willingness to accept project risks.

Nuclear Operations. We have specialized technical capabilities that have allowed us to be a valued supplier of nuclear components and fuel for the U.S. Government’s naval nuclear fleet since the 1950s. Because of the technical standards required to meet U.S. Government contracting requirements for nuclear components and the barriers to entry present in this type of environment, competition in this segment is limited. The primary bases of limited competition for this segment are price, high capital investment, technical capabilities and quality of products and services.

Technical Services. Through this segment, we are engaged in the management and operation of U.S. Government facilities. Many of our government contracts are bid as a joint venture with one or more companies, in which we may have a majority or a minority position. The performance of the prime or lead contractor can impact our reputation and our future competitive position with respect to that particular project and customer. Our primary competitors in the delivery of goods and services to the U.S. Government and the operation of U.S. Government facilities include Bechtel National, Inc., AECOM, CH2M Hill, Inc., Fluor Corporation, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc. and Northrop Grumman Corporation. The primary bases of competition for this segment are experience, past performance, availability of key personnel and technical capabilities.

Nuclear Energy. Our Nuclear Energy segment supplies commercial nuclear steam generators and components. B&W has supplied the nuclear industry with more than 1,300 large, heavy components worldwide. This segment is the only heavy nuclear component manufacturer in North America. Our Nuclear Energy segment fabricates pressure vessels, reactors, steam generators, heat exchangers and other auxiliary equipment. This segment also provides specialized engineering and maintenance services, including services for plant outages. Through this segment, we compete with a number of companies specializing in nuclear capabilities including AREVA Inc., Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. and Westinghouse Electric Corporation. The primary bases of competition for this segment are price, technical capabilities, quality, timeliness of performance, breadth of products and services and willingness to accept project risks.

mPower.Our mPower segment is designing the modular and scalable B&W mPower™ reactor. The B&W mPower™ reactor has the capacity to provide output of greater than 180 MW and is designed to produce clean, near-zero emission operations. While the activity in this segment is currently a function of research and development activity, we expect mPower to ultimately compete against other nuclear equipment manufacturers, as well as manufacturers of other power generation fuel source technologies.

Joint Ventures

We participate in the ownership of a variety of entities with third parties, primarily through corporations, limited liability companies and partnerships, which we refer to as “joint ventures.” Our Power Generation segment enters into joint ventures primarily to enhance its manufacturing, design and global production operations. Through several joint venture arrangements, our Technical Services segment manages and operates nuclear facilities and associated plant infrastructure, manufactures components and assembles/dismantles nuclear devices, constructs large capital facilities, provides safeguards and security for inventory and assets, supports and conducts research and development for advanced energy technology and manages environmental programs for the DOE and the NNSA. We generally account for our investments in joint ventures under the equity method of accounting. Certain of our unconsolidated joint ventures are described below.

Power Generation

subcritical and highly efficient supercritical boilers and pulverizers for the Indian utility boiler market. We have licensed to the joint venture our technology for subcritical boilers 300 MW and larger, highly efficient supercritical boilers and coal pulverizers. In 2013, the joint venture finalized construction of a facility in India designed to produce parts for up to 3,000 MW of utility boiler capacity per year.

Technical Services

Foreign Operations

We have foreign operations in our Power Generation and Nuclear Energy segments. Our Canadian operations serve the North American and global electric utility, industrial power, oil production and global nuclear utility markets. Our operations in Denmark provide comprehensive services to companies in the waste-to-energy and biomass sector of the power generation market, primarily in eastern and western Europe. Our joint venture in China primarily serves the power generation needs of its domestic and other utility markets. Our joint venture in India serves as a low cost manufacturing and engineering facility to support our Power Generation segment, as well as serving the power generation needs of its domestic market. The functional currency of these entities is not the U.S. dollar, and as a result, we are subject to exchange rate fluctuations that impact our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Our combined Power Generation and Nuclear Energy segment revenues, net of intersegment revenues, and income derived from operations located outside of the United States, as well as the approximate percentages of our total segment revenues and total segment operating income, respectively, for each of the last three years were as follows (dollars in thousands):

Our revenues exclude revenues attributable to our joint ventures accounted for under the equity method of accounting, while our operating income includes results from joint ventures accounted for under the equity method.

For additional information on the geographic distribution of our revenues, see Note 16 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report.

Customers

We provide our products and services to a diverse customer base, including utilities and other power producers, businesses in various process industries, such as pulp and paper mills, petrochemical plants, oil refineries and steel mills and the U.S. Government. Our largest customer during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 was the U.S. Government, which represented 45%, 38% and 34% of our total consolidated revenues, respectively. No individual non-U.S. Government customer accounted for more than 5% of our consolidated revenues in the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 or 2012.

The U.S. Government is the primary customer of our Nuclear Operations and Technical Services segments. Revenues from U.S. Government contracts comprised 99% of revenues for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively, in our Nuclear Operations segment. Revenues from the U.S. Government contracts comprised 87%, 77% and 72% of revenues for the years ended December  31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively, in our Technical Services segment.

Raw Materials and Suppliers

Our operations use raw materials, such as carbon and alloy steels in various forms and components and accessories for assembly, which are available from numerous sources. We generally purchase these raw materials and components as needed for individual contracts. Our Power Generation and Nuclear Energy segments do not depend on a single source of supply for any significant raw materials. Our Nuclear Operations segment relies on several single-source suppliers for materials used in its products. We believe these suppliers are viable, and we and the U.S. Government expend significant effort to monitor and maintain the supplier base for our Nuclear Operations segment.

Although shortages of some raw materials have existed from time to time, no serious shortage exists at the present time.

Employees

At December 31, 2014, we employed approximately 11,000 persons worldwide. Approximately 2,700 of our employees were members of labor unions at December 31, 2014. Many of our operations are subject to union contracts, which we customarily renew periodically. We consider our relationships with our employees to be satisfactory.

Patents and Licenses

We currently hold a large number of U.S. and foreign patents and have patent applications pending. We have acquired patents and technology licenses and granted technology licenses to others when we have considered it advantageous for us to do so. Although in the aggregate our patents and licenses are important to us, we do not regard any single patent or license or group of related patents or licenses as critical or essential to our business as a whole. In general, we depend on our technological capabilities and the application of know-how, rather than patents and licenses, in the conduct of our various businesses.

Research and Development Activities

Our research and development activities are related to the development and improvement of new and existing products and equipment, as well as conceptual and engineering evaluation for translation into practical applications. We charge to research and development cost the costs of research and development unrelated to specific contracts as incurred. Substantially all of these costs are in our Power Generation and mPower segments, the majority of which are related to the development of our B&W mPower™ technology. Contractual arrangements for customer-sponsored research and development can vary on a case-by-case basis and include contracts, cooperative agreements and grants.

Research and development activities totaled $142.8 million, $200.8 million and $173.9 million in the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. These activities include amounts paid for by our customers of $41.8 million, $43.2 million and $53.4 million, in the years ended December 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively and DOE funds provided under the Funding Program of $27.8 million and $78.4 million in the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Amounts provided under the Funding Program in the year ended December 31, 2013, include $21.5 million of pre-award cost reimbursement, $9.7 million of which related to research and development costs incurred in the year ended December 31, 2012.

During the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, we recognized $5.8 million, $15.8 million and $17.9 million, respectively, of non-cash in-kind research and development costs (included above) related to services contributed by our minority partner to GmP, our majority-owned subsidiary formed in 2011 filedto oversee the program to develop the small modular nuclear power plant based on B&W mPower™ technology.

Hazard Risks and Insurance

Our operations present risks of injury to or death of people, loss of or damage to property and damage to the environment. We have created loss control systems to assist us in the identification and treatment of the hazard risks presented by our operations, and we endeavor to make sure these systems are effective.

As loss control measures will not always be successful, we seek to establish various means of funding losses and liability related to incidents or occurrences. We primarily seek to do this through contractual protections, including waivers of consequential damages, indemnities, caps on liability, liquidated damage provisions, and access to the insurance of other parties. We also procure insurance, operate our own captive insurance company and/or establish funded or unfunded reserves. However, none of these methods will eliminate all risks.

Depending on competitive conditions, the nature of the work, industry custom and other factors, we may not be successful in obtaining adequate contractual protection from our customers and other parties against losses and liabilities arising out of or related to the performance of our work. The scope of the protection may be limited, may be subject to conditions and may not be supported by adequate insurance or other means of financing. In addition, we sometimes have difficulty enforcing our contractual rights with others following a material loss.

Similarly, insurance for certain potential losses or liabilities may not be available or may only be available at a cost or on terms we consider not to be economical. Insurers frequently react to market losses by ceasing to write or severely limiting coverage for certain exposures. Risks that we have frequently found difficult to cost-effectively insure against include, but are not limited to, business interruption, property losses from wind, flood and earthquake events, nuclear hazards, war and confiscation or seizure of property in some areas of the world, pollution liability, liabilities related to occupational health exposures (including asbestos), liability related to our executives participating in the management of certain outside entities, professional liability/errors and omissions coverage, the failure, misuse or unavailability of our information systems, the failure of security measures designed to protect our information systems from security breaches and liability related to risk of loss of our work in progress and customer-owned materials in our care, custody and control. In cases where we place insurance, we are subject to the credit worthiness of the relevant insurer(s), the available limits of the coverage, our retention under the relevant policy, exclusions in the policy and gaps in coverage.

Our operations in designing, engineering, manufacturing, constructing and servicing nuclear power equipment and components for our commercial nuclear utility customers subject us to various risks, including, without limitation, damage to our customers’ property and third party claims for personal injury, environmental liability, death and property damage. To protect against liability for damage to a customer’s property, we endeavor to obtain waivers of liability and subrogation from the customer and its insurer and are usually named as an additional insured under the utility customer’s nuclear property policy. We also attempt to cap our overall liability in our contracts. To protect against liability from claims brought by third parties, we seek to be insured under the utility customer’s nuclear liability policies and have the benefit of the indemnity and limitation of any applicable liability provision of the Price-Anderson Act. The Price-Anderson Act limits the public liability of U.S. manufacturers and operators of licensed nuclear facilities and other parties who may be liable in respect of, and indemnifies them against, all claims in excess of a certain amount. This amount is determined by the sum of commercially available liability insurance plus certain retrospective premium assessments payable by operators of commercial nuclear reactors. For those sites where we provide environmental remediation services, we seek the same protection from our customers as we do for our other nuclear activities. The Price-Anderson Act, as amended, includes a sunset provision and requires renewal each time that it expires. Contracts that were entered into during a period of time that Price-Anderson was in full force and effect continue to receive the benefit of the Price-Anderson Act’s nuclear indemnity. The Price-Anderson Act is set to expire on December 31, 2025. We also provide nuclear fabrication and other services to the nuclear power industry in Canada. Canada’s Nuclear Liability Act generally conforms to international conventions and is conceptually similar to the Price-Anderson Act in the United States. Accordingly, indemnification protections and the possibility of exclusions under Canada’s Nuclear Liability Act are similar to those under the Price-Anderson Act in the United States.

Although we do not own or operate any nuclear reactors, we have some coverage under commercially available nuclear liability and property insurance for our facilities that are currently licensed to possess special nuclear materials. Substantially all of our Nuclear Operations segment contracts involving nuclear materials are covered by and subject to the nuclear indemnity provisions of either the Price-Anderson Act or Public Law 85-804 which, among other things, authorizes the DOE to indemnify certain contractors when such acts would facilitate national defense. However, to the extent the value of the nuclear materials in our care, custody or control exceeds the commercially available limits of our insurance, we potentially have underinsured risk of loss for such nuclear material.

Our Technical Services segment participates in the management and operation of various U.S. Government facilities. This participation is customarily accomplished through the participation in joint ventures with other contractors for any given facility. These activities involve, among other things, handling nuclear devices and their components for the U.S. Government. Insurable liabilities arising from these sites are rarely protected by our or our partners’ corporate insurance programs. Instead, we rely on government contractual agreements, insurance purchased specifically for a site and certain specialized self-insurance programs funded by the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government has historically fulfilled its contractual agreement to reimburse its contractors for covered claims, and we expect it to continue this process during our participation in the administration of these facilities. However, in most of these situations in which the U.S. Government is contractually obligated to pay, the payment obligation is subject to the availability of authorized government funds. The reimbursement obligation of the U.S. Government is also conditional, and provisions of the relevant contract or applicable law may preclude reimbursement.

Our wholly owned captive insurance subsidiary provides workers’ compensation, employer’s liability, commercial general liability and automotive liability insurance to support our operations. We may also have business reasons in the future to have our insurance subsidiary accept other risks that we cannot or do not wish to transfer to outside insurance companies. These risks may be considerable in any given year or cumulatively. Our insurance subsidiary has not provided significant amounts of insurance to unrelated parties. Claims, as a result of our operations, could adversely impact the ability of our insurance subsidiary to respond to all claims presented.

Additionally, upon the February 22, 2006 effectiveness of the settlement relating to the Chapter 11 proceedings involving several of our subsidiaries, most of our subsidiaries contributed substantial insurance rights to the asbestos personal injury trust, including rights to (1) certain pre-1979 primary and excess insurance coverages and (2) certain of our 1979-1986 excess insurance coverage. These insurance rights provided coverage for, among other things, asbestos and other personal injury claims, subject to the terms and conditions of the policies. The contribution of these insurance rights was made in exchange for the agreement on the part of the representatives of the asbestos claimants, including the representative of future claimants, to the entry of a permanent injunction, pursuant to Section 524(g) of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, to channel to the asbestos trust all asbestos-related claims against our subsidiaries and former subsidiaries arising out of, resulting from or attributable to their operations, and the implementation of related releases and indemnification provisions protecting those subsidiaries and their affiliates from future liability for such claims. Although we are not aware of any significant, unresolved claims against our subsidiaries and former subsidiaries that are not subject to the channeling injunction and that relate to the periods during which such excess insurance coverage related, with the contribution of these insurance rights to the asbestos personal injury trust, it is possible that we could have underinsured or uninsured exposure for non-derivative asbestos claims or other personal injury or other claims that would have been insured under these coverages had the insurance rights not been contributed to the asbestos personal injury trust.

Governmental Regulations and Environmental Matters

General

Many aspects of our operations and properties are affected by political developments and are subject to both domestic and foreign governmental regulations, including those relating to:

We are required by various governmental and quasi-governmental agencies to obtain certain permits, licenses and certificates with respect to our operations. The kinds of permits, licenses and certificates required in our operations depend upon a number of factors.

We cannot determine the extent to which new legislation, new regulations or changes in existing laws or regulations may affect our future operations.

Environmental

Our operations and properties are subject to a wide variety of increasingly complex and stringent foreign, federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations, including those governing discharges into the air and water, the handling and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes, the remediation of soil and groundwater contaminated by hazardous substances and the health and safety of employees. Sanctions for noncompliance may include revocation of permits, corrective action orders, administrative or civil penalties and criminal prosecution. Some environmental laws provide for strict, joint and several liability for remediation of spills and other releases of hazardous substances, as well as damage to natural resources. In addition, companies may be subject to claims alleging personal injury or property damage as a result of alleged exposure to hazardous substances. Such laws and regulations may also expose us to liability for the conduct of or conditions caused by others or for our acts that were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time such acts were performed.

These laws and regulations include the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended (“CERCLA”), the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and similar laws that provide for responses to, and liability for, releases of hazardous substances into the environment. These laws and regulations also include similar foreign, state or local counterparts to these federal laws, which regulate air emissions, water discharges, hazardous substances and waste and require public disclosure related to the use of various hazardous substances. Our operations are also governed by laws and regulations relating to workplace safety and worker health, including the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Act and regulations promulgated thereunder.

We are currently in the process of investigating and remediating some of our current and former operating sites. Although we have recorded reserves in connection with certain of these matters, due to the uncertainties associated with environmental remediation, we cannot assure you that the actual costs resulting from these remediation matters will not exceed the recorded reserves.

Our compliance with U.S. federal, state and local environmental control and protection regulations resulted in pretax charges of approximately $13.6 million, $13.1 million and $15.3 million in the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 respectively. In addition, compliance with existing environmental regulations necessitated capital expenditures of $0.3 million, $1.1 million and $3.2 million in the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. We expect to spend another $3.2 million on such capital expenditures over the next five years. We cannot predict all of the environmental requirements or circumstances that will exist in the future but anticipate that environmental control and protection standards will become increasingly stringent and costly. Based on our experience to date, we do not currently anticipate any material adverse effect on our business or consolidated financial condition as a result of future compliance with existing environmental laws and regulations. However, future events, such as changes in existing laws and regulations or their interpretation, more vigorous enforcement policies of regulatory agencies or stricter or different interpretations of existing laws and regulations, may require additional expenditures by us, which may be material. Accordingly, we can provide no assurance that we will not incur significant environmental compliance costs in the future.

We have been identified as a potentially responsible party at various cleanup sites under CERCLA. CERCLA and other environmental laws can impose liability for the entire cost of cleanup on any of the potentially responsible parties, regardless of fault or the lawfulness of the original conduct. Generally, however, where there are multiple responsible parties, a final allocation of costs is made based on the amount and type of wastes disposed of by each party and the number of financially viable parties, although this may not be the case with respect to any particular site. We have not

been determined to be a major contributor of wastes to any of these sites. On the basis of our relative contribution of waste to each site, we expect our share of the ultimate liability for the various sites will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows in any given year.

Environmental remediation projects have been and continue to be undertaken at certain of our current and former plant sites. In 2002, Congress directed the United States Army Corps of Engineers (“Army Corps”) to clean up radioactive waste at the Shallow Land Disposal Area located in Parks Township, Armstrong County, Pennsylvania (the “SLDA”), consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding between the NRC and the Army Corps for Coordination on Cleanup and Decommissioning of the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program Sites with NRC-Licensed Facilities, dated July 5, 2001 (the “MOU”). From 1961 to 1970, the SLDA was operated by the Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corporation (“NUMEC”) pursuant to Atomic Energy Commission (“AEC”) License SNM-145. The AEC was the predecessor to the NRC. The SLDA was used for the disposal of waste from NUMEC’s nuclear fuels fabrication facility in Apollo, Pennsylvania. Both radioactive and non-radioactive waste was disposed in a series of trenches at the SLDA. NUMEC, a former subsidiary of Atlantic Richfield Company (“ARCO”) was acquired by B&W in November 1971. After the Army Corps’ contractor commenced cleanup operations, the Army Corps ceased excavation activities because the contractor deviated from accepted field procedures, and the excavated material was found to be complex and beyond the Army Corps’ characterization and management procedures. The MOU was modified in late 2014 to add the DOE and the NNSA as parties to deal with “special nuclear materials.” In December 2014, the Army Corps issued a Proposed Record of Decision Amendment which reflects a revised cost estimate of $350 million, in addition to the $62 million expended through September 2014, to implement the selected remedy. The Army Corps expects to award a new remediation contract in 2015, and cleanup operations are expected to re-commence in 2016. The federal legislation directing the Army Corps to clean up the SLDA also directs the Army Corps to seek to recover response costs from appropriate responsible parties in accordance with CERCLA. In connection with B&W’s acquisition of NUMEC from ARCO in November 1971, ARCO assumed and agreed to indemnify and hold harmless B&W with respect to claims and liabilities arising as a result of transactions or operations of NUMEC prior to the acquisition date. Although this ARCO indemnity would cover claims by the Army Corps to seek recovery from B&W, no assurance can be given that such indemnity will be available or sufficient in the event liability claims are asserted for SLDA cleanup costs against B&W.

We perform significant amounts of work for the U.S. Government under both prime contracts and subcontracts and operate certain facilities that are licensed to possess and process special nuclear materials. As a result of these activities, we are subject to continuing reviews by governmental agencies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the “EPA”) and the NRC.

The NRC’s decommissioning regulations require our Nuclear Operations segment to provide financial assurance that it will be able to pay the expected cost of decommissioning each of its licensed facilities at the end of its service life. We provided financial assurance aggregating $44.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2014 with existing letters of credit for the ultimate decommissioning of these licensed facilities. These two facilities have provisions in their government contracts pursuant to which substantially all of our decommissioning costs and financial assurance obligations are covered by the DOE, including the costs to complete the decommissioning projects underway at the Erwin, Tennessee facility. These letters of credit are to cover decommissioning required pursuant to work not subject to this DOE obligation.

The demand for power generation services and products can be influenced by state and federal governmental legislation setting requirements for utilities related to operations, emissions and environmental impacts. The legislative process is unpredictable and includes a platform that continuously seeks to increase the restrictions on power producers. Potential legislation limiting emissions from power plants, including carbon dioxide, could affect our markets and the demand for our products and services in our Power Generation segment.

At December 31, 2014 and 2013, we had total environmental accruals, including provisions for the facilities discussed above, of $59.9 million and $58.1 million, respectively. Of our total environmental accruals at December 31, 2014 and 2013, $3.6 million and $4.7 million, respectively, were included in current liabilities. Inherent in the estimates of those accruals and recoveries are our expectations regarding the levels of contamination, decommissioning costs and recoverability from other parties, which may vary significantly as decommissioning activities progress. Accordingly, changes in estimates could result in material adjustments to our operating results, and the ultimate loss may differ materially from the amounts we have provided for in our consolidated financial statements.

Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Statements

We are including the following discussion to inform our existing and potential security holders generally of some of the risks and uncertainties that can affect our company and to take advantage of the “safe harbor” protection for forward-looking statements that applicable federal securities law affords.

From time to time, our management or persons acting on our behalf make forward-looking statements to inform existing and potential security holders about our company. These statements may include projections and estimates concerning the timing and success of specific projects and our future backlog, revenues, income and capital spending. Forward-looking statements are generally accompanied by words such as “estimate,” “project,” “predict,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “seek,” “goal,” “could,” “intend,” “may,” “should” or other words that convey the uncertainty of future events or outcomes. In addition, sometimes we will specifically describe a statement as being a forward-looking statement and refer to this cautionary statement.

In addition, various statements in this annual report on Form 10-K, including those that express a belief, expectation or intention, as well as those that are not statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. Those forward-looking statements appear in Item 1 – “Business” and Item 3 – “Legal Proceedings” in Part I of this report and in Item 7 – “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in the notes to our consolidated financial statements in Item 8 of Part II of this report and elsewhere in this report.

These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements that relate to, or statements that are subject to risks, contingencies or uncertainties that relate to:

We have based our forward-looking statements on our current expectations, estimates and projections about our industries and our company. We caution that these statements are not guarantees of future performance and you should not rely unduly on them, as they involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that we cannot predict. In addition, we have based many of these forward-looking statements on assumptions about future events that may prove to be inaccurate. While our management considers these assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, regulatory and other risks, contingencies and uncertainties, most of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control. Accordingly, our actual results may differ materially from the future performance that we have expressed or forecast in our forward-looking statements. Differences between actual results and any future performance suggested in our forward-looking statements could result from a variety of factors, including the following:

We believe the items we have outlined above are important factors that could cause estimates in our financial statements to differ materially from actual results and those expressed in a forward-looking statement made in this report or elsewhere by us or on our behalf. We have discussed many of these factors in more detail elsewhere in this report. These factors are not necessarily all the factors that could affect us. Unpredictable or unanticipated factors we have not discussed in this report could also have material adverse effects on actual results of matters that are the subject of our forward-looking statements. We do not intend to update our description of important factors each time a potential important factor arises, except as required by applicable securities laws and regulations. We advise our security holders that they should (1) be aware that factors not referred to above could affect the accuracy of our forward-looking statements and (2) use caution and common sense when considering our forward-looking statements.

Available Information

Our website address iswww.babcock.com. We make available through the Investor Relations section of this website under “SEC Filings,” free of charge, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, our proxy statement, statements of beneficial ownership of securities on Forms 3, 4 and 5 and amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file those materials with, or furnish those materials to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). You may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. You may obtain information regarding the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. In addition, the SEC maintains a website atwww.sec.gov that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. We have also posted on February 29, 2012 (the “Decemberour website our: Corporate Governance Principles; Code of Business Conduct; Code of Ethics for our Chief Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officers; Board of Directors Conflicts of Interest Policies and Procedures; Management, Board Members and Independent Director Contact Information; By-laws; and charters for the Audit & Finance, Governance, Compensation and Safety & Security Committees of our Board.

Risk Factors Related to Our Business

We derive substantial revenues from electric power generating companies and other steam-using industries, with demand for our products and services depending on spending in these historically cyclical industries. Additionally, recent legislative and regulatory developments relating to clean air legislation are impacting plans for spending on coal-fired power plants within the United States.

The demand for power generation products and services depends primarily on the spending of electric power generating companies and other steam-using industries and expenditures by original equipment manufacturers. These expenditures are influenced by such factors as:

A material decline in spending by electric power generating companies and other steam-using industries over a sustained period of time could materially and adversely affect the demand for our power generation products and services and, therefore, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

U.S. coal-fired power plants have been scrutinized by environmental groups and government regulators over the emissions of potentially harmful pollutants. The recent economic environment and uncertainty concerning new environmental legislation or replacement rules or regulations has caused many of our major customers, principally electric utilities, to delay making substantial expenditures for new plants, as well as upgrades to existing power plants.

We rely on U.S. Government contracts for a large percentage of our revenue, and some of those contracts are subject to continued appropriations by Congress and may be terminated or delayed if future funding is not made available. In addition, the U.S. Government may not renew or may seek to modify or terminate our existing contracts.

For the year ended December 31, 2014, we relied on U.S. Government contracts for approximately 45% of our revenue. Government contracts are subject to various uncertainties, restrictions and regulations, including oversight audits, which could result in withholding or delaying of payments to us, and termination or modification at the U.S. Government’s convenience. In addition, some of our large, multi-year contracts with the U.S. Government are subject to annual funding determinations and the continuing availability of Congressional appropriations. Although multi-year operations may be planned in connection with major procurements, Congress generally appropriates funds on a fiscal-year basis even though a program may continue for several years. Consequently, programs often are only partially funded initially, and additional funds are committed only as Congress makes further appropriations. In years when the U.S. Government does not complete its budget process before the end of its fiscal year on September 30, government operations typically are funded through a continuing resolution that authorizes agencies of the U.S. Government to continue to operate, but does not authorize new spending initiatives. When the U.S. Government operates under a continuing resolution, delays can occur in the procurement of products and services. As a result, we are subject to ongoing uncertainties associated with U.S. Government budget restraints and other factors affecting government funding.

The U.S. Government typically can terminate or modify any of its contracts with us either for its convenience or if we default by failing to perform under the terms of the applicable contract. A termination arising out of our default could expose us to liability and have an adverse effect on our ability to compete for future contracts and orders. If any of our contracts reflected in backlog are terminated by the U.S. Government, our backlog would be reduced by the expected value of the remaining work under such contracts. In addition, on those contracts for which we are teamed with others and are not the prime contractor, the U.S. Government could terminate a prime contract under which we are a subcontractor, irrespective of the quality of our products and services as a subcontractor. The reduction or termination of funding, or changes in the timing of funding, for a U.S. Government program in which we provide products or services would result in a reduction or loss of anticipated future revenues attributable to that program and could have a negative impact on our results of operations.

We also have several significant contracts with the U.S. Government that are subject to periodic renewal and rebidding through a competitive process. If the U.S. Government fails to renew these contracts, our results of operations and cash flows would be adversely affected.

As a result of these and other factors, the termination of one or more of our significant government contracts, our suspension from government contract work, the failure of the U.S. Government to renew our existing contracts or the disallowance of the payment of our contract costs could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Federal sequestration and other delays or reductions in government spending could adversely impact government spending for the products and services we provide.

In August 2011, Form 10-K”), solelyCongress enacted the Budget Control Act, which committed the U.S. Government to furnish Exhibit 101significantly reducing the federal deficit over ten years. The Budget Control Act established caps on discretionary spending through 2021. It also called for substantial automatic spending cuts split between defense and non-defense programs scheduled to start in March 2013 and continue over a nine-year period.

Federal government spending reductions, including through sequestration, could adversely impact U.S. Government programs for which we provide products or services. Additionally, while we believe many of our programs are well aligned with national defense and other strategic priorities, and we supply high-end equipment for submarines and aircraft carriers for the U.S. Navy, the outcome of efforts underway regarding sequestration is uncertain and it is possible that spending cuts may be applied to U.S. Government programs across the board, regardless of how programs align with those priorities. There are many variables in how budget reductions could be implemented that will determine its specific impact; however, reductions in federal government spending and sequestration, as currently provided for under the Budget Control Act, could adversely impact programs in which we provide products or services. In addition, these cuts could adversely affect the viability of the suppliers and subcontractors under our programs. We may also be required to maintain operations of our joint ventures if the government can no longer meet its funding obligations.

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 was approved in December 2013. This budget agreement replaces $63 billion in sequester cuts over two years split evenly between defense and non-defense programs. Both defense and non-defense programs received approximately $22.4 billion more in government fiscal year 2014 than would have been allocated under sequestration. The discretionary spending levels for government fiscal years 2014 and 2015 have been set. While this budget agreement provides some near-term relief, sequestration, reduction in government spending in lieu of sequestration or fiscal issues raised by negotiations over the federal debt ceiling remain a long-term concern.

Demand for our products and services is vulnerable to economic downturns, reductions in government spending and industry conditions.

Demand for our products and services has been, and we expect that demand will continue to be, subject to significant fluctuations due to a variety of factors beyond our control, including economic and industry conditions. These factors include, but are not limited to: the cyclical nature of the power generation industry, inflation, geopolitical issues, the availability and cost of credit, volatile oil and natural gas prices, low business and consumer confidence, high unemployment and energy conservation measures.

Unfavorable economic conditions may lead customers to delay, curtail or cancel proposed or existing projects, which may decrease the overall demand for our products and services and adversely affect our results of operations.

In addition, our Nuclear Operations and Technical Services segments depend on U.S. Government funding, particularly funding levels at the DOE. Significant changes in the level of funding (for example, the annual budget of the DOE) or specifically mandated levels for individual programs that are important to our business could have an unfavorable impact on us. In addition, if Congress does not pass annual appropriations bills in a timely fashion, spending delays under our U.S. Government contracts may result. Any reduction in the level of U.S. Government funding, particularly at the DOE, may result in, among other things, a reduction in the number and scope of projects put out for bid by the U.S. Government or the curtailment of existing U.S. Government programs, either of which may result in a reduction in the number of contract award opportunities available to us, a reduction of activities at DOE sites and an increase in costs, including the costs of obtaining contract awards.

In addition, our customers may find it more difficult to raise capital in the future due to limitations on the availability of credit, increases in interest rates and other factors affecting the federal, municipal and corporate credit markets. Also, our customers may demand more favorable pricing terms and find it increasingly difficult to timely pay invoices for our products and services, which would impact our future cash flows and liquidity. Inflation or significant changes in interest rates could reduce the demand for our products and services. Any inability to timely collect our invoices may lead to an increase in our accounts receivables and potentially to increased write-offs of uncollectible invoices. If the economy weakens, or customer spending declines, then our backlog, revenues, net income and overall financial condition could deteriorate.

Our backlog is subject to unexpected adjustments and cancellations and may not be a reliable indicator of future revenues or earnings.

There can be no assurance that the revenues projected in our backlog will be realized or, if realized, will result in profits. Because of project cancellations or changes in project scope and schedule, we cannot predict with certainty when or if backlog will be performed. In addition, even where a project proceeds as scheduled, it is possible that contracted parties may default and fail to pay amounts owed to us or poor project performance could increase the cost associated with a project. Delays, suspensions, cancellations, payment defaults, scope changes and poor project execution could materially reduce or eliminate the revenues and profits that we actually realize from projects in backlog.

Reductions in our backlog due to cancellation or modification by a customer or for other reasons may adversely affect, potentially to a material extent, the revenues and earnings we actually receive from contracts included in our backlog. Many of the contracts in our backlog provide for cancellation fees in the event customers cancel projects. These cancellation fees usually provide for reimbursement of our out-of-pocket costs, revenues for work performed prior to cancellation and a varying percentage of the profits we would have realized had the contract been completed. However, we typically have no contractual right upon cancellation to the December 2011 Form 10-Ktotal revenues reflected in accordanceour backlog. Projects may remain in our backlog for extended periods of time. If we experience significant project terminations, suspensions or scope adjustments to contracts reflected in our backlog, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows may be adversely impacted.

We are subject to risks associated with Rule 405contractual pricing in our industries, including the risk that, if our actual costs exceed the costs we estimate on our fixed-price contracts, our profitability will decline, and we may suffer losses.

We are engaged in highly competitive industries, and we have priced a number of Regulation S-T. Exhibit 101 provides certain itemsour projects on a fixed-price basis. Our actual costs could exceed our projections. We attempt to cover the increased costs of anticipated changes in labor, material and service costs of long-term contracts, either through estimates of cost increases, which are reflected in the original contract price, or through price escalation clauses. Despite these attempts, however, the cost and gross profit we realize on a fixed-price contract could vary materially from the December 2011 Form 10-K formattedestimated amounts because of supplier, contractor and subcontractor performance, changes in eXtensible Business Reporting Language (“XBRL”). Nojob conditions, variations in labor and equipment productivity and increases in the cost of labor and raw materials, particularly steel, over the term of the contract. These variations and the risks generally inherent in our industries may result in actual revenues or costs being different from those we originally estimated and may result in reduced profitability or losses on projects. Some of these risks include:

Changes in our effective tax rate and tax positions may vary.

We are subject to income taxes in the United States and numerous foreign jurisdictions. A change in tax laws, treaties or regulations, or their interpretation, in any country in which we operate could result in a higher tax rate on our earnings, which could have a material impact on our earnings and cash flows from operations. In addition, significant judgment is required in determining our worldwide provision for income taxes. In the ordinary course of our business, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain, and we are regularly subject to audit by tax authorities. Although we believe that our tax estimates and tax positions are reasonable, they could be materially affected by many factors including the final outcome of tax audits and related

litigation, the introduction of new tax accounting standards, legislation, regulations and related interpretations, our global mix of earnings, the realizability of deferred tax assets and changes in uncertain tax positions. A significant increase in our tax rate could have a material adverse effect on our profitability and liquidity.

Our business could be negatively impacted by security threats, including physical and cybersecurity threats, and other disruptions.

We face various security threats, including cyber threats, threats to the physical security of our facilities and infrastructure (including those that we manage and operate for our customers), and threats from terrorist acts, as well as the potential for business disruptions associated with these threats. Although we utilize a combination of tailored and industry standard security measures and technology to monitor and mitigate these threats, we cannot guarantee that these measures and technology will be sufficient to prevent security threats from materializing.

We have been, madeand will likely continue to be, subject to cyber-based attacks and other attempts to threaten our information technology systems, including attempts to gain unauthorized access to our proprietary or classified information and attacks from computer hackers, viruses, malicious code and other security problems. As a U.S. Government contractor, we may be prone to a greater number of those threats than companies in other industries. From time to time, we experience system interruptions and delays; however, prior cyber-based attacks directed at us have not had a material adverse impact on our results of operations. Due to the December 2011 Form 10-K. This amendment speaksevolving nature of these security threats, however, the impact of any future incident cannot be predicted.

The costs related to cyber or other security threats or disruptions may not be fully insured or indemnified by other means. Occurrence of any of these events could adversely affect our internal operations, the services we provide to customers, the value of our investment in research and development efforts and other intellectual property, our future financial results, our reputation or our stock price.

In addition, from time to time we may replace and/or upgrade current financial, human resources and other information technology systems. These activities subject us to inherent costs and risks associated with replacing and updating these systems, including potential disruption of our internal control structure, substantial capital expenditures, demands on management time and other risks of delays or difficulties in transitioning to new systems or of integrating new systems into our current systems. Our systems implementations and upgrades may not result in productivity improvements at the levels anticipated, or at all. In addition, the implementation of new technology systems may cause disruptions in our business operations. Such disruption and any other information technology system disruptions, and our ability to mitigate those disruptions, if not anticipated and appropriately mitigated, could have a material adverse effect on us.

We rely on intellectual property law and confidentiality agreements to protect our intellectual property. We also rely on intellectual property we license from third parties. Our failure to protect our intellectual property rights, or our inability to obtain or renew licenses to use intellectual property of third parties, could adversely affect our business.

Our success depends, in part, on our ability to protect our proprietary information and other intellectual property. Our intellectual property could be stolen, challenged, invalidated, circumvented or rendered unenforceable. In addition, effective intellectual property protection may be limited or unavailable in some foreign countries where we operate.

Our failure to protect our intellectual property rights may result in the loss of valuable technologies or adversely affect our competitive business position. We rely significantly on proprietary technology, information, processes and know-how that are not subject to patent or copyright protection. We seek to protect this information through trade secret or confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, subcontractors or other parties, as well as through other security measures. These agreements and security measures may be inadequate to deter or prevent misappropriation of our confidential information. In the event of an infringement of our intellectual property rights, a breach of a confidentiality agreement or divulgence of proprietary information, we may not have adequate legal remedies to protect our intellectual property. Litigation to determine the scope of intellectual property rights, even if ultimately successful, could be costly and could divert management’s attention away from other aspects of our business. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently developed by competitors.

In some instances, we have augmented our technology base by licensing the proprietary intellectual property of third parties. In the future, we may not be able to obtain necessary licenses on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Our use of the original filing datepercentage-of-completion method of accounting could result in volatility in our results of operations.

We generally recognize revenues and profits under our long-term contracts on a percentage-of-completion basis. Accordingly, we review contract price and cost estimates regularly as the work progresses and reflect adjustments proportionate to the percentage of completion in income in the period when we revise those estimates. To the extent these adjustments result in a reduction or an elimination of previously reported profits with respect to a project, we would recognize a charge against current earnings, which could be material. Our current estimates of our contract costs and the profitability of our long-term projects, although reasonably reliable when made, could change as a result of the uncertainties associated with these types of contracts, and if adjustments to overall contract costs are significant, the reductions or reversals of previously recorded revenue and profits could be material in future periods.

Maintaining adequate bonding and letter of credit capacity is necessary for us to successfully bid on and win various contracts.

In line with industry practice, we are often required to post standby letters of credit and surety bonds to support contractual obligations to customers as well as other obligations. These letters of credit and bonds generally indemnify customers should we fail to perform our obligations under the applicable contracts. If a letter of credit or bond is required for a particular project and we are unable to obtain it due to insufficient liquidity or other reasons, we will not be able to pursue that project. We utilize bonding facilities, but, as is typically the case, the issuance of bonds under each of those facilities is at the surety’s sole discretion. In addition, we have capacity limits under our credit facility for letters of credit. Moreover, due to events that affect the insurance and bonding and credit markets generally, bonding and letters of credit may be more difficult to obtain in the future or may only be available at significant additional cost. There can be no assurance that letters of credit or bonds will continue to be available to us on reasonable terms. Our inability to obtain adequate letters of credit and bonding and, as a result, to bid on new work could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. As of December 2011 Form 10-K, does31, 2014, we had $273.4 million in letters of credit and bank guarantees and $437.9 million in surety bonds outstanding.

Our credit facility could restrict our operations.

The terms of our credit agreement impose various restrictions and covenants on us that could have adverse consequences, including:

Our business strategy includes acquisitions to support our growth. Acquisitions of other businesses can create certain risks and uncertainties.

We intend to pursue growth through the acquisition of businesses or assets that we believe will enable us to strengthen our existing businesses and expand into adjacent industries and regions. We may be unable to continue this growth strategy if we cannot identify suitable businesses or assets, reach agreement on potential strategic acquisitions on acceptable terms or for other reasons. Moreover, business acquisitions involve certain risks, including:

Acquisitions may be funded by the issuance of additional equity or debt financing, which may not changebe available on attractive terms. Our ability to secure such financing will depend in part on prevailing capital market conditions, as well as conditions in our business and operating results. Moreover, to the extent an acquisition transaction financed by non-equity consideration results in goodwill, it will reduce our tangible net worth, which might have an adverse effect on potential credit and bonding capacity.

Additionally, an acquisition may bring us into businesses we have not previously conducted and expose us to additional business risks that are different than those we have historically experienced.

Our business strategy also includes development and commercialization of new technologies to support our growth, which requires significant investment and involves various risks and uncertainties. These new technologies may not achieve desired commercial or updatefinancial results.

Our future growth will depend on our ability to continue to innovate by developing and commercializing new product and service offerings. Investments in new technologies involve varying degrees of uncertainties and risk. Commercial success depends on many factors, including the disclosureslevels of innovation, the development costs and the availability of capital resources to fund those costs, the levels of competition from others developing similar or other competing technologies, our ability to obtain or maintain government permits or certifications, the effectiveness of production, distribution and marketing efforts, and the costs to customers to deploy and provide support for the new technologies. We may not achieve significant revenue from new product and service investments for a number of years, if at all. Moreover, new products and services may not be profitable, and, even if they are profitable, our operating margins from new products and services may not be as high as the margins we have experienced historically. In addition, new technologies may not be patentable and, as a result, we may face increased competition.

Among our opportunities involving new technologies, we are developing the B&W mPower™ reactor. The costs to develop and commercialize this technology will require a substantial amount of investment over a period of years, and the funding requirements may vary significantly from period to period. Commercialization of this technology will require certification from the NRC. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in addressing all of the technological challenges to developing and commercializing this technology or in obtaining the required NRC certification. Furthermore, while there currently are various small reactor competitors with limited capability, the potential exists for other competitors to emerge with competing technologies, in some cases with funding readily available, and we can provide no assurance that those competitors will not develop and commercialize similar or superior technologies sooner than we can or at a significant cost or price advantage.

On April 12, 2013, Babcock &Wilcox mPower, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of B&W, entered into a Cooperative Agreement with the DOE establishing the terms and conditions of a funding award totaling $150 million under the Funding Program. This cost sharing award allowed us to use the DOE funds to cover licensing and engineering development costs associated with the SMR design certification and generic design activities. At December 31, 2014, the DOE had provided $111 million of the $150 million in financial assistance originally awarded to us in the Cooperative Agreement.

On April 14, 2014, we announced our plans to restructure the mPower program to reduce spending and focus on technology development. Beginning in the third quarter of 2014, we slowed the pace of development and intend to invest no more than $15 million on an annual basis while we continue to search for additional investors in the mPower program. We intend to continue working with the DOE to further the program. At this time, the latest extension to the Cooperative Agreement has expired and the DOE funding has been suspended. If a mutually agreeable plan is not identified, future amounts may not be made available to us under the Funding Program. This may cause us to not realize any return on our investment, impact the timing and likelihood of achieving program development milestones and possibly expose us to claims of contractual and other liability from our current partner, customer or others.

Our operations are subject to operating risks, which could expose us to potentially significant professional liability, product liability, warranty and other claims. Our insurance coverage may be inadequate to cover all of our significant risks or our insurers may deny coverage of material losses we incur, which could adversely affect our profitability and overall financial condition.

We engineer, construct and perform services in large industrial facilities where accidents or system failures can have significant consequences. Risks inherent in our operations include:

Any accident or failure at a site where we have provided products or services could result in significant professional liability, product liability, warranty and other claims against us, regardless of whether our products or services caused the incident. We have been, and in the future we may be, named as defendants in lawsuits asserting large claims as a result of litigation arising from events such as those listed above.

We endeavor to identify and obtain in established markets insurance agreements to cover significant risks and liabilities. Insurance against some of the risks inherent in our operations is either unavailable or available only at rates or on terms that we consider uneconomical. Also, catastrophic events customarily result in decreased coverage limits, more limited coverage, additional exclusions in coverage, increased premium costs and increased deductibles and self-insured retentions. Risks that we have frequently found difficult to cost-effectively insure against include, but are not limited to, business interruption, property losses from wind, flood and earthquake events, nuclear hazards, war and confiscation or seizure of property in some areas of the world, pollution liability, liabilities related to occupational health exposures (including asbestos), professional liability/errors and omissions coverage, the failure, misuse or unavailability of our information systems, the failure of security measures designed to protect our information systems from security breaches, and liability related to risk of loss of our work in progress and customer-owned materials in our care, custody and control. Depending on competitive conditions and other factors, we endeavor to obtain contractual protection against certain uninsured risks from our customers. When obtained, such contractual indemnification protection may not be as broad as we desire or may not be supported by adequate insurance maintained by the customer. Such insurance or contractual indemnity protection may not be sufficient or effective under all circumstances or against all hazards to which we may be subject. A successful claim for which we are not insured or for which we are underinsured could have a material adverse effect on us. Additionally, disputes with insurance carriers over coverage may affect the timing of cash flows and, if litigation with the carrier becomes necessary, an outcome unfavorable to us may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

We are also involved in management and operating activities for the U.S. Government where we are the prime contractor. These activities involve, among other things, handling nuclear devices and their components for the U.S. Government. Most insurable liabilities arising from these sites are not protected in our corporate insurance program. Instead, we rely on government contractual agreements, some insurance purchased specifically for the sites and certain specialized self-insurance programs funded by the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government has historically fulfilled its contractual agreement to reimburse for insurable claims, and we expect it to continue this process during our administration of these two facilities. However, it should be noted that, in most situations, the U.S. Government is contractually obligated to pay subject to the availability of authorized government funds. The reimbursement obligation of the U.S. Government is also conditional, and provisions of the relevant contract or applicable law may preclude reimbursement.

We have a captive insurance company subsidiary that provides us with various insurance coverages. Claims, as a result of our operations, could adversely impact the ability of our captive insurance company subsidiary to respond to all claims presented.

Additionally, upon the February 22, 2006 effectiveness of the settlement relating to the Chapter 11 proceedings involving several of our subsidiaries, most of our subsidiaries contributed substantial insurance rights providing coverage for, among other things, asbestos and other personal injury claims, to an asbestos personal injury trust. With the contribution of these insurance rights to the asbestos personal injury trust, we may have underinsured or uninsured exposure for non-derivative asbestos claims or other personal injury or other claims that would have been insured under these coverages had the insurance rights not been contributed to the asbestos personal injury trust.

Our nuclear operations subject us to various environmental, regulatory, financial and other risks.

Our operations in designing, engineering, manufacturing, supplying, constructing and maintaining nuclear fuel and nuclear power equipment and components subject us to various risks, including:

Our nuclear operations are subject to various safety-related requirements imposed by the U.S. Government, the DOE and the NRC. In the event of non-compliance, these agencies might increase regulatory oversight, impose fines or shut down our operations, depending upon the assessment of the severity of the situation. Revised security and safety requirements promulgated by these agencies could necessitate substantial capital and other expenditures.

Limitations or modifications to indemnification regulations of the United States or foreign countries could adversely affect our business.

The Price-Anderson Act partially indemnifies the nuclear industry against liability arising from nuclear incidents in the United States, while ensuring compensation for the general public. The Price-Anderson Act comprehensively regulates the manufacture, use and storage of radioactive materials, while promoting the nuclear industry by offering broad indemnification to commercial nuclear power plant operators and DOE contractors. Because we provide nuclear fabrication and other services to the DOE relating to its nuclear devices, facilities and other programs and the nuclear power industry in the ongoing maintenance and modifications of its nuclear power plants, including the manufacture of equipment and other components for use in such nuclear power plants, we may be entitled to some of the indemnification protections under the Price-Anderson Act against liability arising from nuclear incidents in the United States. The indemnification authority under the Price-Anderson Act was extended through December 2025 by the Energy Policy Act of 2005. We also provide nuclear fabrication and other services to the nuclear power industry in Canada. Canada’s Nuclear Liability Act generally conforms to international

conventions and is conceptually similar to the Price-Anderson Act in the United States. Accordingly, indemnification protections and the possibility of exclusions under Canada’s Nuclear Liability Act are similar to those under the Price-Anderson Act in the United States.

The Price-Anderson Act’s indemnification provisions may not apply to all liabilities that we might incur while performing services as a contractor for the DOE and the nuclear power industry. If an incident or evacuation is not covered under the Price-Anderson Act’s indemnification provisions, we could be held liable for damages, regardless of fault, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. In connection with the international transportation of toxic, hazardous and radioactive materials, it is possible for a claim to be asserted which may not fall within the indemnification provided by the Price-Anderson Act. If such indemnification authority is not applicable in the future, our business could be adversely affected if the owners and operators of nuclear power plants fail to retain our services in the absence of commercially adequate insurance and indemnification.

Moreover, because we manufacture nuclear components for the U.S. Government’s defense program, we may be entitled to some of the indemnification protections afforded by Public Law 85-804 for certain of our nuclear operations risks. Public Law 85-804 authorizes certain agencies of the U.S. Government, such as the DOE and the U.S. Department of Defense, to indemnify their contractors against unusually hazardous or nuclear risks when such action would facilitate the national defense. However, because the indemnification protections afforded by Public Law 85-804 are granted on a discretionary basis, situations could arise where the U.S. Government elects not to offer such protections. In such situations, our business could be adversely affected by either our inability to obtain commercially adequate insurance or indemnification or our refusal to pursue such operations in the absence of such protections.

We are subject to government regulations that may adversely affect our future operations.

Many aspects of our operations and properties are affected by political developments and are subject to both domestic and foreign governmental regulations, including those relating to:

In addition, a substantial portion of the demand for our products and services is from electric power generating companies and other steam-using customers. The demand for power generation products and services can be influenced by state and federal governmental legislation setting requirements for utilities related to operations, emissions and environmental impacts. The legislative process is unpredictable and includes a platform that continuously seeks to increase the restrictions on power producers. Potential legislation limiting emissions from power plants, including carbon dioxide, could affect our markets and the demand for our products and services related to power generation.

We cannot determine the extent to which our future operations and earnings may be affected by new legislation, new regulations or changes in existing regulations.

Regulations related to “conflict minerals” may force us to incur additional expenses, may make our supply chain more complex and may result in damage to our reputation with customers.

On August 22, 2012, under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, the SEC adopted new requirements for companies that use certain minerals and metals, known as conflict minerals, in their products, whether or not these products are manufactured by third parties. Under these requirements, companies that are subject to the rules conduct due diligence and disclose and report whether or not such minerals originate from the Democratic Republic of Congo and adjoining countries. The implementation of these new requirements could adversely affect the sourcing, availability and pricing of minerals used in the manufacture of certain components incorporated in our products. In addition, we will incur additional costs to comply with the disclosure requirements,

including costs related to determining the source of any of the relevant minerals and metals used in our products. Since our supply chain is complex, we may not be able to sufficiently verify the origins for these minerals and metals used in our products through the diligence procedures that we implement, which may harm our reputation. In such event, we may also face difficulties in satisfying customers who require that the components of our products either may not originate from the Democratic Republic of Congo and adjoining countries or must be certified as conflict free.

Our business requires us to obtain, and to comply with, national, state and local government permits and approvals.

Our business is required to obtain, and to comply with, national, state and local government permits and approvals. Any of these permits or approvals may be subject to denial, revocation or modification under various circumstances. Failure to obtain or comply with the conditions of permits or approvals may adversely affect our operations by temporarily suspending our activities or curtailing our work and may subject us to penalties and other sanctions. Although existing licenses are routinely renewed by various regulators, renewal could be denied or jeopardized by various factors, including:

In addition, if new environmental legislation or regulations are enacted or implemented, or existing laws or regulations are amended or are interpreted or enforced differently, we may be required to obtain additional operating permits or approvals. Our inability to obtain, and to comply with, the permits and approvals required for our business could have a material adverse effect on us.

Our operations involve the handling, transportation and disposal of radioactive and hazardous materials, and environmental laws and regulations and civil liability for contamination of the environment or related personal injuries may result in increases in our operating costs and capital expenditures and decreases in our earnings and cash flows.

Our operations involve the handling, transportation and disposal of radioactive and hazardous materials, including nuclear devices and their components. Failure to properly handle these materials could pose a health risk to humans or wildlife and could cause personal injury and property damage (including environmental contamination). If an accident were to occur, its severity could be significantly affected by the volume of the materials and the speed of corrective action taken by emergency response personnel, as well as other factors beyond our control, such as weather and wind conditions. Actions taken in response to an accident could result in significant costs.

Governmental requirements relating to the protection of the environment, including solid waste management, air quality, water quality, the decontamination and decommissioning of nuclear manufacturing and processing facilities and cleanup of contaminated sites, have had a substantial impact on our operations. These requirements are complex and subject to frequent change. In some cases, they can impose liability for the entire cost of cleanup on any responsible party without regard to negligence or fault and impose liability on us for the conduct of others or conditions others have caused, or for our acts that complied with all applicable requirements when we performed them. Our compliance with amended, new or more stringent requirements, stricter interpretations of existing requirements or the future discovery of contamination may require us to make material expenditures or subject us to liabilities that we currently do not anticipate. Such expenditures and liabilities may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, some of our operations and the operations of predecessor owners of some of our properties have exposed us to civil claims by third parties for liability resulting from alleged contamination of the environment or personal injuries caused by releases of hazardous substances into the environment. See “Business—Governmental Regulations and Environmental Matters.”

In our contracts, we seek to protect ourselves from liability associated with accidents, but there can be no assurance that such contractual limitations on liability will be effective in all cases or that our or our customers’

insurance will cover all the liabilities we have assumed under those contracts. The costs of defending against a claim arising out of a nuclear incident or precautionary evacuation, and any damages awarded as a result of such a claim, could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

We maintain insurance coverage as part of our overall risk management strategy and due to requirements to maintain specific coverage in our financing agreements and in many of our contracts. These policies do not protect us against all liabilities associated with accidents or for unrelated claims. In addition, comparable insurance may not continue to be available to us in the future at acceptable prices, or at all.

We conduct a portion of our operations through joint venture entities, over which we may have limited ability to influence.

We currently have equity interests in several significant joint ventures and may enter into additional joint venture arrangements in the future. Our influence over some of these entities may be limited. Even in those joint ventures over which we do exercise significant influence, we are often required to consider the interests of our joint venture partners in connection with major decisions concerning the operations of the joint ventures. In any case, differences in views among the joint venture participants may result in delayed decisions or disputes. We also cannot control the actions of our joint venture participants. We sometimes have joint and several liabilities with our joint venture partners under the applicable contracts for joint venture projects and we cannot be certain that our partners will be able to satisfy any potential liability that could arise. These factors could potentially harm the business and operations of a joint venture and, in turn, our business and operations.

Operating through joint ventures in which we are minority holders results in us having limited control over many decisions made with respect to projects and internal controls relating to projects. These joint ventures may not be subject to the same requirements regarding internal controls and internal control over financial reporting that we follow. As a result, internal control problems may arise with respect to the joint ventures that could adversely affect our ability to respond to requests or contractual obligations to customers or to meet the internal control requirements to which we are otherwise subject.

In addition, our arrangements involving joint ventures may restrict us from gaining access to the cash flows or assets of these entities. In some cases, our joint ventures have governmentally imposed restrictions on their abilities to transfer funds to us.

If our co-venturers fail to perform their contractual obligations on a project or if we fail to coordinate effectively with our co-venturers, we could be exposed to legal liability, loss of reputation and reduced profit on the project.

We often perform projects jointly with third parties. For example, we enter into contracting consortia and other contractual arrangements to bid for and perform jointly on large projects. Success on these joint projects depends in part on whether our co-venturers fulfill their contractual obligations satisfactorily. If any one or more of these third parties fail to perform their contractual obligations satisfactorily, we may be required to make additional investments and provide added services in order to compensate for that failure. If we are unable to adequately address any such performance issues, then our customer may exercise its right to terminate a joint project, exposing us to legal liability, loss of reputation and reduced profit.

Our collaborative arrangements also involve risks that participating parties may disagree on business decisions and strategies. These disagreements could result in delays, additional costs and risks of litigation. Our inability to successfully maintain existing collaborative relationships or enter into new collaborative arrangements could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

Employee, agent or partner misconduct or our overall failure to comply with laws, regulations or government contracts could weaken our ability to win contracts, lead to the suspension of our operations and result in reduced revenues and profits.

Misconduct, fraud, or other improper activities by one or more of our employees, agents or partners as well as our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, could have a significant negative impact on our business

and reputation. Such misconduct could include the failure to comply with government procurement regulations, regulations regarding the protection of classified information, regulations regarding the pricing of labor and other costs in government contracts, regulations on lobbying or similar activities, regulations pertaining to the internal controls over financial reporting and various other applicable laws or regulations. For example, we regularly provide services that may be highly sensitive or that are related to critical national security matters; if a security breach were to occur, our ability to procure future government contracts could be severely limited. The precautions we take to prevent and detect these activities may not be effective, and we could face unknown risks or losses.

We are routinely audited and reviewed by the U.S. Government and its agencies. These agencies review our 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 our purchasing systems, billing systems, property management and control systems, cost estimating systems, compensation systems and management information systems. Any costs found to be improperly allocated to a specific contract will not be reimbursed or must be refunded if already reimbursed. If an audit or review uncovers improper or illegal activities, we could be subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of contracts, forfeiture of profits, suspension of payments, fines, loss of security clearance and suspension or debarment from contracting with the U.S. Government. In addition, we could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against us.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”) generally prohibits companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. officials. Our training program and policies mandate compliance with the FCPA. We operate in some parts of the world that have experienced governmental corruption to some degree, and, in certain circumstances, strict compliance with anti-bribery laws may conflict with local customs and practices. If we are found to be liable for violations of the FCPA (either due to our own acts or our inadvertence, or due to the acts or inadvertence of others, including employees of our joint ventures), we could suffer from civil and criminal penalties or other sanctions.

We may not be able to compete successfully against current and future competitors.

Some of our competitors or potential competitors have greater financial or other resources than we have and in some cases are government supported. Our operations may be adversely affected if our current competitors or new market entrants introduce new products or services with better features, performance, prices or other characteristics than those of our products and services. Furthermore, we operate in industries where capital investment is critical. We may not be able to obtain as much purchasing and borrowing leverage and access to capital for investment as other public companies, which may impair our ability to compete against competitors or potential competitors.

The loss of the services of one or more of our key personnel, or our failure to attract, assimilate and retain trained personnel in the future, could disrupt our operations and result in loss of revenues.

Our success depends on the continued active participation of our executive officers and key operating personnel. The unexpected loss of the services of any one of these persons could adversely affect our operations.

Our operations require the services of employees having the technical training and experience necessary to obtain the proper operational results. As such, our operations depend, to a considerable extent, on the continuing availability of such personnel. If we should suffer any material loss of personnel to competitors, retirement or other reasons, or be unable to employ additional or replacement personnel with the requisite level of training and experience to adequately operate our business, our operations could be adversely affected. While we believe our wage rates are competitive and our relationships with our employees are satisfactory, a significant increase in the wages paid by other employers could result in a reduction in our workforce, increases in wage rates, or both. Additionally, we have announced plans to freeze pension plan benefit accruals at the end of 2015 and to spin off our Power Generation business by mid-summer 2015, which could also result in turnover in our workforce.

We may be unable to realize expected benefits from our Global Competitiveness Initiative and other restructuring actions, and our profitability or our business otherwise might be adversely affected.

In order to operate more efficiently and control costs, in 2012 we launched B&W’s Global Competitiveness Initiative, which includes operational and functional efficiency improvements, organizational design changes and manufacturing optimization. These plans are intended to generate operating expense savings through direct and indirect overhead expense reductions as well as other savings. We continue to focus on structural changes in our operating model to drive significant margin improvement. These types of cost reduction and restructuring activities are complex. If we do not successfully manage our current restructuring activities, or any other restructuring activities that we may undertake in the future, expected efficiencies and benefits might be delayed or not realized, and our operations and business could be disrupted. Risks associated with these actions and other workforce management issues include delays, additional unexpected costs, implementation cost overruns, changes in restructuring plans that increase or decrease the number of employees affected, adverse effects on employee morale and the failure to meet operational targets due to the loss of employees, any of which may impair our ability to achieve anticipated cost reductions or may otherwise harm our business, which could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.

Negotiations with labor unions and possible work stoppages and other labor problems could divert management’s attention and disrupt operations. In addition, new collective bargaining agreements or amendments to agreements could increase our labor costs and operating expenses.

A significant number of our employees are members of labor unions. If we are unable to negotiate acceptable new contracts with our unions from time to time, we could experience strikes or other work stoppages by the affected employees. If any such strikes or other work stoppages were to occur, we could experience a significant disruption of operations. In addition, negotiations with unions could divert management attention. New union contracts could result in increased operating costs, as a result of higher wages or benefit expenses, for both union and nonunion employees. If nonunion employees were to unionize, we would experience higher ongoing labor costs.

Pension and medical expenses associated with our retirement benefit plans may fluctuate significantly depending on changes in actuarial assumptions, future market performance of plan assets, future trends in health care costs and legislative or other regulatory actions.

A substantial portion of our current and retired employee population is covered by pension and postretirement benefit plans, the costs and funding requirements of which depend on our various assumptions, including estimates of rates of return on benefit-related assets, discount rates for future payment obligations, rates of future cost growth, mortality assumptions and trends for future costs. Variances from these estimates could have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, our policy to recognize these variances annually through mark to market accounting could result in volatility in our results of operations, which could be material. Funding requirements for benefit obligations of our pension and postretirement benefit plans also are subject to legislative and other government regulatory actions. As of December 31, 2014, our defined benefit pension and postretirement benefit plans were underfunded by approximately $629.2 million.

Our internal controls over financial reporting may not be sufficient to achieve all stated goals and objectives.

Our internal controls and procedures were developed through a process in which our management applied its judgment in assessing the costs and benefits of such controls and procedures, which, by their nature, can provide only reasonable assurance regarding the control objectives. The design of any system of internal controls and procedures is based in part upon various assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and we cannot provide assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions, regardless of how remote.

Our Nuclear Operations segment relies on several single-source suppliers, which could, under certain circumstances, adversely affect our revenues and operating results.

Our Nuclear Operations segment relies on several single-source suppliers for materials used in its products. If the supply of a single-sourced material is delayed or ceases, we may not be able to produce the related product in a timely manner or in sufficient quantities, if at all, which could adversely affect our revenues and operating results. In addition, a single-source supplier of a key component could potentially exert significant bargaining power over price, quality, warranty claims, or other terms relating to the single-sourced materials.

Our international operations are subject to political, economic and other uncertainties not generally encountered in our domestic operations.

We derive a portion of our revenues and equity in income of investees from international operations. Operating in international markets requires significant resources and management attention and subjects us to political, economic and regulatory risks that are not generally encountered in our U.S. operations. These include:

Various foreign jurisdictions have laws limiting the right and ability of foreign subsidiaries and joint ventures to pay dividends and remit earnings to affiliated companies. Our international operations sometimes face the additional risks of fluctuating currency values, hard currency shortages and controls of foreign currency exchange.

Natural disasters or other events beyond our control could adversely impact our business.

Natural disasters, such as earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, floods, tornados, or other events could adversely impact demand for or supply of our products. In addition, natural disasters could also cause disruption to our facilities, systems or projects, which could interrupt operational processes and performance on our contracts and adversely impact our ability to manufacture our products and provide services and support to our customers. We operate facilities in areas of the world that are exposed to natural disasters, such as, but not limited to, hurricanes, floods and tornados.

War, other armed conflicts or terrorist attacks could have a material adverse effect on our business.

War, terrorist attacks and unrest have caused and may continue to cause instability in the world’s financial and commercial markets and have significantly increased political and economic instability in some of the geographic areas in which we operate. Threats of war or other armed conflict may cause further disruption to financial and commercial markets. In addition, continued unrest could lead to acts of terrorism in the United States or elsewhere, and acts of terrorism could be directed against companies such as ours. Also, acts of terrorism and threats of armed conflicts in or around various areas in which we operate could limit or disrupt our markets and operations, including disruptions from evacuation of personnel, cancellation of contracts or the loss of personnel or assets. Armed conflicts, terrorism and their effects on us or our markets may significantly affect our business and results of operations in the future.

We are subject to continuing contingent liabilities of MII as a result of our spin-off from MII.

With completion of our spin-off from MII in 2010 (“the MII spin-off”), there are several significant areas where the liabilities of MII may become our obligations. For example, under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) and the related rules and regulations, each corporation that was a member of our consolidated tax reporting group during any taxable period or portion of any taxable period ending on or before the effective time of the spin-off is jointly and severally liable for the federal income tax liability of our entire consolidated tax reporting group for that taxable period. We have entered into a tax sharing agreement with a subsidiary of MII that allocates the responsibility for prior period taxes of our consolidated tax reporting group between us and MII and its subsidiaries. However, if the subsidiary of MII were unable to pay, we could be required to pay the entire amount of such taxes. Other provisions of federal law establish similar liability for other matters, including laws governing tax-qualified pension plans as well as other contingent liabilities.

Our spin-off from MII could result in substantial tax liability.

MII obtained a private letter ruling from the IRS substantially to the effect that, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the spin-off qualified under Section 355 of the Code and certain transactions related to the MII spin-off qualified under Sections 355 and/or 368 of the Code. If the factual assumptions or representations made in the private letter ruling request are inaccurate or incomplete in any material respect, then we will not be able to rely on the ruling. Furthermore, the IRS will not rule on whether a distribution such as the MII spin-off satisfies certain requirements necessary to obtain tax-free treatment under Section 355 of the Code. Rather, the private letter ruling is based on representations by MII that those requirements have been satisfied, and any inaccuracy in those representations could invalidate the ruling.

Under the terms of the tax sharing agreement we entered into in connection with the MII spin-off, we are generally responsible for any taxes imposed on us or MII and its subsidiaries in the event that the MII spin-off and/or certain related preparatory transactions were to fail to qualify for tax-free treatment. However, if the MII spin-off and/or certain related preparatory transactions were to fail to qualify for tax-free treatment because of actions or failures to act by MII or its subsidiaries, a subsidiary of MII would be responsible for all such taxes. If we are liable for taxes under the tax sharing agreement, that liability could have a material adverse effect on us.

Potential indemnification liabilities to MII pursuant to the master separation agreement could materially adversely affect our company.

The master separation agreement with MII provides for, among other things, the principal corporate transactions required to effect the MII spin-off, certain conditions to the MII spin-off and provisions governing the relationship between our company and MII with respect to and resulting from the MII spin-off. Among other things, the master separation agreement provides for indemnification obligations designed to make our company financially responsible for substantially all liabilities that may exist relating to our business activities, whether incurred prior to or after the MII spin-off, as well as those obligations of MII assumed by us pursuant to the master separation agreement. If we are required to indemnify MII under the circumstances set forth in the December 2011 Form 10-K as originally filed and doesmaster separation agreement, we may be subject to substantial liabilities.

In connection with our separation from MII, MII will indemnify us for certain liabilities. However, there can be no assurance that the indemnity will be sufficient to insure us against the full amount of such liabilities, or that MII’s ability to satisfy its indemnification obligation will not reflect events occurring afterbe impaired in the original filing of the December 2011 Form 10-K.future.

Pursuant to Rule 406Tthe master separation agreement, MII has agreed to indemnify us for certain liabilities. However, third parties could seek to hold us responsible for any of Regulation S-T, the interactive data files containedliabilities that MII has agreed to retain, and there can be no assurance that the indemnity from MII will be sufficient to protect us against the full amount of such liabilities, or that MII will be able to fully satisfy its indemnification obligations. Moreover, even if we ultimately succeed in Exhibit 101recovering from MII any amounts for which we are deemed “not filed”held liable, we may be temporarily required to bear these losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity.

Risks Relating to the Proposed Spin-Off of Our Power Generation Business

The proposed spin-off of our Power Generation business is contingent upon the satisfaction of a number of conditions, may require significant time and attention of our management and may not achieve the intended results, and difficulties in connection with the spin-off could have an adverse effect on our operations, profitability and cash flow.

We are pursuing a spin-off of our Power Generation business through a pro-rata distribution to our stockholders of the common stock of a subsidiary that would hold, directly or indirectly, the assets and liabilities of our Power Generation businesses. The spin-off will create a new, independent publicly traded power generation company, Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc. (“BW”). Concurrent with the spin-off, the Company will change its name to BWX Technologies, Inc. (“BWXT”). The spin-off will be contingent upon various conditions, including the approval of our Board of Directors, review by the NRC, the effectiveness of a Form 10 registration statement filed with the SEC, an opinion of tax counsel regarding the tax treatment of the transaction and other conditions. For these and other reasons, the spin-off may not be completed. Additionally, execution of the proposed spin-off will likely

require significant time and attention of our management, which could distract management from the operation of our business and the execution of our other strategic initiatives. Some of our employees may also be uncertain about their future roles within the separate companies pending the completion of the spin-off. Further, although we believe separating the Power Generation business from our Government & Nuclear Operations business by means of the spin-off will provide financial, operational, managerial and other benefits to us and our shareholders, the spin-off may not provide such results on the scope or scale we anticipate, and we may not realize the assumed benefits of the spin-off. In addition, we will incur one-time costs in connection with the spin-off that may exceed our estimates or could negate some of the benefits we expect to realize as a result of the spin-off. If we do not realize the assumed benefits of the spin-off or if our costs exceed our estimates, then we could suffer a material adverse effect on our financial condition. Any such difficulties could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

Following the spin-off, the value of your shares of common stock in: (a) BWXT and (b) BW may collectively trade at an aggregate price less than what the Company’s common stock might trade at had the spin-off not occurred.

While we believe the spin-off will benefit our shareholders, the common stock of: (a) BWXT and (b) BW that you may hold following the spin-off may collectively trade at a value less than the price at which the Company’s common stock might have traded at had the spin-off not occurred. The reason for this includes the future performance of either BWXT or BW as separate, independent companies, and the future shareholder base and market for BWXT’s common shares and BW’s common stock and the prices at which these stocks individually trade.

Potential indemnification liabilities relating to the spin-off could materially adversely affect us.

We expect to enter into agreements with BW to provide for, among other things, the principal corporate transactions required to effect the planned spin-off, certain conditions to the spin-off and provisions governing the relationship between us and BW with respect to and resulting from the planned spin-off. Among other things, we expect these agreements to provide for indemnification obligations designed to make us financially responsible for substantially all liabilities that may exist relating to our business activities, whether incurred prior to or after the spin-off. If we are required to indemnify BW, we may be subject to substantial liabilities.

In connection with the proposed spin-off, we expect BW to agree to indemnify us for certain liabilities. However, there can be no assurance that the indemnity will be sufficient to insure us against the full amount of such liabilities, or that BW will be able to satisfy its indemnification obligations.

We expect BW will agree to indemnify us for certain liabilities. However, third parties could seek to hold us responsible for any of the liabilities that BW will agree to retain, and there can be no assurance that the indemnity from BW will be sufficient to protect us against the full amount of such liabilities, or that BW will be able to fully satisfy its indemnification obligations. Moreover, even if we ultimately succeed in recovering from BW any amounts for which we are held liable, we may be temporarily required to bear these losses.

The spin-off could result in substantial tax liability.

The planned spin-off is conditioned on our receipt of an opinion of counsel, in form and substance satisfactory to us, substantially to the effect that, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, the spin-off will qualify under Section 355 of the Code and certain transactions related to the spin-off will qualify under Sections 355 and/or 368 of the Code. The opinion will rely on, among other things, various assumptions and representations as to factual matters made by us and BW which, if inaccurate or incomplete in any material respect, could jeopardize the conclusions reached by such counsel in its opinion. The opinion will not be binding on the IRS or the courts, and there can be no assurance that the IRS or the courts will not challenge the conclusions stated in the opinion or that any such challenge would not prevail.

We are not aware of any facts or circumstances that would cause the assumptions or representations that will be relied on in the opinion to be inaccurate or incomplete in any material respect. If, notwithstanding receipt of the opinion, the spin-off were subsequently determined not to qualify under Section 355 of the Code, each U.S. holder of our common stock who receives shares of BW common stock in the spin-off would generally be treated as receiving a taxable distribution of property in an amount equal to the fair market value of the shares of BW common stock

received. That distribution would be taxable to each such stockholder as a dividend to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits. For each such stockholder, any amount that exceeded our earnings and profits would be treated first as a non-taxable return of capital to the extent of such stockholder’s tax basis in its shares of our common stock with any remaining amount being taxed as a capital gain. In addition, if certain related preparatory transactions were to fail to qualify for tax-free treatment, they would be treated as taxable asset sales and/or distributions to the Company.

We expect to enter into a tax sharing agreement in connection with the spin-off. Pursuant to this agreement, we will agree with BW on the allocation of spin-off related tax liabilities and the indemnification provisions relating to these liabilities. If we are liable for taxes under the tax sharing agreement, that liability could have a material adverse effect on us. Additionally, there can be no assurance that any indemnities from BW will be sufficient to protect us against any potential tax liabilities.

Risks Relating to Ownership of Our Common Stock

Provisions in our corporate documents and Delaware law could delay or prevent a change in control of our company, even if that change may be considered beneficial by some stockholders.

The existence of some provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and Delaware law could discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company that a stockholder may consider favorable. These include provisions:

In addition, we are subject to Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which may have an anti-takeover effect with respect to transactions not approved in advance by our Board of Directors, including discouraging takeover attempts that might result in a premium over the market price for shares of our common stock.

We believe these provisions protect our stockholders from coercive or otherwise unfair takeover tactics by requiring potential acquirers to negotiate with our Board of Directors and by providing our Board of Directors with more time to assess any acquisition proposal, and are not intended to make our company immune from takeovers. However, these provisions apply even if the offer may be considered beneficial by some stockholders and could delay or prevent an acquisition that our Board of Directors determines is not in the best interests of our company and our stockholders.

We may issue preferred stock that could dilute the voting power or reduce the value of our common stock.

Our certificate of incorporation authorizes us to issue, without the approval of our stockholders, one or more classes or series of preferred stock having such designation, powers, preferences and relative, participating, optional and other special rights, including preferences over our common stock respecting dividends and distributions, as our Board of Directors generally may determine. The terms of one or more classes or series of preferred stock could

dilute the voting power or reduce the value of our common stock. For example, we could grant holders of preferred stock the right to elect some number of our directors in all events or on the happening of specified events or the right to veto specified transactions. Similarly, the repurchase or redemption rights or liquidation preferences we could assign to holders of preferred stock could affect the residual value of the common stock.

None

Item 2.

PROPERTIES

The following table provides the segment name, location and general use of each of our principal properties at December 31, 2014 that we own or lease.

We also own or lease a number of sales, administrative and field construction offices, warehouses and equipment maintenance centers strategically located throughout the world. We consider each of our significant properties to be suitable and adequate for its intended use.

For further details regarding our properties, see Item 1, “Business.”

Item 3.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

The information set forth under the heading “Investigations and Litigation” in Note 10 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report is incorporated by reference into this Item 3.

We own, manage and operate Ebensburg Power Company, an independent power company that produces alternative electrical energy. Through one of our subsidiaries, Revloc Reclamation Service, Inc., Ebensburg Power Company operates multiple coal refuse sites in Western Pennsylvania (collectively, the “Revloc Sites”). At the Revloc Sites, Ebensburg Power Company utilizes coal refuse from abandoned surface mine lands to produce energy. Beyond converting the coal refuse to energy, Ebensburg Power Company is also taking steps to reclaim the former surface mine lands to make the land and streams more attractive for wildlife and human uses.

The Revloc Sites are subject to regulation by the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration under the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977. Information concerning mine safety violations or other regulatory matters required by Section 1503(a) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and this Item is included in exhibit 95 to this annual report on Form 10-K.

P A R T     I I

Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol BWC.

High and low common stock prices by quarter in the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 were as follows:

YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014

YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013

On November 5, 2012, our Board of Directors approved an annual cash dividend, payable quarterly, of $0.32 per share. On November 8, 2013, our Board of Directors approved an increase to the annual cash dividend, payable quarterly, to $0.40 per share. Our ability to pay dividends may be limited by certain restrictions in our credit agreement. Our Board of Directors will continue to evaluate our cash dividend policy from time to time.

As of January 31, 2015, there were approximately 2,234 record holders of our common stock.

The following table provides information on our equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2014:

Equity Compensation Plan Information

In November 2012, we announced that a share repurchase program was authorized by our Board of Directors. The following table provides information on our purchases of equity securities during the quarter ended December 31, 2014. Any shares purchased that were not part of a registration statementpublicly announced plan or prospectus for purposesprogram are related to repurchases of Sections 11 or 12common stock pursuant to the provisions of employee benefit plans that permit the repurchase of shares to satisfy statutory tax withholding obligations.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

The following graph provides a comparison of our four-year and five-month cumulative total shareholder return through December 31, 2014 to the return of the Securities ActS&P 500 and our custom peer group. The following graph shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or “filed” with the SEC or be subject to Regulation 14A or 14C (other than as provided in Item 201 of 1933, as amended, are deemed “not filed” for purposesRegulation S-K) or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that B&W specifically incorporates it by reference into such filing.

The peer group used for the four-year and five-month comparison beginning with July 2010 is comprised of the following companies:

Item 6.

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

We immediately recognize actuarial gains (losses) for our pension and postretirement benefit plans into earnings in the fourth quarter each year as a component of net periodic benefit cost. The effect of this adjustment for 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010 on pre-tax income was $(241.6) million, $222.9 million, $(32.0) million, $(215.8) million, and $(91.8) million, respectively.

In the year ended December 31, 2014, the MEGTEC acquisition, which was completed on June 20, 2014, contributed $105.4 million of revenues and $5.3 million of operating income for the year ended December 31, 2014. Additionally, we recorded contract losses totaling $11.6 million for additional estimated costs to complete our Power Generation segment’s Berlin Station project. This project experienced unforeseen worksite conditions and fuel specification issues that caused schedule delays, resulting in us filing suit against the customer in January 2014. This project has now reached substantial completion. We also incurred $41.1 million of charges related to restructuring activities. In addition, we recorded a gain in other income of $14.2 million for the receipt and related fair value adjustment of the Centrus Energy Corp. common stock and notes that we received in the bankruptcy settlement in exchange for our investment in USEC Inc. (“USEC”).

In the year ended December 31, 2013, we recorded contract losses totaling $35.6 million for additional estimated costs to complete our Power Generation segment’s Berlin Station project. We also incurred $39.6 million of charges related to restructuring activities. In addition, we recorded an impairment charge totaling $19.1 million associated with our investment in USEC.

In the year ended December 31, 2012, we recorded contract losses totaling $16.9 million, net of claims, for additional estimated costs to complete our Power Generation segment’s Berlin Station project. We also entered into an agreement with the customer of a Nuclear Energy project to settle contract claims resulting in recognition of revenues totaling approximately $18.4 million. In addition, we recorded an impairment charge totaling $27.0 million associated with our investment in USEC.

In the year ended December 31, 2011, we recorded additional costs totaling approximately $61.8 million ($50.7 million in our Nuclear Energy segment and $11.1 in our Nuclear Operations segment) to complete certain projects attributable to changes in estimate due to productivity and scheduling issues. In addition, we recognized a gain totaling approximately $10.9 million attributable to a settlement with the sellers of Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (“NFS”), a wholly owned subsidiary in our Nuclear Operations segment, related to adverse operating conditions in existence at the acquisition date.

Our historical financial information prior to July 2010 reflects the performance of a combined reporting entity comprised primarily of the assets and liabilities involved in managing and operating what was previously the Power Generation Systems and Government Operations segments of MII and may not provide a useful indicator of future performance.

Statements we make in the following discussion, which express a belief, expectation or intention, as well as those that are not historical fact, are forward-looking statements that are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results, performance or achievements, or industry results, could differ materially from those we express in the following discussion as a result of a variety of factors, including the risks and uncertainties we have referred to under the headings “Cautionary Statement Concerning Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in Items 1 and 1A of Part I of this report.

GENERAL

We operate in five business segments: Power Generation, Nuclear Operations, Technical Services, Nuclear Energy and mPower. In general, we operate in capital-intensive industries and rely on large contracts for a substantial amount of our revenues. We are currently exploring growth strategies across our segments through acquisitions to expand and complement our existing businesses. We would expect to fund these opportunities by cash on hand, external financing, including debt, equity or some combination thereof.

On November 5, 2014, we announced plans to separate our Power Generation business from our Government & Nuclear Operations business, which includes the Nuclear Operations, Technical Services, Nuclear Energy and mPower segments, through a spin-off, creating a new independent, publicly traded power generation company, Babcock & Wilcox Enterprises, Inc. (“BW”). Concurrent with the spin-off, the Company will change its name to BWX Technologies, Inc. (“BWXT”). We plan to effect the separation through a tax-free spin-off transaction. Our Board of Directors and management believe that this proposed separation will provide the following benefits:

Before the distribution date, BW and BWXT are expected to enter into a master separation agreement that will contain the key provisions relating to the separation. The master separation agreement will identify the assets to be transferred, liabilities to be assumed and contracts to be assigned, if any, either to BW by BWXT or by BWXT to BW in the spin-off and describe when and how these transfers, assumptions and assignments will occur. In addition, before the distribution BW and BWXT or certain of their respective subsidiaries are also expected to enter into agreements to define various continuing relationships between them in various contexts. These are expected to include transition services agreements under which the parties will provide each other certain transition services on an interim basis, as well as an agreement providing for the sharing of taxes incurred before and after the distribution, various indemnification rights with respect to tax matters and restrictions to preserve the tax-free status of the distribution.

In connection with the spin-off, we expect to incur one-time, non-recurring after-tax separation costs between $45 million and $55 million. These one-time costs are expected to consist of, among other things: financial, legal, tax, accounting and other advisory fees; and regulatory fees incurred as part of the planned spin-off of our Power Generation business; and retention and severance costs.

We expect that the spin-off will be effective by mid-summer 2015. The spin-off, however, is subject to the completion of several customary conditions required to be satisfied to the sole and absolute discretion of our Board of Directors prior to the distribution including, but not limited to, the receipt of an opinion of tax counsel regarding tax treatment of the spin-off as of the distribution date and certain regulatory approvals. However, even if all of the conditions have been satisfied, we may amend, modify or abandon any and all terms of the distribution and the related transactions at any time prior to the distribution date.

Outlook

Power Generation

We expect the backlog of our Power Generation segment of approximately $2.2 billion at December 31, 2014 to produce revenues of approximately $1.0 billion in 2015, not including any change orders or new contracts that may be awarded during the year. Through this segment, we are actively bidding on and, in some cases, beginning preliminary work on projects that we expect will be awarded to us in 2015 subject to successful contract negotiations. These projects are not currently reflected in backlog.

Our Power Generation segment’s overall activity depends significantly on the capital expenditures and operations and maintenance expenditures of global electric power generating companies, other steam-using industries and industrial facilities with environmental compliance needs, the demand for electricity and capacity utilization of operating power plants, the price of natural gas in the United States, industrial plants and other steam-using industries and an increased emphasis on environmental emissions globally across a broad range of industries and markets.

We continue to seek opportunities to optimize our profitability within all our markets through an operating model that is designed to be strategically efficient and cost competitive; to expand international offerings through increased marketing, manufacturing and operational presence in regions around the world where we expect continued demand growth and increased need for services; and to seek partnering arrangements and acquisitions to expand our market presence and capabilities. On June 20, 2014, we completed the acquisition of MEGTEC. MEGTEC designs, engineers, manufactures and services air pollution control systems and coating / drying equipment for a variety of industrial applications and complements our existing environmental products and solutions offerings.

Globally, efforts to reduce the environmental impact of burning fossil fuels may create opportunities and risks as existing generating capacity is replaced with cleaner technologies. We are actively researching, developing and deploying a range of products to serve this opportunity, including lower-carbon technologies that enable clean use of fossil fuels, such as ultra-supercritical boilers; carbon-neutral technologies, such as biomass-fueled boilers and gasifiers; gas-fired package boiler technologies; and select carbon dioxide capture technologies. Additionally, our significant installed base provides a consistent and recurring aftermarket stream of parts, retrofits and services. Economic recovery, particularly in the United States, as well as major investments in global markets have

strengthened demand, while tightening environmental regulations in China, India and developing countries are creating new opportunities. We foresee long-term trends toward increased environmental controls for global electric power generating companies, other steam-using industries and industrial facilities with environmental compliance needs around the world. However, downturns in regional economies adversely impact demand in the short-term.

Nuclear Operations

We expect the backlog of our Nuclear Operations segment of approximately $2.8 billion at December 31, 2014 to produce revenues of approximately $1.1 billion in 2015, not including any change orders or new contracts that may be awarded during the year.

The revenues of our Nuclear Operations segment are largely a function of defense spending by the U.S. Government. As a supplier of major nuclear components for certain U.S. Government programs, we are a significant participant in the defense industry and have not been negatively impacted by sequestration or federal budget reductions to date. We believe many of our programs are well aligned with national defense and other strategic priorities as we supply high-end equipment for submarines and aircraft carriers for the U.S. Navy. However, it is possible that reductions in federal government spending and sequestration could have an adverse impact on the operating results and cash flows of our Nuclear Operations and Technical Services segments in the future.

Technical Services

A significant portion of this segment’s operations are conducted through joint ventures, which typically earn fees and we account for them following the equity method of accounting. See Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report for financial information on our equity method investments. As a result, this segment reports minimal backlog and revenues.

On January 8, 2013, we were notified that our joint venture, Nuclear Production Partners, LLC, was not selected to lead the National Nuclear Safety Administration’s (“NNSA”) combined Management and Operating contract for the Y-12 National Security Complex and Pantex Plant. The transition of these facilities to the new contractor was completed on June 30, 2014. These joint ventures contributed $21.5 million, $34.0 million and $37.7 million to our operating income in the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. However, with our specialized capabilities of full life-cycle management of special nuclear materials, facilities and technologies, we believe our Technical Services segment is well-positioned to continue to participate in the continuing cleanup, operation and management of the nuclear sites, laboratories and weapons complexes maintained by the DOE, Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and the U.K. Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.

Nuclear Energy

We expect the backlog of our Nuclear Energy segment of approximately $264 million at December 31, 2014 to produce revenues of approximately $87 million in 2015, not including any change orders or new contracts that may be awarded during the year. The revenues in this segment primarily depend on the demand and competitiveness of nuclear energy. The activity of this segment depends on the timing of maintenance outages primarily in the Canadian market and the cyclical nature of capital expenditures and major refurbishments for nuclear utility customers which could cause variability in our financial results.

mPower

The development, general and administrative and capital costs to develop and commercialize our B&W mPower™ technology will require a substantial amount of investment over a period of years, and the funding requirements may vary significantly from period to period.

On April 14, 2014, we announced our plans to restructure the mPower program to reduce spending and focus on technology development. Beginning in the third quarter of 2014, we slowed the pace of development and continued to search for additional investors in the mPower program. Going forward, we plan to invest no more than $15 million per year, net of amounts reimbursed from the Funding Program. As a result of our plans to restructure the mPower program, our operating income was negatively impacted by $23.9 million for the year ended December 31,

2014, consisting of $10.6 million of special charges for restructuring activities as further discussed below and $13.3 million of unrecognized cost-share due to restrictions on additional authorized funding by the DOE under the Funding Program. We intend to continue working with the DOE to further the program. At this time, the latest extension to the Cooperative Agreement has expired and the DOE funding has been suspended. If a mutually agreeable plan is not identified, future amounts may not be made available to us under the Funding Program.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES

Our financial statements and accompanying notes are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Preparing financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. These estimates and assumptions are affected by management’s application of accounting policies. We believe the following are our most critical accounting policies that we apply in the preparation of our financial statements. These policies require our most difficult, subjective and complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates of matters that are inherently uncertain.

Contracts and Revenue Recognition. We determine the appropriate accounting method for each of our long-term contracts before work on the project begins. We generally recognize contract revenues and related costs on a percentage-of-completion method for individual contracts or combinations of contracts based on work performed, man hours or a cost-to-cost method, as applicable to the product or activity involved. We recognize estimated contract revenue and resulting income based on costs incurred to date as a percentage of total estimated costs. Certain costs may be excluded from the cost-to-cost method of measuring progress, such as significant costs for materials and major third-party subcontractors, if it appears that such exclusion would result in a more meaningful measurement of actual contract progress and resulting periodic allocation of income. For all contracts, if a current estimate of total contract cost indicates a loss on a contract, the projected loss is recognized in full when determined. It is possible that current estimates could materially change for various reasons, including, but not limited to, fluctuations in forecasted labor productivity or steel and other raw material prices. We routinely review estimates related to our contracts, and revisions to profitability are reflected in the quarterly and annual earnings we report. In the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, we recognized net favorable changes in estimate related to long-term contracts accounted for on the percentage-of-completion basis that increased operating income by approximately $61.4 million, $21.9 million and $93.1 million, respectively. The 2014 and 2013 amounts include contract losses totaling $11.6 million and $35.6 million, respectively, for additional estimated costs to complete our Power Generation segment’s Berlin Station project. This is in addition to approximately $16.9 million of contract losses, net of claims, recorded on this project in 2012. This project has now reached substantial completion.

For contracts as to which we are unable to estimate the final profitability except to assure that no loss will ultimately be incurred, we recognize equal amounts of revenue and cost until the final results can be estimated more precisely. For these deferred profit recognition contracts, we recognize revenue and cost equally and only recognize gross margin when probable and reasonably estimable, which we generally determine to be when the contract is approximately 70% complete. We treat long-term construction contracts that contain such a level of risk and uncertainty that estimation of the final outcome is impractical except to assure that no loss will be incurred as deferred profit recognition contracts. We did not enter into any contracts that we have accounted for as deferred profit recognition contracts during 2014, 2013 or 2012.

Our policy is to account for fixed-price contracts under the completed-contract method if we believe that we are unable to reasonably forecast cost to complete at start-up. For example, if we have no experience in performing the type of work on a particular project and are unable to develop reasonably dependable estimates of total costs to complete, we would follow the completed-contract method of accounting for such projects. Generally, our management’s policy is not to enter into fixed-price contracts without an accurate estimate of cost to complete. However, it is possible that in the time between contract execution and the start of work on a project, we could lose confidence in our ability to forecast cost to complete based on intervening events, including, but not limited to, experience on similar projects, civil unrest, strikes and volatility in our expected costs. In such a situation, we would use the completed-contract method of accounting for that project. We did not enter into any contracts that we have accounted for under the completed-contract method during 2014, 2013 or 2012.

For parts orders and certain aftermarket services activities, we recognize revenues as goods are delivered and work is performed.

Although we continually strive to improve our ability to estimate our contract costs and profitability, adjustments to overall contract costs due to unforeseen events could be significant in future periods. We recognize claims for extra work or for changes in scope of work in contract revenues, to the extent of costs incurred, when we believe collection is probable and can be reasonably estimated. We recognize income from contract change orders or claims when formally agreed with the customer. We regularly assess the collectability of contract revenues and receivables from customers.

Property, Plant and Equipment. We carry our property, plant and equipment at depreciated cost, reduced by provisions to recognize economic impairment when we determine impairment has occurred. Property, plant and equipment amounts are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset, or asset group, may not be recoverable. An impairment loss would be recognized when the carrying amount of an asset exceeds the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to result from the use of the asset and its eventual disposition. The amount of the impairment loss to be recorded is calculated by the excess of the asset carrying value over its fair value. Fair value is generally determined using a discounted cash flow analysis. Our estimates of cash flow may differ from actual cash flow due to, among other things, technological changes, economic conditions or changes in operating performance. Any changes in such factors may negatively affect our business segments and result in future asset impairments.

We depreciate our property, plant and equipment using the straight-line method, over estimated economic useful lives of eight to 33 years for buildings and three to 28 years for machinery and equipment. We expense the costs of maintenance, repairs and renewals, which do not materially prolong the useful life of an asset, as we incur them.

Investments in Unconsolidated Affiliates. We use the equity method of accounting for affiliates in which our investment ownership ranges from 20% to 50%, unless significant economic or governance considerations indicate that we are unable to exert significant influence, in which case the cost method is used. The equity method is also used for affiliates in which our investment ownership is greater than 50% but we do not have a controlling interest. Currently, all of our material investments in affiliates that are not included in our consolidated results are recorded using the equity method. Affiliates in which our investment ownership is less than 20% and where we are unable to exert significant influence are carried at cost.

Self-Insurance. We have a wholly owned insurance subsidiary that provides employer’s liability, general and automotive liability and workers’ compensation insurance and, from time to time, builder’s risk insurance within certain limits to our companies. We may also have business reasons in the future to have our insurance subsidiary accept other risks that we cannot or do not wish to transfer to outside insurance companies. When estimating our self-insurance liabilities, we consider a number of factors, including historical claims experience and trend lines, projected growth patterns, inflation and exposure forecasts. The assumptions we make with respect to each of these factors represent our judgment as to the most probable cumulative impact of each factor on our future obligations. Our calculation of self-insurance liabilities requires us to apply judgment to estimate the ultimate cost to settle reported claims and claims incurred but not yet reported as of the balance sheet date. We engage the services of an actuarial firm to assist us in the calculation of our liabilities for self-insurance. While the actual outcome of insured claims could differ significantly from estimated amounts, these loss estimates and accruals recorded in our financial statements for claims have historically been reasonable in light of the actual amount of claims paid. Provisions for exposure to self-insurance claims and the related payments of claims have historically not had a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows, and we do not expect these provisions to have a material impact on our self-insurance programs in the future.

Pension Plans and Postretirement Benefits. We utilize actuarial and other assumptions in calculating the cost and benefit obligations of our pension and postretirement benefits. The assumptions utilized in the determination of our benefit cost and obligations include assumptions regarding discount rates, expected returns on plan assets, mortality and health care cost trends. The assumptions utilized represent our best estimates based on historical experience and other factors.

Actual experience that differs from these assumptions or future changes in assumptions will affect our recognized benefit obligations and related costs. We immediately recognize net actuarial gains and losses into earnings in the

fourth quarter as a component of net periodic benefit cost. Net actuarial gains and losses occur when actual experience differs from any of the various assumptions used to value our pension and postretirement benefit plans or when assumptions, which are revisited annually through our update of our actuarial valuations, change due to current market conditions or underlying demographic changes. The primary factors contributing to net actuarial gains and losses are changes in the discount rate used to value the obligations as of the measurement date each year, the difference between the actual return on plan assets and the expected return on plan assets and changes in health care cost trends. The effect of changes in the discount rate and expected rate of return on plan assets assumptions in combination with the actual return on plan assets can result in significant changes in our estimated pension and postretirement benefit cost and our consolidated financial condition. Additionally, in the current year, we adjusted our mortality assumption to reflect mortality improvements identified by the Society of Actuaries, adjusted for the Company’s experience. The impact of the change in this assumption caused a $117.7 million increase in our pension liability.

The following sensitivity analysis shows the impact of a 25 basis point change in the assumed discount rate, return on assets, and health care cost trend rate on our pension and postretirement benefit plan obligations and expense for the year ended December 31, 2014:

Loss Contingencies. We estimate liabilities for loss contingencies when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss is reasonably estimable. We provide disclosure when there is a reasonable possibility that the ultimate loss will exceed the recorded provision or if such probable loss is not reasonably estimable. We are currently involved in some significant litigation, as discussed in Note 10 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report. We have accrued our estimates of the probable losses associated with these matters. However, our losses are typically resolved over long periods of time and are often difficult to estimate due to the possibility of multiple actions by third parties. Therefore, it is possible that future earnings could be affected by changes in our estimates related to these matters.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets. Each year, we evaluate goodwill at each reporting unit to assess recoverability, and impairments, if any, are recognized in earnings. We perform a qualitative analysis when we believe that there is sufficient excess fair value over carrying value based on our most recent quantitative assessment, adjusted for relevant facts and circumstances that could affect fair value. Deterioration in macroeconomic, industry and market conditions, cost factors, overall financial performance, share price decline or entity and reporting unit specific events could cause us to believe a qualitative test is no longer appropriate.

When we determine that it is appropriate to test goodwill for impairment utilizing a quantitative test, the first step of the test compares the fair value of a reporting unit to its carrying amount, including goodwill. We utilize both the income and market valuation approaches to provide inputs into the estimate of the fair value of our reporting units, which would be considered by market participants.

Under the income valuation approach, we employ a discounted cash flow model to estimate the fair value of each reporting unit. This model requires the use of significant estimates and assumptions regarding future revenues, costs, margins, capital expenditures, changes in working capital, terminal year growth rate and cost of capital. Our cash flow models are based on our forecasted results for the applicable reporting units. Actual results could differ materially from our projections. Some assumptions, such as future revenues, costs and changes in working capital are company driven and could be affected by a loss of one or more significant contracts or customers, failure to control costs on certain contracts; a decline in U.S. Government funding or a decline in demand based on changing economic or regulatory conditions. Changes in external market conditions may affect certain other assumptions, such as the cost of capital. Market conditions can be volatile and are outside of our control.

Under the market valuation approach, we employ the guideline publicly traded company method, which indicates the fair value of the equity of each reporting unit by comparing it to publicly traded companies in similar lines of business. After identifying and selecting guideline companies, we analyze their business and financial profiles for relative similarity. Factors such as size, growth, risk and profitability are analyzed and compared to each of our reporting units. Assumptions include the selection of our peer companies and use of market multiples, which could deteriorate or increase based on the profitability of our competitors and performance of their stock, which is often dependent on the performance of the stock market and general economy as a whole.

Adverse changes in these assumptions utilized within the first step of our impairment test could cause a reduction or elimination of excess fair value over carrying value, resulting in potential recognition of impairment. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step of the goodwill impairment test is performed to measure the amount of the impairment loss, if any. The second step compares the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill.

We completed our annual review of goodwill for each of our reporting units for the year ended December 31, 2014, which indicated that we had no impairment of goodwill. The fair value of our reporting units was substantially in excess of carrying value.

Each year, we evaluate indefinite lived intangible assets to assess recoverability, and impairments, if any, are recognized in earnings. We perform a qualitative assessment when testing indefinite lived intangible assets for impairment to determine whether events or circumstances that could affect the significant inputs used in determining fair value have occurred that indicate that it is more likely than not that the indefinite lived intangible asset is impaired. Deterioration in macroeconomic, industry and market conditions, cost factors or overall financial performance could cause us to believe a qualitative test is no longer appropriate. When quantitative assessments are performed, we primarily utilize income-based valuation approaches. Under the income-based valuation approach, we employ a relief from royalty method of valuation. This method requires significant assumptions, including assumed royalty rate, future revenues and cost of capital. Assumptions related to operating performance, such as future revenues, could be affected by loss of a customer contract, a decline in U.S. Government funding or a decline in demand based on changing economic or regulatory conditions. Changes in external market conditions may affect certain other assumptions, such as the cost of capital. Market conditions can be volatile and are outside of our control.

Adverse changes in these assumptions utilized within our indefinite lived intangible asset impairment test could cause a reduction or elimination of excess fair value over carrying value, resulting in potential recognition of impairment.

We have completed our annual review of our indefinite lived intangible assets for the year ended December 31, 2014, which indicated that we had no impairment. The fair value of our indefinite lived intangible assets was substantially in excess of carrying value.

Asset Retirement Obligations and Environmental Clean-up Costs. We accrue for future decommissioning of our nuclear facilities that will permit the release of these facilities to unrestricted use at the end of each facility’s life, which is a requirement of our licenses from the NRC. In accordance with the FASB TopicAsset Retirement and Environmental Obligations, we record the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in

which it is incurred. In estimating fair value, we use present value of cash flows expected to be incurred in settling our obligations. To the extent possible, we perform a marketplace assessment of the cost and timing of performing the retirement activities. We apply a credit-adjusted risk-free interest rate to our expected cash flows in our determination of fair value. When we initially record such a liability, we capitalize a cost by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is accreted to its present value each period, and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of a liability, we will settle the obligation for its recorded amount or incur a gain or loss. This topic applies to environmental liabilities associated with assets that we currently operate and are obligated to remove from service. For environmental liabilities associated with assets that we no longer operate, we have accrued amounts based on the estimated costs of clean-up activities, net of the anticipated effect of any applicable cost-sharing arrangements. We adjust the estimated costs as further information develops or circumstances change. An exception to this accounting treatment relates to the work we perform for two facilities for which the U.S. Government is obligated to pay substantially all the decommissioning costs.

Income Taxes. Income tax expense for federal, foreign, state and local income taxes are calculated on pre-tax income based on current tax law and includes the cumulative effect of any changes in tax rates from those used previously in determining deferred tax assets and liabilities. We record a valuation allowance to reduce our deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than not to be realized. We assess deferred taxes and the adequacy of the valuation allowance on a quarterly basis. In the ordinary course of business there is inherent uncertainty in quantifying our income tax positions. We assess our income tax positions and record tax benefits for all years subject to examination based upon management’s evaluation of the facts, circumstances, and information available at the reporting date. For those tax positions where it is more likely than not that a tax benefit will be sustained, we have recorded the largest amount of tax benefit with a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement with a taxing authority that has full knowledge of all relevant information. For those income tax positions where it is not more likely than not that a tax benefit will be sustained, no tax benefit has been recognized in the financial statements. We record interest and penalties (net of any applicable tax benefit) related to income taxes as a component of provision for income taxes on our consolidated statements of income.

Warranty. We accrue estimated expense included in cost of operations on our consolidated statements of income to satisfy contractual warranty requirements when we recognize the associated revenue on the related contracts. In addition, we record specific provisions or reductions when we expect the actual warranty costs to significantly differ from the accrued estimates. Factors that impact our estimate of warranty costs include prior history of warranty claims and our estimates of future costs of materials and labor. Such changes could have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Stock-Based Compensation. We account for stock-based compensation in accordance with FASB TopicCompensation – Stock Compensation. Under the fair value recognition provisions of this statement, the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments is measured at the grant date based on the fair value of the award. Stock-based compensation expense is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service periods of the awards, which is generally equivalent to the vesting term. We use a Black-Scholes model to determine the fair value of certain share-based awards, such as stock options and stock appreciation rights. For performance shares or units granted in the year ended December 31, 2014 that contain a Relative Total Shareholder Return vesting criteria, we utilize a Monte Carlo simulation to determine the grant date fair value, which determines the probability of satisfying the market condition included in the award. The determination of the fair value of a share-based payment award using an option-pricing model requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, such as the expected life of the award and stock price volatility. For liability-classified awards, such as cash-settled restricted stock units and performance units, fair values are determined at grant date using the closing price of our common stock and are remeasured at the end of each reporting period through the date of settlement.

Business Combinations. We account for acquisitions in accordance with FASB Topic Business Combinations. This topic broadens the fair value measurements and recognition of assets acquired, liabilities assumed and interests transferred as a result of business combinations. It also provides disclosure requirements to assist users of the financial statements in evaluating the nature and financial effects of business combinations.

For further discussion of recently adopted accounting standards, see Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS – YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012

Selected financial highlights are presented in the table below:

Consolidated Results of Operations

Year Ended December 31, 2014 vs. 2013

Consolidated revenues decreased 10.6%, or $346.2 million, to $2.9 billion in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $3.3 billion for the corresponding period in 2013 due to decreases in revenues from our Power Generation, Technical Services and Nuclear Energy segments totaling $281.6 million, $19.4 million and $129.1 million, respectively. These decreases were partially offset by increased revenues in our Nuclear Operations segment totaling $53.3 million.

Consolidated operating income decreased $539.0 million to a loss of $2.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to income of $536.4 million for the corresponding period in 2013. Operating income includes actuarial gains and losses (“MTM charges”) related to our pension and postretirement plans, which reflected a non-cash gain (loss) of $(241.2) million and $222.7 million in 2014 and 2013, respectively. In addition, operating income for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 includes special charges for restructuring activities totaling $41.1 million and $39.6 million, respectively. Excluding MTM charges and special charges for restructuring activities, operating income of our reportable segments and unallocated corporate expenses decreased $73.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to 2013. Operating income in our Power Generation, Technical Services and Nuclear Energy segments declined $57.3 million, $23.0 million and $31.9 million, respectively. These decreases were partially offset by increased operating income in our Nuclear Operations and mPower segment totaling $32.7 million and $12.4 million, respectively.

Year Ended December 31, 2013 vs. 2012

Consolidated revenues decreased 0.7%, or $22.2 million, to $3.27 billion in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $3.29 billion in 2012 due to decreases in revenues from our Power Generation, Technical Services and Nuclear Energy segments totaling $18.3 million, $3.6 million and $41.8 million, respectively. These decreases were partially offset by increased revenues in our Nuclear Operations segment totaling $69.7 million.

Consolidated operating income increased $189.8 million to $536.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 from $346.6 million in 2012. Operating income includes MTM charges, which reflected a non-cash gain (loss) of $222.7 million and $(31.9) million in 2013 and 2012, respectively. In addition, operating income for the year ended December 31, 2013 includes special charges for restructuring activities totaling $39.6 million related to GCI initiatives. Excluding MTM charges and GCI charges, operating income of our reportable segments and unallocated corporate expenses decreased $25.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to 2012. Operating income in our Power Generation, Technical Services and Nuclear Energy segments declined $27.6 million, $1.5 million and $42.0 million, respectively. These decreases were partially offset by increased operating income in our Nuclear Operations and mPower segment totaling $11.6 million and $32.2 million, respectively.

Power Generation

Year Ended December 31, 2014 vs. 2013

Revenues decreased 15.9%, or $281.6 million, to $1,486.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2014, compared to $1,767.7 million in 2013. The decrease was primarily attributable to a $199.8 million decline in revenues from our new build environmental equipment business revenues, principally driven by lower levels of engineering, procurement and construction activities as projects related to the previously enacted environmental rules and regulations near completion and uncertainties continue regarding the ultimate outcome of environmental regulations. We also experienced a $95.7 million decrease in revenues from our new build steam generation systems business due to a lower level of activity on our Berlin Station project and other renewable energy projects. In addition, we experienced a decrease in revenues of $89.1 million in our aftermarket services business related to lower service projects revenues, primarily due to a large boiler retrofit and construction project that was completed in 2013. The MEGTEC acquisition, which was completed on June 20, 2014, contributed $105.4 million of revenues for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Operating income decreased $57.3 million to $98.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $155.8 million in 2013, primarily due to the lower revenues discussed above, partially offset by a $24.0 million lower loss provision recorded on the Berlin Station project as compared to the prior period. In addition, lower levels of warranty improvements in the current year had a negative impact on gross margins when compared to the prior year period. The MEGTEC acquisition contributed $5.3 million of operating income for the year ended December 31, 2014, net of $7.4 million of expense related to amortization of intangible assets. In addition, equity income from our joint ventures decreased by $9.7 million primarily due to market pressures in China and Australia, new facility costs in India and the near completion of a U.S. environmental project joint venture that generated more operating income in the corresponding period in 2013. These decreases were partially offset by a $7.1 million reduction in selling, general and administrative expenses associated with cost savings initiatives and a $3.6 million reduction in research and development expenditures, both of which are net of MEGTEC activity.

Year Ended December 31, 2013 vs. 2012

Revenues decreased 1.0%, or $18.3 million, to $1,767.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2013, compared to $1,786.0 million in 2012. The net decrease is primarily attributable to a $56.9 million decrease in our new build steam generation systems business due to a lower level of activity on waste-to-energy and industrial boiler projects. We also experienced a $12.3 million decrease in our new build environmental equipment business principally driven by lower levels of engineering, procurement and construction activities as projects related to the previously enacted environmental rules and regulations near completion and uncertainties continue regarding the ultimate outcome of environmental regulations. These decreases were partially offset by an increase in revenues of $43.6 million in our aftermarket services business as increases in boiler-related construction and maintenance services more than offset a decrease in environmental retrofit activity.

Operating income decreased $27.6 million to $155.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $183.4 million in 2012, due to contract losses totaling $35.6 million recorded for additional estimated costs to complete the Berlin Station project. These losses are in addition to $16.9 million of contract losses, net of claims, recorded for this project during the fourth quarter of 2012. In addition to the lower revenues discussed above, we also experienced more competitive profit margins and a lower level of net favorable project close-outs compared to the prior period. These decreases in income were partially offset by decreased overhead costs and a $12.5 million reduction in selling, general and administrative expenses due to ongoing cost reduction initiatives.

Nuclear Operations

Year Ended December 31, 2014 vs. 2013

Revenues increased by 4.6%, or $53.3 million, to $1,221.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $1,167.7 million in the corresponding period of 2013. This increase in revenues is primarily attributable to the $46.4 million cumulative effect impact of a contract change order that increased the value of existing contracts. In addition, increased activity in the manufacturing of nuclear components for U.S. Government programs resulted in increased revenues totaling $11.2 million in 2014 as compared to 2013. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in revenues in our naval nuclear fuel and downblending activities totaling $4.2 million due to lower downblending activities.

Operating income increased $32.7 million to $270.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $237.9 million in the corresponding period of 2013, primarily attributable to $20.6 million impact of the change order discussed above, partially offset by the recognition of the associated costs being recovered, as well as positive performance on our naval nuclear fuel and downblending activities.

Year Ended December 31, 2013 vs. 2012

Revenues increased 6.3%, or $69.7 million, to $1,167.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $1,098.0 million in the corresponding period of 2012, primarily attributable to increased activity related to the manufacturing of nuclear components for U.S. Government programs totaling $55.9 million and increased activity in our naval nuclear fuel and downblending activities totaling $13.8 million as compared to the corresponding period of 2012.

Operating income increased $11.6 million to $237.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $226.3 million in the corresponding period in 2012 primarily attributable to increased activity related to the manufacturing of nuclear components for U.S. Government programs totaling $9.6 million and increased activity in our naval nuclear fuel and downblending activities totaling $2.0 million.

Technical Services

Year Ended December 31, 2014 vs. 2013

Revenues decreased 18.6%, or $19.4 million, to $84.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $104.3 million for the corresponding period of 2013, primarily attributable to a decrease in specialty manufacturing associated with the termination of our work scope for the American Centrifuge Program that occurred in the second quarter of 2014.

Operating income decreased $23.0 million to $35.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $58.2 million in the corresponding period of 2013. The loss of fee income on the Pantex and Y-12 contracts contributed $12.5 million of this decrease. We also earned lower fee income due to the contamination and shutdown incident at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. In addition, selling, general, and administrative expenses were $3.3 higher compared to the corresponding period of 2013 primarily due to increased business development activities.

Year Ended December 31, 2013 vs. 2012

Revenues decreased 3.3%, or $3.6 million, to $104.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $107.9 million for the corresponding period of 2012, primarily attributable to lower reimbursable costs at our Naval Reactor decommissioning and decontamination project.

Operating income decreased $1.5 million, to $58.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $59.7 million for the corresponding period of 2012. This decrease is principally due to net lower fees for NNSA projects totaling $2.7 million and lower income associated with a restructured contract totaling $3.7 million. These amounts were offset by lower selling, general and administrative expenses of $4.8 million compared to 2012 primarily due to timing of new proposals resulting in lower business development expenses.

Nuclear Energy

Year Ended December 31, 2014 vs. 2013

Revenues decreased 45.5%, or $129.1 million, to $154.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $283.9 million in the corresponding period of 2013. This decrease is primarily attributable to the exit of our low margin nuclear projects business resulting in a $78.7 million decrease in revenues. In addition, we experienced a decrease in revenues from our nuclear equipment business totaling $42.1 million largely due to the completion of a replacement steam generator contract that was ongoing in the prior year period.

Operating income decreased $31.9 million to a loss of $23.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to income of $8.6 million in the corresponding period of 2013, primarily attributable to the $16.1 million loss recognition resulting from an adverse jury verdict in a lawsuit involving commercial nuclear contracts. We also experienced reduced operating income from our nuclear equipment business related to the decrease in revenues noted above. In addition, during the year ended December 31, 2013, we recognized $7.1 million of warranty improvements associated with favorable warranty experience. This decline in operating income was partially offset by $5.4 million of reduced selling, general and administrative expenses associated with cost savings from GCI and margin improvement initiatives.

Year Ended December 31, 2013 vs. 2012

Revenues decreased 12.8%, or $41.8 million, to $283.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $325.7 million in the corresponding period of 2012. The decrease in revenues is primarily attributable to decreased activity in our nuclear services and nuclear equipment businesses of $95.8 million associated with the completion of several large contracts that were ongoing in the prior period and $18.4 million of revenue recorded in the prior year related to the settlement agreement reached with Energy Northwest related to a condenser replacement project at Columbia Generating Station in 2011. This decline in revenue was partially offset by increased project activities associated with an ongoing long-term project in our nuclear projects business.

Operating income decreased $42.0 million to $8.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $50.6 million in the corresponding period of 2012. This decrease is primarily attributable to the decline in revenues noted above, lower margins due to unfavorable project mix compared to the prior period, and $18.1 million (net of related expenses) recognized in 2012 associated with the Energy Northwest settlement agreement discussed above. These decreases were partially offset by $7.1 million of favorable warranty experience.

mPower

Year Ended December 31, 2014 vs. 2013

Operating income increased $12.4 million to a loss of $68.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to a loss of $81.3 million in the corresponding period of 2013, due to the slowing of the pace of development related to our announced plans to restructure the mPower program. Research and development activities related to the development of the B&W mPower™ reactor decreased by $52.1 million with a related decrease in the recognition of the cost-sharing award from the DOE under our Cooperative Agreement totaling $50.6 million. The year ended December 31, 2013 included the recognition of $9.7 million related to cost reimbursement for the 2012 pre-award period. Selling, general and administrative expenses also decreased $10.5 million.

Year Ended December 31, 2013 vs. 2012

Operating income increased $32.2 million to a loss of $81.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to a loss of $113.5 million in the corresponding period of 2012. Research and development activities related to the continued development of the B&W mPower™ reactor increased by $40.8 million, offset by the recognition of $78.4 million of the cost-sharing award from the DOE under our Cooperative Agreement as a reduction of research and development costs. The cost-sharing amount recognized includes $21.5 million of pre-award cost reimbursement for the period from October 2012 through March 2013. Selling, general, and administrative expenses increased by $5.0 million compared to the corresponding period of 2012 primarily due to increased business development activity.

Unallocated Corporate

Unallocated corporate expenses increased $6.5 million to $32.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, as compared to $26.0 million for the corresponding period in 2013, mainly related to $6.1 million of costs associated with the Company’s decision to pursue a separation of its Power Generation business and Government & Nuclear Operations businesses through a tax-free spin-off.

Unallocated corporate expenses decreased $2.0 million to $26.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $28.0 million in 2012, due to GCI cost savings, partially offset by increased corporate development costs.

Special Charges for Restructuring Activities

Special charges for restructuring activities increased $1.5 million to $41.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2014, as compared to $39.6 million in 2013, due to charges associated with our margin improvement program and restructuring of our mPower program, offset by a decline in charges related to our GCI initiative as this initiative nears completion.

Mark to Market Adjustment

We immediately recognize actuarial gains (losses) for our pension and postretirement benefit plans into earnings as a component of net periodic benefit cost. The effect of this adjustment on operating income was $(241.2) million in 2014, as compared to $222.7 million in 2013, mainly related to a $117.5 million loss recognized on the adoption of a new mortality assumption and a decline in discount rates, offset by actual return on assets that exceeded expected return.

The effect of the mark to market adjustment on operating income was $222.7 million in 2013 as compared to $(31.9) million in 2012, mainly related to an increase in interest rates and actual return on assets that exceeded our expected return.

Other Income Statement Items

Other – net increased by $32.2 million to a gain of $14.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2014, as compared to a loss of $17.5 million for the corresponding period in 2013, primarily due to the receipt and related fair market value adjustment of Centrus Energy Corp. shares and notes received on USEC’s emergence from bankruptcy in the year ended December 31, 2014 totaling $14.2 million. We recognized a $19.1 million loss on our previous investment in USEC in the year ended December 31, 2013.

Other – net increased $7.4 million to a loss of $17.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to a loss of $24.9 million for the corresponding period in 2012, primarily due to the impairment of the remainder of our previous USEC investment in 2013 totaling $19.1 million compared to a $27.0 million impairment of our previous USEC investment in 2012.

Net Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest

Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest decreased $5.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to 2013, primarily attributable to a decline in recognition of our partner’s share of losses incurred in connection with B&W mPower™ reactor development efforts as a result of the restructuring of the mPower program.

Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interest increased $3.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to 2012, primarily attributable to recognition of our partner’s share of losses incurred in connection with B&W mPower™ reactor development efforts.

Provision for Income Taxes

For the year ended December 31, 2014, our provision for income taxes decreased $200.6 million to a benefit of $16.0 million, while income before provision for income taxes decreased $511.7 million to $5.5 million. Our effective tax rate was approximately (292.6)% for 2014, as compared to 35.7% for 2013. The decrease in our

effective tax rate is primarily related to the receipt of a favorable ruling from the Internal Revenue Service that enabled us to amend prior year U.S. income tax returns to exclude distributions of several of our foreign joint ventures from domestic taxable income and the impact of an $14.2 million gain and related fair market value adjustment from the exchange of our USEC investment for which the related tax provision was offset by the reversal of a previously established valuation allowance related to the prior impairment of the USEC investment, as well as the significant decrease in income before provision for income taxes attributable to our mark to market pension adjustments and the effect that had on the overall jurisdictional mix of our pre-tax earnings in 2014 as compared to 2013.

For the year ended December 31, 2013, our provision for income taxes increased $82.7 million to $184.6 million, while income before provision for income taxes increased $197.8 million to $517.2 million. Our effective tax rate was approximately 35.7% for 2013, as compared to 31.9% for 2012. The increase in our effective tax rate is primarily related to the significant increase in income before provision for income taxes attributable to MTM charges and the effect that had on the overall jurisdictional mix of our pre-tax earnings in 2013 as compared to 2012, as well as the recognition of previously unrecognized tax benefits associated with the lapse in 2012 of applicable statutes of limitation. In addition, our provision for income taxes in 2013 was benefited by the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, enacted on January 2, 2013, which retroactively extended the U.S. research and development tax credit for two years, offset by a change in our assertion with respect to some of our undistributed foreign earnings.

We are subject to U.S. federal income tax at a statutory rate of 35% on our U.S. operations plus the applicable state income taxes on our profitable U.S. subsidiaries. Our non-U.S. earnings are subject to tax at various tax rates and under various tax regimes, including deemed profits tax regimes.

See Note 5 to our consolidated financial statements included in this report for further information on income taxes.

ADJUSTED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

In the results of operations discussion above, we have disclosed operating income changes excluding MTM charges and special charges for restructuring activities, which have been recorded in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. We disclose this non-GAAP financial measure because we believe it provides an enhanced understanding of the relationship between our reported results of operations and our segment operating performance.

EFFECTS OF INFLATION AND CHANGING PRICES

Our financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States, using historical U.S. dollar accounting (“historical cost”). Statements based on historical cost, however, do not adequately reflect the cumulative effect of increasing costs and changes in the purchasing power of the U.S. dollar, especially during times of significant and continued inflation.

In order to minimize the negative impact of inflation on our operations, we attempt to cover the increased cost of anticipated changes in labor, material and service costs, either through an estimate of those changes, which we reflect in the original price, or through price escalation clauses in our contracts. However, there can be no assurance we will be able to cover all changes in cost using this strategy.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Our overall liquidity position, which we generally define as our unrestricted cash and investments plus amounts available for borrowings under our credit facility, remained strong in 2014. Our liquidity position at December 31, 2014 increased by approximately $255.3 million to $1,153.5 million from $898.2 million at December 31, 2013, mainly due to the refinancing of our credit facility that increased our aggregate borrowing capacity by $600 million, offset by the factors discussed below and due to the changes in our cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities. We experienced net cash generated from operations in each of the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012. Typically, the fourth quarter has been the period of highest cash flows from operating activities because of the timing of payments received from the U.S. Government on accounts receivable retainages and cash dividends received from our joint ventures.

Credit Facility

On June 24, 2014, B&W entered into a Second Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the “New Credit Agreement”) with a syndicate of lenders and letter of credit issuers, and Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, which amends and restates our previous Credit Agreement dated June 8, 2012. The New Credit Agreement provides for revolving credit borrowings and issuances of letters of credit in an aggregate amount of up to $1.0 billion and a term loan facility of up to $300 million. The New Credit Agreement is scheduled to mature on June 24, 2019. The proceeds of the New Credit Agreement are available for the issuance of letters of credit, working capital needs and other general corporate purposes. The New Credit Agreement includes provisions that allow for additional financial institutions to become lenders, or for any existing lender to increase its commitment thereunder, subject to an aggregate maximum of $400 million for all incremental term loan, revolving credit borrowings and letter of credit commitments.

The New Credit Agreement is guaranteed by substantially all of B&W’s wholly owned domestic subsidiaries. Obligations under the New Credit Agreement are secured by first-priority liens on certain assets owned by B&W and the guarantors (other than our subsidiaries comprising our Nuclear Operations and Technical Services segments). If the corporate family rating of B&W and its subsidiaries from Moody’s is Baa3 or better (with a stable outlook or better), the corporate rating of B&W and its subsidiaries from S&P is BBB- or better (with a stable outlook or better), and other conditions are met, the liens securing obligations under the New Credit Agreement will be released, subject to reinstatement upon the terms set forth in the New Credit Agreement. B&W’s current corporate family rating from Moody’s is Ba1 and its current corporate rating from S&P is BB+.

The New Credit Agreement requires interest payments on revolving loans on a periodic basis until maturity. Beginning with the first quarter of 2015, we are also required to make quarterly amortization payments on the term loan portion of the New Credit Agreement in an amount equal to 1.25% of the aggregate principal amount of the term loan facility. We may prepay all loans under the New Credit Agreement at any time without premium or penalty (other than customary LIBOR breakage costs), subject to notice requirements. We are also required to make certain prepayments on any outstanding term loans under the New Credit Agreement after receipt of cash proceeds from certain asset sales or other events, subject to certain exceptions and our right to reinvest such proceeds in certain circumstances, all as more particularly set forth in the New Credit Agreement.

The New Credit Agreement contains financial covenants relating to leverage and interest coverage and includes covenants that restrict, among other things, debt incurrence, liens, investments, acquisitions, asset dispositions, dividends, prepayments of subordinated debt and mergers. At December 31, 2014, we were in compliance with all of the covenants set forth in the New Credit Agreement.

Loans outstanding under the New Credit Agreement bear interest at our option at either the Eurocurrency rate plus a margin ranging from 1.25% to 2.00% per year or the base rate (the highest of the Federal Funds rate plus 0.50%, the one month Eurocurrency rate plus 1.00%, or the administrative agent’s prime rate) plus a margin ranging from 0.25% to 1.00% per year. The applicable margin for loans varies depending on the credit ratings of the New Credit Agreement. Under the New Credit Agreement, we are charged a commitment fee on the unused portions of the New Credit Agreement, and that fee varies between 0.200% and 0.350% per year depending on the credit ratings of the New Credit Agreement. Additionally, we are charged a letter of credit fee of between 1.250% and 2.000% per year with respect to the amount of each financial letter of credit issued under the New Credit Agreement and a letter of credit fee of between 0.725% and 1.125% per year with respect to the amount of each performance letter of credit issued under the New Credit Agreement, in each case depending on the credit ratings of the New Credit Agreement. We also pay customary fronting fees and other fees and expenses in connection with the issuance of letters of credit under the New Credit Agreement. In connection with entering into the New Credit Agreement, we paid upfront fees to the lenders thereunder, and arrangement and other fees to the arrangers and agents of the New Credit Agreement. At December 31, 2014, borrowings outstanding totaled $300.0 million under our term loan. Letters of credit issued under the New Credit Agreement totaled $171.9 million, resulting in $828.1 million available for borrowings or to meet letter of credit requirements.

Based on the current credit ratings of the New Credit Agreement, the applicable margin for Eurocurrency rate loans is 1.375%, the applicable margin for base rate loans is 0.375%, the letter of credit fee for financial letters of

credit is 1.375%, the letter of credit fee for performance letters of credit is 0.80%, and the commitment fee for unused portions of the New Credit Agreement is 0.225%. The New Credit Agreement does not have a floor for the base rate or the Eurocurrency rate. As of December 31, 2014, the interest rate on our term loan borrowings was 1.54%.

The New Credit Agreement generally includes customary events of default for a secured credit facility. If any default occurs under the New Credit Agreement, or if we are unable to make any of the representations and warranties in the New Credit Agreement, we will be unable to borrow funds or have letters of credit issued under the New Credit Agreement.

Other Arrangements

Certain subsidiaries within our Power Generation segment have credit arrangements with various commercial banks and other financial institutions for the issuance of letters of credit and bank guarantees in association with contracting activity. The aggregate value of all such letters of credit and bank guarantees as of December 31, 2014 was $101.5 million.

We have posted surety bonds to support contractual obligations to customers relating to certain projects. We utilize bonding facilities to support such obligations, but the issuance of bonds under those facilities is typically at the surety’s discretion. Although there can be no assurance that we will maintain our surety bonding capacity, we believe our current capacity is adequate to support our existing project requirements for the next twelve months. In addition, these bonds generally indemnify customers should we fail to perform our obligations under the applicable contracts. We, and certain of our subsidiaries, have jointly executed general agreements of indemnity in favor of surety underwriters relating to surety bonds those underwriters issue in support of some of our contracting activity. As of December 31, 2014, bonds issued and outstanding under these arrangements in support of contracts totaled approximately $437.9 million.

OTHER

Cash, Cash Equivalents, Restricted Cash and Investments

In the aggregate, our cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents and investments decreased by approximately $27.4 million to $382.6 million at December 31, 2014 from $410.0 million at December 31, 2013, primarily due to the items discussed below. Our domestic and foreign cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents and investments as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 were as follows:

Our working capital increased by approximately $144.0 million to $654.2 million at December 31, 2014 from $510.2 million at December 31, 2013, attributable primarily to a reduction in advance billings on contracts associated with the decline in contract activity in our Power Generation segment. We also experienced increased working capital associated with accounts payable movement caused by the timing of payments of vendor and subcontractor invoices in relation to the collection of billings on certain contracts.

Our net cash provided by operating activities was approximately $74.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $137.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2013. This decrease was primarily attributable to changes in net contracts in progress and advance billings due to timing of project billings and a reduction in accounts payable as discussed above.

Our net cash used in investing activities decreased by approximately $219.9 million to cash used in investing activities of approximately $199.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 from cash provided in investing activities of approximately $20.1 million in the year ended December 31, 2013. This increase in net cash used in investing activities was primarily attributable to the acquisition of MEGTEC.

Our net cash provided by financing activities was $104.6 million in the year ended December 31, 2014, as compared to cash used in financing activities of $190.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2013. This increase in cash provided by financing activities was primarily attributable to an increase in borrowings on our credit facility, primarily to fund the acquisition of MEGTEC, common share repurchase activity and working capital needs.

At December 31, 2014, we had restricted cash and cash equivalents totaling $57.2 million, $3.7 million of which was held in restricted foreign cash accounts, $2.7 million of which was held for future decommissioning of facilities (which we include in other assets on our consolidated balance sheets), and $50.8 million of which was held to meet reinsurance reserve requirements of our captive insurer.

At December 31, 2014, we had short-term and long-term investments with a fair value of $12.4 million. Our investment portfolio consists primarily of investments in highly liquid money market instruments. Additionally, we currently hold Centrus Energy Corp. bonds and equities received upon USEC Inc.’s emergence from bankruptcy. Our investments are carried at fair value and are either classified as trading, with unrealized gains and losses reported in earnings, or as available-for-sale, with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, being reported as a component of other comprehensive income. Our net unrealized gain/loss on investments in accumulated other comprehensive income is currently in an unrealized gain position totaling approximately $0.1 million at December 31, 2014. At December 31, 2013, we had unrealized gains on our investments totaling approximately $0.2 million. Based on our analysis of these investments, we believe that none of our securities were permanently impaired as of December 31, 2014.

Based on our liquidity position, we believe we have sufficient cash and letter of credit and borrowing capacity to fund our operating requirements for at least the next twelve months.

Foreign Operations

Included in our total unrestricted cash and cash equivalents is approximately $199.0 million or 63.6% related to foreign operations and subsidiaries. In general, these resources are not available to fund our U.S. operations unless the funds are repatriated to the U.S., which would expose us to taxes we presently have not accrued in our results of operations. We presently have no plans to repatriate these funds to the U.S. in a taxable manner as the liquidity related to our U.S. operations is sufficient to meet the cash requirements of our U.S. operations.

CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

Our cash requirements as of December 31, 2014 under current contractual obligations were as follows:

We expect cash requirements totaling approximately $18.8 million for contributions to our pension plans in 2015. In addition, we anticipate cash requirements totaling approximately $11.0 million for contributions to our other postretirement benefit plans in 2015.

Our contingent commitments under letters of credit, bank guarantees and surety bonds currently outstanding expire as follows:

Our exposure to market risk from changes in interest rates relates primarily to our cash equivalents and our investment portfolio, which primarily consists of investments in highly liquid money market instruments denominated in U.S. dollars. Additionally, we currently hold Centrus Energy Corp. bonds and equities received upon USEC Inc.’s emergence from bankruptcy. We are averse to principal loss and seek to ensure the safety and preservation of our invested funds by limiting default risk, market risk and reinvestment risk. Our investments are primarily classified as available-for-sale.

We have exposure to changes in interest rates on the Credit Agreement (see Item 7 – “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and Capital Resources”). At December 31, 2014, we had $300 million in outstanding borrowings under this facility, which has a capacity of $1.3 billion. We have no material future earnings or cash flow exposures from changes in interest rates on our other long-term debt obligations.

We have operations in many foreign locations, and, as a result, our financial results could be significantly affected by factors such as changes in foreign currency exchange (“FX”) rates or weak economic conditions in those foreign markets. In order to manage the risks associated with FX rate fluctuations, we attempt to hedge those risks with FX derivative instruments. Historically, we have hedged those risks with FX forward contracts. We do not enter into speculative derivative positions.

Interest Rate Sensitivity

The following tables provide information about our financial instruments that are sensitive to changes in interest rates. The tables present principal cash flows and related weighted-average interest rates by expected maturity dates.

Exchange Rate Sensitivity

The following table provides information about our FX forward contracts outstanding at December 31, 2014 and presents such information in U.S. dollar equivalents. The table presents notional amounts and related weighted-average FX rates by expected (contractual) maturity dates and constitutes a forward-looking statement. These notional amounts generally are used to calculate the contractual payments to be exchanged under the contract. The average contractual FX rates are expressed using market convention, which is dependent on the currencies being bought and sold under the forward contract.

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of The Babcock & Wilcox Company:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of The Babcock & Wilcox Company and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2014. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of The Babcock & Wilcox Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2014, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, based on the criteria established inInternal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 25, 2015 expressed an unqualified opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

/S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Charlotte, North Carolina

February 25, 2015

THE BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS