PHOTOCOPY

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
(02/06/90 - DOJ, USCG, AL-T)

- - -

IMPORTANT NOTE: This MOU (1) was signed by the DOJ and defendant on 02/06/90 six months before the Court granted the DOJ the statutorially required permission to intervene in the Relator's lawsuit (a "defacto intervention") and (2) almost 5 months before the Relator signed a Release on 06/29/90 for the DOJ and Defendant Avco-Lycoming Textron. Relator never signed a release with DOJ and Aerospatiale Helicopter. Additionally, the actions taken by the DOJ (before the DOJ's Court approved intervention) appears to directly conflict and render and document a series of DOJ lies to a Washington court adjudicating a Civil Investigative Demand. This also appears to be an illegal and informal policy and custom implimented by the DOJ, in direct conflict with the mandatory language of the law and is very obviously sanctioned by other courts in other simular but unrelated fraud lawsuits.

- - -

February 6, 1990

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

(Page 1) This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") is entered into this Sixth day of February 1990 by and among the United States of America acting by and through the Civil Division of the Department of Justice ("DOJ"), the Department of Transportation ("DOT") acting by and through the United States Coast Guard ("USCG"), and AVCO Corporation, Textron Lycoming Division ("AVCO") (collectively referred to as the "Parties"). This MOU sets forth the contemplated terms and conditions of a proposed Settlement Agreement (the "Settlement Agreement") which the Parties intend to present to authorized officials of DOJ, the USCG, and AVCO for approval. Pursuant to the foregoing, the Parties agree as follows:

1. The Settlement Agreement will be entered into based upon the following facts:

2. AVCO, in full and complete settlement of any and all civil or administrative claims (subject to such limitations as are set forth elsewhere in this MOU) that have been or could have been brought based on any of the conduct that was the subject of the investigation identified in subparagraph l(f) above, as well as any and all civil or administrative claims based on conduct occurring after the date of the Settlement Agreement, provided that the same type of conduct was ongoing (i.e., other than on an isolated basis) during and was the subject of the investigation identified in subparagraph l(f), will:

3. DOJ will:

4. The USCG will:

5. DOJ and the USCG recognize and acknowledge that, in advance of a formal, binding Settlement Agreement and PBH contract, AVCO will be incurring significant costs in performing the Transition Period agreement and in preparing to commence the PBH program. The Parties agree that this aknowledgment is not to be construed as a constructive contract.

6. The Parties agree to use their best reasonable efforts to execute the Settlement Agreement at the earliest practicable date and that the Settlement Agreement will not be executed unless and until:

7. The Settlement Agreement will not become effective unless and until: (1) a final order has been entered "conditioned only upon the payment of the monies identified above in subparagraph 2(a)) dismissing with prejudice the Relator lawsuit against AVCO; and (2) the PBH contract, after having been approved by the necessary approva1 authorities of the OSCG and by the Board of Directors of AVCO and its parent corporation, has been awarded. As set forth in subparagraph 2(a) above, at the time the Settlement Agreement becomes effective, AVCO will pay seventeen million dollars (U.S. $17,000,000) plus accrued interest to the United States. (Page 20)

8. Upon execution of the Settlement Agreement, DOJ will make its best reasonable efforts to return to AVCO all copies of AVCO documents in DOJ's possession that were obtained pursuant to a Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General ("DOT-OIG") subpoena issued on or about August 22, 1988. Also, DOJ will make its best reasonable efforts to secure the return to AVCO of any AVCO documents in the possession of the DOT-DIG that were obtained pursuant to the August 22, 1988 subpoena. Both DOJ and DOT-DIG reserve the right to retain only copies of such materials that are necessary to document the government's conduct of this investigation and its decision to enter into the Settlement Agreement.

9. Nothing in this MOU constitutes an admission on the part of AVCO, the USCG, or DOJ. Similarly, nothing in the Settlement Agreement will constitute an admission by AVCO, the USCG, or DOJ.

10. Nothing in this MOU constitutes a release or waiver of any civil or administrative claims that the United States, by and through DOJ or the USCG, might assert against AHC or any other party other than AVCO.

11. Nothing in the Settlement Agreement is intended to effect whatever rights and defenses that AVCO, the USCG, DOJ, or a third party may have (except for a fraud action by DOJ or the USCG against AVCO based on any of the conduct falling within the scope of the first sentence of each of subparagraphs 3(b) and 4(a) above, such a fraud action being hereby waived and released (Page 21) in any tort action brought by a third party for damages or injury allegedly caused by a USCG-owned LTS101 engine.

12. All parties will use their best reasonable efforts to execute the Settlement Agreement and PBH contract at the earliest practible date.

13. It is understood that this MOU sets forth the intention of AVCO to begin performance of the Transition Period agreement, and also sets forth the understanding and good faith commitment of all parties to enter into a Settlement Agreement and a PBH contract. This MOU shall not be construed as a binding contract for any purpose.