View Filing Data

Document And Entity Information - USD ($)	12 Months Ended
Document And Entity Information - USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2011	Feb. 10, 2012	Jun. 30, 2011
Entity Registrant Name	Halliburton Company
Entity Central Index Key	0000045012
Current Fiscal Year End Date	--12-31
Entity Well-known Seasoned Issuer	Yes
Entity Voluntary Filers	No
Entity Current Reporting Status	Yes
Entity Filer Category	Large Accelerated Filer
Entity Public Float			$ 46,721,000,000
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding		922,983,220
Document Fiscal Year Focus	2011
Document Fiscal Period Focus	FY
Document Type	10-K
Amendment Flag	false
Document Period End Date	Dec. 31, 2011

Consolidated Statements of Operations - USD ($) shares in Millions, $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Revenue:
Services	$ 19,692	$ 13,779	$ 10,832
Product sales	5,137	4,194	3,843
Total revenue	24,829	17,973	14,675
Operating costs and expenses:
Cost of services	15,432	11,227	9,219
Cost of sales	4,379	3,508	3,255
General and administrative	281	229	207
Total operating costs and expenses	20,092	14,964	12,681
Operating income	4,737	3,009	1,994
Interest expense, net of interest income of $5, $11, and $12	(263)	(297)	(285)
Other, net	(25)	(57)	(27)
Income from continuing operations before income taxes	4,449	2,655	1,682
Provision for income taxes	(1,439)	(853)	(518)
Income from continuing operations	3,010	1,802	1,164
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income tax (provision) benefit of $(18), $75, and $5	(166)	40	(9)
Net income	2,844	1,842	1,155
Noncontrolling interest in net income of subsidiaries	(5)	(7)	(10)
Net income attributable to company	2,839	1,835	1,145
Amounts attributable to company shareholders:
Income from continuing operations	3,005	1,795	1,154
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net	$ (166)	$ 40	$ (9)
Basic income per share attributable to company shareholders:
Income from continuing operations (in dollars per share)	$ 3.27	$ 1.98	$ 1.28
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net (in dollars per share)	(0.18)	0.04	(0.01)
Net income per share (in dollars per share)	3.09	2.02	1.27
Diluted income per share attributable to company shareholders:
Income from continuing operations (in dollars per share)	3.26	1.97	1.28
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net (in dollars per share)	(0.18)	0.04	(0.01)
Net income per share (in dollars per share)	$ 3.08	$ 2.01	$ 1.27
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding (in shares)	918	908	900
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding (in shares)	922	911	902

Consolidated Statements of Operations (Parenthetical) - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Consolidated Statements of Operations [Abstract]
Interest income	$ 5	$ 11	$ 12
Income from discontinued operations, income tax (provision) benefit	$ (18)	$ 75	$ 5

- Definition

Tax effect allocated to a disposal group that is classified as a component of the entity reported as a separate component of income before extraordinary items. Includes the tax effects of the following: income (loss) from operations during the phase-out period, gain (loss) on disposal, provision (or any reversals of earlier provisions) for loss on disposal, and adjustments of a prior period gain (loss) on disposal.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 144
-Paragraph 43
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 144
-Paragraph 47
-Subparagraph c
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 109
-Paragraph 46
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 45
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6892542&loc=d3e957-107759

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 740
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 10
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6907707&loc=d3e32672-109319

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (b),(c)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6360339&loc=d3e1361-107760

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 740
-SubTopic 20
-Section 45
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6909487&loc=d3e38679-109324

+ Details

Consolidated Balance Sheets - USD ($) $ in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010
Current assets:
Cash and equivalents	$ 2,698	$ 1,398
Receivables (less allowance for bad debts of $137 and $91)	5,084	3,924
Inventories	2,570	1,940
Investments in marketable securities	150	653
Current deferred income taxes	321	257
Other current assets	754	714
Total current assets	11,577	8,886
Property, plant, and equipment (net of accumulated depreciation of $7,096 and $6,064)	8,492	6,842
Goodwill	1,776	1,315
Other assets	1,832	1,254
Total assets	23,677	18,297
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	1,826	1,139
Accrued employee compensation and benefits	862	716
Deferred revenue	309	266
Other current liabilities	1,124	636
Total current liabilities	4,121	2,757
Long-term debt	4,820	3,824
Employee compensation and benefits	534	487
Other liabilities	986	842
Total liabilities	10,461	7,910
Shareholders' equity:
Common shares, par value $2.50 per share - authorized 2,000 shares, issued 1,073 shares and 1,069 shares	2,683	2,674
Paid-in capital in excess of par value	455	339
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	(273)	(240)
Retained earnings	14,880	12,371
Treasury stock, at cost - 152 and 159 shares	(4,547)	(4,771)
Company shareholders' equity	13,198	10,373
Noncontrolling interest in consolidated subsidiaries	18	14
Total shareholders' equity	13,216	10,387
Total liabilities and shareholders' equity	$ 23,677	$ 18,297

Consolidated Balance Sheets (Parenthetical) - USD ($) $ in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010
Current assets:
Allowance for bad debts	$ 137	$ 91
Accumulated depreciation	$ 7,096	$ 6,064
Shareholders' equity:
Common stock, par value (in dollars per share)	$ 2.50	$ 2.50
Common stock, shares authorized (in shares)	2,000	2,000
Common stock, shares issued (in shares)	1,073	1,069
Treasury shares (in shares)	152	159

- Definition

The cumulative amount of depreciation, depletion and amortization (related to property, plant and equipment, but not including land) that has been recognized in the income statement.

+ References + Details

Consolidated Statements of Shareholders' Equity $ in Millions	USD ($)
Beginning balance at Dec. 31, 2008	$ 7,744
Consolidated Statements of Shareholders' Equity [Roll Forward]
Dividends and other transactions with shareholders	(144)
Treasury shares issued for acquisition	0
Comprehensive income:
Net income	1,155
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans adjustments	2
Other	0
Total comprehensive income	1,157
Ending balance at Dec. 31, 2009	8,757
Consolidated Statements of Shareholders' Equity [Roll Forward]
Dividends and other transactions with shareholders	(287)
Treasury shares issued for acquisition	103
Comprehensive income:
Net income	1,842
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans adjustments	(27)
Other	(1)
Total comprehensive income	1,814
Ending balance at Dec. 31, 2010	10,387
Consolidated Statements of Shareholders' Equity [Roll Forward]
Dividends and other transactions with shareholders	19
Treasury shares issued for acquisition	0
Comprehensive income:
Net income	2,844
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans adjustments	(34)
Other	0
Total comprehensive income	2,810
Ending balance at Dec. 31, 2011	$ 13,216

- Definition

The consolidated profit or loss for the period, net of income taxes, including the portion attributable to the noncontrolling interest.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 51
-Paragraph 29
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 51
-Paragraph 38
-Subparagraph a
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 51
-Paragraph A1, A4, A5
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 51
-Paragraph 5
-Subparagraph b
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 810
-SubTopic 10
-Section 55
-Paragraph 4K
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6922042&loc=SL4591552-111686

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 810
-SubTopic 10
-Section 45
-Paragraph 19
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6921628&loc=SL4569616-111683

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 810
-SubTopic 10
-Section 55
-Paragraph 4J
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6922042&loc=SL4591551-111686

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 810
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1A
-Subparagraph (a),(c)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6921930&loc=SL4573702-111684

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 51
-Paragraph 38
-Subparagraph c(1)
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

+ Details

- Definition

Total of Stockholders' Equity (deficit) items, net of receivables from officers, directors, owners, and affiliates of the entity including portions attributable to both the parent and noncontrolling interests (previously referred to as minority interest), if any. The entity including portions attributable to the parent and noncontrolling interests is sometimes referred to as the economic entity. This excludes temporary equity and is sometimes called permanent equity.

+ References + Details

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income	$ 2,844	$ 1,842	$ 1,155
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash from operations:
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization	1,359	1,119	931
Payments related to KBR TSKJ matters	(6)	(177)	(417)
(Benefit) provision for deferred income taxes, continuing operations	(30)	124	274
(Income) loss from discontinued operations, net	166	(40)	9
Other changes:
Receivables	(1,218)	(902)	869
Inventories	(564)	(331)	232
Accounts payable	649	330	(118)
Other	484	247	(529)
Total cash flows from operating activities	3,684	2,212	2,406
Cash flows from investing activities:
Capital expenditures	(2,953)	(2,069)	(1,864)
Sales of marketable securities	1,001	1,925	300
Purchases of marketable securities	(501)	(1,282)	(1,620)
Acquisitions of business assets, net of cash acquired	(880)	(523)	(55)
Other investing activities	143	194	154
Total cash flows from investing activities	(3,190)	(1,755)	(3,085)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from long-term borrowings, net of offering costs	978	0	1,975
Payments on long-term borrowings	0	(790)	(31)
Dividends to shareholders	(330)	(327)	(324)
Proceeds from exercises of stock options	160	102	74
Payments to reacquire common stock	(43)	(141)	(17)
Other financing activities	68	42	(7)
Total cash flows from financing activities	833	(1,114)	1,670
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash	(27)	(27)	(33)
Increase (decrease) in cash and equivalents	1,300	(684)	958
Cash and equivalents at beginning of year	1,398	2,082	1,124
Cash and equivalents at end of year	2,698	1,398	2,082
Cash payments during the year for:
Interest	261	310	251
Income taxes	$ 1,285	$ 804	$ 485

Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies

Note 1. Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies

Description of Company

Halliburton Company's predecessor was established in 1919 and incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in 1924. We are one of the world's largest oilfield services companies. Our two business segments are the Completion and Production segment and the Drilling and Evaluation segment. We provide a comprehensive range of services and products for the exploration, development, and production of oil and natural gas around the world.

Use of estimates

Our financial statements are prepared in conformity with United States generally accepted accounting principles, requiring us to make estimates and assumptions that affect:

	-	the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements; and
	-	the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period.

We believe the most significant estimates and assumptions are associated with the forecasting of our effective income tax rate and the valuation of deferred taxes, legal and environmental reserves, indemnity valuations, long-lived asset valuations, purchase price allocations, pensions, allowance for bad debts, and percentage-of-completion accounting for long-term contracts. Ultimate results could differ from our estimates.

Basis of presentation

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of our company and all of our subsidiaries that we control or variable interest entities for which we have determined that we are the primary beneficiary. All material intercompany accounts and transactions are eliminated. Investments in companies in which we have significant influence are accounted for using the equity method of accounting. If we do not have significant influence, we use the cost method of accounting.

In 2011, we adopted the provisions of new accounting standards. See Note 14 for further information. All periods presented reflect these changes.

Revenue recognition

Overall. Our services and products are generally sold based upon purchase orders or contracts with our customers that include fixed or determinable prices but do not include right of return provisions or other significant post-delivery obligations. Our products are produced in a standard manufacturing operation, even if produced to our customer's specifications. We recognize revenue from product sales when title passes to the customer, the customer assumes risks and rewards of ownership, collectability is reasonably assured, and delivery occurs as directed by our customer. Service revenue, including training and consulting services, is recognized when the services are rendered and collectability is reasonably assured. Rates for services are typically priced on a per day, per meter, per man-hour, or similar basis.

Software sales. Sales of perpetual software licenses, net of any deferred maintenance and support fees, are recognized as revenue upon shipment. Sales of time-based licenses are recognized as revenue over the license period. Maintenance and support fees are recognized as revenue ratably over the contract period, usually a one-year duration.

Percentage of completion. Revenue from certain long-term, integrated project management contracts to provide well construction and completion services is reported on the percentage-of-completion method of accounting. Progress is generally based upon physical progress related to contractually defined units of work. Physical percent complete is determined as a combination of input and output measures as deemed appropriate by the circumstances. All known or anticipated losses on contracts are provided for when they become evident. Cost adjustments that are in the process of being negotiated with customers for extra work or changes in the scope of work are included in revenue when collection is deemed probable.

Research and development

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Research and development costs were $401 million in 2011, $366 million in 2010, and $325 million in 2009.

Cash equivalents

We consider all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Inventories

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost represents invoice or production cost for new items and original cost less allowance for condition for used material returned to stock. Production cost includes material, labor, and manufacturing overhead. Some domestic manufacturing and field service finished products and parts inventories for drill bits, completion products, and bulk materials are recorded using the last-in, first-out method. The remaining inventory is recorded on the average cost method. We regularly review inventory quantities on hand and record provisions for excess or obsolete inventory based primarily on historical usage, estimated product demand, and technological developments.

Allowance for bad debts

We establish an allowance for bad debts through a review of several factors, including historical collection experience, current aging status of the customer accounts, and financial condition of our customers. Our policy is to write off bad debts when the customer accounts are determined to be uncollectible.

Property, plant, and equipment

Other than those assets that have been written down to their fair values due to impairment, property, plant, and equipment are reported at cost less accumulated depreciation, which is generally provided on the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. Accelerated depreciation methods are also used for tax purposes, wherever permitted. Upon sale or retirement of an asset, the related costs and accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts and any gain or loss is recognized. Planned major maintenance costs are generally expensed as incurred. Expenditures for additions, modifications, and conversions are capitalized when they increase the value or extend the useful life of the asset.

Goodwill and other intangible assets

We record as goodwill the excess purchase price over the fair value of the tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired. During 2011, we recorded an additional $424 million in goodwill arising from 2011 acquisitions, of which $411 million related to the Completion and Production segment and $13 million related to the Drilling and Evaluation segment. The reported amounts of goodwill for each reporting unit are reviewed for impairment on an annual basis, during the third quarter, and more frequently when negative conditions such as significant current or projected operating losses exist. In September 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued an update to existing guidance on the assessment of goodwill impairment to allow companies the option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine whether further goodwill impairment testing is necessary. The annual impairment test for goodwill is a two-step process and involves comparing the estimated fair value of each reporting unit to the reporting unit's carrying value, including goodwill. If the fair value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill of the reporting unit is not considered impaired, and the second step of the impairment test is unnecessary. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step of the goodwill impairment test would be performed to measure the amount of impairment loss to be recorded, if any. The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the implied fair value of the reporting unit's goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill recognized in a business combination. In other words, the estimated fair value of the reporting unit is allocated to all of the assets and liabilities of that unit (including any unrecognized intangible assets) as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination and the fair value of the reporting unit was the purchase price paid. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit's goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. Our goodwill impairment assessment indicated the fair value of each of our reporting units exceeded its carrying amount by a significant margin for 2011, 2010, and 2009. In addition, there were no triggering events that occurred in 2011, 2010, or 2009 requiring us to perform additional impairment reviews.

We amortize other identifiable intangible assets with a finite life on a straight-line basis over the period which the asset is expected to contribute to our future cash flows, ranging from three to 20 years. The components of these other intangible assets generally consist of patents, license agreements, non-compete agreements, trademarks, and customer lists and contracts.

Evaluating impairment of long-lived assets

When events or changes in circumstances indicate that long-lived assets other than goodwill may be impaired, an evaluation is performed. For an asset classified as held for use, the estimated future undiscounted cash flows associated with the asset are compared to the asset's carrying amount to determine if a write-down to fair value is required. When an asset is classified as held for sale, the asset's book value is evaluated and adjusted to the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. In addition, depreciation and amortization is ceased while it is classified as held for sale.

Income taxes

We recognize the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the year. In addition, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in the financial statements or tax returns. A valuation allowance is provided for deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that these items will not be realized.

In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities, projected future taxable income, and tax planning strategies in making this assessment. Based upon the level of historical taxable income and projections for future taxable income over the periods in which the deferred tax assets are deductible, management believes it is more likely than not that we will realize the benefits of these deductible differences, net of the existing valuation allowances.

We recognize interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits within the provision for income taxes on continuing operations in our consolidated statements of operations.

We generally do not provide income taxes on the undistributed earnings of non-United States subsidiaries because such earnings are intended to be reinvested indefinitely to finance foreign activities. These additional foreign earnings could be subject to additional tax if remitted, or deemed remitted, as a dividend; however, it is not practicable to estimate the additional amount, if any, of taxes payable. Taxes are provided as necessary with respect to earnings that are not permanently reinvested.

Derivative instruments

At times, we enter into derivative financial transactions to hedge existing or projected exposures to changing foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. We do not enter into derivative transactions for speculative or trading purposes. We recognize all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value. Derivatives that are not hedges are adjusted to fair value and reflected through the results of operations. If the derivative is designated as a hedge, depending on the nature of the hedge, changes in the fair value of derivatives are either offset against:

	-	the change in fair value of the hedged assets, liabilities, or firm commitments through earnings; or
	-	recognized in other comprehensive income until the hedged item is recognized in earnings.

The ineffective portion of a derivative's change in fair value is recognized in earnings. Recognized gains or losses on derivatives entered into to manage foreign currency exchange risk are included in "Other, net" on the consolidated statements of operations. Gains or losses on interest rate derivatives are included in "Interest expense, net."

Foreign currency translation

Foreign entities whose functional currency is the United States dollar translate monetary assets and liabilities at year-end exchange rates, and nonmonetary items are translated at historical rates. Income and expense accounts are translated at the average rates in effect during the year, except for depreciation, cost of product sales and revenue, and expenses associated with nonmonetary balance sheet accounts, which are translated at historical rates. Gains or losses from changes in exchange rates are recognized in our consolidated statements of operations in "Other, net" in the year of occurrence.

Stock-based compensation

Stock-based compensation cost is measured at the date of grant, based on the calculated fair value of the award, and is recognized as expense over the employee's service period, which is generally the vesting period of the equity grant. Additionally, compensation cost is recognized based on awards ultimately expected to vest, therefore, we have reduced the cost for estimated forfeitures based on historical forfeiture rates. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised in subsequent periods to reflect actual forfeitures. See Note 10 for additional information related to stock-based compensation.

Business Segment and Geographic Information

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Business Segment and Geographic Information [Abstract]

Business Segment and Geographic Information

Note 2. Business Segment and Geographic Information

We operate under two divisions, which form the basis for the two operating segments we report: the Completion and Production segment and the Drilling and Evaluation segment.

Completion and Production delivers cementing, stimulation, intervention, pressure control, specialty chemicals, artificial lift, and completion services. The segment consists of Halliburton Production Enhancement, Cementing, Completion Tools, Boots & Coots, and Multi-Chem.

Halliburton Production Enhancement services include stimulation services and sand control services. Stimulation services optimize oil and natural gas reservoir production through a variety of pressure pumping services, nitrogen services, and chemical processes, commonly known as hydraulic fracturing and acidizing. Sand control services include fluid and chemical systems and pumping services for the prevention of formation sand production.

Cementing services involve bonding the well and well casing while isolating fluid zones and maximizing wellbore stability. Our cementing service line also provides casing equipment.

Completion Tools includes subsurface safety valves and flow control equipment, surface safety systems, packers and specialty completion equipment, intelligent completion systems, expandable liner hanger systems, sand control systems, well servicing tools, and reservoir performance services. Reservoir performance services include testing tools, real-time reservoir analysis, and data acquisition services.

Boots & Coots includes well intervention services, pressure control, equipment rental tools and services, and pipeline and process services.

Multi-Chem includes oilfield production and completion chemicals and services that address production, processing, and transportation challenges.

Drilling and Evaluation provides field and reservoir modeling, drilling, evaluation, and precise wellbore placement solutions that enable customers to model, measure, and optimize their well construction activities. The segment consists of Halliburton Drill Bits and Services, Wireline & Perforating, Testing and Subsea, Baroid, Sperry Drilling, Landmark Software and Services, and Halliburton Consulting and Project Management.

Halliburton Drill Bits and Services provides roller cone rock bits, fixed cutter bits, hole enlargement, and related downhole tools and services used in drilling oil and natural gas wells. In addition, coring equipment and services are provided to acquire cores of the formation drilled for evaluation.

Wireline and Perforating services include open-hole wireline services that provide information on formation evaluation, including resistivity, porosity, density, rock mechanics, and fluid sampling. Also offered are cased-hole and slickline services, which provide cement bond evaluation, reservoir monitoring, pipe evaluation, pipe recovery, mechanical services, well intervention, perforating, and borehole seismic services. Perforating services include tubing-conveyed perforating services and products. Borehole seismic services include fracture analysis and mapping.

Testing and Subsea services provide acquisition and analysis of dynamic reservoir information and reservoir optimization solutions to the oil and natural gas industry utilizing downhole test tools, data acquisition services using telemetry and electronic memory recording, fluid sampling, surface well testing, subsea safety systems, and reservoir engineering services.

Baroid provides drilling fluid systems, performance additives, completion fluids, solids control, specialized testing equipment, and waste management services for oil and natural gas drilling, completion, and workover operations.

Sperry Drilling provides drilling systems and services. These services include directional and horizontal drilling, measurement-while-drilling, logging-while-drilling, surface data logging, multilateral systems, underbalanced applications, and rig site information systems. Our drilling systems offer directional control for precise wellbore placement while providing important measurements about the characteristics of the drill string and geological formations while drilling wells. Real-time operating capabilities enable the monitoring of well progress and aid decision-making processes.

Landmark Software and Services is a supplier of integrated exploration, drilling, and production software information systems, as well as consulting and data management services for the upstream oil and natural gas industry.

Halliburton Consulting and Project Management provides oilfield project management and integrated solutions to independent, integrated, and national oil companies. These offerings make use of all of our oilfield services, products, technologies, and project management capabilities to assist our customers in optimizing the value of their oil and natural gas assets.

Corporate and other includes expenses related to support functions and corporate executives. Also included are certain gains and losses that are not attributable to a particular business segment. "Corporate and other" also represents assets not included in a business segment and is primarily composed of cash and equivalents, deferred tax assets, and marketable securities.

Intersegment revenue and revenue between geographic areas are immaterial. Our equity in earnings and losses of unconsolidated affiliates that are accounted for under the equity method of accounting is included in revenue and operating income of the applicable segment.

The following tables present information on our business segments.

Operations by business segment
	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Revenue:
Completion and Production	$	15,143		$	9,997		$	7,419
Drilling and Evaluation		9,686			7,976			7,256
Total revenue	$	24,829		$	17,973		$	14,675

Operating income:
Completion and Production	$	3,733		$	2,032		$	1,016
Drilling and Evaluation		1,403			1,213			1,183
Total operations		5,136			3,245			2,199
Corporate and other		(399	)		(236	)		(205	)
Total operating income	$	4,737		$	3,009		$	1,994
Interest expense, net of interest income	$	(263	)	$	(297	)	$	(285	)
Other, net		(25	)		(57	)		(27	)
Income from continuing operations before
income taxes	$	4,449		$	2,655		$	1,682
Capital expenditures:
Completion and Production	$	1,669		$	1,010		$	900
Drilling and Evaluation		1,231			1,058			959
Corporate and other		53			1			5
Total	$	2,953		$	2,069		$	1,864
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization:
Completion and Production	$	680		$	537		$	437
Drilling and Evaluation		676			578			490
Corporate and other		3			4			4
Total	$	1,359		$	1,119		$	931

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Total assets:
Completion and Production	$	10,953	$	7,815
Drilling and Evaluation		8,212		7,088
Shared assets		1,249		942
Corporate and other		3,263		2,452
Total	$	23,677	$	18,297

Not all assets are associated with specific segments. Those assets specific to segments include receivables, inventories, certain identified property, plant, and equipment (including field service equipment), equity in and advances to related companies, and goodwill. The remaining assets, such as cash, are considered to be shared among the segments.

Revenue by country is determined based on the location of services provided and products sold.

Operations by geographic area
	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010		2009
Revenue:
United States	$	13,548	$	8,209	$	5,248
Other countries		11,281		9,764		9,427
Total	$	24,829	$	17,973	$	14,675

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Long-lived assets:
United States	$	6,692	$	5,389
Other countries		5,189		3,821
Total	$	11,881	$	9,210

- Definition

The entire disclosure for reporting segments including data and tables. Reportable segments include those that meet any of the following quantitative thresholds a) it's reported revenue, including sales to external customers and intersegment sales or transfers is 10 percent or more of the combined revenue, internal and external, of all operating segments b) the absolute amount of its reported profit or loss is 10 percent or more of the greater, in absolute amount of 1) the combined reported profit of all operating segments that did not report a loss or 2) the combined reported loss of all operating segments that did report a loss c) its assets are 10 percent or more of the combined assets of all operating segments.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 131
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 34
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8981-108599

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 35
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8984-108599

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 42
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e9054-108599

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 40
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e9031-108599

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 31
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8924-108599

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 10
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8538-108599

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 30
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8906-108599

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 41
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e9038-108599

Reference 10: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 29
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8864-108599

Reference 11: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 33
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8971-108599

Reference 12: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 26
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8844-108599

Reference 13: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8380-108599

Reference 14: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 12
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8595-108599

Reference 15: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 280
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 32
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6534315&loc=d3e8933-108599

+ Details

Receivables

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Receivables [Abstract]

Receivables

Note 3. Receivables

Our trade receivables are generally not collateralized. At December 31, 2011, 45% of our gross trade receivables were from customers in the United States. At December 31, 2010, 36% of our gross trade receivables were from customers in the United States. No other country or single customer accounted for more than 10% of our gross trade receivables at these dates.

The following table presents a rollforward of our allowance for bad debts for 2009, 2010, and 2011.

	Balance at		Charged to
Millions of dollars	Beginning of		Costs and				Balance at
Allowance for bad debts	Period		Expenses		Write-Offs		End of Period
Year ended December 31, 2009:	$	60	$	37	$	(7)	$	90
Year ended December 31, 2010:		90		5		(4)		91
Year ended December 31, 2011:		91		53		(7)		137

- Definition

The entire disclosure for claims held for amounts due a company. Examples include trade accounts receivables, notes receivables, loans receivables.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher SEC
-Name Regulation S-X (SX)
-Number 210
-Section 02
-Paragraph 3, 4
-Article 5

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher SEC
-Name Regulation S-X (SX)
-Number 210
-Section 03
-Paragraph 7
-Article 9

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Statement of Position (SOP)
-Number 01-6
-Paragraph 13
-Subparagraph d
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher SEC
-Name Regulation S-X (SX)
-Number 210
-Article 4
-Section 08
-Paragraph k

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 210
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.3,4)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 310
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 4
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6965416&loc=d3e5074-111524

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 310
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6965416&loc=d3e5066-111524

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 235
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.4-08.(k))
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6881521&loc=d3e23780-122690

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 310
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 11
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6965416&loc=d3e5162-111524

+ Details

Inventories

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Inventories [Abstract]

Inventories

Note 4. Inventories

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. In the United States, we manufacture certain finished products and parts inventories for drill bits, completion products, bulk materials, and other tools that are recorded using the last-in, first-out method, which totaled $160 million at December 31, 2011 and $108 million at December 31, 2010. If the average cost method had been used, total inventories would have been $36 million higher than reported at December 31, 2011 and $34 million higher than reported at December 31, 2010. The cost of the remaining inventory was recorded on the average cost method. Inventories consisted of the following:

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Finished products and parts	$	1,801	$	1,369
Raw materials and supplies		673		496
Work in process		96		75
Total	$	2,570	$	1,940

Finished products and parts are reported net of obsolescence reserves of $108 million at December 31, 2011 and $88 million at December 31, 2010.

Property, Plant, and Equipment

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Property, Plant, and Equipment [Abstract]

Property, Plant, and Equipment

Note 5. Property, Plant, and Equipment

Property, plant, and equipment were composed of the following:

		December 31
Millions of dollars		2011		2010
Land	$	123	$	105
Buildings and property improvements		1,609		1,438
Machinery, equipment, and other		13,856		11,363
Total		15,588		12,906
Less accumulated depreciation		7,096		6,064
Net property, plant, and equipment	$	8,492	$	6,842

Classes of assets, excluding oil and natural gas investments, are depreciated over the following useful lives:

	Buildings and Property
	Improvements
	2011		2010
1 - 10 years		13%		13%
11 - 20 years		47%		46%
21 - 30 years		13%		13%
31 - 40 years		27%		28%

	Machinery, Equipment
	and Other
	2011		2010
1 - 5 years		19%		19%
6 - 10 years		75%		74%
11 - 20 years		6%		7%

- Definition

The entire disclosure for long-lived, physical assets that are used in the normal conduct of business to produce goods and services and not intended for resale. Examples include land, buildings, machinery and equipment, and other types of furniture and equipment including, but not limited to, office equipment, furniture and fixtures, and computer equipment and software. This disclosure may include property plant and equipment accounting policies and methodology, a schedule of property, plant and equipment gross, additions, deletions, transfers and other changes, depreciation, depletion and amortization expense, net, accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization expense and useful lives, income statement disclosures, assets held for sale and public utility disclosures.

+ References + Details

Debt

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Debt [Abstract]

Debt

Note 6. Debt

Long-term debt consisted of the following:

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
6.15% senior notes due September 2019	$	997	$	997
7.45% senior notes due September 2039		995		995
6.7% senior notes due September 2038		800		800
3.25% senior notes due November 2021		498		-
4.5% senior notes due November 2041		498		-
5.9% senior notes due September 2018		400		400
7.6% senior debentures due August 2096		293		293
8.75% senior debentures due February 2021		184		184
Other		155		155
Total long-term debt (due 2017 and thereafter)	$	4,820	$	3,824

Senior debt

All of our senior notes and debentures rank equally with our existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness, have semiannual interest payments, and no sinking fund requirements. We may redeem all of our senior notes from time to time or all of the notes of each series at any time at the applicable redemption prices, plus accrued and unpaid interest. Our 7.6% and 8.75% senior debentures may not be redeemed prior to maturity.

Revolving credit facilities

In February 2011, we entered into a new unsecured $2.0 billion five-year revolving credit facility that replaced our then existing $1.2 billion unsecured credit facility established in July 2007. The purpose of the facility is to provide general working capital and credit for other corporate purposes. The full amount of the revolving credit facility was available as of December 31, 2011.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for information about short-term and long-term debt arrangements, which includes amounts of borrowings under each line of credit, note payable, commercial paper issue, bonds indenture, debenture issue, own-share lending arrangements and any other contractual agreement to repay funds, and about the underlying arrangements, rationale for a classification as long-term, including repayment terms, interest rates, collateral provided, restrictions on use of assets and activities, whether or not in compliance with debt covenants, and other matters important to users of the financial statements, such as the effects of refinancing and noncompliance with debt covenants.

+ References + Details

KBR Separation	12 Months Ended
KBR Separation	Dec. 31, 2011
KBR Separation [Abstract]
KBR Separation	Note 7. KBR Separation During 2007, we completed the separation of KBR, Inc. (KBR) from us by exchanging KBR common stock owned by us for our common stock. In addition, we recorded a liability reflecting the estimated fair value of the indemnities provided to KBR as described below. Since the separation, we have recorded adjustments to reflect changes to our estimation of our remaining obligation. All such adjustments are recorded in "Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income tax (provision) benefit." We entered into various agreements relating to the separation of KBR, including, among others, a master separation agreement and a tax sharing agreement. We agreed to provide indemnification in favor of KBR under the master separation agreement for all out-of-pocket cash costs and expenses, or cash settlements or cash arbitration awards in lieu thereof, KBR may incur after the effective date of the master separation agreement as a result of the replacement of the subsea flowline bolts installed in connection with the Barracuda-Caratinga project. During the third quarter of 2011, an arbitration award of $201 million was issued against KBR. Also, under the master separation agreement, we have indemnified KBR for certain losses arising from investigations and charges brought under the United States Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) or similar foreign statutes, laws, rules, or regulations in each case related to the construction of a natural gas liquefaction complex and related facilities at Bonny Island in Rivers State, Nigeria by a consortium of engineering firms comprised of Technip SA of France, Snamprogetti Netherlands B.V., JGC Corporation of Japan, and Kellogg Brown & Root LLC (TSKJ), each of which had an approximate 25% beneficial interest in the venture. Part of KBR's ownership in TSKJ was held through M.W. Kellogg Limited, a United Kingdom joint venture and subcontractor on the Bonny Island project in which KBR beneficially owned a 55% interest at the time of the execution of the master separation agreement. The TSKJ investigations and charges have been resolved. At this time, no other claims by governmental authorities in any jurisdictions have been asserted against the indemnified parties. The tax sharing agreement provides for allocations of United States and certain other jurisdiction tax liabilities between us and KBR. The tax sharing agreement is complex, and finalization of amounts owed between KBR and us under the tax sharing agreement can occur only after income tax audits are completed by the taxing authorities and both parties have had time to analyze the results. Substantially all income tax audits are now complete, and we are in the process of providing relevant documents to KBR and discussing the amounts due under the agreement. There can be no guarantee that the parties will agree on the allocations of tax liabilities, and the process may take several quarters or more to complete. Amounts accrued relating to our remaining KBR liabilities are primarily included in "Other liabilities" on the consolidated balance sheets and totaled $201 million as of December 31, 2011 and $63 million as of December 31, 2010. See Note 8 for further discussion of the Barracuda-Caratinga matter.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for the facts and circumstances leading to the completed or expected disposal, manner and timing of disposal, the gain (loss) recognized in the income statement and the income statement caption that includes that gain (loss), amounts of revenues and pretax profit or loss reported in discontinued operations, the segment in which the disposal group was reported, and the classification (whether sold or classified as held for sale) and carrying value of the assets and liabilities comprising the disposal group. Includes all disposal groups, including those classified as components of the entity (discontinued operations).

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 144
-Paragraph 43-48
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 360
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6391110&loc=d3e2941-110230

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6360339&loc=d3e1361-107760

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 5
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6360339&loc=d3e1510-107760

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 45
-Paragraph 5
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6892542&loc=d3e1020-107759

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 45
-Paragraph 4
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6892542&loc=d3e1012-107759

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 45
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6892542&loc=d3e957-107759

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6360339&loc=d3e1474-107760

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 360
-SubTopic 10
-Section 45
-Paragraph 5
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6390789&loc=d3e2443-110228

Reference 10: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 205
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6360339&loc=d3e1436-107760

+ Details

Commitments and Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Commitments and Contingencies [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Note 8. Commitments and Contingencies

The Gulf of Mexico/Macondo well incident

Overview. The semisubmersible drilling rig, Deepwater Horizon, sank on April 22, 2010 after an explosion and fire onboard the rig that began on April 20, 2010. The Deepwater Horizon was owned by Transocean Ltd. and had been drilling the Macondo exploration well in Mississippi Canyon Block 252 in the Gulf of Mexico for the lease operator, BP Exploration & Production, Inc. (BP Exploration), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BP p.l.c. We performed a variety of services for BP Exploration, including cementing, mud logging, directional drilling, measurement-while-drilling, and rig data acquisition services. Crude oil flowing from the well site spread across thousands of square miles of the Gulf of Mexico and reached the United States Gulf Coast. Numerous attempts at estimating the volume of oil spilled have been made by various groups, and on August 2, 2010 the federal government published an estimate that approximately 4.9 million barrels of oil were discharged from the well. Efforts to contain the flow of hydrocarbons from the well were led by the United States government and by BP p.l.c., BP Exploration, and their affiliates (collectively, BP). The flow of hydrocarbons from the well ceased on July 15, 2010, and the well was permanently capped on September 19, 2010. There were eleven fatalities and a number of injuries as a result of the Macondo well incident.

We are currently unable to estimate the impact the Macondo well incident will have on us. The multi-district litigation (MDL) trial referred to below is scheduled to begin in late February 2012, and recently there have been and we expect there will continue to be orders and rulings of the court that impact the MDL. Moreover, as discussed below, BP has in the last nine months settled litigation with several other defendants in the MDL. We cannot predict the outcome of the many lawsuits and investigations relating to the Macondo well incident, including whether the MDL will proceed to trial, the results of any such trial, or whether we might settle with one or more of the parties to any lawsuit or investigation. Given the numerous potential future developments relating to the MDL and other lawsuits and investigations, we are unable to conclude whether we will incur a loss. As of December 31, 2011, we have not accrued any amounts related to this matter because we have not determined that a loss is probable and a reasonable estimate of a loss or range of loss related to this matter cannot be made. As a result of any future developments, some of which could occur as soon as within the next few months, we may adjust our liability assessment, and liabilities arising out of this matter could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, consolidated results of operations, and consolidated financial condition.

Investigations and Regulatory Action. The United States Coast Guard, a component of the United States Department of Homeland Security, and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE) (formerly known as the Minerals Management Service (MMS) and which was replaced effective October 1, 2011 by two new, independent bureaus - the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)), a bureau of the United States Department of the Interior, shared jurisdiction over the investigation into the Macondo well incident and formed a joint investigation team that reviewed information and held hearings regarding the incident (Marine Board Investigation). We were named as one of the 16 parties-in-interest in the Marine Board Investigation. The Marine Board Investigation, as well as investigations of the incident that were conducted by The National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling (National Commission) and the National Academy of Sciences, have been completed, and reports issued as a result of those investigations are discussed below. In addition, the Chemical Safety Board is conducting an investigation to examine the root causes of the accidental release of hydrocarbons from the Macondo well, including an examination of key technical factors, the safety cultures involved, and the effectiveness of relevant laws, regulations, and industry standards.

In May 2010, the United States Department of the Interior effectively suspended all offshore deepwater drilling projects in the United States Gulf of Mexico. The suspension was lifted in October 2010. Later, the Department of the Interior issued new guidance and regulations for drillers that intend to resume deepwater drilling activity and has proposed additional regulations. Despite the fact that the drilling suspension was lifted, the BOEMRE did not issue permits for the resumption of drilling for an extended period of time, and we experienced a significant reduction in our Gulf of Mexico operations. In the first quarter of 2011, the BOEMRE resumed the issuance of drilling permits, and activity has gradually recovered since that time, although there can be no assurance of future activity levels in the Gulf of Mexico. For additional information, see Part II, Item 1(a), "Risk Factors" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Business Environment and Results of Operations."

DOJ Investigations and Actions. On June 1, 2010, the United States Attorney General announced that the Department of Justice (DOJ) was launching civil and criminal investigations into the Macondo well incident to closely examine the actions of those involved, and that the DOJ was working with attorneys general of states affected by the Macondo well incident. The DOJ announced that it was reviewing, among other traditional criminal statutes, possible violations of and liabilities under The Clean Water Act (CWA), The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (MBTA), and the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA). As part of its criminal investigation, the DOJ is examining certain aspects of our conduct after the incident, including with respect to record-keeping, record retention, post-incident testing, securities filings, and public statements by us or our employees, to evaluate whether there has been any violation of federal law.

The CWA provides authority for civil and criminal penalties for discharges of oil into or upon navigable waters of the United States, adjoining shorelines, or in connection with the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) in quantities that are deemed harmful. A single discharge event may result in the assertion of numerous violations under the CWA. Criminal sanctions under the CWA can be assessed for negligent discharges (up to $50,000 per day per violation), for knowing discharges (up to $100,000 per day per violation), and for knowing endangerment (up to $2 million per violation), and federal agencies could be precluded from contracting with a company that is criminally sanctioned under the CWA. Civil proceedings under the CWA can be commenced against an "owner, operator, or person in charge of any vessel, onshore facility, or offshore facility from which oil or a hazardous substance is discharged" in violation of the CWA. The civil penalties that can be imposed against responsible parties range from up to $1,100 per barrel of oil discharged in the case of those found strictly liable to $4,300 per barrel of oil discharged in the case of those found to have been grossly negligent.

The OPA establishes liability for discharges of oil from vessels, onshore facilities, and offshore facilities into or upon the navigable waters of the United States. Under the OPA, the "responsible party" for the discharging vessel or facility is liable for removal and response costs as well as for damages, including recovery costs to contain and remove discharged oil and damages for injury to natural resources and real or personal property, lost revenues, lost profits, and lost earning capacity. The cap on liability under the OPA is the full cost of removal of the discharged oil plus up to $75 million for damages, except that the $75 million cap does not apply in the event the damage was proximately caused by gross negligence or the violation of certain federal safety, construction or operating standards. The OPA defines the set of responsible parties differently depending on whether the source of the discharge is a vessel or an offshore facility. Liability for vessels is imposed on owners and operators; liability for offshore facilities is imposed on the holder of the permit or lessee of the area in which the facility is located.

The MBTA and the ESA provide penalties for injury and death to wildlife and bird species. The MBTA provides that violators are strictly liable and such violations are misdemeanor crimes subject to fines of up to $15,000 per bird killed and imprisonment of up to six months. The ESA provides for civil penalties for knowing violations that can range up to $25,000 per violation and, in the case of criminal penalties, up to $50,000 per violation.

In addition, federal law provides for a variety of fines and penalties, the most significant of which is the Alternative Fines Act. In lieu of the express amount of the criminal fines that may be imposed under some of the statutes described above, the Alternative Fines Act provides for a fine in the amount of twice the gross economic loss suffered by third parties, which amount, although difficult to estimate, is significant.

On December 15, 2010, the DOJ filed a civil action seeking damages and injunctive relief against BP Exploration, Anadarko Petroleum Corporation and Anadarko E&P Company LP (together, Anadarko), who had an approximate 25% interest in the Macondo well, certain subsidiaries of Transocean Ltd., and others for violations of the CWA and the OPA. The DOJ's complaint seeks an action declaring that the defendants are strictly liable under the CWA as a result of harmful discharges of oil into the Gulf of Mexico and upon United States shorelines as a result of the Macondo well incident. The complaint also seeks an action declaring that the defendants are strictly liable under the OPA for the discharge of oil that has resulted in, among other things, injury to, loss of, loss of use of, or destruction of natural resources and resource services in and around the Gulf of Mexico and the adjoining United States shorelines and resulting in removal costs and damages to the United States far exceeding $75 million. BP Exploration has been designated, and has accepted the designation, as a responsible party for the pollution under the CWA and the OPA. Others have also been named as responsible parties, and all responsible parties may be held jointly and severally liable for any damages under the OPA. A responsible party may make a claim for contribution against any other responsible party or against third parties it alleges contributed to or caused the oil spill. In connection with the proceedings discussed below under "Litigation," in April 2011 BP Exploration filed a claim against us for contribution with respect to liabilities incurred by BP Exploration under the OPA or another law and requested a judgment that the DOJ assert its claims for OPA financial liability directly against us.

We have not been named as a responsible party under the CWA or the OPA in the DOJ civil action, and we do not believe we are a responsible party under the CWA or the OPA. While we are not included in the DOJ's civil complaint, there can be no assurance that the DOJ or other federal or state governmental authorities will not bring an action, whether civil or criminal, against us under the CWA, the OPA, and/or other statutes or regulations. In connection with the DOJ's filing of the civil action, it announced that its criminal and civil investigations are continuing and that it will employ efforts to hold accountable those who are responsible for the incident.

A federal grand jury has been convened in Louisiana to investigate potential criminal conduct in connection with the Macondo well incident. We are cooperating fully with the DOJ's criminal investigation. As of February 16, 2012, the DOJ has not commenced any criminal proceedings against us. We cannot predict the status or outcome of the DOJ's criminal investigation or estimate the potential impact the investigation may have on us or our liability assessment, all of which may change as the investigation progresses.

In June 2010, we received a letter from the DOJ requesting thirty days advance notice of any event that may involve substantial transfers of cash or other corporate assets outside of the ordinary course of business. We conveyed our interest in briefing the DOJ on the services we provided on the Deepwater Horizon but indicated that we would not bind ourselves to the DOJ request.

We have had and expect to continue to have discussions with the DOJ regarding the Macondo well incident and associated pre-incident and post-incident conduct.

Investigative Reports. On September 8, 2010, an incident investigation team assembled by BP issued the Deepwater Horizon Accident Investigation Report (BP Report). The BP Report outlined eight key findings of BP related to the possible causes of the Macondo well incident, including failures of cement barriers, failures of equipment provided by other service companies and the drilling contractor, and failures of judgment by BP and the drilling contractor. With respect to the BP Report's assessment that the cement barrier did not prevent hydrocarbons from entering the wellbore after cement placement, the BP Report concluded that, among other things, there were "weaknesses in cement design and testing." According to the BP Report, the BP incident investigation team did not review its analyses or conclusions with us or any other entity or governmental agency conducting a separate or independent investigation of the incident. In addition, the BP incident investigation team did not conduct any testing using our cementing products.

On June 22, 2011, Transocean released its internal investigation report on the causes of the Macondo well incident. Transocean's report, among other things, alleges deficiencies with our cementing services on the Deepwater Horizon. Like the BP Report, the Transocean incident investigation team did not review its analyses or conclusions with us and did not conduct any testing using our cementing products.

On January 11, 2011, the National Commission released "Deep Water -- The Gulf Oil Disaster and the Future of Offshore Drilling," its investigation report (Investigation Report) to the President of the United States regarding, among other things, the National Commission's conclusions of the causes of the Macondo well incident. According to the Investigation Report, the "immediate causes" of the incident were the result of a series of missteps, oversights, miscommunications and failures to appreciate risk by BP, Transocean, and us, although the National Commission acknowledged that there were still many things it did not know about the incident, such as the role of the blowout preventer. The National Commission also acknowledged that it may never know the extent to which each mistake or oversight caused the Macondo well incident, but concluded that the immediate cause was "a failure to contain hydrocarbon pressures in the well," and pointed to three things that could have contained those pressures: "the cement at the bottom of the well, the mud in the well and in the riser, and the blowout preventer." In addition, the Investigation Report stated that "primary cement failure was a direct cause of the blowout" and that cement testing performed by an independent laboratory "strongly suggests" that the foam cement slurry used on the Macondo well was unstable. The Investigation Report, however, acknowledges a fact widely accepted by the industry that cementing wells is a complex endeavor utilizing an inherently uncertain process in which failures are not uncommon and that, as a result, the industry utilizes the negative-pressure test and cement bond log test, among others, to identify cementing failures that require remediation before further work on a well is performed.

The Investigation Report also sets forth the National Commission's findings on certain missteps, oversights and other factors that may have caused, or contributed to the cause of, the incident, including BP's decision to use a long string casing instead of a liner casing, BP's decision to use only six centralizers, BP's failure to run a cement bond log, BP's reliance on the primary cement job as a barrier to a possible blowout, BP's and Transocean's failure to properly conduct and interpret a negative-pressure test, BP's temporary abandonment procedures, and the failure of the drilling crew and our surface data logging specialist to recognize that an unplanned influx of oil, gas, or fluid into the well (known as a "kick") was occurring. With respect to the National Commission's finding that our surface data logging specialist failed to recognize a kick, the Investigation Report acknowledged that there were simultaneous activities and other monitoring responsibilities that may have prevented the surface data logging specialist from recognizing a kick.

The Investigation Report also identified two general root causes of the Macondo well incident: systemic failures by industry management, which the National Commission labeled "the most significant failure at Macondo," and failures in governmental and regulatory oversight. The National Commission cited examples of failures by industry management such as BP's lack of controls to adequately identify or address risks arising from changes to well design and procedures, the failure of BP's and our processes for cement testing, communication failures among BP, Transocean, and us, including with respect to the difficulty of our cement job, Transocean's failure to adequately communicate lessons from a recent near-blowout, and the lack of processes to adequately assess the risk of decisions in relation to the time and cost those decisions would save. With respect to failures of governmental and regulatory oversight, the National Commission concluded that applicable drilling regulations were inadequate, in part because of a lack of resources and political support of the MMS, and a lack of expertise and training of MMS personnel to enforce regulations that were in effect.

As a result of the factual and technical complexity of the Macondo well incident, the Chief Counsel of the National Commission issued a separate, more detailed report regarding the technical, managerial, and regulatory causes of the Macondo well incident in February 2011.

In March 2011, a third party retained by the BOEMRE to undertake a forensic examination and evaluation of the blowout preventer stack, its components and associated equipment, released a report detailing its findings. The forensic examination report found, among other things, that the blowout preventer stack failed primarily because the blind sheer rams did not fully close and seal the well due to a portion of drill pipe that had become trapped between the blocks and the pipe being outside the cutting surface of the ram blades. The forensic examination report recommended further examination, investigation, and testing, which found that the redundant operating pods of the blowout preventer may not have timely functioned the blind shear rams in the automatic mode function due to a depleted battery in one pod and a miswired solenoid in the other pod. We had no part in manufacturing or servicing the blowout preventer stack.

In September 2011, the BOEMRE released the final report of the Marine Board Investigation regarding the Macondo well incident (BOEMRE Report). A panel of investigators of the BOEMRE identified a number of causes of the Macondo well incident. According to the BOEMRE Report, "a central cause of the blowout was failure of a cement barrier in the production casing string." The panel was unable to identify the precise reasons for the failure but concluded that it was likely due to: "(1) swapping of cement and drilling mud in the shoe track (the section of casing near the bottom of the well); (2) contamination of the shoe track cement; or (3) pumping the cement past the target location in the well, leaving the shoe track with little or no cement." Generally, the panel concluded that the Macondo well incident was the result of, among other things, poor risk management, last-minute changes to drilling plans, failure to observe and respond to critical indicators, and inadequate well control response by the companies and individuals involved. In particular, the BOEMRE Report stated that BP made a series of decisions that complicated the cement job and may have contributed to the failure of the cement job, including the use of only one cement barrier, the location of the production casing, and the failure to follow industry-accepted recommendations.

The BOEMRE Report also stated, among other things, that BP failed to properly communicate well design and cementing decisions and risks to Transocean, that BP and Transocean failed to correctly interpret the negative-pressure test, and that we, BP, and Transocean failed to detect the influx of hydrocarbons into the well. According to the BOEMRE Report, the panel found evidence that we, among others, violated federal regulations relating to the failure to take measures to prevent the unauthorized release of hydrocarbons, the failure to take precautions to keep the well under control, and the failure to cement the well in a manner that would, among other things, prevent the release of fluids into the Gulf of Mexico. In October 2011, the BSEE issued a notification of Incidents of Noncompliance (INCs) to us for violating those regulations and a federal regulation relating to the failure to protect health, safety, property, and the environment as a result of a failure to perform operations in a safe and workmanlike manner. According to the BSEE's notice, we did not ensure an adequate barrier to hydrocarbon flow after cementing the production casing and did not detect the influx of hydrocarbons until they were above the blowout preventer stack. We understand that the regulations in effect at the time of the alleged violations provide for fines of up to $35,000 per day per violation. We have appealed the INCs to, and the appeal was accepted by, the Interior Board of Land Appeals (IBLA). In January 2012, the IBLA, in response to our and the BSEE's joint request, has suspended the appeal and has ordered us and the BSEE to file notice within 15 days after the conclusion of the MDL and, within 60 days after the MDL court issues a final decision, to file a proposal for further action in the appeal. The BSEE has announced that the INCs will be reviewed for possible imposition of civil penalties once the appeal has ended. The BSEE has stated that this is the first time the Department of the Interior has issued INCs directly to a contractor that was not the well's operator. We have not accrued any amounts related to the INCs.

In December 2011, the National Academy of Sciences released a pre-publication copy of its report examining the causes of the Macondo well incident and identifying measures for preventing similar incidents in the future (NAS Report). The NAS Report noted that it does not attempt to assign responsibility to specific individuals or entities or determine the extent that the parties involved complied with applicable regulations.

According to the NAS Report, the flow of hydrocarbons that led to the blowout began when drilling mud was displaced by seawater during the temporary abandonment process, which was commenced by the drilling team despite a failure to demonstrate the integrity of the cement job after multiple negative pressure tests and after incorrectly deciding that a negative pressure test indicated that the cement barriers were effective. In addition, the NAS Report found, among other things, that: the approach chosen for well completion failed to provide adequate safety margins considering the reservoir formation; the loss of well control was not noted until more than 50 minutes after hydrocarbon flow from the formation had started; the blowout preventer was not designed or tested for the dynamic conditions that most likely existed at the time attempts were made to recapture well control; and the entities involved did not provide an effective systems safety approach commensurate with the risks of the Macondo well. According to the NAS Report, a number of key decisions related to the design, construction, and testing of the barriers critical to the temporary abandonment process were flawed.

The NAS Report also found, among other things, that the heavier "tail" cement slurry, intended for placement in the Macondo well shoe track, was "gravitationally unstable" on top of the lighter foam cement slurry and that the heavier tail cement slurry probably fell into or perhaps through the lighter foam cement slurry during pumping into the well, which would have left a tail slurry containing foam cement in the shoe track. The NAS Report also found, among other things, that foam cement that may have been inadvertently left in the shoe track likely would not have had the strength to resist crushing when experiencing the differential pressures exerted on the cement during the negative pressure test. In addition, the NAS Report found, among other things, that evidence available before the blowout indicated that the flapper valves in the float collar probably failed to seal, but the evidence was not acted upon and, due to BP's choice of a long-string production casing and the lack of minimum circulation of the well prior to the cement job, the possibility of mud-filled channels or poor cement bonding existed.

The NAS Report also set forth the following observations, among others: (1) there were alternative completion techniques and operational processes available that could have safely prepared the well for temporary abandonment; (2) post-incident static tests on a foam cement slurry similar to the slurry pumped into the Macondo well were performed under laboratory conditions and exhibited the settling of cement and nitrogen breakout, although because the tests were not conducted at bottom hole conditions "it is impossible to say whether the foam was stable at the bottom of the well"; (3) the "cap" cement slurry was subject to contamination by the spacer or the drilling mud that was placed ahead of the cap cement slurry and, if the cap cement slurry was heavily contaminated, it would not reach the strength of uncontaminated cement; (4) the numerous companies involved and the division of technical expertise among those companies affected their ability to perform and maintain an integrated assessment of the margins of safety for the Macondo well; (5) the regulatory regime was ineffective in addressing the risks of the Macondo well; and (6) training of key personnel and decision makers in the industry and regulatory agencies has been inadequate relative to the risks and complexities of deepwater drilling.

The NAS Report recommended, among other things: that all primary cemented barriers to flow should be tested to verify quality, quantity, and location of cement; that the integrity of mechanical barriers should be verified by using the best available test procedures; that blowout preventer systems should be redesigned for the drilling environment to which they are being applied; and that operating companies should have ultimate responsibility and accountability for well integrity, well design, well construction, and the suitability of the rig and associated safety equipment.

The Cementing Job and Reaction to Reports. We disagree with the BP Report, the National Commission, Transocean's report, the BOEMRE Report, and the NAS Report regarding many of their findings and characterizations with respect to the cementing and surface data logging services, as applicable, on the Deepwater Horizon. We have provided information to the National Commission, its staff, and representatives of the joint investigation team for the Marine Board Investigation that we believe has been overlooked or selectively omitted from the Investigation Report and the BOEMRE Report, as applicable. We intend to continue to vigorously defend ourselves in any investigation relating to our involvement with the Macondo well that we believe inaccurately evaluates or depicts our services on the Deepwater Horizon.

The cement slurry on the Deepwater Horizon was designed and prepared pursuant to well condition data provided by BP. Regardless of whether alleged weaknesses in cement design and testing are or are not ultimately established, and regardless of whether the cement slurry was utilized in similar applications or was prepared consistent with industry standards, we believe that had BP and Transocean properly interpreted a negative-pressure test, this test would have revealed any problems with the cement. In addition, had BP designed the Macondo well to allow a full cement bond log test or if BP had conducted even a partial cement bond log test, the test likely would have revealed any problems with the cement. BP, however, elected not to conduct any cement bond log tests, and with Transocean misinterpreted the negative-pressure test, both of which could have resulted in remedial action, if appropriate, with respect to the cementing services.

At this time we cannot predict the impact of the Investigation Report, the BOEMRE Report, the NAS Report, or the conclusions of future reports of the Chemical Safety Board, Congressional committees, or any other governmental or private entity. We also cannot predict whether their investigations or any other report or investigation will have an influence on or result in us being named as a party in any action alleging liability or violation of a statute or regulation, whether federal or state and whether criminal or civil.

We intend to continue to cooperate fully with all governmental hearings, investigations, and requests for information relating to the Macondo well incident. We cannot predict the outcome of, or the costs to be incurred in connection with, any of these hearings or investigations, and therefore we cannot predict the potential impact they may have on us.

Litigation. Since April 21, 2010, plaintiffs have been filing lawsuits relating to the Macondo well incident. Generally, those lawsuits allege either (1) damages arising from the oil spill pollution and contamination (e.g., diminution of property value, lost tax revenue, lost business revenue, lost tourist dollars, inability to engage in recreational or commercial activities) or (2) wrongful death or personal injuries. We are named along with other unaffiliated defendants in more than 400 complaints, most of which are alleged class actions, involving pollution damage claims and at least nine personal injury lawsuits involving four decedents and at least 21 allegedly injured persons who were on the drilling rig at the time of the incident. Another six lawsuits naming us and others relate to alleged personal injuries sustained by those responding to the explosion and oil spill. Plaintiffs originally filed the lawsuits described above in federal and state courts throughout the United States, including Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. Except for certain lawsuits not yet consolidated (including two lawsuits that are proceeding in Louisiana state court, one lawsuit that is proceeding in Louisiana federal court, two lawsuits that are proceeding in Texas state court, two lawsuits that are proceeding in Florida federal court, and four lawsuits in Florida state court for which we have not been served), the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation ordered all of the lawsuits against us consolidated in the MDL proceeding before Judge Carl Barbier in the United States Eastern District of Louisiana. The pollution complaints generally allege, among other things, negligence and gross negligence, property damages, taking of protected species, and potential economic losses as a result of environmental pollution and generally seek awards of unspecified economic, compensatory, and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief. Plaintiffs in these pollution cases have brought suit under various legal provisions, including the OPA, the CWA, the MBTA, the ESA, the OCSLA, the Longshoremen and Harbor Workers Compensation Act, general maritime law, state common law, and various state environmental and products liability statutes.

Furthermore, the pollution complaints include suits brought against us by governmental entities, including the State of Alabama, the State of Louisiana, Plaquemines Parish, the City of Greenville, and three Mexican states. Complaints brought against us by ten other parishes in Louisiana were dismissed with prejudice, and the dismissal is being appealed by those parishes. The wrongful death and other personal injury complaints generally allege negligence and gross negligence and seek awards of compensatory damages, including unspecified economic damages and punitive damages. We have retained counsel and are investigating and evaluating the claims, the theories of recovery, damages asserted, and our respective defenses to all of these claims.

Judge Barbier is also presiding over a separate proceeding filed by Transocean under the Limitation of Liability Act (Limitation Action). In the Limitation Action, Transocean seeks to limit its liability for claims arising out of the Macondo well incident to the value of the rig and its freight. Although the Limitation Action is not consolidated in the MDL, to this point the judge is effectively treating the two proceedings as associated cases. On February 18, 2011, Transocean tendered us, along with all other defendants, into the Limitation Action. As a result of the tender, we and all other defendants will be treated as direct defendants to the plaintiffs' claims as if the plaintiffs had sued each of us and the other defendants directly. In the Limitation Action, the judge intends to determine the allocation of liability among all defendants in the hundreds of lawsuits associated with the Macondo well incident, including those in the MDL proceeding that are pending in his court. Specifically, the judge will determine the liability, limitation, exoneration and fault allocation with regard to all of the defendants in a trial, which is scheduled to occur in three phases, that is set to begin in late February 2012. The three phases of this portion of the trial are scheduled to cover the liabilities associated with the blowout itself, the actions relating to the attempts to control the flow of hydrocarbons from the well, and the efforts to contain and clean-up the oil that was discharged from the Macondo well. We do not believe that a single apportionment of liability in the Limitation Action is properly applied, particularly with respect to gross negligence and punitive damages, to the hundreds of lawsuits pending in the MDL proceeding.

Damages for the cases tried in the MDL proceeding, including punitive damages, are expected to be tried following the three-phase portion of the trial described above. Under ordinary MDL procedures, such cases would, unless waived by the respective parties, be tried in the courts from which they were transferred into the MDL. It remains unclear, however, what impact the overlay of the Limitation Action will have on where these matters are tried. Document discovery and depositions among the parties to the MDL are ongoing. It is unclear how the judge will address the DOJ's civil action for alleged violations of the CWA and the OPA.

In April and May 2011, certain defendants in the proceedings described above filed numerous cross claims and third party claims against certain other defendants. BP Exploration and BP America Production Company filed claims against us seeking subrogation and contribution, including with respect to liabilities under the OPA, and direct damages, and alleging negligence, gross negligence, fraudulent conduct, and fraudulent concealment. Transocean filed claims against us seeking indemnification, and subrogation and contribution, including with respect to liabilities under the OPA and for the total loss of the Deepwater Horizon, and alleging comparative fault and breach of warranty of workmanlike performance. Anadarko filed claims against us seeking tort indemnity and contribution, and alleging negligence, gross negligence and willful misconduct, and MOEX Offshore 2007 LLC (MOEX), who has an approximate 10% interest in the Macondo well, filed a claim against us alleging negligence. Cameron International Corporation (Cameron) (the manufacturer and designer of the blowout preventer), M-I Swaco (provider of drilling fluids and services, among other things), Weatherford U.S. L.P. and Weatherford International, Inc. (together, Weatherford) (providers of casing components, including float equipment and centralizers, and services), and Dril-Quip, Inc. (Dril-Quip) (provider of wellhead systems), each filed claims against us seeking indemnification and contribution, including with respect to liabilities under the OPA in the case of Cameron, and alleging negligence. Additional civil lawsuits may be filed against us. In addition to the claims against us, generally the defendants in the proceedings described above filed claims, including for liabilities under the OPA and other claims similar to those described above, against the other defendants described above. BP has since announced that it has settled those claims between it and each of MOEX, Weatherford, Anadarko, and Cameron.

In April 2011, we filed claims against BP Exploration, BP p.l.c. and BP America Production Company (BP Defendants), M-I Swaco, Cameron, Anadarko, MOEX, Weatherford, Dril-Quip, and numerous entities involved in the post-blowout remediation and response efforts, in each case seeking contribution and indemnification and alleging negligence. Our claims also alleged gross negligence and willful misconduct on the part of the BP Defendants, Anadarko, and Weatherford. We also filed claims against M-I Swaco and Weatherford for contractual indemnification, and against Cameron, Weatherford and Dril-Quip for strict products liability, although the court has since issued orders dismissing all claims asserted against Dril-Quip and Weatherford in the MDL. We filed our answer to Transocean's Limitation petition denying Transocean's right to limit its liability, denying all claims and responsibility for the incident, seeking contribution and indemnification, and alleging negligence and gross negligence.

Judge Barbier has issued an order, among others, clarifying certain aspects of law applicable to the lawsuits pending in his court. The court ruled that: (1) general maritime law will apply and therefore dismissed all claims brought under state law causes of action; (2) general maritime law claims may be brought directly against defendants who are non-"responsible parties" under the OPA with the exception of pure economic loss claims by plaintiffs other than commercial fishermen; (3) all claims for damages, including pure economic loss claims, may be brought under the OPA directly against responsible parties; and (4) punitive damage claims can be brought against both non-responsible parties under general maritime law and responsible parties under the OPA. As discussed above, with respect to the ruling that claims for damages may be brought under the OPA against responsible parties, we have not been named as a responsible party under the OPA, but BP Exploration has filed a claim against us for contribution with respect to liabilities incurred by BP Exploration under the OPA.

In September 2011, we filed claims in Harris County, Texas against the BP Defendants seeking damages, including lost profits and exemplary damages, and alleging negligence, grossly negligent misrepresentation, defamation, common law libel, slander, and business disparagement. Our claims allege that the BP Defendants knew or should have known about an additional hydrocarbon zone in the well that the BP Defendants failed to disclose to us prior to our designing the cement program for the Macondo well. The location of the hydrocarbon zones is critical information required prior to performing cementing services and is necessary to achieve desired cement placement. We believe that had BP Defendants disclosed the hydrocarbon zone to us, we would not have proceeded with the cement program unless it was redesigned, which likely would have required a redesign of the production casing. In addition, we believe that the BP Defendants withheld this information from the BP Report and from the various investigations discussed above. In connection with the foregoing, we also moved to amend our claims against the BP Defendants in the MDL proceeding to include fraud. The BP Defendants have denied all of the allegations relating to the additional hydrocarbon zone and filed a motion to prevent us from adding our fraud claim in the MDL. In October 2011, our motion to add the fraud claim against the BP Defendants in the MDL proceeding was denied. The court's ruling does not, however, prevent us from using the underlying evidence in our pending claims against the BP Defendants.

In December 2011, BP filed a motion for sanctions against us alleging, among other things, that we destroyed evidence relating to post-incident testing of the foam cement slurry on the Deepwater Horizon and requesting adverse findings against us. A magistrate judge in the MDL proceeding denied BP's motion. BP appealed that ruling, and Judge Barbier affirmed the magistrate judge's decision.

We intend to vigorously defend any litigation, fines, and/or penalties relating to the Macondo well incident and to vigorously pursue any damages, remedies, or other rights available to us as a result of the Macondo well incident. We have incurred and expect to continue to incur significant legal fees and costs, some of which we expect to be covered by indemnity or insurance, as a result of the numerous investigations and lawsuits relating to the incident.

Macondo derivative case. In February 2011, a shareholder who had previously made a demand on our board of directors with respect to another derivative lawsuit filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit relating to the Macondo well incident. See "Shareholder derivative cases" below.

Indemnification and Insurance. Our contract with BP Exploration relating to the Macondo well generally provides for our indemnification by BP Exploration for certain potential claims and expenses relating to the Macondo well incident, including those resulting from pollution or contamination (other than claims by our employees, loss or damage to our property, and any pollution emanating directly from our equipment). Also, under our contract with BP Exploration, we have, among other things, generally agreed to indemnify BP Exploration and other contractors performing work on the well for claims for personal injury of our employees and subcontractors, as well as for damage to our property. In turn, we believe that BP Exploration was obligated to obtain agreement by other contractors performing work on the well to indemnify us for claims for personal injury of their employees or subcontractors, as well as for damages to their property. We have entered into separate indemnity agreements with Transocean and M-I Swaco, under which we have agreed to indemnify those parties for claims for personal injury of our employees and subcontractors and they have agreed to indemnify us for claims for personal injury of their employees and subcontractors.

In April 2011, we filed a lawsuit against BP Exploration in Harris County, Texas to enforce BP Exploration's contractual indemnity and alleging BP Exploration breached certain terms of the contractual indemnity provision. BP Exploration removed that lawsuit to federal court in the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. We filed a motion to remand the case to Harris County, Texas, and the lawsuit was transferred to the MDL.

BP Exploration, in connection with filing its claims with respect to the MDL proceeding, asked that court to declare that it is not liable to us in contribution, indemnification, or otherwise with respect to liabilities arising from the Macondo well incident. Other defendants in the litigation discussed above have generally denied any obligation to contribute to any liabilities arising from the Macondo well incident.

In January 2012, the court in the MDL proceeding entered an order in response to our and BP's motions for summary judgment regarding certain indemnification matters. The court held that BP is required to indemnify us for third-party compensatory claims, or actual damages, that arise from pollution or contamination that did not originate from our property or equipment located above the surface of the land or water, even if we are found to be grossly negligent. The court did not express an opinion as to whether our conduct amounted to gross negligence, but we do not believe the performance of our services on the Deepwater Horizon constituted gross negligence. The court also held, however, that BP does not owe us indemnity for punitive damages or for civil penalties under the CWA, if any, and that fraud could void the indemnity on public policy grounds, although the court stated that it was mindful that mere failure to perform contractual obligations as promised does not constitute fraud. As discussed above, the DOJ is not seeking civil penalties from us under the CWA. The court in the MDL proceeding deferred ruling on whether our indemnification from BP covers penalties or fines under the OCSLA, whether our alleged breach of our contract with BP Exploration would invalidate the indemnity, and whether we committed an act that materially increased the risk to or prejudiced the rights of BP so as to invalidate the indemnity. We do not believe that we breached our contract with BP Exploration or committed an act that would otherwise invalidate the indemnity. The court's rulings will be subject to appeal at the appropriate time.

In responding to similar motions for summary judgment between Transocean and BP, the court also held that public policy would not bar Transocean's claim for indemnification of compensatory damages, even if Transocean was found to be grossly negligent. The court also held, among other things, that Transocean's contractual right to indemnity does not extend to punitive damages or civil penalties under the CWA.

The rulings in the MDL proceeding regarding the indemnities are based on maritime law and may not bind the determination of similar issues in lawsuits not comprising a part of the MDL proceedings. Accordingly it is possible that different conclusions with respect to indemnities will be reached by other courts.

Indemnification for criminal fines or penalties, if any, may not be available if a court were to find such indemnification unenforceable as against public policy. In addition, certain state laws, if deemed to apply, would not allow for enforcement of indemnification for gross negligence, and may not allow for enforcement of indemnification of persons who are found to be negligent with respect to personal injury claims.

Financial analysts and the press have speculated about the financial capacity of BP, and whether it might seek to avoid indemnification obligations in bankruptcy proceedings. BP's public filings indicate that BP has recognized in excess of $40 billion in pre-tax charges, excluding offsets for settlement payments received from certain defendants in the proceedings described above under "Litigation," as a result of the Macondo well incident. BP's public filings also indicate that the amount of, among other things, certain natural resource damages with respect to certain OPA claims, some of which may be included in such charges, cannot be reliably estimated as of the dates of those filings. We consider, however, the likelihood of a BP bankruptcy to be remote.

In addition to the contractual indemnities discussed above, we have a general liability insurance program of $600 million. Our insurance is designed to cover claims by businesses and individuals made against us in the event of property damage, injury or death and, among other things, claims relating to environmental damage, as well as legal fees incurred in defending against those claims. We have received and expect to continue to receive payments from our insurers with respect to covered legal fees incurred in connection with the Macondo well incident. Through January 2012, we have incurred legal fees and related expenses covered by our insurance program of approximately $76 million. To the extent we incur any losses beyond those covered by indemnification, there can be no assurance that our insurance policies will cover all potential claims and expenses relating to the Macondo well incident. In addition, we may not be insured with respect to civil or criminal fines or penalties, if any, pursuant to the terms of our insurance policies. Insurance coverage can be the subject of uncertainties and, particularly in the event of large claims, potential disputes with insurance carriers, as well as other potential parties claiming insured status under our insurance policies.

Barracuda-Caratinga arbitration

We provided indemnification in favor of KBR under the master separation agreement for all out-of-pocket cash costs and expenses (except for legal fees and other expenses of the arbitration so long as KBR controls and directs it), or cash settlements or cash arbitration awards, KBR may incur after November 20, 2006 as a result of the replacement of certain subsea flowline bolts installed in connection with the Barracuda-Caratinga project. At Petrobras' direction, KBR replaced certain bolts located on the subsea flowlines that failed through mid-November 2005, and KBR informed us that additional bolts have failed thereafter, which were replaced by Petrobras. These failed bolts were identified by Petrobras when it conducted inspections of the bolts. In March 2006, Petrobras commenced arbitration against KBR claiming $220 million plus interest for the cost of monitoring and replacing the defective bolts and all related costs and expenses of the arbitration, including the cost of attorneys' fees. The arbitration panel held an evidentiary hearing in March 2008 to determine which party was responsible for the designation of the material used for the bolts. On May 13, 2009, the arbitration panel held that KBR and not Petrobras selected the material to be used for the bolts. Accordingly, the arbitration panel held that there is no implied warranty by Petrobras to KBR as to the suitability of the bolt material and that the parties' rights are to be governed by the express terms of their contract. The parties presented evidence and witnesses to the panel in May 2010, and final arguments were presented in August 2010. During the third quarter of 2011, the arbitration panel issued an award against KBR in the amount of $201 million, which is reflected as a liability and a component of loss from discontinued operations in our consolidated financial statements. KBR filed a motion to vacate the arbitration award with the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. See Note 7 for additional information regarding the KBR indemnification.

Securities and related litigation

In June 2002, a class action lawsuit was filed against us in federal court alleging violations of the federal securities laws after the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) initiated an investigation in connection with our change in accounting for revenue on long-term construction projects and related disclosures. In the weeks that followed, approximately twenty similar class actions were filed against us. Several of those lawsuits also named as defendants several of our present or former officers and directors. The class action cases were later consolidated, and the amended consolidated class action complaint, styled Richard Moore, et al. v. Halliburton Company, et al., was filed and served upon us in April 2003. As a result of a substitution of lead plaintiffs, the case was styled Archdiocese of Milwaukee Supporting Fund (AMSF) v. Halliburton Company, et al. AMSF has changed its name to Erica P. John Fund, Inc. (the Fund). We settled with the SEC in the second quarter of 2004.

In June 2003, the lead plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file a second amended consolidated complaint, which was granted by the court. In addition to restating the original accounting and disclosure claims, the second amended consolidated complaint included claims arising out of our 1998 acquisition of Dresser Industries, Inc., including that we failed to timely disclose the resulting asbestos liability exposure.

In April 2005, the court appointed new co-lead counsel and named the Fund the new lead plaintiff, directing that it file a third consolidated amended complaint and that we file our motion to dismiss. The court held oral arguments on that motion in August 2005. In March 2006, the court entered an order in which it granted the motion to dismiss with respect to claims arising prior to June 1999 and granted the motion with respect to certain other claims while permitting the Fund to re-plead some of those claims to correct deficiencies in its earlier complaint. In April 2006, the Fund filed its fourth amended consolidated complaint. We filed a motion to dismiss those portions of the complaint that had been re-pled. A hearing was held on that motion in July 2006, and in March 2007 the court ordered dismissal of the claims against all individual defendants other than our Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The court ordered that the case proceed against our CEO and us.

In September 2007, the Fund filed a motion for class certification, and our response was filed in November 2007. The district court held a hearing in March 2008, and issued an order November 3, 2008 denying the motion for class certification. The Fund appealed the district court's order to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's order denying class certification. On May 13, 2010, the Fund filed a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court. In early January 2011, the Supreme Court granted the writ of certiorari and accepted the appeal. The Court heard oral arguments in April 2011 and issued its decision in June 2011, reversing the Fifth Circuit ruling that the Fund needed to prove loss causation in order to obtain class certification. The Court's ruling was limited to the Fifth Circuit's loss causation requirement, and the case was returned to the Fifth Circuit for further consideration of our other arguments for denying class certification. The Fifth Circuit returned the case to the district court, and in January 2012 the court issued an order certifying the class which we have appealed. The case is at an early stage, and we cannot predict the outcome or consequences thereof. As of December 31, 2011, we had not accrued any amounts related to this matter because we do not believe that a loss is probable. Further, an estimate of possible loss or range of loss related to this matter cannot be made. We intend to vigorously defend this case.

Shareholder derivative cases

In May 2009, two shareholder derivative lawsuits involving us and KBR were filed in Harris County, Texas, naming as defendants various current and retired Halliburton directors and officers and current KBR directors. These cases allege that the individual Halliburton defendants violated their fiduciary duties of good faith and loyalty, to our detriment and the detriment of our shareholders, by failing to properly exercise oversight responsibilities and establish adequate internal controls. The District Court consolidated the two cases, and the plaintiffs filed a consolidated petition against only current and former Halliburton directors and officers containing various allegations of wrongdoing including violations of the FCPA, claimed KBR offenses while acting as a government contractor in Iraq, claimed KBR offenses and fraud under United States government contracts, Halliburton activity in Iran, and illegal kickbacks. Subsequently, a shareholder made a demand that the board take remedial action respecting the FCPA claims in the pending lawsuit. Our Board of Directors designated a special committee of independent and disinterested directors to oversee the investigation of the allegations made in the lawsuits and shareholder demand. Upon receipt of its special committee's findings and recommendations, the independent and disinterested members of the Board determined that the shareholder claims were without merit and not otherwise in the best interest of the company to pursue. The Board directed company counsel to report its determinations to the plaintiffs and demanding shareholder. As of December 31, 2011, we had not accrued any amounts related to this matter because we do not believe that a loss is probable. Further, an estimate of possible loss or range of loss related to this matter cannot be made.

We have agreed in principle, subject to approval by the court, to settle the lawsuits. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, we have agreed to implement certain changes to our corporate governance policies and agreed to pay the plaintiffs' legal fees.

In February 2011, the same shareholder who had made the demand on our board of directors in connection with one of the derivative lawsuits discussed above filed a shareholder derivative lawsuit in Harris County, Texas naming us as a nominal defendant and certain of our directors and officers as defendants. This case alleges that these defendants, among other things, breached fiduciary duties of good faith and loyalty by failing to properly exercise oversight responsibilities and establish adequate internal controls, including controls and procedures related to cement testing and the communication of test results, as they relate to the Macondo well incident. Our Board of Directors designated a special committee of independent and disinterested directors to oversee the investigation of the allegations made in the lawsuit and shareholder demand. Upon receipt of its special committee's findings and recommendations, the independent and disinterested members of the Board determined that the shareholder claims were without merit and not otherwise in the best interest of the company to pursue. The Board directed company counsel to report its determinations to the plaintiffs and demanding shareholder. As of December 31, 2011, we had not accrued any amounts related to this matter because we do not believe that a loss is probable. Further, an estimate of possible loss or range of loss related to this matter cannot be made.

Angola Investigations

We are conducting an internal investigation of certain areas of our operations in Angola, focusing on compliance with certain company policies, including our Code of Business Conduct (COBC), and the FCPA and other applicable laws. In December 2010, we received an anonymous e-mail alleging that certain current and former personnel violated our COBC and the FCPA, principally through the use of an Angolan vendor. The e-mail also alleges conflicts of interest, self-dealing and the failure to act on alleged violations of our COBC and the FCPA. We contacted the DOJ to advise them that we were initiating an internal investigation with the assistance of outside counsel and independent forensic accountants.

During the third quarter of 2011, we met with the DOJ and the SEC to brief them on the status of our investigation and provided them documents. We are currently responding to a subpoena from the SEC regarding this matter and are producing all relevant documents. We understand that one of our employees has also received a subpoena from the SEC regarding this matter.

We expect to continue to have discussions with the DOJ and the SEC, and we intend to continue to cooperate with their inquiries and requests as they investigate this matter. Because these investigations are at an early stage, we cannot predict their outcome or the consequences thereof.

Environmental

We are subject to numerous environmental, legal, and regulatory requirements related to our operations worldwide. In the United States, these laws and regulations include, among others:

	-	the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act;
	-	the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act;
	-	the Clean Air Act;
	-	the Federal Water Pollution Control Act;
	-	the Toxic Substances Control Act; and
	-	the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.

In addition to the federal laws and regulations, states and other countries where we do business often have numerous environmental, legal, and regulatory requirements by which we must abide. We evaluate and address the environmental impact of our operations by assessing and remediating contaminated properties in order to avoid future liabilities and comply with environmental, legal, and regulatory requirements. Our Health, Safety and Environment group has several programs in place to maintain environmental leadership and to help prevent the occurrence of environmental contamination. On occasion, in addition to the matters relating to the Macondo well incident described above and the Duncan, Oklahoma matter described below, we are involved in other environmental litigation and claims, including the remediation of properties we own or have operated, as well as efforts to meet or correct compliance-related matters. We do not expect costs related to those remediation requirements to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position or our results of operations. Our accrued liabilities for environmental matters were $81 million as of December 31, 2011 and $47 million as of December 31, 2010. Our total liability related to environmental matters covers numerous properties.

Between 1965 and 1991, a former Halliburton unit known as the Halliburton Industrial Services Division (HISD) performed work for the U.S. Department of Defense cleaning solid fuel from missile casings at a semi-rural facility on the north side of Duncan, Oklahoma. We closed our site in coordination with the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in the mid-1990s, but continued to monitor the groundwater at DEQ's request. A principal component of the missile fuel was ammonium perchlorate, a salt that is highly soluble in water, which has been discovered in the soil and groundwater on our site and in certain residential water wells near our property.

Commencing in October 2011, a number of lawsuits were filed against us, including a putative class action case in federal court in the Western District of Oklahoma and other lawsuits filed in Oklahoma state courts. The lawsuits generally allege, among other things, that operations at our Duncan facility caused releases of pollutants, including ammonium perchlorate and, in the case of the federal lawsuit, nuclear or radioactive waste, into the groundwater, and that we knew about those releases and did not take corrective actions to address them. It is also alleged that the plaintiffs have suffered from certain health conditions, including hypothyroidism, a condition that has been associated with exposure to perchlorate at sufficiently high doses over time. These cases seek, among other things, damages, including punitive damages, and the establishment of a fund for future medical monitoring. The cases allege, among other things, strict liability, trespass, private nuisance, public nuisance, and negligence and, in the case of the federal lawsuit, violations of the U.S. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, resulting in personal injuries, property damage, and diminution of property value.

The lawsuits generally allege that the cleaning of the missile casings at the Duncan facility contaminated the surrounding soils and groundwater, including certain water wells used in a number of residential homes, through the migration of, among other things, ammonium perchlorate. The federal lawsuit also alleges that our processing of radioactive waste from a nuclear power plant over 25 years ago resulted in the release of "nuclear/radioactive" waste into the environment.

We and the DEQ have recently conducted soil and groundwater sampling relating to the allegations discussed above that has confirmed that the alleged nuclear or radioactive material is confined to the soil in a discrete area of the onsite operations and is not present in the groundwater onsite or in any areas offsite. The radiological impacts from this discrete area are not believed to present any health risk for offsite exposure. With respect to ammonium perchlorate, we have made arrangements to supply affected residents with bottled drinking water and, if needed, with a temporary water supply system, at no cost to the residents. We have worked with the City of Duncan and the DEQ to expedite expansion of the city water supply to the relevant areas.

The lawsuits described above are at an early stage, and additional lawsuits and proceedings may be brought against us. We cannot predict their outcome or the consequences thereof. As of December 31, 2011, we had accrued $35 million related to our initial estimate of response efforts, third-party property damage, and remediation related to the Duncan, Oklahoma matter. We intend to vigorously defend the lawsuits and do not believe that these lawsuits will have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, consolidated results of operations, or consolidated financial condition.

Additionally, we have subsidiaries that have been named as potentially responsible parties along with other third parties for nine federal and state superfund sites for which we have established reserves. As of December 31, 2011, those nine sites accounted for approximately $7 million of our $81 million total environmental reserve. For any particular federal or state superfund site, since our estimated liability is typically within a range and our accrued liability may be the amount on the low end of that range, our actual liability could eventually be well in excess of the amount accrued. Despite attempts to resolve these superfund matters, the relevant regulatory agency may at any time bring suit against us for amounts in excess of the amount accrued. With respect to some superfund sites, we have been named a potentially responsible party by a regulatory agency; however, in each of those cases, we do not believe we have any material liability. We also could be subject to third-party claims with respect to environmental matters for which we have been named as a potentially responsible party.

Guarantee arrangements

In the normal course of business, we have agreements with financial institutions under which approximately $1.7 billion of letters of credit, bank guarantees, or surety bonds were outstanding as of December 31, 2011, including $292 million of surety bonds related to Venezuela. Some of the outstanding letters of credit have triggering events that would entitle a bank to require cash collateralization.

Leases

We are obligated under operating leases, principally for the use of land, offices, equipment, manufacturing and field facilities, and warehouses. Total rentals, net of sublease rentals, were $735 million in 2011, $591 million in 2010, and $528 million in 2009.

Future total rentals on noncancellable operating leases are as follows: $207 million in 2012; $166 million in 2013; $112 million in 2014; $87 million in 2015; $64 million in 2016; and $164 million thereafter.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name FASB Interpretation (FIN)
-Number 14
-Paragraph 3
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 5
-Paragraph 9, 10, 11, 12
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 210
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.25)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 450
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 4
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6952336&loc=d3e14435-108349

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 460
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 8
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6398077&loc=d3e12565-110249

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 440
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6394976&loc=d3e25287-109308

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 825
-SubTopic 20
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6449706&loc=d3e16207-108621

+ Details

Income Taxes

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Income Taxes [Abstract]

Income Taxes

Note 9. Income Taxes

The components of the (provision)/benefit for income taxes on continuing operations were:

	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Current income taxes:
Federal	$	(1,026	)	$	(400	)	$	30
Foreign		(334	)		(287	)		(250	)
State		(109	)		(42	)		(24	)
Total current		(1,469	)		(729	)		(244	)
Deferred income taxes:
Federal		(28	)		(124	)		(237	)
Foreign		57			3			(31	)
State		1			(3	)		(6	)
Total deferred		30			(124	)		(274	)
Provision for income taxes	$	(1,439	)	$	(853	)	$	(518	)

The United States and foreign components of income from continuing operations before income taxes were as follows:

	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010		2009
United States	$	4,040	$	1,918	$	589
Foreign		409		737		1,093
Total	$	4,449	$	2,655	$	1,682

Reconciliations between the actual provision for income taxes on continuing operations and that computed by applying the United States statutory rate to income from continuing operations before income taxes were as follows:

	Year Ended December 31
	2011			2010			2009
United States statutory rate		35.0	%		35.0	%		35.0	%
Domestic manufacturing deduction		(2.1	)		(1.8	)		-
Adjustments of prior year taxes		(1.3	)		(1.2	)		(2.1	)
Impact of foreign income taxed at different rates		(0.5	)		(1.3	)		(3.3	)
Other impact of foreign operations		(0.4	)		(1.3	)		(0.4	)
Impact of devaluation of Venezuelan Bol�var Fuerte		-			0.8			-
Other items, net		1.6			1.9			1.6
Total effective tax rate on continuing operations		32.3	%		32.1	%		30.8	%

We have not provided United States income taxes and foreign withholding taxes on the undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011 because we intend to permanently reinvest such earnings outside the United States. If these foreign earnings were to be repatriated in the future, the related United States tax liability may be reduced by any foreign income taxes previously paid on these earnings. As of December 31, 2011, the cumulative amount of earnings upon which United States income taxes have not been provided is approximately $4.1 billion. It is not possible to estimate the amount of unrecognized deferred tax liability related to these earnings at this time.

The primary components of our deferred tax assets and liabilities were as follows:

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Gross deferred tax assets:
Employee compensation and benefits	$	345	$	313
Net operating loss carryforwards		139		52
Accrued liabilities		64		77
Insurance accruals		48		47
Software revenue recognition		44		50
Inventory		30		28
Capitalized research and experimentation		29		44
Other		110		106
Total gross deferred tax assets		809		717
Gross deferred tax liabilities:
Depreciation and amortization		648		631
Joint ventures, partnerships, and unconsolidated affiliates		38		48
Other		68		57
Total gross deferred tax liabilities		754		736
Valuation allowances - net operating loss carryforwards		44		22
Net deferred income tax asset (liability)	$	11	$	(41	)

At December 31, 2011, we had a total of $346 million of foreign net operating loss carryforwards, of which $211 million will expire from 2012 through 2032. The balance will not expire due to indefinite expiration dates.

The following table presents a rollforward of our unrecognized tax benefits and associated interest and penalties.

		Unrecognized		Interest
Millions of dollars		Tax Benefits		and Penalties
Balance at January 1, 2009	$	300	$	43
Change in prior year tax positions		(42)		(6)
Change in current year tax positions		23		2
Cash settlements with taxing authorities		(7)		(1)
Lapse of statute of limitations		(11)		(9)
Balance at December 31, 2009	$	263	$	29
Change in prior year tax positions		(74)		7
Change in current year tax positions		19		2
Cash settlements with taxing authorities		(28)		(5)
Lapse of statute of limitations		(3)		(1)
Balance at December 31, 2010	$	177(a)	$	32
Change in prior year tax positions		38		41
Change in current year tax positions		5		1
Cash settlements with taxing authorities		(12)		(3)
Lapse of statute of limitations		(3)		(2)
Balance at December 31, 2011	$	205(a)(b)	$	69

(a)		Includes $67 million as of December 31, 2011 and $62 million as of December 31, 2010 in amounts to be settled in accordance with our Tax Sharing Agreement with KBR and foreign unrecognized tax benefits that would give rise to a United States tax credit. See Note 7 for further information. The remaining balance of $138 million as of December 31, 2011 and $115 million as of December 31, 2010, if resolved in our favor, would positively impact the effective tax rate and, therefore, be recognized as additional tax benefits in our statement of operations.
(b)		Includes $42 million that could be resolved within the next 12 months.

We file income tax returns in the United States federal jurisdiction and in various states and foreign jurisdictions. In most cases, we are no longer subject to state, local, or non-United States income tax examination by tax authorities for years before 2000. Tax filings of our subsidiaries, unconsolidated affiliates, and related entities are routinely examined in the normal course of business by tax authorities. Currently, our United States federal tax filings are under review for tax years 2008 and 2009.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for income taxes. Disclosures may include net deferred tax liability or asset recognized in an enterprise's statement of financial position, net change during the year in the total valuation allowance, approximate tax effect of each type of temporary difference and carryforward that gives rise to a significant portion of deferred tax liabilities and deferred tax assets, utilization of a tax carryback, and tax uncertainties information.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher SEC
-Name Regulation S-X (SX)
-Number 210
-Section 08
-Paragraph h
-Article 4

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 109
-Paragraph 136, 172
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 109
-Paragraph 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 740
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 15
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6907707&loc=d3e32718-109319

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 740
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 9
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6907707&loc=d3e32639-109319

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 235
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.4-08.(h))
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6881521&loc=d3e23780-122690

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 740
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6907707&loc=d3e32537-109319

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 740
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6907707&loc=d3e32559-109319

+ Details

Shareholders' Equity and Stock Incentive Plans

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Shareholders Equity And Stock Incentive Plans [Abstract]

Shareholders' Equity And Stock Incentive Plans

Note 10. Shareholders' Equity and Stock Incentive Plans

The following tables summarize our common stock and other shareholders' equity activity:

	Company Shareholders' Equity
			Paid-in
			Capital in									Accumulated			Noncontrolling
			Excess									Other			Interest in
	Common		of Par			Treasury			Retained			Comprehensive			Consolidated
Millions of dollars	Shares		Value			Stock			Earnings			Income (Loss)			Subsidiaries		Total
Balance at December 31, 2008	$	2,666	$	484		$	(5,251	)	$	10,041		$	(215	)	$	19	$	7,744
Cash dividends paid		-		-			-			(324	)		-			-		(324	)
Stock plans		3		(51	)		266			-			-			-		218
Common shares purchased		-		-			(17	)		-			-			-		(17	)
Tax loss from exercise of options and
restricted stock		-		(22	)		-			-			-			-		(22	)
Other		-		-			-			1			-			-		1
Total dividends and other transactions with
shareholders		3		(73	)		249			(323	)		-			-		(144	)
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income		-		-			-			1,145			-			10		1,155
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		-		-			-			-			(5	)		-		(5	)
Defined benefit and other postretirement
plans, net		-		-			-			-			2			-		2
Net unrealized gains on investments, net of
tax provision of $3		-		-			-			-			5			-		5
Total comprehensive income		-		-			-			1,145			2			10		1,157
Balance at December 31, 2009	$	2,669	$	411		$	(5,002	)	$	10,863		$	(213	)	$	29	$	8,757
Cash dividends paid		-		-			-			(327	)		-			-		(327	)
Stock plans		5		(37	)		252			-			-			-		220
Common shares purchased		-		-			(141	)		-			-			-		(141	)
Tax loss from exercise of
options and restricted stock		-		(18	)		-			-			-			-		(18	)
Other		-		-			-			-			-			(21)		(21	)
Total dividends and other transactions
with shareholders		5		(55	)		111			(327	)		-			(21)		(287	)
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		-		(17	)		120			-			-			-		103
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income		-		-			-			1,835			-			7		1,842
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		-		-			-			-			(1	)		-		(1	)
Defined benefit and other postretirement
plans adjustments, net		-		-			-			-			(26	)		(1)		(27	)
Total comprehensive income		-		-			-			1,835			(27	)		6		1,814
Balance at December 31, 2010	$	2,674	$	339		$	(4,771	)	$	12,371		$	(240	)	$	14	$	10,387
Cash dividends paid		-		-			-			(330	)		-			-		(330	)
Stock plans		9		82			267			-			-			-		358
Common shares purchased		-		-			(43	)		-			-			-		(43	)
Tax loss from exercise of
options and restricted stock		-		34			-			-			-			-		34
Total dividends and other transactions
with shareholders		9		116			224			(330	)		-			-		19
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income		-		-			-			2,839			-			5		2,844
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Defined benefit and other postretirement
plans adjustments, net		-		-			-			-			(33	)		(1)		(34	)
Total comprehensive income		-		-			-			2,839			(33	)		4		2,810
Balance at December 31, 2011	$	2,683	$	455		$	(4,547	)	$	14,880		$	(273	)	$	18	$	13,216

Accumulated other comprehensive loss	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Cumulative translation adjustment	$	(66	)	$	(66	)	$	(65	)
Defined benefit and other postretirement liability adjustments (a)		(208	)		(175	)		(149	)
Unrealized gains on investments		1			1			1
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss	$	(273	)	$	(240	)	$	(213	)

(a) Included net actuarial losses for our international pension plans of $184 million at December 31, 2011, $170 million at December 31, 2010, and $149 million at December 31, 2009.

Shares of common stock	December 31
Millions of shares	2011			2010			2009
Issued		1,073			1,069			1,067
In treasury		(152	)		(159	)		(165	)
Total shares of common stock outstanding		921			910			902

Our stock repurchase program has an authorization of $5.0 billion, of which $1.7 billion remained available at December 31, 2011. The program does not require a specific number of shares to be purchased and the program may be effected through solicited or unsolicited transactions in the market or in privately negotiated transactions. The program may be terminated or suspended at any time. From the inception of this program in February 2006 through December 31, 2011, we have repurchased approximately 96 million shares of our common stock for approximately $3.3 billion at an average price per share of $34.22. There were no stock repurchases under the program in 2011.

Preferred Stock

Our preferred stock consists of five million total authorized shares at December 31, 2011, of which none are issued.

Stock Incentive Plans

The following table summarizes stock-based compensation costs for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009.

	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Stock-based compensation cost	$	198		$	158		$	143
Tax benefit	$	(61	)	$	(50	)	$	(46	)
Stock-based compensation cost, net of tax	$	137		$	108		$	97

Our Stock and Incentive Plan, as amended (Stock Plan), provides for the grant of any or all of the following types of stock-based awards:

	-	stock options, including incentive stock options and nonqualified stock options;
	-	restricted stock awards;
	-	restricted stock unit awards;
	-	stock appreciation rights; and
	-	stock value equivalent awards.

There are currently no stock appreciation rights or stock value equivalent awards outstanding.

Under the terms of the Stock Plan, approximately 133 million shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance to employees and non-employee directors. At December 31, 2011, approximately 14 million shares were available for future grants under the Stock Plan. The stock to be offered pursuant to the grant of an award under the Stock Plan may be authorized but unissued common shares or treasury shares.

In addition to the provisions of the Stock Plan, we also have stock-based compensation provisions under our Restricted Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors and our Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP).

Each of the active stock-based compensation arrangements is discussed below.

Stock options

The majority of our options are generally issued during the second quarter of the year. All stock options under the Stock Plan are granted at the fair market value of our common stock at the grant date. Employee stock options vest ratably over a three- or four-year period and generally expire 10 years from the grant date. Compensation expense for stock options is generally recognized on a straight line basis over the entire vesting period. No further stock option grants are being made under the stock plans of acquired companies.

The following table represents our stock options activity during 2011.

			Weighted		Weighted
			Average		Average		Aggregate
	Number		Exercise		Remaining		Intrinsic
	of Shares		Price		Contractual		Value
Stock Options	(in millions)		per Share		Term (years)		(in millions)
Outstanding at January 1, 2011		15.8	$	26.79
Granted		3.4		43.87
Exercised		(3.9)		22.05
Forfeited/expired		(0.4)		33.54
Outstanding at December 31, 2011		14.9	$	31.74		6.7	$	94

Exercisable at December 31, 2011		8.5	$	29.07		5.3	$	68

The total intrinsic value of options exercised was $102 million in 2011, $38 million in 2010, and $10 million in 2009. As of December 31, 2011, there was $55 million of unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to nonvested stock options, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately 2 years.

Cash received from option exercises was $160 million during 2011, $102 million during 2010, and $74 million during 2009.

The fair value of options at the date of grant was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The expected volatility of options granted was a blended rate based upon implied volatility calculated on actively traded options on our common stock and upon the historical volatility of our common stock. The expected term of options granted was based upon historical observation of actual time elapsed between date of grant and exercise of options for all employees. The assumptions and resulting fair values of options granted were as follows:

	Year Ended December 31
	2011		2010		2009
Expected term (in years)		5.20		5.27		5.18
Expected volatility		40%		40%		53%
Expected dividend yield		0.69 - 1.01%		0.99 - 1.71%		1.23 - 2.55%
Risk-free interest rate		0.93 - 2.29%		1.20 - 2.78%		1.38 - 2.47%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share	$	15.61	$	9.94	$	9.36

Restricted stock

Restricted shares issued under the Stock Plan are restricted as to sale or disposition. These restrictions lapse periodically over an extended period of time not exceeding 10 years. Restrictions may also lapse for early retirement and other conditions in accordance with our established policies. Upon termination of employment, shares on which restrictions have not lapsed must be returned to us, resulting in restricted stock forfeitures. The fair market value of the stock on the date of grant is amortized and charged to income on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the entire award.

Our Restricted Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors (Directors Plan) allows for each non-employee director to receive an annual award of 800 restricted shares of common stock as a part of their compensation. These awards have a minimum restriction period of six months, and the restrictions lapse upon the earlier of mandatory director retirement at age 72 or early retirement from the Board after four years of service. The fair market value of the stock on the date of grant is amortized over the lesser of the time from the grant date to age 72 or the time from the grant date to completion of four years of service on the Board. We reserved 200,000 shares of common stock for issuance to non-employee directors, which may be authorized but unissued common shares or treasury shares. At December 31, 2011, 145,600 shares had been issued to non-employee directors under this plan. There were 7,200 shares, 8,000 shares, and 8,000 shares of restricted stock awarded under the Directors Plan in 2011, 2010, and 2009. In addition, during 2011, our non-employee directors were awarded 19,395 shares of restricted stock under the Stock Plan, which are included in the table below.

The following table represents our Stock Plan and Directors Plan restricted stock awards and restricted stock units granted, vested, and forfeited during 2011.

			Weighted Average
	Number of Shares		Grant-Date Fair
Restricted Stock	(in millions)		Value per Share
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2011		13.3	$	28.10
Granted		5.4		43.35
Vested		(3.7)		28.81
Forfeited		(0.8)		32.59
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2011		14.2	$	33.45

The weighted average grant-date fair value of shares granted during 2010 was $29.39 and during 2009 was $22.90. The total fair value of shares vested during 2011 was $165 million, during 2010 was $100 million, and during 2009 was $59 million. As of December 31, 2011, there was $352 million of unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to nonvested restricted stock, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of 4 years.

Employee Stock Purchase Plan

Under the ESPP, eligible employees may have up to 10% of their earnings withheld, subject to some limitations, to be used to purchase shares of our common stock. Unless the Board of Directors shall determine otherwise, each six-month offering period commences on January 1 and July 1 of each year. The price at which common stock may be purchased under the ESPP is equal to 85% of the lower of the fair market value of the common stock on the commencement date or last trading day of each offering period. Under this plan, 44 million shares of common stock have been reserved for issuance. They may be authorized but unissued shares or treasury shares. As of December 31, 2011, 25.3 million shares have been sold through the ESPP.

The fair value of ESPP shares was estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The expected volatility was a one-year historical volatility of our common stock. The assumptions and resulting fair values were as follows:

	Offering period July 1 through December 31
	2011			2010			2009
Expected term (in years)		0.5			0.5			0.5
Expected volatility		34	%		43	%		80	%
Expected dividend yield		0.70	%		1.44	%		1.74	%
Risk-free interest rate		0.10	%		0.21	%		0.33	%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share	$	12.57		$	6.72		$	7.66

	Offering period January 1 through June 30
	2011			2010			2009
Expected term (in years)		0.5			0.5			0.5
Expected volatility		43	%		48	%		71	%
Expected dividend yield		0.88	%		1.15	%		1.85	%
Risk-free interest rate		0.20	%		0.19	%		0.27	%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share	$	10.99		$	8.81		$	6.69

Income per Share

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Income per Share [Abstract]

Income per Share

Note 11. Income per Share

Basic income per share is based on the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income per share includes additional common shares that would have been outstanding if potential common shares with a dilutive effect had been issued.

A reconciliation of the number of shares used for the basic and diluted income per share calculations is as follows:

Millions of shares	2011		2010		2009
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding		918		908		900
Dilutive effect of stock options		4		3		2
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding		922		911		902

Excluded from the computation of diluted income per share are options to purchase three million shares of common stock that were outstanding in 2011, five million shares of common stock that were outstanding in 2010, and seven million shares of common stock that were outstanding in 2009. These options were outstanding during these years but were excluded because they were antidilutive, as the option exercise price was greater than the average market price of the common shares.

Financial Instruments and Risk Management	12 Months Ended
Financial Instruments and Risk Management	Dec. 31, 2011
Financial Instruments and Risk Management [Abstract]
Financial Instruments and Risk Management	Note 12. Financial Instruments and Risk Management At December 31, 2011, we held $150 million of short-term, United States Treasury securities with maturities that extend through February 2012 compared to $653 million of short-term, United States Treasury securities at December 31, 2010. These securities are accounted for as available-for-sale and recorded at fair value, based on quoted market prices, in "Investments in marketable securities" on our consolidated balance sheets. The carrying amount of cash and equivalents, investments in marketable securities, receivables, and accounts payable, as reflected in the consolidated balance sheets, approximates fair value due to the short maturities of these instruments. We have no financial instruments measured at fair value using unobservable inputs. The fair value of our long-term debt was $6.2 billion as of December 31, 2011 and $4.6 billion as of December 31, 2010, which differs from the carrying amount of $4.8 billion as of December 31, 2011 and $3.8 billion as of December 31, 2010, on our consolidated balance sheets. As of December 31, 2011, $3.6 billion of the fair value of our long-term debt and as of December 31, 2010, $4.2 billion of the fair value of our long-term debt were calculated using quoted prices in active markets for identical liabilities. As of December 31, 2011, $2.6 billion of the fair value of our long-term debt and as of December 31, 2010, $422 million of the fair value of our long-term debt were calculated using significant observable inputs for similar liabilities. We are exposed to market risk from changes in foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. We selectively manage these exposures through the use of derivative instruments, including forward exchange contracts and interest rate swaps. The objective of our risk management strategy is to minimize the volatility from fluctuations in foreign currency and interest rates. We do not use derivative instruments for trading purposes. The fair value of our forward exchange contracts and interest rate swaps was not material as of December 31, 2011. The counterparties to our forward exchange contracts and interest rate swaps are global commercial and investment banks. Foreign currency exchange risk We have operations in many international locations and are involved in transactions denominated in currencies other than the United States dollar, our functional currency, which exposes us to foreign currency exchange rate risk. Techniques in managing foreign currency exchange risk include, but are not limited to, foreign currency borrowing and investing and the use of currency derivative instruments. We attempt to selectively manage significant exposures to potential foreign currency exchange losses based on current market conditions, future operating activities, and the associated cost in relation to the perceived risk of loss. The purpose of our foreign currency risk management activities is to minimize the risk that our cash flows from the sale and purchase of services and products in foreign currencies will be adversely affected by changes in exchange rates. We use forward exchange contracts to manage our exposure to fluctuations in the currencies of the countries in which we do the majority of our international business. These forward exchange contracts are not treated as hedges for accounting purposes, generally have an expiration date of one year or less, and are not exchange traded. While forward exchange contracts are subject to fluctuations in value, the fluctuations are generally offset by the value of the underlying exposures being managed. The use of some of these contracts may limit our ability to benefit from favorable fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. Forward exchange contracts are not utilized to manage exposures in some currencies due primarily to the lack of available markets or cost considerations (non-traded currencies). We attempt to manage our working capital position to minimize foreign currency exposure in non-traded currencies and recognize that pricing for the services and products offered in these countries should account for the cost of exchange rate devaluations. We have historically incurred transaction losses in non-traded currencies. The notional amounts of open forward exchange contracts were $268 million at December 31, 2011 and $356 million at December 31, 2010. The notional amounts of our forward exchange contracts do not generally represent amounts exchanged by the parties, and thus are not a measure of our exposure or of the cash requirements related to these contracts. As such, cash flows related to these contracts are typically not material. The amounts exchanged are calculated by reference to the notional amounts and by other terms of the contracts, such as exchange rates. Interest rate risk We are subject to interest rate risk on our long-term debt. Our marketable securities and short-term borrowings do not give rise to significant interest rate risk due to their short-term nature. We had fixed rate long-term debt totaling $4.8 billion at December 31, 2011 and fixed rate long-term debt totaling $3.8 billion at December 31, 2010 with none maturing before May 2017. We maintain an interest rate management strategy that is intended to mitigate the exposure to changes in interest rates in the aggregate for our investment portfolio. During the second quarter of 2011, we entered into a series of interest rate swaps relating to two of our debt instruments with a total notional amount of $1.0 billion at a weighted-average, LIBOR-based, floating rate of 3.57% as of December 31, 2011. We utilize interest rate swaps to effectively convert a portion of our fixed rate debt to floating rates. These interest rate swaps, which expire when the underlying debt matures, are designated as fair value hedges of the underlying debt and are determined to be highly effective. The fair value of our interest rate swaps are included in "Other assets" in our consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2011. The fair value of our interest rate swaps was determined using an income approach model with inputs, such as the notional amount, LIBOR rate spread, and settlement terms that are observable in the market or can be derived from or corroborated by observable data. We did not have any interest rate swaps outstanding as of December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2011, we had fixed rate debt aggregating $3.8 billion and variable rate debt aggregating $1.0 billion, after taking into account the effects of the interest rate swaps. Credit risk Financial instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of credit risk are primarily cash equivalents, investments in marketable securities, and trade receivables. It is our practice to place our cash equivalents and investments in marketable securities in high quality investments with various institutions. We derive the majority of our revenue from selling products and providing services to the energy industry. Within the energy industry, our trade receivables are generated from a broad and diverse group of customers, although a significant amount of our trade receivables are generated in the United States. We maintain an allowance for losses based upon the expected collectability of all trade accounts receivable. We do not have any significant concentrations of credit risk with any individual counterparty to our derivative contracts. We select counterparties to those contracts based on our belief that each counterparty's profitability, balance sheet, and capacity for timely payment of financial commitments is unlikely to be materially adversely affected by foreseeable events.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for the fair value of financial instruments (as defined), including financial assets and financial liabilities (collectively, as defined), and the measurements of those instruments as well as disclosures related to the fair value of non-financial assets and liabilities. Such disclosures about the financial instruments, assets, and liabilities would include: (1) the fair value of the required items together with their carrying amounts (as appropriate); (2) for items for which it is not practicable to estimate fair value, disclosure would include: (a) information pertinent to estimating fair value (including, carrying amount, effective interest rate, and maturity, and (b) the reasons why it is not practicable to estimate fair value; (3) significant concentrations of credit risk including: (a) information about the activity, region, or economic characteristics identifying a concentration, (b) the maximum amount of loss the entity is exposed to based on the gross fair value of the related item, (c) policy for requiring collateral or other security and information as to accessing such collateral or security, and (d) the nature and brief description of such collateral or security; (4) quantitative information about market risks and how such risks are managed; (5) for items measured on both a recurring and nonrecurring basis information regarding the inputs used to develop the fair value measurement; and (6) for items presented in the financial statement for which fair value measurement is elected: (a) information necessary to understand the reasons for the election, (b) discussion of the effect of fair value changes on earnings, (c) a description of [similar groups] items for which the election is made and the relation thereof to the balance sheet, the aggregate carrying value of items included in the balance sheet that are not eligible for the election; (7) all other required (as defined) and desired information.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 133
-Paragraph 44A, 44B
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 107
-Paragraph 15C, 15D
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 107
-Paragraph 15A
-Subparagraph a-d
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 107
-Paragraph 15B
-Subparagraph a, b
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 107
-Paragraph 3, 10, 14, 15
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 157
-Paragraph 32, 33, 34
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 159
-Paragraph 17-22, 27, 28
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 820
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6925170&loc=d3e19207-110258

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 825
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 21
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6947722&loc=d3e13537-108611

Reference 10: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 825
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 28
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6957238&loc=d3e14064-108612

Reference 11: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 825
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 10
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6947722&loc=d3e13433-108611

Reference 12: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 825
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 30
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6957238&loc=d3e14172-108612

Reference 13: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 825
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 16
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6947722&loc=d3e13504-108611

Reference 14: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 820
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 5
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6925170&loc=d3e19296-110258

+ Details

Retirement Plans

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Retirement Plans [Abstract]

Retirement Plans

Note 13. Retirement Plans

Our company and subsidiaries have various plans that cover a significant number of our employees. These plans include defined contribution plans, defined benefit plans, and other postretirement plans:

	-	our defined contribution plans provide retirement benefits in return for services rendered. These plans provide an individual account for each participant and have terms that specify how contributions to the participant's account are to be determined rather than the amount of pension benefits the participant is to receive. Contributions to these plans are based on pretax income and/or discretionary amounts determined on an annual basis. Our expense for the defined contribution plans for continuing operations totaled $245 million in 2011, $196 million in 2010, and $186 million in 2009;
	-	our defined benefit plans, which include both funded and unfunded pension plans, define an amount of pension benefit to be provided, usually as a function of age, years of service, and/or compensation. The unfunded obligations and net periodic benefit cost of our United States defined benefit plans were not material for the periods presented; and
	-	our postretirement medical plans are offered to specific eligible employees. The accumulated benefit obligations and net periodic benefit cost for these plans were not material for the periods presented.

Funded status

For our international pension plans at December 31, 2011, the projected benefit obligation was $928 million and the fair value of plan assets was $705 million, which resulted in an unfunded obligation of $223 million. At December 31, 2010, the projected benefit obligation was $908 million and the fair value of plan assets was $691 million, which resulted in an unfunded obligation of $217 million. The accumulated benefit obligation for our international plans was $868 million at December 31, 2011 and $829 million at December 31, 2010.

The following table presents additional information about our international pension plans.

Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Amounts recognized on the Consolidated Balance Sheets
Accrued employee compensation and benefits	$	10	$	15
Employee compensation and benefits		213		202
Pension plans in which projected benefit
obligation exceeded plan assets at December 31
Projected benefit obligation	$	928	$	902
Fair value of plan assets		705		685
Pension plans in which accumulated benefit
obligation exceeded plan assets at December 31
Accumulated benefit obligation	$	784	$	764
Fair value of plan assets		621		614

Fair value measurements of plan assets

The following table sets forth by level within the fair value hierarchy the fair value of assets held by our international pension plans.

	Quoted Prices		Significant
	in Active		Observable		Significant
	Markets for		Inputs for		Unobservable
Millions of dollars	Identical Assets		Similar Assets		Inputs		Total
Common/collective trust funds (a)
Equity funds	$	-	$	241	$	-	$	241
Bond funds		-		110		-		110
Balanced funds		-		12		-		12
Corporate bonds		-		89		-		89
United States equity securities		67		-		-		67
Non-United States equity securities		64		-		-		64
Other assets		15		16		91		122
Fair value of plan assets at December 31, 2011	$	146	$	468	$	91	$	705

Common/collective trust funds (a)
Equity funds	$	-	$	155	$	-	$	155
Bond funds		-		97		-		97
Balanced funds		-		14		-		14
Non-United States equity securities		133		-		-		133
Corporate bonds		-		84		-		84
United States equity securities		41		-		-		41
Other assets		82		6		79		167
Fair value of plan assets at December 31, 2010	$	256	$	356	$	79	$	691

(a)	Strategies are generally to invest in equity or debt securities, or a combination thereof, that match or outperform certain predefined indices.

Equity securities are traded in active markets and valued based on their quoted fair value by independent pricing vendors. Government bonds and corporate bonds are valued using quotes from independent pricing vendors based on recent trading activity and other relevant information, including market interest rate curves, referenced credit spreads, and estimated prepayment rates. Common/collective trust funds are valued at the net asset value of units held by the plans at year-end.

Our investment strategy varies by country depending on the circumstances of the underlying plan. Typically, less mature plan benefit obligations are funded by using more equity securities, as they are expected to achieve long-term growth while exceeding inflation. More mature plan benefit obligations are funded using more fixed income securities, as they are expected to produce current income with limited volatility. The fixed income allocation is generally invested with a similar maturity profile to that of the benefit obligations to ensure that changes in interest rates are adequately reflected in the assets of the plan. Risk management practices include diversification by issuer, industry, and geography, as well as the use of multiple asset classes and investment managers within each asset class.

For our United Kingdom pension plan, which constituted 74% of our international pension plans' projected benefit obligations at December 31, 2011, the target asset allocation is 65% equity securities and 35% fixed income securities.

Net periodic benefit cost

Net periodic benefit cost for our international pension plans was $27 million in 2011, $28 million in 2010, and $32 million in 2009.

Actuarial assumptions

Certain weighted-average actuarial assumptions used to determine benefit obligations of our international pension plans at December 31 were as follows:

	2011			2010
Discount rate		5.2	%		5.7	%
Rate of compensation increase		5.4	%		5.2	%

Certain weighted-average actuarial assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit cost of our international pension plans for the years ended December 31 were as follows:

	2011	2010	2009
Discount rate	7.1%	7.9%	7.4%
Expected long-term return on plan assets	5.7%	5.6%	5.6%
Rate of compensation increase	6.2%	6.4%	5.7%

Assumed long-term rates of return on plan assets, discount rates for estimating benefit obligations, and rates of compensation increases vary by plan according to local economic conditions. Discount rates were determined based on the prevailing market rates of a portfolio of high-quality debt instruments with maturities matching the expected timing of the payment of the benefit obligations. Expected long-term rates of return on plan assets were determined based upon an evaluation of our plan assets and historical trends and experience, taking into account current and expected market conditions.

Expected cash flows

Contributions. Funding requirements for each plan are determined based on the local laws of the country where such plan resides. In certain countries the funding requirements are mandatory, while in other countries they are discretionary. We currently expect to contribute $11 million to our international pension plans in 2012.

Benefit payments. Expected benefit payments over the next 10 years are approximately $25 million annually for our international pension plans.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for pension and other postretirement benefits.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 132R
-Paragraph 5
-Subparagraph a
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 132R
-Paragraph 5
-Subparagraph b
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 132R
-Paragraph 5
-Subparagraph h
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 132R
-Paragraph 5
-Subparagraph q
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 132R
-Paragraph 8
-Subparagraph m
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 106
-Paragraph 518
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 87
-Paragraph 264
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
-Number 03-2
-Paragraph 8
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Principles Board Opinion (APB)
-Number 30
-Paragraph 26
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 10: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name FASB Staff Position (FSP)
-Number FAS106-2
-Paragraph 20, 21, 22
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 11: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 158
-Paragraph 7, 21, 22
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 12: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 132R
-Paragraph 5, 6, 7, 8
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 13: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Implementation Guide (Q and A)
-Number FAS88
-Paragraph 63
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 14: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 715
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2235017

+ Details

Accounting Standards Recently Adopted	12 Months Ended
Accounting Standards Recently Adopted	Dec. 31, 2011
Accounting Standards Recently Adopted [Abstract]
Accounting Standards Recently Adopted	Note 14. Accounting Standards Recently Adopted In September 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued an update to existing guidance on the assessment of goodwill impairment. This update simplifies the assessment of goodwill for impairment by allowing companies to consider qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount before performing the two step impairment review process. It also amends the examples of events or circumstances that would be considered in a goodwill impairment evaluation. We have elected to early adopt this update to be effective for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2011. The adoption of this update did not have an impact on our annual goodwill assessment. On January 1, 2011, we adopted an update issued by the FASB to existing guidance on revenue recognition for arrangements with multiple deliverables. This update allows companies to allocate consideration for qualified separate deliverables using estimated selling price for both delivered and undelivered items when vendor-specific objective evidence or third-party evidence is unavailable. It also requires additional disclosures on the nature of multiple element arrangements, the types of deliverables under the arrangements, the general timing of their delivery, and significant factors and estimates used to determine estimated selling prices. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2010. The adoption of this update did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements or existing revenue recognition policies.

- Definition

The entire disclosure for reporting accounting changes and error corrections. It includes the conveyance of information necessary for a user of the Company's financial information to understand all aspects and required disclosure information concerning all changes and error corrections reported in the Company's financial statements for the period.

+ References + Details

Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Use of estimates

Our financial statements are prepared in conformity with United States generally accepted accounting principles, requiring us to make estimates and assumptions that affect:

	-	the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements; and
	-	the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period.

Basis of presentation

In 2011, we adopted the provisions of new accounting standards. See Note 14 for further information. All periods presented reflect these changes.

Revenue recognition

Research and development

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred. Research and development costs were $401 million in 2011, $366 million in 2010, and $325 million in 2009.

Cash equivalents

We consider all highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.

Inventories

Allowance for bad debts

Property, plant, and equipment

Goodwill

Finite-lived intangible assets

Impairment of long-lived assets

Income taxes

We recognize interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits within the provision for income taxes on continuing operations in our consolidated statements of operations.

Undistributed earnings of non-United States subsidiaries

Derivative instruments

	-	the change in fair value of the hedged assets, liabilities, or firm commitments through earnings; or
	-	recognized in other comprehensive income until the hedged item is recognized in earnings.

Foreign currency translation

Stock-based compensation

Business Segment and Geographic Information (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Business Segment and Geographic Information [Abstract]

Information on business segments

Operations by business segment
	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Revenue:
Completion and Production	$	15,143		$	9,997		$	7,419
Drilling and Evaluation		9,686			7,976			7,256
Total revenue	$	24,829		$	17,973		$	14,675

Operating income:
Completion and Production	$	3,733		$	2,032		$	1,016
Drilling and Evaluation		1,403			1,213			1,183
Total operations		5,136			3,245			2,199
Corporate and other		(399	)		(236	)		(205	)
Total operating income	$	4,737		$	3,009		$	1,994
Interest expense, net of interest income	$	(263	)	$	(297	)	$	(285	)
Other, net		(25	)		(57	)		(27	)
Income from continuing operations before
income taxes	$	4,449		$	2,655		$	1,682
Capital expenditures:
Completion and Production	$	1,669		$	1,010		$	900
Drilling and Evaluation		1,231			1,058			959
Corporate and other		53			1			5
Total	$	2,953		$	2,069		$	1,864
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization:
Completion and Production	$	680		$	537		$	437
Drilling and Evaluation		676			578			490
Corporate and other		3			4			4
Total	$	1,359		$	1,119		$	931

Reconciliation of assets from segments to consolidated

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Total assets:
Completion and Production	$	10,953	$	7,815
Drilling and Evaluation		8,212		7,088
Shared assets		1,249		942
Corporate and other		3,263		2,452
Total	$	23,677	$	18,297

Schedule of revenue and long-lived assets by geographic area

Operations by geographic area
	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010		2009
Revenue:
United States	$	13,548	$	8,209	$	5,248
Other countries		11,281		9,764		9,427
Total	$	24,829	$	17,973	$	14,675

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Long-lived assets:
United States	$	6,692	$	5,389
Other countries		5,189		3,821
Total	$	11,881	$	9,210

- Definition

Tabular disclosure of the profit or loss and total assets for each reportable segment. An entity discloses certain information on each reportable segment if the amounts (a) are included in the measure of segment profit or loss reviewed by the chief operating decision maker or (b) are otherwise regularly provided to the chief operating decision maker, even if not included in that measure of segment profit or loss.

+ References + Details

Receivables (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Receivables [Abstract]

Allowance for bad debts

	Balance at		Charged to
Millions of dollars	Beginning of		Costs and				Balance at
Allowance for bad debts	Period		Expenses		Write-Offs		End of Period
Year ended December 31, 2009:	$	60	$	37	$	(7)	$	90
Year ended December 31, 2010:		90		5		(4)		91
Year ended December 31, 2011:		91		53		(7)		137

Inventories (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Inventories [Abstract]

Inventories

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Finished products and parts	$	1,801	$	1,369
Raw materials and supplies		673		496
Work in process		96		75
Total	$	2,570	$	1,940

Property, Plant, and Equipment (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Property, Plant, and Equipment [Abstract]

Property, plant, and equipment

		December 31
Millions of dollars		2011		2010
Land	$	123	$	105
Buildings and property improvements		1,609		1,438
Machinery, equipment, and other		13,856		11,363
Total		15,588		12,906
Less accumulated depreciation		7,096		6,064
Net property, plant, and equipment	$	8,492	$	6,842

Percentages of building and property improvements, and total machinery, equipment and other, excluding oil and natural gas investments, depreciated over useful lives

	Buildings and Property
	Improvements
	2011		2010
1 - 10 years		13%		13%
11 - 20 years		47%		46%
21 - 30 years		13%		13%
31 - 40 years		27%		28%

	Machinery, Equipment
	and Other
	2011		2010
1 - 5 years		19%		19%
6 - 10 years		75%		74%
11 - 20 years		6%		7%

Debt (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Debt [Abstract]

Schedule of long-term debt

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
6.15% senior notes due September 2019	$	997	$	997
7.45% senior notes due September 2039		995		995
6.7% senior notes due September 2038		800		800
3.25% senior notes due November 2021		498		-
4.5% senior notes due November 2041		498		-
5.9% senior notes due September 2018		400		400
7.6% senior debentures due August 2096		293		293
8.75% senior debentures due February 2021		184		184
Other		155		155
Total long-term debt (due 2017 and thereafter)	$	4,820	$	3,824

- Definition

Tabular disclosure of long-debt instruments or arrangements, including identification, terms, features, collateral requirements and other information necessary to a fair presentation. These are debt arrangements that originally required repayment more than twelve months after issuance or greater than the normal operating cycle of the entity, if longer.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher SEC
-Name Regulation S-X (SX)
-Number 210
-Section 02
-Paragraph 22
-Article 5

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 835
-SubTopic 30
-Section 45
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6451184&loc=d3e28551-108399

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 835
-SubTopic 30
-Section 45
-Paragraph 1A
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6451184&loc=d3e28541-108399

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 505
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6928386&loc=d3e21475-112644

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 210
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.22)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 505
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 6
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6928386&loc=d3e21506-112644

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 505
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 8
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6928386&loc=d3e21538-112644

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 505
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 7
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6928386&loc=d3e21521-112644

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 835
-SubTopic 30
-Section 55
-Paragraph 8
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6584090&loc=d3e28878-108400

Reference 10: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 942
-SubTopic 470
-Section 50
-Paragraph 3
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6479336&loc=d3e64711-112823

Reference 11: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 235
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.4-08.(e),(f))
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6881521&loc=d3e23780-122690

+ Details

Income Taxes (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Income Taxes [Abstract]

Components of the (provision)/benefit for income taxes on continuing operations

	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Current income taxes:
Federal	$	(1,026	)	$	(400	)	$	30
Foreign		(334	)		(287	)		(250	)
State		(109	)		(42	)		(24	)
Total current		(1,469	)		(729	)		(244	)
Deferred income taxes:
Federal		(28	)		(124	)		(237	)
Foreign		57			3			(31	)
State		1			(3	)		(6	)
Total deferred		30			(124	)		(274	)
Provision for income taxes	$	(1,439	)	$	(853	)	$	(518	)

United States and foreign components of income from continuing operations before income taxes

	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010		2009
United States	$	4,040	$	1,918	$	589
Foreign		409		737		1,093
Total	$	4,449	$	2,655	$	1,682

Reconciliations between the actual provision for income taxes on continuing operations and that computed by applying the US statutory rate to income from continuing operations before income taxes

	Year Ended December 31
	2011			2010			2009
United States statutory rate		35.0	%		35.0	%		35.0	%
Domestic manufacturing deduction		(2.1	)		(1.8	)		-
Adjustments of prior year taxes		(1.3	)		(1.2	)		(2.1	)
Impact of foreign income taxed at different rates		(0.5	)		(1.3	)		(3.3	)
Other impact of foreign operations		(0.4	)		(1.3	)		(0.4	)
Impact of devaluation of Venezuelan Bol�var Fuerte		-			0.8			-
Other items, net		1.6			1.9			1.6
Total effective tax rate on continuing operations		32.3	%		32.1	%		30.8	%

Primary components of deferred tax assets and liabilities

	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Gross deferred tax assets:
Employee compensation and benefits	$	345	$	313
Net operating loss carryforwards		139		52
Accrued liabilities		64		77
Insurance accruals		48		47
Software revenue recognition		44		50
Inventory		30		28
Capitalized research and experimentation		29		44
Other		110		106
Total gross deferred tax assets		809		717
Gross deferred tax liabilities:
Depreciation and amortization		648		631
Joint ventures, partnerships, and unconsolidated affiliates		38		48
Other		68		57
Total gross deferred tax liabilities		754		736
Valuation allowances - net operating loss carryforwards		44		22
Net deferred income tax asset (liability)	$	11	$	(41	)

Rollforward of unrecognized tax benefits and associated interest and penalties

		Unrecognized		Interest
Millions of dollars		Tax Benefits		and Penalties
Balance at January 1, 2009	$	300	$	43
Change in prior year tax positions		(42)		(6)
Change in current year tax positions		23		2
Cash settlements with taxing authorities		(7)		(1)
Lapse of statute of limitations		(11)		(9)
Balance at December 31, 2009	$	263	$	29
Change in prior year tax positions		(74)		7
Change in current year tax positions		19		2
Cash settlements with taxing authorities		(28)		(5)
Lapse of statute of limitations		(3)		(1)
Balance at December 31, 2010	$	177(a)	$	32
Change in prior year tax positions		38		41
Change in current year tax positions		5		1
Cash settlements with taxing authorities		(12)		(3)
Lapse of statute of limitations		(3)		(2)
Balance at December 31, 2011	$	205(a)(b)	$	69

(a)		Includes $67 million as of December 31, 2011 and $62 million as of December 31, 2010 in amounts to be settled in accordance with our Tax Sharing Agreement with KBR and foreign unrecognized tax benefits that would give rise to a United States tax credit. See Note 7 for further information. The remaining balance of $138 million as of December 31, 2011 and $115 million as of December 31, 2010, if resolved in our favor, would positively impact the effective tax rate and, therefore, be recognized as additional tax benefits in our statement of operations.
(b)		Includes $42 million that could be resolved within the next 12 months.

- Definition

Tabular disclosure of tax positions taken in the tax returns filed or to be filed for which it is more likely than not that the tax position will not be sustained upon examination by taxing authorities (i.e., uncertain tax positions) and other types of income tax contingencies, including: (1) the policy on classification of interest and penalties; (2) a tabular reconciliation of the total amounts of unrecognized tax benefits at the beginning and end of the period; the total amount(s) of: (3) unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would affect the effective tax rate, and (4) interest and penalties recognized in each of the income statement and balance sheet; (5) for positions for which it is reasonably possible that the total amounts unrecognized will significantly change within 12 months of the reporting date the: (i) nature of the uncertainty, (ii) nature of the event that could occur that would cause the change, and (iii) an estimate of the range of the reasonably possible change or a statement that an estimate of the range cannot be made; and (6) a description of tax years that remain subject to examination by major tax jurisdictions.

+ References + Details

Shareholders' Equity and Stock Incentive Plans (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Shareholders Equity And Stock Incentive Plans [Abstract]

Summary of common stock and other shareholders' equity activity

	Company Shareholders' Equity
			Paid-in
			Capital in									Accumulated			Noncontrolling
			Excess									Other			Interest in
	Common		of Par			Treasury			Retained			Comprehensive			Consolidated
Millions of dollars	Shares		Value			Stock			Earnings			Income (Loss)			Subsidiaries		Total
Balance at December 31, 2008	$	2,666	$	484		$	(5,251	)	$	10,041		$	(215	)	$	19	$	7,744
Cash dividends paid		-		-			-			(324	)		-			-		(324	)
Stock plans		3		(51	)		266			-			-			-		218
Common shares purchased		-		-			(17	)		-			-			-		(17	)
Tax loss from exercise of options and
restricted stock		-		(22	)		-			-			-			-		(22	)
Other		-		-			-			1			-			-		1
Total dividends and other transactions with
shareholders		3		(73	)		249			(323	)		-			-		(144	)
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income		-		-			-			1,145			-			10		1,155
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		-		-			-			-			(5	)		-		(5	)
Defined benefit and other postretirement
plans, net		-		-			-			-			2			-		2
Net unrealized gains on investments, net of
tax provision of $3		-		-			-			-			5			-		5
Total comprehensive income		-		-			-			1,145			2			10		1,157
Balance at December 31, 2009	$	2,669	$	411		$	(5,002	)	$	10,863		$	(213	)	$	29	$	8,757
Cash dividends paid		-		-			-			(327	)		-			-		(327	)
Stock plans		5		(37	)		252			-			-			-		220
Common shares purchased		-		-			(141	)		-			-			-		(141	)
Tax loss from exercise of
options and restricted stock		-		(18	)		-			-			-			-		(18	)
Other		-		-			-			-			-			(21)		(21	)
Total dividends and other transactions
with shareholders		5		(55	)		111			(327	)		-			(21)		(287	)
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		-		(17	)		120			-			-			-		103
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income		-		-			-			1,835			-			7		1,842
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		-		-			-			-			(1	)		-		(1	)
Defined benefit and other postretirement
plans adjustments, net		-		-			-			-			(26	)		(1)		(27	)
Total comprehensive income		-		-			-			1,835			(27	)		6		1,814
Balance at December 31, 2010	$	2,674	$	339		$	(4,771	)	$	12,371		$	(240	)	$	14	$	10,387
Cash dividends paid		-		-			-			(330	)		-			-		(330	)
Stock plans		9		82			267			-			-			-		358
Common shares purchased		-		-			(43	)		-			-			-		(43	)
Tax loss from exercise of
options and restricted stock		-		34			-			-			-			-		34
Total dividends and other transactions
with shareholders		9		116			224			(330	)		-			-		19
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income		-		-			-			2,839			-			5		2,844
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Defined benefit and other postretirement
plans adjustments, net		-		-			-			-			(33	)		(1)		(34	)
Total comprehensive income		-		-			-			2,839			(33	)		4		2,810
Balance at December 31, 2011	$	2,683	$	455		$	(4,547	)	$	14,880		$	(273	)	$	18	$	13,216

Schedule of accumulated other comprehensive (loss)

Accumulated other comprehensive loss	December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Cumulative translation adjustment	$	(66	)	$	(66	)	$	(65	)
Defined benefit and other postretirement liability adjustments (a)		(208	)		(175	)		(149	)
Unrealized gains on investments		1			1			1
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss	$	(273	)	$	(240	)	$	(213	)

(a) Included net actuarial losses for our international pension plans of $184 million at December 31, 2011, $170 million at December 31, 2010, and $149 million at December 31, 2009.

Schedule of shares of common stock

Shares of common stock	December 31
Millions of shares	2011			2010			2009
Issued		1,073			1,069			1,067
In treasury		(152	)		(159	)		(165	)
Total shares of common stock outstanding		921			910			902

Stock-based compensation costs

	Year Ended December 31
Millions of dollars	2011			2010			2009
Stock-based compensation cost	$	198		$	158		$	143
Tax benefit	$	(61	)	$	(50	)	$	(46	)
Stock-based compensation cost, net of tax	$	137		$	108		$	97

Stock options activity

			Weighted		Weighted
			Average		Average		Aggregate
	Number		Exercise		Remaining		Intrinsic
	of Shares		Price		Contractual		Value
Stock Options	(in millions)		per Share		Term (years)		(in millions)
Outstanding at January 1, 2011		15.8	$	26.79
Granted		3.4		43.87
Exercised		(3.9)		22.05
Forfeited/expired		(0.4)		33.54
Outstanding at December 31, 2011		14.9	$	31.74		6.7	$	94

Exercisable at December 31, 2011		8.5	$	29.07		5.3	$	68

Assumptions and fair values of options granted

Year Ended December 31
	2011		2010		2009
Expected term (in years)		5.20		5.27		5.18
Expected volatility		40%		40%		53%
Expected dividend yield		0.69 - 1.01%		0.99 - 1.71%		1.23 - 2.55%
Risk-free interest rate		0.93 - 2.29%		1.20 - 2.78%		1.38 - 2.47%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share	$	15.61	$	9.94	$	9.36

	Offering period July 1 through December 31
	2011			2010			2009
Expected term (in years)		0.5			0.5			0.5
Expected volatility		34	%		43	%		80	%
Expected dividend yield		0.70	%		1.44	%		1.74	%
Risk-free interest rate		0.10	%		0.21	%		0.33	%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share	$	12.57		$	6.72		$	7.66

	Offering period January 1 through June 30
	2011			2010			2009
Expected term (in years)		0.5			0.5			0.5
Expected volatility		43	%		48	%		71	%
Expected dividend yield		0.88	%		1.15	%		1.85	%
Risk-free interest rate		0.20	%		0.19	%		0.27	%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share	$	10.99		$	8.81		$	6.69

Restricted stock awards activity

			Weighted Average
	Number of Shares		Grant-Date Fair
Restricted Stock	(in millions)		Value per Share
Nonvested shares at January 1, 2011		13.3	$	28.10
Granted		5.4		43.35
Vested		(3.7)		28.81
Forfeited		(0.8)		32.59
Nonvested shares at December 31, 2011		14.2	$	33.45

Income per Share (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Income per Share [Abstract]

Reconciliation of the number of shares used for the basic and diluted income per share calculations

Millions of shares	2011		2010		2009
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding		918		908		900
Dilutive effect of stock options		4		3		2
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding		922		911		902

Retirement Plans (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Retirement Plans [Abstract]

Amounts recognized on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, and projected and accumulated benefit obligations in excess of plan assets

Millions of dollars	2011		2010
Amounts recognized on the Consolidated Balance Sheets
Accrued employee compensation and benefits	$	10	$	15
Employee compensation and benefits		213		202
Pension plans in which projected benefit
obligation exceeded plan assets at December 31
Projected benefit obligation	$	928	$	902
Fair value of plan assets		705		685
Pension plans in which accumulated benefit
obligation exceeded plan assets at December 31
Accumulated benefit obligation	$	784	$	764
Fair value of plan assets		621		614

Fair value of pension plan assets by category

	Quoted Prices		Significant
	in Active		Observable		Significant
	Markets for		Inputs for		Unobservable
Millions of dollars	Identical Assets		Similar Assets		Inputs		Total
Common/collective trust funds (a)
Equity funds	$	-	$	241	$	-	$	241
Bond funds		-		110		-		110
Balanced funds		-		12		-		12
Corporate bonds		-		89		-		89
United States equity securities		67		-		-		67
Non-United States equity securities		64		-		-		64
Other assets		15		16		91		122
Fair value of plan assets at December 31, 2011	$	146	$	468	$	91	$	705

Common/collective trust funds (a)
Equity funds	$	-	$	155	$	-	$	155
Bond funds		-		97		-		97
Balanced funds		-		14		-		14
Non-United States equity securities		133		-		-		133
Corporate bonds		-		84		-		84
United States equity securities		41		-		-		41
Other assets		82		6		79		167
Fair value of plan assets at December 31, 2010	$	256	$	356	$	79	$	691

(a)	Strategies are generally to invest in equity or debt securities, or a combination thereof, that match or outperform certain predefined indices.

Weighted-average assumptions for principal retirement and other postretirement benefit plans

Certain weighted-average actuarial assumptions used to determine benefit obligations of our international pension plans at December 31 were as follows:

	2011			2010
Discount rate		5.2	%		5.7	%
Rate of compensation increase		5.4	%		5.2	%

Certain weighted-average actuarial assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit cost of our international pension plans for the years ended December 31 were as follows:

	2011	2010	2009
Discount rate	7.1%	7.9%	7.4%
Expected long-term return on plan assets	5.7%	5.6%	5.6%
Rate of compensation increase	6.2%	6.4%	5.7%

Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies (Details) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2010 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2009 USD ($)
Description of Company and Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract]
Number of business segments	2
Revenue recognition [Abstract]
Standard contract period for revenue recognition of maintenance and support fees (in years)	1
Research and development [Abstract]
Research and development costs	$ 401	$ 366	$ 325
Cash equivalents [Abstract]
Cash equivalents, maximum maturity (in months)	3
Goodwill and other intangible assets [Abstract]
Goodwill acquired during the period	$ 424
Finite-lived intangible assets [Abstract]
Minimum useful life of finite-lived intangible assets (in years)	3
Maximum useful life of finite-lived intangible assets (in years)	20
Completion And Production [Member]
Goodwill and other intangible assets [Abstract]
Goodwill acquired during the period	$ 411
Drilling And Evaluation [Member]
Goodwill and other intangible assets [Abstract]
Goodwill acquired during the period	$ 13

Business Segment and Geographic Information (Details) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2010 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2009 USD ($)
Business Segment and Geographic Information [Abstract]
Number of business segments	2
Revenue:
Total revenue	$ 24,829	$ 17,973	$ 14,675
Operating income:
Total operating income	4,737	3,009	1,994
Interest expense, net of interest income	(263)	(297)	(285)
Other, net	(25)	(57)	(27)
Income from continuing operations before income taxes	4,449	2,655	1,682
Capital expenditures:
Total capital expenditures	2,953	2,069	1,864
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization:
Total depreciation, depletion and amortization	1,359	1,119	931
Total assets:
Total assets	23,677	18,297
Operations by geographic area, Revenue:
United States	13,548	8,209	5,248
Other countries	11,281	9,764	9,427
Total revenue	24,829	17,973	14,675
Operations by geographic area, Long-lived assets:
United States	6,692	5,389
Other countries	5,189	3,821
Long-lived assets	11,881	9,210
Completion and Production [Member]
Revenue:
Total revenue	15,143	9,997	7,419
Operating income:
Total operating income	3,733	2,032	1,016
Capital expenditures:
Total capital expenditures	1,669	1,010	900
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization:
Total depreciation, depletion and amortization	680	537	437
Total assets:
Total assets	10,953	7,815
Operations by geographic area, Revenue:
Total revenue	15,143	9,997	7,419
Drilling and Evaluation [Member]
Revenue:
Total revenue	9,686	7,976	7,256
Operating income:
Total operating income	1,403	1,213	1,183
Capital expenditures:
Total capital expenditures	1,231	1,058	959
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization:
Total depreciation, depletion and amortization	676	578	490
Total assets:
Total assets	8,212	7,088
Operations by geographic area, Revenue:
Total revenue	9,686	7,976	7,256
Total Operating Segments [Member]
Operating income:
Total operating income	5,136	3,245	2,199
Shared assets [Member]
Total assets:
Total assets	1,249	942
Corporate and other [Member]
Operating income:
Total operating income	(399)	(236)	(205)
Capital expenditures:
Total capital expenditures	53	1	5
Depreciation, depletion, and amortization:
Total depreciation, depletion and amortization	3	4	$ 4
Total assets:
Total assets	$ 3,263	$ 2,452

Receivables (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
Receivables (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Allowance for bad debts [Roll forward]
Balance at Beginning of Period	$ 91	$ 90	$ 60
Charged to Costs and Expenses	53	5	37
Write-Offs	(7)	(4)	(7)
Balance at End of Period	$ 137	$ 91	$ 90
Geographic Concentration Risk [Member] \| United States [Member] \| Gross Trade Receivables [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Concentration risk, percentage (in hundredths)	45.00%	36.00%
Geographic Concentration Risk [Member] \| Other Countries [Member] \| Gross Trade Receivables [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Maximum percentage of gross trade receivables from one geographic segment (in hundredths)	10.00%	10.00%
Customer Concentration Risk [Member] \| Gross Trade Receivables [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Maximum percentage of gross trade receivables from one customer (in hundredths)	10.00%	10.00%

Inventories (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010
LIFO method related items [Abstract]
LIFO inventory amount	$ 160	$ 108
LIFO reserve	36	34
Inventories, net [Abstract]
Finished products and parts	1,801	1,369
Raw materials and supplies	673	496
Work in process	96	75
Total	2,570	1,940
Obsolescence reserves	$ 108	$ 88

- Definition

The amount of the valuation account as of the balance sheet date which reduces the carrying amount of inventory to net realizable value; takes into consideration such factors as market value, excessive quantities based on expected sales, technological obsolescence, and shrinkage. May also provide for estimated product returns or price concessions pertaining to product cost.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher SEC
-Name Regulation S-X (SX)
-Number 210
-Section 02
-Paragraph 6
-Subparagraph a
-Article 5

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 43
-Chapter 3
-Section A
-Paragraph 9
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 43
-Chapter 4
-Paragraph 14
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher AICPA
-Name Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB)
-Number 43
-Chapter 4
-Paragraph 8, 9, 14
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher SEC
-Name Regulation S-X (SX)
-Number 210
-Section 09
-Article 12

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 210
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (SX 210.5-02.6(a))
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6877327&loc=d3e13212-122682

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 330
-SubTopic 10
-Section 35
-Paragraph 2
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6386567&loc=d3e3927-108312

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 330
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 2
-Subparagraph (SAB TOPIC 5.BB)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6386940&loc=d3e100047-122729

Reference 9: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 235
-SubTopic 10
-Section S99
-Paragraph 4
-Subparagraph (SX 210.12-09)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6881521&loc=d3e24092-122690

+ Details

Property, Plant, and Equipment (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Gross property, plant and equipment	$ 15,588	$ 12,906
Less accumulated depreciation	7,096	6,064
Net property, plant, and equipment	8,492	6,842
Land [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Gross property, plant and equipment	123	105
Buildings and property improvements [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Gross property, plant and equipment	$ 1,609	$ 1,438
Buildings and property improvements [Member] \| 1 through 10 Years [Member]
Property, plant and equipment useful lives and total depreciated percentages [Abstract]
Ratio of depreciation by useful asset life over total depreciation of asset (in hundredths)	13.00%	13.00%
Buildings and property improvements [Member] \| 11 through 20 Years [Member]
Property, plant and equipment useful lives and total depreciated percentages [Abstract]
Ratio of depreciation by useful asset life over total depreciation of asset (in hundredths)	47.00%	46.00%
Buildings and property improvements [Member] \| 21 through 30 Years [Member]
Property, plant and equipment useful lives and total depreciated percentages [Abstract]
Ratio of depreciation by useful asset life over total depreciation of asset (in hundredths)	13.00%	13.00%
Buildings and property improvements [Member] \| 31 through 40 Years [Member]
Property, plant and equipment useful lives and total depreciated percentages [Abstract]
Ratio of depreciation by useful asset life over total depreciation of asset (in hundredths)	27.00%	28.00%
Machinery, equipment, and other [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Gross property, plant and equipment	$ 13,856	$ 11,363
Machinery, equipment, and other [Member] \| 1 through 5 Years [Member]
Property, plant and equipment useful lives and total depreciated percentages [Abstract]
Ratio of depreciation by useful asset life over total depreciation of asset (in hundredths)	19.00%	19.00%
Machinery, equipment, and other [Member] \| 6 through 10 Years [Member]
Property, plant and equipment useful lives and total depreciated percentages [Abstract]
Ratio of depreciation by useful asset life over total depreciation of asset (in hundredths)	75.00%	74.00%
Machinery, equipment, and other [Member] \| 11 through 20 Years [Member]
Property, plant and equipment useful lives and total depreciated percentages [Abstract]
Ratio of depreciation by useful asset life over total depreciation of asset (in hundredths)	6.00%	7.00%

Debt (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
Debt (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Total long-term debt (due 2017 and thereafter)	$ 4,820	$ 3,824
Debt instrument call feature description	<div>We may redeem all of our senior notes from time to time or all of the notes of each series at any time at the applicable redemption prices, plus accrued and unpaid interest.</div>
Revolving Credit Facility [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Line of credit facility, maximum borrowing capacity	$ 2,000
Previous Line Of Credit [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Line of credit facility, maximum borrowing capacity		$ 1,200
Senior Notes Due 2019 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	6.15%	6.15%
Maturity date	September 2019	September 2019
Total long-term debt	$ 997	$ 997
Senior Notes Due 2039 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	7.45%	7.45%
Maturity date	September 2039	September 2039
Total long-term debt	$ 995	$ 995
Senior Notes Due 2038 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	6.70%	6.70%
Maturity date	September 2038	September 2038
Total long-term debt	$ 800	$ 800
Senior Notes Due Nov 2021 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	3.25%
Maturity date	November 2021
Total long-term debt	$ 498	0
Senior Notes Due 2041 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	4.50%
Maturity date	November 2041
Total long-term debt	$ 498	$ 0
Senior Notes Due 2018 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	5.90%	5.90%
Maturity date	September 2018	September 2018
Total long-term debt	$ 400	$ 400
Senior Debentures Due 2096 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	7.60%	7.60%
Maturity date	August 2096	August 2096
Total long-term debt	$ 293	$ 293
Debt instruments non-call feature description	<div>may not be redeemed prior to maturity</div>
Senior Debentures Due Feb 2021 [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Interest rate (in hundredths)	8.75%	8.75%
Maturity date	February 2021	February 2021
Total long-term debt	$ 184	$ 184
Debt instruments non-call feature description	<div>may not be redeemed prior to maturity</div>
Other long-term debt [Member]
Debt Instrument [Line Items]
Total long-term debt	$ 155	$ 155

KBR Separation (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	3 Months Ended
KBR Separation (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	Sep. 30, 2011	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010
KBR Separation [Abstract]
Arbitration award issued against KBR	$ 201
Beneficial Interest in TSKJ of owners (in hundredths)		25.00%
KBR Beneficial Interest in MWKL (in hundredths)		55.00%
KBR indemnities and guarantees excluding amounts related to the DOJ and SEC settlements		$ 201	$ 63

- Definition

Overall income (loss) from a disposal group that is classified as a component of the entity, before income tax, reported as a separate component of income before extraordinary items. Includes the following (before income tax): income (loss) from operations during the phase-out period, gain (loss) on disposal, provision (or any reversals of earlier provisions) for loss on disposal, and adjustments of a prior period gain (loss) on disposal.

+ References + Details

Commitments and Contingencies (Details)	3 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies (Details)	Sep. 30, 2011 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2011 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2010 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2009 USD ($)
Litigation [Abstract]
Arbitration award issued against KBR	$ 201,000,000
Environmental [Abstract]
Accrued liabilities for environmental matters		$ 81,000,000	$ 47,000,000
Number of superfund sites		9
Accrued liabilities for superfund sites		$ 7,000,000
Leases [Abstract]
Rental expense, net of sublease rentals		735,000,000	$ 591,000,000	$ 528,000,000
Future rentals on noncancellable operating leases [Abstract]
2012		207,000,000
2013		166,000,000
2014		112,000,000
2015		87,000,000
2016		64,000,000
Thereafter		$ 164,000,000
The Gulf of Mexico/Macondo well incident [Member]
Loss Contingencies [Line Items]
Federal government estimate of oil discharged from the well (in barrels)		4.9
Number of fatalities		11
Number Of Months That Settlement Activities Have Been Ongoing		9
Number of independent bureaus created to replace the Minerals Management Service		2
Number of parties-of-interest in the Marine Board investigation		16
Maximum per day assessment for negligent discharges under the CWA		$ 50,000
Maximum per day assessment for knowing discharges under the CWA		100,000
Maximum per day assessment for negligent endangerment under the CWA		2,000,000
Maximum per barrel civil penalty for strict liability under the CWA		1,100
Maximum per barrel civil penalty for gross negligence under the CWA		4,300
Liability cap under the OPA in addition to the full cost of removal of the discharged oil		75,000,000
Maximum fine per bird killed under the MBTA		$ 15,000
Maximum imprisonment under the MBTA (in months)		6
Maximum civil penalty per violation under the ESA		$ 25,000
Maximum criminal penalty per violation under the ESA		$ 50,000
Anadarko interest in Macondo well		25.00%
DOJ minimum estimate of removal costs and damages to the United Sates due to discharges of oil into the Gulf of Mexico		$ 75,000,000
Number of days of advance notice to DOJ of any event that may involve substantial transfers of cash or other corporate assets outside the ordinary course of business (in days)		30
Number of key findings related to possible causes of the well incident		8
Number of safeguards that could have contained hydrocarbon pressures		3
Number of centralizers used by BP		6
Number of general root causes of the well incident identified by the Investigation Report		2
Number of pods with depleted battery		1
Number of cement barriers		1
Maximum per day fine for violating federal regulations related to INCs		$ 35,000
Number Of Days To File Notice After Conclusion Of Mdl		15
Number of days to appeal INCs issued by the BSEE		60
Number of minutes taken to note loss of well control		50
Litigation [Abstract]
Minimum number of environmental class-action complaints		400
Minimum number of wrongful death and personal injury multiple plaintiff lawsuits		9
Number of decedents in personal injury lawsuits		4
Number of allegedly injured persons in personal injury lawsuits		21
Minimum number of lawsuits naming the company		6
Number of Louisiana lawsuits not consolidated		2
Number of Louisiana lawsuits not consolidated that are proceeding in Louisiana federal court		1
Number of Texas state court lawsuits not consolidated		2
Number Of Lawsuits In Florida State Court Not Yet Served		4
Number of lawsuits in Florida federal court not consolidated		2
Number of Mexican states included in pollution complaint		3
Number of Louisiana parishes included in pollution complaint		10
Number of proceedings treated as associated cases		2
Number Of Phases Involved In Limitation Action Trial		3
Interest of MOEX in Macondo well (in hundreths)		10.00%
Indemnification and insurance [Abstract]
Total amount of general liability insurance program		$ 600,000,000
Pre-tax charge recognized by BP as a result of the Macondo well incident		40,000,000,000
Legal fees and related expenses covered by insurance		76,000,000
Barracuda-Caratinga arbitration [Member]
Litigation [Abstract]
Petrobras arbitration claim against KBR		$ 220,000,000
Securities and related litigation [Member]
Litigation [Abstract]
Number of similar class action lawsuits that were later consolidated into one suit		20
Shareholder derivative cases [Member]
Litigation [Abstract]
Number of shareholder derivative lawsuits		2
Duncan, Oklahoma environmental matter [Member]
Environmental [Abstract]
Accrued liabilities for environmental matters		$ 35,000,000
Number Of Years Passed Since Alleged Release		25
Financial agreements [Member]
Guarantee arrangements [Abstract]
Guarantee arrangements outstanding		$ 1,700,000,000
Venezuela surety bonds [Member]
Guarantee arrangements [Abstract]
Guarantee arrangements outstanding		$ 292,000,000

Income Taxes (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
Income Taxes (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Current income taxes:
Federal	$ (1,026)	$ (400)	$ 30
Foreign	(334)	(287)	(250)
State	(109)	(42)	(24)
Total current	(1,469)	(729)	(244)
Deferred income taxes:
Federal	(28)	(124)	(237)
Foreign	57	3	(31)
State	1	(3)	(6)
Total deferred	30	(124)	(274)
Provision for income taxes	(1,439)	(853)	(518)
The United States and foreign components of income from continuing operations before income taxes [Abstract]
United States	4,040	1,918	589
Foreign	409	737	1,093
Income from continuing operations before income taxes	$ 4,449	$ 2,655	$ 1,682
Reconciliations between the actual provision for income taxes on continuing operations [Abstract]
United States statutory rate (in hundredths)	35.00%	35.00%	35.00%
Domestic manufacturing deduction (in hundredths)	(2.10%)	(1.80%)	0.00%
Impact of foreign income taxed at different rates (in hundredths)	(0.50%)	(1.30%)	(3.30%)
Adjustments of prior year taxes (in hundredths)	(1.30%)	(1.20%)	(2.10%)
Other impact of foreign operations (in hundredths)	(0.40%)	(1.30%)	(0.40%)
Impact of devaluation of Venezuelan Bolivar Fuerte (in hundredths)	0.00%	0.80%	0.00%
Other items, net (in hundredths)	1.60%	1.90%	1.60%
Total effective tax rate on continuing operations (in hundredths)	32.30%	32.10%	30.80%
Gross deferred tax assets:
Employee compensation and benefits	$ 345	$ 313
Accrued liabilities	64	77
Net operating loss carryforwards	139	52
Capitalized research and experimentation	29	44
Insurance accruals	48	47
Software revenue recognition	44	50
Inventory	30	28
Other	110	106
Total gross deferred tax assets	809	717
Gross deferred tax liabilities:
Depreciation and amortization	648	631
Joint ventures, partnerships, and unconsolidated affiliates	38	48
Other	68	57
Total gross deferred tax liabilities	754	736
Valuation allowances - net operating loss carryforwards	44	22
Net deferred income tax asset (liability)	11	(41)
Unrecognized tax benefits [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	177	263	$ 300
Change in prior year tax positions	38	(74)	(42)
Change in current year tax positions	5	19	23
Cash settlements with taxing authorities	(12)	(28)	(7)
Lapse of statute of limitations	(3)	(3)	(11)
Ending balance	205	177	263
Interest and penalties [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	32	29	43
Change in prior year tax positions	41	7	(6)
Change in current year tax positions	1	2	2
Cash settlements with taxing authorities	(3)	(5)	(1)
Lapse of statute of limitations	(2)	(1)	(9)
Ending balance	69	32	$ 29
Amounts to be settled in accordance with tax sharing agreement with KBR and foreign unrecognized tax benefits that would give rise to a United States tax credit	67	62
The remaining balance which if resolved favorably, would positively impact the effective tax rate, and therefore, be recognized as additional tax benefits in statements of operations	138	$ 115
Portion of unrecognized tax benefits that could be resolved within the next 12 months	42
Foreign Country [Member]
Operating Loss Carryforwards [Line Items]
Net operating loss carryforwards	346
Net operating loss carryforwards that expire	$ 211
Operating loss carryforwards, expiration dates	2012 through 2032
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) [Member]
Income Tax Examination [Line Items]
Income tax filings, years under review	2008 and 2009
Investments in Foreign Subsidiaries and Foreign Corporate Joint Ventures that are Essentially Permanent in Duration [Member]
Deferred Tax Liability Not Recognized [Line Items]
Deferred Tax Liability Not Recognized, Cumulative Amount of Temporary Difference	$ 4,100

Shareholders' Equity and Stock Incentive Plans, Shareholders' Equity Activity (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Increase (decrease) in shareholders' equity [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	$ 10,387	$ 8,757	$ 7,744
Cash dividends paid	(330)	(327)	(324)
Stock plans	358	220	218
Common shares repurchased	(43)	(141)	(17)
Tax benefit (loss) from exercise of options and restricted stock	34	(18)	(22)
Other		(21)	1
Total dividends and other transactions with shareholders	19	(287)	(144)
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		103
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income	2,844	1,842	1,155
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		(1)	(5)
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans, net	(34)	(27)	2
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax benefit/provision			5
Net unrealized losses on investments, tax provision (benefit)			3
Total comprehensive income	2,810	1,814	1,157
Ending balance	13,216	10,387	8,757
Common Shares [Member]
Increase (decrease) in shareholders' equity [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	2,674	2,669	2,666
Cash dividends paid	0	0	0
Stock plans	9	5	3
Common shares repurchased	0	0	0
Tax benefit (loss) from exercise of options and restricted stock	0	0	0
Other		0	0
Total dividends and other transactions with shareholders	9	5	3
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		0
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income	0	0	0
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		0	0
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans, net	0	0	0
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax benefit/provision			0
Total comprehensive income	0	0	0
Ending balance	2,683	2,674	2,669
Paid-in Capital in Excess of Par Value [Member]
Increase (decrease) in shareholders' equity [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	339	411	484
Cash dividends paid	0	0	0
Stock plans	82	(37)	(51)
Common shares repurchased	0	0	0
Tax benefit (loss) from exercise of options and restricted stock	34	(18)	(22)
Other		0	0
Total dividends and other transactions with shareholders	116	(55)	(73)
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		(17)
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income	0	0	0
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		0	0
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans, net	0	0	0
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax benefit/provision			0
Total comprehensive income	0	0	0
Ending balance	455	339	411
Treasury Stock [Member]
Increase (decrease) in shareholders' equity [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	(4,771)	(5,002)	(5,251)
Cash dividends paid	0	0	0
Stock plans	267	252	266
Common shares repurchased	(43)	(141)	(17)
Tax benefit (loss) from exercise of options and restricted stock	0	0	0
Other		0	0
Total dividends and other transactions with shareholders	224	111	249
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		120
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income	0	0	0
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		0	0
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans, net	0	0	0
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax benefit/provision			0
Total comprehensive income	0	0	0
Ending balance	(4,547)	(4,771)	(5,002)
Retained Earnings [Member]
Increase (decrease) in shareholders' equity [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	12,371	10,863	10,041
Cash dividends paid	(330)	(327)	(324)
Stock plans	0	0	0
Common shares repurchased	0	0	0
Tax benefit (loss) from exercise of options and restricted stock	0	0	0
Other		0	1
Total dividends and other transactions with shareholders	(330)	(327)	(323)
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		0
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income	2,839	1,835	1,145
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		0	0
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans, net	0	0	0
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax benefit/provision			0
Total comprehensive income	2,839	1,835	1,145
Ending balance	14,880	12,371	10,863
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) [Member]
Increase (decrease) in shareholders' equity [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	(240)	(213)	(215)
Cash dividends paid	0	0	0
Stock plans	0	0	0
Common shares repurchased	0	0	0
Tax benefit (loss) from exercise of options and restricted stock	0	0	0
Other		0	0
Total dividends and other transactions with shareholders	0	0	0
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		0
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income	0	0	0
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		(1)	(5)
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans, net	(33)	(26)	2
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax benefit/provision			5
Total comprehensive income	(33)	(27)	2
Ending balance	(273)	(240)	(213)
Noncontrolling Interest in Consolidated Subsidiaries [Member]
Increase (decrease) in shareholders' equity [Roll Forward]
Beginning balance	14	29	19
Cash dividends paid	0	0	0
Stock plans	0	0	0
Common shares repurchased	0	0	0
Tax benefit (loss) from exercise of options and restricted stock	0	0	0
Other		(21)	0
Total dividends and other transactions with shareholders	0	(21)	0
Treasury shares issued for acquisition		0
Comprehensive income (loss):
Net income	5	7	10
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		0	0
Defined benefit and other postretirement plans, net	(1)	(1)	0
Net unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax benefit/provision			0
Total comprehensive income	4	6	10
Ending balance	$ 18	$ 14	$ 29

Shareholders' Equity and Stock Incentive Plans, Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, Common Stock, and Preferred Stock (Details) - USD ($) $ / shares in Units, $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Schedule of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) [Abstract]
Cumulative translation adjustment	$ (66)	$ (66)	$ (65)
Defined benefit and other postretirement liability adjustments	(208)	(175)	(149)
Unrealized gains on investments	1	1	1
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss	$ (273)	$ (240)	$ (213)
Class of Stock [Line Items]
Issued (in shares)	1,073	1,069	1,067
In treasury (in shares)	(152)	(159)	(165)
Total shares of common stock outstanding (in shares)	921	910	902
Common stock disclosures [Abstract]
Stock authorized to repurchase	$ 5,000
Stock remaining available for repurchase at period end	$ 1,700
Number of shares of common stock repurchased from inception (in shares)	96,000,000
Approximate value of shares of common stock repurchased from inception	$ 3,300
Average price per share of common stock that has been repurchased from inception (in dollars per share)	$ 34.22
Repurchase of shares during the period (in shares)	0
Preferred stock [Abstract]
Number of shares of preferred stock that are authorized for issuance (in shares)	5,000,000
Number of shares of preferred stock that are issued at period end (in shares)	0
International [Member]
Defined Benefit Plan Disclosure [Line Items]
Net actuarial losses	$ 184	$ 170	$ 149

Shareholders' Equity and Stock Incentive Plans, Stock Incentive Plans (Details) - USD ($) $ / shares in Units, $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Stock Plan [Member]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation cost	$ 198	$ 158	$ 143
Tax benefit	(61)	(50)	(46)
Stock-based compensation cost, net of tax	$ 137	$ 108	97
Number of shares reserved for issuance to recipient (in shares)	133,000,000
Number of shares available for future grants (in shares)	14,000,000
Fair value assumptions and methodology [Abstract]
Number of shares of restricted stock issued to non-employee directors (in shares)	19,395
Stock options [Member]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Quarter of the year that stock options are generally issued	second
Vesting period of stock options to employees - minimum (in years)	3
Vesting period of stock options to employees - maximum (in years)	4
Expiration from the grant date of the award (in years)	10
Share-based payment award, options, outstanding [Roll Forward]
Outstanding at beginning of period (in shares)	15,800,000
Granted (in shares)	3,400,000
Exercised (in shares)	(3,900,000)
Forfeited/expired (in shares)	(400,000)
Outstanding at end of period (in shares)	14,900,000	15,800,000
Share based payment award, options, additional disclosures [Abstract]
Outstanding, weighted average exercise price - beginning of period (in dollars per share)	$ 26.79
Granted, Weighted average exercise price (in dollars per share)	43.87
Exercised, weighted average exercise price (in dollars per share)	22.05
Forfeited/expired, weighted average exercise price (in dollars per share)	33.54
Outstanding , weighted average exercise price - end of period (in dollars per share)	$ 31.74	$ 26.79
Weighted average remaining contractual term at end of period (in years)	6.7
Aggregate intrinsic value options outstanding end of period	$ 94
Number of shares exercisable at period end (in shares)	8,500,000
Weighted average exercise price - exercisable at period end (in dollars per share)	$ 29.07
Weighted average remaining contractual term - exercisable at period end (in years)	5.3
Aggregate intrinsic value - exercisable at period end	$ 68
Intrinsic value of options exercised during the period	102	$ 38	10
Employee service share based compensation, aggregate disclosures [Abstract]
Unrecognized compensation cost - nonvested awards at period end	$ 55
Weighted average period unrecognized compensation cost is to be recognized (in years)	2
Cash received from option exercises	$ 160	$ 102	$ 74
Fair value assumptions and methodology [Abstract]
Expected term (in years)	5.20	5.27	5.18
Expected volatility (in hundredths)	40.00%	40.00%	53.00%
Expected dividend yield - minimum (in hundredths)	0.69%	0.99%	1.23%
Expected dividend yield - maximum (in hundredths)	1.01%	1.71%	2.55%
Risk-free interest rate - minimum (in hundredths)	0.93%	1.20%	1.38%
Risk-free interest rate - maximum (in hundredths)	2.29%	2.78%	2.47%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share (in dollars per share)	$ 15.61	$ 9.94	$ 9.36
Restricted stock [Member]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Expiration from the grant date of the award (in years)	10
Employee service share based compensation, aggregate disclosures [Abstract]
Unrecognized compensation cost - nonvested awards at period end	$ 352
Weighted average period unrecognized compensation cost is to be recognized (in years)	4
Equity instruments other than options, nonvested [Roll Forward]
Nonvested shares - beginning balance (in shares)	13,300,000
Granted (in shares)	5,400,000
Vested (in shares)	(3,700,000)
Forfeited (in shares)	(800,000)
Nonvested shares - ending balance (in shares)	14,200,000	13,300,000
Equity instruments other than options, nonvested, additional disclosures [Abstract]
Nonvested shares outstanding, weighted average grant date fair value - beginning balance (in dollars per share)	$ 28.10
Granted, weighted average grant date fair value (in dollars per share)	43.35	$ 29.39	$ 22.90
Vested, weighted average grant date fair value in dollars per share)	28.81
Forfeited, weighted average grant date fair value (in dollars per share)	32.59
Nonvested shares outstanding, weighted average grant date fair value - ending balance (in dollars per share)	$ 33.45	$ 28.10
Total fair value of shares vested during the period	$ 165	$ 100	$ 59
Restricted stock [Member] \| Non-Employee Directors [Member]
Share-based Goods and Nonemployee Services Transaction [Line Items]
Vesting period, description	Minimum restriction period of six months, and the restrictions lapse upon the earlier of mandatory director retirement at age 72 or early retirement from the Board after four years of service.
Number of units the plan allows for annual award for nonemployee directors (in shares)	800
The time over which the fair market value of the stock is amortized for awards awarded to nonemployee directors	The lesser of the time from the grant date to age 72 or the time from the grant date to completion of four years of service on the Board.
Number of shares of common stock reserved for issuance to nonemployee directors (in shares)	200,000
Number of shares issued to non-employee directors inception-to-date (in shares)	145,600
Number of shares issued to non-employee directors during the period (in shares)	7,200	8,000	8,000
Employee stock purchase plan [Member]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Number of shares reserved for issuance to recipient (in shares)	44,000,000
Employee Stock Purchase Plan [Abstract]
Percentage of earnings eligible employees may withhold under the employee stock purchase plan (in hundredths)	10.00%
Number of months each offering period last beginning on January 1 and July 1 each year (in months)	6
Percentage of the lower of fair market value of unit on the commencement date or fair market value of unit on the last trading day of the offering period (in hundredths)	85.00%
Number of shares sold through the plan (in shares)	25,300,000
Employee stock purchase plan [Member] \| Offering period July 1 through December 31 [Member]
Fair value assumptions and methodology [Abstract]
Expected term (in years)	0.5	0.5	0.5
Expected volatility (in hundredths)	34.00%	43.00%	80.00%
Expected dividend yield (in hundredths)	0.70%	1.44%	1.74%
Risk-free interest rate (in hundredths)	0.10%	0.21%	0.33%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share (in dollars per share)	$ 12.57	$ 6.72	$ 7.66
Employee stock purchase plan [Member] \| Offering period January 1 through June 30 [Member]
Fair value assumptions and methodology [Abstract]
Expected term (in years)	0.5	0.5	0.5
Expected volatility (in hundredths)	43.00%	48.00%	71.00%
Expected dividend yield (in hundredths)	0.88%	1.15%	1.85%
Risk-free interest rate (in hundredths)	0.20%	0.19%	0.27%
Weighted average grant-date fair value per share (in dollars per share)	$ 10.99	$ 8.81	$ 6.69

Income per Share (Details) - shares shares in Millions	12 Months Ended
Income per Share (Details) - shares shares in Millions	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Reconciliation of the number of shares used for the basic and diluted income per share calculations [Abstract]
Basic weighted average common shares outstanding (in shares)	918	908	900
Dilutive effect of stock options (in shares)	4	3	2
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding (in shares)	922	911	902
Stock Options [Member]
Antidilutive Securities Excluded from Computation of Earnings Per Share [Line Items]
Antidilutive securities excluded from the computation of diluted income per share (in shares)	3	5	7

- Definition

Securities (including those issuable pursuant to contingent stock agreements) that could potentially dilute basic earnings per share (EPS) or earnings per unit (EPU) in the future that were not included in the computation of diluted EPS or EPU because to do so would increase EPS or EPU amounts or decrease loss per share or unit amounts for the period presented.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 128
-Paragraph 13, 14
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 128
-Paragraph 171
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 128
-Paragraph 40
-Subparagraph c
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 260
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (c)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6371337&loc=d3e3550-109257

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Glossary Diluted Earnings Per Share
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6510752

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Glossary Contingent Stock Agreement
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6508534

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Glossary Antidilution
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6505113

Reference 8: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
-Number 07-4
-Paragraph 4
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

+ Details

- Definition

The average number of shares or units issued and outstanding that are used in calculating diluted EPS or earnings per unit (EPU), determined based on the timing of issuance of shares or units in the period.

+ References + Details

- Definition

Number of [basic] shares or units, after adjustment for contingently issuable shares or units and other shares or units not deemed outstanding, determined by relating the portion of time within a reporting period that common shares or units have been outstanding to the total time in that period.

+ References

Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 128
-Paragraph 171
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 128
-Paragraph 40
-Subparagraph a
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (FAS)
-Number 128
-Paragraph 8
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 260
-SubTopic 10
-Section 50
-Paragraph 1
-Subparagraph (a)
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6371337&loc=d3e3550-109257

Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Topic 260
-SubTopic 10
-Section 45
-Paragraph 10
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6920599&loc=d3e1448-109256

Reference 6: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Accounting Standards Codification
-Glossary Weighted-Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding
-URI http://asc.fasb.org/extlink&oid=6528421

Reference 7: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/presentationRef
-Publisher FASB
-Name Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF)
-Number 07-4
-Paragraph 4
-LegacyDoc This reference is SUPERSEDED by the Accounting Standards Codification effective for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009. This reference is included to help users transition from the previous accounting hierarchy and will be removed from future versions of this taxonomy.

+ Details

Financial Instruments and Risk Management (Details) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011 USD ($)	Jun. 30, 2011 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2010 USD ($)
Foreign exchange risk [Abstract]
Maximum term of currency derivative instruments (in years)	1
Notional amounts of open foreign exchange forward contracts and option contracts	$ 268		$ 356
Investments in marketable securities	150		653
Fair values of other financial assets and liabilities [Abstract]
Marketable securities	150		653
Interest rate risk [Abstract]
Aggregate fixed rate debt	$ 4,800		3,800
Number of debt instruments with related interest rate swaps		2
Notional amounts of interest rate swaps		$ 1,000
Floating rate basis	LIBOR-based
Weighted average floating rate	3.57%
Aggregate fixed rate debt after effect of interest rate swaps	$ 3,800
Aggregate floating rate debt after effect of interest rate swaps	1,000
Carrying Value [Member]
Fair values of other financial assets and liabilities [Abstract]
Long-term debt	4,800		3,800
Fair Value [Member]
Fair values of other financial assets and liabilities [Abstract]
Long-term debt	6,200		4,600
Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets or Liabilities [Member]
Fair values of other financial assets and liabilities [Abstract]
Long-term debt	3,600		4,200
Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets or Liabilities [Member]
Fair values of other financial assets and liabilities [Abstract]
Long-term debt	$ 2,600		$ 422

Retirement Plans, Funded Status (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Retirement Plans [Abstract]
Expense for the defined contribution plans for continuing operations	$ 245	$ 196	$ 186
International [Member]
Reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances of benefit obligations [Roll Forward]
Benefit obligation at beginning of period	908
Benefit obligation at end of period	928	908
Accumulated benefit obligation at end of period	868	829
Reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances of fair value of plan assets [Roll Forward]
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of period	691
Fair value of plan assets at end of period	705	691
Funded status at end of period [Abstract]
Funded status at end of period	223	217
Amounts recognized on the Consolidated Balance Sheets
Accrued employee compensation and benefits	10	15
Employee compensation and benefits	213	202
Pension plans in which projected benefit obligation exceeded plan assets at December 31
Projected benefit obligation	928	902
Fair value of plan assets	705	685
Pension plans in which accumulated benefit obligation exceeded plan assets at December 31
Accumulated benefit obligation	784	764
Fair value of plan assets	$ 621	$ 614

Retirement Plans, Plan Assets (Details) - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010
International [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	$ 705	$ 691
International [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Equity funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	241	155
International [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Bond funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	110	97
International [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Balanced funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	12	14
International [Member] \| United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	67	41
International [Member] \| Non-United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	64	133
International [Member] \| Corporate bonds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	89	84
International [Member] \| Other asset [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	122	167
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	146	256
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Equity funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Bond funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Balanced funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member] \| United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	67	41
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member] \| Non-United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	64	133
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member] \| Corporate bonds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets [Member] \| Other asset [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	15	82
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	468	356
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Equity funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	241	155
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Bond funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	110	97
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Balanced funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	12	14
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member] \| United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member] \| Non-United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member] \| Corporate bonds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	89	84
International [Member] \| Significant Observable Inputs for Similar Assets [Member] \| Other asset [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	16	6
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	91	79
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Equity funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Bond funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member] \| Common/collective trust funds - Balanced funds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member] \| United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member] \| Non-United States equity securities [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member] \| Corporate bonds [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	0	0
International [Member] \| Significant Unobservable Inputs [Member] \| Other asset [Member]
Fair value of plan assets [Abstract]
Fair value of plan assets	$ 91	$ 79
United Kingdom Pension Plan [Member]
Asset category, target allocations [Abstract]
Percentage of international pension plans' project benefit obligation (in hundredths)	74.00%
Equity securities target (in hundredths)	65.00%
Debt securities target (in hundredths)	35.00%

Retirement Plans, Net Periodic Benefit Cost, Assumptions, and Expected Cash Flows (Details) - International [Member] - USD ($) $ in Millions	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2011	Dec. 31, 2010	Dec. 31, 2009
Components of net periodic benefit cost [Abstract]
Total net periodic benefit cost	$ 27	$ 28	$ 32
Actuarial assumptions used to determine benefit obligation [Abstract]
Discount rate (in hundredths)	5.20%	5.70%
Rate of compensation increase (in hundredths)	5.40%	5.20%
Weighted-average actuarial assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit costs [Abstract]
Discount rate (in hundredths)	7.10%	7.90%	7.40%
Expected long-term return on plan assets (in hundredths)	5.70%	5.60%	5.60%
Rate of compensation increase (in hundredths)	6.20%	6.40%	5.70%
Expected cash flows [Abstract]
Expected contribution to pension plans in the next fiscal year	$ 11
Expected future annual benefit payments for the next 10 years	$ 25
Number of years current level annual benefit payments are estimated to be made	10