Back to GetFilings.com

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D. C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d)

of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2004

Commission File No. 1-3660

Owens Corning

One Owens Corning Parkway

Toledo, Ohio 43659

Area Code (419) 248-8000

A Delaware Corporation

I.R.S. Employer Identification No. 34-4323452

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes x     No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes ¨    No x

Shares of common stock, par value $0.10 per share, outstanding at March 31, 2004

55,343,098

INDEX

(i)

PART I

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME (LOSS)

(unaudited)

The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.

- 2 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET

(unaudited)

The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.

- 3-

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET (continued)

(unaudited)

The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.

- 4 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS

(unaudited)

The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.

- 5 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(unaudited)

On October 5, 2000 (the “Petition Date”), Owens Corning and the 17 United States subsidiaries listed below (collectively with Owens Corning, the “Debtors”) filed voluntary petitions for relief (the “Filing”) under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “USBC”):

The Debtors are currently operating their businesses as debtors-in-possession in accordance with provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. The Chapter 11 cases of the Debtors (collectively, the “Chapter 11 Cases”) are being jointly administered under Case No. 00-3837 (JKF).

The referenced Chapter 11 cases do not include any other United States or foreign subsidiaries of Owens Corning (collectively, the “Non-Debtor Subsidiaries”). As described more fully below under the heading “The Plan of Reorganization”, Owens Corning may cause certain of such Non-Debtor Subsidiaries that issued guarantees with respect to Owens Corning’s $1.8 billion pre-petition bank credit facility (the “Pre-Petition Credit Facility”, which is in default) to file petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code under certain circumstances.

The Debtors filed for relief under Chapter 11 to address the growing demands on Owens Corning’s cash flow resulting from its multi-billion dollar asbestos liability. This liability is discussed in greater detail in Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

In late 2001, the asbestos-related Chapter 11 cases pending in the District of Delaware (the Chapter 11 Cases of Owens Corning and the cases of Armstrong World Industries, Inc., W.R. Grace & Co., Federal-Mogul Global, Inc., and USG Corporation) were ordered transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the “District Court”) before Judge Alfred M. Wolin to facilitate development and implementation of a coordinated plan for management (the “Administrative Consolidation”). The District Court has entered an order referring the Chapter 11 Cases back to the USBC, where they were previously pending, subject to its ongoing right to withdraw such referral with respect to any proceedings or issues (the applicable court from time to time responsible for any particular aspect of the Chapter 11 Cases being hereinafter referred to as the “Bankruptcy Court”). Owens Corning is unable to predict what impact the Administrative Consolidation will have on the timing, outcome or other aspects of the Chapter 11 Cases.

Two creditors’ committees, one representing asbestos claimants and the other representing unsecured creditors, have been appointed as official committees in the Chapter 11 Cases. In addition, the Bankruptcy Court has appointed James J. McMonagle as Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos personal injury claimants against one or more of the Debtors. The two committees and the Legal Representative have the right to be heard on all matters that come before the Bankruptcy Court.

- 6 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

On January 17, 2003, the Debtors, together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed a proposed joint plan of reorganization in the USBC. The same proponents filed a proposed amended joint plan of reorganization in the USBC on March 28, 2003, a proposed second amended joint plan of reorganization in the USBC on May 23, 2003, a proposed third amended joint plan of reorganization in the USBC on August 8, 2003, and a proposed fourth amended joint plan of reorganization (as so amended through such fourth amendment, the “Plan”) in the USBC on October 24, 2003. Certain terms, conditions and provisions of the Plan are discussed below. The Plan is subject to confirmation by the Bankruptcy Court.

Consequence of Filing

As a consequence of the Filing, all pending litigation against the Debtors was stayed automatically by section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code and, absent further order of the Bankruptcy Court, no party may take any action to recover on pre-petition claims against the Debtors. In addition, pursuant to section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, the Debtors may reject or assume pre-petition executory contracts and unexpired leases, and other parties to contracts or leases that are rejected may assert rejection damages claims as permitted by the Bankruptcy Code.

Owens Corning anticipates that substantially all liabilities of the Debtors as of the date of the Filing will be resolved under one or more Chapter 11 plans of reorganization to be proposed and voted on in the Chapter 11 Cases in accordance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Although the Debtors intend to seek confirmation of the Plan, there can be no assurance that the Plan will not be further amended prior to confirmation, nor can there be any assurance that such Plan will be confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court and consummated. Owens Corning is unable to predict what impact the Administrative Consolidation will have on the timing of the confirmation of a plan or plans of reorganization or its effect, if any, on the terms thereof.

Related Developments

PROPOSED ASBESTOS LEGISLATION

As previously disclosed, on May 22, 2003, the United States Senate introduced proposed legislation (S 1125, also known as the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2003). On April 7, 2004, the United States Senate introduced proposed substitute legislation (S 2290, also known as the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2004). References in the following discussion to the “FAIR Act” refer to each Bill separately.

If enacted into law, the FAIR Act would establish an administrative claims resolution structure through which all asbestos personal injury claims would be channeled and reviewed. The FAIR Act would also establish a national trust fund, funded through mandated contributions from defendant companies, insurance companies and existing trusts, that would be the source of compensation of all approved claims. Under the present terms of the FAIR Act, companies like Owens Corning and Fibreboard, that have filed for bankruptcy but have not yet emerged through a confirmed plan of reorganization, would be included as participants in the resolution structure.

The fate of the FAIR Act remains uncertain, and Owens Corning is unable to make any prediction as to whether the FAIR Act will be enacted or, if it is enacted, what its final form would be or what the effect, if any, would be on Owens Corning and Fibreboard or their plan or plans of reorganization. The provisions of any legislation ultimately enacted may have a material effect on the amount of liability that Owens Corning and Fibreboard ultimately have for asbestos-related claims, which could be more or less than the amounts reserved for in Owens Corning’s financial statements.

- 7 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

OTHER MATTERS FILED IN THE USBC

On or about October 10, 2003, Kensington International Limited and Springfield Associates, LLC (collectively, “K&S”), two assignees of lenders under Owens Corning’s Pre-Petition Credit Facility, filed a motion in the USBC to recuse District Court Judge Alfred M. Wolin from further participation in the Chapter 11 Cases. On October 15, 2003, the District Court entered an order withdrawing the reference of this matter from the USBC. On October 23, 2003, the District Court entered an order staying all discovery and other proceedings related to the motion until further order of the Court. On October 27, 2003, K&S filed an Emergency Petition for a Writ of Mandamus (the “Mandamus Petition”) with respect to the recusal motion in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”), seeking an order directing Judge Wolin either to recuse himself from the Chapter 11 Cases or to withdraw his order of October 23, 2003, and permit expedited discovery and an expedited briefing and hearing schedule with respect to the recusal motion. On October 28, 2003, the District Court issued an order setting forth certain procedures with respect to the recusal motion, including the provision by certain parties of affidavits and a briefing schedule with respect to the recusal motion. By orders dated October 30, 2003, and November 3, 2003, the Third Circuit stayed those proceedings in the Chapter 11 Cases for which the reference had been withdrawn from the USBC and which are pending solely before Judge Wolin; such orders do not affect other proceedings in the Chapter 11 Cases. The Third Circuit held a hearing on the Mandamus Petition on December 12, 2003. On December 18, 2003, the Third Circuit issued an order directing the District Court to vacate its October 23, 2003 stay of discovery, proceed with expedited discovery on the recusal motion, and issue a ruling on the recusal motion. On February 2, 2004, the District Court denied the recusal motion. The Third Circuit held a hearing on April 19, 2004 to review the District Court’s ruling.

On or about October 15, 2003, Credit Suisse First Boston (“CSFB”), the bank agent and a lender under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, filed a complaint in the USBC against Owens Corning and twenty unnamed law firms who are alleged to have received payments under Owens Corning’s National Settlement Program (the “NSP”, which is discussed more fully in Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements under the heading “Asbestos Liabilities”). This complaint, which is captioned Credit Suisse First Boston v. Owens Corning, et al., seeks to impose a constructive trust on all funds held by Owens Corning drawn under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility between March 1, 2000 and October 5, 2000, and to impose a constructive trust against the unnamed law firms. The complaint alleges that the NSP caused financial difficulties for Owens Corning that culminated in loan covenant breaches under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility that were not disclosed to CSFB, resulting in loans under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility that the lenders would not have been required to make. Owens Corning has filed a motion to dismiss this action. Following a hearing in February 2004, the USBC continued the proceedings in order to allow the plaintiffs to conduct limited discovery. A pre-trial conference has been set for May 18, 2004.

On or about October 17, 2003, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors filed a motion in the USBC requesting appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee to assume control of the Chapter 11 Cases due to alleged breach of the Debtors’ fiduciary duty of undivided loyalty to act in the best interest of all creditors. After such motion was dismissed by the USBC for failure to comply with local court rules, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors re-filed such motion on October 30, 2003. A hearing on this matter has been set for May 18, 2004.

The Debtors believe that the above three matters are without merit and intend to vigorously oppose them in appropriate proceedings.

- 8 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

The Plan of Reorganization

Owens Corning believes that it is likely that the terms, conditions and provisions of the Plan will be the subject of continuing negotiations or litigation to resolve differences among the creditor constituencies as to their treatment. Accordingly, Owens Corning is unable to predict at this time what the treatment of creditors and equity holders of the respective Debtors will ultimately be under any plan or plans of reorganization finally confirmed. The current Plan provides for partial payment of all unsecured creditors’ claims, in the form of distributions of new common stock and notes of the reorganized company, and cash. Additional distributions from potential insurance and other third-party claims may also be paid to certain classes of unsecured creditors, but it is expected that all classes of pre-petition unsecured creditors will be impaired. Therefore, the Plan also provides that the existing common stock of Owens Corning will be cancelled, and that current shareholders will receive no distribution or other consideration in exchange for their shares. It is impossible to predict at this time the terms and provisions of any plan or plans of reorganization that may ultimately be confirmed, when a plan or plans of reorganization will be confirmed, or the treatment of creditors thereunder.

The Plan is premised upon the substantive consolidation of the Debtors (but not the Fibreboard Settlement Trust (see Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements)) for the purposes of voting, determining which claims and interests will be entitled to vote to accept or reject the Plan, confirmation of the Plan, and the resultant discharge of and cancellation of claims and interests and distribution of assets, interests and other property under the Plan. For these purposes, the Plan would treat all assets and liabilities of each Debtor (excluding the Fibreboard Settlement Trust) as though they were merged into one consolidated estate with the assets and liabilities of the other Debtors. Substantive consolidation under the Plan will not result in the merger of or the transfer or commingling of any assets of any of the Debtors or Non-Debtor Subsidiaries. Certain creditor constituencies have asserted that substantive consolidation is not appropriate and are challenging that approach in the Plan confirmation hearings described below.

As part of the Plan, Owens Corning intends to effect an internal restructuring in order to adopt a holding company structure. This internal restructuring is expected to be refined further as steps are taken to implement it.

The percentage recovery and value of the payments made under the Plan to each class of creditors will depend upon a number of factors. Those factors include the value of the shares of new common stock and notes to be issued by the Company, the amount of cash available for distribution, the resolution of certain inter-creditor issues, and the ultimate aggregate asbestos liability.

The Plan provides that liability for current and future asbestos personal injury claims against Owens Corning and Fibreboard would be determined by the Bankruptcy Court as part of the confirmation hearing on the Plan. The Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants have reserved the right to withdraw support of the Plan if such liability is determined to be less than $16 billion in the aggregate. Hearings concerning confirmation of the Plan began on April 8, 2003. Any disagreements raised by creditors with the terms of the Plan, including with respect to the appropriateness of substantive consolidation, are expected to be handled through litigation as part of the confirmation process. Owens Corning is unable to predict the outcome of such litigation.

- 9 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

Under the Plan, a majority of the newly issued common stock, together with notes, and cash, as well as the assets of the existing Fibreboard Settlement Trust (see Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements), will fund a new trust created under the Plan intended to qualify under Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Section 524(g) trust will assume all obligations of Owens Corning, Fibreboard, and their respective subsidiaries and affiliates, for current and future asbestos personal injury claims and demands, and will, through Owens Corning and Fibreboard sub-accounts, make payments to claimants in accordance with the trust distribution procedures included as part of the Plan. In addition, the Plan provides for an injunction by the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code that will enjoin actions against the reorganized Debtors for the purpose of, directly or indirectly, collecting, recovering or receiving payment of, on, or with respect to any claims resulting from asbestos-containing products allegedly manufactured, sold or installed by Owens Corning or Fibreboard, which claims will be paid in whole or in part by the Section 524(g) trust. Similar plans of reorganization have been confirmed in the Chapter 11 cases of other companies involved in asbestos-related litigation. Section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that, if certain specified conditions are satisfied, a court may issue a supplemental permanent injunction barring the assertion of asbestos-related claims or demands against the reorganized company and channeling those claims to an independent trust.

Among other things, the Plan provides that (1) except as otherwise provided in the Plan, no distributions will be made under the Plan on account of inter-company claims among any of the Debtors, and (2) all guarantees of the Debtors of the obligations of any other Debtor will be deemed eliminated. Since, as described above, it is likely that the Plan will be the subject of continuing negotiations or litigation, Owens Corning is unable to predict at this time what the treatment of such matters, and other inter-company and intra-company arrangements, transactions and relationships that were entered into prior to the Petition Date, will ultimately be under any plan or plans of reorganization finally confirmed. Such matters and other arrangements, transactions and relationships may be challenged by various parties in the Chapter 11 Cases and payments and other obligations in respect thereof may be restricted or modified by order of, or subject to review and approval by, the Bankruptcy Court. The outcome of such challenges and other actions, if any, may have an impact on the treatment of various claims under the plan or plans ultimately confirmed and on the respective assets, liabilities and results of operations of Owens Corning and its subsidiaries. For example, Owens Corning is unable to predict at this time what the treatment will ultimately be under any such plan or plans with respect to (1) the guarantees issued by certain of Owens Corning’s U.S. subsidiaries, including Owens-Corning Fiberglas Technology Inc. (“OCFT”) and IPM Inc., a Non-Debtor Subsidiary that holds Owens Corning’s ownership interest in a majority of Owens Corning’s foreign subsidiaries (“IPM”), with respect to Owens Corning’s Pre-Petition Credit Facility or (2) OCFT’s license agreements with Owens Corning and Exterior Systems, Inc., an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Owens Corning (“Exterior”), pursuant to which OCFT licenses intellectual property to Owens Corning and Exterior. In the event that (1) the major creditor constituencies do not approve the Plan and (2) no other acceptable alternative agreement is reached to release such entities from their guaranty obligations, Owens Corning expects to cause IPM as well as Vytec Corporation and Owens-Corning Fiberglas Sweden Inc., two other Non-Debtor Subsidiaries that have issued guarantees in connection with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, to file for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, and to join in the proposal of the Plan, and will also seek to cause those Non-Debtor Subsidiaries to be substantively consolidated with the current Debtors for the purposes set forth in the Plan.

The Bankruptcy Court may confirm a plan of reorganization only upon making certain findings required by the Bankruptcy Code, and a plan may be confirmed over the dissent of non-accepting creditors and equity security holders if certain requirements of the Bankruptcy Code are met. The payment rights and other entitlements of pre-petition creditors and Owens Corning’s shareholders may be substantially altered by any plan or plans of reorganization confirmed in the Chapter 11 Cases, and the pre-petition creditors of some Debtors may be treated differently than those of other Debtors.

- 10 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

Pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code, schedules have been filed by the Debtors with the Bankruptcy Court setting forth the assets and liabilities of the Debtors as of the date of the Filing. Differences between amounts recorded by the Debtors and claims filed by creditors will be investigated and resolved as part of the proceedings in the Chapter 11 Cases.

Bar Dates for Filing Claims

GENERAL BAR DATE

In connection with the Chapter 11 Cases, the Bankruptcy Court set April 15, 2002 as the last date by which holders of certain pre-petition claims against the Debtors must file their claims (the “General Bar Date”). The General Bar Date does not apply to asbestos-related personal injury claims and asbestos-related wrongful death claims (other than claims for contribution, indemnity, reimbursement, or subrogation). Any holder of a claim that was required to file a claim by the General Bar Date and did not do so will be barred from asserting such claim against any of the Debtors and will not participate in any distribution in any of the Chapter 11 Cases on account of such claim.

Approximately 25,000 proofs of claim (including late-filed claims), totaling approximately $16.4 billion, alleging a right to payment from a Debtor were filed with the Bankruptcy Court in response to the General Bar Date. Owens Corning continues to investigate these claims to determine their validity. The Bankruptcy Court will ultimately determine liability amounts that will be allowed for claims in the Chapter 11 Cases.

In its review of the filed claims, Owens Corning identified approximately 16,000 claims, totaling approximately $8.5 billion, which it believed should be disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court, primarily because they appeared to be duplicate claims or claims that were not related to the indicated Debtor (the “Objectionable Claims”). Owens Corning filed omnibus objections to certain of these Objectionable Claims and likely will file additional objections. As of March 31, 2004, approximately 6,100 of the Objectionable Claims, totaling approximately $3.9 billion, had either been withdrawn by the claimants or disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court. While the Bankruptcy Court will ultimately determine liability amounts, if any, that will be allowed as part of the Chapter 11 Cases, Owens Corning believes that all or substantially all of the remaining Objectionable Claims will be disallowed.

In addition to the Objectionable Claims described above, the remaining filed proofs of claim included approximately 9,000 claims, totaling approximately $7.9 billion. As of March 31, 2004, approximately 1,000 of these claims, totaling approximately $0.2 billion, had either been withdrawn by the claimants, disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court, or otherwise resolved. The remaining claims consist of:

- 11 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

Owens Corning has recorded liability amounts for those claims that can be reasonably estimated and which it believes are probable of being allowed by the Bankruptcy Court. At this time, it is impossible to reasonably estimate the value of all the claims that will ultimately be allowed by the Bankruptcy Court, due to the uncertainties of the Chapter 11 process, the in-progress state of Owens Corning’s investigation of submitted claims, and the lack of documentation submitted in support of many claims. Owens Corning continues to evaluate claims filed in the Chapter 11 Cases and will make such adjustments as may be appropriate. Any such adjustments could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations in any given period. For a discussion of liability amounts in respect of asbestos personal injury claims, see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

ASBESTOS BAR DATE

A bar date for filing proofs of claim against the Debtors with respect to asbestos-related personal injury claims and asbestos-related wrongful death claims (other than claims for contribution, indemnity, reimbursement, or subrogation) has not been set. On April 11, 2003, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors filed a motion seeking establishment of a bar date for such asbestos-related claims. On April 25, 2003, the District Court entered an order withdrawing the reference of the Chapter 11 Cases to the USBC with respect to such motion, and staying all proceedings on such motion pending further order of the District Court.

As indicated above, the General Bar Date does not apply to asbestos-related personal injury claims and asbestos-related wrongful death claims (other than claims for contribution, indemnity, reimbursement, or subrogation). Despite this, approximately 3,100 proofs of claim (in addition to claims described above under “General Bar Date”), totaling approximately $2.3 billion, with respect to asbestos-related personal injury or wrongful death were filed with the Bankruptcy Court in response to the General Bar Date. Of these claims, Owens Corning has identified approximately 1,200, totaling approximately $0.5 billion, as Objectionable Claims. Of the remaining claims, Owens Corning believes that a substantial majority represent claimants that had previously asserted asbestos-related claims against the Company.

As noted above, under the Plan all asbestos-related personal injury and wrongful death claims will be channeled to the Section 524(g) trust, subject to approval by the Bankruptcy Court. Please see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information concerning asbestos-related liabilities.

- 12 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

Avoidance Actions

Under the Bankruptcy Code, October 4, 2002 was the deadline by which the Debtors, on behalf of the bankruptcy estates, could bring adversary actions seeking the return of potentially avoidable transfers made by the Debtors to certain parties within a prescribed period prior to the commencement of the Chapter 11 proceedings. As part of their review of potentially avoidable transactions, the Debtors (1) negotiated tolling agreements with some of the recipients of the preferential transfers in order to toll the time period in which to bring an avoidance action; (2) determined not to prosecute certain of those potential avoidance actions that were not the subject of tolling agreements; and (3) instituted, prior to the October 4, 2002 deadline, a total of 19 adversarial actions, including 3 preference actions, 1 turnover action, and 15 avoidance actions, as described further below. All such actions were commenced in the USBC.

Among the parties who were identified by the Debtors as having received potentially avoidable transfers were (a) 12 present and former officers that received certain pre-petition incentive payments exceeding a threshold in the aggregate per officer; (b) one director that received a pre-petition pension payment; and (c) a joint venture affiliate of the Company that received approximately $3.8 million in the one-year period prior to the commencement of the Chapter 11 proceedings.

The Debtors have executed tolling agreements with all 12 present and former officers, the director and the affiliate of the Company, as well as with certain other parties identified as having received potentially avoidable transfers.

The adversary actions were commenced against various other defendants seeking, among other things, (a) avoidance of certain guarantees and certain preferential payments made in connection with Owens Corning’s Pre-Petition Credit Facility (the “Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action”); (b) the return of up to approximately $515 million paid by the Company to shareholders of Fibreboard in connection with the Company’s purchase of Fibreboard in 1997 (the “FBD Shareholder Action”); (c) the return of up to approximately $61.8 million paid by the Company to shareholders in dividends in the period 1996 through 2000 (the “Dividend Action”); and (d) the return of approximately $133 million paid by the Company to Bank of America Corp. in connection with Owens Corning’s purchase of Fibreboard in 1997. Both the FBD Shareholder Action and the Dividend Action are defendant class actions. Certain present or former officers or directors of the Company may be members of either or both defendant classes. Certain holders of Owens Corning debt securities have filed a Complaint in Intervention in connection with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action, seeking to assert securities fraud related claims against five subsidiaries of Owens Corning that issued guarantees in connection with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The Company has opposed such intervention. It is expected that such matter will be determined by the Bankruptcy Court in conjunction with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action.

- 13 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

Separately, and at the request of the Debtors’ Official Creditors’ Committee and the direction of the Bankruptcy Court, the Debtors either obtained tolling agreements from, or filed actions against, approximately 115 law firms that entered into NSP or non-NSP agreements (see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements) with the Debtors on behalf of claimants asserting asbestos-related personal injury or wrongful death claims. Lawsuits were brought initially against the 11 law firms that did not sign tolling agreements, seeking two forms of relief: (a) first, a declaratory judgment as to whether payments made, or obligations incurred, under NSP and non-NSP agreements were in exchange for reasonably equivalent value; and (b) second, in the event reasonably equivalent value was not received, the recovery or avoidance of payments made and obligations incurred under the relevant NSP and non-NSP agreements pursuant to applicable state and federal fraudulent conveyance law. On or before September 29, 2003, similar lawsuits were brought against 5 additional law firms whose tolling agreements were about to expire. The Official Creditors’ Committee was named as a defendant in all such lawsuits, solely with respect to the declaratory relief sought. During the first quarter of 2004, the lawsuit against one of the law firms was dismissed with the consent of the Official Creditors’ Committee and Bankruptcy Court approval.

By motions filed on or about October 16, 2002, and December 17, 2003, the Debtors sought an order of the Bankruptcy Court staying all of the foregoing litigation pending its disposition in a plan of reorganization. Pursuant to a ruling of the Bankruptcy Court, all of the foregoing litigation, other than the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action, has been stayed until the earlier of (i) February 23, 2005, or (ii) 90 days after the confirmation of a plan of reorganization for Owens Corning. The Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action, previously scheduled for trial before the District Court commencing in June 2003, has been continued indefinitely by the Court.

Certain Post-Petition Matters

The Debtors have received approval from the Bankruptcy Court to pay or otherwise honor certain of their pre-petition obligations, including employee wages, salaries, benefits and other employee obligations, pre-petition claims of critical vendors, and certain other pre-petition claims including certain customer program and warranty claims.

As a result of the Filing, contractual interest expense has not been accrued or recorded on pre-petition debt of the Debtors since the Petition Date. From the Petition Date through March 31, 2004, contractual interest expense not accrued or recorded on pre-petition debt (calculated using ordinary, non-default interest rates and without regard to debt maturity) totaled approximately $550 million, of which $34 million relates to the first quarter of 2004 and $32 million relates to the first quarter of 2003.

At March 31, 2004, the Company had $821 million of cash and cash equivalents.

In connection with the Filing, the Debtors obtained a $500 million debtor-in-possession credit facility from a group of lenders led by Bank of America, N.A. (the “DIP Financing”), which was originally scheduled to expire November 15, 2002. Effective October 31, 2002, the DIP Financing was amended to, among other things, reduce the maximum available credit amount to $250 million and extend the scheduled expiration to November 15, 2004. There were no borrowings outstanding under the DIP Financing at March 31, 2004; however, approximately $82 million of the availability under this credit facility was utilized as a result of the issuance of standby letters of credit and similar uses.

- 14 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

As a consequence of the Filing and the impact of certain provisions of the Company’s DIP Financing and in a cash management order entered by the Bankruptcy Court, the Company and its subsidiaries are now subject to certain restrictions, including on their ability to pay dividends and to transfer cash and other assets to each other and to their affiliates.

The Company believes, based on information presently available to it, that its cash and cash equivalents, and cash available from operations, will provide sufficient liquidity to allow it to continue as a going concern for the foreseeable future. However, the ability of the Company to continue as a going concern (including its ability to meet post-petition obligations of the Debtors and to meet obligations of the Non-Debtor Subsidiaries) and the appropriateness of using the going concern basis for its financial statements are dependent upon, among other things, (i) the Company’s ability to comply with the terms of any cash management order entered by the Bankruptcy Court from time to time in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases, (ii) the ability of the Company to maintain adequate cash on hand, (iii) the ability of the Company to generate cash from operations, (iv) the ability of the Non-Debtor Subsidiaries to obtain necessary financing, (v) confirmation of a plan or plans of reorganization under the Bankruptcy Code, and (vi) the Company’s ability to maintain profitability following such confirmation.

Financial Statement Presentation

The Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with AICPA Statement of Position 90-7 (“SOP 90-7”), “Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization Under the Bankruptcy Code”, and on a going concern basis, which contemplates continuity of operations, realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities in the ordinary course of business. However, as a result of the Filing, such realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities are subject to uncertainty. While operating as debtors-in-possession under the protection of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, and subject to Bankruptcy Court approval or otherwise as permitted in the ordinary course of business, the Debtors, or some of them, may sell or otherwise dispose of assets and liquidate or settle liabilities for amounts other than those reflected in the Consolidated Financial Statements. Further, a plan of reorganization could materially change the amounts and classifications reported in the consolidated historical financial statements.

Substantially all of the Company’s pre-petition debt is now in default due to the Filing. As described below, the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements present the Debtors’ pre-petition debt under the caption “Liabilities Subject to Compromise”. This includes debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility and approximately $1.4 billion of other outstanding debt. As required by SOP 90-7, at the Petition Date the Company recorded the Debtors’ pre-petition debt instruments at the allowed amount, as defined by SOP 90-7.

As reflected in the Consolidated Financial Statements, “Liabilities Subject to Compromise” refer to Debtors’ liabilities incurred prior to the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases. The amounts of the various liabilities that are subject to compromise are set forth below following the debtor-in-possession financial statements. These amounts represent Owens Corning’s estimate of known or potential pre-petition claims to be resolved in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases. Such claims remain subject to future adjustments. Adjustments may result from (1) negotiations; (2) actions of the Bankruptcy Court; (3) further developments with respect to disputed claims; (4) rejection of executory contracts and unexpired leases; (5) the determination as to the value of any collateral securing claims; (6) proofs of claim; or (7) other events. Payment terms for these amounts will be established in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases.

- 15 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION STATEMENT OF INCOME (LOSS)

- 16 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION BALANCE SHEET

- 17 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION BALANCE SHEET (continued)

-18 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS

- 19 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

The amounts subject to compromise in the Consolidated and Debtor-in-Possession Balance Sheets consist of the following items:

The amounts for Chapter 11 related reorganization items in the Consolidated and Debtor-in-Possession Statements of Income (Loss) consist of the following:

- 20 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

In the second quarter of 2003, the Company realigned its internal operating segments. Following this realignment, the Company reviewed its segments in accordance with SFAS No. 131 and concluded that the aggregation of its operating segments into two reportable segments remained appropriate; however, certain components within the segments have changed. Net sales and income from operations have been reclassified for all periods presented to reflect this change.

The Company has reported financial and descriptive information about each of the Company’s two reportable segments below on a basis that is used internally for evaluating segment performance and deciding how to allocate resources to those segments.