# Certificat e o f Servic e 

# GEI W DE C 3 0 200 9 AIRPORT/ENVIRONMENTA L LAW , AGC-60 0 

# ^

1

I hereb y certif

y tha t I hav e thi s day serve dth e foregoin g REPL Y t o TSAI A ANSWE Ro n th e followin g person s at

th e followin g addresse s b y Certifie dMail : Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse l Attention : FAAPar t 1 6 Airpor t Proceeding s Docl<et , AGC-61 0 Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Ave. , SW . Washington , D C 2059 1 Christin e E . Klein , AA E Deput yCommissione rfo rAviatio n an d Actin g Airpor t Directo r Te d Steven s Ancliorag e Internationa l Airpor t 

### P O Bo x 19696 0 Anchorage , A K99519-696 0 P : (907 ) 269-072 4 E : Christine.klein(iaalaska.go v 

### Date dthi s \& 1 day o f

December . 2009 . 'Shau n Deoenha m Member , Debenha m Properties , LL C Managin g Membe ro f RDM , LL C 296 0 C Street , Suit e 20 2 Anchorage , A K9950 3 W : (907)562-933 0 F : (907 ) 562-933 1 E : shaundebenham(ia)alaska.ne tREPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R

Decembe r16 , 200 9 Offic e o f th e Chie f Counse l Attention : FA APar t 1 6 Airpor t Proceeding s Docket , AGC-61 0 Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Ave. , SW . Washington , D C 2059 1 

### Docke t No . 16-09-1 4 REPL Y t o TSAI AANSWE R RDM , LL C v . Te d Steven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t 

## REPL Y RDM , LL C (RDM) , hereb yReplie s t o th e Answe rfile d b yTe d Steven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t (TSAIA ) i n regar d t o RDM' s Complain t file d o n Octobe r27 , 2009 . I n doin g so , RD M wil l repl yt o bot h th e seve n pag e TSAI AAnswe ran d th e accompanyin g 7 1 pag e TSAI AAnswe rExhibi t A . 

## Sectio n 1 : Repl yt o Seve n Pag e Answe r Th e seve n pag e Answe rprovide d b yTSAI Aprovide s selectiv e material , hal ftruths , an d vagarie s i n a chronologica l orde rdesigne d t o discredi t AGLA D Postmark , LL C (AGLAD ) an d RDM . N o wher e doe s TSAI Aaddres s th e centra l issu e o fth e complain t o fRDM , whic h i s tha t TSAI Aviolate d th e Airpor t Improvemen t Progra m (authorize d b yth e Airpor t an d Airwa yImprovemen t Ac t o f 1982) , a s pertainin g t o Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s becaus e TSAI Aengage d i n economi c discriminatio n an d faile d t o compl ywit h Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 22 , Economi c Nondiscriminatio n an d Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 23 , Exclusiv e Rights . Belo wi s a detaile d repl ywit h respec t t o eac h numbere d paragrap h foun d i n TSAIA' s seve n pag e Answer . 1 . Th e plannin g an d developmen t o fTe d Steven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t ha s bee n financed , i n part , wit h fund s provide d b yth e FAAunde rth e Airpor t Improvemen t Progra m (AIP) , authorize d b yth e Airpor t an d Airwa yImprovemen t Ac t o f 1982 , a s amended , 4 9 U.S.C . §47101 , e t seq . A s such , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . Th e "unfortunat e story " her e i s tha t fo ryear s TSAI Aha s bee n ignorin g an d i n som e cas e eve n flauntin g it s obligation s wit h regar d t o Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . TSAIA' s tota l disregar d t o wel l documented , fa rrangin g Genera l Writte n Assurance s violation s abuse s th e inten t o f th e cod e an d shoul d b e brough t t o a n end . A s evidence d i n RDM' s complaint , TSAIA , fo rsevera l years , ha s willfull yengage d i n preferentia l treatmen t o f tenant s a s determine d b ywha t tenant s "brin g t o th e table. " Thes e year s o f abus e hav e create d a n allege d cultur e o fcorruptio n tha t imperil s th e public' s interests . Tenant s nee d t o b e confiden t tha t TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Federa l La wa s i t pertain s t o a M tenants , no t jus t th e selec t few .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 2 . Th e complain t wa s file d b yRD M t o ensur e tha t TSAI Ai s hel d responsibl e fo rit s violation s o f gran t assurances . I t wa s th e violatio n o fthes e right s tha t directl y lea d t o th e failur e o f th e AGLA D development . 3 . RD M wa s no t involve d i n th e developmen t durin g thi s tim e frame . 4 . RD M wa s no t involve d i n th e developmen t durin g thi s tim e frame . 5 . A t leas e signin g fo rAGI-A D i n Novembe ro f2005 , AGLA D ha d assemble d a reputabl e loca l Alaska n grou p o fdevelopers , forme rcommissioners , engineers , an d genera l contractor s t o g o forwar d wit h developmen t a t th e propose d site . Include d i n thi s grou p wa s RDM . RDM' s managemen t compan yDebenha m Properties , LL C own s ove r$40 M o finvestmen t rea l estat e i n Alaska , Utah , an d Nevada . Debenha m Propertie s specialize s i n development , acquisition s an d propert ymanagemen t o f industria l space . Th e grou p recognize d tha t a large rinvesto rwoul d b e neede d bu t bot h AGLA D ($1M ) an d RD M ($1.3M ) pu t mone yu p fron t t o star t th e developmen t process . A s histor ylate rshowed , th e stringen t leas e deadline s an d term s impose d i n th e AGLA D leas e mad e i t ver ydifficul t t o attrac t tenant s t o th e AGLA D developmen t (Pleas e note , th e complain t show s 100 % o fth e buildin g spac e wa s prelease d an d 73 % o f th e ram p spac e wa s prelease d whe n TSAI Atoo k bac k th e lease ) an d extremel ydifficul t t o attrac t larg e investor s t o th e development . Eve n whe n RD M brough t on e o fman yver yseriou s investo rt o th e tabl e (th e billio n dolla rnativ e grou p CIRI ) TSAI Acontinue d t o refus e t o wor k wit h AGLA D t o renegotiat e th e leas e term s tha t late rwoul d b e discovere d t o violat e gran t assurances . 6 . I t i s interestin g t o not e her e tha t TSAI Awa s concerne d abou t th e siz e o fth e project . Ha d TSAI Ano t violate d gran t assurance s b ydenyin g AGLA D th e us e o f Firs t Righ t o f Refusal' s (FROR) , AGLA D woul d hav e bee n abl e t o initiall yleas e a smalle ramoun t o f lan d an d the n exercis e thei rrigh t o fFROR' s a s marke t force s demande d development . Thi s i s exactl ywha t FedE xan d UP S bot h wer e allowe d t o do . Again , becaus e AGI_A D wa s no t bringin g thousand s o ffligh t landing s t o Anchorag e pe ryear , AGLA D wa s no t allowe d FRORs . 7 . TSAI Awa s concerne d abou t AGLAD' s abilit yt o financ e it s developmen t ye t i t denie d AGLA D acces s t o an yo fth e man ytool s grante d t o othe rtenant s tha t woul d hav e assiste d AGLA D t o secur e financing . Al l o fth e TSAI Aviolation s describe d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-2 0 woul d hav e significantl yhelpe d AGLA D secur e financing . I n particula rth e followin g violation s particularl yhindere d AGLAD' s abilit yt o secur e financing : a . Insertin g a "financial " obligatio n int o AGLAD' s leas e whic h ha d no t bee n include d i n othe rTSAI Atenan t leases . b . No t ignorin g o rsubstantiall yextendin g AGLA D leas e obligation s t o th e degre e tha t CargoPor t receive d extensions . c . Failin g t o significantl yexten d AGLAD' s leas e i n ligh t o fth e terribl e world/nationa l recession . CargoPor t receive d thi s concessio n i n 199 8 fo r lik e cause . d . Failin g t o gran t a longe rinitia l ter m i n whic h t o complet e Phas e I improvements . CargoPor t receive d thi s concession .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R

e . Failin g t o allo wAGLA D t o defaul t o n onl yon e o fit s parcel s instea d o fal l th e parcel s whe n AGLA D wa s foun d i n defaul t fo rno t providin g proo fo f financin g fo rPhas e I . CargoPort' s an d FedEx' s parcel s wer e treate d individuall yno t collectively . f . No t givin g AGLA D ren t deferra l unti l improvement s wer e substantiall y complete . CargoPor t an d FedE xreceive d thi s concession . g . No t grantin g AGLA D th e abilit yt o pa ybac k deferre d ren t ove rtw o years . FedE xreceive d thi s concession . h . Failin g t o provid e AGLA D wit h fre e "fill " materia l fo rit s sit e development . FedE xan d UP S receive d thi s concession . i . Failin g t o provid e AGLA D th e abilit yt o sel l it s improvement s t o TSAI A an d leas e bac k

th e improvement s a s a mechanis m t o receiv e favorabl e financing . CargoPor t receive d thi s concession . j . Denyin g AGLA D th e abilit yt o us e Firs t Righ t o fRefusal s fo rthei r development . UP S an d FedE xreceive d thi s concession . k . Denyin g AGLA D "Preferentia l Use " o fhardstand s P-1 , P-2 , an d P-3 . UP S receive d thi s concession . I . No t givin g AGLA D th e righ t t o ren t th e P-1 , P-2 , an d P- 3 hardstand s a t a lo w rate . FedE xreceive d thi s concession . m . Makin g AGLA D pa yfo rtaxiwa yconstruction , maintenance , an d operation . CargoPort , UPS , an d FedE xreceive d thi s concession . n . Makin g AGLA D pa yfo rsit e civi l wor k fo rthei rdevelopment . FedE x receive d thi s concession . o . Economicall yundercuttin g AGLAD' s developmen t b ydecreasin g TSAIA' s fe e fo rparkin g carrier s a t thei rhardstand s fro m $17 9 pe rfou rhou rsto p t o $88.52 , a 51 % decrease . Also , AGLA D spen t ove r$250,00 0 an d hundred s o fma n hour s t o secur e th e Cor p permi t fo rth e wetland s a t th e site . Yet , TSAI Atoo k bac k th e lease , secure d th e wetlan d permit , an d di d no t reimburs e AGLAD . 8 . I t i s interestin g t o not e her e tha t CargoPor t ha d a ne wleas e tha t wa s no t require d t o g o ou t fo rpubli cnotice , ye t TSAIA , i n a revers e decision , require d AGLA D t o g o ou t fo rpubli cnotice . Anothe rexampl e o fselectiv e gran t assuranc e compliance . 9 . No t onl yi s RDM , LL C a 31.8 % owne ro fAGLA D Postmark , LLC , bu t the yar e als o "deeme d t o hav e a 51 % Percentag e Interes t i n th e Compan yfo rvotin g purposes" . Thi s allow s RD M greate rcontro l ove rAGLA D Postmar k tha n depicte d i n th e Answer . (Exhibi t A ) Althoug h RD M initiall ywa s no t th e "contac t person " wit h TSAIA , RD M wa s a ver y activ e membe ro f AGLA D Postmark , LL C an d worke d closel ywit h Le e Nun n an d Caro l Meyer s o n th e AGLA D development . I n th e fal l o f 200 8 RD M too k a ver yactiv e rol e i n th e AGLA D developmen t whe n the ysecure d a n Optio n t o purchas e al l o fAGLAD , Inc.' s interes t i n AGLA D Postmark , LLC . RD M me t severa l time s wit h TSAI A(Octobe r14 , 2008 , Octobe r 28 , 2008 , an d Novembe r17 , 2008 ) t o discus s extendin g AGLAD' s leas e deadlin e an d TSAI Ahel p wit h financing .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 3 o

f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R I n advanc e o f th e Octobe r28 , 200 8 meeting , TSAI Arequeste d tha t RD M provid e a cop yo f th e Optio n Agreemen t (se e Exhibi t B) . RD M wa s tol d b yTSAI Atha t the ywoul d no t mee t wit h RD M unles s the yha d proo ftha t RD M ha d authorit yt o ac t o n behal f o f AGLA D Postmark , LLC . Onc e th e Optio n Agreemen t wa s provided , TSAI Adeeme d th e Optio n Agreemen t a s satisfactor yan d proceede d t o mee t wit h RDM . Th e assertio n tha t RD M i s a mino rpartne rwit h littl e inpu t i s simpl ywrong . 10 . N o commen t needed . 1 1 . Again , i f TSAI Awa s concerne d abou t AGLAD' s abilit yt o secur e financing , wh ydi d i t violat e gran t assurance s b ydenyin g AGLA D treatmen t equa l t o tha t grante d t o othe rtenant s whic h woul d hav e significantl yhelpe d AGLAD' s abilit yt o secur e financing . Th e lis t o f violation s i s documente d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-2 0 an d abov e i n Sectio n 1.7.a-o . 12.TSAI Apresente d AGLA D a "tak e i t o rleav e it " leas e i n Novembe ro f200 5 tha t containe d unreasonabl e requirement s tha t violate d gran t assurances . I n additio n t o this , TSAI Adenie d AGLA D othe radvantage s afforde d othe rtenant s a s describe d i n Sectio n 1.7.a- o abov e an d th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 . 13 . TSAI Adi d no t commi t t o providin g AGLA D an yopportunitie s t o succeed . Althoug h TSAI Adi d gran t AGLA D thre e leas e supplements , however , th e treatmen t wa s n o wher e nea rtha t accorde d t o CargoPort , FedE xan d UPS . I n fact , i f anything , th e succeedin g leas e amendment s create d mor e deadline s an d restrictiv e covenant s whic h mad e AGLAD' s leas e signin g an d abilit yt o dro w investor s t o th e projec t impossible . 14 . I f TSAI Awa s trul yconsiderin g "it s regulator yobligations , th e publi cinteres t an d th e preceden t tha t migh t b e set " the n the ywoul d no t hav e committe d th e 1 2 violation s o f gran t assurance s describe d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 . TSAIA' s regulator yobligation s deman d tha t the ycompl ywit h Writte n Gran t Assurance s an d no t discriminate . TSAI Aha d alread yse t presiden t wit h CargoPort , UPS , an d FedEx . 15 . AGLA D wa s workin g wit h tigh t deadline s becaus e o fTSAIA' s deadlin e requirements . A s mentione d before , th e unreasonablenes s o fth e deadline s mad e leasin g effort s ver ydifficul t an d th e abilit yt o fin d a larg e investo rnearl y impossible . Th e interes t i n th e AGLA D developmen t fro m potentia l tenant s an d investor s wa s overwhelmin g bu t TSAIA' s overbearin g an d violatin g requirement s an d denial s discourage d development . 16 . AGLA D an d RD M ha d bee n workin g wit h TSAI Asinc e th e beginnin g o f200 8 t o renegotiat e leas e terms . A s outline d before , AGLA D ha d th e projec t significantl y preleased , desig n nearl ycomplete , nearl yal l permittin g wor k complete , an d th e sit e ha d bee n dewatered . I n all , AGLA D ha d spen t $3 M t o advanc e th e project . I n th e fal l o f 2008 , RD M receive d a n optio n fro m AGLAD , Inc . t o purchas e thei r interes t i n AGLAD . However , afte rRD M me t wit h TSAIA , i t becam e clea rtha t the ywoul d continu e thei rprejudicia l treatmen t an d defaul t th e leas e regardles s o f RDM' s effort s o rabilities . O n Octobe r24 , 2008 , Debenha m Properties , LL C (th e managin g membe ro fRDM , LLC ) sen t a lette rt o Jeanett e Lucke y(se e Exhibi t C) . Thi s lette rwa s t o outlin e th e purpos e o f th e Octobe r28 , 200 8 meetin g betwee n RDM , LL C an d TSAIA . Presen t a t th e Octobe r28 * meetin g wa s Ra yDebenha m an d Shau n Debenha m

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 4 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R (member s o f RDM , LLC ) an d severa l TSAI Astaf fmembers . A s indicate d i n th e letter , RD M directl yrequeste d tha t TSAI Aexten d th e leas e deadlin e t o allo wtim e t o secur e financin g an d brin g i n intereste d investors . RD M als o directl y requeste d tha t TSAI Ahel p ou t i n an ywa ywit h regar d t o financin g a s wel l a s th e optio n o f TSAI At o bu ybac k Taxiwa yP extensio n an d Taxiwa yN afte r construction . A t th e Octobe r28 , 200 8 meetin g betwee n TSAI Aan d RD M i t appeare d tha t TSAI Awa s goin g t o gran t RD M onl ya thre e mont h extension . Durin g thi s meetin g Joh n Parro t (Airpor t Manager ) indicate d tha t an yextensio n woul d hav e t o b e shor t (thre e months) . Also , Ric h Wilso n (forme rDevelopmen t Manager ) state d tha t CargoPor t ha d receive d a simila rextensio n o fon e yea ri n 199 8 du e t o economi cconditions . Whe n RD M inquire d durin g th e meetin g i fa on e yea r extension , simila rt o CargoPorts , woul d b e granted , TSAI Aindicate d tha t i t woul d no t an d tha t a shorte rthre e mont h extensio n shoul d b e sought . Th e preferentia l treatmen t show n CargoPor t i s a violatio n o fgran t assurances . Als o durin g thi s meeting , RD M aske d tha t TSAI Ahel p wit h financing . RD M specificall yaske d i f TSAI Awoul d b e abl e t o ow n th e AGLA D development . Thi s wa s denied . RD M learne d a t a late rtim e tha t CargoPor t ha d receive d suc h preferentia l treatmen t fo rthei rdevelopment . Th e preferentia l treatmen t show n CargoPor t i s a violatio n o f gran t assurances . Lastly , durin g thi s meetin g RD M aske d tha t TSAI Abu ybac k afte rconstruction , th e Taxiwa yP extensio n an d Taxiwa yN . Thi s to o wa s denie d b yTSAIA . Again , RD M learne d a t a late rtim e tha t TSAI Aowne d th e taxiway s fo rth e CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xdevelopments . Th e preferentia l treatmen t show n t o CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xi s a violatio n o fgran t assurances . 17 . A s mentione d abov e AGLA D ha d bee n workin g wit h TSAI Athroughou t 200 8 t o chang e leasin g term s o rexten d deadlines . A s wa s documente d i n th e Complaint , 200 8 wa s a terribl e recessio n yea rfo rth e U S an d Worl d financia l markets . Th e U S wa s i n th e bigges t recessio n sinc e th e Grea t Depressio n an d bon d financin g wa s completel ynonexistent . Additionally , traditiona l bank s wer e ver yhesitan t t o financ e anything . AGLA D wa s u p agains t a n impossibl e deadline . Fo rthi s reason , AGLA D requeste d a sensibl e extensio n t o thei rleas e deadline . TSAI Aha d don e thi s i n th e pas t fo r CargoPor t bu t denie d doin g s o fo rAGLAD . 18.TSAI Atrie s t o soun d compassionat e b ygivin g AGLA D 3 0 additiona l day s i n Januar yo f 200 9 t o mee t a "proo fo ffinancing " deadlin e tha t wa s impossibl e t o meet . However , TSAI Awa s require d b yth e term s o fth e leas e t o d o so . 19 . AGLA D requeste d thi s extensio n becaus e financin g wa s impossibl e t o find . TSAI A recognize d tha t th e U S an d Worl d wer e i n a terribl e recessio n an d tha t financin g wa s nearl yimpossibl e t o secure , ye t the ydi d nothin g t o hel p AGLAD . 20 . AGLA D agai n appeale d t o Christin e Klei n requestin g TSAI Aawar d advantage s commensurat e wit h wha t wa s grante d t o others , i.e. , a leas e deadlin e extensio n du e t o economi cconditions . Thi s las t appea l wa s barel yacknowledge d an d denied . 2 1 . RD M coul d no t believ e tha t a developmen t tha t wa s nearl y100 % preleased , nearl ycompletel ydesigne d an d permitted , an d wel l o n it s wa yt o developmen t wa s deraile d s o callousl yb yTSAIA . Ove r$3 M ha d bee n investe d int o th e

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 5 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R project . RD M foun d i t particularl yfrustratin g tha t othe rtenant s o fTSAI Aha d receive d vastl ydifferen t treatment . I t wa s unde rth e impetu s o fthes e circumstance s tha t RD M foun d ou t abou t th e Airpor t an d Airwa yImprovemen t Ac t o f198 2 tha t obligate s airport s t o compl y wit h Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . RD M immediatel yse t ou t studyin g othe rTSAI Atenan t lease s t o determin e i f preferentia l treatmen t wa s indee d present . Th e resul t i s th e Complain t tha t RD M file d agains t TSAI Ao n Octobe r27 , 2009 . Thi s effor t wa s pursue d b yRD M t o ensur e tha t TSAI Ab e hel d accountabl e fo rviolation s o fgran t assurances . 22 . A s documente d above , i n th e Answe rt o th e MOTIO N T O DISMIS S an d th e Complaint , RD M i s a ver yinvolve d membe ro fAGLA D Postmark , LL C whic h signe d a leas e wit h TSAI Ai n Novembe ro f2005 . Further , RD M ha s documente d tha t i t ha s bee n "directl yan d substantiall yaffected " b yTSAIA' s violations . Als o documente d bot h abov e an d i n detai l i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 , i s th e fac t tha t AGLA D wa s no t treate d reasonabl yno requitabl ythroughou t it s venture . Ther e is , therefore , ampl e basi s fo rrevie wunde r4 9 C.F.R . Par t 16 , an d consequen t basi s fo rremed yfo rRDM . RDM' s standin g i s ensure d b y1 4 C.F. R Par t 1 6 §16.23(a ) whic h reads , " Aperso n directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d b yan yallege d noncomplianc e ma yfil e a complain t wit h th e Administrator . Aperso n doin g busines s wit h a n airpor t an d payin g fee s o rrental s t o th e airpor t shal l b e considere d directl yan d substantiall y affecte d b yallege d revenu e diversio n a s define d i n 4 9 U.S.C . 4710 7 (b). " O n pag e 46 , Sectio n 4 o f Ji m Marty n v . Por t o fAnacortes , Washingto n (Docke t No . 16-02-03 ) th e FAAexpand s o n 1 4 C.F. R Par t 1 6 §16.23(a) . "Th e secon d sentenc e o f thi s sectio n doe s no t exclud e previou s o rpotentia l airpor t user s wh o d o no t hav e currentl yfee-payin g arrangement s wit h a n airpor t fro m fillin g complaint s unde rPar t 16 . Rather , i t confirm s tha t a complainan t presentl y engage d i n a busines s arrangemen t wit h th e airpor t i n questio n woul d b e assume d t o suffe rfro m a direc t an d substantia l effec t whe n revenu e diversio n i s allege d withou t havin g t o demonstrat e tha t effect . Thi s poin t relate d directl yt o 17.2 3 (b)(4 ) tha t require s a complain t file d unde rPar t 1 6 t o contai n a descriptio n o f ho wth e complainan t wa s directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d b yth e thing s don e o romitte d t o b e don e b yth e respondents . Allegation s relate d t o revenu e diversio n d o no t requir e th e complainan t t o describ e ho wi t wa s directl yan d substantiall yaffected . [See , e.g . Rule s o fPractic e fo rFederally-Assiste d Airpor t Proceedings , Fina l Rule , 6 1 Fed . Reg . 5399 8 (Oct . 16 , 1996).] " "Th e fac t tha t th e Complainan t i s no t currentl ypayin g fee s o rrental s t o th e Anacorte s Airpor t doe s no t preclud e hi m fro m bein g directl yan d substantiall y affecte d b yan yallege d noncompliance . Th e Complainan t mus t mee t th e requirement s o f §16.23(b)(4 ) b yprovidin g a brie fdescriptio n o fho wh e wa s affected. " Th e FA Astate s her e tha t i n orde rt o hav e standing , th e Complainan t need s onl y t o mee t th e requirement s o f§16.23(b)(4 ) b yprovidin g a brie fdescriptio n o fho w h e wa s affected . RD M ha s me t thi s standard . O n page s 9-2 0 o fth e Complaint , RD M describe s ho wthe ywer e "directl yan d substantially " affecte d b yTSAIA' s gran t assuranc e violations .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 6 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 

## Sectio n 2 : Repl yt o 7 1 Pag e Answe rExhibi t A 1 . RD M documente d repeatedl yi n it s complain t 1 ) RDM' s positio n a s a membe ro f AGLA D Postmark , LL C an d 2 ) TSAIA' s violation s o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assuranc e whic h lea d directl yt o th e failur e o f AGLAD' s developmen t an d th e resultan t los s o fove r$3 M o fwhic h RD M directl y los t mor e tha n $1.3M . However , RD M wil l revie wth e majo rpoint s outline d i n it s complaint . Fo ra mor e complet e revie wo f TSAIA' s Titl e 4 9 violation s pleas e refe rt o RDM' s complaint . Revie wo f Majo rPoints : a . Th e plannin g an d developmen t o fTe d Steven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t ha s bee n financed , i n part , wit h fund s provide d b yth e FAAunde rth e Airpor t Improvemen t Progra m (AIP) , authorize d b yth e Airpor t an d Airwa y Improvemen t Ac t o f 1982 , a s amended , 4 9 U.S.C . §47101 , etseq . b . A s such , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . c . AGLA D Postmark , LL C (AGLAD ) signe d a leas e wit h TSAI Ao n Novembe r18 , 2005 . d . RDM , LL C i s a membe ro fAGLA D Postmark , LLC . (Se e Exhibi t ARD M Complain t Date d Octobe r27 , 2009. ) e . No t onl yi s RDM , LL C a 31.8 % owne ro fAGLA D Postmark , LL C bu t the yar e als o "deeme d t o hav e a 51 % Percentag e Interes t i n th e Compan yfo rvotin g purposes" . Thi s allow s RD M greate rcontro l ove rAGLA D Postmar k tha n depicte d i n TSAIA' s MOTIO N T O DISMISS . (Exhibi t A , pgs . 1-2 ) f . RD M contribute d approximatel y$1.3 M cas h plu s hundred s o fma n hour s t o th e AGLA D development . g . Althoug h RD M initiall ywa s no t th e "contac t person " wit h TSAIA , RD M wa s a ver yactiv e membe ro f AGLA D Postmark , LL C an d worke d closel ywit h Le e Nun n an d Caro l Meyer s o n th e AGLA D development . h . Additionally , i n th e fal l o f200 8 RD M too k a ver yactiv e rol e i n th e AGLA D developmen t whe n the ysecure d a n Optio n t o purchas e al l o fAGLAD , Inc.' s interes t i n AGLA D Postmark , LLC . RD M me t severa l time s wit h TSAI A (Octobe r14 , 2008 , Octobe r28 , 2008 , an d Novembe r17 , 2008 ) t o discus s extendin g AGLAD' s leas e deadlin e an d TSAI Ahel p wit h financing . i . I n advanc e o f th e Octobe r28 , 200 8 meeting , TSAI Arequeste d tha t RD M provid e a cop yo f th e Optio n Agreemen t (se e Exhibi t B) . RD M wa s tol d b y TSAI Atha t the ywoul d no t mee t wit h RD M unles s the yha d proo ftha t RD M ha d authorit yt o ac t o n behal fo fAGLA D Postmark , LLC . Onc e th e Optio n Agreemen t wa s provided , TSAI Adeeme d th e Optio n Agreemen t a s satisfactio n o f thei rrequiremen t an d proceede d t o mee t wit h RDM . j . Th e assertio n tha t RD M i s a mino rpartne rwit h littl e inpu t i s simpl ywrong . k . TSAI Aviolate d Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assuranc e by : i . Insertin g a "financial " obligatio n int o AGLAD' s leas e whic h ha d no t bee n include d i n othe rTSAI Atenan t leases .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 7 of4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R ii . No t ignorin g o rsubstantiall yextendin g AGLA D leas e obligation s t o th e degre e tha t CargoPor t receive d extensions . iii . Failin g t o significantl yexten d AGLAD' s leas e i n ligh t o fth e terribl e world/nationa l recession . CargoPor t receive d thi s concessio n i n 199 8 fo rlik e cause . iv . Failin g t o gran t a longe rinitia l ter m i n whic h t o complet e Phas e I improvements . CargoPor t receive d thi s concession . V . Failin g t o allo wAGLA D t o defaul t o n onl yon e o fit s parcel s instea d o f al l th e parcel s whe n AGLA D wa s foun d i n defaul t fo rno t providin g proo fo f financin g fo rPhas e I . CargoPort' s an d FedEx' s parcel s wer e treate d individuall yno t collectively . vi . No t givin g AGLA D ren t deferra l unti l improvement s wer e substantiall y complete . CargoPor t an d FedE xreceive d thi s concession . vii . No t grantin g AGLA D th e abilit yt o pa ybac k deferre d ren t ove rtw o years . FedE xreceive d thi s concession . viii.Failin g t o provid e AGLA D wit h fre e "fill " materia l fo rit s sit e development . FedE xan d UP S receive d thi s concession . ix . Failin g t o provid e AGLA D th e abilit yt o sel l it s improvement s t o TSAI A an d leas e bac k

th e improvement s a s a mechanis m t o receiv e favorabl e financing . CargoPor t receive d thi s concession . X . Denyin g AGLA D th e abilit yt o us e Firs t Righ t o fRefusal s fo rthei r development . UP S an d FedE xreceive d thi s concession . xi . Denyin g AGLA D "Preferentia l Use " o fhardstand s P-1 , P-2 , an d P-3 . UP S receive d thi s concession . xii . No t givin g AGLA D th e righ t t o ren t th e P-1 , P-2 , an d P- 3 hardstand s a t a lo wrate . FedE xreceive d thi s concession . xiii.Makin g AGLA D pa yfo rtaxiwa yconstruction , maintenance , an d operation . CargoPort , UPS , an d FedE xreceive d thi s concession . xiv . Makin g AGLA D pa yfo rsit e civi l wor k fo rthei rdevelopment . FedE x receive d thi s concession . XV . Makin g AGLA D pa yfo rhanga rconstruction . FedE xreceive d thi s concession . xvi . Economicall yundercuttin g AGLAD' s developmen t b ydecreasin g TSAIA' s fe e fo rparkin g carrier s a t thei rhardstand s fro m $17 9 pe rfou r hou rsto p t o $88.52 , a 51 % decrease . xvii . Transferrin g AGLAD' s wetland s permi t t o TSAI Awithou t compensation . I . TSAIA' s violation s o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assuranc e "directl yan d substantiall yaffected " th e AGLA D development . I n fact , i t lea d directl yt o th e failur e o fth e development . m . RD M ( a membe ro f AGLA D Postmark , LLC ) los t approximatel y$1.3 M cas h becaus e o f TSAIA' s violations , an d henc e ha s bee n "directl yan d substantiall y affected" . n . RDM' s standin g i s ensure d b y1 4 C.F. R Par t 1 6 §16.23(a ) whic h reads , " A perso n directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d b yan yallege d noncomplianc e ma y RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 8 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R fil e a complain t wit h th e Administrator . Aperso n doin g busines s wit h a n airpor t an d payin g fee s o rrental s t o th e airpor t shal l b e considere d directl y an d substantiall yaffecte d b yallege d revenu e diversio n a s define d i n 4 9 U.S.C . 4710 7 (b). " O n pag e 46 , Sectio n 4 o fJi m Marty n v . Por t o fAnacortes , Washingto n (Docke t No . 16-02-03 ) th e FAAexpand s o n 1 4 C.F. R Par t 1 6 §16.23(a) . "Th e secon d sentenc e o f thi s sectio n doe s no t exclud e previou s o rpotentia l airpor t user s wh o d o no t hav e currentl yfee-payin g arrangement s wit h a n airpor t fro m fillin g complaint s unde rPar t 16 . Rather , i t confirm s tha t a complainan t presentl yengage d i n a busines s arrangemen t wit h th e airpor t i n questio n woul d b e assume d t o suffe rfro m a direc t an d substantia l effec t whe n revenu e diversio n i s allege d withou t havin g t o demonstrat e tha t effect . Thi s poin t relate d directl yt o 17,2 3 (b)(4 ) tha t require s a complain t file d unde rPar t 1 6 t o contai n a descriptio n o fho wth e complainan t wa s directl yan d substantiall y affecte d b yth e thing s don e o romitte d t o b e don e b yth e respondents . Allegation s relate d t o revenu e diversio n d o no t requir e th e complainan t t o describ e ho wi t wa s directl yan d substantiall yaffected . [See , e.g . Rule s o f Practic e fo rFederally-Assiste d Airpor t Proceedings , Fina l Rule , 6 1 Fed . Reg . 5399 8 (Oct . 16 , 1996).] " "Th e fac t tha t th e Complainan t i s no t currentl ypayin g fee s o rrental s t o th e Anacorte s Airpor t doe s no t preclud e hi m fro m bein g directl yan d substantiall y affecte d b yan yallege d noncompliance . Th e Complainan t mus t mee t th e requirement s o f §16.23(b)(4 ) b yprovidin g a brie f descriptio n o fho wh e wa s affected. " Th e FAAstate s her e tha t i n orde rt o hav e standing , th e Complainan t need s onl yt o mee t th e requirement s o f§16.23(b)(4 ) b yprovidin g a brie f descriptio n o f ho wh e wa s affected . RD M ha s me t thi s standard . O n page s 9 - 2 0 o f th e Complaint , RD M describe s ho wthe ywer e "directl yan d substantially " affecte d b yTSAIA' s gran t assuranc e violations . 2 . N o comment . 3 . Se e commen t i n Sectio n 2.1.a- n abov e regardin g RDM' s qualification s t o fil e a complain t an d se e Complain t pag e 1 an d Complain t Exhibi t B fo rproo ftha t RD M trie d t o engag e TSAI Ai n goo d fait h negotiations . 4 . N o comment . 5 . TSAI Adi d violat e Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s becaus e TSAI Aha s engage d i n economi cdiscriminatio n an d ha s faile d t o compl ywit h Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 22 , Economi cNondiscriminatio n an d Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 23 , Exclusiv e Rights . 6 . TSAI Amake s th e assertio n tha t AGLA D ha d no t begu n materia l developmen t o f th e lease d premises . Thi s i s no t correct . TSAI Atake s a ver ynarro wdefinitio n o f developmen t i n thi s instanc e b ycharacterizin g developmen t a s actua l constructio n o n th e site . However , th e developmen t proces s i s a muc h broade rproces s tha n actua l sit e construction . Adevelopmen t undergoe s severa l phase s including : a preconstructio n phas e (preleasing , designing , permitting , contracto rselections , etc.) , a constructio n phas e (actua l constructio n o fproject) , an d a pos t constructio n phas e (managemen t o fth e project) . Th e preconstructio n phas e o fa developmen t i s typicall ymuc h longe ri n duratio n tha n th e constructio n phas e o fa

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 9 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R project . Thi s i s becaus e larg e project s tak e monumenta l effort s t o cour t an d sig n tenants , permi t an d desig n th e project , an d selec t contractors . Thi s wa s exactl y th e cas e fo rAGLAD' s development . A s i s documente d i n th e Complain t o n pag e 6 unde rth e paragrap h Achieve d Projec t Milestones , AGLA D ha d advance d ver yfa ri n th e developmen t proces s an d onl ylacke d financing . Th e proble m wa s tha t du e t o th e mel t dow n o fth e U S an d Worl d financia l markets , financin g wa s no t immediatel ypossible . 7 . Althoug h TSAI Arespond s tha t th e leas e di d no t cal l fo ra thir d phas e an d hanga r thi s doe s no t mea n tha t AGLA D wa s no t plannin g fo ra thir d phas e an d hangar . 7.a-d : N o comment . 8 . Again , TSAI Arespond s t o thi s paragrap h wit h regar d t o th e AGLA D leas e requirement s bu t thi s paragrap h depict s wha t actuall ywa s goin g t o b e built . 9 . TSAIA' s denia l "tha t a n "AGLA D development " eve rexiste d a t all " i s fla t wrong . AGLA D pu t $3 M int o advancin g th e AGLA D development . A s detaile d i n th e Complain t o n pag e 6 unde rAchieve d Projec t Milestones , AGLA D ha d significantl y prelease d th e development , considerabl ypermitte d an d designe d th e project , secure d a difficul t t o obtai n wetland s permi t an d spen t thousand s an d thousand s o f ma n hour s cultivatin g relationship s wit h prospectiv e tenants . TSAIA' s apparen t lac k o f understandin g o fho wdevelopment s occu ri s distressing . TSAI Aliterall yappear s t o believ e tha t al l tenant s shoul d com e t o th e lan d leas e signin g wit h thei rdevelopment s pre-leased , pre-permitted , pre-finance d an d read yfo rconstruction . Ther e i s n o tim e neede d t o cour t an d negotiat e wit h prospectiv e tenants ; ther e ar e n o permittin g problem s t o sor t out ; design s ar e quic k an d eas yt o produce ; an d millio n dolla rproject s jus t appear . Thi s i s no t th e answer . TSAI Aknow s violation s o fgran t assurance s hav e occurre d an d ar e diligentl yworkin g t o discredi t RDM' s vali d assertion s o ftenan t discrimination . 9- 1 N o commen t needed . 9-1. a Contrar yt o TSAIA' s clai m tha t th e Alask a Developmen t an d Expor t Authorit yan d RB C Capita l Market s lie d a s t o thei rrepresentatio n o f AGLAD' s project , th e fac t wa s tha t th e AGLA D projec t wa s financiall y viabl e an d o n trac k

t o clos e bonds . Th e reaso n th e bon d sal e initiall y di d no t occu rwa s becaus e o fTSAIA' s extremel ytigh t leas e deadlines . Prospectiv e tenant s wer e ver yleer yo fsignin g lease s wit h AGLA D whe n AGLA D wa s i n constan t dange ro flosin g thei rleas e bac k t o TSAIA . AGLA D los t man ytenant s du e t o TSAIA' s unreasonabl e leas e deadlines . Later , th e bon d sal e di d no t occu rdu e t o force s outsid e AGLAD' s control . I n 200 7 th e bon d marke t completel ydisappeare d (i t wa s th e commercia l backe d mortgage s tha t starte d th e globa l financia l meltdown) . Wit h th e bon d marke t drie d up , AGLA D ha d t o see k mor e traditiona l mean s (i.e . banks ) fo rfinancing . However , TSAI Awoul d no t hel p AGLA D ou t i n an ywa y(a s the yha d wit h othe rtenants) . A complet e revie wo fthes e tool s ca n b e see n i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 . 9-1. b Se e comment s abov e i n 9-1.a . 9-1. cSe e comment s abov e i n 9-1.a . RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 1 0 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 9-1. d N o commen t needed . 9-1. e N o commen t needed . 9- 2 AGLA D wa s i n constan t contac t wit h Kalitt a Air , LL C wit h regard s t o th e AGLA D development . The ywer e ver yexcite d t o finall yhav e a locatio n t o consolidat e thei rram p an d buildin g activities . Thes e wer e facilitie s tha t the yneede d an d wer e committe d t o th e AGLA D developmen t t o th e end . 9- 3 N o commen t needed . 9-3. a Se e comment s abov e i n 9-1.a . 9-3. b N o commen t needed . 9- 4 AGLA D wa s i n constan t contac t wit h Evergree n Internationa l Airlines , Inc . wit h regard s t o th e AGLA D development . The yto o wer e ver yexcite d t o finall yhav e a locatio n t o consolidat e thei rram p an d buildin g activities . Thes e wer e facilitie s tha t the yneede d an d wer e committe d t o th e AGLA D developmen t t o th e end . 9- 5 AGLA D wa s i n constan t contac t wit h Trailbos s Enterprises , Inc . wit h regard s t o th e AGLA D development . The yto o wer e ver yexcite d t o b e a par t o f thi s development . Thes e wer e facilitie s tha t the yneede d an d wer e committe d t o th e AGLA D developmen t t o th e end . 9- 6 AGLA D wa s i n constan t contac t wit h Ho t Wing s o fAlaska , Inc . wit h regard s t o th e AGLA D development . The yto o wer e ver yexcite d t o b e a par t o f thi s development . Thes e wer e facilitie s tha t the yneede d an d wer e committe d t o th e AGLA D developmen t t o th e end . 9- 7 N o commen t needed . 9-7. a N o commen t needed . 9-7. b A s describe d above , th e abilit yfo rAGLA D t o mee t thi s deadlin e wa s impossible . Du e t o n o faul t o fAGLAD's , th e U S an d Worl d financia l market s i n 200 8 wer e i n disarray . I t literall ywa s almos t impossibl e fo rAGLA D t o mee t thi s deadline . O n to p o ftha t TSAI Awa s unwillin g t o offe rhel p (a s describe d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 ) t o AGLA D t o ge t throug h thi s difficul t time . 9-7. cN o commen t needed . 9-7. d N o commen t needed . 9-7. e N o commen t needed . 9- 8 Pegasu s Aircraf t Maintenanc e wa s goin g t o b e a majo rancho rtenan t t o AGLAD' s development . No t onl ydi d Pegasu s sig n u p fo rbuildin g spac e i n th e firs t phas e bu t the yals o anticipate d leasin g a larg e portio n o fth e secon d phas e building . AGLA D spen t man yhour s workin g wit h Pegasu s o n th e project . The ywer e ver yexcite d t o finall yhav e a locatio n t o consolidat e thei rram p an d buildin g activities . Pegasu s service s man y aircraf t a t TSAI Aan d thi s facilit ywoul d hav e bee n a perfec t fi t fo rthem . Thes e wer e facilitie s tha t the ydesperatel yneede d an d wer e ver y committe d t o th e AGLA D developmen t t o th e end . 9- 9 AGLA D wa s i n constan t contac t wit h Alask a Sno wRemova l wit h regard s t o th e AGLA D development . The yto o wer e ver yexcite d t o b e a par t o fthi s

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 1 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R development . Thes e wer e facilitie s tha t the yneede d an d wer e committe d t o th e AGLA D developmen t t o th e end . 9-1 0 Catha yPacifi cAirway s Limite d wa s als o goin g t o b e a majo rancho rtenan t t o AGLAD' s development . No t onl ydi d Catha ysig n u p fo rbuildin g an d ram p spac e i n th e firs t phas e bu t the yals o anticipate d leasin g a larg e portio n o f th e secon d phas e ram p an d buildin g space . Catha ydesperatel y neede d a facilit yt o consolidat e thei rram p an d buildin g activities . The y wer e jus t endin g a leas e wit h TSAI Aan d reall ywante d t o mov e t o th e AGLA D development . The ywer e ver yexcite d t o finall yhav e a locatio n t o consolidat e thei rram p an d buildin g activities . Thes e wer e facilitie s tha t the ydesperatel yneede d an d wer e ver ycommitte d t o th e AGLA D developmen t t o th e end . Aconcernin g not e i s tha t TSAI Awa s competin g wit h AGLA D t o secur e lease s wit h Catha yPacifi cfo rbuildin g space . Durin g thi s time , TSAI A dramaticall yreduce d TSAI Aaircraf t parkin g positio n fee s an d defaulte d AGLAD' s lease . S o muc h fo rcompetin g fairl ywit h it s tenants . 9-1 1 N o commen t needed . 9-11. a N o commen t needed . 9-11. b A s describe d above , th e abilit yfo rAGLA D t o mee t th e financin g deadlin e wa s impossible . Du e t o n o faul t o fAGLAD's , th e U S an d Worl d financia l market s i n 200 8 wer e i n disarray . I t literall ywa s almos t impossibl e fo rAGLA D t o mee t thi s deadline . O n to p o ftha t AGLA D wa s unwillin g t o offe rhel p (a s describe d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 ) t o AGLA D t o ge t throug h thi s difficul t time . 9-11. cN o commen t needed . 9-11. d N o commen t needed . 9-11. e N o commen t needed . 9-11. f N o commen t needed . 9-11. g N o commen t needed . 9-1 2 N o commen t needed . 9-12. a I n th e fal l o f 2008 , RD M too k a ver yactiv e rol e i n th e AGLA D developmen t whe n the ysecure d a n Optio n t o purchas e al l o fAGLAD , Inc.' s interes t i n AGLA D Postmark , LLC . RD M me t severa l time s wit h TSAI A(Octobe r14 , 2008 , Octobe r28 , 2008 , an d Novembe r17 , 2008 ) t o discus s extendin g AGLAD' s leas e deadline , TSAI Ahel p wit h financing , an d intereste d investmen t groups . I n advanc e o f th e Octobe r28 , 200 8 meeting , TSAI Arequeste d tha t RD M provid e a cop yo fth e Optio n Agreemen t (se e Exhibi t B) . RD M wa s tol d b yTSAI Atha t the ywoul d no t mee t wit h RD M unles s the yha d proo f tha t RD M ha d authorit yt o ac t o n behal fo fAGLA D Postmark , LLC . Onc e th e Optio n Agreemen t wa s provided , TSAI Adeeme d th e Optio n Agreemen t a s satisfactio n o fthei rrequiremen t an d proceede d t o mee t wit h RDM . O n Octobe r24 , 2008 , Debenha m Properties , LL C (th e managin g membe ro f RDM , LLC ) sen t a lette rt o Jeanett e Lucke y(se e Exhibi t C , pgs . 1-2) . Thi s lette rwa s t o outlin e th e purpos e o fth e Octobe r28 ,

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 2 o

f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 200 8 meetin g betwee n RDM , LL C an d TSAIA . Presen t a t th e Octobe r 28" " meetin g wa s Ra yDebenha m an d Shau n Debenha m (member s o f RDM , LLC ) an d severa l TSAI Astaf fmembers . A s indicate d i n th e letter , RD M directl yrequeste d tha t TSAI Aexten d th e leas e deadlin e t o allo wtim e secur e financin g an d brin g i n intereste d investors . RD M als o directl yrequeste d tha t TSAI Ahel p ou t i n an ywa ywit h regard s t o financin g an d bu ybac k Taxiwa yP extensio n an d Taxiwa yN afte r construction . A t th e Octobe r28 , 2008 , meetin g betwee n TSAI Aan d RD M i t appeare d tha t TSAI Awa s goin g t o gran t RD M onl ya thre e mont h extension . Durin g thi s meetin g Joh n Parro t (Airpor t Manager ) indicate d tha t an yextensio n woul d hav e t o b e shor t (thre e months) . Also , Ric h Wilso n (forme rDevelopmen t Manager ) state d tha t CargoPor t ha d receive d a simila rextensio n o fon e yea ri n 199 8 du e t o economi cconditions . Whe n inquire d durin g th e meetin g i fa on e yea r extension , simila rt o CargoPorts , woul d b e granted , TSAI Aindicate d tha t i t woul d no t an d tha t a shorte rthre e mont h extensio n shoul d b e sought . Th e preferentia l treatmen t show n CargoPor t i s a violatio n o f gran t assurances . Als o durin g thi s meeting , RD M aske d tha t TSAI Ahel p wit h financing . RD M specificall yaske d i fTSAI Awoul d b e abl e t o ow n th e AGLA D development . However , thi s wa s denied . I t wa s no t know n a t thi s tim e t o RD M tha t CargoPor t ha d receive d thi s preferentia l treatmen t fo rthei rdevelopment . Th e preferentia l treatmen t show n CargoPor t i s a violatio n o f gran t assurances . Lastly , durin g thi s meetin g RD M aske d tha t TSAI Abu ybac k afte r construction , th e Taxiwa yP extensio n an d Taxiwa yN . Thi s to o wa s denie d b yTSAIA . I t wa s no t know n b yRD M a t tha t tim e tha t TSAI A owne d th e taxiway s fo rth e CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xdevelopments . Th e preferentia l treatmen t show n t o CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xi s a violatio n o f gran t assurances . Lastly , contrar yt o TSAIA' s assertion , o n Novembe r25 , 200 8 Debenha m Properties , LL C (managin g membe ro fRDM , LLC ) sen t a lette rt o Jeanett e Lucke yexplainin g th e rational e fo rth e requeste d thre e mont h extensio n o fAGLAD' s leas e deadline . (Se e Exhibi t C , pgs , 3-4) . I n thi s letter , Debenha m Propertie s state s tha t thre e mont h leas e extensio n i s requeste d t o allo wtim e t o formaliz e agreement s wit h ne winvestors . 9-1 3 N o commen t needed . 9-13. a N o commen t needed . 9-1 4 AGLAD' s abilit yt o mee t th e financin g deadlin e wa s impossible . Du e t o n o faul t o f AGLAD's , th e U S an d Worl d financia l market s i n 200 8 wer e i n disarray . I t literall ywa s almos t impossibl e fo rAGLA D t o mee t thi s deadline . O n to p o f tha t TSAI Awa s unwillin g t o offe rhel p (a s describe d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 ) t o AGLA D t o ge t throug h thi s difficul t time . 9-1 5 N o commen t needed .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 3 o

f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 9-1 6 TSAIA' s denia l o f AGLA D reques t fo r" a yea rextension " o fth e leas e wa s a violatio n o f gran t assurances . A s documente d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-11 . 9-1 7 N o commen t needed . 9-1 8 N o commen t needed . 9-1 9 N o commen t needed . 10 . N o commen t needed . 10- a N o commen t needed . 10- b N o commen t needed . 10- cN o commen t needed . 10- d N o commen t needed . 10- e AGLA D spen t ove r$250,00 0 an d man yma n hour s t o secur e th e Cor p permi t fo rth e wetland s a t th e site . Yet , TSAI Atoo k bac k th e lease , secure d th e wetlan d permit , an d di d no t reimburs e AGLAD . TSAI Ai s no t fre e t o enjo yth e us e o f thi s wetlan d permi t fo rfree . 10- f AGLA D pai d $70,00 0 t o Pruh s Constructio n t o sufficientl ydewate rth e sit e i n preparatio n fo rconstruction . AGLA D ha s a $70,00 0 bil l t o sho wtha t indee d th e sit e wa s dewatered . 10- g N o commen t needed . 10- h N o commen t needed . 10- i Tota l mone yinveste d int o th e AGLA D developmen t wa s righ t a t $3M . 10- j N o commen t needed . 1 1 . RDM' s state d allegation s hav e factua l an d lega l meri t a s describe d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 . 12 . N o commen t needed . 13 . A s documente d o n page s 7 an d 8 i n th e Complain t an d TSAI Agran t assuranc e violation s foun d o n page s 9-2 0 i n th e Complaint , AGLAD' s developmen t wa s ver y simila rt o th e development s b yCargoPort , FedEx , an d UPS . 14 . A s documente d o n page s 7 an d 8 i n th e Complain t an d TSAI Agran t assuranc e violation s foun d o n page s 9-2 0 i n th e Complaint , AGLAD' s developmen t wa s simila ri n siz e an d locatio n t o CargoPort , FedEx , an d UPS . Additionally , al l fou r development s ha d simila rdevelopmen t pattern s o fdevelopin g bot h hardstand s fo raircraf t servicin g an d buildin g spac e fo rindustria l uses . Thi s i s tru e fo ral l fou rdevelopments . 15 . TSAI Arespons e i s no t accurate . TSAI Aprovide d substantia l sit e improvement s t o bot h FedE xan d UP S (a s documente d i n th e Complain t o n page s 17-19) . Thi s include d TSAI Afill . 16 . TSAI A"denie s tha t al l fou rsite s compare d b yRD M ar e sufficientl ysimila ri n siz e t o b e similarl ysituated " bu t the n goe s o n t o describ e th e development s size s an d al l fou rar e indee d ver ysimila ri n size : a . CargoPort : 1,649,128s f (93 % o fAGLA D lease )

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 4 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R b . UPS : 989,350s f (56 % o fAGLA D lease ) UP S squar e footag e doe s no t includ e th e ram p spac e use d b yUP S a s "Preferentia l Use " hardstand s bu t ultimatel y ar e "Exclusiv e Use " hardstands . Includin g thi s squar e footag e woul d pu t th e UP S developmen t ver yclos e t o CargoPort' s an d AGLAD' s developmen t size , c . FedEx : 2,774,385s f (157 % o fAGLA D lease ) Al l fou rdevelopment s ar e approximatel y1M + s fdevelopment s tha t hav e aircraf t servicin g hardstand s an d warehousin g facilities . Acoupl e o f importan t thing s t o remembe rar e a s follows . First , UP S an d FedE x wer e abl e t o star t of f wit h a ver ysmal l leas e becaus e the yha d th e res t o fthei r lan d tie d u p i n th e for m o f Firs t Righ t o fRefusal s (FROR) . Th e critica l too l o f FROR' s wa s denie d t o AGLAD . Ha d AGLA D bee n abl e utiliz e FROR' s the yto o woul d hav e bee n abl e t o star t of fwit h a muc h smalle rlease . Also , a s discusse d above , UP S wa s abl e t o us e TSAIA-owne d hardstand s fo rthei rdevelopmen t an d therefor e di d no t nee d additiona l lan d fo rth e developmen t o fthei row n hardstands . Thi s allowe d UP S t o hav e a muc h smalle rdevelopment . 17 . Althoug h TSAI Apoint s ou t tha t th e fou rdevelopment s d o no t hav e exactl yth e sam e uses , a s documente d o n pag e 8 o fth e Complaint , the yd o hav e ver ysimila r uses . Al l fou rdevelopment s rel yextensivel yo n aircraf t parkin g hardstan d t o servic e aircraft . Additionally , al l fou rdevelopment s rel yextensivel yo n warehousin g facilitie s t o servic e good s an d services . 18 . I n respons e 1 8 TSAI Aagree s wit h RDM' s assessmen t i n th e Complain t o n pag e 8 tha t states , "Al l fou rdevelopment s involv e constructin g an d usin g aircraf t parkin g position s an d a buildin g facilit ywher e office , warehous e an d carg o transfer/sortin g ca n occur. " Thi s i s RDM' s point , tha t b yan d large , al l fou r development s ar e simila ri n siz e an d use . Becaus e o f this . Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s mus t b e uniforml yapplie d t o al l fou rdevelopments . However , a s outline d o n page s 9-2 0 o f th e Complain t thi s wa s no t th e case . CargoPort , FedE x an d UP S al l receive d preferentia l treatmen t ove rAGLAD . 18.A . 1- 9 TSAI Aliste d i n thi s sectio n difference s betwee n FedEx/UP S an d AGLAD . Som e o f thes e difference s include : a . The ywer e signator yairline s b . TSAI Awante d thei rne wlong-ter m commitmen t fo rlandin g fee s an d fue l flowag e revenue . c . The ywer e experience d developer s an d operator s o fai rcarg o facilities . d . The ywer e majo rnationa l an d internationa l corporation s wit h stron g financia l trac k

records . e . Alask a regulation s wer e differen t whe n the ystarte d developmen t f . Alask a Internationa l Airpor t Syste m ha d les s deb t bac k i n 198 8 an d 199 0 an d wa s therefor e bette rprepare d t o mak e airpor t revenu e availabl e fo r suppor t o f tenan t development . Al l o f th e abov e ma yo rma yno t b e tru e bu t i t doe s no t excus e TSAI Afro m fulfillin g thei robligation s t o Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . TSAIA' s requiremen t t o compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e i s no t tenan t specific . Meaning , TSAI Aca n no t willfull ycompl ywit h al l Genera l Writte n Assurance s fo ron e tenan t an d the n decid e t o compl yonl ywit h a RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 1 5 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R selec t numbe ro f Genera l Writte n Assurance s fo ranothe rtenant . TSAI Amus t compl ywit h a

M Genera l Writte n Assurance s wit h regard s t o a M tenants , regardles s o f wh o th e tenan t is , ho wimpressiv e thei rbalanc e shee t is , o rho w man yflight s the ymigh t brin g t o Anchorage , Alaska . 18.B . 1- 8 TSAI Aliste d i n thi s sectio n difference s betwee n CargoPor t an d AGLAD . Som e o f thes e difference s include : a . The ywer e a n experience d develope ran d operato ro fai rcarg o facilities . b . The yha d a member , MAPCO , wh o wa s a mid-majo roi l compan ywit h a stak e i n je t fue l sale s an d TSAIA . c . Alask a regulation s wer e differen t whe n the ystarte d developmen t d . Alask a Internationa l Airpor t Syste m ha d les s deb t bac k i n 199 7 an d wa s therefor e bette rprepare d t o mak e airpor t revenu e availabl e fo rsuppor t o f tenan t development . Again , a s state d i n 18.A . 1-9 , al l o fth e abov e ma yo rma yno t b e tru e bu t i t doe s no t excus e TSAI Afro m fulfillin g thei robligation s t o Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . TSAIA' s requiremen t t o compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e i s no t tenan t specific . Meaning , TSAI Aca n no t willfull ycompl ywit h al l Genera l Writte n Assurance s fo ron e tenan t an d the n decid e t o compl yonl ywit h a selec t numbe ro fGenera l Writte n Assurance s fo r anothe rtenant . TSAI Amus t compl ywit h al l Genera l Writte n Assurance s wit h regard s t o a

M tenants , regardles s o fwh o th e tenan t is , ho wimpressiv e thei r balanc e shee t is , o rho wman yflight s the ymigh t brin g t o Anchorage , Alaska . 19 . TSAI Amake s th e poin t tha t TSAI Atreate d AGLA D differentl ytha n CargoPort , FedEx , an d UPS , bu t the ystat e tha t thi s wa s "justifie d b ydifferin g circumstance s an d times. " Thi s i s no t correc t a s explaine d below . a . Becaus e th e plannin g an d developmen t o fTSAI Aha s bee n financed , i n part , wit h fund s provide d b yth e FA Aunde rth e Airpor t Improvemen t Progra m (AIP) , authorize d b yth e Airpor t an d Airwa yImprovemen t Ac t o f1982 , a s amended , 4 9 U.S.C . §47101 , e t seq , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . b . TSAIA' s requiremen t t o compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e i s no t tenan t specific . Meaning , TSAI Aca n no t willfull ycompl ywit h al l Genera l Writte n Assurance s fo ron e tenan t an d the n decid e t o compl yonl ywit h a selec t numbe ro f Genera l Writte n Assurance s fo ranothe rtenant . TSAI Amus t compl ywit h a

M Genera l Writte n Assurance s wit h regard s t o a M sam e o rsimila r tenants , regardles s o f wh o th e tenan t is , ho wimpressiv e thei rbalanc e shee t is , o rho wman yflight s the ymigh t brin g t o Anchorage , Alaska . c . Specifically , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e 22 , "Economi cNondiscrimination. " FAAOrde r5190.6 A"describe s th e responsibilitie s unde rAssuranc e 2 2 assume d b yth e owner s o fpublic-us e airport s develope d wit h Federa l assistance . Amon g thes e i s th e obligatio n t o trea t i n a unifor m manne rthos e user s makin g th e sam e o rsimila rus e o fth e airpor t an d t o mak e al l airpor t facilitie s an d service s availabl e o n reasonabl e term s withou t unjus t discrimination. " [Se e Order , Sees . 4-14(a)(2 ) an d 3-1 ] Also , "Th e owne ro f an yairpor t develope d wit h Federa l gran t assistanc e i s require d t o operat e th e airpor t fo rth e us e an d benefi t o fth e publi can d t o

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 6 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R mak e i t availabl e t o al l types , kind s an d classe s o faeronautica l activit yo n reasonabl e terms , an d withou t unjus t discrimination. " [Se e Order , Sec . 4 - 13(a). ] d . Additionally , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e 23 , "Exclusiv e Rights. " FAAOrde r5190.6 Astates , "w e hav e take n th e positio n tha t th e applicatio n o f an yunreasonabl e requiremen t o ran ystandar d tha t i s applie d i n a n unjustl ydiscriminator ymanne rma yconstitut e th e constructiv e gran t o f a n exclusiv e righ t t o th e entit yo rentitie s no t subjec t t o th e sam e requirement s o rstandards. " e . Whe n AGLA D Postmark , LL C negotiate d it s groun d leas e wit h TSAI Ai n 200 5 i t di d s o wit h th e belie f tha t TSAI Awa s negotiatin g i n goo d fait h an d wa s no t violatin g an ylaw s o rpolicy . Ha d AGLA D know n tha t TSAIA' s propose d leas e term s (se e abov e TSAI Aviolation s i n Sectio n 1. 8 o n pag e 2 ) wer e i n violatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances , AGLA D woul d hav e negotiate d it s groun d leas e differentl yo rma yno t hav e entere d int o a leas e a t all . f . Whe n AGLA D Postmark , LL C negotiate d wit h TSAI Apos t 200 5 (onc e i t ha d a signe d leas e wit h TSAIA ) i t di d s o agai n wit h th e belie ftha t TSAI Awa s negotiatin g i n goo d fait h an d wa s no t violatin g an ylaw s o rpolicy . Ha d AGLA D know n tha t TSAIA' s tactic s (se e abov e TSAI Aviolation s i n Sectio n 1. 8 o n pag e 2 ) wer e i n violatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s AGLA D woul d hav e negotiate d differently . 19- 1 N o commen t needed . 19-1. a TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t di d no t hav e a "financin g requirement" . Thi s constitute s preferentia l treatmen t becaus e AGLA D di d hav e thi s requirement . 19-1. b TSAI Aadmit s tha t UP S di d no t hav e a "financin g requirement" . Thi s constitute s preferentia l treatmen t becaus e AGLA D di d hav e thi s requirement . 19-1. cTSAI Aadmit s tha t FedE xdi d no t hav e a "financin g requirement" . Thi s constitute s preferentia l treatmen t becaus e AGLA D di d hav e thi s requirement . 19-1. d TSAI Aadmit s tha t AGLA D dj d hav e a "financin g requirement. " TSAI Asite s Alask a regulation s a s justificatio n fo rAGLAD' s financin g requirement , bu t thi s doe s no t excus e TSAI Afro m it s obligatio n unde rTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance . Also , thes e regulation s stat e tha t i t i s u p t o th e Airpor t Manage rt o determin e i fa financin g requiremen t i s required , s o TSAI Acoul d hav e chose n t o compl ywit h gran t assuranc e an d no t adde d a n AGLA D financia l requirement . Th e botto m lin e i s tha t TSAI Aviolate d thei rgran t assurance s b ysettin g a preceden t wit h CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xo fno t requirin g a "financin g requirement " bu t the n require d on e fro m AGLAD . 19-1. e Althoug h TSAI Adenie s thi s paragraph , i t i s true . 19-1. f Althoug h TSAI Adenie s thi s paragraph , i t i s true . 19- 2 N o commente d needed . 19-2. a Althoug h CargoPor t eventuall yme t thi s leas e obligatio n i n 2005 , i t di d no t d o s o befor e signin g a ne wleas e i n 2000 . TSAI Aallowe d CargoPor t t o RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 7 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R Sig n a ne wleas e eve n thoug h the yha d no t fulfille d thei rleas e obligation s fo r fiv e years . 19-2. b I f i t i s tru e tha t hardstand s 8 an d 9 wer e no t require d t o b e constructe d b yCargoPor t the n thi s to o i s a violatio n o fgran t assurances . Ever yhardstan d a t th e AGLA D developmen t wa s require d t o b e buil t b ya specifi cdate . Thi s sectio n prove s agai n tha t TSAI Awa s muc h mor e lenien t wit h CargoPor t tha n AGLA D whic h i s a violatio n o fgran t assurances . 19-2. cTSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t di d no t complet e constructio n o f Hardstan d 7 & 1 2 b yth e require d completio n dat e i n thei rlease . Thi s i s ye t anothe rexampl e o f TSAI Aignorin g CargoPor t leas e obligations . However , thi s allowanc e wa s no t give n t o AGLAD . Thi s i s a violatio n o fgran t assurances . 19-2. d N o commen t necessary . 19-2.eTSAI S admit s tha t i t di d gran t CargoPor t extensions . A s documente d abov e an d o n page s 9-2 0 i n th e Complaint , thes e extension s wer e muc h mor e significan t tha n AGLAD's . Also , TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t onl ysatisfie d th e majorit yo f it s deadlines . Wh ydi d no t TSAI Atak e bac k CargoPort' s lease ? CargoPor t wa s treate d mor e preferentiall ytha n AGLAD . 19-2. f N o commen t necessary . 19- 3 N o commen t necessary . 19-3. a TSAI Adoe s no t addres s th e allegatio n containe d her e b yRDM . CargoPor t signe d thei rleas e o n Jul y1 , 1997 . Constructio n o fa carg o facilit y buildin g an d fiv e wid e bod yaircraf t parkin g position s wa s t o b e complete d b y n o late rtha n thre e year s fro m th e beginnin g o fth e leas e term . Thi s woul d pu t constructio n completio n aroun d Jul y1 , 2000 . However , CargoPor t di d no t mee t th e constructio n completio n deadline . Instea d a s i s state d i n th e Complaint , TSAI Agav e CargoPor t a n "unofficial " on e yea rextensio n du e t o th e recessio n tha t wa s affectin g globa l market s i n 1998 . Thes e ar e Ric h Wilson' s words , a s tol d t o RDM , no t RDM's . TSAIA' s cite d lette rfro m Richar d Wilso n t o Mr . Lythgo e i s i n referenc e t o CargoPort s requiremen t t o submi t a performanc e bon d whic h ha s nothin g t o d o wit h CargoPort' s extensio n explaine d above . Whe n AGLA D face d simila rcircumstance s i n 200 8 (a s documente d i n th e Complain t o n pag e 98il0) , the yaske d fo ran d wa s denie d a n extension . 19-3. b N o commen t necessary . 19-3.b. i N o commen t necessary . 19-3.b.i i TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t receive d fou r(4 ) extension s o f deadline s fo rconstructio n o fhardstands . The yals o admi t tha t th e fou r hardstand s ha d a tota l buil d ou t duratio n o fseve n years . AGLA D di d no t receiv e thi s luxury . 19-3.b.ii i TSAI Aadmit s t o givin g CargoPor t man yextension s an d providin g CargoPor t seve n (7 ) year s t o complet e sai d improvements . 19-3. cTSAI Ashoul d hav e grante d AGLA D a muc h longe rinitia l perio d i n whic h t o complet e construction .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 1 8 o

f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 19-3. d AGLA D wa s presente d wit h a "tak e i t o rleav e it " leas e i n th e fal l o f 2005 . A s explaine d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 , AGLA D woul d hav e ha d a muc h smalle rinitia l leas e ha d the ybee n abl e t o utiliz e Firs t Righ t o f Refusal s lik e UP S an d FedEx . Also , AGLA D woul d hav e ha d a smalle rleas e i f the ydi d no t hav e t o own , construct , an d maintai n th e taxiway s lik e CargoPort , UP S an d FedEx . 19-3. e TSAI Aadmit s tha t i t gav e CargoPor t leas e deadlin e extension s bu t whe n AGLA D wa s face d wit h simila rcircumstance s a s CargoPor t (worl d recession) , AGLA D wa s denie d a simila rextension . 19-3. f CargoPor t receive d seve n year s t o construc t fou rhardstand s a t a cos t o f $1.5M , whic h wa s wel l belo wAGLAD' s $25 M development . Du e t o th e magnitud e o f it s project , AGLA D shoul d hav e bee n grante d substantiall ymor e tim e t o complet e Phas e I . 19-3. g Althoug h thi s wa s no t a "policy " document , TSAI Aadmit s t o usin g th e describe d languag e a s "genera l practice" . Thi s show s tha t eve n TSAIA' s "genera l practices " recommende d tha t AGLA D shoul d hav e receive d a longe r initia l ter m du e t o th e larg e siz e o fthei rproject . 19-3. h RDM' s allegatio n wa s i n referenc e t o CargoPort' s leas e fo rth e constructio n o f fou rhardstand s ove ra seve n yea rduration . Again , becaus e AGLAD' s initia l constructio n phas e ($25M ) wa s s o muc h large rtha n CargoPort' s leas e ($1.5M) , AGLA D shoul d hav e bee n grante d a muc h longe r initia l tim e perio d i n whic h t o complet e construction . 19-3. 1 TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t receive d man yleas e deadlin e extensions . 19-3. J TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPort' s developmen t ($3.7M ) wa s significantl ysmalle rtha n AGLAD' s ($25M) . 19-3.j.(i ) N o commen t necessary . 19-3.j.(ii ) Th e leas e signe d i n Novembe ro f200 5 wa s a leas e tha t wa s signe d afte rman yyear s o fnegotiatio n i n letters , emails , phon e calls , an d meetings . Th e cite d lette rb yCaro l Meyer s i s onl yon e o fman y occurrence s i n whic h leas e term s wer e discussed . Also , whe n AGLA D Postmark , LL C negotiate d it s groun d leas e wit h TSAI A i n 200 5 i t di d s o wit h th e belie ftha t TSAI Awa s negotiatin g i n goo d fait h an d wa s no t violatin g an ylaw s o rpolicy . Ha d AGLA D know n tha t TSAIA' s propose d leas e term s (se e abov e TSAI Aviolation s i n Sectio n 1. 8 o n pag e 2 ) wer e i n violatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances , AGLA D woul d hav e negotiate d it s groun d leas e differentl yo rma yno t hav e entere d int o a leas e a t all . 19-3.J.(iii ) AGLA D wa s no t allowe d th e us e o fFirs t Righ t o fRefusal' s (FROR ) wit h regard s t o thei rdevelopment . Ha d AGLA D bee n abl e t o utiliz e FRORs , the ywoul d hav e bee n abl e t o initiall yleas e a muc h smalle r sectio n o f lan d an d ther e woul d no t hav e th e nee d t o hav e leas e completio n date s fo rth e variou s phase s o fth e AGLA D development . 19-3.j.(iv)Th e AGLA D an d CargoPor t lease s ca n b e fairl ycompared . Th e reaso n wh yi s becaus e bot h lease s involve d constructin g hardstand s an d warehousin g facilities . TSAI Aha s alread yadmitte d t o thi s #18 .

RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 1 9 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R Th e allegation s o f th e las t sentenc e o fparagrap h 19-3. j wer e foun d t o b e tru e no t i n "hindsight " bu t i n realit ysoo n afte rAGLA D signe d it s leas e i n Novembe ro f 2005 . Thi s wa s a sourc e o fconstan t argumen t betwee n Le e Nun n an d TSAI Athroughou t th e AGLA D development . Ther e i s a majo rdifferenc e betwee n marketin g a prospectiv e projec t tha t migh t occu ran d on e i n whic h a develope rcontrol s a prim e piec e o frea l estate , secure s permittin g fo rth e project , start s desig n o n th e project , an d activel ystart s courtin g tenant s t o sig n leases . So , no , AGLA D di d no t hav e thre e additiona l year s befor e th e signin g o fth e lease . A s explaine d above , whe n AGLA D Postmark , LL C negotiate d it s groun d leas e wit h TSAI Ai n 200 5 i t di d s o wit h th e belie ftha t TSAI Awa s negotiatin g i n goo d fait h an d wa s no t violatin g an ylaw s o rpolicy . Ha d AGLA D know n tha t TSAIA' s propose d leas e term s (se e abov e TSAI A violation s i n Sectio n 1. 8 o n pag e 2 ) wer e i n violatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances , AGLA D woul d hav e negotiate d it s groun d leas e differentl yo rma yno t hav e entere d int o a leas e a t all . Th e disaste ro rcalamit ywa s tha t TSAI Aviolate d it s gran t assurance s b y heavil ydiscriminatin g agains t AGLA D whic h directl ylea d t o th e failur e o f thei rproject . 19-3. k TSAI Aadmit s tha t the ysignificantl yextende d CargoPort' s lease . RDM' s stand s b yit s paragraph . 19-3. 1 RD M stand s b yth e concludin g paragraph . 19- 4 N o commen t necessary . 19-4. a Th e mai n poin t o fth e paragrap h remain s th e same , a defaul t o n on e parce l i s onl ya forfei t o f th e subjec t parce l an d doe s no t affec t th e remainin g parcels . 19-4. b FedE xLan d Leas e ADA-30172 , Supplemen t 3 , Sectio n V , clearl y state s tha t a defaul t o n on e parce l di d no t constitut e a defaul t o n othe rFedE x parcels . (Se e Complain t Exhibi t F pg . 2 ) 19-4. cWha t TSAI Adoe s no t poin t ou t i s tha t AGLA D di d no t hav e " a defaul t o n on e parce l doe s no t constitut e a defaul t o n al l parcels " optio n fo rPhas e I o f th e AGLA D development . I fAGLA D had , TSAI Awoul d hav e bee n unabl e t o defaul t th e AGLA D leas e i n it s entirety . 19-4. d A t a minimu m TSAI Aadmit s FedE xha d provision s i n thei rleas e tha t state d tha t a defaul t o n on e parce l di d no t constitut e a defaul t o n othe r parcels . (Se e Complain t pg . 1 2 an d Complain t Exhibi t F pg . 2 ) AGLA D di d no t hav e thi s provisio n fo rthei rPhas e I development . Thi s clearl yshow s biase d treatmen t b yTSAI Aan d a s suc h i s a violatio n o fthei rgran t assurances . 19-4. e AGLA D shoul d hav e onl ybee n defaulte d o n i t Phas e I lot s an d no t al l lots . 19- 5 N o commen t necessary . 19-5. a TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t receive d ren t deferral . 19-5. b TSAI Aadmit s FedE xreceive d ren t deferral .

RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 2 0 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 19-5. cTSAI Aadmit s FedE xreceive d ren t deferral . 19-5. d TSAI Aadmit s AGLA D di d no t receiv e ren t deferra l whe n the ysigne d thei rleas e i n Novembe r2005 . 19-5. e AGLA D pai d jus t unde rhal fa millio n dollar s ($469,880.73 ) i n leas e payment s t o TSAI Abefor e constructio n eve n started . TSAI Atrie s t o justif y no t givin g AGLA D ren t deferra l b ysayin g tha t FedEx , UP S an d CargoPor t lease s wer e no t simila rt o AGLAD's . Thi s i s no t true . Se e RDM' s comment s foun d abov e i n Sectio n 2.1 3 t o 2.19 . 19-5. f TSAI Ai s obligate d t o no t discriminat e agains t simila rus e tenants . RD M ha s show n abov e tha t TSAI Agrante d ren t deferra l t o CargoPor t an d FedE xbu t denie d i t t o AGLAD . Thi s i s a clea rviolatio n o fgran t assurances . 19- 6 N o commen t necessary . 19.6, a Th e poin t o f thi s paragrap h i s tha t TSAI Aende d u p chargin g AGLA D fo rit s fill . TSAI Apoint s ou t tha t AGLA D signe d a leas e statin g tha t fre e fil l wa s no t a guarante e however , AGLA D wa s presente d wit h a "tak e i t o rleav e it " lease . I t wa s no t know n a t tha t tim e tha t bot h FedE xan d UP S receive d significan t sit e improvemen t fro m TSAIA . 19.6. b TSAI Aadmit s tha t i t "improve d lot s 2 Aan d 2 B o fBloc k 21 , an d 33,75 0 squar e fee t o f th e adjacen t transien t parkin g ramp " o n th e FedE x development . I n orde rfo rTSAI At o "improve " th e lo t t o mak e i t read yfo r constructio n i t woul d hav e ha d t o o fprovide d "fill" . 19.6. cTSAI Aadmit s tha t i t reimburse d UPS , minu s cost s associate d wit h th e design , engineerin g an d constructio n managemen t (whic h ar e relativel y minimal ) fo rth e constructio n o ffou rhardstand s t o b e use d o n a "Preferential " basis . A s par t o f thi s reimbursement , TSAI Awoul d hav e eithe rgive n UP S fre e "fill " fo rthei rsit e o rwoul d hav e charge d UP S an d the n reimburse d them . 19.6. d TSAI Aadmit s tha t i t di d no t giv e AGLA D fre e fill . TSAI Atrie s t o impl ytha t AGLA D willingl yaccepte d t o pa yfo rfil l bu t thi s i s no t th e case . Le e Nun n negotiate d extensivel yfo rfre e fill . Also , late rwhe n RD M me t wit h TSAI Ao n Octobe r28 , 200 8 an d th e subjec t o ffil l wa s discussed , becaus e th e origina l fil l permi t wa s lapsing , RD M wa s tol d tha t no t onl ywoul d AGLA D no t b e grante d fre e fil l bu t i t woul d b e har d presse d fo rAGLA D t o fin d readil y availabl e fil l anywher e a t th e airport . 19.6. e A s describe d abov e i n Sectio n 2.1 3 t o 2.1 9 AGLAD' s developmen t wa s simila rt o thos e o f FedE xan d UPS . AGLA D shoul d hav e receive d fre e fill . 19- 7 N o commen t necessary . 19.7. a TSAI Aadmit s tha t TSAI A"agree d t o accep t titl e t o certai n improvements.... " Although , TSAI Atrie s t o muddl e it s importance , thi s wa s ver ysignificant . Havin g a TSAI Aagre e t o tak e titl e allowe d CargoPor t t o ensur e long-ter m financing . AGLA D di d no t hav e a proble m securin g constructio n financin g (shor t ter m financing ) i t wa s long-ter m financin g tha t wa s th e problem . Ha d AGLA D bee n abl e t o utiliz e th e sam e sale-leas e bac k too l tha t CargoPor t did , AGLA D woul d hav e bee n abl e t o secur e financing . 19.7. b AGLA D engage d TSAI Asevera l time s t o se e i fthe ycoul d hel p wit h financing . Durin g thi s tim e i t wa s no t know n t o AGLA D tha t TSAI Aha d helpe d CargoPor t wit h financin g b yagreein g t o a sale-leas e back . Ever yreques t fo r TSAI Aassistanc e wa s denied . Th e las t tim e wa s durin g th e Octobe r28 , 200 8 RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 1 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R (Se e Exhibi t C , pgs . 1- 2 fo rlette rtha t show s a questio n pertainin g t o TSAI A hel p wit h financing ) meetin g betwee n RD M an d TSAI Awher e RD M requeste d tha t TSAI Atak e ownershi p o fth e AGLA D development . However , thi s wa s agai n denied . 19.7. cTSAI Aadmit s tha t a t th e Octobe r24 , 200 8 meetin g tha t i t denie d RDM' s reques t fo rhel p wit h financing . Specifically , RD M requeste d tha t TSAI Abu ybac k

th e AGLA D developmen t bu t wa s denied . A s outline d above , TSAI Adi d hel p CargoPor t obtai n long-ter m financin g b yagreein g t o a sale leaseback . 19.7. d TSAIA' s admissio n tha t i t too k titl e t o CargoPort s improvement s i s a n admissio n tha t i t acte d a s a n guaranto rfo rth e project . Onc e TSAI Aagree d t o tak e title , i t als o agree d t o an ydeb t owe d o n thos e improvements . TSAIA' s denia l tha t th e sale-leas e bac k wa s a mechanis m b ywhic h CargoPor t wa s abl e t o secur e long-ter m financin g simpl yi s NO Ttrue . AGLA D di d reques t hel p fro m TSAI Ao n man yoccasions . Th e las t suc h reques t cam e a t th e Octobe r24 , 200 8 meetin g wher e RD M wa s tol d tha t TSAI Acoul d no t d o anythin g t o hel p AGLAD . Thi s wa s no t true , TSAI Acoul d hav e offere d th e sam e sale-leas e bac k too l tha t CargoPor t used . 19.7. e TSAI Aassiste d CargoPor t wit h long-ter m financin g b yagreein g t o a sale-leas e bac k

fo rcomplete d improvements . Lon g ter m financin g i s alway s th e hardes t financin g t o secur e fo ra development . I n 2008 , a s writte n abou t i n dept h abov e an d th e Complaint , long-ter m financin g wa s practicall y impossibl e t o secure . TSAI Ashoul d hav e offere d a sale-leas e bac k t o AGLAD . Thi s constitute s a violatio n o fgran t assurances . 19- 8 N o commen t necessary . 19-8. a TSAI Aadmit s t o grantin g UP S a Firs t Righ t o fRefusa l (FROR) . 19-8. b TSAI Aadmit s t o grantin g FedE xa FRO R an d t o no t marke t th e FROR . 19-8. cTSAI Aadmit s t o denyin g AGLA D a FROR . 19-8. d N o commen t necessary . 19-8. e RD M stand s b yit s statemen t tha t FROR' s ar e "ver yimportant " tool s fo rdevelopmen t a t TSAIA . FROR' s allo wdeveloper s t o initiall yleas e smal l parcel s an d reserv e th e remainin g lan d fo rlate ruse . Th e righ t t o FROR' s wa s no t mad e availabl e t o AGLA D a s admitte d t o b yTSAI Ai n 19-9.c . 19-8. f AGLA D wa s no t awar e a t th e tim e o fnegotiatin g it s leas e tha t FROR' s wer e grante d t o UP S an d FedE xi n manne rdescribe d o n page s 1 4 & 1 5 i n th e Complaint . Ha d AGLA D know n this , AGLA D coul d hav e significantl y reduce d thei rinitia l leas e squar e footage , resultin g i n les s u p fron t cost s an d eventua l constructio n costs . Also , TSAIA' s denia l o f a FRO R t o AGLA D prevente d the m fro m latte r requestin g a FRO R fo rthei ralread ylease d land . 19-8. g FROR' s shoul d hav e bee n a too l mad e availabl e t o AGLA D a s ha d bee n mad e availabl e t o FedE xan d UPS . Thi s constitute s a violatio n o fgran t assurances . 19- 9 N o commen t necessary .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 2 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 19-9. a TSAI Aadmit s tha t TSAI A"modified " th e then-existin g apro n t o b e use d b yFedE xan d the n effectivel ysol d th e apro n t o FedE xfo r$0.266/s fpe r year . Thi s represent s million s o fdollar s i n saving s t o FedE xha d the ybee n require d t o construc t th e hardstan d fro m undisturbe d land . 19-9. b TSAI Aadmit s tha t UP S wa s grante d "Preferentia l Use " o fth e TSAI A owne d hardstands . 19-9. cTSAI Aadmit s t o grantin g UP S "Preferentia l Use " o fth e TSAI A owne d hardstands . Althoug h TSAI Adenie s tha t th e "Preferentia l Use " wa s mor e o f a n "Exclusiv e Use" , reaso n show s tha t i t woul d b e extremel ydifficul t fo ranothe rairlin e t o regularl yus e thes e "aircraf t parkin g positions" . 19-9. d RD M stand s b yi t statement s describe d i n thi s paragraph . UP S receive d a n exceptiona l dea l fo rfou rextremel yexpensiv e "aircraf t parkin g positions" . 19-9. e N o commen t necessary . 19-9.e. l RD M stand s b yi t statement s foun d i n thi s paragraph . UP S ende d u p payin g $185,62 5 fo rfou rhardstand s tha t cos t $4.5 M t o construct . 19-9.e. 2 Th e poin t o fthi s paragrap h i s no t tha t UP S wa s allowe d t o pa y th e paltr y$185,62 5 ove r2 5 year s a t 5 % interest , i t i s tha t TSAI A admitte d tha t th e $185,00 0 wa s belo wi t rea l value . 19-9. f TSAI Aadmit s tha t UPS' s onl yrequiremen t fo rmaintenanc e wit h regard s t o th e TSAI Aowne d hardstan d "Preferentially " bein g use d b yUP S wa s t o pa yfo rsno wstorage . Suc h allowanc e wa s no t give n t o AGLAD . 19-9. g TSAI Aadmit s tha t AGLA D wa s no t grante d "preferentia l use " o f hardstan d P-1 , P-2 , an d P-3 . TSAI Aessentiall yjustifie s thi s b ystatin g tha t UP S an d FedE x"brough t mor e t o th e table. " Thi s i s no t justifiabl e discrimination . 19-9. h TSAI Aagai n admit s denyin g AGLA D "preferentia l use " o fth e P-1 , P 2 , an d P- 3 hardstands . 19-9. i RD M stand s b yit s statemen t foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . Th e us e o f th e P-1 , P-2 , an d P- 3 o n a "preferentia l use " basi s woul d hav e literall ysave d AGLA D million s o fdollar s an d AGLA D coul d hav e easil ysecure d financin g fo rth e buildin g an d the n develope d th e othe r hardstan d a s marke t force s dictated . 19-9. J RD M stand s b yit s statemen t foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . 19-9. k N o commen t necessary . 19-9. 1 RD M stand s b yit s statemen t foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . TSAI Ashoul d no t hav e discriminate d agains t AGLA D an d allowe d the m t o us e th e P-1 , P-2 , an d P- 3 hardstand s o n a "preferentia l basis" . 19-1 0 N o commen t necessary . 19-10. a TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t wa s abl e t o us e Taxiwa y"S " fre e o f charge . 19-10. b N o commen t necessary .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 3 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 19-10. cTSAI Aadmit s tha t afte rcompletio n o fTaxiwa y"T " i t woul d becom e "public " an d tha t TSAI Awoul d assum e maintenanc e responsibilities . Curiously , TSAI Adoe s no t admi t no rden ytha t TSAI Awoul d reimburs e FedE x fo rth e constructio n o f Taxiwa y"T" . However , a s documente d i n Complain t Exhibi t L , pg . 2 , TSAI Adoe s agre e t o reimburs e FedE xfo rth e constructio n o f Taxiwa y"T" . 19-10. d TSAI Aadmit s t o improvin g Lot s 2 Aan d 2 B an d 33,750s fs o tha t the ywer e "read yfo rth e constructio n o fa n ai rexpres s packag e sortin g an d clearanc e facility. " 19-10. e TSAI Aadmit s t o TSAIA' s obligatio n "t o bargai n i n goo d fait h concernin g th e availabilit yo fpubli cfinancin g fo rth e developmen t o fsit e improvement s fo rlot s upo n whic h Federa l Expres s retain s a n optio n o rfirs t righ t o f refusa l o rothe ragree d upo n site. " 19-10. f TSAI Aadmit s t o reimbursin g FedE xfo rsit e improvemen t fo rFedE x Phas e I I an d II I lot s (Lot s l A& 2 C Bloc k 2 1 an d Lo t IB , 2B , 3C , an d 5 ABloc k 22) . TSAI Aals o admit s tha t i t provide d fre e fil l t o FedE xfo rthei r development . 19-10. g RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . TSAI Agav e FedE xa ver yimpressiv e financin g packag e fo rth e paymen t b yTSAI Ao fsignifican t sit e improvement s a t th e FedE x development . 19-10. h N o commen t necessary . 19-10. i RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xal l wer e provide d wit h fre e taxiways . AGLA D di d no t receiv e this . 19-lO. j TSAI Aadmit s t o requirin g AGLA D t o pa yfo ral l sit e improvements . 19-10. k N o commen t necessary . 19-10. 1 CargoPor t di d no t hav e t o pa yfo rTaxiwa y"S" . UP S di d no t hav e pa yfo rth e Taxiway s t o thei r"preferential " hardstands . FedE xgo t reimburse d fo rit s constructio n o fTaxiwa y"T" . CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xal l receive d som e typ e o f assistanc e fro m TSAI Awit h regar d t o Taxiways , bu t AGLA D wa s denie d an ysuc h assistance . 19-10. m RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . Th e extremel ybeneficia l servic e tha t FedE xha d wa s tha t TSAI A finance d th e sit e improvements . A s state d i n th e Complaint , simila r treatmen t woul d hav e dramaticall yreduce d AGLAD' s constructio n cost s an d henc e thei rabilit yt o secur e long-ter m financing . 19-10. n N o commen t necessary . 19-1 1 N o commen t necessary . 19-11. a RD M stand s b yit s statemen t foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . 19-11. b TSAI Aadmit s t o significantl ydecreasin g (51 % decrease ) parkin g fee s fo rcarrier s a t TSAIA . TSAI Amake s th e statemen t tha t th e "cost-cente r calculation " i s wha t drov e th e parkin g fee s fo raircraf t parkin g position s down . Thi s i s a n excuse . TSAI Acoul d com e u p wit h whateve rrat e the ywante d an d the n blam e i t o n th e "cost-cente rcalculation" . TSAIA' s practice s mak e i t RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 4 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R nearl yimpossibl e t o compete . I fdeveloper s ar e goin g t o inves t million s o f dollar s int o project s a t TSAI Athe ynee d t o kno wtha t TSAI Ai s no t goin g t o willfull yprice-undercu t them . 19-11. cN o commen t necessary . 19-11. d RD M stand s b yit s statemen t foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . 19-1 2 N o commen t necessary . 19-12. a N o commen t necessary . 19-12. b RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . TSAI Aget s t o directl yenjo ya wetland s permi t tha t cos t AGLA D hundred s o f thousand s o fdollar s t o secure . TSAI Apurport s t o hav e sustaine d damage s b yAGLAD' s leas e default . AGLA D pai d TSAI Ajus t unde rhal fa millio n dollar s i n rent . 19-12. cRD M stand s b yit s statemen t foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . 20 . RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . 2 1 . RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . However , RD M firml ybelieve s tha t AGLAD' s developmen t wa s simila rt o CargoPort's , UPS's , an d FedEx' s an d tha t thes e thre e development s receive d significan t preferentia l treatmen t a s outline d i n th e Complain t o n page s 9-20 . 22 . RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . 23 . TSAI Adi d violat e 4 9 U.S. C §47107(a) . 23- 1 I n 19-1.a , 19-1. b an d 19-1. cTSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xdi d no t hav e a "financin g requirement" . I n 19-1.d , TSAI Aadmit s tha t AGLA D di d hav e a "financin g requirement" . Becaus e CargoPort , UP S an d FedE xar e simila rdevelopment s t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yincludin g a "financin g requirement " i n thei rleas e an d ha s thu s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23- 2 I n 19-2.c , TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t di d no t complet e constructio n o f Hardstand s 7 & . 1 2 b yth e require d completio n dat e i n thei rlease . I n 19 - 2. e TSAI Aadmit s CargoPor t wa s grante d extension s an d CargoPor t di d no t mee t al l thei rleas e deadlines . Becaus e CargoPor t i s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde r th e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t significantl yextendin g AGLA D leas e obligation s t o th e degre e tha t CargoPor t receive d extension s an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23- 3 Ric h Wilso n fro m TSAI Astate d i n a meetin g wit h RD M o n Octobe r28 , 200 8 tha t CargoPor t receive d a on e yea rextensio n du e t o th e worl d recessio n a t tha t tim e affectin g financin g markets .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 5 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R Becaus e CargoPor t i s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde r th e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t extendin g AGLA D leas e obligation s t o th e degre e tha t CargoPor t receive d extension s an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23- 4 I n 19-3.b.ii , TSAI Aadmit s t o givin g CargoPor t fou rextension s o fleas e deadline s tha t extende d th e constructio n completio n deadlin e o ffou r hardstan d t o seve n years . Inl9-3.b.iii , TSAI Aadmit s t o givin g CargoPor t man yextension s an d providin g CargoPor t seve n year s t o complet e improvements . I n 19-3.e , TSAI Aadmit s tha t i t gav e CargoPor t leas e deadlin e extension s bu t whe n AGLA D wa s face d wit h simila rcircumstance s a s CargoPor t (worl d recession) , AGLA D wa s denie d a simila rextension . I n 19-3.g , TSAI Aadmit s t o usin g "genera l practice " guideline s a t tha t tim e tha t recommende d tha t large rdevelopment s shoul d b e grante d longe r initia l terms . Becaus e CargoPor t i s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde r th e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t extendin g AGLA D leas e obligation s t o th e degre e tha t CargoPor t receive d extension s an d b yno t followin g "genera l practice " guideline s tha t recommende d large r developmen t b e grante d longe rinitia l term s an d thu s ha s violate d thei r gran t assurances . 23- 5 I n 19-4.d , TSAI Aadmit s a t a minimu m tha t FedE X ha d provision s i n thei r leas e tha t state d tha t a defaul t o n on e parce l di d no t constitut e a defaul t o n othe rparcels . Becaus e FedE X i s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t includin g i n thei rleas e a provisio n tha t states , " a defaul t o n on e parce l di d no t constitut e a defaul t o n othe rparcels " an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23- 6 I n 19-5.a-c , TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t an d FedE xreceive d ren t deferral . Inl9-5.d , TSAI Aadmit s tha t AGLA D di d no t receiv e ren t deferra l whe n the ysigne d thei rleas e i n Novembe ro f2005 . Becaus e CargoPor t an d FedE xar e simila rdevelopment s t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D (the ypai d jus t hal fa millio n dollar s i n rent ) b yno t allowin g the m t o defe rren t an d thu s ha s violate d thei r gran t assurances . 23- 7 I n 19-5.c , TSAI Aadmit s tha t FedE xwa s abl e t o pa ybac k deferre d ren t ove rtw o years . Becaus e FedE xi s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 6 o f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D (the ypai d jus t hal fa millio n dollar s i n rent ) b yno t allowin g the m t o pa ybac k deferre d ren t ove rtw o year s an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23- 8 I n 19-6.b , TSAI Aadmit s t o improvin g FedEx' s land , whic h include d providin g fre e fill . I n 19.6.c , TSAI Aadmit s t o reimbursin g UP S fo rth e cos t t o construc t fou rhardstands , whic h woul d hav e include d providin g fre e fill . I n 19-6. d TSAI Aadmit s tha t i t di d no t gran t AGLA D fre e fill . Becaus e FedE xan d UP S ar e simila rdevelopment s t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b ygrantin g the m fre e fil l an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23- 9 I n 19-7.a , TSAI Aadmit s t o agreein g t o accep t titl e t o CargoPort s improvements . I n 19-7.c , TSAI Aadmit s tha t a t th e Octobe r24 , 200 8 meetin g wit h RDM , RDM' s reques t fo rhel p wit h financin g wa s denied . I n particular , RD M requeste d a t thi s meetin g tha t TSAI Abu ybac k th e AGLA D development . Thi s wa s denied . Becaus e CargoPor t i s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde r th e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t allowin g AGLA D t o utiliz e th e sale-leas e bac k

mechanis m tha t wa s afforde d CargoPor t an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23-1 0 I n 19-8. a an d 19-8.b , TSAI Aadmit s t o grantin g UP S an d FedE xFirs t Righ t o f Refusals . I n 19-8.c , TSAI Aadmit s t o denyin g AGLA D a FROR . Becaus e FedE xan d UP S ar e simila rdevelopment s t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t grantin g the m th e us e o f FROR s an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23-1 1 I n 19-9.b , TSAI Aadmit s t o grantin g UP S "Preferentia l Use " o fTSAI A owne d hardstands . I n 19-9.c , TSAI Aadmit s t o requirin g UP S t o onl ypa y fo rsno wremova l fo rth e "preferential " hardstands . I n 19-9.g,h , TSAI A admit s t o denyin g AGLA D th e "preferentia l use " o fth e P-1 , P- 2 an d P- 3 TSAI Aowne d hardstands . Becaus e UP S i s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t grantin g th e "preferentia l use " o f TSAI Aowne d hardstan d (P-1 , P-2 , an d P-3 ) an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23-1 2 RD M modifie s thi s sectio n t o read , "No t givin g AGLA D th e righ t t o purchas e th e P-1 , P-2 , an d P- 3 hardstand s a t a lo wrate . FedE xreceive d thi s concession. " I n 19-9.a , TSAI Aadmit s t o modifyin g th e existin g TSAI Aowne d apro n t o mee t FedE xrequirement s an d the n t o sellin g thi s apro n t o FedEx . RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 7 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R Becaus e FedE xi s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t agreein g t o sel l th e TSAI A owne d hardstan d (P-1 , P-2 , an d P-3 ) t o AGLA D an d thu s ha s violate d thei r gran t assurances . 23-1 3 I n 19-10.a , TSAI Aadmit s tha t CargoPor t wa s abl e t o us e Taxiwa y"S " fre e o f charge . I n 19-10.b , TSAI Aadmit s afte rFedE xconstructe d Taxiwa y"T" , the ywoul d b e reimburse d fo rthei rcosts , an d Taxiwa y"T " woul d becom e "public" . AGLA D wa s require d t o pa yfo ral l taxiway s an d t o maintai n them . Becaus e CargoPor t an d FedE xar e simila rdevelopment s t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e obligatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . I TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yrequirin g the m t o pa yfo ral l i taxiwa yconstructio n an d t o maintai n the m an d thu s ha s violate d thei r j gran t assurances . 1 23-1 4 I n 19-10.d&f , TSAI Aadmit s t o providin g sit e improvement s t o FedEx . I n I 19-10.e , TSAI Aadmit s t o agreein g t o bargai n fo radditiona l publi cfund s I fo radditiona l sit e improvemen t o n othe rFedE xproperties . I n 19-lO.j , ! TSAI Aadmit s t o requirin g AGLA D t o pa yfo ral l sit e improvements .

5 ! Becaus e FedE xi s a simila rdevelopmen t t o AGLAD's , TSAI Ai s unde rth e j obligatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n \ Assurance s t o no t discriminat e agains t AGLAD . j TSAI Adi d discriminat e agains t AGLA D b yno t providin g significan t sit e j improvement s an d thu s ha s violate d thei rgran t assurances . 23-1 5 N o commen t necessary . 23-1 6 I n 19-11.b , TSAI Aadmit s t o significantl ydecreasin g (51 % decrease ) parkin g fee s fo rcarrier s a t TSAIA . TSAI Ashoul d no t b e i n th e busines s o f competin g wit h an d pric e undercuttin g it s tenants . Thi s make s airpor t tenant s abilit yt o ru n a profitabl e compan yextremel ydifficult . TSAI Aha s violate d gran t assurance s b yno t treatin g thei rtenan t fairly . 23-1 7 TSAI Asecure d AGLAD' s wetland s permi t withou t compensatin g AGLA D fo r th e thousand s o f dollar s an d hundred s o fma n hous e i t investe d t o secur e them . TSAI Ashoul d no t b e i n th e busines s o fprofitin g of fth e failur e o f thei rtenants . TSAI Aha s violate d gran t assurance s b yno t treatin g thei rtenan t fairly . 24 . RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint . 25 . RD M stand s b yit s statement s foun d i n thi s paragrap h i n th e Complaint .

RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 2 8 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 

## Sectio n 3 : Explanatio n o fPertinen t FA ACase s an d Order s Belo war e pertinen t FA Acase s an d Order s tha t RD M believe s ar e relevan t t o RDM' s Complaint . 30.Th e plannin g an d developmen t o fTe d Steven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t ha s bee n financed , i n part , wit h fund s provide d b yth e FAAunde rth e Airpor t Improvemen t Progra m (AIP) , authorize d b yth e Airpor t an d Airwa yImprovemen t Ac t o f 1982 , a s amended , 4 9 U.S.C . §47101 , etseq . 3 1 . A s such , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances . 32 . TSAIA' s requiremen t t o compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e i s no t tenan t specific . Meaning , TSAI Aca n no t willfull ycompl ywit h al l Genera l Writte n Assurance s fo ron e tenan t an d the n decid e t o compl yonl ywit h a selec t numbe r o f Genera l Writte n Assurance s fo ranothe rtenant . TSAI Amus t compl ywit h al l Genera l Writte n Assurance s wit h regard s t o a M tenants , regardles s o fwh o th e tenan t is , ho wimpressiv e thei rbalanc e shee t is , o rho wman yflight s the ymigh t brin g t o Anchorage , Alaska . 33 . Specifically , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e 22 , "Economi c Nondiscrimination. " FAAOrde r5190.6 A"describe s th e responsibilitie s unde r Assuranc e 2 2 assume d b yth e owner s o fpublic-us e airport s develope d wit h Federa l assistance . Amon g thes e i s th e obligatio n t o trea t i n a unifor m manne r thos e user s makin g th e sam e o rsimila rus e o fth e airpor t an d t o mak e al l airpor t facilitie s an d service s availabl e o n reasonabl e term s withou t unjus t discrimination. " [Se e Order , Sees . 4-14(a)(2 ) an d 3-1 ] 34 . Also , "Th e owne ro f an yairpor t develope d wit h Federa l gran t assistanc e i s require d t o operat e th e airpor t fo rth e us e an d benefi t o fth e publi can d t o mak e i t availabl e t o al l types , kind s an d classe s o faeronautica l activit yo n reasonabl e terms , an d withou t unjus t discrimination. " [Se e Order , Sec . 4-13(a). ] 35 . "Th e FAAconsider s i t inappropriat e t o provid e Federa l assistanc e fo r improvement s t o airport s wher e th e benefit s o fsuc h improvement s wil l no t b e full yrealize d du e t o inheren t restrictio n o n aeronautica l activitie s (Se e FA AOrde r 5190.6A , Sec . 3-8(a). " 36 . Additionally , TSAI Amus t compl ywit h Genera l Writte n Assuranc e 23 , "Exclusiv e Rights. " FAAOrde r5190.6 Astates , "w e hav e take n th e positio n tha t th e applicatio n o f an yunreasonabl e requiremen t o ran ystandar d tha t i s applie d i n a n unjustl ydiscriminator ymanne rma yconstitut e th e constructiv e gran t o fa n exclusiv e righ t t o th e entit yo rentitie s no t subjec t t o th e sam e requirement s o r standards. " 37 . "Additionally , th e FA Anote s tha t a n exclusiv e righ t ma yb e conferre d eithe rb y expres s agreement , b yth e impositio n o funreasonabl e standard s o r requirements , o rb yan yothe rmeans . Suc h a righ t conferre d o n on e o rmor e partie s bu t excludin g other s fro m enjoyin g o rexercisin g a simila rrigh t o rright s woul d b e a n exclusiv e righ t i n violatio n o f4 9 US C 40103(e ) an d 47107(a)(4) , an d relate d gran t assuranc e n o 23 . [Se e FA AOrde r5190.6A , Appendi x5 , Para , i. ] Accordingly , thes e tw o issues , unjus t economi cdiscriminatio n an d exclusiv e rights, " 38 . Leonar d Cardinals ' Pilo t Shop , Incorporate d v . Chesapeak e Airpor t Authority , FA A Docke t 16-01-06 : RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 2 9 o

f4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R

a . Pag e 27 , "Court s hav e foun d th e gran t o fa n exclusiv e righ t wher e a significan t burde n ha s bee n plac e o n on e competito rtha t i s no t plac e o n anothe r[Se e e.g . Pompan o Beac h v . FAA , 77 4 F.2 2 152 9 (11t h Cir , 1985).] " b . Pag e 33 , "th e FAAEaster n Regio n steepe d i n an d rule d tha t th e Responden t ha d establishe d unattainabl e standard s tha t th e Complainan t coul d neve r achieve . Whil e i t i s th e prerogativ e o fth e airpor t owne rt o impos e condition s o n user s o f th e airpor t t o ensur e i t saf e an d efficien t operation , suc h condition s mus t b e reasonabl e an d no t unjustl ydiscriminatory . The ymus t b e relevan t t o th e propose d activity , reasonabl yattainable , an d uniforml y applied . [Se e FA

AOrde r5190.6A , Sec . 3-12] " c . Pag e 36 , ".. a concer n abou t wha t a n operato rmigh t d o i s no t a legitimat e exercis e o f a sponsor' s authority. " d . Pag e 41 , "B yimposin g unreasonabl e requirement s . . th e Responden t ha s engage d i n unjus t discriminatio n violatio n o fTitl e 4 9 U.S.C . 47107(a)(l)(5 ) an d Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 2 2 regardin g economi cnondiscrimination . 10 . Skydanc e Helicopters , Inc . d/b/ a Skydanc e Operations , Inc . LL C v . Sedon a Oak Cree k Airpor t Authorit y(Operator ) an d Yavapa i County , Arizon a (Owne ran d Sponsor) , FAADocke t no . 16-02-0 2 a . Pag e 3 , "th e leas e term s offered , combine d wit h th e two-yea rrenewabl e licens e an d restrictivervi e provision s ar e inconsisten t wit h th e Authority' s rol e t o promot e an d develo p th e airport . . . . " b . Pag e 19 , "FA AOrde r5190.6 A. . . Amon g thes e i s th e obligatio n t o trea t i n a unifor m manne rthos e user s makin g th e sam e o rsimilarl yus e o fth e airpor t an d t o mak e al l airpor t facilitie s an d service s availabl e o n fai ran d reasonabl e term s withou t unjus t discrimination . [Se e Order , Sees . 4-14(a)(2 ) an d 3-1]. " c . Page s 28-29 , "Capita l Investments . . . Unde ra long-ter m lease , th e airpor t owne rtransfer s th e cos t o fth e capita l improvemen t an d th e ris k associate d wit h financin g t o th e tenant . I n retur n th e airpor t owne rgive s u p a degre e o f flexibility . Prospectiv e tenant s considerin g a substantia l investmen t i n th e airpor t generall yseek s a leas e ter m sufficientl ylon g t o ensur e tha t th e tenan t get s no t onl ya retur n o fit s investments , bu t a retur n o n it s investmen t a s well . . . . wit h it s two-yea rter m an d restrictiv e provisions , discourag e privat e investmen t i n airpor t facilities . Privat e investmen t , combine s wit h Federa l financia l assistanc e an d airpor t use rfees , collectivel ysuppor t th e operation s o f th e nation' s airports . Whe n a n airpor t owne rimpose d unreasonabl e barrier s t o privat e investors , i t exclude s thi s essentia l ingredien t i n developin g a viabl e airport . I n th e process , i t jeopardize s th e Federa l investmen t i n thos e facilities . d . "Th e two-yea rlicens e requirement , a s presented , unjustl ydiscriminate s agains t thos e aeronautica l operator s askin g th e airpor t t o giv e u p a certai n leve l o f flexibilit yan d contro l i n exchang e fo rmak e a substantia l investment. " e . Pag e 30 , "Fo rth e Complainant , however , attachin g a two-yea rrenewabl e busines s licens e t o a long-ter m leas e i s no t consisten t an d ha s tw o potentia l seriou s impacts . First , i t coul d impai rth e Complainant' s abilit yt o ge t favorabl e financin g fo rth e $300,00 0 investment . Second , i fth e Complaintnan t coul d ge t financing , th e limite d tim e o n th e licens e coul d impai rth e busines s operation' s abilit yt o generat e sufficien t retur n o n it s investment . RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 3 0 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 

### f . Pag e 33 , "Th e Complainan t argue s tha t i s wa s prohibite d fro m constructin g hanga ran d offic e facilitie s o n th e airpor t unde rreasonabl e term s an d condition s tha t hav e bee n extende d t o othe rengage d i n th e sam e activity . . . Byunjustl ydiscriminatin g agains t th e Complainant , th e Authorit yha s denie d th e Complainan t a righ t o rprivileg e enjoye d b yother s makin g simila rus e o f th e airport . A n exclusiv e right s violatio n occur s whe n th e airpor t sponso r exclude s other , eithe rintentionall yo runintentionally , fro m participatin g i n a n on-airpor t aeronautica l activity. " g . Pag e 36 , "FA

AOrde r5190.6A , par a 4-1 5 an d 4-15(c) , respectivel ystates : Unles s [th e airpor t owner ] undertake s t o provid e thes e [aeronautical ] service s itself , th e airpor t owne rha s a dut yt o negotiat e i n goo d fait h fo rth e leas e o f suc h premise s a s ma yb e availabl e fo rth e conduc t o faeronautica l services . I f adequat e spac e i s availabl e o n th e airport , an d i fth e airpor t owne ri s no t providin g th e service , i t i s obligate d t o negotiat e o n reasonabl e term s fo rth e leas e o f spac e neede d b ythos e activitie s offerin g fligh t service s t o th e public , o rsuppor t service s t o othe rfligh t operators , t o th e exten t tha t ther e ma yb e a publi cnee d fo rsuc h services . Awillingnes s b yth e tenan t t o leas e th e spac e an d inves t i n th e facilitie s require d b yreasonabl e standard s shal l b e construe d a s establishin g th e nee d o fth e publi cfo rth e service s propose d t o b e offered. " h . Pag e 37 , "Th e Respondents , throug h thei rpolicie s an d practices , hav e constructivel ygrante d a n exclusiv e righ t b yimposin g requirement s tha t discourag e competitio n amon g aeronautica l servic e provider s . . . i n violatio n o f Titl e 4 0 U.S.C . 40103(e) , an d relate d Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 23 , Exclusiv e Rights . 11 . Ji m Marty n v . Port o f Anacortes , Washington , FA ADocke t no . 16-02-0 3 a . Pag e 24 , "I n reviewin g th e Authority' s complianc e herein , th e FA Awil l tak e int o consideratio n tha t th e prim e obligatio n o f th e owne ro f a federall y assiste d airpor t i s t o operat e i t fo rth e us e an d benefi t o fth e public . Th e publi cbenefi t i s no t assure d merel yb ykeepin g th e runway s ope n t o al l classe s o f users . Whil e th e owne ri s no t require d t o construc t hangar s an d termina l faculties , i t ha s th e obligatio n t o mak e availabl e suitabl e area s o r spac e o n reasonabl e term s t o thos e wh o ar e willin g an d otherwis e qualifie d t o offe rfligh t service s t o th e public , i.e. , hanga rstorage . Thi s mean s tha t unles s i t undertake s t o provid e thes e service s itself , th e airpor t owne rha s a dut yt o negotiat e i n goo d fait h fo rth e leas e o fsuc h premise s a s ma yb e availabl e fo r th e conduc t o f aeronautica l activities . {FA AAirpor t Complianc e Requirements , Orde r5190.6A , [4-15]) " b . Pag e 34 , "A s state d earlie ri n Sectio n V , Applicabl e La wan d Policy , i n orde rt o sustai n a n exclusiv e right s violation , th e FA Awoul d hav e t o fin d tha t th e Responden t grante d specia l right s o rprivilege s t o other s makin g th e sam e o r simila rus e o f th e Airpor t whil e denyin g th e sam e t o th e Complainant . Specifically , th e FA

Awoul d hav e t o fin d tha t th e Port permitte d other s o n th e Airpor t t o engag e i n activitie s tha t hav e bee n denie d t o th e Complainant . . . recognize d i t ha s alread yse t a precedent . c . Pag e 44 , "Unswor n statement s submitte d i n suc h pleading s ma yconstitut e substantia l evidenc e i f suc h statement s hav e sufficien t indici a o freliabilit yan d probativeness . Th e FA Ai s fre e i n it s exercis e o f expertis e t o giv e conflictin g evidenc e th e suitabl e weigh t i t deem s appropriat e i n ligh t o fth e accuracyan d credibilit yo f suc h evidence . . . th e Directo rconclude s tha t th e fac t tha t th e RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 3 1 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R informatio n submitte d b yth e Complainan t i s unswor n doe s no t diminis h it s credibility . Th e preponderanc e o fevidenc e standar d ca n b e simpl ystate d a s th e more-likely-than-no t standar d an d i t couple d wit h th e broa d standar d fo r admissibl e evidenc e i n administrativ e proceedings . 12.Skydiv e Pari s Inc . v . Henr yCounty . Tennessee , FAADocke t No . 16-02-0 6 a . Pag e 12 , "I n al l cases , th e FA Awil l mak e th e fina l determinatio n o fth e reasonablenes s o f th e airpor t owner' s restriction s whic h denie d o rrestricte d u s e o f th e airport . [FA AOrde r5190.6A , Par4-8(b).] " 13 . Brow n Transpor t Co . v . Cit yo fHolland . Michigan , FA ADocke t No . 16-06-0 9 a . Pag e 7 , "A n exclusiv e righ t i s define d a s a power , privilege , o rothe rrigh t excludin g o rdebarrin g anothe rfro m enjoyin g o rexercisin g a lik e power , privilege , o rright . A n exclusiv e righ t ca n b e conferre d eithe rb yexpres s agreement , b yth e impositio n o funreasonabl e standard s o rrequirements , o r b yan yothe rmeans . Suc h a righ t conferre d o n on e o rmor e parties , bu t excludin g other s fro m enjoyin g o rexercisin g a simila rrigh t o rrights , woul d b e a n exclusiv e right . (Se e FA Aadvisor yCircula r5190- 5 Exclusiv e Right s an d Minimu m Standard s fo rCommercia l Aeronautica l Activities , Jun e 10 , 2002.) " b . Pag e 9 , "Thus , th e FAAca n tak e int o consideratio n reasonabl e correctiv e action s b yth e airpor t sponso ra s measure s t o resolv e allege d o rpotentia l violation s o f applicabl e Federa l obligations , an d a s measure s tha t coul d preven t recurrenc e o f noncomplianc e an d ensur e complianc e i n th e future. " c . Pag e 16 , "FA Adoe s . . .fin d . . A$ 1 millio n additiona l abilit yt o pa yi s a significan t su m b yan ystandard . Th e amoun t o fth e requiremen t i s th e issu e a t hand . Requirin g an yself-fuele rt o hav e a t leas t $ 1 millio n se t asid e i n pledge d persona l asset s o ra lette ro fcredi t o rbon d i n orde rt o self-fuel , is , o n it s face , unreasonable. " d . "Moreover , a s th e Cit yagreement s wit h it s fueler s ar e "subjec t an d subordinat e t o th e provision s o fan yexistin g o rfutur e agreemen t betwee n th e Cit yan d th e Unite d States, " th e Cit yha s th e abilit yt o chang e existin g agreemen t t o mee t it s Federa l obligations . Fo rexample , th e lan d leas e betwee n th e Cit yan d Princ e Corporatio n specificall ystate s tha t th e "leas e i s subordinat e t o th e provision s o fan yexistin g o rfutur e agreemen t betwee n th e Lesso ran d th e Unite d State s relativ e t o th e operatio n o rmaintenanc e o fth e Airport . e . "Cit ycan' t appl yrequirement s t o on e part yan d ignor e th e ris k o fth e activitie s o f anotlie rsimilarl ysituate d parties. " 14 . Richar d M . Grayso n an d Gat e 9 Hanga rLL C v . DeKal b County , GA , FA ADocke t No . 16-05-1 3 a . Pag e 3 , "Lan d No t Unde rLeas e - Th e use d an d developmen t o flan d no t unde rleas e appear s t o b e a t a standstill . I t appear s th e Count ydoe s no t activel yadvertis e an d promot e th e availabl e o funuse d land . Anothe rconcer n i s whethe ro rno t th e Count yha s place d unreasonabl e restriction s o n undevelope d propert ytha t ha s th e resul t o fmak e developmen t unattractiv e eithe runeconomicall yand/o rfunctionally. " b . Pag e 9-10 , " 5 A s state d above , th e Federa l obligation s o fth e Count y regardin g economi cnondiscriminatio n an d reasonabl e aeronautica l acces s exis t i n bot h it s surplu s propert yan d gran t assuranc e 2 2 obligations . Th e

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 3 2 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 

### prim e obligatio n o f th e owne ro fa federally-assiste d airpor t i s t o operat e i t fo r th e us e an d benefi t o f th e public . Th e publi cbenefi t i s no t assure d merel yb y keepin g runway s ope n t o al l classe s o f users . Whil e th e owne ri s no t require d t o construc t hangar s an d termina l facilities , i t ha s th e obligatio n t o mak e availabl e suitabl e area s o rspac e o n reasonabl e term s t o thos e wh o ar e willin g an d otherwis e qualifie d t o offe rfligh t service s t o th e publi c.. . o rsuppor t servic e (i.e . fuel , storage , ti e down , fligh t lin e maintenance , etc. ) t o aircraf t operators . Thi s mean s tha t unles s i t undertake s t o provid e thes e service s itself , th e airpor t owne rha s a dut yt o negotiat e i n goo d fait h fo rth e leas e o f suc h premise s a s ma yb e availabl e fo rth e conduc t o faeronautica l activities . [Se e Order , Sec . 4-15 ] c . "I f adequat e spac e i s availabl e o n th e airport , an d i fth e airpor t owne ri s no t providin g th e service , i t i s obligate d t o negotiat e o n reasonabl e term s fo rth e leas e o f spac e neede d b ythos e activitie s offerin g fligh t service s t o th e public , o rsuppor t service s t o othe rfligh t operators , t o th e exten t tha t ther e ma yb e a publi cnee d fo rsuc h services . Awillingnes s b yth e tenan t t o leas e th e spac e an d inves t i n facilitie s require d b yreasonabl e standard s shal l b e construe d a s establishin g th e nee d o f th e publi cfo rservice s propose d t o b e offered . [Se e Order , Sec . 4-15c ] d . Pag e 11 , "I n orde rfo rth e Directo rt o sustai n a n allegatio n o funjus t economi c discrimination , th e recor d mus t sho wth e element s o funjus t economi c discriminatio n unde rgran t assuranc e 22 . I n a Part 1 6 proceeding , th e Complainan t ha s th e burde n o fproo ft o establis h th e element s o funjus t discrimination . Unlik e a n allegatio n o f unreasonabl e denia l o faccess , discusse d below , th e recor d mus t sho wtha t anothe rpart ysimilarl ysituate d t o th e Complainan t receive d preferentia l treatmen t denie d t o th e Complainan t i n simila rcircumstances . e . "Th e FA

Aha s acknowledge d tha t severa l factor s ca n distinguis h partie s tha t a sponso rca n justl ytrea t differently , withou t violatin g it s Federa l obligations . Suc h factor s ma ybe : perio d o flease , busines s pla n proposed , locatio n o f facilities , leve l o f servic e an d amenities , scop e o f services , investment , marke t conditions , an d reasonabl e action s b yth e sponso rt o promot e an d protec t it s abilit yt o continu e t o serv e th e interest s o f th e publi ci n civi l aviation , includin g th e enlistmen t o fpruden t busines s practice s tha t may chang e ove rtime. " f . Pag e 12 , "Th e Directo rnote s tha t willfulness , purposefulnes s an d directnes s ar e no t require d element s fo ra findin g o f unreasonabl e denia l o f acces s sufficien t t o fin d a violatio n o fth e County' s Federa l obligations . Inactio n an d omissio n ca n b e th e mean s b ywhic h unreasonabl e denia l o f acces s migh t be achieved. " g . Pag e 14 , "A s state d i n th e Order , operatin g th e airpor t fo raeronautica l us e i s no t a secondar yobligation ; i t i s th e 'prim e obligation ' o fa n airpor t sponsor . Proposal s o faeronautica l developmen t b ypotentia l leaseholder s i s evidenc e o faeronautica l demand . [Se e Order , Sec . 4 - 15c] . Pursuin g leas e terms , plans , o rmanageria l processes , tha t unnecessaril ylimi t th e airport' s aeronautica l utilit yb yrestrictin g developmen t i s inconsisten t wit h th e City' s Federa l obligations . I t i s unreasonabl e fo ra n airpor t operato rt o refus e t o develo p a Federally obligate d airpor t i n respons e t o aeronautica l demand , a s th e airpor t wa s conveye d fo rthi s ver ypurpos e an d Federa l gran t fund s hav e

RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 3 3 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R bee n expende d fo rth e purpos e o fenhancin g th e aeronautica l utilit y o f th e airport. " 15 . Centennia l Expres s Ailines . Golde n Eagl e Charger s d/b/ a Centennia l Expres s Airlines ; Thoma s Kehmeier : FA Av . Arapaho e Count yPubli cAirport , FAADocke t No . 16-98-05 , 13-94-03 , 13-94-2 5 a . Pag e 8 , "Th e Rule s o f Practic e fo rFederally-Assiste d Airpor t Enforcemen t Proceeding s i n 1 4 C.F.R . Par t 1 6 provide s tha t "[a ] perso n directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d b yan yallege d non-complianc e ma ytil e a complain t wit h th e Administrator, " 1 4 C .F.R , 16.2 3 a) . Assuming , arguendo , tha t th e standin g requiremen t o f Par t 1 6 applies , i t i s difficul t t o imagin e a stronge r cas e fo ra direc t an d substantia l effec t o n Complainants . b . "Th e Airpor t Authorit yobtaine d a n injunctio n tha t immediatel ybrough t Centennia l Express' s schedule d passenge roperation s a t Centennia l Airpor t t o a halt , forcin g i t ou t o fbusines s there . Kehmeie ri s a shareholde ro f Centennia l Expres s an d therefor e i s directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d b yan y prohibitio n o n Centennia l Express' s revenu e operations . c . "Th e ver yfact s tha t Greenwoo d point s t o —th e surrende ro fth e Par t 13 5 certificat e an d th e dissolutio n o fGolde n Eagl e Charter s —ar e perhap s th e mos t compellin g evidenc e possibl e tha t th e Airpor t Authority' s allege d non-complianc e ha d a direc t an d substantia l effec t o n Complainants. " d . Pag e 8 an d 9 , "A s Kennet h Gul p Davi s state s i n 24. 1 o fth e Administrativ e La wTreatis e (2' d ed . 1983) , Amai n objectiv e i n reformin g th e la wo f standin g shoul d b e t o stri p dow n th e la wt o on e simpl e proposition : on e wh o i s adversel yaffecte d i n fac t shoul d neve rb e denie d standing." ' e . Pag e 10 , "Thu s th e rol e o fth e FA AOffic e o fAirpor t Safet yan d Standard s i s no t t o represen t Complainants , bu t t o represen t th e agency , actin g t o protec t th e publi cinterest . Th e rol e o fth e privat e complainan t i s simpl yt o brin g t o th e agency' s attentio n apparen t violation s o fairpor t gran t assurances . Se e 6 1 Fed . Reg . a t 53,99 9 (Octobe r16 , 1996) , notin g tha t th e FAAi s th e part ywit h th e burde n o f proo f an d tha t th e Rule s o fPractic e receiv e Complainant s part y statu s onl yt o assis t th e FA Ai n th e developmen t o fth e factua l record. " f . Pag e 17 , "Federa l court s wil l no t giv e effec t t o a judgmen t o rdecre e o fa stat e cour t tha t woul d restrai n th e exercis e o fsovereig n powe ro fth e Unite d State s b yimposin g requirement s tha t ar e contrar yt o importan t an d establishe d Federa l policy , id . citin g Bvr d v . Blu e Ridg e Cooperative , 35 6 U.S . 52 5 (1957) ; Re d Fo xv . Re d Fox . 56 4 F.2 d 361 , 36 5 n. 3 (9t h Cir . 1977) ; America n Manne xCo . v . Rozands , 46 2 F.2 d 688,69 0 (5t h Cir.) , cerr . denied , 30 9 U.S . 104 0 (1972) . g . "Th e ba n violate s Congress ' expres s prohibition , i n 4 9 U.S.C . 41713(b) ( 1) . o n stat e an d loca l regulatio n o fai rcarrie rrates , routes , o rservices . I n th e Airlin e Deregulatio n Act . Congres s preempte d stat e an d loca l regulatio n o f rates , routes , an d service s o fai rcarrier s t o ensur e tha t th e state s woul d no t und o Federa l deregulatio n (i fdomesti cai rtransport . Morale s v . TWA , 50 4 U.S . 374 , 378-37 9 (1992). " h . " Asaf e an d efficien t syste m o fpubli cus e airport s canno t b e maintaine d i f eac h Federally-funde d airpor t i s fre e t o impos e it s ow n ba n o n certai n type s o f ai rservic e withou t a n adequat e basi s i n fac t o rlaw . Th e nationa l syste m

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 3 4 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R 

### i I woul d weake n an d balkanize . Se e New - Englan d Lega l Foundatio n v . j Massachusett s Por t Authority . 88 3 F.2 d 157 , 17 2 ( 1s t Cir . 1989) . referrin g t o j th e "[b]alkanizin g force s o fstat e an d loca l regulation. " an d statin g tha t i n reducin g Federa l economi cregulatio n o faviation . Congres s di d no t inten d t o leav e a vacuu m fo rstat e an d loca l government s t o fill. " ' 16 . Unite d Aeria l Advertising , Inc . v . Count yo fSuffol k Boar d O fCommissioners , FA A 

### Docke t No . 16-99-1 8 a . Pag e 9 , "However , i n al l case s involvin g th e airpor t owne rimposin g restriction s o n th e us e o f th e airpor t fo rsafet yan d efficienc yreasons , th e FA A wil l mak e th e fina l determinatio n o fth e reasonablenes s o fth e airpor t owner' s restriction s tha t den yo rrestric t us e o fth e airport . (FA AOrde r6A , para . 4 - 8). " b . Pag e 14 , "Suffol k County' s apparen t singlin g ou t o fUnite d appear s t o b e furthe revidence d b yth e fac t tha t som e o fth e requirement s impose d o n Unite d ha d n o reasonabl e basis. " c . Pag e 15 , "B yimposin g thi s restriction , Suffol k Count yha s grante d a n exclusiv e righ t t o th e airport' s tw o existin g fixe d bas e operators . Exclusiv e righ t ma yresul t fro m a n expres s agreement , fro m th e impositio n o f unreasonabl e standard s o rrequirements , o rb yan yothe rmeans . I t i s th e agency' s position : d . "Th e existenc e o f a n exclusiv e righ t t o conduc t an yaeronautica l activit ya t a n airpor t limit s th e usefulnes s o fth e airpor t an d deprive s th e usin g publi co fth e benefit s o f a competitiv e enterprise . Apar t fro m th e lega l considerations , th e FA Aconsider s i t inappropriat e t o provid e Federa l fund s fo rimprovement s t o airport s wher e th e benefit s o fsuc h improvement s wil l no t b e full yrealize d du e t o th e inheren t restriction s o fa n exclusiv e monopol yo n aeronautica l activities . (FA AOrder , para . 3 - 8a. ) FA AOrde r5190.6 Adefine s a n exclusiv e righ t t o mean-"an yexclusiv e righ t t o us e th e airpor t fo rconductin g an y particula raeronautica l activit yrequirin g operatio n o fth e aircraft . N o exclusiv e righ t fo rth e us e o f th e airpor t a t whic h th e propert ydispose d o fi s locate d shal l b e veste d (eithe rdirectl yo rindirectly ) i n an yperso n o rperson s t o th e exclusio n o f other s i n th e sam e class. " (Se e Order , Para . 3-2 d .). " 17.Gin a Michell e Moore , individuall yan d d/b/a / Warbir d Sk yVentures , Inc . v . Sumne rCount yRegiona l Airpor t Authority , FA ADocke t No . 16-07-1 6 a . "A n exclusiv e righ t i s define d a s a power , privilege , o rothe rrigh t excludin g o r debarrin g anothe rfro m enjoyin g o rexercisin g a lik e power , privilege , o rright . A n exclusiv e righ t ca n b e conferre d eithe rb yexpres s agreement , b yth e impositio n o f unreasonabl e standard s o rrequirements , o rb yan yothe r means . Suc h a righ t conferre d o n on e o rmor e parties , bu t excludin g other s fro m enjoyin g o rexercisin g a simila rrigh t o rrights , woul d b e a n exclusiv e right . [Se e FA

AAdvisor yCircula r5190- 6 Exclusiv e Right s an d Minimu m Standard s fo rCommercia l Aeronautica l Activities , Januar y4 , 2007]. " 18 . M . Danie l Care yan d Clif f Davenpor t v . Afton-Lincol n Count yMunicipa l Airpor t Join t Power s Board , FAADocke t No . 16-06-0 6 a . Pag e 29 , " Th e Directo rdoe s find , however , base d o n th e record , tha t th e Responden t i s i n violatio n o fgran t assuranc e 24 , Fe e an d Renta l Structure , b y failin g t o collec t leas e payments . I n addition , th e Responden t i s advise d tha t failin g t o collec t leas e payment s fro m on e airpor t tenan t whil e collectin g suc h

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 3 5 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R leas e payment s fro m othe rsimilarl ysituate d tenant s i s als o a violatio n o f gran t assuranc e 22 , Economi cNondiscrimination. " b . Pag e 38 , "A n exclusiv e right s violatio n occur s whe n th e airpor t sponso r exclude s others , eithe rintentionall yo runintentionally , fro m participatin g i n a n on-airpor t aeronautica l activity . [Se e FAAAdvisor yCircula r(AC ) 150/5190-6 , Exclusiv e Right s a t Federall yObligate d Airports , Januar y4 , 2007 , sectio n 1.2. ] c . "Responden t require s other s t o mee t thes e standard s a s a conditio n o f providin g service s an d facilitie s o n th e airport . Thi s actio n give s Afto n Aircraf t Services , Inc . a n economi cadvantag e ove rpotentia l competitors . I t als o grant s a n exclusiv e righ t t o Afto n Aircraf t Services , Inc. , t o b e th e onl yfixed base d operato rt o enjo ya reduce d leve l o frequirements. " 19 . Atlanti cHelicopter s Inc. / Chesapeak e Ba yHelicopter s v . Monro e County . Florida ^ FA ADocke t No . 16-07-1 2 a . Pag e 29 , "applyin g a highe rminimu m standard , becaus e o fa concer n abou t wha t a n operato rmigh t d o i s no t a legitimat e exercis e o fa sponsor' s authority . [Leonard , DD , p . 36] " b . Pag e 40 , "I n orde rt o sustai n a n allegatio n o funjus t economi cdiscrimination , th e discriminatio n mus t b e unjust . I t ca n onl yb e unjus t i fth e preferre d part y i s similarly-situate d t o th e dis-preferre d party . I n thi s case , th e Complainant.. . i s s o dis-simila rfro m th e full-servic e FBO s a t [th e airport ] a s t o i n n o wa yb e similarly-situated . I t i s insufficien t t o simpl ystat e tha t anothe rpart yi s managin g t o escap e sanctio n fro m th e airpor t sponso rb ydepartin g fro m standard s i n on e way , s o tha t th e airpor t sponso rmus t allo wa complainin g part yt o depar t fro m standard s i n a differen t way . I n fact , t o sustai n a n allegatio n o f unjus t discrimination , th e Complainant.. . mus t compl ywit h Minimu m Standard s t o a degre e simila rt o [th e ful l servic e FBO ] an d reques t simila rtreatmen t i n an ypreferenc e grante d b yth e Airport . [Sel fServe , p . 27] " 20 . AGLA D Postmark , LL C (AGLAD ) signe d a leas e wit h TSAI Ao n Novembe r18 , 2005 . 2 1 . RDM , LL C i s a membe ro f AGLA D Postmark , LLC . (Se e Exhibi t ARD M Complain t Date d Octobe r27 , 2009. ) 22 . No t onl yi s RDM , LL C a 31.8 % owne ro fAGLA D Postmark , LL C bu t the yar e als o "deeme d t o hav e a 51 % Percentag e Interes t i n th e Compan yfo rvotin g purposes" . Thi s allow s RD M greate rcontro l ove rAGLA D Postmar k tha n depicte d i n TSAIA' s MOTIO N T O DISMISS . (Exhibi t A , pgs . 1-2 ) 23 . RD M contribute d approximatel y$1.3 M t o th e AGLA D development . 24 . Althoug h RD M initiall ywa s no t th e "contac t person " wit h TSAIA , RD M wa s a ver y activ e membe ro f AGLA D Postmark , LL C an d worke d closel ywit h Le e Nun n an d Caro l Meyer s o n th e AGLA D development . Additionally , i n th e fal l o f 200 8 RD M too k a ver yactiv e rol e i n th e AGLA D developmen t whe n the ysecure d a n Optio n t o purchas e al l o fAGLAD , Inc.' s interes t i n AGLA D Postmark , LLC . RD M me t severa l time s wit h TSAI A(Octobe r 14 , 2008 , Octobe r28 , 2008 , an d Novembe r17 , 2008 ) t o discus s extendin g AGLAD' s leas e deadlin e an d TSAI Ahel p wit h financing .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 3 6 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R I n advanc e o f th e Octobe r28 , 200 8 meeting , TSAI Arequeste d tha t RD M provid e a cop yo f th e Optio n Agreemen t (se e Exhibi t B) . RD M wa s tol d b yTSAI Atha t the ywoul d no t mee t wit h RD M unles s the yha d proo ftha t RD M ha d authorit yt o ac t o n behal f o f AGLA D Postmark , LLC . Onc e th e Optio n Agreemen t wa s provided , TSAI Adeeme d th e Optio n Agreemen t a s satisfactio n o fthei r requiremen t an d proceede d t o mee t wit h RDM . 25 . RD M allege s tha t TSAI Aha s violate d thi s Ac t a s pertainin g t o Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s becaus e TSAI Aha s engage d i n economi cdiscriminatio n an d ha s faile d t o compl ywit h Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 22 , Economi cNondiscriminatio n an d Federa l Gran t Assuranc e 23 , Exclusiv e Rights . 26 . RD M ( a membe ro f AGLA D Postmark , LLC ) los t approximatel y$1.3 M becaus e o f TSAIA' s violations , an d henc e ha s bee n "directl yan d substantiall yaffected" . 27 . RDM' s standin g i s ensure d b y1 4 C.F. R Par t 1 6 §16.23(a ) whic h reads , " Aperso n directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d b yan yallege d noncomplianc e ma yfil e a complain t wit h th e Administrator . Aperso n doin g busines s wit h a n airpor t an d payin g fee s o rrental s t o th e airpor t shal l b e considere d directl yan d substantiall y affecte d b yallege d revenu e diversio n a s define d i n 4 9 U.S.C . 4710 7 (b). " 28 . O n pag e 46 , Sectio n 4 o f Ji m Marty n v . Por t o fAnacortes , Washingto n (Docke t No . 16-02-03 ) th e FA Aexpand s o n 1 4 C.F. R Par t 1 6 §16.23(a) . "Th e secon d sentenc e o f thi s sectio n doe s no t exclud e previou s o rpotentia l airpor t user s wh o d o no t hav e currentl yfee-payin g arrangement s wit h a n airpor t fro m fillin g complaint s unde rPar t 16 . Rather , i t confirm s tha t a complainan t presentl y engage d i n a busines s arrangemen t wit h th e airpor t i n questio n woul d b e assume d t o suffe rfro m a direc t an d substantia l effec t whe n revenu e diversio n i s allege d withou t havin g t o demonstrat e tha t effect . Thi s poin t relate d directl yt o 17.2 3 (b)(4 ) tha t require s a complain t file d unde rPar t 1 6 t o contai n a descriptio n o f ho wth e complainan t wa s directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d b yth e thing s don e o romitte d t o b e don e b yth e respondents . Allegation s relate d t o revenu e diversio n d o no t requir e th e complainan t t o describ e ho wi t wa s directl yan d substantiall yaffected . [See , e.g . Rule s o fPractic e fo rFederally-Assiste d Airpor t Proceedings , Fina l Rule , 6 1 Fed . Reg . 5399 8 (Oct . 16 , 1996).] " "Th e fac t tha t th e Complainan t i s no t currentl ypayin g fee s o rrental s t o th e Anacorte s Airpor t doe s no t preclud e hi m fro m bein g directl yan d substantiall y affecte d b yan yallege d noncompliance . Th e Complainan t mus t mee t th e requirement s o f §16.23(b)(4 ) b yprovidin g a brie fdescriptio n o fho wh e wa s affected. " 29 . Th e FAAstate s her e tha t i n orde rt o hav e standing , th e Complainan t need s onl y t o mee t th e requirement s o f §16.23(b)(4 ) b yprovidin g a brie fdescriptio n o fho w h e wa s affected . RD M ha s me t thi s standard . O n page s 9-2 0 o fth e Complaint , RD M describe s ho wthe ywer e "directl yan d substantially " affecte d b yTSAIA' s gran t assuranc e violations . 30 . Whe n AGLA D Postmark , LL C negotiate d it s groun d leas e wit h TSAI Ai n 200 5 i t di d s o wit h th e belie f tha t TSAI Awa s negotiatin g i n goo d fait h an d wa s no t violatin g an ylaw s o rpolicy . Ha d AGLA D know n tha t TSAIA' s propose d leas e term s (se e abov e TSAI Aviolation s i n Sectio n 1. 8 o n pag e 2 ) wer e i n violatio n o fTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances , AGLA D woul d hav e negotiate d it s groun d leas e differentl yo rma yno t hav e entere d int o a leas e a t all . RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 3 7 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R

3 1 . Whe n AGLA D Postmark , LL C negotiate d wit h TSAI Apos t 200 5 (onc e i t ha d a signe d leas e wit h TSAIA ) i t di d s o agai n wit h th e belie ftha t TSAI Awa s negotiatin g i n goo d fait h an d wa s no t violatin g an ylaw s o rpolicy . Ha d AGLA D know n tha t TSAIA' s tactic s (se e abov e TSAI Aviolation s i n Sectio n 1. 8 o n pag e 2 ) wer e i n violatio n o f Titl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurance s AGLA D woul d hav e negotiate d differently . 32 . Finally , i n Maxi m United , LL C v . Boar d o fCount yCommissioner s o fJefferso n County , Colorad o (Docke t No . 16-01-10 ) th e Boar d o fCount yCommissioner s o f Jefferso n Count , Colorad o (County ) argue d that , "Maxi m voluntaril ysigne d a leas e containin g th e exac t languag e abou t whic h i t no wcomplains , an d wit h knowledg e tha t ther e wa s n o guarante e tha t th e ne wminimu m standard s woul d b e complete d a t an ygive n time . No wtha t th e leas e term s hav e becom e inconvenient , Maxi m ask s tha t FAAt o interven e an d forc e th e Count yt o amen d thos e terms . Suc h a challeng e t o th e propriet yo fth e County' s requirements , i f eve rappropriate , shoul d hav e bee n brough t prio rt o signin g th e lease. " (Pg . 6 , paragrap h 6 ) Th e County' s wordin g an d argumen t i s ver ysimila rt o TSAIA' s wordin g foun d o n pag e 4 lin e 2 o f th e MEMORANDU M I N SUPPOR TO F MOTIO N T O DISMISS . Thi s paragrap h states , "AGLA D entere d int o th e leas e voluntaril yan d voluntaril y agree d t o eac h modificatio n b ysupplement . A t an ypoint , AGLA D coul d hav e take n advantag e o f th e right s o fadministrativ e protes t an d appea l o fan yAN C leas e requiremen t o rdecisio n unde r1 7 AA C 42.91 0 an d 1 7 AA C 42.920 . Unti l th e leas e wa s terminated , AGLA D di d no t avai l itsel fo fthes e remedies . Havin g faile d t o avai l itsel f o f administrativ e remedies , AGLA D accepte d thos e decision s a s a matte ro f law . RD M no walleges , incorrectly , tha t AN C treate d othe rtenant s differentl yi n th e past . Bu t ANC' s mer e enforcemen t o fth e leas e contrac t AGLA D voluntaril yentere d int o canno t b e a prope rbasi s fo ra clai m tha t AN C thereb y violate d federa l obligation s tha t directl yan d substantiall yaffecte d RDM. " Late ro n pag e 5 lin e 1 1 i t states , "Ever yagreemen t ter m betwee n Responden t an d AGLA D wa s entere d int o voluntaril yan d withou t reserve d objectio n b y AGLAD . AGLAD' s Lan d Leas e Agreemen t ADA-3117 0 an d it s supplement s substantiall yframe d an d governe d th e relationshi p betwee n Responden t an d AGLAD . Althoug h RD M assert s tha t th e term s t o whic h AGLA D agree d wer e les s favorabl e tha n th e term s o fRespondent' s leas e agreement s wit h certai n othe r tenants , i t ignore s th e fac t tha t AGLA D voluntaril ybecam e boun d t o thos e term s b ycontract. " An d finall ylate ri n th e paragraph , lin e 20 , "Ha d AGLA D believe d th e term s t o b e i n violatio n o f th e Gran t Assurances , AGLA D shoul d hav e challenge d the m i n advance , whethe rbefor e th e FAAo rb yth e Stat e o fAlaska' s administrativ e proces s unde r1 7 AC C 42.910 . RD M shoul d no t no wb e permitte d (to ) see k t o hol d Responden t accountabl e unde rth e Gran t Assurance s fo rterm s AGLA D wa s comfortabl e enterin g into , an d RD M wa s comfortabl e authorizin g AGLA D t o ente r into. " I n sectio n V.A. I (pg . 18 ) o f Maxi m United , LL C v . Boar d o fCount yCommissioner s o f Jefferso n County , Colorad o (Docke t No . 16-01-10 ) th e FAAdetermines , "Eve n thoug h th e recor d support s tha t th e Complainan t ma yhav e agree d t o leas e term s restrictin g self-fuelin g unti l suc h time s a s th e revise d minimu m standard s ar e adopte d an d implemented , w e canno t suppor t th e County' s position . Th e leas e term s i n questio n ar e inconsisten t wit h th e Respondent' s gran t assuranc e 22(f) , whic h provide s tha t th e owne rshal l hav e th e righ t t o self-servic e it s ow n

RD M V. TSAI A- Pag e 3 8 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R aircraft . Th e leas e agreemen t doe s no t supersed e th e Respondent' s Federa l obligatio n t o permi t self-fueling . Th e Responden t canno t avoi d it s Federa l obligatio n b ysecurin g a n agreemen t t o th e contrar yfro m th e tenant , whe n tha t agreemen t i s require d a s a conditio n o freasonabl e acces s t o th e airport. " (Italic s adde d fo remphasis. ) TSAIA' s assertio n tha t AGLA D voluntaril ysigne d thei rleas e an d thi s shoul d excus e TSAI Afro m complianc e wit h Genera l Writte n Assurance s o rfedera l la wi s no t correct . Th e abov e mentione d cas e debunk s thi s theory . I n th e fal l o f 2005 , AGLA D wa s presente d wit h a leas e o n a "tak e i t o rleav e it " basis . AGLA D wa s no t awar e a t th e tim e tha t TSAI Aha d give n muc h mor e favorabl e term s t o othe rsimila rtenant s a t th e airport . A s mentione d previously , AGLA D wa s operatin g unde rth e expectatio n tha t TSAI Awa s negotiatin g i n goo d faith , an d wa s i n complianc e wit h al l law s an d policy . Ha d AGLA D bee n mad e awar e tha t othe rsimila rtenant s ha d receive d muc h mor e favorabl e term s an d tha t TSAI Awa s unde rth e obligatio n t o offe rthes e favorabl e term s withou t discriminatio n pe rTitl e 4 9 Unite d State s Cod e §4710 7 (a ) Genera l Writte n Assurances , AGLA D woul d hav e negotiate d differently . 33 . O n pag e 5 (lin e 16 ) o f th e MOTIO N T O DISMISS , TSAI Amake s us e o fRoadhous e Aviation , LL C v . Cit yo f Tuls , FA ADocke t No . 16-05-0 8 t o augmen t th e argumen t tha t AGLA D voluntaril yentere d int o th e leas e an d accepte d thos e decision s a s a matte ro f la wan d therefor e th e complain t i s "no t a prope rsubjec t fo rrevie w unde rPar t 16. " I t cite s th e followin g sentenc e i n thi s cas e a s proo ftha t RDM' s complain t ha s n o merit . "FA Adoe s no t normall yinterven e simpl ybecaus e a part y t o a contrac t late robject s t o a provisio n i n th e contract. " TSAI Ashoul d hav e continue d readin g i n thi s paragraph , becaus e i n th e thir d sentenc e o f thi s sam e paragrap h i t states , "I n thi s case , th e Complainant' s allege d misunderstandin g o f th e leas e term s doe s no t ris e t o th e leve l o fa gran t assuranc e violation , bu t ma ya s th e Directo radvised , b e a stat e contrac t la w issue. " 34 . Areadin g o f th e entir e cas e make s i t ver yclea rtha t th e reaso n th e Directo rdi d no t fin d th e Cit yo f Tul s a t faul t wa s no t becaus e Roadhous e Aviation , LL C agree d t o a leas e an d th e leas e mus t b e adhere d to , rather , th e Directo rmake s th e poin t tha t th e Cit yo f Tul s action s di d "no t ris e t o th e leve l o fa gran t assuranc e violation. " I f Roadhous e Aviation , LL C ha d bee n abl e t o sho wa violatio n o fa gran t assurance , th e Cit yo f Tul s woul d hav e bee n foun d liabl e regardles s o fth e fac t tha t Roadhous e Aviation , LL C voluntaril yagree d t o th e term s i n thei rlease .

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 3 9 o f 4 0REPL Yt o TSAI AANSWE R



## Sectio n 4 : Conclusio n I t woul d appea rtha t thi s shoul d b e a prett ysimpl e cas e fo rth e FAA . RD M has : show n tha t i t ha s standin g t o fil e th e Complaint , show n tha t th e CargoPort , FedE x an d UP S development s ar e simila rt o AGLAD's , demonstrate d tha t TSAI Aha s violate d gran t assurance s b ycitin g specifi cinstances , an d ha s provide d pas t F/ ^ case s tha t ar e pertinen t t o th e RD M Complaint . RD M respectfull yask s tha t th e FAAfind s TSAI Ai n violatio n o fgran t assurance . Sincerely , Shau n Debenha m Member , Debenha m Properties , LL C Managin g Membe ro f RDM , LL C 

### 296 0 C Street , Suit e 20 2 Anchorage , A K9950 3 

### W : (907 ) 562-933 0 F : (907 ) 562-933 1 E : shaundebenham(a)alaska.ne t

RD M V . TSAI A- Pag e 4 0 o f 4 0Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t A



## EXHIBI TA Applicabl e Supportin g Document s fo rproo f o f RD M 51 % votin g interes t AGLA D Postmark , LL

C Operatin g Agreement : Titl e Pag e 

## '^tUKUM f

\ ^

Titl e pag e t o AGLA D Postmark , LL C LIMITE D LIABILIT Y COMPAN Y OPERATIN GAGREEMEN T O F AGLAD Postmark , LL C (anAlask aLimite dLiability Company )

' ^., ' Date dan dE^eictiv e a s o f 

### <

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t A- Pag e 1 o f 2Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t A



### Applicabl e Supportin g Document s fo rproo fo fRD M 51 % votin g interes t AGLA D Postmark , LL

C Operatin g Agreement : Pag e 3

• 1 

### '> .

Thi s paragrap h show s tha t

RD M ha da51 % interes t i nAGLA D Postmark , LL C fo r votin g "Member " raean§ eac hperso no r entit y whffejfccute s acqunterpart qf,thtlf'Agrecmen

l a s aMembe r an deachpcfsoiio r

entit y wh o ma y hereaffe r b e admittedto the Compan

y a s a n additiona l or substitute dMember . "Ne t Appraise dValue " fo

r purpose s of

determining tli e fai

r market value of th e Company , an

dfo r purpose s o f

calculatin g th e feir

marke t value o f aMember' s Percentag e Interes t i nth e Company , wil l consis t o f th e appraisedvalue o f

the Project

determinedi

ntli e appraisa l conducte dunde

r th e provision s o f

Section8.4 reduce

db y outstandin g liabilitie s of

di e Company . "Percentag e Interest " mean s eachMember' s percentag e interes t i ndi e Compan

y a s se t fort honth e attache dSchedul e I , a s adjuste dfromtim

e to tim e i

naccordanc e wit

hihi s Agreement , includin g bu t

no t limite dt o under

Section9.3 . "Preferre dReturn " means , wit hrespect to aMember, the retur

no f a namoun t equa l t o the Member' s capita

l contributions , plu s acumulativ e retur no f 12 % pe r annum , compounded quarterly , onsuchMember' s capita l contribution s fro

mtim e t o time during th e perio dto whic h the PreferredRetur

nrelates , commencin g a s o f tli e firs t dat e th e Membe

r make s acapita

l contributio nt

o th e Company . "Project " ha s th e meanin g set fort hi nSection1.3 . "RDM " mean s RDM , LLC . "Regulation " include s temporar y an dfinal Treasur

y regulation s promulgatedunde r th e Cod e an dtli e correspondin g section s o f an y regulation s subsequentl

y issuedtha

t amen dor supersede suchregulations .

ARTICL E3 - MEMBERS , CONTRIBUTION S AN D INTEREST S 3. 1 Members ' Names , Addresse s an dPercentages . The name s an daddresse s of

tlie Members , an

dthei r Percentag e Interest s are set fort honth e attachedSchedul e 1 , a s amended fromtim e to time , provided , however , tha t RDM shall b e deeme

dto hav e a51 % Percentag e Interes t inth e Company fo

r votin g purpose s (but

no t fo r purpose s of

distribution s or

an y other purpose ) until th e las t

o f th e following event s (collectively , the "Obligations") : (a ) .Airpor t Stock , LL C ha s receive d$875,00 0 mdistribution s fromthe Company , (b ) RD M ha s receive d distribution s fromth e Company equa l to all o f RDM' s Preferre

dRetur nonit s initial capita

l contribution s to th e Company , an d(c ) no other

fundin g o r guarantee s fromRDM or

it s affiliate s i s outstanding . 3. 2 Additiona l Members . Additiona l Members shall be adTnitte donly upo nthe consen t of al l Members . 3. 3 Contributions . EachMember shall contribut

e a s his , he

r or it s uiitial capita

l contributio nt

o th e Company th e cashand/or propert y describedo

nattache dSchedul e 1 , a s AN C 79697v 5 30338- 3 «18«9- 1 3

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t A- Pag e 2 o f2Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B



## EXHIBI TB RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

Titl e pag e t o AGLA D Postmark , LL C OPTIO NAGREEMEN T Thi s Optio nAgreement

("Agreement" ) i s mad

e an dentere dinto a s o f

the 1 8 da

y of November , 200 8 by andamon g RDM , LL C ("RDM") , a

nAlaskalimite dliabilit

y company , an

d Anchorag e Globa

l Logistic s Airpar

k Development , Inc . ("AGLAD") , a nAlaskacorporation . RECITAL S WHEREAS , RD M hold s a nownership interes t

i nAGLA D Postmark , LLC , a

nAlask a limitedliabilit

y company (th e "Company" ) equa l to 32.28 % o f

tli e tota l outstandin g membershi

p interest s inthe Company an dAGLA D hold s amembership interes t equa l to 67.72 % of

the tota l outstandin g membership interest s inthe Compan y ("AGLAD' s Membe

r Interest") ; an

d WHEREAS , RDM desire s t o obtain , andAGLA

D desire s t

o convey to RDM , a

noption to purchas e AGLAD' s Member Interes t inth e Compan y o nthe tenn s an

dcondition s se

t fort hi n thi s Agreement ; NO WTHEREFORE , inconsideratio no f the premises , mutua

l covenant s and conunitment s se

t fort hbelow , andothe

r goodandvaluabl e consideration , the receip t an d adequac y o f

whichar e hereb y acknowledged , the partie s agree a s follows :

I . GRANT O FOPTIO N 1. 1 Subject

to the term s an

dcondition s set

fort hmthi s Agreement , the AGLA D irrevocably grant s to RD M a noptio nto purchas e all o f

AGLAD' s Membe

r Interes t i nth e Compan y a t th e Purchas e Pric e describe di nSectionl l (the "Option") , whic hPurchas e Pric e shall , subject

t o the Holdback

Amoun t provision s o

f Section3.4 , be payabl e to AGLAD . ^^. 2 Thi s Optio ni s exercisabl e b y RD M a t an y time durin g aperio dcommencing o n tl^^t e o f executio no f

thi s Agreemen

t an dexpiring onDecembe

r 31 , 200 8 ("Optio nPeriod" ) ^po nwrittennotic e by RD M delivere dto AGLA D ("OptionNotice") . 1. 3 A s consideratio nfo

r granting thi s Option , immediately upo nexecutio nof thi s Agreement , RDM shal l mak e aneffor t to brin g th e projec t

out o f default b y payin g th e back leas e payments , payin g th e Novembe r an dDecembe

r ren t payment s whenthe

y come due an

d fulfilling the"financia

l security " requirements , regardin g sit e civi l wor

k fo r Stag e 1 , o f

the Te d Steven s Internationa

l Airpor t or it s successor

(the "Airport") . If

RD M determines , init s sole discretion , tha

t i t i s unabl e to fulfil

l suchrequirement s of

the Airport , RDM i s under no obligatio nt

o continu e makin g groim

dleas e payments . H . PURCHAS EPRIC E The tota l amount payabl e by RD

M fo r all o f AGLAD' s Member

Interes t i s $400,000 , les s an y portio nof

th e Holdbac k

Amount tha t AGLA D i s not entitle dto (altogether , th e "Purchas e Price") . Optio nAgreemen t Pag e 1 o f1 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 o f1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

Fo r purpose s o f

thi s agreement

(includin g determinin g payment o f the Holdback Amount) : (a

) the ter m"Closin g Date Liabilities " shall mea n(i ) all unpai dliabilitie s of th e Compan y due an dpayabl e onor

befor e th e Closing Dat

e tha t ar e listedi nthe attache dto Exhibit A , a s supplemente dby AGLAD no late r tha nfive day s afte

r executio nof

thi s Agreement , an

d (ii ) t o the exten

t tha t late fee s andinteres t

a s of Novembe r 14 , 200 8 of

th e liabilitie s listedi

n Exhibi t A ar e materially disclose dinExhibit Aa s supplementedpursuant to thi s Agreement , lat

e fee s an dinteres t accrue doneachsuchliabilit y afte r Novembe r 14 , 2008 ; and(b ) the ter

m "Undisclose dLiabilities " shall mea nall otlie r unpai dCompan

y liabilities , including , without limitation , contrac t

obligations , trade account s or other payables , payment s du e onoutstandin g judgment s or

orders , taxes , interest , penaltie s o r othe r lega l liabilitie s or

regulator y payments . III . CLOSIN G 3. 1 Upo ndeliver

y of th e OptionNotice , AGLA D shall b e boundto sel l AGLAD' s Membe r Interes t to RD M andRDM shall b e boundto purchas e AGLAD' s Membe r Interes t fro m AGLAD . 3. 2 Closin g o f

di e sal e andpurchas e of

AGLAD' s Membe

r Interes t ("Closing" ) shall tak e plac e a t 296 0 "C " Street , Suite 202 , Anchorage ^ Alaska(or

a t suchother

plac e a s ma

y b e agreedbetweenthe parties ) a t 1 2 noononth e fifth(5th ) da y afte r th e date o nwhichRD

M serve s it s OptionNotic e to AGLAD ("Closin g Date'' ) provide dthat , i f suchda y i s no t abusines s day , thenClosin g shall tak

e plac e a t 1 2 noo nonth e first

busines s da

y afte r tha t day . 3. 3 A t Closing , th e AGLA

D shall : - a . transfe

r all o f AGLAD' s Membe

r Interes t to RD M fre e andclea r of al l liens , encumbrances , an

dresfriction s whatsoever ; b . deliver

a nabsolute assignment

AGLAD' s Membe

r Interes t to RDM ; c . execute an

ddelive r to RD M aClosing Certificat

e i nsubstantially the for

m set fort hinExhibit

B ; d .

Optio n Agreemen t surrender all right s unde

r tli e Company' s article s andoperatin g agreement , a s amended , includin g t

o managemen

t an dt o project managemen

t fees ; deliver all tangibl e andintangibl e propert y of the Company , including witliout limitatio ndrawing s andreports , documents , electroni c wor d processin g anddatafiles, faxes , databas e information , accountin g an d contac t information , passwords , files, an dother intellectual propert

y (RD M wil l mak

e anangement s to pick

u p th e files andthe filing cabinet s o f th e Company) ; and d o suc hthing s an

dexecut e suchdocument s a s shall b e necessar y o r a s RDM ma y reasonably reques t

to giv e effec

t to th e sal e of

AGLAD' s Member Interes t hereimder ; an

d ge2ofl 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 2 o f1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

g . provide dtha

t if Closin g take s plac e prior

t o the retur no f Mr . Nun nto Anchorage , all document s describe dabov e whic har e inMr . Nunn' s possessio nshal l b e delivere dto RD M withinfive workin g day s o f Mr . Nuim' s return . 3. 4 Subject

t o AGLAD' s materia

l complianc e wit

hit s obligation s under

Sectio n3. 3 an dotlie r obligation s containe di

nthi s Agreement , RDM shall , a t Closing , pa

y to AGLA

D i n cashor b y wir e transfer a namount eqiia l t o $50,000 . The $350,00 0 balanc e o f the Purchas e Pric e (the "Holdbac k

Amount" ) shal l b e payabl e to AGLA D to tli e extent

provide dbelow , i

n cashor b y wir e transfer , a s follows : (a) $150,00 0 o nadate tha

t i s 1 2 month s afte

r di e Closin g Date , les s (i ) an y materia l UndisclosedLiabilitie s and(ii ) any damag e to RD M or the Coinpan

y arisin g fromthe breachof an y covenant , representatio nor warrant y containe dinthi s Agreemen t or i nthe Closin g Certificate ; (b ) $200,00 0 o nadate tha t i s 24 month s afte

r the Closin g Date , les s (i ) an y materia l Undisclose dLiabilitie s and(ii ) an y damag e to RDM or

th e Compan

y arisin g fro

mth e breacho

f an y covenant , representatio nor warrant y containe dinthi s Agreement or inth e Closin g Certificate ; (c ) Provided , however , i f

Postmar k transfers it s groundleas e wit hthe Airport , tlie Holdback Amount remainin g owin g will b e immediately du e i nfull . IV . DU EDILIGENCE/COOPERATIO N Withinfive (5 ) day s following executio no f thi s Agreement , AGLAD andth e Compan y shall produc e to RD M all o f th e document s andinforihatio ndescribe dinExhibi t C attache d heret o whichhav e no t

already beenprovide dto RDM-, andshall promptly produc e t o RD M suc h additiona l informatio na s it

ma y reques t durin g th e OptionPerio dconcernin g th e Company' s business , operations , organization , andfinances (collectively , "Du e Diligenc e Information Requests") , provide dtha

t all suc hdocument s whichar e inMr . Nurm' s possessio nshall be deliveredto RD M withi nfive workin g day s o f Mr . Nunn' s return . I

nadditio nto th e foregoing , AGLA D andth e Company shal l reasonabl y cooperate wit hRD M inan y otlier

request s made i

n connectionwit

hit s du e diligenc e efforts , includin g without limitation , providin g acces s t o th e physica l premise s andto the record s owne dor controlle dby th e Company or it s Members . Th

e Compan y hereb y give s RD M pennissio nto tal k to it s outside consultants , professiona l advisor s an dpotentia l investor s about

th e Due Diligenc e Iiiforraationprovide dby th e Company . RD M shall b e exclusively responsibl e fo r any additiona

l fee s incurre db y consultin g suchconsultants , adviser s an

dinvestors . V . ADDITIONA LCOVENANT S 5, 1 During th e Optio nPeriod : a . the Compan

y shall not

create or issu e to any thir

dpart y atiy new membership interest ; Optio nAgreemen t Pag e 3 of] 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 3 o f1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

b . inth e event

an y Membe r shal l transfe

r all or aportio no f

a nexistin g membershi

p interes t to athirdparty , suchtransfe r shall b e expressly subjec t to , andth e purchasin g part

y shal l b e boun dby , th e term s andcondition s o f thi s Agreement ; without limiting the foregoing , the transferrin g Membe r agree s to execute , or

caus e to b e executed , suc hdocument s a s ma y b e reasonably requestedby RD M to memorializ e suc

h continuin g obligations ; c . neither

th e Compan

y nor th e Member s shall (i ) sell , transfer , pledge , encumbe r or alienate any materia

l portio nof

th e asset s or

propert y of th e Company , or (ii ) mak e adividen dor

other distributio nfromthe Compan y to it s Members ; an

d d . th e Member s an

dth e Compan

y will promptly advis e RD M o f an y matte r relatin g to th e asset s an

daffairs o f

the Compan

y tha t occu r outside o f

th e ordinar

y cours e of it s business .

VI . WARRANTIE S AN D REPRESENTATIO N 6. 1 AGLAD represent s andwarrant s t o RD M tha t it i s aregistere dholder

an d beneficia l owne r o f AGLAD' s Membe

r Interes t andthat , apar

t fromthi s Agreement , it s Membe r Interes t i s free andclea

r o f any charge , lien , equjty , thirt i part y right , option , right

o f pre-emptio n o r an y othe r encumbrance , priorit

y or securit y interes t whatsoever . AGLAD furthe r represent s tha t i t own s 67.72 % o f

th e outstandin g metpbership interest s i ndi e Company . 6. 2 AGLAD represent s andwarrant s to RDM that , excep t a s disclose di

nExhibit A , an da s supplemente dpursuan t to thi s Agreement , ther

e ar e no Compan

y liabilities , contract obligations , trade accoimt s or other payables, ' payment s due onoutstandin g judgment s or orders , taxes , interest , penaltie s or other lega l liabilitie s pr

regiilator y payments . 6. 3 AGLAD andthe Compan y eachrepresent

andwarrant

tha t eac hha s takenaction t o authoriz e the execution , deliver y andperformanc e o f

thi s Agreement . Caro l Myer s represent s an dwarrant s tha

t she andLe e Nunn , constitutin g amajorit y o f th e boar dof director s fo

r AGLAD , authorize dinaboardmeetin g hel do nor about November

16,200 8 AGLA

D t o ente r int o thi s optio nagreement , andauthorize dCarol Myers to sig nonbehal f o f AGLAD ; attachedas E.Khibi t D hereto i s atru e andcorrec t copy of suchminutes . Carol Myer s furthe r represent s an

d warrant s diat , to th e extent tha t any furthe

r actio ni s necessar

y to authoriz e th e execution , deliver y an dperformanc e o f

thi s Agreement , she an

dLee Nunnwil l cause , a s applicable , AGLA D andth e Company , to take suc haction . Thi s Agreemen t ha s bee ndul y execute dan

d delivered , andconstitute s legal , vali dtm dbindin g obligation s o f

AGLAD andth e Company , enforceable , a s applicable , agains t AGLAD arid/o

r the Compan

y inaccordanc e wit

hit s terms , subjec t to applicabl e bankruptcy , insolvenc y andsimila r law s affecting rights o f

creditor s generally , andgenera

l principle s o f

equity . Neithe

r the executio nof

, nor complianc e with , thi s Agreemen t will conflic t

wit hany applicabl e la

w or an y contrac t obligatio no f

AGLA D or the Compan y or violate any provisio no f

suc hparty' s articles , bylaws , operatin g agreement or othe r governing documents . N o exercis e o f an y of th e term s of

thi s Agreement , or

any righ t thereunder , will render

either thi s Agreemen

t or the Optionunenforceable . Optio n Agreemen t Page4o f 1 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 4 o f1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

6. 4 RDM represent s andwarrant s tha t it ha s the unrestricte dright, powe r an d authorit y to execute anddeliver

thi s Agreemen

t andto perfom

i eacho f th e obligations , hereunder , an

dfiirthe r tha t neither th e execufio

nof , nor complianc e witli thi s Agreement will conflict vwt han y applicabl e la

w or an y contrac t obligation s o f

RDM or violate an y provisio nof its articles , bylaws , or

governin g documents ,

VII . NOTICE S An y notic e require dor

permitte dto b e givenunde r thi s Agreement

shal l b e inwritin g an

d shall be sen

t to it s registere doffice atjdi t addriss s se

t fort honth e signature pag e o f

thi s Agreemen t or to suc hother

addres s a s ajpart

y ma y designate b

y notic e to th e other

partie s i n accordanc e wit

hthi s clause . Any suc hnotic e shall be deliveredpersonally , by courier , or sen t b y certifiedmail , receip t

requested , postag e prepai dan dshall be deemedto hav e bee ndelivered , i

f b y persona l servic e or

by courier , whendelivered , ari di f by mail , 5 day s afte

r deposi t mtlie UnitedState s mail , postag e prepaid . VIII . GENERA L 8. 1 Thi s agreement

ma y b e executedi

nan y numbe r of counterparts , whichtaken togethe r shall constitute on e agreement . 8. 2 Excep t

a s provide dinSection5.1(b),'above , thi s Agreement ma y no t b e assigned i nwhol e o r inpart , but

i s bindin g uponan

dshall operat

e fo r the benefit

o f th e parties ' persona

l representative s andother

successor s an

dpermitte dassigns . Notwithstandin g th e foregoing , RD M shall be permitte dto assig nit s rights an dobligation s unde

r thi s Agreement

to an y direc t o r indirect wholly-owne dsubsidiar

y o f RDM , 8. 3 Thi s Agreement

supersede s an

y previou s agreement

betweenthe partie s i

n relationto the matter s deal t wit han drepresent s (togethe

r wit han y dociunent s referredto inthi s agreement ) the entire agreement

betweenth e parties'i nrelatio nto suchmatters , andno variation shal l b e effective unles s made inwritin g andsignedb y all partie s to thi s Agreement . 8. 4 The failur

e by an y of th e partie s a

t an y tim e t o require performanc e by an y othe r part y or t o claimabreac ho f

any ter mo f thi s Agreemen

t shall not be deeme dto be awaive

r of an y righ t unde r thi s Agreement . 8. 5 Th e partie s shall us e their respectiv e bes t

efforts t o ensure tha

t an y necessar y thir d partie s shall execute anddo all suchiiirther deeds , document s an

dthing s a s an

y part y ma y reasonabl y require by notic e inwritmg to an y othe r part y to carr y the provision s of

thi s Agreemen t into fiill forc e andeffect

and(s o fa

r a s they ar e able ) shall do everyUiing necessar y (including widiou t

limitatio nexercisin g their power s as member s an

da s director s of

the Company) t

o giv e effect

to di e spiri t

andinten t o f thi s agreement . 8. 6 I nadditio nto any otlie

r remed y availabl e a

t la w or inequity , i nth e event

o f a breac hof thi s Agreement

by any Membe

r or the Company , on e o

r bot hof the oUie r partie s shal

l b e entitledt o su e fo r specifi c performanc e of

the obligation s hereunder . Optio nAgreemen t Pag e So n 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 5 o f1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

''••«•' «

8. 7 . An y dat e o r

jjerio dmentione di n thi s Agreeinen t ma y b e extende db y agreemen t betwee nth e partie s (o r

suc ho f th e partie s a s nia y b e affecte dthereby ) but , a s regard s an y dat e o r perio d(whethe r

o r no t extende da s aforesaid) , tim e shal l b e o f th e essence . 8. 8 Eac ho f

th e partie s t o thi s Agreemen t shal l bea r

it s ow ncost s an dexpense s relatin g to'thi s Agreement . 8, 9 Thi s Agreemen t

shal l b e go.vem ( la w an dth e partie s hereb y submi t to'the*^^^ ^ I N'WITNES S o f

whic hth e paiti*-^ !

Optio nAgreement ^$l.csnstriie di n accordanc e wit hAlask a R> f di e Alask acourts . ^^y^Agreemen t

a s follows :

^>ei>€K^^JJlW* ^ itt -

'••:if ^

Pag e 6 o f 1 2

RD M V , TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 6 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

Optio nAgreemen t ANCHORAG EGLOBALLOGISTIC S AIRPARK

DEVELOPMENT , INC . ^i^f7^/-^i,^<^^- ^ By : fits : . ..Address : /^tLtc / ^ /flycr j Si' ^ I't-fa^ f

/ 7'r<a.J i />< } /JHXi C a<//l.'S 3 Ai/CdAjYO^e- , /^AJ-J ^ f9^'^' / AGLA D POSTMARK , LLC ,;^^^/fWo x T By : /h-Cjurs^ i CrUij./Ai^^ijfl't J ^'•'/la.r di>i-> < A c Its : ' MiSM.*i^v r Address : •i-fi

o Ao-a . j'^/sz s /^p^ ^ Caro l Myer s indiyidtially , as to Sectio n6. 3

Page7ofl 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 7 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

Exhibit A

Account s Payabl e AGUk D In c• Pro

J Mng r AGU^ D Inc , Ai rCarg o Managemsn t Grou p Alask a Communication s System s Alask a Dapartmen t o f Natura l Rssourcs s Alask a t.^n d Clearin g Contractor s LL C Alask a US AInsuranc e Broker s America n Expres s Arcti cOffic e Product s Ban k o f Americ a Caro l A . Myer s Davi s Wrigh t Tremaln e LL P EEI S Consultin g Engineers , Inc . Enterpris e Engineering , Inc . Gar yPeterso n & Associates , In c Grea t Norther n Engineerin g Ljmtech , Inc . Le e R . Nun n LochorLL C Mikunda , Cottral l & Co . Municipalit yo f Anchorag e Municipalit yo f Anchorag e - Permit s Premiu m Financin g Specialists , Inc . Pruh s Constructio n Company , LL C Shanno n & Vl/ilson , Inc . SUt s o f Alask a SUt e o f Alask a - DE C Stat e o f Alask a - DN R Stat e o f Alaska-TSAI A UC G Associates , Inc . Willi s o f Alaska , inc . TOTA L ACCOUNT S PAYABL E Contlnoen t Liabilitie s Pegasu s buildin g leas e Catha yPacifi cbuildin g leas e Risk s Kaiit U buildin g leas e Kalitt a ram p leas e Nov14 , 0 8 0.0 0 888.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 p.o o o.o d • 0.0 0 • 1,510.92 ^ 81,143.3 4 549,8 1 ?'l O 12,921.2 5 . 1,509.0 0 • .

. . 14.781.00 . 16,068.51' ; . 5,247.00 , 4,627,5 0 . 5,448.7 2 ' 108,895.18 ; . 57,000.00 ; 0.() 0 . 71,310.0 0 14,205.5 5 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 39,800.7 8 57,396.3 6 0.0 0 1,040,665.2 1 $ 36,000.0 0 maximu m i 26,500.0 0 maximu m

eac h cai^celabl e I f th e othe rI s cancelle d ' eac h cancelabl e i f th e othe ri s cancelle d Optio nAgreemen t PageSof n

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 8 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

Account s Payabl e AGLA D Inc . Ai rCarg o Managemen t Grou p Alaska Communicalion s System s Alaska Lan d Clearin g Contractor s LL C Alaska US

AInsuranc e Brokers America n Expres s Arcli cOlflc e Product s Ban k o f Americ a Caro l A . Myer

s Davi s Wrigh t Tremain e LL P EEl S Consultin g Engineers , Inc . Enterpris e Engineering , Inc . Gar yPeterso n & Associates , In c Grea t Norther n Engineerin g Lantech , Inc . Le e R . Nun n Loche rLL

C

^^ ^ Mikunda , Collrel l & Co .

Municipalil yof Anchorag e Municipalityo

f Anchorag e - Permit s Premiu m Financin g Specialists , Inc . Pruh s Constructio n Company , LLC RB C Dai n Rausche r RD M Shanno n & Wilson . Inc . Stat e o f Alaska Stal e o f Alaska-DE C Stat e of Alaska - Dep t o f Nat l Resource s Stat e ofAlaska-DN R Slat e of Alaska-TSAI A UC G Associates , Inc . Watterso n Constructio n 1 TOTA L ACCOUNT S PAYABL E AGLA D Postmark , LL C Exhibi t A

No v22 , O

B

886.0 0

. .0.0 0 ">'• ' ' . •'I'O.tJO '

, •' ; ' 0.0 0 17i506.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 1,632.42 87,919.1 9 549,812.1 0 12.921.2 5 1,509.0 0 14,781.0 0 16,068.5 1 5,247.0 0 4,627.5 0 5,471.7 5 106,895.1 8 57,000.0 0 0.0 0 71,310.0 0 0.0 0 11,935.0 0 14,736.2 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 40,020.8 8 57,396.3 6 0.0 0 1,077,671.3 5 Pai d byRD M pos t signin g

* •

. Par t nowi n collection . Se e A/ P file .

. Deferre d portio n ($3,235 ) du e withi n 3 0 day s o f ftnaricjng , o rbears interes t at 12% . 200 7 laxretur n bein g hel d COD . + Propertytaxe s tw o years i n arrears . Interes t accruing . Mun i invoice s sporadically , s o amoun t not u p t o date . Se e A/ P file s (200 7 & 2008) . ±Est . BId g permi t wil l no t b e complete d unti l paid . Dewalerin g site . Has not bille d fo rexpense s I n connectio n wit h wor k don e o n bon d issu e tw o years ago . Interes t accruing .

Pak j byRD M pos t signing . * (before payment s note d above ) Contractors hav e performe d staf fwor k (suc h as estimates , schedules , preliminar ydesigns ) i n advanc e o f anticipate d fiel d work . I f RD M wer e t o chang e contractors , i t I s possibl e tha t invoice s coul d b e presente d fo rwor k performed . Pag e 1 o f 2 ^ ^

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 9 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B



### RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t "

Contlnaen t Liabilitie s Pegau s buildin g leas e Catha yPacifi cbuildin g leas e

Contlnaencle s Kalitt a buildin g leas e Kalilt a ram p leas e Contract s 4 Commitment s EEI S Consultin g Engineer s

Enterpris e Engineering , inc . Gar yPeterso n i Associates , In c Grea t Norther n Engineerin g

Lantec h Loche rLL C Pruh s Construclio n Co. , LL C

RB C Dai n Rausche r

Shanno n i Wilso n UC G Watterso n Constructio n 

### wit h AGLAD , Inc . AGLA D Postmark . LL C 

### Exhibi t A Notf22,0 B 36,000,0 0 maximum . Penalt yclaus e fo rdamage s {i fany ) fo r

no t completin g buildin g b ya dat e certain . 28,500.0 0 maximum . Penalt yclaus e fo rdamage s (i fany ) fo r p Vi , ^

- no t completin g buildin g b ya dal e certain .

\ Eac h leas e I s cancelabl e i fth e othe ri s cancelled .

Desig n managemen t an d coardinalion . Sit e plans . Variou s pennit s (suc h a s disposa l site) . Utilit y coordination . Wate r& sewe rdesign s fo rsite , etc . Contrac t fo rStag e 1 ram p desig n (5113.000 } an d engineerin g suppor t durin g constructio n (S9,500) , 'Artis t reridering s an d floo rplan s fo rbuilding .

. > His"architectura l contrac t i s wit h . (Watterson? ) ; ;/Elecfrfca l & mechanica l desig n contracto rfo rramp . ".'N o contrac t I n file . Ha s don e staf fwork . Cohlrac t (thr u Locher ) fo rsurveying . Conlra d fo rpermittin g (Corp s permit) . Wor k complete . Contrac t fo rportio n o fsit e work . Dat e o fcomptetio n i n contrac t ha s past , bu t Pruh s coul d stil l clai m contrac t i s i n force . Ha s don e staf fwork . Want s al l sit e work . Contrac t fo rinvestmen t services . Cancelabl e Fe e owe d onl yi fbond s ar e Issued . Out-of-pocke t expense s t o b e reimbursed . Contrac t (thr u Locher ) fo rgeotec h work . Contrac t fo rfeasibilit ystudy . Hav e quot e fo rdesign-buil d contract , wit h guarantee d maximu m price , fo rStag e 1 building . N o contrac t i n file , Watterso n ha s don e staf fwork .

Pag e 2 o f2

RD M V. TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 0 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

Exhibit B Closing Certificat

e AGLA D represent s andwarrant s to RDM ; 1 . Tha

t tli e item s containe donSchedule 1 t o thi s Exhibit

B constitute aful

l an d complete accountin g o f

th e Company' s Closing Dat e Liabilities , 2 . Tha

t th e Compan

y andAGLA

D iiave respondedfiilly an

dcompletely to eac

han d ever y Due Diligenc e InformationReques t mad e by RDM . The information provide dto RDM wa s complet e andaccurat

e a s of th e date of

the Company' s initia l respons e and , excep t

as set fort hi nSchedule 2 to tlii s Exhibit , no additiona l informatio nrelatin g to an

y Due Diligenc e InformationReques t ha s subsequently bee nreceive dor

i s bein g hel dby tli e Compan y or it s Meirtbers , an

dno respons e to an y Du e Diligenc e InfontiafionReques t i s inaccurate or

incomplet

e as o f the Closin g Date . 3 . The Wanantie s andRepresentation s containedi nSection s 6.1 , 6. 2 an

d6. 3 o f the Agreement

wer e tru e andcbrr^c

j whe nmade , an

dremai ntro e andcorrec t

i nal l materia l respec t as o f th e Closing Date , Anchorag e Globa l Logistic s Airpar

k Development , Inc , By : Its :

AGLA D Postmark , LL

C By : Its :

Optio nAgreemen t Pag e 9 o f 1 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 1 o f1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

Exhibit C Due Diligenc e Material s All busines s record s of

the Compan

y includin g forinatio ndocuments , minute s o f Company meetings , book s of accoimts , account s payable , account s receivable , loa ndocuments , periodi c financia l statements , ta

x returns , insuranc e record s an d the like . An y andall economi c analyses , financial analyse s or schedule s or

pro form a projection s concernin g the economic prospect s of the projec t

whethe r preparedb

y the Company , any consultant s t o th e Company , tli e Te

dSteven s Anchorag e International Airpor

t o r an y otlie r sourc e alon g wit

han y other suchmaterial s availabl e t o th e Compan

y tha t for mapar t of it s busines s records . All documents , request s fo r proposals , pendin g or

approve dcontracts , engineering reports , surveys , enviromnenta l reports , permits , plans , specifications , bid s an d the lik e concernin g the constructiono f har dstands , apron s parkin g lots , buildings , utilitie s an

dan y other aspect of th e constructio nt

o b e performe da

t the site . Eachan dever y documen

t pertaining to th e renta

l or leasin g o f har dstand s o r spac e a t th e project , whethe

r inside or outside of an y propose dbuilding , including , bu t

no t limitedto : a . The leas e betweenTe

dSteven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t an dthe Company wherei nthe Compan y lease s afe

e interes t inth e 4 0 acre parcel approximately describe da s Lot 2 , Lo t 3 , Lot 4 an dLot 5 o f th e Company' s AlaskaAirpar

k Development

- Sit e Plan , b . The 12-yea

r leas e betweenKalittaAi

r an dth e Compan y fo r har dstandspace ; c . Th e 5-yea

r leas e betweenEvergreenInternationa l andthe Compan

y fo r har d standspace ; d . Th e 12-yea

r leas e betweenKalittaAi

r an dthe Compan

y whereinKalittalease s 6,75 0 square fee

t of warehous e spac e inthe propose dCompan y warehouse ; e . Th e 10-yea

r leas e betwee

nPegasu s Aircraf

t Maintenanc e an

dthe Compan

y whereinPegasu s lease s 7,500 squar e fee t intli e propose dCompan

y warehouse ; f Th e 5-yea

r leas e betweenEvergree

nInternationa

l andthe Compan

y wherein Evergreenlease s 1,19

0 squar e fee t i nth e propose dCompany warehouse ; g . The 5-yea

r leas e betwee

nAlaskaSno

w Remova

l andthe Compan

y wherein AlaskaSno w Remova

l lease s 5,720 squar

e fee t inth e propose dCompan

y warehouse ; Optio nAgreeinen

l Pag e 1 0 o f 1 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 2 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

h . Th e 5-yea

r leas e betweenCatha

y Pacific andth e Compan

y whereinCatha

y lease s 2,00 0 square fee

t intlie proposedCompan

y warehouse ; i . The 12-yea

r leas e betweenKalittaan

dthe Compan

y whereinKalittalease s 75 0 squar e fee t o f office spac e i

nthe proposedCompan

y warehouse ; j . The 10-yea

r leas e betweenPegasu s Aircraf t Maintenanc e andth e Compan y whereinPegasu s lease s 1,82 0 squar e fee t o f office spac e i

nthe proposed Company warehouse ; k . Th e 5-yea

r leas e betwee

nEvergreenInternationa

l andthe Compan

y wherein Evergreenlease s 300 squar e fee t o f office spac e inth e propose dCompan y warehouse ; 1, Th e 10-yea

r leas e betwee

nTrailbos s Mi

dth e Compan

y wherei nTrailbos s lease s 1,00 0 square fee

t of office spac e inthe propose dCompan y Warehouse ; m . The 5-yea

r leas e betweenHot

Wing s ofAlask aandthe Company whereinHot Wing s lease s 1,48

0 squar e fee t of office spac e inth e propose dCompan y warehouse ; n . Th e 5-yea

r leas e betweenCatha

y Pacifi c an

dth e Compan

y whereinCatlia

y lease s 1,40 0 square fee

t o f office spac e i ntlie propose dCompany warehouse ; o . An y andal l otlier

pending , proposedo

r partiall y negotiate dlease s wit han y othe r potential tencm

t fo r har dstan dspace , warehous e spac e or office spac e inthe project .

Optio nAgreemen t Pag e 1 1 ofl 2

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 3 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B



### RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc .

v_ y •*^»«5XM<^-«"»-'!.'*t»4-'S " ;.*t><'.t*/,?r'--' ; :^^ , ^.^' ' ^^"'-yy,-- ' '.'"^n^^'C^^r^ •••wf S '* \

VS-.< .

Optio n Agreemen t ^ Exhibit p '* ' ' '^Authorizin g Miniite s



### Ssji^^fe^t-f-ii ' -

Pag e 1 2 o f 1 2

RD M V , TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 4 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B

RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc . Anchorag e Global Logistic s Airpar k Developmen t

Inc , Minute s o f

Boar dof Director s Meetin g o nNovembe r

16,200 8 Attendee s Carol A . Myer s —telephonically Le e R. Nun n—telephonically • Not i nAttendanc e

' ' ' Jame s P . Fer

o Othe r Attendee s

The meeting wa s calle dto orde r b y the Chairman , Mr , Nunn , a t 1:55 a m(onNovember

17) . Qiioru m Th e Corporat

e Secretary , Ms . Myers , advisedthattw o o f thre e director s wer

e i nattendance , constitutin g aquorum . Notic e Ms . Myei s advise dtha

t the urgency o f

the situatio nprevente dgiving proper notic e oFlhe meeting and , a s Mr, Fero i s unreachable , the Corporatio nwill have to see k awaive r ofnotic e of llie meeting Iron

i Mr, Fero . Mr . Nun

nadvise dtha

t th e meetin g i s justifie dan dw e shoul d proceed , subsequently explainin g the situatio nto Mr, Fero . Nr:vv liu.siNES. s Resolutio n2008-10 : Optio nto Sell Ownershi p fntcrcs t inAGLAD Postmark . LL C Ms . Myet s advise dtha

t a noffe r ha dbeenreceive dnea

r the clos e of

busines s o

nFrida y tiom Debenha mProperties , LL

C fo r a noptio nto purchas e the Corporation' s interes t i nAGLA D Postmark , LLC . She explaine dthat , a s previously advised , di e lan dleas e wit

hthe Te dSteven s Anchorag e Internationa

l Airpor t i s i ndefaul t an dwill b e los t

onNovember

19 . 200 8 i

f th e ren t iincarag e i s not

paidandcondition s of

"financia l security " ar

e not met . Th e Corporatio nha

d bee ni nnegotiation s previousl y wit hother Debenha mentitie s unde

r other propose dslrucUires , an dth e Corporatio nha

dtriedt o sel l the asset s of

AGLA D Postmark , LL

C t o thir dpartie s svithoii l success . Debenha

mProperties , LLC believe s that , give ntime , i t ca nobtai nothe

r members an

dfinancing fo

r AGLA D Postmark , LLC . Accordingly , it ha s propose da

noption t o purchas e the Corporation' s interes t whil e it attempt s to cur

e the default

onthe leas e an

dliii d llnancing . The optio nexpire s onDecembe r 31 , 2008 , the date b

y whichthe landleas e require s llnancin g i nplac e fo r constructio nof

Stag e On e of the facility .

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 5 o f 1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t B RDM , LL C Optio n Agreemen t wit h AGLAD , Inc . '.;'ni|.'i. :

Debenha mProperties , LLC ha s offere dto bu y di e Corporation' s 67.72 % interes t inAGLA D Postmark . LL

C fo r $400,00 0 i f

the optio ni s exercised , payabl e $50,00 0 uponexercising the option , $150,00 0 ayea

r later , an d$200,000 anothe

r yea r later . Ms . Myer s mad e amotio nt

o adopt Resolution2008-10 . Mr . Nim nseconded . Ms . Myers askedfo

r avote o nthe rcsolulion.sRcsoIuHo n2008-1 0 passed . Ml- . Nun nappointe dMs . Myer s t

o s^r^e| s actin g President

while he i s traveliiig Adiscussionensuedregardin g the due diligenc e process , an dMr . Nun nadvisedtha

t hi s workpaper s wer

e i nstorag e andtha

t he wouldhavej o segregat e them . Until then , or

instea d of . h e lecommendedtha

t Debenha mPropertifs,;|.|: Gobtaindrawing s andothe r documenl s diiectly fro

mEEI S Consultin g Engineers andEnfeipris e Engineering . Furthe r discussio nensuedregardin g debt paymen t prior i tie s fo r th e Corporatio nif

th e optioni s exercisedan

dfunds becom

e available . Adjournnicn t Mr . Nun nmove dto adjour

nth e meeting . Ms . Myer s seconded . Without objection , th

e meeting wa s adjourneda

t 2:1 3 am . Th e undersignedhereb y certifie s tha t she i s th e diil

y electedan

dqualifiedSecretar

y an dthe custodia no f the book s an

drecord s an

dsea l o f Aqchprag e Globa

l Logistic s Airpar

k Developmen

t Inc. , acorporatio ndul

y forme dpursuant

to the law s of

the stat e ofAlaska . an

dtha t the foregoing i s atru e recor dof the meeting o f

the Boar dof Directors , an

dtha t saidmeeting wa s hel do nNovembe

r 17,2008 . I NWITNES S THEREOF , I hav e executedm y nam e a s Secretar

y an dhav e hereunto affixe

dth e corporat e sea l o f the above-namedCorporationonthi s the / / da y of /Jiytt.ilit ^ . 2008 . Secretar y Carol A , Myer s

RD M V. TSAI AExhibi t B - Pag e 1 6 o f1 6Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t C



## EXHIBI TC Octobe r24 , 200 8 Lette rfro m Debenha m Properties , LL C t o Jeanett e Luckey : Pag e 1 

# Debenha m propertie s Octobe r24 , 200 8 Jeanett e Lucke y Assistan t Propertie s Directo r Te d Steven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t P O Box 19062 9 Anchorage , A K9951 9 RE : Question s fo rOctobe r28" * Meetin g Jeanette , Thank s agai n fo rarrangin g fo rDebenha m t o mee t wit h yo u an d you rassociate s nex t Tuesda ya t 3:30pm , A s I sai d o n th e phone , th e purpos e o fthi s meetin g I s fo r Debenha m t o gathe radditiona l Informatio n pertinen t t o th e Airpor t whic h wil l allo w u s t o mak e a n educate d decisio n o n whethe rw e shoul d bu yAGLA D Postmark , LLC' s asset s (th e Airpor t groun d lease ) o rwhethe rw e shoul d le t th e leas e laps e an d pursu e a whol e .ne wgroun d leas e wit h th e Airpor t o rwhethe rw e shoul d Jus t wal k awa yfro m th e projec t altogether . Th e preferre d alternativ e i s t o bu yPostmark' s asset s becaus e thi s preserve s th e mone yw e hav e alread ypu t Int o th e projec t ($1.2M ) an d save s Debenha m tim e an d mone ygoin g forward . However , a s I sai d o n th e phone , w e hav e a fe wquestion s fo rth e Airpor t tha t w e woul d lik e t o discuss . Belo war e th e question s an d a brte f commen t abou t them : 1 . Wha t ca n th e Airpor t d o abou t th e curren t Postmar k deadlines ? I f Debenha m purchase s thi s project , I t I s Inheritin g a faile d projec t tha t i s literall yi n shamble s an d w e wil l b e basicall ystartin g fro m scratch . Debenha m need s tim e t o marke t th e project , sig n and/o rreconfir m tenan t leases , secur e financin g (se e questio n below) , an d ge t constructio n contract s negotiated . 2 . Ca n th e Airpor t hel p i n anywa ywit h securin g financin g fo rthi s projec t o r provid e financin g fo rth e project ? Du e t o th e curren t financia l struggles , man ybanks wil l no t financ e commercia l project s an d thos e bank s tha t ar e willin g (lik e Well s Fargo ) ar e requirin g very stringen t term s wit h a to n o fmone ydown . Debenha m ha s mad e significan t progres s wit h Well s Fargo , bu t woul d th e Airpor t b e abl e t o hel p ou t i n an yway ? 3 . I fDebenha m I s unabl e t o secur e financing , throug h n o faul t o f thei rown , du e t o financia l Institution s lik e bank s bein g unwillin g t o loa n mone ydurtn g thes e economi cdifficul t times , wil l Debenha m stil l b e expecte d t o mee t Airpor t deadlines ? 1 Debenha m Properties , LL C 293 2 C Street , Suit e C Anchorage , A K9950 3 907.562.933 0 Area l estat e developmen t company . 907!562'933i fa x

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t A- Pag e 1 o f4Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t C

Octobe r24 , 200 8 Lette rfro m Debenha m Properties , LL C t o Jeanett e Luci<ey : Pag e 2 

# Debenha m propertie s Ala n Greenspa n recentl ysai d tha t th e U S econom yi s seein g a financia l tsunam i tha t happen s onc e a century . W e ar e concerne d tha t w e ar e goin g t o d o a lo t o f wor k an d spen d a lo t o fmone yonl yt o se e ou rleas e laps e durin g thes e difficul t economi c time s becaus e o fa n inabilit yt o secur e financin g befor e a n Airpor t deadline , eve n thoug h Debenha m ha s a grea t project , has man ysigne d leases , an d i s a financiall y stron g company . 4 , Ca n Debenha m ge t assurance s tha t th e [Materia l Us e Permit tha t expire s i n Novembe rwil l b e renewe d wit h th e sam e terms ? Du e t o th e larg e amount s o f pea t o n th e site , th e abilit yt o secur e unclassifie d fil l a t th e airpor t I s critica l t o th e succes s o f th e project . 5 , Woul d th e Airpor t b e willin g t o bu ybac k afte rconstructio n fro m Debenha m th e Taxiwa yP Extensio n an d Taxiwa yNovember ? Fro m ou rdiscussion s wit h th e bank , th e hardstand s ar e goin g t o be th e hardes t t o finance . Thi s I s becaus e th e hardstand s ar e mor e difficul t tha n th e buildin g t o penci l out . Havin g th e Airpor t bu ybac k th e taxilane s woul d greatl yenhanc e th e feasibilit y o f th e ram p an d henc e mak e i t muc h easie rt o finance. Well , tha t I s al l o f th e question s tha t I ca n com e u p wit h righ t now , I agai n sincerel y appreciat e yo u takin g th e tim e t o mee t wit h us . I loo k forwar d t o ou rmeeting .

Shau n Debenha m Debenha m Properties , LL C Vic e Presiden t o f Acquisition s an d Developmen t 296 0 C Street , Suit e 20 2 Anchorage , A K9951 5 W : (907 ) 562-933 0 C ; (907 ) 440-877 6 E ; ?haundebenham(aalaska.ne t

Area l estat e developmen t company . Debenha m Properties , LL C 293 2 C Street , Suit e C Anchorage , A K9950 3 907.562.933 0 907.562.933 1 fa x

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t A- Pag e 2 o f4Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t C

Novembe r25 , 200 8 Lette rfro m Debenha m Properties , LL C t o Jeanett e Luclcey : Pag e 1 

# Debenha m propertie s Novembe r25 , 200 8 Jeanett e Lucke y Assistan t Propertie s Directo r Te d Steven s Anchorag e Internationa l Airpor t P O Box 19052 9 Anchorage , A K9951 9 RE : Reques t fo rExtensio n Jeanette , Th e purpos e o f thi s lette ri s t o provid e th e rational e fo rth e thre e mont h extensio n (Marc h 31 , 2009 ) o f th e Decembe r31 , 200 8 Airpor t deadlin e fo r"proo fo ffinancing " requeste d b yAGLA D Postmark , LL C (se e attache d letter) . Th e rational e fo rth e extensio n i s a s follows : 1 , Ne wPartners : A s yo u know , Debenha m recentl ysecure d fro m AGLAD , Inc . a n optio n t o purchas e al l o fAGLAD' s ownershi p interes t i n th e project . Additionally , Neese rConstructio n Inc , (Jerr yNeeser ) an d Unite d Companies , Inc , (Davi d Cottrell ) hav e agree d t o partne rwit h Debenha m t o develo p th e project , Debenham , Neeser , an d Unite d nee d som e tim e t o transitio n fro m AGLA D managemen t t o managemen t b you rgroup , Le e Nun n ha s literall ylef t th e countr yan d i t wil l tak e a littl e tim e ge t thing s bac k o n track . 2 , Ban k

Financing : Du e t o th e poo reconomi ccondition s tha t presentl yexist , bank s ar e ver ycarefu l i n lendin g mone yan d hav e ne wstringen t criteri a fo r lending . Th e Debenham , Neeser , Unite d partnershi p need s tim e t o ge t th e financin g throug h th e bank . I t i s anticipate d tha t require d "proo fo f financing " wil l b e secure d b yMarc h 31 , 2009 , 3 , Constructio n Start : Wit h financin g i n place , constructio n wil l star t i n earl y Sprin g 2009 . RD M respectfull yrequest s tha t th e leas e b e extende d thre e month s wit h n o additiona l contingencies . Du e t o th e shor t perio d o ftim e unti l th e deadlin e (Marc h 3 1 , 2009 ) an d th e curren t economi cclimat e (dismal) , an yadditiona l contingencie s wil l onl ymak e RDM' s jo b o fstartin g constructio n tha t muc h harder . Again , becaus e th e extensio n i s onl ythre e month s pleas e allo wRD M t o operat e unde rth e curren t condition s o f th e lease . Lastly , sen t previousl yar e tw o documents . Th e firs t I s th e signe d agreemen t betwee n RDM , LL C (Debenham ) an d AGUkD , Inc . Th e secon d i s a sit e pla n o f th e developmen t tha t illustrate s wher e th e ConocoPhillip s hanga ri s propose d t o b e located . I fyo u hav e an yquestion s abou t thi s reques t pleas e le t m e know , I appreciat e th e Airport s consideratio n i n thi s matter . 1

Area l estat e developmen t company . Debenha m Properties , LL C 293 2 C Street . Suit e C Anchorage . A K9950 3 907.562.933 0 907.562.933 1 fa x

RD M V. TSAI AExhibi t A- Pag e 3 of4Repl yt o TSAI AAnswe r- Exhibi t C

Novembe r25 , 200 8 Lette rfro m Debenha m Properties , LL C t o Jeanett e Luckey : Pag e 2 

# Debenha m propertie s Sincerely , 

# ^ ML ^ Shau n Debenha m Member , Debenha m Properties , LL C Managin g Membe ro fRDM , LL C 296 0 C Street , Suit e 20 2 Anchorage , A K9951 5 W : (907 ) 562-933 0 C : (907 ) 440-877 6 E : shaundebenhami'fflalaska.ne t

Area l estat e developmen t company . Debenha m Properties , LLC 293 2 C Street , Suit

e C Anchorage . A K99503 907.562.933 0 907.562.933 1 fa

x

RD M V . TSAI AExhibi t A- Pag e 4 of4