UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

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

For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007

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

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number: 1-1511

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)


Michigan		38-0533580
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(IRS employer identification number)

26555 Northwestern Highway, Southfield, Michigan		48033-2146
(Address of principal executive offices)		(Zip Code)

(248) 354-7700

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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

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

Large accelerated filer ¨ Accelerated filer ¨ Non-accelerated filer x

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

As of July 25, 2007, there were 89,861,480 outstanding shares of the registrant’s $5.00 stated value common stock.

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Form 10-Q

For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2007

INDEX


		Page No.

Forward-Looking Statements		2
Part I – Financial Information
Item 1 – Financial Statements
Consolidated Statements of Operations		4
Consolidated Balance Sheets		5
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows		6
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements		7
Item 2 – Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		45
Item 3 – Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk		67
Item 4 – Controls and Procedures		68
Part II – Other Information
Item 1 – Legal Proceedings		69
Item 3 – Defaults Upon Senior Securities		69
Item 6 – Exhibits		69
Signatures		70
Exhibits		71

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements contained or incorporated in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q which are not statements of historical fact constitute “Forward-Looking Statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Reform Act”).

Forward-looking statements give current expectations or forecasts of future events. Words such as “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “plan”, “seek” and other words and terms of similar meaning in connection with discussions of future operating or financial performance signify forward-looking statements. Federal-Mogul Corporation (the “Company”) also, from time to time, may provide oral or written forward-looking statements in other materials released to the public. Such statements are made in good faith by the Company pursuant to the “Safe Harbor” provisions of the Reform Act.

Any or all forward-looking statements included in this report or in any other public statements may ultimately be incorrect. Forward-looking statements may involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may cause the actual results, performance, experience or achievements of the Company to differ materially from any future results, performance, experience or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.

These are some of the factors that could potentially cause actual results to differ materially from expected and historical results. Other factors besides those listed here could also materially affect the Company’s business.

Chapter 11 Filing

•

Factors relating to Federal-Mogul’s filing for Chapter 11 in the U.S., such as: the possible disruption of relationships with creditors, customers, and employees; the Company’s ability to implement its plan of reorganization; the outcome of asbestos litigation proceedings; and the Company’s compliance with its debtor-in-possession credit facility.

Legal and Environmental Proceedings

•

Legal actions and claims of undetermined merit and amount involving, among other things, product liability, warranty, recalls of products manufactured or sold by the Company, and environmental and safety issues involving the Company’s products or facilities.

•

The merit and amount of claims to reinsurance carriers for asbestos related claims, and the financial viability of and resources available to the reinsurance carriers to meet these claims.

Business Environment and Economic Conditions

•

The Company’s ability to generate cost savings or manufacturing efficiencies to offset or exceed contractually or competitively required price reductions or price reductions to obtain new business.

•

Variations in the financial or operational condition of the Company’s significant customers, particularly the world’s original equipment manufacturers of commercial and personal vehicles.

•

Fluctuations in the price and availability of raw materials and other supplies used in the manufacturing and distribution of the Company’s products.

•

Material shortages, transportation system delays, or other difficulties in markets where the Company purchases supplies for the manufacturing of its products.

•

Significant work stoppages, disputes, or any other difficulties in labor markets where the Company obtains materials necessary for the manufacturing of its products or where its products are manufactured, distributed or sold.

•

Increased development of fuel cells, hybrid-electric or other non-combustion engine technologies.

•

The Company’s ability to obtain cash adequate to fund its needs, including the borrowings available under its debtor-in-possession credit facility and the availability of financing for the Company’s subsidiaries not included under the voluntary filing for Chapter 11.

•

Changes in actuarial assumptions, interest costs and discount rates, and fluctuations in the global securities markets, all of which directly impact the valuation of assets and liabilities associated with the Company’s pension and other postemployment benefit plans.

Other Factors

•

Various worldwide economic, political and social factors, changes in economic conditions, currency fluctuations and devaluations, credit risks in emerging markets, or political instability in foreign countries where the Company has significant manufacturing operations, customers or suppliers.

•

Physical damage to or loss of significant manufacturing or distribution property, plant and equipment due to fire, weather or other factors beyond the Company’s control.

•

New or expanded litigation activity regarding alleged asbestos claims against subsidiaries of the Company not included in the U.S. Chapter 11 Proceedings.

•

Legislative activities of governments, agencies, and similar organizations, both in the United States and in other countries, that may affect the operations of the Company.

•

Possible terrorist attacks or acts of aggression or war, that could exacerbate other risks such as slowed vehicle production or the availability of supplies for the manufacturing of the Company’s products.

•

The Company is currently transitioning its information system infrastructure and functions to newer generation systems. If the new systems cannot be properly implemented, the Company would expect to incur additional expenses to upgrade and improve our legacy systems.

PART I

FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Consolidated Statements of Operations

(Unaudited)


	Three Months Ended June 30						Six Months Ended June 30
	2007			2006			2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars, Except Per Share Amounts)

Net sales	$	1,763.4		$	1,631.6		$	3,479.9		$	3,231.9
Cost of products sold		1,441.0			1,327.4			2,849.7			2,642.7


Gross margin		322.4			304.2			630.2			589.2

Selling, general and administrative expenses		212.7			218.4			419.6			445.9
Adjustment of assets to fair value		3.2			1.1			3.5			21.2
Interest expense, net		51.9			44.3			101.9			83.3
Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses		27.6			20.8			41.2			41.9
Equity earnings of unconsolidated affiliates		(10.1	)		(7.7	)		(18.0	)		(17.1	)
Restructuring expense, net		13.5			16.5			29.6			42.3
Other income, net		(1.5	)		(1.0	)		(8.3	)		(1.3	)


Income (loss) before income tax expense		25.1			11.8			60.7			(27.0	)
Income tax expense		21.2			28.6			52.2			58.2


Net income (loss)	$	3.9		$	(16.8	)	$	8.5		$	(85.2	)


Basic and diluted income (loss) per common share:
Basic net income (loss) per common share	$	0.04		$	(0.19	)	$	0.10		$	(0.96	)


Diluted net income (loss) per common share	$	0.04		$	(0.19	)	$	0.09		$	(0.96	)

See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Consolidated Balance Sheets


	(Unaudited) June 30 2007			December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and equivalents	$	378.1		$	359.3
Accounts receivable, net		1,167.7			992.6
Inventories, net		905.8			892.6
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		291.4			248.2


Total current assets		2,743.0			2,492.7

Property, plant and equipment, net		2,055.5			2,078.6
Goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets		1,219.7			1,205.3
Definite-lived intangible assets, net		254.1			254.3
Asbestos-related insurance recoverable		873.7			859.0
Prepaid pension costs and other noncurrent assets		262.5			289.2


	$	7,408.5		$	7,179.1


LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
Current liabilities:
Short-term debt, including current portion of long-term debt	$	820.2		$	482.1
Accounts payable		618.4			488.0
Accrued liabilities		514.2			435.0
Current portion of postemployment benefit liability		67.0			67.9
Other current liabilities		147.1			181.7

Total current liabilities		2,166.9			1,654.7

Liabilities subject to compromise		5,455.5			5,813.4

Long-term debt		22.8			26.7
Postemployment benefits		1,094.6			1,111.1
Long-term portion of deferred income taxes		84.2			81.8
Other accrued liabilities		159.6			185.1
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries		40.1			54.2

Shareholders’ deficit:
Series C ESOP preferred stock		28.0			28.0
Common stock		449.3			445.3
Additional paid-in capital		2,199.4			2,160.2
Accumulated deficit		(4,129.4	)		(4,151.7	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(162.5	)		(229.7	)

Total shareholders’ deficit		(1,615.2	)		(1,747.9	)


	$	7,408.5		$	7,179.1

See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited)


	Six Months Ended June 30
	2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Cash Provided From (Used By) Operating Activities
Net income (loss)	$	8.5		$	(85.2	)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided from operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		172.1			159.4
Adjustment of assets to fair value		3.5			21.2
Change in postemployment benefits, including pensions		(27.1	)		67.4
Change in deferred taxes		3.8			(7.4	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable		(157.8	)		(80.7	)
Inventories		0.9			(58.6	)
Accounts payable		106.5			72.3
Other assets and liabilities		75.5			46.3

Net Cash Provided From Operating Activities		185.9			134.7

Cash Provided From (Used By) Investing Activities
Expenditures for property, plant and equipment		(132.0	)		(80.6	)
Net proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment		18.1			2.7
Net proceeds from the sale of business		—			4.0
Proceeds from sale of investment		13.8			—
Payments to acquire minority interests		(6.8	)		—
Payments to acquire business		—			(30.5	)

Net Cash Used By Investing Activities		(106.9	)		(104.4	)

Cash Provided From (Used By) Financing Activities
Proceeds from borrowings on DIP credit facility		550.0			164.3
Principal payments on DIP credit facility		(228.1	)		(198.0	)
Increase in short-term debt		8.7			0.3
Decrease in other long-term debt		(5.8	)		(1.0	)
Net change in restricted cash		—			(26.9	)
Payments on factoring arrangements		(58.9	)		—
Repayment of pre-petition Tranche C debt		(330.4	)		—
Debt refinance fees		(0.3	)		—

Net Cash Used By Financing Activities		(64.8	)		(61.3	)

Effect of foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations on cash		4.6			47.9


Increase in cash and equivalents		18.8			16.9

Cash and equivalents at beginning of period		359.3			387.2


Cash and equivalents at end of period	$	378.1		$	404.1

See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)

June 30, 2007

1.	Basis of Presentation

Interim Financial Statements: The unaudited consolidated financial statements of Federal-Mogul Corporation (“Federal-Mogul” or the “Company”) have been prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. These statements include all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) that management believes are necessary to present fair statements of the results of operations, financial position and cash flows. The Company’s management believes that the disclosures are adequate to make the information presented not misleading when read in conjunction with the financial statements and the notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Operating results for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2007 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2007.

Financial Statement Presentation: The Company and all of its wholly-owned United States (“U.S.”) subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions on October 1, 2001 (the “Petition Date”) for reorganization (the “U.S. Restructuring” or the “Restructuring Proceedings”) under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”). Also on October 1, 2001, certain of the Company’s United Kingdom (“U.K.”) subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code with the Bankruptcy Court, and filed petitions for Administration under the United Kingdom Insolvency Act of 1986 (the “Act”) in the High Court of Justice, Chancery division in London, England (the “High Court”). The High Court, in November 2006, approved the discharge of the Administration Proceedings for those U.K. subsidiaries that entered into Company Voluntary Arrangements. The Chapter 11 Cases are further discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with AICPA Statement of Position 90-7 (“SOP 90-7”), Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization under the Bankruptcy Code, and on a going concern basis, which contemplates continuity of operations and realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities in the ordinary course of business. However, as a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, such realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities, without substantial adjustments to the amounts and/or changes of ownership, is highly uncertain. While operating as debtors-in-possession (“DIP”) under the protection of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code and subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court, or otherwise as permitted in the ordinary course of business, the Debtors, or some of them, may sell or otherwise dispose of assets and liquidate or settle liabilities for some amounts other than those reflected in the consolidated financial statements. Further, the plan of reorganization could materially change the amounts and/or classifications from these included within the historical consolidated financial statements.

The appropriateness of using the going concern basis for the Company’s financial statements is dependent upon, among other things: (i) the Company’s ability to comply with the terms of its DIP credit facility and any cash management order entered by the Bankruptcy Court in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases; (ii) the ability of the Company to maintain adequate cash on hand; (iii) the ability of the Company to generate cash from operations; (iv) confirmation of the plan of reorganization under the Bankruptcy Code; and (v) the Company’s ability to achieve profitability following such confirmation.

Principles of Consolidation: The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and all domestic and international subsidiaries that are more than 50% owned. Investments in affiliates of 50% or less but greater than 20% are accounted for using the equity method, while investments in affiliates of 20% or less are accounted for under the cost method. The Company does not hold a controlling interest in an entity based on exposure to economic risks and potential rewards (variable interest) for which it is the primary beneficiary. Further,

the Company’s joint ventures are businesses established and maintained in connection with its operating strategy and are not special purpose entities.

Use of Estimates: The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported therein. Due to the inherent uncertainty involved in making estimates, actual results reported in future periods may be based upon amounts that differ from these estimates.

Trade Accounts Receivable: Federal-Mogul subsidiaries in Brazil, France, Germany, Italy and Spain are party to accounts receivable factoring and discounting arrangements. Gross accounts receivable factored or discounted under these facilities was $324 million and $272 million as of June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively. Of those gross amounts, $294 million and $252 million, respectively, were factored without recourse and treated as a sale under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities. Under terms of these factoring arrangements, the Company is not obligated to draw cash immediately upon the factoring of accounts receivable. Thus, as of June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, the Company had outstanding factored amounts of $13 million and $9 million, respectively, for which cash had not yet been drawn. Expenses associated with receivables factored or discounted are recorded in the statements of operations within “other income, net.”

Reclassifications: Certain items in the 2006 consolidated financial statements have been reclassified to conform with the presentation used in the current period.

2.	Voluntary Reorganization under Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration

Federal-Mogul and all of its wholly-owned United States subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions on October 1, 2001 for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. Also on October 1, 2001, certain of the Company’s United Kingdom subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code with the Bankruptcy Court, and filed petitions for Administration under the United Kingdom Insolvency Act of 1986 in the High Court. The High Court, in November 2006, approved the discharge of the Administration Proceedings for those U.K. subsidiaries that entered into Company Voluntary Arrangements.

The Company and its U.S. and U.K. subsidiaries included in the U.S. Restructuring are herein referred to as the “Debtors.” The Chapter 11 Cases of the Debtors (collectively, the “Chapter 11 Cases”) have been consolidated for purposes of joint administration as In re: Federal-Mogul Global Inc., T&N Limited, et al (Case No. 01-10578(JKF)). Subsidiaries outside of the aforementioned U.S. and U.K. subsidiaries were or are not party to any insolvency proceeding and, therefore, are not currently provided protection from creditors by any insolvency court and are operating in the normal course.

The Restructuring Proceedings were initiated in response to a sharply increasing number of asbestos-related claims and their demand on the Company’s cash flows and liquidity. Under the Restructuring Proceedings, the Debtors have submitted and have requested the Bankruptcy Court to approve and implement a plan for addressing the asbestos-related claims against them, as discussed below.

Consequences of the Restructuring Proceedings

The Debtors are operating their businesses as debtors-in-possession subject to the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. All vendors are being paid for goods furnished and services provided after the Petition Date. However, as a consequence of the Restructuring Proceedings, pending litigation against the Debtors as of the Petition Date is stayed (subject to certain exceptions in the case of governmental authorities), and no party may take any action to pursue or collect pre-petition claims except pursuant to an order of the Bankruptcy Court. It is the Debtors’ intention to address pending and future asbestos-related claims and other pre-petition claims through their plan of reorganization under the Bankruptcy.

In the U.S., four committees, representing asbestos claimants, asbestos property damage claimants, unsecured creditors and equity security holders (collectively, the “Committees”) have been appointed as official committees in the Chapter 11 Cases and, in accordance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, have the right to be heard on all matters that come before the Bankruptcy Court. The Committees, together with the legal representative for the future asbestos claimants, play important roles in the Restructuring Proceedings.

Solicitation packages containing the Third Amended Plan of Reorganization and Disclosure Statement (the “Third Amended Plan”), various supporting documents and a ballot, if appropriate, were mailed on July 12, 2004 to known creditors of the Company and to holders of common and preferred stock interests in the Company. The overwhelming majority of the classes of claims and interests voted to accept the Third Amended Plan. For the few classes of claims that voted to reject the Third Amended Plan, the Unsecured Creditors Committee, the Asbestos Claimants Committee, the Future Asbestos Claimants Representative, the Agent for the Pre-petition Bank Lenders and the Equity Security Holders Committee (collectively referred to as the “Plan Proponents”) intended to either amend the Third Amended Plan so as to obtain such classes’ accepting votes or seek to confirm the Third Amended Plan over the objection of such classes.

The Fourth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”) for the Company and the other U.S. and U.K. Debtors was filed with the Bankruptcy Court on November 21, 2006. The Plan was jointly proposed by the Company and the Plan Proponents. On February 2, 2007, the supplemental Disclosure Statement was approved by the Bankruptcy Court to be used in soliciting votes to accept or reject the Plan from those classes of creditors whose treatment under the Plan has changed since the solicitation under the Third Amended Plan. Voting on the Plan concluded in May 2007, with all classes of creditors and interest holders entitled to vote on the Plan voting to accept the Plan.

The confirmation hearing relating to the Plan began on June 18, 2007. Although all major constituencies in the Chapter 11 Cases support confirmation of the Plan, and the Plan has been accepted by all classes of creditors and interest holders, certain parties have objected to confirmation of the Plan, and those objections were addressed as part of the confirmation hearing. After six days of hearings before the Bankruptcy Court, the presentation of evidence in connection with the confirmation hearing ended on July 10, 2007. The Bankruptcy Court has asked for additional briefing relating to the confirmation hearing to be submitted by August 30, 2007, and has scheduled closing arguments for the confirmation hearing on October 1, 2007. While the outcome of the confirmation hearing and the timetable for confirmation of the Plan reside with the Bankruptcy Court, the Company anticipates that the Plan will be confirmed reasonably promptly after completion of the closing arguments.

The Plan provides that asbestos personal injury claimants, both present and future, will be permanently channeled to a trust or series of trusts established pursuant to Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code, thereby protecting the Company and its affiliates in the Chapter 11 Cases from existing and future asbestos liability. The Plan provides that all currently outstanding stock of the Company will be cancelled, 50.1% of newly issued common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul will be distributed to the asbestos trust, and 49.9% of the newly issued common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul will be distributed pro rata to the noteholders and holders of unsecured claims against the U.S. Debtors that elected to have their claims satisfied by receiving shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul rather than cash. The holders of currently outstanding common and preferred stock of the Company, at the time those shares are cancelled, will receive warrants that may be used to purchase shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul at a predetermined exercise price. These warrants will only be of value if the market price of the shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul exceeds the predetermined exercise price during the 7-year term during which the warrants will be saleable or exercisable.

The Plan also provides that: i) the U.S. asbestos trust will make a payment to the reorganized Company (or pay a portion of the common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul to be issued to the U. S. asbestos trust in lieu thereof) for the agreed amounts that will be used by the U.K. Administrators to provide distributions on account of U.K. asbestos personal injury claims; ii) the U.S. asbestos trust will provide an option to an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn for the purchase of the remaining shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul held by such trust; and (iii) if such affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn does not exercise such option, an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn will provide certain financing to the U.S. asbestos trust.

Unsecured creditors, including trade creditors, of the U.S. Debtors have the option to either receive shares of reorganized Federal-Mogul or receive cash distributions under the Plan equal to 35% of their allowed claims,

payable in three annual installments, provided that the aggregate payout of all allowed unsecured claims against the U.S. Debtors does not exceed $258 million. Any excess above this amount could result in a reduction in the percentage distribution that the unsecured creditors of the U.S. Debtors ultimately receive.

The Administrators of the U.K. Debtors and the Plan Proponents, on September 26, 2005, entered into an agreement outlining the terms and conditions of distributions to the creditors of the U.K. Debtors (“U.K. Settlement Agreement”). Prior to this agreement, the Administrators had agreed to sell certain long-term intercompany notes held by T&N Limited (“Loan Notes”) to Deutsche Bank as a means to fund expected distributions to creditors. In December 2005, in accordance with terms of the U.K. Settlement Agreement, the Company elected to retain the Loan Notes. Concurrently, the Loan Notes were transferred from the U.K. Debtors to a newly created non-debtor wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company and to Federal-Mogul Corporation, as provided in the Loan Note Sale Agreement filed with the SEC on Form 8-K on December 15, 2005. A copy of the U.K. Settlement Agreement was filed with the SEC on Form 8-K on September 30, 2005.

The Company Voluntary Arrangements (“CVAs”) became effective on October 11, 2006, resolving claims (other than those that are to be dealt with by the Plan) against the principal U.K. Debtors. The discharge of administration orders for the principal U.K. Debtors became effective on November 30, 2006. The CVAs divide asbestos claims against the principal U.K. Debtors into two categories: CVA Asbestos Claims and Chapter 11 Asbestos Claims. CVA Asbestos Claims are dealt with by the CVAs and it is intended that Chapter 11 Asbestos Claims will be dealt with by the Plan. The CVAs compromise and protect the CVA companies from the CVA Asbestos Claims. The trustees of the U.K. asbestos trust will pay dividends to CVA Asbestos claimants from the U.K. asbestos trust. Upon the effective date of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Asbestos Claims will be compromised. Accordingly, the Plan contemplates that the U.S. asbestos trustees look exclusively to the U.S. asbestos trust to pay dividends to Chapter 11 Asbestos claimants.

The Bankruptcy Court may confirm a plan of reorganization only upon making certain findings required by the Bankruptcy Code, and a plan may be confirmed over the dissent of non-accepting creditors and equity security holders if certain requirements of the Bankruptcy Code are met. The payment rights and other entitlements of pre-petition creditors and equity security holders may be substantially altered by any plan of reorganization confirmed in the Chapter 11 Cases. The pre-petition creditors of some Debtors may be treated differently than those of other Debtors under the proposed Plan and CVAs. While the outcome of the confirmation hearing and the timetable for confirmation of the Plan reside with the Bankruptcy Court, the Company anticipates that the Plan will be confirmed reasonably promptly after completion of the closing arguments.

Chapter 11 Financing

In connection with the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company entered into a debtor-in-possession (“DIP”) credit facility to supplement liquidity and fund operations during the Restructuring Proceedings. In May 2007, the Company amended its DIP facility, modifying certain terms of the agreement and extending the term of the post-petition financing through December 31, 2007. The amended DIP facility consists of a $500 million revolving credit facility (“Revolving Credit Facility”) and a $605 million term loan facility (“Term Loan Facility”). The proceeds of the Term Loan Facility were used primarily to refinance approximately $330 million in loans under the Senior Credit Facility and for general corporate purposes.

The Revolving Credit Agreement has an interest rate of either the alternative base rate (“ABR”) plus ¹/2 percentage points or a formula based on the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 1¹/2 percentage points. Interest on the Term Loan accrues at a rate of either the ABR plus ³/4 percentage point or a formula based on the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 1³/4 percentage points. ABR is the greater of either the bank’s prime rate or the federal funds rate plus ¹/2 percentage point or ³/4 percentage point on the Revolving Credit Facility or Term Loan Facility, respectively.

The amended DIP facility is secured by the Company’s domestic assets and the DIP lenders received permission from the lenders of the Senior Credit Agreements to have a priority over their collateral interest. The Term Loan Facility has a first priority lien in the domestic fixed assets of the Company and a second priority lien in the Company’s domestic current assets. The Revolving Credit Facility has a first priority lien in the Company’s domestic current assets and a second priority lien in its domestic fixed assets. Availability under the Company’s

Revolving Credit Facility is determined by the underlying collateral borrowing base at any point in time, consisting of the Company’s domestic inventories and domestic accounts receivable. The borrowing base available to the Company is calculated weekly based on the value of this underlying collateral. Commitments available under the amended DIP facility are mandatorily reduced by a portion of proceeds from certain future asset or business divestitures. Amounts available and outstanding on the amended DIP credit facility are further discussed in Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements, “Debt.”

As a condition of granting the amended DIP credit facility priority over the collateral interest of the Senior Credit Agreements, the Bankruptcy Court ordered that the noteholders receive, in cash, adequate protection payments equal to one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the outstanding notes per year. These cash payments, which approximate $2.6 million per quarter, are recorded as interest expense in the statement of operations. All cash adequate protection payments made to the noteholders are provisional in nature and are subject to recharacterization, credit against allowed claims, or other relief if the Bankruptcy Court were to ultimately conclude that the noteholders were not entitled to such payments.

The Bankruptcy Court further ordered additional adequate protection to the noteholders in the form of either cash payment of one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the outstanding notes per year or the granting of an administrative expense claim pursuant to Section 507(b) of the Bankruptcy Code in the amount of one percent (1.0%) of the outstanding notes per year. The Company has elected to grant an administrative expense claim in favor of the noteholders for this additional adequate protection. All adequate protection administrative expense claims inured in favor of the noteholders are provisional in nature and subject to challenge by all parties-in-interest to the Restructuring Proceedings. Thus, the ultimate amount and related payment terms, if any, for these administrative expense claims will be established in connection with the Restructuring Proceedings. Accordingly, such additional administrative expense claims, approximating $118 million as of June 30, 2007, have not been recorded in the accompanying financial statements.

Financial Statement Classification

Virtually all of the Company’s pre-petition debt is in default. At June 30, 2007, the Debtors’ pre-petition debt is classified under the caption “Liabilities subject to compromise.” This includes debt outstanding of $1,635.8 million under the pre-petition Senior Credit Agreements and $2,117.4 million of other outstanding debt, primarily notes payable at various unsecured rates, less capitalized debt issuance fees of $29.1 million. The carrying value of the pre-petition debt will be adjusted once it has become an allowed claim by the Bankruptcy Court to the extent the related carrying value differs from the amount of the allowed claim. Such adjustment may be material to the consolidated financial statements.

As a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company is in default to its affiliate holder of its convertible junior subordinated debentures and is no longer accruing interest expense or making interest payments on the debentures. As a result, the affiliate no longer has the funds available to pay distributions on the Company-Obligated Mandatorily Redeemable Preferred Securities and stopped accruing and paying such distributions on October 1, 2001. The affiliate is in default on the Company-Obligated Mandatorily Redeemable Preferred Securities. The Company is a guarantor on the outstanding debentures and, as a result of the default, the Company has become a debtor directly to the holders of the debentures. This liability is a pre-petition liability and has been classified as “Liabilities subject to compromise” in the accompanying balance sheets.

As reflected in the consolidated financial statements, “Liabilities subject to compromise” refers to Debtors’ liabilities incurred prior to the commencement of the Restructuring Proceedings. The amounts of the various liabilities that are subject to compromise are set forth below. These amounts represent the Company’s estimate of known or potential pre-petition claims to be resolved in connection with the Restructuring Proceedings. Such claims remain subject to future adjustments, which may result from: (i) negotiations; (ii) actions of the Bankruptcy Court; (iii) further developments with respect to disputed claims; (iv) rejection of executory contracts and unexpired leases; (v) the determination as to the value of any collateral securing claims; (vi) proofs of claim; or (vii) other events. Payment terms for these claims will be established in connection with the Restructuring Proceedings.

Liabilities subject to compromise include the following:


	June 30 2007		December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Debt	$	3,724.1	$	4,053.5
Asbestos liabilities		1,392.9		1,391.7
Accounts payable		175.5		175.4
Company-obligated mandatorily redeemable securities		74.3		114.6
Interest payable		44.2		44.2
Environmental liabilities		27.0		26.7
Other accrued liabilities		17.5		7.3

Subtotal		5,455.5		5,813.4
Intercompany payables to affiliates		408.8		408.8

	$	5,864.3	$	6,222.2

The reduction in liabilities subject to compromise reflects the conversion of Trust Convertible Preferred Securities into the Company’s common stock, and the repayments of approximately $330 million of the Senior Credit Facility (see note 11).

The Debtors have received approval from the Bankruptcy Court to pay or otherwise honor certain of their pre-petition obligations, including employee wages, salaries, benefits and other employee obligations and from limited available funds, pre-petition claims of certain critical vendors, certain customer programs and warranty claims, adequate protection payments on the Company’s notes, and certain other pre-petition claims.

Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses in the consolidated statements of operations consist of legal, financial and advisory fees, including fees of the U.K. Administrators, critical employee retention costs, and other directly related internal costs as follows:


	Three Months Ended June 30				Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006		2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Professional fees directly related to the filing	$	25.1	$	15.7	$	36.8	$	33.0
Critical employee retention costs		2.5		4.6		4.4		8.4
Other direct costs		—		0.5		—		0.5

	$	27.6	$	20.8	$	41.2	$	41.9

Pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code, the Debtors have filed schedules with the Bankruptcy Court setting forth the assets and liabilities of the Debtors as of the Petition Date. On October 4, 2002, the Debtors issued approximately 100,000 proof of claim forms to their current and prior employees, known creditors, vendors and other parties with whom the Debtors have previously conducted business. To the extent that recipients disagree with the claims as quantified on these forms, the recipient may file discrepancies with the Bankruptcy Court. Differences between amounts recorded by the Debtors and claims filed by creditors will be investigated and resolved as part of the Restructuring Proceedings. The Bankruptcy Court ultimately will determine liability amounts that will be allowed for these claims in the Chapter 11 Cases. A March 3, 2003 bar date was set for the filing of proofs of claim against the Debtors. The ultimate number and allowed amount of such claims are not presently known.

Approximately 10,800 proofs of claim, totaling approximately $171.1 billion in alleged claims against various Debtors, were filed in connection with the March 3, 2003 bar date.

•

To date, the Debtors have obtained orders allowing and disallowing more than 5,000 claims and stipulations or withdrawals of more than 1,700 claims, effectively reducing claims filed by approximately $9.8 billion and allowing claims of approximately $120 million.

•

The Debtors have completed the review of approximately 2,000 claims totaling approximately $40.0 million for which no reduction is to be sought.

•

Approximately 260 claims, totaling approximately $2.1 billion, are associated with asbestos-related contribution, indemnity, or reimbursement claims. These claims will be handled and resolved by the Asbestos Trust in accordance with the Trust Distribution Procedures detailed in the Plan.

•

The Debtors have identified approximately 70 contribution and indemnity claims, totaling approximately $12.0 billion, which will be resolved through a settlement that is embodied in the Plan.

•

Approximately 900 claims, totaling $27.0 million in liquidated and an unspecified amount in unliquidated claims, represent asbestos property damage claims for which settlements have been documented and have either been approved by the Bankruptcy Court or are embodied in the Plan for resolution when the Plan is confirmed and becomes effective.

Of the remaining 870 claims:

•

The Debtors have completed the review of approximately 320 claims, totaling approximately $139.1 billion, which the Debtors believe should be disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court primarily because these claims appear to be duplicative or unsubstantiated.

•

Approximately 10 claims, totaling approximately $7.3 billion, represent bank and noteholder debt claims. The Debtors have previously recorded approximately $4.3 billion for these claims, which is included in the financial statement caption “Liability subject to compromise”. The Debtors believe the amount in excess of their books and records are duplicative and will be filing pleadings to have the duplicative amounts disallowed.

•

Approximately 270 claims, totaling approximately $4.0 million, represent employee benefit claims. The Plan provides that nearly all employee benefit claims involving the U.S. Debtors will be unimpaired and honored in the ordinary course of the operations of the reorganized Federal-Mogul.

The Debtors have not completed their evaluation of the approximately 270 remaining claims, totaling approximately $609.0 million, alleging rights to payment for financing, environmental, litigation, executory contracts, taxes, trade accounts payable and other matters. The Debtors continue to investigate these unresolved proofs of claim, and intend to file objections to the claims that are inconsistent with their books and records. Accordingly, the ultimate number and allowed amount of such claims are not presently known and cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. The resolution of such claims could result in a material adjustment to the Debtors’ financial statements.

Debtors’ Financial Statements

The condensed consolidated financial statements of the Debtors are presented below. These statements reflect the financial position, results of operations and cash flows of the combined Debtor subsidiaries, including certain amounts and activities between Debtor and non-Debtor subsidiaries of the Company, which are eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Debtors’ Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations (Unaudited)


	Three Months Ended June 30						Six Months Ended June 30
	2007			2006			2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net sales	$	925.5		$	930.7		$	1,823.1		$	1,872.6
Cost of products sold		754.6			786.1			1,512.4			1,596.5


Gross margin		170.9			144.6			310.7			276.1

Selling, general and administrative expenses		130.7			148.7			260.3			300.6
Adjustment of assets to fair value		—			0.8			—			12.4
Interest expense, net		48.0			42.7			95.3			81.7
Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses		27.6			20.8			41.2			41.9
Interest income from non-filers		(18.8	)		(75.7	)		(46.3	)		(149.8	)
Restructuring expense, net		6.1			9.8			14.2			20.2
Other income, net		(22.2	)		(6.0	)		(56.4	)		(13.8	)


Income (loss) before income taxes and equity income (loss) of non-Debtor subsidiaries		(0.5	)		3.5			2.4			(17.1	)
Income tax expense		0.4			2.2			4.4			4.4


Income (loss) before equity income (loss) of non-Debtor subsidiaries		(0.9	)		1.3			(2.0	)		(21.5	)
Equity income (loss) of non-Debtor subsidiaries		4.8			(18.1	)		10.5			(63.7	)


Net income (loss)	$	3.9		$	(16.8	)	$	8.5		$	(85.2	)

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Debtors’ Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets


	(Unaudited) June 30 2007			December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and equivalents	$	79.8		$	50.8
Accounts receivable, net		651.1			543.3
Accounts receivable from non-Debtor affiliates		518.4			524.7
Inventories, net		401.4			420.3
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		103.4			97.2

Total current assets		1,754.1			1,636.3

Property, plant and equipment, net		776.6			830.3
Goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets		1,092.8			1,128.8
Definite-lived intangible assets, net		179.0			183.9
Asbestos-related insurance recoverable		873.7			859.0
Loans receivable from and investments in non-Debtors, net		1,806.6			1,695.4
Prepaid pension costs and other noncurrent assets		242.3			247.2


	$	6,725.1		$	6,580.9


LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
Current liabilities:
Short-term debt, including current portion of long-term debt	$	693.0		$	371.1
Accounts payable and accrued compensation		316.5			267.5
Accounts payable to non-Debtor affiliates		350.4			339.5
Current portion of postemployment benefit liability		52.6			52.6
Other current liabilities		231.1			185.9

Total current liabilities		1,643.6			1,216.6

Postemployment benefits		734.5			769.1
Other accrued liabilities		97.9			120.9
Liabilities subject to compromise		5,864.3			6,222.2
Shareholders’ deficit		(1,615.2	)		(1,747.9	)


	$	6,725.1		$	6,580.9

FEDERAL-MOGUL CORPORATION

Debtors’ Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited)


	Six Months Ended June 30
	2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net Cash Provided From (Used By) Operating Activities	$	50.0		$	89.0

Cash Provided From (Used By) Investing Activities
Expenditures for property, plant and equipment		(34.5	)		(42.3	)
Net proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment		14.2			—
Net proceeds from the sale of businesses		—			3.6
Net proceeds from the sale of investment		13.8			—
Payments to acquire minority interest		(6.8	)		—

Net Cash Used By Investing Activities		(13.3	)		(38.7	)

Cash Provided From (Used By) Financing Activities
Proceeds from borrowings on DIP credit facility		550.0			164.3
Principal payments on DIP credit facility		(228.1	)		(198.0	)
Principal payments on pre-petition Tranche C debt		(330.4	)		—
Net change in restricted cash		—			(26.9	)
Debt refinance fees		(0.3	)		—

Net Cash Used By Financing Activities		(8.8	)		(60.6	)

Effect of foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations on cash		1.1			41.3


Increase in cash and equivalents		29.0			31.0

Cash and equivalents at beginning of period		50.8			53.8


Cash and equivalents at end of period	$	79.8		$	84.8

3.	Acquisitions

The Company, during May 2006, invested approximately $32 million for the acquisition of a controlling interest in Federal-Mogul Goetze India Limited (“FMG”), a piston and piston ring manufacturer headquartered in Delhi, India. FMG has three main operations in India, located in Patiala, Bangalore, and Bhiwadi, which supply major Indian original equipment manufacturers (“OEM”) in the automotive, heavy-duty, motorcycle, industrial and agricultural markets and a variety of aftermarket and export customers.

Prior to this acquisition, the Company owned 25.47% of the outstanding shares of FMG and had accounted for its investment using the equity method of accounting. As a result of this acquisition, the Company owns 50.11% of the outstanding shares, has effective control of FMG, and consolidates its results of operations. During the quarter ended June 30, 2007, the Company finalized its purchase price allocation in accordance with SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations. Changes from the initial purchase price allocation completed during 2006 and the final purchase price allocation were not material.

4.	Adjustment of Long-Lived Assets to Fair Value

During the six month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, the Company recorded charges of $3.5 million and $21.2 million, respectively, to adjust property, plant and equipment to their estimated fair values in accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. The fair value of property, plant and equipment is based upon estimated discounted future cash flows and estimates of salvage value. The impairment charge represents the difference between the estimated fair values and the carrying value of the subject assets.

Impairment charges by reporting segment are as follows:


	Three Months Ended June 30					Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006			2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	—	$	0.5		$	—	$	10.7
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		—		3.9			—		13.4
Vehicle Safety and Protection		—		—			—		—
Automotive Products		3.2		(0.1	)		3.5		0.3
Global Aftermarket		—		—			—		—
Other		—		(3.2	)		—		(3.2	)

	$	3.2	$	1.1		$	3.5	$	21.2

5.	Restructuring

The Company defines restructuring expense to include costs directly associated with exit or disposal activities accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities, employee severance costs incurred as a result of an exit or disposal activity accounted for in accordance with SFAS Nos. 88 and 112, and pension and other postemployment benefit costs incurred as a result of an exit or disposal activity accounted for in accordance with SFAS Nos. 87 and 106.

Estimates of restructuring charges are based on information available at the time such charges are recorded. In general, management anticipates that restructuring activities will be completed within a timeframe such that significant changes to the exit plan are not likely. In certain countries where the Company operates, statutory requirements include involuntary termination benefits that extend several years into the future. Accordingly, severance payments continue well past the date of termination at many international locations. Thus, these programs appear to be ongoing when, in fact, terminations and other activities under these programs have been substantially completed. Management expects that future savings resulting from execution of its restructuring programs will generally result in full pay back within 36 months.

Due to the inherent uncertainty involved in estimating restructuring expenses, actual amounts paid for such activities may differ from amounts initially estimated. Accordingly, the Company may from time to time record reversals of these reserves. Such reversals are recorded consistent with SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 100, Restructuring and Impairment Charges, and result from actual costs at program completion being less than costs estimated at the commitment date. In most instances where final costs are lower than original estimates, the Company experienced a higher rate of voluntary employee attrition than estimated as of the commitment dates resulting in lower severance costs.

Management expects to finance these restructuring programs over the next several years through cash generated from its ongoing operations or through cash available under its existing DIP credit facility, subject to the terms of applicable covenants. Management does not expect that the execution of these programs will have an adverse impact on its liquidity position.

The Company’s restructuring activities are undertaken as necessary to execute management’s strategy and streamline operations, consolidate and take advantage of available capacity and resources, and ultimately achieve net cost reductions. Restructuring activities include efforts to integrate and rationalize the Company’s businesses and to relocate manufacturing operations to lower cost markets, and generally fall into one of the following categories:

1.	Closure of facilities and relocation of production – in connection with the Company’s strategy, certain operations have been closed and related production relocated to low cost geographies or to other locations with available capacity.

Consolidation of administrative functions and standardization of manufacturing processes – as part of its productivity initiative, the Company has acted to consolidate its administrative functions and change its manufacturing processes to reduce selling, general and administrative costs and improve operating efficiencies through standardization of processes.

The following is a summary of the Company’s consolidated restructuring reserves and related activity as of and for the six months ended June 30, 2007. “PTE”, “PTSB”, “VSP”, “AP”, and “GA” represent Powertrain Energy, Powertrain Sealing and Bearings, Vehicle Safety and Protection, Automotive Products, and Global Aftermarket, respectively.


	PTE			PTSB			VSP			AP			GA			Corporate		Total
	(Millions of dollars)

Balance of reserves at December 31, 2006	$	15.6		$	16.5		$	0.4		$	5.1		$	2.5		$	—	$	40.1
Provisions		2.4			7.0			1.3			1.5			4.0			0.1		16.3
Reversals		(0.1	)		(0.1	)		—			—			—			—		(0.2	)
Payments		(4.9	)		(9.9	)		(0.7	)		(1.3	)		(0.9	)		—		(17.7	)
Foreign currency		0.1			0.1			—			—			—			—		0.2

Balance of reserves at March 31, 2007		13.1			13.6			1.0			5.3			5.6			0.1		38.7
Provisions		6.7			5.4			1.3			0.7			—			—		14.1
Reversals		—			(0.3	)		(0.3	)		—			—			—		(0.6	)
Payments		(5.1	)		(9.8	)		(0.5	)		(0.9	)		(1.7	)		—		(18.0	)
Foreign currency		0.1			0.1			0.1			—			—			—		0.3

Balance of reserves at June 30, 2007	$	14.8		$	9.0		$	1.6		$	5.1		$	3.9		$	0.1	$	34.5

In January 2006 the Company announced a global restructuring plan (“Restructuring 2006”), as part of its global profitable growth strategy. This plan will affect approximately 25 facilities and reduce the Company’s workforce by approximately 10% by the end of 2008. The Company continues to solidify the individual components of this plan, and will announce those components as plans are finalized.

As of June 30, 2007 the Company has recorded cumulative restructuring charges of $107 million related to previously announced closures and projects associated with Restructuring 2006. The Company expects to incur additional charges of approximately $50 million in connection with Restructuring 2006, and expects to achieve annual cost savings of $130 million subsequent to the completion of this restructuring program.

During the quarter ended March 31, 2007, the Company announced the closure of its facility located in Gif-sur-Yvette, France. As of March 31, 2007, the Company has recorded cumulative restructuring charges of $95 million related to this and other previously announced closures and projects associated with Restructuring 2006. Included in the summary table above, the payment activity and remaining reserves associated with activities executed under Restructuring 2006 are as follows:


	PTE			PTSB			VSP			AP			GA			Corporate		Total
	(Millions of dollars)

Balance of reserves at December 31, 2006	$	10.8		$	15.9		$	0.4		$	4.6		$	1.1		$	—	$	32.8
Provisions		2.4			7.0			0.8			1.5			3.2			—		14.9
Reversals		(0.1	)		(0.1	)		—			—			—			—		(0.2	)
Payments		(4.6	)		(9.9	)		(0.2	)		(1.3	)		(0.6	)		—		(16.6	)
Foreign currency		0.1			0.1			—			—			—			—		0.2

Balance of reserves at March 31, 2007		8.6			13.0			1.0			4.8			3.7			—		31.1
Provisions		6.5			5.4			0.1			0.7			—			—		12.7
Reversals		—			(0.3	)		(0.3	)		—			—			—		(0.6	)
Payments		(4.9	)		(9.8	)		(0.3	)		(0.8	)		(1.3	)		—		(17.1	)
Foreign currency		—			0.1			—			—			—			—		0.1

Balance of reserves at June 30, 2007	$	10.2		$	8.4		$	0.5		$	4.7		$	2.4		$	—	$	26.2

Significant components of charges related to Restructuring 2006 are as follows:


	Total Expected Costs		Incurred Prior to April 1, 2007		Incurred During the Quarter			Estimated Charges Not Yet Incurred
	(Millions of dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	33.7	$	20.2	$	6.5		$	7.0
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		57.3		39.2		5.1			13.0
Vehicle Safety and Protection		24.5		3.7		(0.2	)		21.0
Automotive Products		25.0		20.3		0.7			4.0
Global Aftermarket		15.7		11.7		—			4.0
Corporate		1.1		0.1		—			1.0

	$	157.3	$	95.2	$	12.1		$	50.0

6.	Other Income, Net

The specific components of “Other income, net” are as follows:


	Three Months Ended June 30						Six Months Ended June 30
	2007			2006			2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Amortization of intangible assets	$	4.8		$	4.4		$	9.3		$	8.7
Foreign currency exchange		0.1			(5.3	)		0.5			(9.3	)
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries		(3.4	)		1.2			(2.7	)		2.1
Royalty income		(0.8	)		—			(0.7	)		(0.3	)
Accounts receivable discount expense		1.9			0.7			3.6			2.0
Gain on sale of assets		(7.5	)		(0.4	)		(10.5	)		(0.2	)
(Gain) loss on sale of businesses		0.4			—			0.4			(0.3	)
Unrealized (gain) loss on commodity forward contracts		3.3			—			(6.5	)		—
Other		(0.3	)		(1.6	)		(1.7	)		(4.0	)

	$	(1.5	)	$	(1.0	)	$	(8.3	)	$	(1.3	)

7.	Inventories

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost determined by the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method was used for 43% and 45% of inventories at June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively. The remaining inventories are recorded using the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method. Inventories are reduced by an allowance for excess and obsolete inventories based on management’s review of on-hand inventories compared to historical and estimated future sales and usage. A summary of inventories is provided in the table below:


	June 30 2007			December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Raw materials	$	176.0		$	170.4
Work-in-process		163.3			164.0
Finished products		636.6			624.5

		975.9			958.9
Valuation reserves		(70.1	)		(66.3	)

	$	905.8		$	892.6

8.	Investments in Non-Consolidated Affiliates

The Company maintains investments in various non-consolidated affiliates, which are located in Turkey, China, Korea, India, Japan, the United States and Mexico. The Company’s direct ownership in such affiliates ranges from approximately 5% to 50%. The aggregate investment in these affiliates approximated $170 million and $187 million at June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively, and is included in the consolidated balance sheets as “other noncurrent assets.” The investment balance decreased during the six months ended June 30, 2007 resulting from dividends paid by the joint venture affiliates of approximately $35 million. Decreases in the investment balance were offset by the Company’s equity in the earnings of such affiliates amounting to approximately $18 million and $17 million for the six month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. During the six months ended June 30, 2007, these entities generated sales of approximately $356 million, net income of approximately $40 million, and had total net assets at June 30, 2007 of approximately $374 million. The Company does not hold a controlling interest in any entity based on exposure to economic risks and potential rewards (variable interests) for which it is the primary beneficiary. Further, the Company’s joint ventures are businesses established and maintained in connection with its operating strategy and are not special purpose entities.

The Company holds a 50% non-controlling interest in a joint venture located in Turkey. This joint venture was established in 1995 for the purpose of manufacturing and marketing automotive parts, including pistons, pins, piston rings, and cylinder liners, to original equipment (“OE”) and aftermarket customers. Pursuant to the joint venture agreement, the Company’s partner holds an option to put its shares to a subsidiary of the Company at the higher of the current fair value or at a guaranteed minimum amount. The term of the contingent guarantee is indefinite, consistent with the terms of the joint venture agreement. However, the contingent guarantee would not survive termination of the joint venture agreement.

The guaranteed minimum amount represents a contingent guarantee of the initial investment of the joint venture partner and can be exercised at the discretion of the partner. As of June 30, 2007, the total amount of the contingent guarantee, were all triggering events to occur, approximated $55 million. Management believes that this contingent guarantee is substantially less than the estimated current fair value of the guarantees’ interest in the affiliate. As such, the contingent guarantee does not give rise to a contingent liability and, as a result, no amount is recorded for this guarantee. If this put option were exercised, the consideration paid and net assets acquired would be accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 141, Business Combinations.

If this put option were exercised at its estimated current fair value, such exercise would have a material effect on the Company’s liquidity. Any value in excess of the minimum guaranteed amount of the put option would be the subject of negotiation between the Company and its joint venture partner.

In accordance with SFAS No. 150, Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both Liabilities and Equity, the Company has determined that its investments in Chinese joint venture arrangements are considered to be “limited-lived” as such entities have specified durations ranging from 30 to 50 years pursuant to regional statutory regulations. In general, these arrangements call for extension, renewal or liquidation at the discretion of the parties to the arrangement at the end of the contractual agreement. Accordingly, a reasonable assessment cannot be made as to the impact of such arrangements on the future liquidity position of the Company.

9.	Forward Contracts

The Company is dependent upon the supply of certain raw materials used in its production processes; these raw materials are exposed to price fluctuations on the open market. The Company enters into commodity price forward contracts to manage the volatility associated with these forecasted purchases. The Company monitors its commodity price risk exposures periodically to maximize the overall effectiveness of its commodity forward contracts, including exposures related to natural gas, copper, nickel, lead, high-grade aluminum and aluminum alloy. Forward contracts are used to mitigate commodity price risk associated with raw materials, generally related to purchases forecasted for up to fifteen months in the future.

The Company had 185 contracts outstanding with a combined notional value of $106.7 million at June 30, 2007. Such contracts are recorded on the balance sheet at fair value. Effective April 1, 2007, the Company completed the required evaluation and documentation to designate the majority of such contracts as cash flow hedges. As a result, after April 1, 2007 the effective portion of changes in fair value of contracts designated as cash flow hedges are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the underlying hedged item affected earnings. At June 30, 2007, an unrecognized gain of $3.4 million related to forward contracts was included in accumulated other comprehensive income. The ineffectiveness, as defined by SFAS 133, related to those forward contracts for the three months ended June 30, 2007 was not material.

10.

Accrued Liabilities

Accrued liabilities consisted of the following:


	June 30 2007		December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Accrued compensation	$	233.5	$	215.1
Accrued rebates		86.3		82.1
Accrued income taxes		54.9		5.1
Restructuring reserves		34.5		40.1
Accrued Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration expenses		31.9		29.3
Accrued product returns		20.1		20.4
Accrued professional services		19.5		17.7
Non-income taxes payable		17.5		7.9
Accrued warranty		16.0		17.3

	$	514.2	$	435.0

11.

Debt

Long-term debt consisted of the following:


	June 30 2007			December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

DIP credit facility	$	693.0		$	371.1
Other .		150.0			137.7

		843.0			508.8
Less: current maturities included in short-term debt		(820.2	)		(482.1	)

	$	22.8		$	26.7

The amended DIP facility is secured by the Company’s domestic assets and the DIP lenders received permission from the lenders of the Senior Credit Agreements to have priority over their collateral interest. The Term Loan Facility has a first priority lien in the domestic fixed assets of the Company and a second priority lien in the Company’s domestic current assets. The Revolving Credit Facility has a first priority lien in the Company’s domestic current assets and a second priority lien in its domestic fixed assets. Availability under the Company’s Revolving Credit Facility is determined by the underlying collateral borrowing base at any point in time, consisting of the Company’s domestic inventories and domestic accounts receivable. The borrowing base available to the Company is calculated weekly based on the value of this underlying collateral. Commitments available under the amended DIP facility are mandatorily reduced by a portion of proceeds from certain future assets or business divestitures. The commitment and amounts outstanding on the DIP credit facilities are as follows:


	June 30 2007		December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Contractual commitment:
Revolving credit facility	$	500.0	$	500.0
Term loan facility		605.0		275.0
Mandatory commitment reductions		—		—

Current commitment	$	1,105.0	$	775.0


Outstanding:
Revolving credit facility	$	88.0	$	96.1
Term loan facility		605.0		275.0
Letters of credit		34.9		24.5

Total outstanding	$	727.9	$	395.6


Borrowing Base on Revolving credit facility
Current borrowings	$	88.0		96.1
Letters of credit		34.9		24.5
Available to borrow		377.1		353.6

Total borrowing base	$	500.0	$	474.2

The DIP credit facility contains restrictive covenants. The more significant of these covenants include the maintenance of certain levels of earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization and limitations on

quarterly capital expenditures. Additional covenants include, but are not limited to, restrictions on the early retirement of debt, additional borrowings, payment of dividends and the sale of assets or businesses.

12.

Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

The Company’s comprehensive income (loss) consists of the following:


	Three Months Ended June 30					Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006			2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net income (loss)	$	3.9	$	(16.8	)	$	8.5	$	(85.2	)
Foreign currency translation adjustments and other		29.9		8.7			46.8		14.3
Forward contracts		3.4		—			3.4		—
Postemployment benefits		6.9		—			17.0		—

	$	44.1	$	(8.1	)	$	75.7	$	(70.9	)

13.

Income Taxes

For the six months ended June 30, 2007, the Company recorded income tax expense of $52.2 million on earnings before income taxes of $60.7 million. This compares to income tax expense of $58.2 million on a loss before income taxes of $27.0 million in the same period of 2006. Income tax expense for the six month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 differs from statutory rates due to non-recognition of income tax benefits on certain operating losses, primarily in the U.S. and U.K., and non-deductible items in various jurisdictions.

The Company adopted Financial Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109 (“FIN 48”) as of January 1, 2007. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in companies’ financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. As a result, the Company applies a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold for all tax uncertainties. FIN 48 only allows the recognition of those tax benefits that have a greater than 50% likelihood of being sustained upon examination by the taxing authorities. As a result of implementing FIN 48, the Company recognized a $13.8 million decrease in the reserve for unrecognized tax benefits, which was accounted for as a reduction to the January 1, 2007 total shareholders’ deficit.

Including the cumulative effect decrease at the beginning of 2007, the Company had $168.4 million of total unrecognized tax benefits. Of this total, $38.6 million represents the amount of unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would affect the effective income tax rate. The total unrecognized tax benefits differ from the amount which would affect the effective tax rate primarily due to the impact of valuation allowances. As of June 30, 2007, there has been no material change in the unrecognized tax benefits or tax-related net interest and penalties.

The Company classifies tax-related penalties and net interest as income tax expense. As of January 1, 2007, the Company has recorded $11.4 million in liabilities for tax-related net interest and penalties on its consolidated balance sheet.

If tax audit settlements are effected in accordance with expectations, it is reasonably possible that the Company could recognize up to $30.8 million of tax benefits within the next 12 months. Because of valuation allowances that currently exist, the potential settlements would not result in a material change to the Company’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

The Company, or one of its subsidiaries, files income tax returns in the United States and other foreign jurisdictions. As of the beginning of 2007, the Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal tax examinations for years before 2004 or state and local examinations for years before 2001, with limited exceptions. The Company is no longer subject to income tax examinations in major foreign tax jurisdictions for years prior to 1998.

The Internal Revenue Service has completed an examination of the Company’s U.S. income tax returns for 2001 through 2003, with a tentative settlement at the appellate level for all issues. The tentative settlement would not result in a material change to the Company’s results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity. The Company is also under income tax examination in Germany and in several other state and foreign jurisdictions.

14.

Income Per Common Share

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted income (loss) per common share:


	Three Months Ended June 30					Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006			2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars, Except Share and Per Share Amounts)

Net income (loss)	$	3.9	$	(16.8	)	$	8.5	$	(85.2	)

Weighted average shares outstanding, basic (in millions)		89.7		89.1			89.4		89.1

Basic income (loss) per common share	$	0.04	$	(0.19	)	$	0.10	$	(0.96	)


Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted (in millions)		91.2		89.1			90.9		89.1

Diluted income (loss) per common share	$	0.04	$	(0.19	)	$	0.09	$	(0.96	)

As a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company stopped accruing and paying dividends on its Series C Preferred Stock.

15.

Pensions and Other Postretirement Benefits

The Company sponsors several defined benefit pension plans (“Pension Benefits”) and health care, disability and life insurance benefits (“Other Benefits”) for certain employees and retirees around the world. The Company funds Pension Benefits based on the funding requirements of federal and international laws and regulations in advance of benefit payments and Other Benefits as benefits are provided to participating employees.

Components of net periodic benefit cost for the three month periods ended June 30 are as follows:


	Pension Benefits												Other Benefits
	United States						International						Other Benefits
	2007			2006			2007			2006			2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)
Service cost	$	6.5		$	7.4		$	1.4		$	1.9		$	0.5		$	1.3
Interest cost		15.1			14.5			3.7			38.7			9.0			8.5
Expected return on plan assets		(17.9	)		(15.6	)		(0.4	)		(30.2	)		—			—
Amortization of actuarial loss		4.6			6.4			0.6			28.7			3.8			3.2
Amortization of prior service cost (benefit)		1.6			1.6			—			—			(1.0	)		(1.0	)

Net periodic benefit cost	$	9.9		$	14.3		$	5.3		$	39.1		$	12.3		$	12.0

Components of net periodic benefit cost for the six month periods ended June 30 are as follows:


	Pension Benefits												Other Benefits
	United States						International						Other Benefits
	2007			2006			2007			2006			2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)
Service cost	$	13.1		$	14.9		$	2.6		$	3.8		$	1.0		$	4.0
Interest cost		30.2			29.0			7.1			75.9			18.0			17.2
Expected return on plan assets		(35.8	)		(31.2	)		(0.6	)		(59.3	)		—			—
Amortization of actuarial loss		9.2			12.8			1.2			56.3			7.7			6.4
Amortization of prior service cost (benefit)		3.2			3.2			—			—			(2.1	)		(2.0	)
Settlement gain		—			—			(0.3	)		—			—			—

Net periodic benefit cost	$	19.9		$	28.7		$	10.0		$	76.7		$	24.6		$	25.6

In October 2006, as part of the discharge of U.K. Administration, the Company settled its U.K. pension liabilities and was relieved of responsibility for all U.K. pension benefit obligations. Prior to settlement, the Company was incurring pension expense for the related employees of approximately $11 million per month; $8 million recorded as cost of goods sold, and $3 million recorded as selling, general and administrative expense. Once the pension was settled, the Company no longer recorded any charges relating to its U.K. pension plans.

16.

Litigation and Environmental Matters

T&N Companies Asbestos Litigation

Background

The Company’s U.K. subsidiary, T&N Ltd., and two U.S. subsidiaries (the “T&N Companies”) are among many defendants named in numerous court actions in the U.S. alleging personal injury resulting from exposure to asbestos or asbestos-containing products. T&N Ltd. and certain of its French subsidiaries are also subject to asbestos-disease litigation, to a lesser extent, in the U.K. and France. As of the Petition Date, T&N Ltd. was a defendant in approximately 115,000 pending personal injury claims. The two U.S. subsidiaries were defendants in approximately 199,000 pending personal injury claims. The Company includes as a pending claim open served claims, settled but not documented claims and settled but not paid claims. Notice of complaints continue to be received after the Petition Date and are in violation of the automatic stay.

Recorded Liability

The Company, during the year ended December 31, 2000, increased its estimate of asbestos-related liability for the T&N Companies by $751 million and recorded a related insurance recoverable asset of $577 million. The revision in the estimate of probable asbestos-related liability principally resulted from a study performed by an econometric firm that specializes in these types of matters. The liability (approximately $1.2 billion as of June 30, 2007) represented the Company’s estimate prior to the Restructuring Proceedings for claims currently pending and those which were reasonably estimated to be asserted and paid through 2012. The Company did not provide a liability for claims that may be paid subsequent to this period as it could not reasonably estimate such claims. In estimating the liability prior to the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company made assumptions regarding the total number of claims anticipated to be received in a future period, the typical cost of settlement (which is sensitive to the industry in which the plaintiff claims exposure, the alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the action is being brought), the rate of receipt of claims, the settlement strategy in dealing with outstanding claims and the timing of settlements. As a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, pending asbestos-related litigation against the Company in the U.S. is stayed, and no party may take action to pursue or collect on such asbestos claims absent specific authorization of the Bankruptcy Court. Since the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company has ceased making payments with respect to asbestos-related lawsuits. An asbestos creditors’ committee has been appointed in the U.S. representing asbestos claimants with pending claims against the Company, and the Bankruptcy Court has appointed a legal representative for the interests of potential future asbestos claimants.

In December of 2000, the Company entered into $250 million of surety bonds on behalf of the T&N Companies to meet certain collateral requirements for asbestos indemnity obligations associated with their prior membership in the Center for Claims Resolution (“CCR”). This amount was stepped down by contract to $225 million effective June 2001. As a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company has sought declaratory and injunctive relief in an adversary proceeding filed in the Bankruptcy Court, in order to enjoin any post-petition payments to asbestos claimants by the CCR and any post-petition draw by the CCR on $225 million in face amount of the surety bonds. The CCR sought to draw on the surety bonds to fund past and future payments although the basis of such draw, the validity of such claims under the pre-petition bond terms, and whether such draw may be utilized to pay obligations of other CCR members were all disputed.

On May 2, 2005, the Company entered into a Surety Claims Settlement Agreement with the CCR and various surety bondholders whereby in fulfillment of all claims made by the CCR, $29 million was placed into escrow for use by the CCR to fund: i) settlements that have already occurred or have yet to occur up to $26 million; and ii) CCR expenses of $3 million. In exchange for a secured claim against the Company and in connection with the pre-petition lenders, the surety bondholders allowed the exercise of the surety bonds in the amount of $28 million. The remaining $1 million was funded from an outstanding letter of credit. The settlement agreement cancels the remaining face amount of the surety bonds and gives the surety bondholders an entitlement to adequate protection upon full payment of the net bond draw of $28 million. Accordingly, the surety bondholders will receive monthly payments of interest on the net bond draw at a rate of LIBOR plus 200 basis points until the earlier of the effective date of the Plan or the occurrence of certain specified termination events.

The Company also issued various letters of credit in connection with asbestos lawsuits that had resulted in verdicts against the Company or its subsidiaries prior to its filing for bankruptcy protection. The letters of credit were issued as security for the judgments entered against the Company or its subsidiaries to permit the Company to pursue appeals to those judgments. The Bankruptcy Court lifted the automatic stay with respect to certain cases where letters of credit were in place to allow the appeals of those cases to proceed. During 2003, the final appeal in three of these cases was denied, and draws were made upon the letters of credit of approximately $16 million.

While the Company believes that the liability recorded for the U.S. asbestos claims was appropriate as of October 1, 2001 for anticipated losses arising from asbestos-related claims against the T&N Companies through 2012, it is the Company’s view that, as a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, there is even greater uncertainty in estimating the timing and amount of future asbestos liability and related insurance recovery for pending and future claims. There are significant differences in the treatment of asbestos claims in a bankruptcy proceeding as compared to the tort litigation system. Among other things, it is uncertain at this time as to the number of asbestos-related claims that will be filed in the Restructuring Proceedings, the number of current and future claims that will be included in the plan of reorganization, how claims for punitive damages and claims by persons with no asbestos-related physical impairment will be treated and whether such claims will be allowed, and the impact that historical settlement values for asbestos claims may have on the estimation of asbestos liability in the Restructuring Proceedings.

No assurance can be given that the T&N Companies will not be subject to material additional liabilities and significant additional litigation relating to asbestos matters for the U.S. asbestos claims through 2012 or thereafter. In the event that such liabilities exceed the amounts recorded by the Company or the remaining insurance coverage, the Company’s results of operations and financial condition could be materially affected.

Insurance Recoverable

This trial commenced in October 2003. The parties were able to reach a settlement prior to the conclusion of the trial. As a result of this settlement, the Company recorded a $38.9 million asbestos charge during 2003. Under the terms of the settlement, EIR would be liable for 65.5% of its one-third share of the reinsurance policy. By separate agreement, Sedgwick agreed to be liable for an additional 17.25% of the EIR share of the reinsurance policy. T&N Ltd. has also agreed to indemnify the insurer for sums paid under the policy for which the insurer is liable to T&N Ltd. for which the insurer has no recovery from the reinsurers or Sedgwick. The settlement agreements referenced above are being held in escrow pending approval by the Bankruptcy Court and the Administrators of T&N Ltd. of those portions of the above-described settlement agreements that affect the Debtors. A motion seeking the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of the settlement was filed on March 1, 2004.

Subsequent to this motion, the other two reinsurers, Munchener Ruckversicherungs-Gesellschaft AG (“Munich Re”) and Centre Reinsurance International Co. (“CRIC”), a subsidiary of the Zurich Financial Services Group, notified the Company of their belief that the settlements with EIR and Sedgwick may breach one or more provisions of the reinsurance agreement. The parties were unable to resolve the issues raised by the two reinsurers and this prompted the U.K. Administrators to file an action in the High Court seeking a declaration that the settlements with EIR and Sedgwick do not breach provisions of the reinsurance agreement. A hearing was conducted during July 2005 and judgment was handed down on December 21, 2005. The High Court held that the settlements did not breach the reinsurance agreement. Munich Re and CRIC have not appealed the judgment. As a result, the motion seeking the Bankruptcy Court’s approval was renoticed and the Bankruptcy Court approved the settlement in November 2006.

The ultimate realization of insurance proceeds is directly related to the amount of related covered valid claims against the Company. If the ultimate asbestos claims are higher than the recorded liability, the Company expects the ultimate insurance recoverable to be higher than the recorded amount, up to the cap of the insurance layer. If the ultimate asbestos claims are lower than the recorded liability, the Company expects the ultimate insurance recoverable to be lower than the recorded amount. While the Restructuring Proceedings will impact the timing and amount of the asbestos claims and the insurance recoverable, there has been no change, other than to reflect the settlement discussed above and foreign exchange translation, to the recorded amounts since the Company initiated the Restructuring Proceedings. Accordingly, the recorded amounts for this insurance recoverable asset could change significantly based upon events that occur from the Restructuring Proceedings.

The security rating of Centre Reinsurance International Co. was downgraded by several major credit rating providers during the first quarter of 2004. As a result of the downgrade, the Company obtained a guarantee of all CRIC’s obligations under the policy from Centre Reinsurance (US) Limited (“CRUS”), an affiliate of CRIC. The security rating of CRUS has not been affected by the downgrade of CRIC and remains unchanged since the inception of the policy. If the reinsurers and/or the related affiliate are not able to meet their obligations under the policy, the Company’s results of operations and financial condition could be materially affected.

The Company has reviewed the financial viability and legal obligations of the three reinsurance companies involved and has concluded that there is little risk that the reinsurers will not be able to meet their obligations under the policy based upon their financial condition. The U.S. claims costs applied against this policy are converted at a fixed exchange rate of $1.69/£. As such, if the market exchange rate is greater or less than $1.69/£, the Company will effectively have a premium or discount on claims paid. As of June 30, 2007, the $714 million insurance recoverable asset includes an exchange rate premium of approximately $99 million.

Abex and Wagner Asbestos Litigation

Background

Two of the Company’s businesses formerly owned by Cooper Industries, LLC (“Cooper”), historically known as Abex and Wagner, are involved as defendants in numerous court actions in the U.S. alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos or asbestos-containing products. These claims mainly involve vehicle safety and protection products. As of the Petition Date, Abex and Wagner were defendants in approximately 66,000 and 33,000 pending claims, respectively. The Company includes as a pending claim open served claims, settled but not documented claims and settled but not paid claims. Notices of complaints continue to be received post-petition and are in violation of the automatic stay.

The liability of the Company with respect to claims alleging exposure to Wagner products arises from the 1998 stock purchase from Cooper of the corporate successor by merger to Wagner Electric Company; the purchased entity is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company and one of the Debtors in the Restructuring Proceedings.

The liability of the Company with respect to claims alleging exposure to Abex products arises from a contractual liability entered into in 1994 by the predecessor to the Company whose stock the Company purchased in 1998. Pursuant to that contract and prior to the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company, through the relevant subsidiary, was liable for certain indemnity and defense payments incurred on behalf of an entity known as Pneumo Abex Corporation (“Pneumo”), the successor in interest to Abex Corporation. Effective as of the Petition Date, the Company has ceased making such payments and is currently considering whether to accept or reject the 1994 contractual liability.

As of the Petition Date, pending asbestos litigation of Abex (as to the Company only) and Wagner is stayed, and no party may take action to pursue or collect on such asbestos claims absent specific authorization of the Bankruptcy Court.

Recorded Liability

The liability (comprised of $129.5 million in Abex liabilities and $84.1 million in Wagner liabilities as of June 30, 2007) represented the Company’s estimate prior to the Restructuring Proceedings for claims currently pending and those which were reasonably estimated to be asserted and paid through 2012. The Company did not provide a liability for claims that may be brought subsequent to this period as it could not reasonably estimate such claims. In estimating the liability prior to the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company made assumptions regarding the total number of claims anticipated to be received in a future period, the typical cost of settlement (which is sensitive to the industry in which the plaintiff claims exposure, the alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the action is being brought), the rate of receipt of claims, the settlement strategy in dealing with outstanding claims and the timing of settlements.

The Company issued various letters of credit in connection with asbestos lawsuits that had resulted in verdicts against the Company prior to its filing for bankruptcy protection. The letters of credit were issued as security for judgments entered against the Company to permit the Company to pursue appeals to these judgments. The final appeal in one case was denied during 2004, the Bankruptcy Court lifted the automatic stay related to one letter of credit associated with this appeal, and a net draw was made upon this letter of credit of approximately $1 million.

While the Company believes that the liability recorded was appropriate as of October 1, 2001 for anticipated losses arising from asbestos-related claims related to Abex and Wagner through 2012, it is the Company’s view that, as a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, there is even greater uncertainty in estimating the timing and amount of future asbestos liability and related insurance recovery for pending and future claims. There are significant differences in the treatment of asbestos claims in a bankruptcy proceeding as compared to the tort litigation system. Among other things, it is uncertain at this time as to the number of asbestos-related claims that will be filed in the proceeding, the number of current and future claims that will be included in a plan of reorganization, how claims for punitive damages and claims by persons with no asbestos-related physical impairment will be treated and whether such claims will be allowed, and the impact historical settlement values for asbestos claims may have on the estimation of asbestos liability in the Restructuring Proceedings.

Cooper, Pneumo, the Company, the asbestos claimants committee, the representative for future asbestos claimants, and various other relevant parties, signed a nonbinding term sheet in July of 2006, reflecting a global settlement that will provide two alternative means of resolving all of Cooper’s and Pneumo’s claims against the Company arising out of the Abex asbestos litigation and the related alleged indemnity obligations. One of these alternatives will be accomplished as part of the Plan and its confirmation. Under one alternative, Cooper will contribute $756 million to a trust to be established pursuant to Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code, consisting of $256 million in cash and a $500 million promissory note, in consideration for Cooper and Pneumo being protected from current and future Abex asbestos claims by the Plan’s channeling injunction which will channel all the Abex asbestos claims to the trust. This alternative settlement has been documented as part of the Plan, and affected creditors voted in favor of this alternative as part of the solicitation of votes on the Plan which was completed in May 2007.

The other alternative settlement will only be utilized if the first alternative cannot be successfully implemented. Under the second settlement structure, Cooper will receive $138 million and Pneumo will receive $2 million in exchange for completely releasing all their claims against the Company and all its affiliates. The terms of this alternative settlement are set forth in the Plan B Settlement Agreement executed as of September 18, 2006, by the same parties that signed the term sheet in July of 2006. This alternative has been documented as part of the Plan. Under both of the foregoing alternatives, Cooper has agreed to permit the Company to: (i) negotiate certain lump-sum or installment settlements involving the Wagner insurance (described below); and (ii) retain 88% of the proceeds from such insurance settlements in the case of the first alternative settlement structure and 80% of the proceeds in the case of the second alternative settlement structure. Cooper, Pneumo, the Company, the asbestos claimants committee, the representative for future asbestos claimants, and various other relevant parties, have entered a Plan Support Agreement which was approved by the Bankruptcy Court on February 2, 2007, binding the parties to the alternative settlements.

Neither of the foregoing settlement alternatives will be consummated until the Plan has been confirmed. Accordingly, the Company will not be relieved of material additional liabilities and significant additional litigation relating to Abex and Wagner asbestos matters until the Plan becomes effective. The Company’s results of operations and financial condition could be materially affected in the event that such liabilities cannot be resolved and end up exceeding the amounts recorded by the Company or the remaining insurance coverage.

Insurance Recoverable

Abex maintained product liability insurance coverage for most of the time that it manufactured products that contained asbestos. This coverage is shared with other third-party companies. The subsidiary of the Company that may be liable for certain indemnity and defense payments with respect to Abex has the benefit of that insurance up to the extent of that liability. Abex has been in litigation since 1982 with the insurance carriers of its primary layer of liability concerning coverage for asbestos claims. Abex also has substantial excess layer liability insurance coverage that is shared with other companies that, barring unforeseen insolvencies of excess carriers or other adverse events, should provide coverage for asbestos claims against Abex. The Abex insurance recoverable was $111.9 million as of June 30, 2007.

Wagner also maintained product liability insurance coverage for some of the time that it manufactured products that contained asbestos. This coverage is shared with other third-party companies. One of the companies, Dresser Industries, Inc. (“Dresser”) initiated an adversary action in federal court against the Debtors and a number of insurance carriers in the Company’s Restructuring Proceedings (the “Adversary Proceeding”). In its complaint, Dresser alleged that it has rights under certain primary and excess general liability insurance policies that may be shared with one of the Debtors, Federal-Mogul Products (“FMP”) as the successor to Wagner Electric Corporation. Dresser sought, among other things, a declaration of the parties’ respective rights and obligations under the policies and a partition of the competing rights of Dresser and FMP under the policies. FMP answered Dresser’s complaint and filed cross-claims against all of the defendant-insurers seeking a declaration of FMP’s rights to the policies. The subsidiary of the Company that may be liable for asbestos claims against Wagner has the benefit of that insurance, subject to the rights of other potential insureds under the policies. Primary layer liability insurance coverage for asbestos claims against Wagner is the subject of an agreement with Wagner’s solvent primary carriers. The agreement provides for partial reimbursement of indemnity and defense costs for Wagner asbestos claims until exhaustion of aggregate limits. Wagner also has substantial excess layer liability insurance coverage which, barring unforeseen insolvencies of excess carriers or other adverse events, should provide coverage for asbestos claims against Wagner. The Wagner insurance recoverable was $47.6 million as of June 30, 2007. On November 4, 2004, FMP, Dresser and Cooper Industries, LLC. (“Cooper”) and certain of the insurers (“Parties”) entered into a partitioning agreement, by which the Parties agreed as to the manner in which the limits of liability, self-insured retentions, deductibles and any other self-insurance features, and the erosion thereof, are to be partitioned among FMP, Dresser and Cooper. The partitioning agreement effectively disposes of Dresser’s claims in the Adversary Proceeding. However, FMP’s cross claim against the defendant-insurers remains. In a separate agreement, FMP, Cooper, and Pneumo have agreed, among other things, to a method for dividing the FMP-Cooper portion of the partitioned limits among those three entities. The agreement among FMP, Cooper, and Pneumo is subject to bankruptcy court approval and is set forth in detail in the Fourth Amended Plan of Reorganization.

Because the legal issues raised in the Adversary Proceeding generally involve state rather than federal law, on September 19, 2006, FMP filed a complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey (the “New Jersey Complaint”) against all of the defendant insurers in the Adversary Proceeding. On March 28, 2007, the federal court in the Adversary Proceeding entered an order abstaining from the Adversary Proceeding. The New Jersey Complaint generally tracks the cross-claims previously asserted by FMP against the defendant insurers in the Adversary Proceeding, and seeks a declaration as to FMP’s coverage rights under the policies as well as damages for breach of contract and bad faith. Several defendant insurers have stated that they believe that the New York Supreme Court rather than the New Jersey Superior Court is the more appropriate forum for the litigation. On or about May 8, 2007, those insurers sued FMP, Federal-Mogul Corporation and certain other parties in New York Supreme Court, seeking a declaration that they do not have any obligation to cover Wagner asbestos claims.

The ultimate realization of insurance proceeds is directly related to the amount of related covered valid claims against the Company. If the ultimate asbestos claims are higher than the recorded liability, the Company expects the ultimate insurance recoverable to be higher than the recorded amount. If the ultimate asbestos claims are lower than the recorded liability, the Company expects the ultimate insurance recoverable to be lower than the recorded amount. While the Restructuring Proceedings and the proposed settlement with Cooper will impact the timing and amount of the asbestos claims and the insurance recoverable, there has been no change to the recorded amounts since the initiation of the Restructuring Proceedings, other than to reflect cash received under this policy, due to the uncertainties created by the Restructuring Proceedings. Accordingly, the recorded amounts for this insurance recoverable asset could change materially based upon events that occur from the Restructuring Proceedings.

The Company believes that based on its review of the insurance policies, the financial viability of the insurance carriers, and advice from outside legal counsel, it is probable that Abex and Wagner will realize an insurance recoverable correlating with the respective liability.

Federal-Mogul and Fel-Pro Asbestos Litigation

Prior to the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company was sued in its own name as one of a large number of defendants in multiple lawsuits brought by claimants alleging injury from exposure to asbestos due to its ownership of certain assets involved in gasket making. As of the Petition Date, the Company was a defendant in approximately 61,500 pre-petition pending claims. Over 40,000 of these claims were transferred to a federal court, where, prior to the Restructuring Proceedings, they were pending. Notices of complaints continue to be received post-petition and are in violation of the automatic stay.

Prior to the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company’s Fel-Pro subsidiary also was named as a defendant in a number of product liability cases involving asbestos, primarily involving gasket or packing products. Fel-Pro was a defendant with respect to nearly 2,000 pending claims as of the Petition Date. Fel-Pro had been named in a further 32,000 claims that had been dismissed without prejudice prior to the Petition Date. The Company was defending all such claims vigorously and believed that it and Fel-Pro had substantial defenses to liability and insurance coverage for defense and indemnity. All claims alleging exposure to products of the Company and of Fel-Pro have been stayed as a result of the Restructuring Proceedings.

Aggregate of Asbestos Liability and Insurance Recoverable Asset

The following is a summary of the asbestos liability subject to compromise and the insurance recoverable asset as of June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006:


	T&N Companies		Abex			Wagner		Other		Total
	(Millions of Dollars)

Liability:
Balance at December 31, 2006	$	1,175.4	$	129.5		$	84.1	$	2.7	$	1,391.7
Foreign exchange		1.2		—			—		—		1.2

Balance at June 30, 2007	$	1,176.6	$	129.5		$	84.1	$	2.7	$	1,392.9


Asset:
Balance at December 31, 2006	$	698.8	$	112.6		$	47.6	$	—	$	859.0
Cash receipts		—		(0.7	)		—		—		(0.7	)
Foreign exchange		15.4		—			—		—		15.4

Balance at June 30, 2007	$	714.2	$	111.9		$	47.6	$	—	$	873.7

The Company’s estimate of asbestos-related liabilities for pending and expected future asbestos claims is subject to considerable uncertainty because such liabilities are influenced by numerous variables that are inherently difficult to predict. The Restructuring Proceedings significantly increase the inherent difficulties and uncertainties involved in estimating the number and cost of resolution of present and future asbestos-related claims against the Company, and may have the effect of increasing the ultimate cost of the resolution of such claims.

Other Matters

The Company is involved in other legal actions and claims, directly and through its subsidiaries. After taking into consideration legal counsel’s evaluation of such actions, management believes that the outcomes are not likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, operating results, or cash flows.

Environmental Matters and Asset Retirement Obligations

The Company is a defendant in lawsuits filed, or the recipient of administrative orders issued, in various jurisdictions pursuant to the Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”) or other similar national, provincial or state environmental laws. These laws require responsible parties to pay for remediating contamination resulting from hazardous substances that were discharged into the environment by them, by prior owners or occupants of their property, or by others to whom they sent such substances for treatment or other disposition. In addition, the Company has been notified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, other national environmental agencies, and various provincial and state agencies that it may be a potentially responsible party (“PRP”) under such laws for the cost of remediating hazardous substances pursuant to CERCLA and other national and state or provincial environmental laws. PRP designation typically requires the funding of site investigations and subsequent remedial activities.

At most of the sites that are likely to be the costliest to remediate, which are often current or former commercial waste disposal facilities to which numerous companies sent wastes, the Company’s exposure is expected to be limited. Despite the joint and several liability which might be imposed on the Company under CERCLA and some of the other laws pertaining to these sites, the Company’s share of the total waste sent to these sites has generally been small. The other companies that sent wastes to these sites, often numbering in the hundreds or more, generally include large, solvent publicly owned companies and in most such situations the government agencies and courts have imposed liability in some reasonable relationship to contribution of waste.

The Company has also identified certain other present and former properties at which it may be responsible for cleaning up environmental contamination, in some cases as a result of contractual commitments. The Company is actively seeking to resolve these actual and potential statutory, regulatory and contractual obligations. Although difficult to quantify based on the complexity of the issues, the Company has accrued amounts corresponding to its

best estimate of the costs associated with such regulatory and contractual obligations on the basis of factors such as available information from site investigations and consultants.

The Company records asset retirement obligations in accordance with SFAS No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations and Financial Interpretation No. 47 (“FIN 47”), Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations, when the amount can be reasonably estimated, typically upon decision to close or sell an operating site. The Company has identified sites with contractual obligations and several sites that are closed or expected to be closed and sold in connection with Restructuring 2006. In connection with these sites, the Company has accrued $25.7 million and $25.3 million as of June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively, for conditional asset retirement obligations, primarily related to anticipated costs of asbestos removal.

The Company has additional asset retirement obligations, also primarily related to asbestos removal costs, for which it believes reasonable cost estimates cannot be made at this time because the Company does not believe it has a reasonable basis to assign probabilities to a range of potential settlement dates for these retirement obligations. Accordingly, the Company is currently unable to determine amounts to accrue for conditional asset retirement obligations at such sites.

For those sites that the Company identifies in the future for closure or sale, or for which it otherwise believes it has a reasonable basis to assign probabilities to a range of potential settlement dates, the Company will review these sites for both impairment issues in accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, and for conditional asset retirement obligations in accordance with SFAS No. 143 or FIN 47.

Total environmental reserves, including reserves for conditional asset retirement obligations, were $82.6 million and $82.1 million at June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively, and are included in the consolidated balance sheets as follows:


	June 30 2007		December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Current liabilities:
Environmental liabilities	$	6.3	$	6.6
Asset retirement obligations		9.0		8.6
Long-term accrued liabilities:
Environmental liabilities		23.6		23.5
Asset retirement obligations		16.7		16.7
Liabilities subject to compromise - Environmental		27.0		26.7

	$	82.6	$	82.1

Management believes that recorded environmental liabilities will be adequate to cover the Company’s estimated liability for its exposure in respect to such matters. In the event that such liabilities were to significantly exceed the amounts recorded by the Company, the Company’s results of operations and financial condition could be materially affected. At June 30, 2007, management estimates that reasonably possible material additional losses above and beyond management’s best estimate of required remediation costs as recorded approximates $77 million.

Environmental liabilities subject to compromise include those related to claims that may be reduced in the Company’s bankruptcy proceeding because obligations underlying such claims may be determined to be “dischargeable debts” incurred prior to the Company’s filing for bankruptcy. Such liabilities generally arise at either: (1) commercial waste disposal sites to which the Company and other companies sent wastes for disposal; or (2) sites in relation to which the Company has a contractual obligation to indemnify the current owner of a site for the costs of cleanup of contamination that was released into the environment before the Company sold the site.

Environmental liabilities determined not to be subject to compromise include those which arise from a legal obligation of the Company, under an administrative or judicial order to perform cleanup at a site. Such obligations are normally associated with sites which the Company owns and/or operates.

The best estimate of environmental liability at a site may change from time to time during a bankruptcy proceeding even if the liability relating to that site is subject to compromise and the Company’s responsibility to make payments is stayed. Notwithstanding the stay of legal proceedings against the Company regarding such a site, activities such as further site investigation and/or actual cleanup work often continue to be performed, generally by parties other than the Company. Such activities may produce new and better information that requires the Company to revise its best estimate of total site cleanup costs and its own share of such costs.

17.

Operations by Reporting Segment

The Company’s integrated operations are organized into six reporting segments generally corresponding to major product groups; Powertrain Energy, Powertrain Sealing and Bearings, Vehicle Safety and Protection, Automotive Products, Global Aftermarket and Corporate. Segment information for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2006 has been reclassified to reflect organizational changes implemented in the second quarter of 2007.

The accounting policies of the segments are the same as those of the Company. Revenues related to products sold by Powertrain Energy, Powertrain Sealing and Bearings, Vehicle Safety and Protection, and Automotive Products to OE customers are recorded within the respective segments. Revenues from such products sold to Aftermarket customers are recorded within the Global Aftermarket segment.

The Company evaluates segment performance principally on an Operational EBITDA basis. Operational EBITDA is defined as earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, and certain items such as restructuring and impairment charges, Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses, and gains or losses on the sales of assets.

Net sales and gross margin information by reporting segment is as follows:


	Net Sales
	Three Months Ended June 30				Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006		2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	510	$	468	$	1,023	$	916
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		271		251		538		496
Vehicle Safety and Protection		205		191		403		375
Automotive Products		83		72		161		148
Global Aftermarket		694		650		1,355		1,297

	$	1,763	$	1,632	$	3,480	$	3,232


	Gross Margin
	Three Months Ended June 30					Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006			2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	68	$	73		$	138		$	142
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		16		30			33			56
Vehicle Safety and Protection		53		47			103			93
Automotive Products		21		16			39			28
Global Aftermarket		164		162			318			315
Corporate		—		(24	)		(1	)		(45	)

	$	322	$	304		$	630		$	589

Operational EBITDA by reporting segment and the reconciliation of Operational EBITDA to income (loss) before income tax expense is as follows:


	Three Months Ended June 30						Six Months Ended June 30
	2007			2006			2007			2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	88		$	85		$	174		$	164
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		18			30			35			55
Vehicle Safety and Protection		50			42			96			83
Automotive Products		20			17			36			29
Global Aftermarket		116			117			224			218
Corporate		(80	)		(117	)		(153	)		(229	)

Total Operational EBITDA		212			174			412			320

Interest expense, net		(52	)		(44	)		(102	)		(83	)
Depreciation and amortization		(88	)		(80	)		(172	)		(159	)
Restructuring charges, net		(14	)		(17	)		(30	)		(42	)
Adjustment of assets to fair value		(3	)		(1	)		(4	)		(21	)
Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses		(28	)		(21	)		(41	)		(42	)
Other		(2	)		1			(2	)		—

Income (loss) before income tax expense	$	25		$	12		$	61		$	(27	)

Total assets by reportable segment are as follows:


	June 30 2007		December 31 2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	1,496	$	1,474
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		1,187		1,195
Vehicle Safety and Protection		1,013		983
Automotive Products		959		1,007
Global Aftermarket		1,946		1,828
Corporate		808		692

	$	7,409	$	7,179

18.

Stock-Based Compensation

On February 2, 2005, the Company entered into a five-year employment agreement with José Maria Alapont, effective March 1, 2005, whereby Mr. Alapont was appointed as the Company’s chairman, president and chief executive officer. In connection with this agreement, the Plan Proponents have agreed to amend the Plan to provide that the reorganized Federal-Mogul will grant to Mr. Alapont stock options equal to at least 4% of the value of the reorganized Company at the reorganization date (“Options”). If there is a material reduction in the value of the reorganized Company under any amendment to the Plan that is confirmed, Mr. Alapont would receive stock options in an amount that would be the economic equivalent of the Options. These stock options vest ratably over the life of the employment agreement, such that one fifth of the options will vest on each anniversary of the employment agreement effective date. The contractual term of these stock options is 7 years from the date of grant.

Additionally, one-half of the options have an additional feature allowing for the exchange of options for shares of common stock of the reorganized Company prior to the end of the employment agreement, at the exchange equivalent of four

options for one Class A share of common stock. The options without the exchange feature are referred to herein as “plain vanilla options” and those options with the exchange feature are referred to as “options with exchange.”

In accordance with SFAS No. 123(R), Share Based Payments, the Company has determined the amount of compensation expense associated with these stock options upon the fair value of such options as of June 30, 2007. Key assumptions and related option-pricing models used by the Company are summarized in the following table.


	Plain Vanilla Options		Options with Exchange

Valuation model	Black-Scholes		Modified Binomial
Expected volatility	35	%	35	%
Expected dividend yield	0	%	0	%
Risk-free rate over the estimated expected life of option	4.87 – 5.16	%	4.87 – 5.16	%
Expected term (in years)	3.92		4.78

Until the date of grant, the Company is required to reassess the value of the Options quarterly and adjust the aggregate compensation expense recognized to reflect any change in the value of the Options. During the six month periods ended June 30, 2007 and June 30, 2006, the Company recorded compensation expense of $2.8 million and $3.4 million, respectively. As of June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, there was approximately $17.1 million and $21.1 million, respectively, of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested stock-options under the employment agreement, which is expected to be recognized ratably over the remaining term of the employment agreement.

Because of recent changes in the U.S. tax code, the Company has proposed changes to Mr. Alapont’s non-qualified stock option grant from the reorganized Company. The proposed changes are detailed in the Fourth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The proposed changes eliminate the use of “options with exchange” and provide that all the granted options will be “plain vanilla” options as described above. Mr. Alapont also would enter into a deferred compensation arrangement that replaces the benefits which he would have had under the options with exchange provided for in his employment agreement. An actuarial calculation has estimated the value of this future option grant to be $33 million.

19.

Consolidating Condensed Financial Information of Guarantor Subsidiaries

Certain subsidiaries of the Company (as listed below, collectively the “Guarantor Subsidiaries”) have guaranteed fully and unconditionally, on a joint and several basis, the obligation to pay principal and interest under the Company’s Senior Credit Agreements.


Federal-Mogul Venture Corporation	Federal-Mogul Piston Rings, Inc.	Federal-Mogul Powertrain, Inc.
Federal-Mogul Global Properties Inc.	Federal-Mogul Dutch Holdings Inc.	Federal-Mogul Mystic, Inc.
Carter Automotive Company, Inc.	Federal-Mogul UK Holdings Inc.	Felt Products MFG. Co.
Federal-Mogul World Wide Inc.	F-M UK Holdings Limited	Ferodo America, Inc.
Federal-Mogul Ignition Company	Federal-Mogul Global Inc.	McCord Sealing, Inc.
Federal-Mogul Products, Inc.	T&N Industries, Inc.

The Company issued notes in 1999 and 1998 that are guaranteed by the Guarantor Subsidiaries. The Guarantor Subsidiaries also guarantee the Company’s previously existing publicly registered Medium-term notes and Senior notes.

In lieu of providing separate unaudited financial statements for the Guarantor Subsidiaries, the Company has included the accompanying consolidating condensed financial statements based on the Company’s understanding of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s interpretation and application of Rule 3-10 of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation S-X and Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 53. Management does not believe that separate financial statements of the Guarantor Subsidiaries are material to investors. Therefore, separate financial statements and other disclosures concerning the Guarantor Subsidiaries are not presented.

Subsequent to the Restructuring Proceedings, no dividends have been paid to the Federal-Mogul parent company by any of its subsidiaries.

As a result of the Restructuring Proceedings (see Note 2 “Voluntary Reorganization Under Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration”) certain of the liabilities at June 30, 2007, as shown below, were liabilities subject to compromise as of the Petition date:


	Parent		Guarantor Subsidiaries		Non-Guarantor Subsidiaries		Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)

Debt	$	3,723.9	$	0.2	$	—	$	3,724.1
Asbestos liabilities		1.5		236.3		1,155.1		1,392.9
Accounts payable		59.0		116.5		—		175.5
Company-obligated mandatorily redeemable preferred securities of subsidiary holding solely convertible subordinated debentures of the Company		—		—		74.3		74.3
Interest payable		44.0		0.2		—		44.2
Environmental liabilities		27.0		—		—		27.0
Other accrued liabilities		13.7		0.1		3.7		17.5

	$	3,869.1	$	353.3	$	1,233.1	$	5,455.5

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Unaudited Consolidating Condensed Statement of Operations

Three Months Ended June 30, 2007


	Unconsolidated									Eliminations			Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries			Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries			Eliminations			Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net sales	$	310.7		$	417.9		$	1,482.4		$	(447.6	)	$	1,763.4
Cost of products sold		254.7			317.9			1,316.0			(447.6	)		1,441.0


Gross margin		56.0			100.0			166.4			—			322.4

Selling, general and administrative expenses		61.3			54.8			96.6			—			212.7
Adjustment of assets to fair value		—			—			3.2			—			3.2
Interest expense, net		48.4			—			3.5			—			51.9
Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses		27.6			—			—			—			27.6
Equity earnings (loss) of unconsolidated affiliates		—			(0.8	)		(9.3	)		—			(10.1	)
Restructuring expense, net		2.5			1.9			9.1			—			13.5
Other (income) expense, net		(5.7	)		(12.5	)		16.7			—			(1.5	)


Earnings (loss) before income taxes and equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(78.1	)		56.6			46.6			—			25.1
Income tax expense		0.5			—			20.7			—			21.2


Earnings (loss) before equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(78.6	)		56.6			25.9			—			3.9
Equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		82.5			41.2			—			(123.7	)		—


Net earnings (loss)	$	3.9		$	97.8		$	25.9		$	(123.7	)	$	3.9

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Unaudited Consolidating Condensed Statement of Operations

Six Months Ended June 30, 2007


	Unconsolidated									Eliminations			Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries			Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries			Eliminations			Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net sales	$	596.6		$	832.3		$	2,951.1		$	(900.1	)	$	3,479.9
Cost of products sold		506.3			637.0			2,606.5			(900.1	)		2,849.7


Gross margin		90.3			195.3			344.6			—			630.2

Selling, general and administrative expenses		122.2			110.0			187.4			—			419.6
Adjustment of assets to fair value		—			—			3.5			—			3.5
Interest expense, net		96.4			—			5.5			—			101.9
Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses		41.2			—			—			—			41.2
Equity earnings (loss) of unconsolidated affiliates		—			(2.1	)		(15.9	)		—			(18.0	)
Restructuring expense, net		7.2			3.9			18.5			—			29.6
Other (income) expense, net		(24.6	)		(33.2	)		49.5			—			(8.3	)


Earnings (loss) before income taxes and equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(152.1	)		116.7			96.1			—			60.7
Income tax expense		4.3			—			47.9			—			52.2


Earnings (loss) before equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(156.4	)		116.7			48.2			—			8.5
Equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		164.9			130.8			—			(295.7	)		—


Net earnings (loss)	$	8.5		$	247.5		$	48.2		$	(295.7	)	$	8.5

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Unaudited Consolidating Condensed Statement of Operations

Three Months Ended June 30, 2006


	Unconsolidated									Eliminations			Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries			Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries			Eliminations			Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net sales	$	304.7		$	419.4		$	1,362.1		$	(454.6	)	$	1,631.6
Cost of products sold		242.8			322.9			1,216.3			(454.6	)		1,327.4


Gross margin		61.9			96.5			145.8			—			304.2

Selling, general and administrative expenses		71.3			52.8			94.3			—			218.4
Adjustment of assets to fair value		0.8			0.3			—			—			1.1
Interest expense (income), net		51.3			—			(7.0	)		—			44.3
Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses		20.8			—			—			—			20.8
Equity earnings (loss) of unconsolidated affiliates		0.1			(1.4	)		(6.4	)		—			(7.7	)
Restructuring expense, net		5.3			—			11.2			—			16.5
Other (income) expense, net		(13.7	)		(33.8	)		46.5			—			(1.0	)


Earnings (loss) before income taxes and equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(74.0	)		78.6			7.2			—			11.8
Income tax expense		1.0			1.1			26.5			—			28.6


Earnings (loss) before equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(75.0	)		77.5			(19.3	)		—			(16.8	)
Equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		58.2			(21.9	)		—			(36.3	)		—


Net earnings (loss)	$	(16.8	)	$	55.6		$	(19.3	)	$	(36.3	)	$	(16.8	)

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Unaudited Consolidating Condensed Statement of Operations

Six Months Ended June 30, 2006


	Unconsolidated									Eliminations			Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries			Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries			Eliminations			Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net sales	$	606.6		$	850.6		$	2,667.8		$	(893.1	)	$	3,231.9
Cost of products sold		500.8			656.3			2,378.7			(893.1	)		2,642.7


Gross margin		105.8			194.3			289.1			—			589.2

Selling, general and administrative expenses		144.9			106.7			194.3			—			445.9
Adjustment of assets to fair value		9.2			0.5			11.5			—			21.2
Interest expense (income), net		98.3			—			(15.0	)		—			83.3
Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses		41.9			—			—			—			41.9
Equity earnings (loss) of unconsolidated affiliates		0.1			(3.0	)		(14.2	)		—			(17.1	)
Restructuring expense, net		9.7			0.1			32.5			—			42.3
Other (income) expense, net		(16.3	)		(65.8	)		80.8			—			(1.3	)


Earnings (loss) before income taxes and equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(182.0	)		155.8			(0.8	)		—			(27.0	)
Income tax expense		2.0			2.2			54.0			—			58.2


Earnings (loss) before equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		(184.0	)		153.6			(54.8	)		—			(85.2	)
Equity earnings (loss) of subsidiaries		98.8			(8.4	)		—			(90.4	)		—


Net earnings (loss)	$	(85.2	)	$	145.2		$	(54.8	)	$	(90.4	)	$	(85.2	)

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Unaudited Consolidating Condensed Balance Sheet

June 30, 2007


	Unconsolidated							Eliminations			Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries		Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries		Eliminations			Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and equivalents	$	26.3		$	—	$	351.8	$	—		$	378.1
Accounts receivable, net		238.7			318.3		610.7		—			1,167.7
Inventories, net		90.3			276.1		539.4		—			905.8
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		54.9			38.4		198.1					291.4

Total current assets		410.2			632.8		1,700.0		—			2,743.0

Property, plant and equipment, net		213.9			461.4		1,380.2		—			2,055.5
Goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets		482.3			577.8		159.6		—			1,219.7
Definite-lived intangible assets, net		14.2			70.8		169.1		—			254.1
Investment in subsidiaries		7,275.4			3,398.9		—		(10,674.3	)		—
Intercompany accounts, net		(4,317.4	)		3,341.3		976.1		—			—
Asbestos-related insurance recoverable		—			159.5		714.2		—			873.7
Prepaid pension costs and other noncurrent assets		48.0			19.0		195.5		—			262.5


	$	4,126.6		$	8,661.5	$	5,294.7	$	(10,674.3	)	$	7,408.5


LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT)
Current liabilities:
Short-term debt, including current portion of long-term debt	$	693.0		$	—	$	127.2	$	—		$	820.2
Accounts payable		98.5			121.8		398.1		—			618.4
Accrued liabilities		125.9			63.8		324.5		—			514.2
Current portion of postemployment benefit liability		52.6			—		14.4		—			67.0
Other current liabilities		58.4			13.0		75.7		—			147.1

Total current liabilities		1,028.4			198.6		939.9		—			2,166.9

Liabilities subject to compromise		3,869.1			353.3		1,233.1		—			5,455.5

Long-term debt		—			—		22.8		—			22.8
Postemployment benefits		734.5			—		360.1		—			1,094.6
Long-term portion of deferred income taxes		—			—		84.2		—			84.2
Other accrued liabilities		69.7			7.6		82.3		—			159.6
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries		40.1			—		—		—			40.1
Shareholders’ equity (deficit)		(1,615.2	)		8,102.0		2,572.3		(10,674.3	)		(1,615.2	)


	$	4,126.6		$	8,661.5	$	5,294.7	$	(10,674.3	)	$	7,408.5

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Consolidating Condensed Balance Sheet

December 31, 2006


	Unconsolidated								Eliminations			Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries		Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries			Eliminations			Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and equivalents	$	9.2		$	—	$	350.1		$	—		$	359.3
Accounts receivable, net		188.9			268.2		535.5			—			992.6
Inventories, net		98.6			282.5		511.5			—			892.6
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		50.6			33.3		164.3						248.2

Total current assets		347.3			584.0		1,561.4			—			2,492.7

Property, plant and equipment, net		227.1			474.1		1,377.4			—			2,078.6
Goodwill and indefinite-lived intangible assets		482.3			577.7		145.3			—			1,205.3
Definite-lived intangible assets, net		15.5			73.1		165.7			—			254.3
Investment in subsidiaries		7,264.8			3,006.4		—			(10,271.2	)		—
Intercompany accounts, net		(4,369.4	)		3,471.0		898.4			—			—
Asbestos-related insurance recoverable		—			160.2		698.8			—			859.0
Prepaid pension costs and other noncurrent assets		48.0			19.3		221.9			—			289.2


	$	4,015.6		$	8,365.8	$	5,068.9		$	(10,271.2	)	$	7,179.1


LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT)
Current liabilities:
Short-term debt, including current portion of long-term debt	$	371.1		$	—	$	111.0		$	—		$	482.1
Accounts payable		78.8			82.4		326.8			—			488.0
Accrued liabilities		103.1			59.0		272.9			—			435.0
Current portion of postemployment benefit liability		52.6			—		15.3			—			67.9
Other current liabilities		49.3			10.3		122.1			—			181.7

Total current liabilities		654.9			151.7		848.1			—			1,654.7

Liabilities subject to compromise		4,198.2			353.2		1,262.0			—			5,813.4

Long-term debt		—			—		26.7			—			26.7
Postemployment benefits		769.0			0.1		342.0			—			1,111.1
Long-term portion of deferred income taxes		—			—		81.8			—			81.8
Other accrued liabilities		92.4			—		92.7			—			185.1
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries		49.0			6.3		(1.1	)		—			54.2
Shareholders’ equity (deficit)		(1,747.9	)		7,854.5		2,416.7			(10,271.2	)		(1,747.9	)


	$	4,015.6		$	8,365.8	$	5,068.9		$	(10,271.2	)	$	7,179.1

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Unaudited Consolidating Condensed Statement of Cash Flows

Six Months Ended June 30, 2007


	(Unconsolidated)									Eliminations		Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries			Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries			Eliminations		Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net Cash Provided From (Used By) Operating Activities	$	(36.2	)	$	148.4		$	73.7		$	—	$	185.9

Expenditures for property, plant and equipment		(14.1	)		(16.4	)		(101.5	)		—		(132.0	)
Net proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment		1.2			—			16.9			—		18.1
Net proceeds from sale of investment		13.8			—			—			—		13.8
Payments to acquire minority interests		(1.7	)		—			(5.1	)		—		(6.8	)

Net Cash Used By Investing Activities		(0.8	)		(16.4	)		(89.7	)		—		(106.9	)

Proceeds from borrowings on DIP credit facility		550.0			—			—			—		550.0
Principal payments on DIP credit facility		(228.1	)		—			—			—		(228.1	)
Increase in short-term debt		—			—			8.7			—		8.7
Decrease in long-term debt		—			—			(5.8	)		—		(5.8	)
Payments on factoring arrangements		—			—			(58.9	)		—		(58.9	)
Repayment of pre-petition Tranche C debt		(330.4	)		—			—			—		(330.4	)
Debt refinance fees		(0.3	)		—			—			—		(0.3	)
Change in intercompany accounts		58.3			(132.0	)		73.7			—		—

Net Cash Provided From (Used By) Financing Activities		49.5			(132.0	)		17.7			—		(64.8	)

Effect of foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations on cash		4.6			—			—			—		4.6


Increase in cash and equivalents	$	17.1		$	—		$	1.7		$	—	$	18.8

Federal-Mogul Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

Unaudited Consolidating Condensed Statement of Cash Flows

Six Months Ended June 30, 2006


	(Unconsolidated)									Eliminations		Consolidated
	Parent			Guarantor Subsidiaries			Non- Guarantor Subsidiaries			Eliminations		Consolidated
	(Millions of Dollars)

Net Cash Provided From (Used By) Operating Activities	$	34.9		$	122.9		$	(23.1	)	$	—	$	134.7

Expenditures for property, plant and equipment		(6.8	)		(15.3	)		(58.5	)		—		(80.6	)
Net proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment		—			—			2.7			—		2.7
Net proceeds from sale of business		—			—			4.0			—		4.0
Payments to acquire business		(30.5	)		—			—			—		(30.5	)

Net Cash Used By Investing Activities		(37.3	)		(15.3	)		(51.8	)		—		(104.4	)

Proceeds from borrowings on DIP credit facility		164.3			—			—			—		164.3
Principal payments on DIP credit facility		(198.0	)		—			—			—		(198.0	)
Increase in short-term debt		—			—			0.3			—		0.3
Decrease in long-term debt		—			—			(1.0	)		—		(1.0	)
Net change in restricted cash		(26.9	)		—			—			—		(26.9	)
Change in intercompany accounts		36.0			(107.2	)		71.2			—		—

Net Cash Provided From (Used By) Financing Activities		(24.6	)		(107.2	)		70.5			—		(61.3	)

Effect of foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations on cash		47.9			—			—			—		47.9


Net increase (decrease) in cash and equivalents	$	20.9		$	0.4		$	(4.4	)	$	—	$	16.9

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Overview

Federal-Mogul is a leading supplier of a broad range of vehicular parts, accessories, modules and systems to the automotive, small engine, heavy-duty, marine, railroad, aerospace and industrial markets, including customers in both the original equipment (“OE”) market and the replacement market (“aftermarket”). Federal-Mogul has established an expansive global presence and conducts its operations through various manufacturing, distribution and technical centers that are wholly-owned subsidiaries or partially-owned joint ventures, organized into five primary reporting segments; Powertrain, Sealing Systems, Vehicle Safety and Performance, Aftermarket Products and Services, and Corporate. The Company has operations in established markets including Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, and the United States, and emerging markets including Brazil, China, Czech Republic, Hungary, India, Korea, Mexico, Poland, Thailand and Turkey. The attendant risks of the Company’s international operations are primarily related to currency fluctuations, changes in local economic and political conditions, and changes in laws and regulations.

Federal-Mogul offers its customers a diverse array of market-leading products for OE and aftermarket applications, including engine bearings, pistons, piston pins, rings, cylinder liners, valve train and transmission products, connecting rods, sealing systems, element resistant systems protection sleeving products, electrical connectors and sockets, disc pads and brake shoes, and ignition, lighting, fuel, wiper and chassis products. The Company’s principal customers include many of the world’s original equipment manufacturers (“OEM”) of vehicles and industrial products and aftermarket retailers and wholesalers. The Company seeks to participate in both of these markets by leveraging its original equipment product engineering and development capability, manufacturing know-how, and expertise in managing a broad and deep range of replacement parts to service the aftermarket. The Company believes that it is uniquely positioned to effectively manage the life cycle of a broad range of products to a diverse customer base. The Company’s principal customers include many of the world’s original equipment manufacturers (“OEM”) of vehicles and industrial products and aftermarket retailers and wholesalers.

The Company operates in an extremely competitive industry, driven by global vehicle production volumes and part replacement trends. Business is typically awarded to the supplier offering the most favorable combination of cost, quality, technology and service. In addition, customers continue to require periodic price reductions that require the Company to continually assess, redefine and improve its operations, products, and manufacturing capabilities to maintain and improve profitability. Management continues to develop and execute initiatives to meet the challenges of the industry and to achieve its strategy.

For a more detailed description of the Company’s business, products, industry, operating strategy and associated risks, refer to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.

Voluntary reorganization under Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration

The Company and all of its wholly-owned United States subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions on October 1, 2001 for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the Bankruptcy Court. Also on October 1, 2001, certain of the Company’s United Kingdom subsidiaries filed voluntary petitions for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code with the Bankruptcy Court, and filed petitions for Administration under the United Kingdom Insolvency Act of 1986 in the High Court. The High Court, in November 2006, approved the discharge of the Administration Proceedings for those U.K. subsidiaries that entered into Company Voluntary Arrangements.

The Restructuring Proceedings were initiated in response to a sharply increasing number of asbestos-related claims and their demand on the Company’s cash flows and liquidity. Under the Restructuring Proceedings, the Debtors have submitted and have requested the Bankruptcy Court to approve and are implementing a plan to address the asbestos-related claims against them.

Consequences of the Restructuring Proceedings

The confirmation hearing relating to the Plan began on June 18, 2007. Although all major constituencies in the Chapter 11 Cases support confirmation of the Plan, and the Plan has been accepted by all classes of creditors and interest holders, certain parties have objected to confirmation of the Plan, and those objections were addressed as part of the confirmation hearing. After six days of hearings before the Bankruptcy Court, the presentation of evidence in connection with the confirmation hearing ended on July 10, 2007. The Bankruptcy Court has asked for additional briefing relating to the confirmation hearing to be submitted by August 30, 2007, and has scheduled closing arguments for the confirmation hearing on October 1, 2007. While the outcome of the confirmation hearing and the timetable for confirmation of the Plan resides with the Bankruptcy Court, the Company anticipates that the Plan will be confirmed reasonably promptly after completion of the closing arguments.

to have their claims satisfied by receiving shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul rather than cash. The holders of currently outstanding common and preferred stock of the Company, at the time those shares are cancelled, will receive warrants that may be used to purchase shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul at a predetermined exercise price. These warrants will only be of value if the market price of the shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul exceeds the predetermined exercise price during the 7-year term during which the warrants will be saleable or exercisable.

The Plan also provides that: i) the U.S. asbestos trust will make a payment to the reorganized Company (or pay a portion of the common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul to be issued to the U.S. asbestos trust in lieu thereof) for the agreed amounts that will be used by the U.K. Administrators to provide distributions on account of U.K. asbestos personal injury claims; ii) the U.S. asbestos trust will provide an option to an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn for the purchase of the remaining shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul held by such trust; and (iii) if such affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn does not exercise such option, an affiliate of Mr. Carl Icahn will provide certain financing to the U.S. asbestos trust.

Unsecured creditors, including trade creditors, of the U.S. Debtors have the option to either receive shares of common stock of reorganized Federal-Mogul or receive cash distributions under the Plan equal to 35% of their allowed claims, payable in three annual installments, provided that the aggregate payout of all allowed unsecured claims against the U.S. Debtors does not exceed $258 million. Any excess above this amount could result in a reduction in the percentage distribution that the unsecured creditors of the U.S. Debtors ultimately receive.

The Administrators of the U.K. Debtors and the Plan Proponents, on September 26, 2005, entered into an agreement outlining the terms and conditions of distributions to the creditors of the U.K. Debtors (“U.K. Settlement Agreement”). Prior to this agreement, the Administrators had agreed to sell certain long-term intercompany notes held by T&N Limited (“Loan Notes”) to Deutsche Bank as a means to fund expected distributions to creditors. In accordance with terms of the U.K. Settlement Agreement, the Company elected in December 2005 to retain the Loan Notes. Concurrently, the Loan Notes were transferred from the U.K. Debtors to a newly created non-debtor wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company and to Federal-Mogul Corporation, as provided in the Loan Note Sale Agreement. A copy of the U.K. Settlement Agreement was filed with the SEC on Form 8-K on September 30, 2005.

The company voluntary arrangements (“CVAs”) became effective on October 11, 2006, resolving claims (other than those that are to be dealt with by the Plan) against the principal U.K. Debtors. The discharge of administration orders for the principal U.K. Debtors became effective on November 30, 2006. The CVAs divide asbestos claims against the principal U.K. Debtors into two categories: CVA Asbestos Claims and Chapter 11 Asbestos Claims. CVA Asbestos Claims are dealt with by the CVAs and it is intended that Chapter 11 Asbestos Claims will be dealt with by the Plan. The CVAs compromise and protect the CVA companies from the CVA Asbestos Claims. The trustees of the U.K. asbestos trust will pay dividends to CVA Asbestos claimants from the U.K. asbestos trust. Upon the effective date of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Asbestos Claims will be compromised. Accordingly, the Plan contemplates that the U.S. asbestos trustees look exclusively to the U.S. asbestos trust to pay dividends to Chapter 11 Asbestos claimants.

Code and subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court, or otherwise as permitted in the ordinary course of business, the Debtors, or some of them, may sell or otherwise dispose of assets and liquidate or settle liabilities for some amounts other than those reflected in the consolidated financial statements. Further, the plan of reorganization could materially change the amounts and classifications in the historical consolidated financial statements.

Asbestos Liabilities and Related Insurance Recoverable

The Company, during the year ended December 31, 2000, increased its estimate of asbestos-related liability for the T&N Companies by $751 million and recorded a related insurance recoverable asset of $577 million. The revision in the estimate of probable asbestos-related liability principally resulted from a study performed by an econometric firm that specializes in these types of matters. The liability (approximately $1.2 billion as of June 30, 2007) represented the Company’s estimate prior to the Restructuring Proceedings for claims currently pending and those which were reasonably estimated to be asserted and paid through 2012. The Company did not provide a liability for claims that may be paid subsequent to this period as it could not reasonably estimate such claims. In estimating the liability prior to the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company made assumptions regarding the total number of claims anticipated to be received in a future period, the typical cost of settlement (which is sensitive to the industry in which the plaintiff claims exposure, the alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the action is being brought), the rate of receipt of claims, the settlement strategy in dealing with outstanding claims and the timing of settlements. As a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, pending asbestos-related litigation against the Company in the United States is stayed , and no party may take action to pursue or collect on such asbestos claims absent specific authorization of the Bankruptcy Court. Since the Restructuring Proceedings, the Company has ceased making payments with respect to asbestos-related lawsuits. An asbestos creditors’ committee has been appointed in the U.S. representing asbestos claimants with pending claims against the Company, and the Bankruptcy Court has appointed a legal representative for the interests of potential future asbestos claimants.

While the Company believes that the liability recorded for the U.S. Asbestos Claims was appropriate as of October 1, 2001 for anticipated losses arising from asbestos-related claims against the T&N Companies through 2012, it is the Company’s view that, as a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, there is even greater uncertainty in estimating the timing and amount of future asbestos liability and related insurance recovery for pending and future claims. There are significant differences in the treatment of asbestos claims in a bankruptcy proceeding as compared to the tort litigation system. Among other things, it is uncertain at this time as to the number of asbestos-related claims that will be filed in the Restructuring Proceedings, the number of current and future claims that will be included in the plan of reorganization, how claims for punitive damages and claims by persons with no asbestos-related physical impairment will be treated and whether such claims will be allowed, and the impact that historical settlement values for asbestos claims may have on the estimation of asbestos liability in the Restructuring Proceedings.

In the event that such liabilities exceed the amounts recorded by the Company or the remaining insurance coverage, the Company’s results of operations and financial condition could be materially affected.

T&N Ltd. (formerly T&N, plc), during the year ended December 31, 1996, purchased for itself and its then defined global subsidiaries a £500 million layer of insurance which will be triggered should the aggregate costs of claims made or brought after June 30, 1996, where the exposure occurred prior to that date, exceed £690 million. The Company, during the year ended December 31, 2000, concluded that the aggregate cost of the claims filed after June 30, 1996 would exceed the trigger point and recorded an insurance recoverable asset under the T&N policy of $577 million. The recorded insurance recoverable was $714 million as of June 30, 2007. One of the three reinsurers, European International Reinsurance Company Ltd. (“EIR”), in December 2001, filed suit in a London, England court to challenge the validity of its insurance contract with the T&N Companies. As a result of this lawsuit, a claim was made against the broker (Sedgwick) that assisted in procuring this policy for breach of its duties as a broker. This trial commenced in October 2003. The parties were able to reach a settlement prior to the conclusion of the trial. As a result of this settlement, the Company recorded a $38.9 million asbestos charge during 2003. Under the terms of the settlement, EIR would be liable for 65.5% of its one-third share of the reinsurance policy. By separate agreement, Sedgwick agreed to be liable for an additional 17.25% of the EIR share of the reinsurance policy. T&N Ltd. has also agreed to indemnify the insurer for sums paid under the policy for which the insurer is liable to T&N Ltd. for which the insurer has no recovery from the reinsurers or Sedgwick. The settlement agreements referenced above are being held in escrow pending approval by the Bankruptcy Court and the Administrators of T&N Ltd. of those portions of the above-described settlement agreements that affect the Debtors. A motion seeking the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of the settlement was filed on March 1, 2004.

Two of the Company’s businesses formerly owned by Cooper Industries, LLC (“Cooper”), historically known as Abex and Wagner, are involved as defendants in numerous court actions in the U.S. alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos or asbestos-containing products. These claims mainly involve vehicle safety and performance products. As of the Petition Date, Abex and Wagner were defendants in approximately 66,000 and 33,000 pending claims, respectively. The Company includes as a pending claim open served claims, settled but not documented claims and settled but not paid claims. Notices of complaints continue to be received post-petition and are in violation of the automatic stay.

While the Company believes that the liability recorded was appropriate as of October 1, 2001 for anticipated losses arising from asbestos-related claims related to Abex and Wagner through 2012, it is the Company’s view that, as a result of the Restructuring Proceedings, there is even greater uncertainty in estimating the timing and amount of future asbestos liability and related insurance recovery for pending and future claims. There are significant differences in the treatment of asbestos claims in a bankruptcy proceeding as compared to the tort litigation system. Among other things, it is uncertain at this time as to the number of asbestos-related claims that will be filed in the proceeding, the number of current and future claims that will be included in the plan of reorganization, how claims for punitive damages and claims by persons with no asbestos-related physical impairment will be treated and whether such claims will be allowed, and the impact historical settlement values for asbestos claims may have on the estimation of asbestos liability in the Restructuring Proceedings.

The other alternative settlement will only be utilized if the first alternative cannot be successfully implemented. Under the second settlement structure, Cooper will receive $138 million and Pneumo will receive $2 million in exchange for completely releasing all their claims against the Company and all its affiliates. The terms of this alternative settlement are set forth in the Plan B Settlement Agreement, executed as of September 18, 2006, by the same parties that signed the term sheet in July of 2006. This alternative has been documented as part of the Plan. Under both of the foregoing alternatives, Cooper has agreed to permit the Company to (i) negotiate certain lump-sum or installment settlements involving the Wagner insurance (described below), and (ii) retain 88% of the proceeds from such insurance settlements in the case of the first alternative settlement structure and 80% of the proceeds in the case of the second alternative settlement structure. Cooper, Pneumo, the Company, the asbestos claimants committee, the representative for future asbestos claimants, and various other relevant parties, have entered a Plan Support Agreement which was approved by the Bankruptcy Court on February 2, 2007, binding the parties to the alternative settlements.

Both Abex and Wagner maintained separate product liability insurance coverage for most of the time that each manufactured products that contained asbestos. This coverage is shared with other third-party companies. The ultimate realization of insurance proceeds is directly related to the amount of related covered valid claims against the Company. If the ultimate asbestos claims are higher than the recorded liability, the Company expects the ultimate insurance recoverable to be higher than the recorded amount. If the ultimate asbestos claims are lower than the recorded liability, the Company expects the ultimate insurance recoverable to be lower than the recorded amount. While the Restructuring Proceedings and the proposed settlement with Cooper will impact the timing and amount of the asbestos claims and the insurance recoverable, there has been no change to the recorded amounts since the initiation of the Restructuring Proceedings, other than to reflect cash received under this policy, due to the uncertainties created by the Restructuring Proceedings. Accordingly, the recorded amounts for this insurance recoverable asset could change materially based upon events that occur from the Restructuring Proceedings.

Results of Operations

The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis of financial condition and results of operations (“MD&A”) should be read in conjunction with the MD&A included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.

Consolidated Results

Net sales by reporting segment were:


	Three Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006		Change
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	510	$	468	$	42
Powertrain Sealing & Bearings		271		251		20
Vehicle Safety and Protection		205		191		14
Automotive Products		83		72		11
Global Aftermarket		694		650		44

	$	1,763	$	1,632	$	131

The percentage of net sales by group and region are listed below. “PTE”, “PTSB”, “VSP”, “AP”, and “GA” represent Powertrain Energy, Powertrain Sealing and Bearings, Vehicle Safety and Protection, Automotive Products, and Global Aftermarket, respectively.


	Three Months Ended June 30
	PTE		PTSB		VSP		AP		GA		Total
2007
Americas	17	%	50	%	42	%	67	%	74	%	50	%
Europe	73	%	50	%	55	%	27	%	24	%	46	%
Asia	10	%	*		3	%	6	%	2	%	4	%

2006
Americas	24	%	53	%	46	%	70	%	75	%	53	%
Europe	70	%	47	%	53	%	25	%	23	%	44	%
Asia	6	%	*		1	%	5	%	2	%	3	%

*less than 1%

Gross margin by reporting segment was:


	Three Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006			Change
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	68	$	73		$	(5	)
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		16		30			(14	)
Vehicle Safety and Protection		53		47			6
Automotive Products		21		16			5
Global Aftermarket		164		162			2
Corporate		—		(24	)		24

	$	322	$	304		$	18

Net sales increased by $131 million, or 8%, to $1,763 million for the second quarter of 2007 from $1,632 million in the same period of 2006. Roughly half of the Company’s revenue is generated in Europe. The weakening of the U.S. dollar against the euro, compared to the same period in 2006, increased revenues reported by the Company’s European operations by $49 million, or 3%, in addition to $7 million from favorable movements in other currencies.

New program launches combined with net increases in global OEM production and the demand for replacement parts increased sales by $74 million, or 5% year over year. Customer price reductions reduced revenues by 1%, year over year, largely offsetting the carry-over impact of the May 2006 acquisition of a controlling interest in FMG.

In October 2006, as part of the discharge of U.K. Administration, the Company settled its U.K. pension liabilities and was relieved of responsibility for all U.K. pension benefit obligations. Prior to settlement, the Company was incurring pension expense for the related employees of approximately $11 million per month; $8 million recorded as cost of goods sold, and $3 million recorded as selling, general and administrative expense (“SG&A”). Once the pension was settled, the Company no longer recorded any charges relating to its U.K. pension plans.

Gross margin increased by $18 million, to $322 million, or 18.3% of sales, for the second quarter of 2007 from $304 million, or 18.6% of sales, in the same period of 2006. The reduction in U.K. pension expense accounted for $22 million in additional gross margin. Customer price reductions and increases in raw material costs reduced margins by $16 million and $12 million respectively. These adverse impacts were partially offset by productivity in excess of labor and benefits inflation of $14 million, reductions in the cost of bought-in finished product for resale through the aftermarket of $7 million, and the impact of increased volumes, net of product mix, of $5 million.

Reporting Segment Results – Three Months Ended June 30, 2007 compared to June 30, 2006

The following table provides a reconciliation of changes in sales and gross margin for the three months ended June 30, 2007 compared with the three months ended June 30, 2006 for each of the Company’s reporting segments.


	PTE			PTSB			VSP			AP			GA			Corporate			Total
	(Millions of Dollars)
Sales
Three months ended June 30, 2006	$	468		$	251		$	191		$	72		$	650		$	—		$	1,632
Sales volumes		7			10			9			9			39			—			74
Customer pricing		(8	)		1			(3	)		—			(6	)		—			(16	)
Acquisition		17			—			—			—			—			—			17
Foreign currency		26			9			8			2			11			—			56

Three months ended June 30, 2007	$	510		$	271		$	205		$	83		$	694		$	—		$	1,763


	PTE			PTSB			VSP			AP			GA			Corporate			Total
	(Millions of Dollars)
Gross Margin
Three months ended June 30, 2006	$	73		$	30		$	47		$	16		$	162		$	(24	)	$	304
Sales volumes / mix		(4	)		—			7			(2	)		4			—			5
Customer pricing		(8	)		1			(3	)		—			(6	)		—			(16	)
Productivity, net of inflation		8			(7	)		1			7			—			3			12
Raw material cost inflation		(4	)		(8	)		(1	)		(1	)		7			—			(7	)
Settlement of U.K. pensions		—			—			—			1			—			21			22
Acquisition		3			—			—			—			—			—			3
Depreciation		(4	)		—			—			—			—			—			(4	)
Other, including new customer incentives		2			—			—			—			(6	)		—			(4	)
Foreign currency		2			—			2			—			3			—			7

Three months ended June 30, 2007	$	68		$	16		$	53		$	21		$	164		$	—		$	322

Powertrain Energy

Sales increased by $42 million to $510 million for the second quarter of 2007 from $468 million in the same period of 2006. PTE generates 73% of its revenue in Europe where the weakening of the U.S. dollar primarily against the euro increased reported sales by $26 million. The acquisition of FMG in May 2006 contributed additional sales of $17 million, and sales volumes increased by $7 million offset by customer price reductions of $8 million.

Although sales volumes increased by $7 million globally, there was weaker market demand in North America from both light vehicle and heavy duty OEMs of $20 million, with the greatest impact in the heavy duty market due to the non-recurrence of 2006 pre-builds in advance of emissions regulations changes that took effect at the end of 2006. The overall decline in North American volumes was more than offset by increased demand from both light and commercial vehicle OEMs in Europe of $27 million.

Gross margin decreased by $5 million to $68 million, or 13% of sales, for the second quarter of 2007 compared to $73 million, or 16% of sales for the second quarter of 2006. Operational productivity, in excess of labor and benefits inflation, combined with the impact of the FMG acquisition mostly offset customer price reductions and adverse product mix. The most significant external driver of the reduced margin was the increased cost of raw materials.

Powertrain Sealing and Bearings

Sales increased by $20 million to $271 million for the second quarter of 2007 from $251 million in the same period of 2006. Sales volumes increased $10 million with reduced market demand in North America being offset by new program launches in North America and increased market demand in Europe. PTSB generates 50% of its sales in Europe where the relative weakness of the U.S. dollar against the euro increased sales reported by the European operations by $7 million, in addition to $2 million from movements in other currencies.

Gross margin decreased by $14 million to $16 million, or 6% of sales, for the second quarter of 2007 from $30 million, or 12% of sales for the second quarter of 2006. This decrease was a combination of increased cost of raw materials, primarily in Europe, and the one-time cost of production transfers within the North American bearings operations.

Vehicle Safety and Protection

Sales increased by $14 million to $205 million for the second quarter of 2007 from $191 million in the same period of 2006. Sales volumes increased $9 million with reduced market demand in North America being offset by new program launches in North America and increased market demand in Europe. VSP generates 55% of its sales in Europe where the relative weakness of the U.S. dollar against the euro increased sales reported by the European operations by $6 million, in addition to $2 million from movements in other currencies.

Gross margin increased by $6 million to $53 million, or 26% of sales, for the second quarter of 2007 compared to $47 million, or 25% of sales, for the second quarter of 2006, with the impact of increased sales volumes more than offsetting customer price reductions.

Automotive Products

Sales increased by $11 million, or 15%, to $83 million for the second quarter of 2007, from $72 million in the same period of 2006. This increase was primarily due to increased sales volumes of $9 million. New program launches in both North America and Europe more than offset the impact of reduced North American market demand.

Gross margin increased by $5 million to $21 million, or 25% of sales, for the second quarter of 2007 compared to $16 million, or 22% of sales, in the same period of 2007. Productivity accounted for $7 million of this increase, which was partially offset by sales adverse product mix of $2 million.

Global Aftermarket

Sales increased by $44 million, or 7%, to $694 million for the second quarter of 2007, from $650 million in the same period of 2006. This increase was driven by increased sales volumes and foreign currency of $39 million and $11 million, respectively. These increases were offset by $6 million in customer price increases, primarily in North America.

Gross margin increased by $2 million to $164 million, or 24% of sales, for the second quarter of 2006 compared to $162 million, or 25% of sales, in the same period of 2007. Savings in the cost of bought-in components for resale of $7 million was partially offset by $6 million of customer price increase. The impact of increased sales volumes was partially offset by adverse changes in product mix, as the market shifted away slightly from premium to entry-level products, combined with the one-time cost of new customer acquisitions.

Corporate

Corporate expenses are comprised primarily of certain minor central headquarters functions as well as employee post-retirement benefits and other general insurance coverages, which improved by $24 million. This improvement is primarily the benefit of pension expense decreases due to the settlement of the U.K. pension plans in the fourth quarter of 2006.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

SG&A expenses were $213 million, or 12% of net sales, for the second quarter of 2007 as compared to $218 million, or 13% of net sales, for the same quarter of 2006. Adverse exchange impacts of $6 million partially offset $8 million in U.K. pension cost reductions. The remaining SG&A expenses decreased primarily due to cost saving measures over and above labor and benefits inflation.

Included in SG&A expenses were research and development (“R&D”) costs, including product engineering and validation costs, of $45 million for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 compared with $42 million for the same period in 2006. As a percentage of OE sales, R&D was 5% for the quarters ended June 30, 2007 and 2006. The Company maintains technical centers throughout the world designed to integrate the Company’s leading technologies into advanced products and processes, to provide engineering support for all of the Company’s manufacturing sites, and to provide technological expertise in engineering and design development providing solutions for customers and bringing new, innovative products to market. Federal-Mogul’s research and development activities are conducted at the Company’s major research centers in Burscheid, Germany; Nuremberg, Germany; Wiesbaden, Germany; Bad Camberg, Germany; Chapel, United Kingdom; Plymouth, Michigan; Skokie, Illinois; Ann Arbor, Michigan and Yokohama, Japan.

Adjustment of Assets to Fair Value

During the three month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, the Company recorded charges of $3.2 million and $1.1 million, respectively, to adjust property, plant and equipment to their estimated fair values in accordance with SFAS No. 144. The fair value of property, plant and equipment is based upon estimated discounted future cash flows and estimates of salvage value. The impairment charge represents the difference between the estimated fair values and the carrying value of the subject assets.

Impairment charges by reporting segment are as follows:


	Three Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)
Powertrain Energy	$	—	$	0.5
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		—		3.9
Vehicle Safety and Protection		—		—
Automotive Products		3.2		(0.1	)
Global Aftermarket		—		—
Other		—		(3.2	)

	$	3.2	$	1.1

Interest Expense, Net

Interest expense, net was $52 million in the second quarter of 2007 compared to $44 million for the same quarter of 2006. The increase is due to higher average interest rates on all debt, and the loss of three months of interest income of $7 million on the restricted U.K. cash balance of approximately $700 million held during 2006.

$2.6 million per quarter, are recorded as interest expense in the statement of operations. All cash adequate protection payments made to the noteholders are provisional in nature and are subject to recharacterization, credit against allowed claims or other relief if the Bankruptcy Court were to ultimately conclude that the noteholders were not entitled to such payments.

In connection with the Restructuring Proceedings and in accordance with SOP 90-7, the Company ceased recording interest expense on its outstanding pre-petition Notes, Medium-Term Notes and Senior Notes effective October 1, 2001.

Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration Related Reorganization Expenses

During the three months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, the Company recorded Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses of $27.6 million and $20.8 million, respectively. These expenses fluctuate largely based upon the necessity for professional services by third-party advisors in connection with the Restructuring Proceedings.


	Three Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Professional fees directly related to the filing	$	25.1	$	15.7
Critical employee retention costs		2.5		4.6
Other directly related costs		—		0.5

	$	27.6	$	20.8

Cash payments for Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses totaled $23.8 million and $20.0 million for the three months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

Restructuring Activities

The Company defines restructuring expense to include costs directly associated with exit or disposal activities accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 146, employee severance costs incurred as a result of an exit or disposal activity accounted for in accordance with SFAS Nos. 88 and 112, and pension and other postemployment benefit costs incurred as a result of an exit or disposal activity accounted for in accordance with SFAS Nos. 87 and 106.

The following is a summary of the Company’s consolidated restructuring reserves and related activity as of and for the six months ended June 30, 2007. “PTE”, “PTSB”, “VSP”,”AP”, and “GA” represent Powertrain Energy, Powertrain Sealing and Bearings, Vehicle Safety and Protection, Automotive Products, and Global Aftermarket, respectively.


	PTE			PTSB			VSP			AP			GA			Corporate		Total
	(Millions of dollars)

Balance of reserves at December 31, 2006	$	15.6		$	16.5		$	0.4		$	5.1		$	2.5		$	—	$	40.1
Provisions		2.4			7.0			1.3			1.5			4.0			0.1		16.3
Reversals		(0.1	)		(0.1	)		—			—			—			—		(0.2	)
Payments		(4.9	)		(9.9	)		(0.7	)		(1.3	)		(0.9	)		—		(17.7	)
Foreign currency		0.1			0.1			—			—			—			—		0.2

Balance of reserves at March 31, 2007		13.1			13.6			1.0			5.3			5.6			0.1		38.7
Provisions		6.7			5.4			1.3			0.7			—			—		14.1
Reversals		—			(0.3	)		(0.3	)		—			—			—		(0.6	)
Payments		(5.1	)		(9.8	)		(0.5	)		(0.9	)		(1.7	)		—		(18.0	)
Foreign currency		0.1			0.1			0.1			—			—			—		0.3

Balance of reserves at June 30, 2007	$	14.8		$	9.0		$	1.6		$	5.1		$	3.9		$	0.1	$	34.5

The Company’s restructuring reserve balances are principally comprised of severance and employee-related costs.

Income Tax Expense

For the three months ended June 30, 2007, the Company recorded income tax expense of $21.2 million on income before income taxes of $25.1 million. This compares to income tax expense of $28.6 million on income before income taxes of $11.8 million in the same period of 2006. Income tax expense for the three month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 differs from statutory rates due to non-recognition of income tax benefits on certain operating losses, primarily in the U.S. and U.K., and non-deductible items in various jurisdictions.

Consolidated Results – Six Months Ended June 30, 2007 compared to June 30, 2006

Net sales by reporting segment were:


	Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006		Change
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	1,023	$	916	$	107
Powertrain Sealing & Bearings		538		496		42
Vehicle Safety and Protection		403		375		28
Automotive Products		161		148		13
Global Aftermarket		1,355		1,297		58

	$	3,480	$	3,232	$	248

The percentage of net sales by group and region are listed below. “PTE”, “PTSB”, “VSP”,”AP”, and “GA” represent Powertrain Energy, Powertrain Sealing and Bearings, Vehicle Safety and Protection, Automotive Products, and Global Aftermarket, respectively.


	Six Months Ended June 30
	PTE		PTSB		VSP		AP		GA		Total
2007
Americas	17	%	50	%	43	%	68	%	74	%	50	%
Europe	73	%	50	%	55	%	26	%	24	%	46	%
Asia	10	%	*		2	%	6	%	2	%	4	%

2006
Americas	25	%	53	%	46	%	69	%	75	%	54	%
Europe	71	%	47	%	53	%	25	%	23	%	44	%
Asia	4	%	*		1	%	6	%	2	%	2	%

* less than 1%

Gross margin by reporting segment was:


	Six Months Ended June 30
	2007			2006			Change
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	138		$	142		$	(4	)
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		33			56			(23	)
Vehicle Safety and Protection		103			93			10
Automotive Products		39			28			11
Global Aftermarket		318			315			3
Corporate		(1	)		(45	)		44

	$	630		$	589		$	41

Net sales increased by $248 million, or 8%, to $3,480 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 from $3,232 million in the same period of 2006. Roughly half of the Company’s revenue is generated in Europe. The weakening of the U.S. dollar against the euro, compared to the same period in 2006, increased revenues reported by the Company’s European operations by $107 million, or 3%, in addition to $9 million from favorable movements in other currencies. New program launches combined with net increases in global OEM production and the demand for replacement parts increased sales by $115 million, or 4% year over year. Customer price reductions reduced revenues by 1%, year over year, largely offsetting the carry-over impact of the May 2006 acquisition of a controlling interest in Federal-Mogul Goetze (“FMG”).

In October 2006, as part of the discharge of U.K. Administration, the Company settled its U.K. pension liabilities and was relieved of responsibility for all U.K. pension benefit obligations. Prior to settlement, the Company was incurring pension expense for the related employees of approximately $11 million per month; $8 million recorded as cost of goods sold, and $3 million recorded as selling, general and administrative expense (“SG&A”). Once the pension was settled, the Company no longer recorded any charges relating to its U.K. pension plans.

Gross margin increased by $41 million, to $630 million, or 18.1% of sales for the six months ended June 30, 2007 from $589 million, or 18.2% of sales, in the same period of 2006. The reduction in U.K. pension plans accounted for an increase of $47 million. Customer price reductions and increases in raw material costs each reduced margins by $30 million. This adverse $60 million impact was partially offset by productivity, in excess of labor and benefits inflation, of $22 million, reductions in the cost of bought-in finished product for resale through the aftermarket of $8 million, and the impact of volume increases, net of product mix, of $12 million. Favorable foreign currency movements increased gross margin by $16 million.

Reporting Segment Results – Six Months Ended June 30, 2007 compared to June 30, 2006

The following table provides a reconciliation of changes in net sales and gross margin for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared with the six months ended June 30, 2006 for each of the Company’s reporting segments. “PTE”, “PTSB”, “VSP”,”AP”, and “GA” represent Powertrain Energy, Powertrain Sealing and Bearings, Vehicle Safety and Protection, Automotive Products, and Global Aftermarket, respectively.


	PTE			PTSB			VSP			AP			GA			Corporate			Total
	(Millions of Dollars)
Sales
Six months ended June 30, 2006	$	916		$	496		$	375		$	148		$	1,297		$	—		$	3,232
Sales volumes		21			23			16			9			46			—			115
Customer pricing		(16	)		(1	)		(6	)		—			(7	)		—			(30	)
Acquisition		47			—			—			—			—			—			47
Foreign currency		55			20			18			4			19			—			116

Six months ended June 30, 2007	$	1,023		$	538		$	403		$	161		$	1,355		$	—		$	3,480


	PTE			PTSB			VSP			AP			GA			Corporate			Total
	(Millions of Dollars)
Gross Margin
Six months ended June 30, 2006	$	142		$	56		$	93		$	28		$	315		$	(45	)	$	589
Sales volumes / mix		(7	)		7			12			(4	)		4			—			12
Customer pricing		(16	)		(1	)		(6	)		—			(7	)		—			(30	)
Productivity, net of inflation		16			(12	)		5			12			2			(1	)		22
Raw material cost inflation		(5	)		(19	)		(6	)		—			8			—			(22	)
Settlement of U.K. pensions		—			—			—			2			—			45			47
Acquisition		5			—			—			—			—			—			5
Depreciation		(4	)		2			—			1			—			—			(1	)
Other, including new customer incentives		1			(2	)		—			—			(7	)		—			(8	)
Foreign currency		6			2			5			—			3			—			16

Six months ended June 30, 2007	$	138		$	33		$	103		$	39		$	318		$	(1	)	$	630

Powertrain Energy

Sales increased by $107 million to $1,023 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 from $916 million in the same period of 2006. PTE generates about 73% of its revenue in Europe where the weakening of the U.S. dollar primarily against the euro increased reported sales by $55 million. The acquisition of FMG in May 2006 contributed additional sales of $47 million, and although the sales volume increased $21 million, this was partially offset by customer price reductions of $16 million.

Although sales volumes increased by $21 million globally, there was weaker market demand in North America from both light vehicle and heavy duty OEMs of about $41 million, with the greatest impact in the heavy duty market due to the non-recurrence of 2006 pre-builds in advance of emissions regulations changes that took effect at the end of 2006. The overall decline in North America volumes was more than offset by increased demand from both light and commercial vehicle OEMs in Europe of $57 million, and increased penetration into Asia of $5 million.

Gross margin decreased by $4 million to $138 million, or 13% of sales, for the six months ended 2007 compared to $142 million, or 16% of sales for the second quarter of 2006. Operational productivity, in excess of labor and benefits inflation, combined with the impact of the FMG acquisition mostly offset customer price reductions and adverse product mix. The most significant external driver of the reduced margin was the increased cost of raw materials.

Powertrain Sealing and Bearings

Sales increased by $42 million to $538 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 from $496 million in the same period of 2006. Sales volumes increased $23 million with reduced market demand in North America being offset by new program launches in North America and increased market demand in Europe. PTSB generates 50% of its sales in Europe where the relative weakness of the U.S. dollar against the euro increased sales reported by the European operations by $20 million.

Gross margin decreased by $23 million to $33 million, or 6% of sales, for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to $56 million, or 11% of sales for the second quarter of 2006. This decrease was a combination of increased cost of raw materials, primarily in Europe, and the one-time cost of production transfers within the North American bearings operations.

Vehicle Safety and Protection

Sales increased by $28 million to $403 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 from $375 million in the same period of 2006. Sales volumes increased $16 million with reduced market demand in North America being offset by new program launches in North America and increased market demand in Europe. VSP generates 55% of its sales in Europe where the relative weakness of the U.S. dollar against the euro increased sales reported by the European operations by $16 million, in addition to $2 million from movements in other currencies. Customer price reductions were $6 million in the period.

Gross margin increased by $10 million to $103 million, or 26% of sales, for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to $93 million, or 25% of sales for the second quarter of 2006. The impact of increased sales volumes of $12 million, increased productivity of $5 million and the favorable currency movements of $5 million were partially offset by unfavorable customer pricing of $6 million and increased raw material costs of $6 million.

Automotive Products

Sales increased by $13 million to $161 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 from $148 million in the same period of 2006. This increase was primarily due to increased sales volumes of $9 million. New program launches in both North America and Europe more than offset the impact of reduced North American market demand.

Gross margin increased by $11 million to $39 million, or 24% of sales, for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to $28 million, or 19% of sales for the second quarter of 2006, primarily as a result of productivity improvements.

Global Aftermarket

Sales increased by $58 million to $1,355 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 from $1,297 million in the same period of 2006. The increase in sales volumes of $46 million and favorable foreign currency of $19 million were partially offset by unfavorable customer pricing of $7 million, largely in North America.

Gross margin increased by $3 million to $318 million, or 23% of sales, for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to $315 million, or 24% of sales for the second quarter of 2006. Increased volumes, net of product mix, of $4 million and operational efficiencies of $2 million were more than offset by customer price reductions of $7 million. Savings in the cost of bought-in components for resale of $8 million were partially offset by changes in customer rebate programs and the cost of new customer acquisitions of $7 million. The favorable impact of currency movements was $3 million.

Corporate

Corporate expenses are comprised primarily of certain minor central headquarters functions as well as employee post-retirement benefits and other general insurance coverages, which increased by $44 million due to the settlement of pension plans in the U.K. in the fourth quarter of 2006.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

SG&A expenses were $420 million, or 12% of net sales, for the six months ended June 30, 2007 as compared to $446 million, or 14% of net sales, for the same period of 2006. Adverse exchange impacts of $12 million partially offset $16 million in U.K. pension cost reductions. The remaining SG&A expenses decreased primarily due to cost saving measures over and above labor and benefits inflation.

Included in SG&A expenses were R&D costs, including product engineering and validation costs, of $88 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared with $83 million for the same period in 2006. As a percentage of OE sales, R&D was 5% for the six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006.

Adjustment of Assets to Fair Value

During the six month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, the Company recorded charges of $3.5 million and $21.2 million, respectively, to adjust property, plant and equipment to their estimated fair values in accordance with SFAS No. 144. The fair value of property, plant and equipment is based upon estimated discounted future cash flows and estimates of salvage value. The impairment charge represents the difference between the estimated fair values and the carrying value of the subject assets.

Impairment charges by reporting segment are as follows:


	Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Powertrain Energy	$	—	$	10.7
Powertrain Sealing and Bearings		—		13.4
Vehicle Safety and Protection		—		—
Automotive Products		3.5		0.3
Global Aftermarket		—		—
Other		—		(3.2	)

	$	3.5	$	21.2

Interest Expense, Net

Interest expense, net was $102 million for the six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to $83 million for the same period of 2006. The increase is due to the loss of six months of interest income earned on the restricted U.K. cash balance of approximately $700 million held during 2006.

As a condition of granting the amended DIP credit facility priority over the collateral interest of the Senior Credit Agreements, the Bankruptcy Court ordered that the noteholders receive, in cash, adequate protection payments equal to one-half of one percent (0.5%) of the outstanding notes per year. These cash payments, which approximate $2.6 million per quarter, are recorded as interest expense in the statement of operations. All cash adequate protection payments made to the noteholders are provisional in nature and are subject to recharacterization, credit against allowed claims or other relief if the Bankruptcy Court were to ultimately conclude that the noteholders were not entitled to such payments.

Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration Related Reorganization Expenses

During the six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, the Company recorded Chapter 11 and U.K. Administration related reorganization expenses of $41.2 million and $41.9 million, respectively. These expenses fluctuate largely based upon the necessity for professional services by third-party advisors in connection with the Restructuring Proceedings.


	Six Months Ended June 30
	2007		2006
	(Millions of Dollars)

Professional fees directly related to the filing	$	36.8	$	33.0
Critical employee retention costs		4.4		8.4
Other direct costs

FEDERAL MOGUL CORP 10-Q