part iI / item 7 29 viously conducted epidemiological studies estimating the number of individuals likely to develop asbestos-related diseases. Using that information, HR&A estimates the number of future claims that would be filed against us through our forecast period and estimates the aggregate settlement or indemnity costs that would be incurred to resolve both pending and future claims based upon the average settlement costs by disease during the reference period. After dis- cussions with us, HR&A augments our liability estimate for the costs of defending asbestos claims in the tort system using a fore- cast from us which is based upon discussions with our defense counsel. Based on this information, HR&A compiles an estimate of our asbestos liability for pending and future claims expected to be filed through the indicated forecast period. The most significant factors affecting the liability estimate are (1) the number of new mesothelioma claims filed against us, (2) the average settlement costs for mesothelioma claims, (3) the percentage of mesothelioma claims dismissed against us and (4) the aggregate defense costs incurred by us. These factors are interdependent, and no one factor predominates in determining the liability estimate. Although the methodology used by HR&A can be applied to show claims and costs for periods subsequent to the indicated period (up to and including the endpoint of the epidemiological studies referred to above), management believes that the level of uncertainty regarding the various factors used in estimating future asbestos costs is too great to provide for reasonable estimation of the number of future claims, the nature of such claims or the cost to resolve them for years beyond the indicated estimate. Through December 31, 2012, our actual experience during the updated reference period for mesothelioma claims filed and dismissed generally approximated the assumptions in our liability estimate. In addition to this claims experience, we considered additional quantitative and qualitative factors such as the nature of the aging of pending claims, significant appellate rulings and legislative developments, and their respective effects on expected future settlement values. Based on this evalua- tion, we determined that no change in the estimate was warranted for the period ended December 31, 2012. Nevertheless, if certain factors show a pattern of sustained increase or decrease, the liability could change materially; however, all the assumptions used in estimating the asbestos liability are interdependent and no sin- gle factor predominates in determining the liability estimate. Because of the uncertainty with regard to and the interdependency of such factors used in the calculation of our asbestos liability, and since no one factor predominates, we believe that a range of poten- tial liability estimates beyond the indicated forecast period cannot be reasonably estimated. In conjunction with developing the aggregate liability estimate referenced above, we also developed an estimate of probable insurance recoveries for our asbestos liabilities. As of December 31, 2012, we had an aggregate asbestos receivable of $205 million. In developing this estimate, we considered our coverage-in-place and other settlement agreements, as well as a number of additional factors. These additional factors include the financial viability of the insurance companies, the method by which losses will be allo- cated to the various insurance policies and the years covered by those policies, how settlement and defense costs will be covered by the insurance policies and interpretation of the effect on coverage of various policy terms and limits and their interrelationships. Environmental. For environmental matters, we record a liability for estimated remediation costs when it is probable that we will be responsible for such costs and they can be reasonably estimated. Generally, third party specialists assist in the estimation of remediation costs. The environmental remediation liability at December 31, 2012 is substantially all for the former manufacturing site in Goodyear, Arizona (the “Goodyear Site”). As of December 31, 2012, the total estimated gross liability for the Goodyear Site was $50 million. On July 31, 2006, we entered into a consent decree with the U.S. Department of Justice on behalf of the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy pursuant to which, among other things, the U.S. Government reimburses us for 21% of qualifying costs of investigation and remediation activities at the Goodyear Site. As of December 31, 2012, the total estimated receivable from the U.S. Government related to the environmental remediation liabilities of the Goodyear Site was $11 million. Pension Plans. In the United States, we sponsor a defined benefit pension plan that covers approximately 28% of all U.S. employees. In the fourth quarter of 2012, we announced that pension eligible employees will no longer earn future benefits in the domestic defined benefit pension plan effective January 1, 2013. The benefits are based on years of service and compensation on a final average pay basis, except for certain hourly employees where benefits are fixed per year of service. This plan is funded with a trustee in respect to past and current service. Charges to expense are based upon costs computed by an independent actuary. Our funding policy is to contribute, annually, amounts that are allowable for federal or other income tax purposes. These contributions are intended to provide for future benefits earned to date. A number of our non-U.S. subsidiaries sponsor defined benefit pension plans that cover approximately 14% of all non-U.S. employees. The benefits are typically based upon years of service and compensa- tion. These plans are generally funded with trustees in respect to past and current service. Charges to expense are based upon costs computed by independent actuaries. Our funding policy is to con- tribute, annually, amounts that are allowable for tax purposes or mandated by local statutory requirements. These contributions are intended to provide for future benefits earned to date. The net periodic pension cost was $20 million in 2012, $6 million in 2011 and $14 million in 2010. Employer cash contributions were $4 million in 2012, $47 million in 2011 and $42 million in 2010 of which $30 million and $25 million were made on a discretionary basis to our U.S. defined benefit pension plan in 2011 and 2010, respectively. We expect, based on current actuarial calculations, to contribute cash of approximately $15 million to our pension plans in 2013. Cash contributions in subsequent years will depend on a number of factors including the investment performance of plan assets. For the pension plan, holding all other factors constant, a decrease in the expected long-term rate of return of plan assets by 0.25 per- centage points would have increased U.S. 2012 pension expense by $0.8 million for U.S. pension plans and $0.7 million for non-U.S. pension plans. Also, holding all other factors constant, a decrease in the discount rate used to determine net periodic pension cost by 0.25 percentage points would have increased 2012 pension expense by $1.9 million for U.S. pension plans and $0.9 million for non- U.S. pension plans.