 WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/DS317/1 
G/L/698 
G/SCM/D63/1 12 October 2004 
 
 
(04-4275) 
 Original:   English 
  
 
UNITED STATES – MEASURES AFFECTING TRADE 
IN LARGE CIVIL AIRCRAFT 
 
Request for Consultations by the European Communities
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 6 October 2004, from the delegation of the European Communities to the delegation of the United States a nd to the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement 
Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.4 of the DSU. 
 
_______________ 
 
  The European Communities hereby requests cons ultations with the Government of 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).     The measures that are the subject of this request are prohibited and actionable subsidies provided to US producers of large civil aircraft (LCA) and in particular the BOEING company, as 
well as legislation, regulations, statutory inst ruments and amendments thereto providing such 
subsidies, grants, and any other assistance to th e US producers (US LCA industry).  The measures 
include the following:  
1. State and Local Subsidies 
 
a. State of Washington  
i. Tax benefit/incentive package for production of Boeing 7E7 
   –  Washington House Bill No. 2294 (2003); 
 
b. State of Kansas  
i. Financial incentive package, including preferential bond financing, for 
Boeing 7E7 
   –  Kansas Senate Bill No. 281  (2003); 
  c. State of Illinois/City of Chicago 
 i. Tax incentives, relocation assistance, development grant, rental-free 
headquarters for Boeing corporate relocation. 
 
2. NASA Research & Development Subsidies 
 
a. High Speed Research Program 
  –  Basis of NASA FY 1993-FY 2001 Funding Requirement 
  – National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568, As Amended; WT/DS317/1 
G/L/698 G/SCM/D63/1 
Page 2 
  
 
 b. Advanced Subsonic Technology Program 
  –  Basis of NASA FY 1994-FY 2001 Funding Requirement 
  –  National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568, As Amended;  
  c. Aviation Safety Program   –  Basis of NASA FY 2000 – FY 2004 Funding Requirement  
  –  National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568, As Amended;  
 
 d. Quiet Aircraft Technology Program   –  Basis of NASA FY 2001 – FY 2004 Funding Requirement  
  –  National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568, As Amended;  
 
 e. NASA High Performance Computing and Communications Program 
  –  Basis of NASA FY 2001 – FY 2003 Funding Requirement  
  –  National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568, As Amended; 
  f. NASA Research & Technology Base Program 
  – Basis of NASA FY 2001 – FY 2004 Funding Requirement  
  –  National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568, As Amended; 
  g. NASA Patent Waiver Program   –  National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958, Pub. L. No. 85-568, As Amended  
  –  14 CFR § 1245 et. Seq;  
 
 h. NASA Personnel Dedicated to Boeing R&D. 
 
3. Department of Defense Research & Development Subsidies  
 
 a. Independent Research & Developm ent, and Bid & Proposal Reimbursements 
  – 10 U.S.C. § 2372   – 48 CFR § 31.205-18   – 48 CFR § 231.205-18   – Department of Defense Directive Regarding IR&D, Number 3204.1;  
  b. Research, Development, Testing and Evaluation Programs 
  –  Individual Budgets for DOD Project Related Elements of US Airforce.  
 
4. National Institute of Standards & Tec hnology (Department of Commerce) Subsidies 
  
a. Advanced Technology Program; 
  – Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Ac t of 1988, Pub. L. No. 100-418, 
     As Amended.   – American Technology Preeminence Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-245   – 15 CFR §295.1 et seq. 
 5. FSC/ETI Subsidies
1 
 
                                                      
1 Such measures have already been declared to be a prohibited export subsidy in panel and Appellate  
Body  reports adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body. The current retaliatory measures applied by the EC do 
not cover trade in LCAs and the EC reserves all ri ghts to take appropriate action in this respect.  WT/DS317/1 
 G/L/698 
 G/SCM/D63/1 
 Page 3 
  
a. Sections 921-927 of the Internal Revenue  Code and related measures   establishing 
special tax treatment for "Foreign Sales Corporations" ("FSCs") including individual applications; 
 
b. FSC Repeal and Extraterritorial Income  Exclusion Act of 2000, including individual 
applications and any successor legislation. 
 
6. Research & Experimentation Tax Credits 
 
7. NASA Procurement Contracts 
 
8. Other Subsidies 
 
 Any other support not included in paragra phs 1-6 above which involves a financial 
contribution by US, State, or Local entitles or entities controlled by US government entities pursuant to any laws, regulations, administrative procedur es, administrative practices and any other present 
measures, amendments thereto, or future me asures which benefit the US LCA Industry.   
  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 US, State and Local statutes, regulations, 
and administrative procedures listed above are inc onsistent with these provisions as such and as 
applied.   
 The measures listed above are subsidies b ecause in each instance there is a financial 
contribution by the US, State or Local government, or an income or price support in the sense of Article XVI of GATT 1994, and a benefit is thereby conferred within the meaning of Article 1.1(a) 
and (b) of the SCM Agreement .  Each of the listed subsidies is specific to the US LCA industry within 
the meaning of Article 2 of the SCM Agreement .  
 
 The use of these measures causes adverse effects, i.e. serious prejudice or a threat of serious 
prejudice to the interests of the Euro pean Communities and material injury or threat of material injury 
to the European Communities LCA industry:      – The effect of the measures is significant price depression and price suppression in the 
markets for LCA products in the European  Communities and elsewhere 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 .   
 WT/DS317/1 
G/L/698 G/SCM/D63/1 
Page 4 
   – 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 led or threat ens to lead to significantly lower revenues 
received by the European Communities’ LCA in dustry and is to cause material injury 
or threat thereof in violation of Article 5(a) of the SCM Agreement . 
 
 Articles 4.2 and 7.2 of the SCM Agreement  together require that this request for consultations 
includes a statement of available ev idence (1) with regard to the exis tence and nature of the subsidies 
in question and (2) the adverse effects to the inte rests of the European Communities.  This letter 
identifies the existence and nature of the subsidies, and further evidence is provided in the Annex to 
this letter.  
 
The European Communities reserves the right to request the United States to produce 
information and documents regarding the measures in question and their effect on the interests of the 
European Communities, during the consultation pr ocess.  The European Communities also reserves 
the right to address additional measures and claims under other WTO provisions during the course of the consultations.   
 
 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.   WT/DS317/1 
 G/L/698 
 G/SCM/D63/1 
 Page 5 
  
ANNEX
 
 
STATEMENT OF AVAILABLE EVIDENCE  
 
  The evidence set out below is evidence availa ble to the EC at this time regarding the 
existence and nature of the subsidies set out in the Request for Consultations, dated 6 October 2004, 
and the adverse effects caused by them to the intere sts of the EC.  It reflects the presently available 
evidence regarding the claims refl ected in the EC’s Request for C onsultations and is supported by 
documents that are listed below.  It is further supported by business conf idential internal Airbus 
documents that are summarized below.  The EC reserv es 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 EC includes the following doc uments.  The EC’s request for 
consultations describes in more detail the nature of these subsidies.  Letter from NASA Glenn Research Center 
 
Contract No. NAS1-20267  19 CFR § 351.524(b) (1998)   
Internal Revenue Service, Re venue Procedure 87-56 (1987)  
 US Federal Reserve Bank, Yiel ds on 10-year T-Bills 1962-2002 
 Foreign Sales Corporation Tax Benef its to Boeing and McDonnell Douglas  
 
Basis of NASA HSR FY 1993- FY 2001 Funding Requirement  
 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 Spino ffs," Aerospace America at 28, 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)  
Total Allocation of Subsidies to Boeing & McDonnell Douglas LCA Division  
 The 1958 Space Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2451  Basis of NASA AST FY 1994- FY 2001 Funding Requirement  WT/DS317/1 
G/L/698 G/SCM/D63/1 
Page 6 
  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, February 10, 1994, Federal Document Clearing House, 1994 W.L. 214062 
 Advanced Subsonic Technology Program, Technol ogy Transfer Control Handbook (Aug. 1998) 
 
Federal News Service, Hearing of the Science,  Technology and Space Subcommittee of the Senate 
Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, April 24, 1997  Basis of ASP FY 2000 – FY 2004 Funding Requirement   
Flight International, 11 August 1999  
 Basis of NASA QAT FY 2001 – FY 2004  Funding Requirement   The National Aeronautics and Space Administra tion's (NASA) High Performance Computing and 
Communications (HPCC) Program  
 
Basis of NASA HPCC FY 1991-FY 2003 Funding Requirement   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  
CAS as a Portion of HPCC Program 
 Basis of NASA R&T Base FY 1993 - FY 2004 Funding Requirement   Civil Aircraft Related Portion of R& T Base Program (Including Engines) 
 
Civil Aircraft Related Portion of R& T Base Program (Excluding Engines) 
 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  
 NASA Salaries for NASA Employees Assisting Boeing & McDonnell Douglas LCA Division   35 U.S.C. §§ 154, 271  
 
NASA Property Rights in Inventions, 42 USC § 2457 et. seq.  NASA Patent Waiver Regulations, 14 CFR  § 1245 et. seq.   WT/DS317/1 
 G/L/698 
 G/SCM/D63/1 
 Page 7 
  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, Valu e 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 CFR § 31.205-18 
 
Independent Research and Development and Bi d and Proposal Cost Defense Acquisition Rule, 
48 CFR § 231.205-18   Department of Defense Directive Regarding IR&D Number 3204.1 WT/DS317/1 
G/L/698 G/SCM/D63/1 
Page 8 
  Internal Revenue Service National Office T echnical Advice Memorandum, Private Ruling 8633004 
(unpublished), 1986 PLR LEXIS 2296 (May 9, 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 Technolog y, DOD (14 March 1997) 
 Michael E. Davey & Dahlia Stein, Congressiona l Research Service Report For Congress: DOD's 
Independent Research and Development Pr ogram: Changes and Issues (Dec. 17, 1993) 
 
Statute Defining 'Covered' Contracts, 10 USC § 2324(l)(1) (version in effect from FY 1995 – FY 2001)  IR&D Statute – FY91/92 Version, 10 USC § 2372(5)  
10 USC § 2306a (version in effect FY 1991 – FY 1992) 
 IR&D/B&P Statute – FY 93/94 Version, 10 USC § 2372(i)(1)  Statute Defining 'Covered' Contracts – FY 93/94 Version, 10 USC § 2324(m) 
 
Federal Acquisition Rules Relating To Types Of Contracts, 48 CFR § 16.301-3(a)(1)  Federal Acquisition Rules Relating to  Commercial Items, 48 CFR § 12.207 
 Federal Acquisition Rules Relating to Servi ce Contracting, 48 CFR § 37.602-4, et. seq. 
 
Federal Acquisition Rules Relating to C onstruction Contracts, 48 CFR § 36.207(a) 
 Defense Acquisition Rules Relating To Types Of Contracts, 48 CFR § 216.104-70(b)(2), (c), (d)(2)  
Defense Acquisition Rules Relating To Research  And Development Contracting, 48 CFR § 
235.006(b)(i)   Federal Acquisition Rules Relating to Research a nd Development Contracting, 48 CFR § 35.006(c) 
 Defense Contract Audit Agency, Independent Resear ch and Development and Bid and Proposal Costs 
Incurred by Major Defense Contractors (Multiple  Reports for Fiscal Years 1989 through 2001) 
 GSA Database (CD-Rom)  Database with IR&D-eligible Contracts (CD-Rom)  
 
IR&D Program:  Chart I. Esti mated Total DOD IR&D and B&P Subsidies to Boeing & McDonnell 
Douglas; Chart II: DOD IR&D-Eligible Contracts of 8 Aerospace Contractors as a Percentage of All 
DOD IR&D-Eligible Contracts FY 1991 – FY 2001   WT/DS317/1 
 G/L/698 
 G/SCM/D63/1 
 Page 9 
  Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, Competing Economies: Government Support of 
Large Civil Aircraft Industries of Japan, Europe and the United States (Washington, 1991)  
DOD RDT&E US Civil Aircraft Related Project Elements 
 Air Systems & Advanced Technology Budgets for FY 2000 – FY 2001 (PE# 0603217N)  Aircraft Engine Component Improvement Plan Budgets for  FY 1997 – FY 2001 
(PE# 0207268F/0604268F) 
 Aircraft Propulsion System Integration Budgets for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 0603202F) 
 Defense Research Sciences Budgets  for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 601102F) 
 
Materials Budgets for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 602102F)  Dual Use Technology 1995 Report  Aerospace Flight Dynamics Budgets for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 0602201F) 
 
Aerospace Propulsion Budgets for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 0602203F)  Advanced Materials for Weapons Systems B udgets for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 0603112F) 
 
Flight Vehicle Technology Budgets for FY 1996 – 2001 (PE# 0603205F) 
 Aerospace Structures Budgets for FY 1997 – FY 2001 (PE# 0603211F)  C-17 Budgets for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 0604321F)  
BC-17X Background Information  
 Aerospace Avionics/Aerospace Sensors Budge ts for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 0602204F) 
 Aerospace Propulsion and Power Technology Budge ts for FY 1996 – FY 2001 (PE# 0603216F) 
 
US Department of Defense News Release: Technology Reinvestment Project Announces FY 
94 Selections, October 25, 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 WT/DS317/1 
G/L/698 G/SCM/D63/1 
Page 10 
   RDT&E Item Justification Sheets for Fiscal Ye ars 1997-2003: PE #0603805 E (Defensewide – FY 
1999), PE #0603805S (Defensewide – FY 1999 – FY  2001), PE# 0602805A (Army – FY 1999- FY 
2001), PE# 0602805N (Navy – FY 1999- FY 2001), PE# 0602805F (Airforce – FY 1999 – FY 2001) 
 Defense Acquisition Reform: Hearing before the Su bcommittee 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 De fense 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 CFR Part 235  Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (" OTCA"), Pub. L. No. 100-418, codified at 
15 U.S.C. § 278n 
 
American Technology Preeminence Act of  1991 ("ATPA"), Pub. L. No. 102-245 
 National Institute of Standards & Technology Rules ("NIST 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, at Slide 12 (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, Slide 52 (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 (March 10, 1994)  WT/DS317/1 
 G/L/698 
 G/SCM/D63/1 
 Page 11 
   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 Electrical Products), and 97-05-0020 (EECOMS: 
Extended Enterprise Coalition for Integrated Collaborative Manufacturing Systems) 
 
(b) Serious Prejudice to the Interests of the European Communities 
 
The European Communities has volumi nous evidence that the subsidies granted to the US large civil 
aircraft industry has caused and is continuing to  cause adverse effects through significant price 
suppression or depression of prices of large civil aircraft worldwide, significant price undercutting 
and significant lost sales by the EC industry in the market for large civil aircraft. 
 The evidence available includ es the following materials: 
• Airbus Industrie, The 100-seater widebody - Comparing the A318 with the 717 and 737-600 
• Airbus Industrie, Maintaining the lead – A320 Family versus 737NG maintenance cost 
• Airbus Industrie, A320 Family The world’s most profitable single-aisle family – ever 
• Airbus Industrie, THE RIGHT CHOICE FOR THE 21
ST CENTURY – The A330-200 against 
the 767-300ER 
• Airbus Industrie, A330-200 – The Economic Powerhouse 
• Airbus Industrie, THE DAWN OF A NEW AGE – The A340-600 against the 747-400 
• Airbus Industrie, A340 The World Ranger Un iquely matched to the new competitive 
environment – Comparing the A340 and the 777 
• Airbus Industrie, A330-300 The most efficient air transport vehicle yet designed by man – 
Comparing the A330 and the 777 
• www.boeing.com/commercial/overview.html  
• "Bouncing Boeing," The Economist, 13 June 1998 
• Single Aisle Airbus and Boeing Aircraft, Range and Seats 
• Widebody Mid-Range Airbus and Bo eing Aircraft, Range and Seats 
• Widebody Long Range Airbus and Bo eing Aircraft, Range and Seats 
• "Airbus Eclipses Boeing, Sets Order Book Reco rd," Aviation Week and Space Technology, 
10 January 2000 
• "Boeing increases base price for commercial aircra ft by 5 percent," Seattle Times, 10 July 
1998 
• R. Baldwin and P. Krugman, "Industrial Policy and International Competition in Wide-bodied 
Aircraft," in NBER Conference Report Series: Trade Policy Issues and Empirical Analysis (R. Baldwin, Ed., University of Chicago Press, 1988) 
• Richard Diamond, "Economic Foundations of C ountervailing Duty Law," 29 VA J Int’l Law, 
p. 767 WT/DS317/1 
G/L/698 G/SCM/D63/1 
Page 12 
  
• 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 pu sh 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 
• Airbus delivery data 
• "USA: Strong gains expected from Boeing comm ercial 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 
• Boeing web site, "Order Summary by Year – as of January 2001" 
• "USA: Boeing sold below cost, study sugg ests," The Seattle Times, 4 March 1999 
• "Fearful Boeing," The Economist, 27 February 1999 
• "Boeing to Revive Plans for Larger Supe r Jumbo," Seattle Times, 9 September 1998 
• "Medium Residual Values of 747 Buoyed by A3 XX Delay," Aircraft Value News, 13 April 
1998 
• "A340-500/600 Nears Go-Ahead," Aviation W eek and Space Technology, 11 August 1997 
• "Too Big to Fly?," Washington Post, 4 May 1997 
• Commission Decision of 30 July 1997 declari ng a concentration compatible with the common 
market and the functioning of the EEA Agreement, OJ L 336/16 (8 December 1997) 
• Moody’s Investors Service, Global Aerosp ace/Defense – Industry Outlook January 2002 
• Society General, Aerospace and De fense Industry Report, June 2002 
• Aircraft Value News, 11 February 2002 
• Society of British Aerospace Companies, Has the Business model for commercial aviation 
changed permanently post September 11
th? 
• US International Trade Commission, Investigati on no. 332-414, Publication 3433, June 2001 
• Statement by Airbus that it has also gathered  substantial evidence of a business confidential 
nature (e.g. internal memoranda, letters to a nd from (actual and potential) clients, campaign 
progress reports), which confirms the existence of price suppression, depression and undercutting as well as of lost sales.   
 
__________ 