UNITED STATES – MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE IN LARGE CIVIL AIRCRAFT
Document: Request for Consultations by the European Communities Addendum
Date: 1 July 2005
Document codes: WT/DS317/1/Add.1; G/L/698/Add.1; G/SCM/D63/1/Add.1
Complainant: EU
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Japan, South Korea
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 3.1, 3.2, 5, 6.3  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. III:4  GATT 1994

UNITED STATES – MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE
IN LARGE CIVIL AIRCRAFT

Request for Consultations by the European Communities

Addendum

 The following communication, dated 27 June 2005, from the delegation of the European
Communities to the delegation of the United States and to the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU.

 The European Communities refers to the Unite d States' statement at the meeting of the
Dispute Settlement Body ("DSB") on 13 June concer ning the European Communities' request for the
establishment of a Panel in the above case, wher e you asserted that 13 of the 28 subsidy programs
referenced in the panel request were not liste d in the consultation request of 6 October 2004
(circulated as document WT/DS/317/1 on 12 Octobe r 2004) and cannot be the subject of panel
proceedings.

 The European Communities cannot agree with this contention but is prepared to pursue
consultations on the issues raised in these proceedi ngs in order to clarify and, if possible, resolve
them, it being understood that this is without prejudice to the European Communities' legal position
and rights.

 Accordingly, the European Communities hereby requests consultations with the United States
pursuant to Articles 4.1, 7.1 and 30 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures
("SCM Agreement "), Article XXIII:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994
("GATT 1994") and Article 4 of the Understa nding on Rules and Procedures Governing the
Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"). These consultati ons will be a continuation of those held on
5 November 2004 pursuant to the request for consultations of 6 October 2004.

The measures that are the subject of this request are prohibited and actionable subsidies
provided to US producers of large civil aircraft
1 ("US LCA industry"), and in particular the Boeing
Company and the McDonnell Douglas Corporation, prio r to its merger with Boeing, including related

1 In accordance with the 1992 Agreement between the European Communities and the Government of
the United States of America concerning the application of the GATT Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft on
trade in large civil aircraft, large civil aircraft ("LCA") includes all aircraft as defined in Article 1 of the GATT
Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, except engines as defined in Article 1.1(b) thereof, that are designed for
passenger or cargo transportation and have 100 or more passenger seats or its equivalent in cargo configuration.
Boeing produces or markets the following families of LCA: 717, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, and 787.

legislation, regulations, statutory instruments a nd amendments thereto. The measures currently
include the following:

1. STATE AND LOCAL SUBSIDIES

US States and local authorities, where production a nd headquarter facilities of the US LCA industry
are located, transfer in various ways economic r esources to the US LCA industry. Such States and
local authorities include, but are not limited to, those in the States of Washington, Kansas and Illinois.

These economic resources transferred to the US LC A industry include numerous financial incentives
and other advantages effectuated, for example, thr ough tax breaks, bond financing, fee waivers, lease
arrangements, corporate headquarters relocation assist ance, research funding, infrastructure measures
and other benefits.

2. NASA SUBSIDIES

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration ("NASA") transfers economic resources to the
US LCA industry, inter alia, by:

(i) allowing the US LCA industry to participate in research programmes, making payments to the
US LCA industry under those programmes, or enabling the US LCA industry to exploit the
results thereof by means including but not limite d to the foregoing or waiving of valuable
patent rights, the granting of limited exclusiv e rights data ("LERD"), or otherwise exclusive
or early access to data, trade secrets and other knowledge resulting from government funded
research. The following are examples of such NASA programmes:

• High Speed Research Program;
• Advanced Subsonic Technology Program;
• Aviation Safety Program/Aviation Safety & Security Program/Aviation Security &
Safety Program;
• Quiet Aircraft Technology Program;
• High Performance Computing and Communications Program;
• Research & Technology Base Program;
• Advanced Composites Technology Program;
• Vehicle Systems Program;
• Materials and Structures Systems Technology Program;
• Aircraft Energy Efficiency Program, including Composite Primary Aircraft
Structures, Transport Aircraft Systems Technology, and Advanced Composite
Structures Technology Programs;

(ii) NASA Personnel and Institutional Suppor t Costs Dedicated to US LCA Industry R&D;

(iii) NASA Independent Research & Developmen t, and Bid & Proposal Reimbursements;

(iv) Use by the US LCA industry of research, test and evaluation facilities owned by the US
Government, including NASA wind tunnels, in particular the Langley research centre;

(v) NASA procurement contracts.

3. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE SUBSIDIES

The Department of Defense ("DOD") transfers economic resources to the US LCA industry,
inter alia, by:

(i) allowing the US LCA industry to participate in DOD-funded research, making payments to
the US LCA industry for such research, or enabling the US LCA industry to exploit the
results thereof by means including but not limite d to the foregoing or waiving of valuable
patent rights, and the granting of exclusive or early access to data, trade secrets and other
knowledge resulting from government funded research, through, for example:

• Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation Programs;
• Independent Research & Development, and Bid & Proposal Reimbursements;

(ii) use by the US LCA industry of test and evaluation facilities owned by the US Government,
including the Major Range Test Facility Bases;

(iii) procurement contracts including those for the purchase of goods from the US LCA industry
for more than adequate remuneration, including in particular but not limited to the US Air
Force contract with the Boeing corporation fo r the purchase of certain spare parts for its
Airborne Warning and Control System (A WACS) aircraft, the Boeing KC-767A Tanker
Program (lease contract), the National Pola r-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite
System-Conical Microwave Imager Sensor, Boeing, the C-22 Replacement Program (C-40),
Boeing, the KC-135 Programmed Depot Mainte nance, Boeing/Pemco, the C-40 Lease and
Purchase Program, Boeing, the C-130 avionics modernisation upgrade program, the C-17
H22 contract (Boeing BC-17X) and the US Navy contract with Boeing for the production and
maintenance of 108 civil B-737 and their conve rsion into long-range submarine hunter Multi-
Mission Aircraft.

The EC is also concerned about pending legislatio n, in particular draft amendment (Section 817 –
Prohibition on Procurement from Beneficiaries of Foreign Subsidies) to the FY06 Defense
Authorisation bill (HR 1815) (Hunter Amendment).

4. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SUBSIDIES

The Department of Commerce ("DOC") transfers economic resources to the US LCA industry,
inter alia, by allowing the US LCA industry to particip ate in the National Institute of Standards &
Technology ("NIST") Advanced Technology Program, making payments to the US LCA industry
under this research programme, or enabling the US LCA industry to exploit the results thereof by
means including but not limited to the foregoing or wa iving of valuable patent rights, the granting of
exclusive or early access to data, trade secrets and other knowledge resulting from government funded
research.

5. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR SUBSIDIES

The US Department of Labor transfers economi c resources to the US LCA industry through,
inter alia, the Aerospace Industry Initiative, an element of the president's High Growth Training
Initiative, by granting to Edmonds Community Coll ege in the State of Washington funds for the
training of aerospace industry workers.

6. FEDERAL TAX SUBSIDIES

The US Government transfers economic resources to the US LCA industry through the federal tax
system, and in particular the following tax measures:

Sections 921-927 of the Internal Revenue Code (p rior to repeal) and related measures establishing
special tax treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" ("FSCs"), including individual applications; the
FSC Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-519, including
individual applications; and the American Jobs Cr eation Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-357 including
individual applications.

 The European Communities considers that these measures are inconsistent with the
obligations of the United States under the following provisions:

 (1) Articles 3.1 (a) and (b) and 3.2 of the SCM Agreement;

 (2) Article 5 (a) and (c) of the SCM Agreement;

 (3) Article 6.3 (a), (b), and (c) of the SCM Agreement;

 (4) Article III:4 of the GATT 1994.

 The European Communities is of the view that the measures referred to above are inconsistent
with these provisions as such and as applied.

 These measures are subsidies because in each inst ance there is a financial contribution by the
US, State or local government and a benefit is there by conferred within the meaning of Article 1.1(a)
and (b) of the SCM Agreement. Each of them is specific to the US LCA industry within the meaning
of Article 2 of the SCM Agreement.

 The subsidies listed above are de jure or de facto export contingent, and contingent on the use
of domestic over imported goods. The use of these measures causes adverse effects, in particular ,
serious prejudice or a threat of serious prejudice to the interests of the European Communities and
material injury or threat of material injury to the European Community LCA industry:

 – The effect of the measures is significant price undercutting by subsidized products of
the US LCA industry as compared with th e price of the European Community LCA
products, or a threat thereof in violation of Articles 5(c) and 6.3(c) of the
SCM Agreement;

 – The effect of the measures is significant price depression and price suppression in the
markets for LCA products or a threat thereof in violation of Articles 5(c) and 6.3(c)
of the SCM Agreement;

 – The effect of the measures is significant lost sales in the markets for LCA products or
a threat thereof in violation of Articles 5(c) and 6.3(c) of the SCM Agreement;

 – The effect of the measures is to displace or impede exports of European Community
LCA products in the US market or a threat thereof in violation of Articles 5(c) and
6.3(a) of the SCM Agreement;

 – The effect of the measures is to displace or impede exports of European Community
LCA products in third country markets or a th reat thereof in violation of Articles 5(c)
and 6.3(b) of the SCM Agreement;

 – The effect of the measures is material injury to the European Community LCA
industry or a threat thereof in violation of Article 5(a) of the SCM Agreement.

 – The Hunter Amendment would also be incompatible, inter alia, with Article 23 of the
DSU and Article 32 of the SCM Agreement.

 Articles 4.2 and 7.2 of the SCM Agreement together require that requests for consultations
include a statement of available evidence with regard to: (1) the existence and nature of the subsidies
in question, and (2) the adverse effects to the inte rests of the European Co mmunities. The available
evidence is listed in the Annex to this letter. It combines the available evid ence already contained in
the letter of 6 October 2004 and additional evidence on the existence and nature of the subsidies that
has become available since then.

 The European Communities reserves the right to request the United States to produce further
information and documents regarding the measures in question and their effect on the interests of the
European Communities. The European Communiti es also reserves the right to address additional
measures and claims under other WTO provisions.

 My authorities look forward to receiving in du e course a reply from the United States to this
request. The European Communities is ready to cons ider with the United States mutually convenient
dates to hold consultations in Geneva.

ANNEX

STATEMENT OF AVAILABLE EVIDENCE

 The evidence set out below is evidence availa ble to the European Communities at this time
regarding the existence and nature of the subsidies subject to this dispute, and the adverse effects
caused by them to the interests of the European Communities. It is further supported by business
confidential internal Airbus documents that ar e summarized below. Th e European Communities
reserves the right to supplement or alter this list in the future, as required.

(a) Existence and Nature of the Subsidization

The evidence currently available to the Europ ean Communities includes th e following documents.
The European Communities' request for consultations describes in more detail the nature of these
subsidies.

H.B. 2294, 58th Leg., 2d Spec. Sess. (Wash. 2003)

Final Bill Report, H.B. 2294

Memorandum of Agreement for Project Olympus between the Boeing Company and the State of
Washington, dated as of 19 December 2003, available at
http://www.effwa.org/pdfs/boeing_olympus.pdf

Project Olympus Master Site Development and Location Agreement between the Boeing Company
and the State of Washington, dated as of 19 December 2003, available at
http://www.effwa.org/pdfs/boeing_olympus.pdf

First Amendment to Project Olympus Master Site Development and Location Agreement between the
Boeing Company and the State of Washington, dated as of 19 December 2003, available at
http://www.effwa.org/pdfs/boeing_amended.pdf

News Release, Office of Governor Gary Locke, Gov. Gary Locke Unveils Tax Incentives Package to
Help Land Boeing 7E7, Outlines Project's Significant Economic Impact on State , 9 June 2003,
available at http://www.governor.wa.gov/press/press-view.asp?pressRelease=1372&newsType=1

Bryan Corliss, 7E7 Perks Go to Boeing , HeraldNet, 20 December 2003, available at
http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/03/12/20/17926878.cfm

Action Washington, Boeing 7E7 Site Agreement: Tax Adjustment Package, 6 December 2004,
available at http://dir.cted.wa.gov/DesktopModules/Documents/DocumentsView.aspx?tabID=

0&alias=ActionWA&lang=en&ItemID=146&MId=116&wversion=Staging

News Release, Office of Governor Gary Locke, Gov. Locke, Business, Labor and Government
Leaders Celebrate Delivery of State's 7E 7 Proposal at ‘Action Washington' Rally , 20 June 2003,
available at http://www.governor.wa.gov/press/press-view.asp?pressRelease=1379&newsType=1

News Release, Office of Governor Gary Locke, Gov. Gary Locke Credits States Aggressive Proposal,
Unified Effort in Winning 7E7 Bid , 16 December 2003, available at
http://www.governor.wa.gov/press/press-view.asp?pressRelease=1491&newsType=1

David Ammons, Boeing 7E7 Deal Includes Perks , The Olympian, 22 January 2004, available at
http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20040122/business/19223_Printer.shtml

Our View: Sweet Boeing Deal Leaves a Sour Taste , King County Journal, 22 January 2004, available
at http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/154305

Press Release, Evergreen Freedom Foundation, Details of Boeing Agreement Revealed , 21 January
2004, available at http://www.effwa.org/press_releases/2004_01_21a.php

Open Letter to Washington Legislators from Bob Williams, President of EFF, 15 October 2004,
available at http://www.effwa.org/commentaries/2004_10_15.php

John Gillie, A Smooth Landing for the 7E7 , The News Tribune, 20 December 2004, available at
http://www.thenewstribune.com/business/aerospace/story/4356715p-4127928c.html

Action Washington, available at http://dir.cted.wa.gov/portal/alias__ActionWA/lang__en/tabID__63/

DesktopDefault.aspx

State of Washington, House and Senate Floor Debates, HB 2294, 10-11 June 2003

Executive Message Video, 20 June 2003, available at http://dir.cted.wa.gov/

DesktopModules/Documents/DocumentsView.aspx?tabID=0&alias=ActionWA&lang=en&ItemID=1
77&MId=115&wversion=Staging

Washington State and the Boeing Company: Work ing Together for the Boeing 7E7 Dreamliner,
Continuing Support and Collaborativ e Actions, September Presentation, Greenville, SC (September
2003)

Project Management Services Contract Between State of Washington Employment Security
Department and Accenture, LLP, ESD Contract No. 05-415-PS, 5 May 2005, and related exhibits

Boeing's 747 Large Cargo Freighter Development on Plan, 22 February 2005, available at
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q1/nr_050222g.html

Snohomish County Airport, Aircraft Rate Schedule, effective 1 April 2002

Aircraft Models and Weights for Reporting All-Cargo Data to FAA, CY 2003 FAA ACAIS, February
2005, available at http://www.faa.gov/arp/planning/stats/2005/

Cy04CargoAircraftEnc2.pdf

Joint Use Agreement between Snohomish County and the Boeing Company with regard to Boeing's
use of the Snohomish County Airport (Paine Fiel d), dated 17 June 1966, and all subsequent
amendments and letter agreements in relation theret o, including those dated 14 July 1969, 25 August
1999, 7 December 2000, 17 December 2002, and any amendments pursuant to the Project Olympus
Master Site Agreement

Port of Everett, Rail/Barge Transfer Facility, available at
http://www.portofeverett.com/boeingrailbarge.shtml

Port Commission authorizes staff to go out to bid on Rail-Barge Facility , Port of Everett Press
Release, 26 May 2005, available at http://www.portofeverett.com/press/

2005_05_26BidRailBarg.shtml

City of Everett Ordinance 2759-04 (2004), amending Chapter 3.24 of the Everett Municipal Code

Boeing Major Production Facilities, Everett, Washington, available at
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/facilities/

Spreadsheets of top Everett manufacturing companies as compiled by the City of Everett Mayor's
Office

Economic Revitalization and Reinvestment Act, S.B. 281, 2003 Sess., Reg. Sess., § 1(e) (Kan. 2003)

Supplemental Note on S.B. 281, available at
http://www.kslegislature.org/supplemental/2004/SN0281.pdf

Richard Williamson, Kansas Lands Piece of Jet, but Boeing May not Use the Bonds, The Bond Buyer,
24 November 2003

Caroline Daniel, Boeing Eyes Highest Handout in Bid to Soar Above Europe , The Financial Times,
16 June 2003

Steve Painter, Boeing Wichita Lands State Bonds, The Wichita Eagle, 22 May 2003

Jean Hays, Tweaks to Boeing Bill Pass Senate, The Wichita Eagle, 7 May 2003

Chris Grenz, Boeing Banking on State, The Topeka Capital-Journal, 20 April 2003

Kansas Department of Commerce, Legislative Session Track for S.B. 281, available at
http://kdoch.state.ks.us:82/NewsApp/news_legislative_updates_bill_display.jsp?id=1049378817480

Steve Painter and Molly McMillin, State Sees Bonds as Boeing's Best Shot , The Wichita Eagle,
2 April 2003

Kansas Development Finance Authority, Financial Statements Years Ended June 30, 2003 and 2002,
and Independent Auditors' Report, available at
http://www.kdfa.org/admin/UPLOADS/FinalAuditReport-FY2003.pdf

Now You Know: Who Received Incentives? The Wichita Eagle, 11 July 2004

City of Wichita, IRB Overview, "Industrial Revenue Bond Issuance in the State of Kansas," available
at http://www.wichita.gov/Business/EconomicDevelopment/IRB/IRBOverview.htm

Minutes of Meetings of the Wichita City Council, 1995-2005, available at
http://www.wichitagov.org/Government/MinutesAndAgendas/CityCouncil/

Lillian Zier Martell, The Wichita Eagle, 10 November 1999

David Dinell, City approves Boeing industrial revenue bonds , 7 November 2002, available at
http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2002/11/04/daily44.html

Karen Pierog, Wichita Council OKs Tax Break for Boeing, Reuters News Service, 10 November 1999

Council approves Boeing bonds , Wichita Business Journal, 14 November 2000, available at
http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2000/11/13/daily21.html

City of Wichita Industrial Revenue B ond Policy, Resolution No. R-98-151, available at
http://www.wichita.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C4F7504-A681-47EC-8369-F1AD7C400FAE/0/
Industrial_Revenue_Bond_Policy_06d.pdf

Wichita City Council Ordinance Nos. 46-401 (2004), 45-914 (2003), 45-495 (2002), 45-133 (2001),
44-811 (2000), 44-428 (1 999), 44-102 (1998), 43-642 (1997), 43-325 (1996), 42-949 (1995), 42-553
(1994), 42-228 (1993), 41-916 (1992), and 41-592 (1991)

Bond transcripts for industrial revenue bonds issued on behalf of Boeing by the City of Wichita since
1979

Letters of intent for Industrial Re venue Bonds issued to the US LCA industry pursuant to actions of
the Wichita City Council taken on 17 May 2005, 13 July 2004, 9 November 1999, 13 February 1996,
24 March 1992, 5 December 1989, 21 December 1982, 9 June 1981, and 23 October 1979

Tax Abatement Cost-Benefit Analyses for US LCA- industry industrial revenue bonds performed by
the Center for Economic Development and Business Research, W. Frank Barton School of Business,
Wichita State University

Council approves Onex IRBs , Wichita Business Journal, 17 May 2005, available at
http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2005/05/16/daily16.html

K.S.A. §§ 12-1740 et seq., as amended

K.S.A. §§ 79-201 et seq., as amended, and Article 11, Section 13 of the Constitution of the State of
Kansas

K.S.A. §§ 79-3601 et seq., as amended

Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Wichita Division, "Wichita Overview," available at
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/wichita/commercial.htm

List maintained by the City of Wichita that contains information about all IRBs issued by the City of
Wichita since 1979

City of Wichita/Sedgwick County Econom ic Development Incentives Policy, available at
http://www.wichita.gov/NR/rdonlyres/5C4F7504-A681-47EC-8369-F1AD7C400FAE/0/

Industrial_Revenue_Bond_Policy_06d.pdf

The City of Wichita Industrial Revenue Bond Policy, Resolution No. R-98-151

Property Tax Exemption Orders issued by the Kansas Board of Tax Appeals for property owned by or
leased to the Boeing Company from FY 1985 to present

Property Tax Exemption Applicati ons filed with the Kansas Board of Tax Appeals by the Boeing
Company from FY 1985 to present

Kansas Department of Revenue Ruling No. 19-1996-1, 1 July 1989

Kansas Private Letter Ruling No. P-2001-098, 30 September 2001

Kansas Private Letter Ruling No. P-1999-44, 26 February 1999

Funding provided by the State of Kansas, Kans as Technology Enterprise Corporation ("KTEC"), and
the Federal Government to the National Institute for Aviation Research at Wichita State University
for collaborations with the US LCA industry, as detailed in the National Institute for Aviation
Research, 2003 Annual Report

Economic Development for a Growing Economy Ta x Credit Act, Illinois Public Act 91-476, as
amended

35 Ill. Comp. Stat. §§ 10/5 et seq.

35 Ill. Comp. Stat. §§ 5/211 et seq.

Corporate Headquarters Relocation Act, Illinois Public Act 92-0207, 20 Ill. Comp. Stat. §§ 611/1
et seq.

35 Ill. Comp. Stat. § 200/18-165

Ordinance of the County of Cook, Illinois, Appr oving Execution of a Tax Reimbursement Payment
Agreement with the Boeing Company (2001)

Ordinance of the City of Chicago, Illinois, Approving Execution of a Tax Reimbursement Payment
Agreement with the Boeing Company (2001)

The Boeing Company – Corporate Headquarters Relo cation Grant Application (10 December 2001),
prepared for the Illinois Department of Commerce and Community Affairs

John O'Connor, Chicago's Boeing Incentives May Be Cut, Denver Post, 24 May 2001

Tax Reimbursement Payment Agree ment Between the City of Chicago and the Boeing Company,
1 November 2001, attached as Exhibit A to An Ordi nance of the City of Chicago, Illinois Approving
Execution of a Tax Reimbursement Payment Agre ement with the Boeing Company (ordinance
available at http://egov.cityofchicago/webportal/COCWebPortal/COC_Editorial/ Boeing.txt

Tax Reimbursement Payment Ag reement Between the County of Cook and The Boeing Company ,
1 November 2001

Boeing amended certification of real estate tax es paid in accordance with the Lease Agreement
(attached to Boeing's 23 July 2003 request for Tax Reimbursement from the County of Cook)

Boeing certification of real estate taxes paid in accordance with the Lease Agreement (2 December
2003) (attached to Boeing's 29 January 2004 request for Tax Reimbursement Payment from the City
of Chicago)

Statement of Robert Kunze (Deputy Commissioner, Department of Planning and Development, City
of Chicago), Report of the Committee on Finan ce, Board of Commissioners of Cook County, 12
September 2001, available at http://www.co.cook.il.us/secretary/CommitteePages/

Meeting%20Reports/Finance%20Committee/2001/09-12-01.htm

Meeting of the Cook County Board of Commission ers: Post Agenda Report, 29 September 2001,
available at http://www.cookctyclerk.com/agendas/2001/092001/092001meeting.pdf

Boeing Moving Headquarters to Chicago, 14 May 2000, available at http://www.spaceandtech.com/
digest/sd2001-19/sd2001-19-001.shtml

City of Chicago, Office of City Comptroller, Order Payment Voucher, No. PV08030801779

City of Chicago, Office of City Comptroller, Order Payment Voucher, No. PV08040800041

City of Chicago, Office of City Comptroller, Order Payment Voucher, No. PV08040801118

City of Chicago, Office of City Comptroller, Order Payment Voucher, No. PV08040800574

Cook County, Bureau of Finance, Cashier's Check 461492, 25 May 2004

Cook County, Bureau of Finance, Cashier's Check 456646, 23 December 2003

Boeing Headquarters Relocation Projected Cost/Benefit Analysis

Lease Termination Compensation Agreement between 100 North Riverside, LLC and the City of
Chicago, 15 January 2003

Jack Lyne, US$63 million in Incentives, Last-Second Space Deal Help Chicago Land Boeing , June
2001, available at www.conway.com/ssinsider/incentive/ti0106.htm

Press Release from The Boeing Company, Boeing Begi ns World Headquarters Operations in Chicago
(4 September 2001), available at http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2001/q3/nr_010904z.htm

Press Release from the Office of Illinois Governor George Ryan (10 May 2001), available at
http://www.state.il.us/gov/press/01/may/0510boeing.htm

Ron Starner and Mark Arend, "Behind Boeing's F light Plan: Why the New Chicago Headquarters is
Just Part of the Story," Site Selecti on Magazine, September 2001, available at
http://www.siteselection.com/issues/2001/sep/p572

Illinois Economic and Fiscal Commission, Corporate Incentives in the State of Illinois (August 2001)

Memo to Honorable Members of the General A ssembly from Pam McDonough, Director, Department
of Commerce and Community Affairs, regarding the Corporate Headquarters Relocation Act (23 May
2001)

State of Illinois, 92
nd General Assembly, House of Representatives, Transcription Debate, 69 th
Legislative Day, 31 May 2001

Jeff McCourt and Greg LeRoy, Good Jobs First, A Better Deal for Illinois: Improving Economic
Development Policy (January 2003), available at http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=12828

Corporate Headquarters Relocation Act Master Ag reement between The Illinois Department of
Commerce and Community Affairs and The Boeing Company (27 March 2002)

Marc J. Lane, It Pays to Invest in State's Homegrown Technology , 24 Crain's Chicago Bus. 11, 2001
WL 7067142

Reports of Job Creation/Retention and Capital Improvements Expenditures for several years

EDGE Tax Credit Report of Annual Compliance for Year Ending 12/31/2003

Report of the Committee on Finance, Board of Commissioners of Cook County (12 September 2001),
available at http://www.co.cook.il.us/secretary/CommitteePages/Meeting%20Reports/

Finance%20Committee/2001/09-12-01.htm

Hearing Charter, The Future of Aeronautics at NASA: He aring Before the House Subcomm. on Space
and Aeronautics of the Comm. on Science, 16 March 2005

Statement of Dr. J. Victor Lebacqz, NASA Associ ate Administrator for Aeronautics Research, before
the House Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, 16 March 2005

Achieving Aeronautics Leadership, NASA Aer onautics Strategic Enterprise Plan, 1995-2000,
April 1995

Statement of Dr. John M. Klineberg, Chair, Committee to Review NASA's Aeronautics Technology
Program, Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences,
National Research Council, the National Academie s, before the House Subcommittee on Space and
Aeronautics, 16 March 2005

NASA Langley Research Center, Economic Impact, Fiscal Year 1998

Joseph R. Chambers, Concept to Reality: Contributions of th e NASA Langley Research Center to US
Civil Aircraft of the 1990s (2003)

Minutes of the NASA Advisory Council, Aerospace Technology Advisory Committee, and
Technology and Commercialization Advisory Committee

Federal Support for US Aeronautics Industry: He aring Before the House Subcomm. on Government
Activities and Transportation of the Comm. on Government Operations, 102nd Cong. 182 (1992)

FY98 Budget for NASA: Hearing Before the Senate Subcomm. on Science, Technology and Space of
the Comm. on Commerce, Science and Transportation , 105th Cong. (1997), Federal News Service,
24 April 1997

Competitiveness of the Aerospace Industry: He aring on S. 419 Before the Senate Comm. on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 103rd Cong. 80-81 (1993)

The Clinton Administration's Initiative to Pr omote a Strong Competitive Aviation Industry,
January 1994

Joe Cobb, Clinton's Welcome Plan to Improve Air Travel , Heritage Foundation Reports, 28 January
1994

Competition in the US Aircraft Manufacturing I ndustry: Hearing before the House Subcomm. on
Aviation of the Comm. on Transportation and Infrastructure, 107th Cong. 4 (2001)

Jeffrey L. Ethell, Fuel Economy in Aviation, NASA SP-462

NASA's Aeronautics Program: Hearing Before th e Senate Subcomm. on Science, Technology and
Space of the Comm. on Commerce, Science and Transportation , 107th Cong. (2001), FDCH Political
Transcripts, 24 April 2001

Innovations in Aircraft Design, available at http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/spinoff1997/t1.html

Statement of Billy M. Glover, Director of E nvironmental Performance Strategy, Boeing Commercial
Airplanes, before the House Subcommittee on Av iation of the Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, 5 June 2003

Dawn C. Jegley and Harold G. Bush, Structural Response and Failure of a Full-Scale Stitched
Graphite-Epoxy Wing, AIAA Paper No. 2001-1334-CP

Randy Tinseth, Boeing Innovations in Technology and Airplane Design, April 2004

National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568

NASA Appropriations Acts, P.L. 94-116 (FY 1976) ; P.L. 94-378 (FY 1977); P.L. 95-119 (FY 1978);
P.L. 95-392 (FY 1979); P.L. 96-103 (FY 1980); P.L. 96-526 (FY 1981); P.L. 97-101 (FY 1982); P.L.
97-272 (FY 1983); P.L. 98-45 (FY 1984); P.L. 98-371 (FY 1985); P.L. 99-160 (FY 1986); P.L. 99-
500 & P.L. 99-591 (FY 1987); P.L. 100-202 (FY 1988); P.L. 100-404 (FY 1989); P.L. 101-144
(FY 1990); P.L. 101-507 (FY 1991); P.L. 102-139 (FY 1992); P.L. 102-389 (FY 1993); P.L. 103-124
(FY 1994); P.L. 103-327 (FY 1995); P.L. 104-134 (FY 1996); P.L. 104-204 (FY 1997); P.L. 105-65
(FY 1998); P.L. 105-276 (FY 1999); P.L. 106-74 (FY 2000); P.L. 106-377 (FY 2001); P.L. 107-73 &
P.L. 107-117 (FY 2002); P.L. 108-7 (FY 2003); P.L. 108-199 (FY 2004); P.L. 108-447 (FY 2005)

Basis of NASA FY 1976-FY 2006 Funding Requirements, including sections relevant to the Aircraft
Energy Efficiency ("ACEE"), Materials and St ructures Systems Technology ("MSST"), Advanced
Composites Technology ("ACT"), High Speed Resear ch ("HSR"), Advanced Subsonic Technology
("AST"), High Performance Computing and Commun ications ("HPCC"), Aviation Safety/Aviation
Safety & Security/Aviation Security & Safety ("Aviation Safety"), Quiet Aircraft Technology
("QAT"), Vehicle Systems, and Research and Tec hnology Base ("R&T Base") Programs, as well as
Research and Program Management ("R&PM"), and Institutional Support

Basis of NASA ACEE FY 1976-FY 1987 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA MSST FY 1988-FY 1995 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA ACT FY 1996-FY 1997 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA HSR FY 1990-FY 2001 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA AST FY 1992-FY 2001 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA HPCC FY 1991-FY 2003 Funding Requirements

Basis of Aviation Safety FY 2000-FY 2006 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA QAT FY 2000-FY 2006 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA Vehicle Systems FY 2003-FY 2006 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA R&T Base FY 1991-FY 2004 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA R&PM FY 1976-FY 2003 Funding Requirements

Basis of NASA Aerospace Institutional Support FY 2002-FY 2005 Funding Requirements

48 C.F.R. § 31. 205-18

14 C.F.R. § 1274.204(g)

48 C.F.R. §§ 9904.420 et seq.

Requirements for Documentation, Approval, and Dissemination of NASA Scientific and Technical
Information, section 4.5.7.1 (NPG 2200.2A)

48 C.F.R. §§ 27.400 et seq.

L.B. Ilcewicz, P.J. Smith, C.T. Hanson, T.H. Wa lker, S.L. Metschan, G.E. Mabson, K.S. Willden,
B.W. Flynn, D.B. Scholz, D.R. Polland, H.G. Fredrikson, J.T. Olson, and B.F. Backman, The Boeing
Company, Seattle, WA, NASA/CR 4734, Advanced Technology Composite Fuselage ─Program
Overview, April 1997

Robert H. Kinder, Douglas Aircraft Company, N95-29030, Impact of Composites on Future
Transport Aircraft

John Quinlivan, N95-29031, Challenges and Payoff of Composites in Transport Aircraft: 777
Empennage and Future Applications

R.H. Liebeck, D.A. Andrastek, J. Chau, R. Girvin, R. Lyon, B.K. Rawdon, P.W. Scott, R.A. Wright,
McDonnell Douglas Aerospace, Long Beach, CA, NASA/CR-195443, Advanced Subsonic Airplane
Design & Economic Studies, April 1995

L.B. Ilcewicz, T.H. Walker, K.S. Willden, G.D. Swanson, G. Truslove, S. L. Metschan, and C.L.
Pfahl, The Boeing Company, Seattle, WA, NASA/CR-4418, Application of a Design-Build Team
Approach to Low Cost and Weight Composite Fuselage Structure, 1991

Individual Budgets for DOD Project Related Elemen ts of US Navy, Army, and the Defense Research
Projects Agency

10 U.S.C. §§ 2511, 2521

DOD Appropriations Acts P.L. 101-511 (FY 1991); P.L. 102-172 (FY 1992); P.L. 102-396 (FY 993);
P.L. 103-139 (FY 1994); P.L. 103-335 (FY 1995); P.L. 104-61 (FY 1996); P.L. 104-208 (FY 1997);
P.L. 105-56 (FY 1998); P.L. 105-262 (FY 1999); P.L. 106-79 (FY 2000); P.L. 106-259 (FY 2001);
P.L. 107-117 (FY 2002); P.L. 107-248 (FY 2003); P.L. 108-87 (FY 2004); P.L. 108-287 (FY 2005)

RDT&E US Civil Aircraft Related Project El ement Budgets for FY 1991-FY 2005, including:
Defense Research Sciences (PE# 0601102F), Ma terials (PE# 0602102F), Aerospace Flight
Dynamics\Vehicle Technologies (PE# 0602201F), Aerospace Propulsion (PE# 0602203F), Aerospace
Sensors (PE# 0602204F), Dual Use Applications\Science & Technology (PE# 0602805F), Advanced
Materials for Weapon Systems (PE# 0603112F), Flight Vehicle Technology (PE# 0603205F),
Aerospace Structures\Technology Dev/Demo (PE# 0603211F), Aerospace Propulsion & Power
Technology (PE# 0603216F), Flight Vehicle Tec hnology Integration (PE# 0603245F), RDT&E For
Aging Aircraft (PE# 0605011F), Manufacturing Technology/Industrial Preparedness
(PE# 0603771F/0708011F/0708011N), C-17 (PE# 0401130F/0604231F), CV-22 (PE# 0401318F),
Joint Strike Fighter (PE# 0603800F/0603800N/0 603800E/0604800F/0604800N), AV-8B Aircraft
(PE# 0604214N), Comanche (PE# 0604223A), F- 22 (PE# 0604239F), B-2 Advanced Technology
Bomber (PE# 0604240F), V-22 (PE# 0604262N), A- 6 Squadron (PE# 0204134N), F/A-18 Squadrons
(PE# 0204136N), Dual Use Applications Progr am (including its predecessor, the Technology
Reinvestment Project)

DOD RDT&E Budget Item Justification, Exhibits R-2, FY 1991-FY 2006

DOD FY 1991-FY 2006 Budgets for RDT&E Programs (Exhibit R-1), DOD Component Summary

Department of Defense Office of the Inspector General, "Major Range and Test Facility Base,"
D-2004-035, 8 December 2003

Report of 15 February 2005 of the General A ccountability Office (GAO) of the United States'
Government to the Secretary of Defense, Contract Management, The Air Force Should Improve How
It Purchases AWACS Spare Parts, GAO-05-169.

Management Accountability Review of the Boeing KC-767A Tanker Program, Office of the Inspector
General of the Department of Defense, 13 May 2005, Report No OIG-2004-171, available at:
http:/www.dodig.osd.mil/tanker.htm.

Daily Briefing, 15 April 2005

GAO says problems justify rebidding C-130 contract

By Amy Klamper, CongressDaily, available at:
http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0405/041505cdam2.htm

E-Mails Detail Air Force Push for Boeing Deal

Pentagon Official Called Proposal Lease of Tankers a "Bailout", Report Finds

By R. Jeffrey Smith, Washington Post, Tuesday 7 June 2005; A01

Holes in the Tanker Story

Washington Post, Monday, 20 June 2005; A14

Factual information and various statements covering, among other things, the "Tanker Deal" available
at http:/www.pogo.org/p/x/archivecontractover.html (Project on Government Oversight website)

Report of 14 April 2005 of the General Acco untability Office (GAO) of the United States'
Government, Air Force Procurement, Protests Challenging Role of Biased Official Sustained,
GAO-05-436T, available at: http:/www.gao.gov/new.items/d05436t.pdf

Congressional Budget Office (CBO) Report, Letter of Douglas Holtz-Eakin, Director addressed to the
Honorable Don Nickles, Chairman of the Comm ittee on the Budget United States Senate dated 26
August 2003 and related doc uments available at:
http:/www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=4494&sequence=0

Statement of The Honorable Joseph E. Schmitz, Inspect or General, Department of Defense before the
Airland Subcommittee, Senate Co mmittee on Armed Services on "Air Force Acquisition Oversight",
14 April 2005 available at: http://armed-services.senate.gov/statemnt/2005/April/Schmitz%2004-14-
05.pdf

DOD Follow-Up on Boeing Probe Results in 8 Contract s Referred to IG, in particular the National
Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellit e System-Conical Microwave Imager Sensor,
Boeing, the C-22 Replacement Program (C- 40), Boeing, the KC-135 Programmed Depot
Maintenance, Boeing/Pemco, the C-40 Lease and Purchase Program, Boeing, the upgrade to the
avionics of the C-130J aircraft, the C-17 H22 contract, the Boeing KC-767A tanker program, the
contract for the purchase of certain spare parts for the Airborne Warning and Control System
(AWACS) aircraft and Pentagon statement on DCMA Identified Questionable Contracts, BNA of
15 February 2005.

FY06 Defense Authorisation bill (HR 1815), House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan
Hunter's amendment (Section 817 – Prohibition on Procurement from Beneficiaries of Foreign
Subsidies) adopted by the US House on 25 May 2005.

Jeanne Rapley, Testing for Private Industry: A Legal Perspective , powerpoint presentation, 17 March
1997, available at http://www.dtc.army.mil/apbi/1997/legal97/index.html

AEDC, "Commercial Success Stories," available at
http://www.arnold.af.mil/aedc/commercial/commercial.pdf

10 U.S.C. § 2681

10 U.S.C. § 2539b

NAWCAD, "Commercial Service Agreements (CSAs)," available at
http://nawcadcounsel.navair.navy.mil/CSAs.htm

US General Accounting Office, "Aerospace Testi ng: Promise of Closer NASA/DOD Cooperation
Remains Largely Unfulfilled," GAO/NSIAD-98-52, March 1998

US Department of Labor Employment & Training Administration News Release, US Secretary of
Labor Elaine L. Chao Announces Nearly $1.5 M illion to Train Washington Workers for Careers in
the Aerospace Industry , 5 November 2004, available at
http://www.doleta.gov/whatsnew/new_releases/november052004-Washington.cfm

Notification of Award for Grant No. AN-14571-05-60 to Edmonds Community College, 4 February
2005

Workforce Investment Act of 1998, Pub. L. No. 105-220 (1998)

Statement of Work for Grant No. AN-14571-05-60 to Edmonds Community College, undated

35 U.S.C. §§ 200 et seq.

48 C.F.R. §§ 27.300 et seq.

Memorandum to the Heads of Executi ve Departments and Agencies: G overnment Patent Policy, Pub.
Papers 248 (18 February 1983)

Executive Order 12591 (10 April 1987)

14 C.F.R. §§ 1274.911 – 1274.914

48 C.F.R. §§ 1827.301 et seq.

48 C.F.R. §§ 227.303 et seq.

48 C.F.R. §§ 227.7100 et seq.

Contract No. NAS1-20267

19 C.F.R. § 351.524(b) (1998)

NASA Langley Research Center, High-Speed Research Program: Technology Transfer Control
Handbook (April 1998)

National Research Council, Committee on High Speed Research, US Supersonic Commercial
Aircraft: Assessing NASA's High Speed Research Program (1997)

James Schultz, "HSR Leaves Legacy of Spinoffs," Aerospace America, September 1999

United States notification to the WTO Committe e on Subsidies and Coun tervailing Measures,
G/SCM/N/3/USA/Suppl.1 (19 November 1998)

United States Updating and New and Full Notification to the WTO Committee on Subsidies and
Countervailing Measures, G/SCM/N/48/USA (2 July 2002)

Aviation Systems Analysis Capability, Executiv e Assistant Development, NASA/CR-1999-209119,
Logistics Management Institute, March 1999

Testimony to the Subcommittee on Technology, Environment, and Aviation of the US House of
Representatives, 10 February 1994, Federal Document Clearing House, 1994 WL 214062

Advanced Subsonic Technology Program, Technology Transfer Control Handbook (August 1998)

Federal News Service, Hearing of the Science, Technology and Space Subcommittee of the Senate
Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, 24 April 1997

Flight International, 11 August 1999

NASA HPCC, Status of Ames Sponsored HPCC NASA Research Announcements

NASA HPCC, Computational Aerospace Sciences ("CAS") Project Description

NASA HPCC, Computational Aerospace Sciences NASA HPCC 1999 Brochure

NASA HPCC, Mission Description

NASA Budget Estimates for FY 1993-FY 2003, NASA Mission Support, Research and Program
Management

NASA News, Boeing Names New Airplane Wing Composites Development Center

35 U.S.C. §§ 154, 271

NASA Property Rights in Inventions, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2457 et seq.

NASA Patent Waiver Regulations, 14 C.F.R. §§ 1245 et seq.

Evidence from Patents and Patent Citations on th e Impact of NASA and other Federal Labs on
Commercial Innovation, National Bureau of Economic Research (May 1997)

General Information Concerning Patents, published by USPTO

Sylvia K. Kraemer, NASA's Director of Policy De velopment Office of Policy and Plans, Monopolies,
and the Cold War: The Origins and Con sequences of NASA Patent Policy, 1958-1998
(October 1999)

NASA Office of Policy and Plans, Value of Patent Rights Waived by NASA

US Patent No. 6,497,389

US Patent No. 6,126,110

US Patent No. 6,053,050

US Patent No. 6,014,606

US Patent No. 5,971,252

US Patent No. 6,138,895

US Patent No. 5,953,231

US Patent No. 5,931,107

US Patent No. 5,902,535

US Patent No. 5,242,523

US Patent No. 5,893, 535

US Patent No. 5,909,858

US Patent No. 5,899,413

US Patent No. 5,740,984

US Patent No. 5,681,013

Independent Research and Development and Bid a nd Proposal Costs: Payments to Contractors,
10 U.S.C. § 2372

Independent Research and Development and Bi d and Proposal Cost Federal Acquisition Rule,
48 C.F.R. § 31.205-18

Independent Research and Development and Bi d and Proposal Cost Defense Acquisition Rule,
48 C.F.R. § 231.205-18

Department of Defense Directive Regarding IR&D Number 3204.1 (10 May 1999)

Internal Revenue Service National Office T echnical Advice Memorandum, Private Ruling 8633004
(unpublished), 1986 PLR LEXIS 2296 (9 May 1986)

Defense Contract Audit Agency Contract Audit Manual, DCAAM 7640.1, January 2001

DOD Independent Research & Development, Program Report (May 2002)

Assessing the Impact of Regulatory and Legislative Changes to the Independent Research and
Development Program, Prepared for Office of the Director, Defense Research & Engineering
Acquisition and Technology, DOD (14 March 1997)

Michael E. Davey & Dahlia Stein, Congressiona l Research Service Report for Congress: DOD's
Independent Research and Development Program: Changes and Issues (17 December 1993)

10 U.S.C. § 2324(l)(1) (version in effect from FY 1995-FY 2001)

10 U.S.C. § 2306a (version in effect FY 1991-FY 1992)

10 U.S.C. § 2324(m)

48 C.F.R. § 16.301-3(a)(1)

48 C.F.R. § 12.207

48 C.F.R. §§ 37.602-4, et seq.

48 C.F.R. § 36.207(a)

48 C.F.R. § 216.104-70(b)(2), (c), (d)(2)

48 C.F.R. § 235.006(b)(i)

48 C.F.R. § 35.006(c)

Defense Contract Audit Agency, Independent Research and Development and Bid and Proposal Costs
Incurred by Major Defense Contractors (Multiple Reports for Fiscal Years 1989 through 2004)

GSA Contract Database
Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, Competing Economies: Government Support of
Large Civil Aircraft Industries of Japan, Europe and the United States (Washington, 1991)

Dual Use Technology 1995 Report

BC-17X Background Information

US Department of Defense News Release: Technology Reinvestment Project Announces FY
94 Selections, 25 October 1994

Commerce Business Daily, "Technology Reinv estment Project Program Announcement,"
21 October 1994

Anne Kellogg, "Clinton Administration to Diversify Defense Under Attack," The Hartford Courant,
11 May 1996, p. A9

Richard Burnett, "Defense Conversion Faces Own War; The Program Has Come Under Attack by
Congress as Lawmakers Search for Prime Budget Cuts," Orlando Sentinel, 15 October 1995, p. H1

Potomac Institute for Policy Studies, A Revi ew of the Technology Reinvestment Project,
30 January 1999

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997, 10 U.S.C. § 2511

Defense Acquisition Reform: Hearing before the Subcommittee on Acquisition and Technology of the
Senate Committee on Armed Services, 105th Congress, 19 March 1997 (Statement of Hon. Paul
G. Kaminski, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology)

Dual Use Science and Technology Program Web Site, at Fact Sheet hyperlink

FY02 Air Force Dual Use Science & Technology Annual Competition: Updated FY 02 Solicitation
Schedule

Department of Defense, Report to Congress on the Activities of the DOD Office of Technology
Transition, January 1998

Department of Defense, Dual Use Scien ce & Technology Report to Congress, March 1999,
Appendix C

DOD Research & Development Contracting Definitions, 48 C.F.R. § 235

Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-418, codified at 15 U.S.C. § 278n

American Technology Preeminence Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-245

National Institute of Standards & Technology Rules, 15 C.F.R. §§ 295.1 et seq.

NISTIR-6099, Connie K.N. Chang, ATP Eligibility Cr iteria for US Subsidiaries of Foreign-owned
Companies: Legislation, Implementation and Results, Chapter 1

NISTIR-5896, Rosalie Ruegg, Guidelines For Pr oposing Economic Evaluation Studies to The
Advanced Technology Program (ATP), Chapter 1.4

Slides by Marc G. Stanley, Acting Director of ATP (ATP Awards to Date by Technology Area
(1990-2001))

US Secretary of Commerce, A Progress Report on the Impacts of an Industry-Government
Technology Partnership

NISTIR-6491, Jeanne W. Powell and Karen L. Le llock, Development, Commercialization, and
Diffusion of Enabling Technologies: Progress Report (2000)

Slides About the ATP Proposers' Conference (1999)

Replies to Questions Posed by Chile, the Europ ean Community, Mexico and Poland Regarding the
New and Full Notification of the United States, G/SCM/Q2/USA/20 (7 April 1999)

NIST Overview of the Advanced Technology Program

Statements of US Senators Danforth and Holli ngs Regarding ATP Program, 140 Cong. Rec. S2851
(11 March 1994), Cong. Rec. S2763 (10 March 1994)

Historical Statistics on Awards/Winners (1990 – 5 September 2002)

ATP Project Briefs, Projects 93-01-0089 (CVD Diamond-Coated Rotating Tools for Machining
Advanced Composite Materials), 95-12-0024 (An Agen t-Based Framework for Integrated Intelligent
Planning – Execution), 95-01-0108 (Precision Optoelectronics Assembly), 91-01-0267 (PREAMP –
Pre-competitive Advanced Manufacturing of Elect rical Products), 97-05-0020 (EECOMS: Extended
Enterprise Coalition for Integrated Collaborativ e Manufacturing Systems), and 98-01-0168 (Hot
Metal Gas Forming)

Sections 921-927 of the Internal Revenue Code (prior to repeal) and related measures

FSC Repeal and Extraterritorial Income Exclusion Act of 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-519

American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-357

(b) Serious Prejudice to the Interests of the European Communities

The European Communities has voluminous evidence that the subsidies granted to the US LCA
industry have caused and continue to cause adver se effects through significant price suppression or
depression of prices of LCA worldwide, significant price undercutting and significant lost sales by the
Community industry in the market for LCA.

The evidence available includes the following materials:

Information regarding Airbus products, including at http://www.airbus.com/en/aircraftfamilies/ and
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/flash.html
, and related links and company information

Airbus and Boeing documents describing aircraft in terms of range and seats

Boeing pricing, order and delivery data, including at http://www.boeing.com/commercial/prices/
 and
http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/userdefinedselection.cfm

Airbus order and delivery data, including at
http://www.airbus.com/en/corporate/orders_and_deliveries/ (and in internal business confidential
sources)

Airbus marketing material analysing the competiti ve relationship between the various Airbus and
Boeing products

Airclaims, Client Aviation System Inquiry data (paid access database)

Boeing Current Market Outlook, various editions (including at
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/cmo/index.shtml)

Airbus Global Market Forecast, various editions (including at
http://www.airbus.com/store/mm_repository/pdf/att00003033/media_object_file_GMF2004_full_issu
e.pdf)

"Bouncing Boeing," The Economist, 13 June 1998

"Airbus Eclipses Boeing, Sets Order Book R ecord," Aviation Week and Space Technology,
10 January 2000

"Boeing increases base price for commercial aircraft by 5 percent," Seattle Times, 10 July 1998

Cumulative Deliveries for the Boeing 737 Family since 1974

"Airbus bets the company," The Economist, 18 March 2000

"Boeing, Banking on a big bird," The Economist, 12 March 1994

"Wall Street frets over Boeing," Airline Business, August 1998

"Just in time, not just in case; Boeing's push for production casts," Air Transport World, April 1994

"Boeing hit by 737 problems," Financial Times, 23 April 1998

"Airbus, Boeing in costs dogfight," Financial Times, 12 July 1994

"USA: Strong gains expected from Boeing commercial unit," The Seattle Times, 14 January 2000

"USA: Software City starts to find major bugs in reality," Independent, 5 December 1998

"USA: City – what's bugging Boeing," Sunday Telegraph, 6 September 1998

"USA: Boeing sold below cost, study suggests," The Seattle Times, 4 March 1999

"Fearful Boeing," The Economist, 27 February 1999

"Boeing to Revive Plans for Larger Super Jumbo," Seattle Times, 9 September 1998

"Medium Residual Values of 747 Buoyed by A3XX Delay," Aircraft Value News, 13 April 1998

"A340-500/600 Nears Go-Ahead," Aviation Week and Space Technology, 11 August 1997

"Too Big to Fly?," Washington Post, 4 May 1997

Airbus press releases (including at http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre/pressreleases/)

Boeing press releases (including at http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/archive2004.html
, and for
earlier years included in website archives)

Press releases by Airbus and Boeing customers

Commission Decision of 30 July 1997 declaring a c oncentration compatible with the common market
and the functioning of the EEA Agreement, OJ L 336/16 (8 December 1997)

Moody's Investors Service, Global Aerospace/Defense – Industry Outlook January 2002

Society General, Aerospace and Defense Industry Report, June 2002

Aircraft Value News, various editions

Aviation Week & Space Technology, various editions

Air Transport World, various editions

Airline Business, various editions

Citigroup Smith Barney, Boeing analyst reports

Credit Suisse First Boston, Boeing analyst reports

JP Morgan, Boeing analyst reports

Wachovia Securities, Boeing analyst reports

Society of British Aerospace Companies, Has the Business model for commercial aviation changed
permanently post September 11
th?

US International Trade Commission, Investigation No. 332-414, Publication 3433, June 2001

US Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration, "The US Jet Industry:
Competition, Regulation, and Global Market Factors Affecting US Producers," March 2005

Statement by Airbus that it has also gathered s ubstantial evidence of a business confidential nature
(e.g., internal memoranda, communications to and from actual and potential airline and leasing
company customers, and internal analyses of camp aigns), which confirms the existence of injury,
market displacement or impediment, price s uppression, depression and undercutting as well as lost
sales