UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006

or

¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from              to             

Commission File Number: 1-3660

Owens Corning

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware	34-4323452
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
One Owens Corning Parkway, Toledo, OH	43659
(Address of principal executive offices)	(Zip Code)

(419) 248-8000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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 a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  ¨        Accelerated filer  x        Non-accelerated filer  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

As of April 28, 2006, 55,340,432 shares of registrant’s common stock, par value $0.10 per share, were outstanding.

	( i )
	INDEX
		Page
Cover Page		1
PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1.	Financial Statements
	Consolidated Statement of Income (Loss)	2
	Consolidated Balance Sheet	3 - 4
	Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows	5
	Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
	Voluntary Petition for Relief Under Chapter 11	6 - 26
	Segment Data	27 - 28
	General	29
	Inventories	29
	Goodwill and Other Intangibles	29
	Warranties	30
	Pension Plans and Other Postretirement Benefits	30 - 31
	Stock Compensation	31
	Contingent Liabilities and Other Matters	32 - 48
	Fibreboard Settlement Trust	48 - 50
	Earnings per Share	51
	Comprehensive Income/Loss	52
	Income Taxes	52
	Accounting Pronouncements	52
	Subsequent Events	52
Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	53 - 74
Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	74
Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	74
	INDEX
		Page
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.	Legal Proceedings	75 - 80
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	80
Item 2.	Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds	80 - 81
Item 3.	Defaults Upon Senior Securities	81
Item 4.	Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders	81
Item 5.	Other Information	81
Item 6.	Exhibits	81
	Signatures	82
	Exhibit Index	83 - 85

- 2 -

PART I

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (LOSS)

(unaudited)

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions, except per share data)
NET SALES	$	1,601		$	1,402
COST OF SALES		1,332			1,167
Gross margin		269			235
OPERATING EXPENSES
Marketing and administrative expenses		131			124
Science and technology expenses		16			13
Chapter 11 related reorganization items		10			36
Provision (credit) for asbestos litigation claims (recoveries) – Owens Corning		(3	)		3,435
Provision for asbestos litigation claims – Fibreboard		—			907
Other		—			1
Total operating expenses		154			4,516
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS		115			(4,281	)
Interest expense, net		65			1
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAX BENEFIT		50			(4,282	)
Income tax benefit		(10	)		(48	)
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE MINORITY INTEREST AND EQUITY IN NET EARNINGS (LOSS) OF AFFILIATES		60			(4,234	)
Minority interest and equity in net earnings (loss) of affiliates		3			(3	)
NET INCOME (LOSS)	$	63		$	(4,237	)
NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE
Basic net income (loss) per share	$	1.14		$	(76.59	)
Diluted net income (loss) per share	$	1.05		$	(76.59	)
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARES DURING THE PERIOD
Basic		55.3			55.3
Diluted		59.9			55.3

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

- 3 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(unaudited)

ASSETS	March 31, 2006			December 31, 2005
	(dollars in millions)
CURRENT
Cash and cash equivalents	$	1,360		$	1,559
Receivables, less allowances of $18 million in 2006 and $19 million in 2005		742			608
Inventories		516			477
Other current assets		44			61
Total current		2,662			2,705
OTHER
Restricted cash – asbestos and insurance related		198			189
Restricted cash, securities, and other - Fibreboard		1,436			1,433
Deferred income taxes		1,464			1,432
Pension-related assets		455			471
Goodwill		214			215
Investment in affiliates		77			77
Other noncurrent assets		213			201
Total other		4,057			4,018
PLANT AND EQUIPMENT, at cost
Land		85			85
Buildings and leasehold improvements		810			796
Machinery and equipment		3,380			3,346
Construction in progress		174			177
		4,449			4,404
Accumulated depreciation		(2,435	)		(2,392	)
Net plant and equipment		2,014			2,012
TOTAL ASSETS	$	8,733		$	8,735

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

- 4 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (continued)

(unaudited)

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT	March 31, 2006			December 31, 2005
	(dollars in millions)
CURRENT
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	903		$	1,032
Accrued post-petition interest		801			735
Short-term debt		7			6
Long-term debt - current portion		13			13
Total current		1,724			1,786
LONG-TERM DEBT		35			36
OTHER
Pension plan liability		684			684
Other employee benefits liability		407			410
Other		213			199
Total other		1,304			1,293
LIABILITIES SUBJECT TO COMPROMISE		13,520			13,520
COMPANY OBLIGATED SECURITIES OF ENTITIES HOLDING SOLELY PARENT DEBENTURES - SUBJECT TO COMPROMISE		200			200
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Notes 9 and 10)
MINORITY INTEREST		45			47
STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
Preferred stock, no par value 8,000,000 shares authorized; none issued or outstanding at March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005		—			—
Common stock, par value $0.10 per share 100,000,000 shares authorized; 55.3 issued and outstanding at March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005		6			6
Additional paid in capital		692			692
Accumulated deficit		(8,483	)		(8,546	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(309	)		(297	)
Other		(1	)		(2	)
Total stockholders’ deficit		(8,095	)		(8,147	)
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT	$	8,733		$	8,735

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

- 5 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(unaudited)

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
NET CASH FLOW FROM OPERATIONS
Net income (loss)	$	63		$	(4,237	)
Reconciliation of net cash flow used for operations
Noncash items:
Provision for asbestos litigation claims		—			4,342
Provision for depreciation and amortization		60			59
Provision for impairment of fixed assets		—			3
Credit for deferred income taxes		(25	)		(57	)
Provision for pension and other employee benefits liabilities		24			29
Provision for post-petition interest/fees on pre-petition debt		66			—
Other		(1	)		7
Increase in receivables		(120	)		(144	)
Increase in inventories		(37	)		(71	)
Decrease in accounts payable and accrued liabilities		(144	)		(45	)
Proceeds from insurance for asbestos litigation claims, excluding Fibreboard		9			1
Pension fund contribution		(4	)		(4	)
Payments for other employee benefits liability		(7	)		(6	)
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash – asbestos and insurance related		(9	)		1
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash, securities, and other – Fibreboard		(3	)		6
Other		(19	)		(16	)
Net cash flow used for operations		(147	)		(132	)
NET CASH FLOW FROM INVESTING
Additions to plant and equipment		(62	)		(46	)
Investment in affiliates and subsidiaries, net of cash acquired		(1	)		(1	)
Proceeds from the sale of assets or affiliate		10			—
Net cash flow used for investing		(53	)		(47	)
NET CASH FLOW FROM FINANCING
Payments on long-term debt		(1	)		(11	)
Net increase (decrease) in short-term debt		1			(1	)
Net cash flow used for financing		—			(12	)
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash		1			(4	)
NET DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS		(199	)		(195	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		1,559			1,125
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD	$	1,360		$	930

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

- 6 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11

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”):

CDC Corporation	Integrex Testing Systems LLC
Engineered Yarns America, Inc.	HOMExperts LLC
Falcon Foam Corporation	Jefferson Holdings, Inc.
Integrex	Owens-Corning Fiberglas Technology, Inc.
Fibreboard Corporation	Owens Corning HT, Inc.
Exterior Systems, Inc.	Owens-Corning Overseas Holdings, Inc.
Integrex Ventures LLC	Owens Corning Remodeling Systems, LLC
Integrex Professional Services LLC	Soltech, Inc.
Integrex Supply Chain Solutions LLC

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”, it is possible that certain of such Non-Debtor Subsidiaries, namely IPM Inc., Vytec Corporation and Owens-Corning Fiberglas Sweden Inc., that issued guarantees with respect to Owens Corning’s primary pre-petition bank credit facility (the “Pre-Petition Credit Facility”), may initiate Chapter 11 proceedings in order to be covered by the terms of the Plan (as defined below) in order to resolve such entities’ potential liability under such guarantees. The timing of any such filing would permit the inclusion of such entities as part of the Plan confirmation process.

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 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Overseeing Federal District Court

In late 2001, all of 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 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”).

On May 27, 2004, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) assigned Judge John P. Fullam of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to replace Judge Wolin in the Chapter 11 Cases. In addition, the Third Circuit assigned other judges to sit on other

- 7 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

of the cases that had previously been consolidated under the terms of the Administrative Consolidation, effectively terminating the consolidation.

Consequence of the 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.

Two creditors’ committees, one representing asbestos claimants (the “Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants”) and the other representing unsecured creditors (the “Official Committee of 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.

Owens Corning anticipates that substantially all liabilities of the Debtors as of the Petition Date will be resolved under the Plan (as defined below) or some other Chapter 11 plan of reorganization to be voted on in the Chapter 11 Cases in accordance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. 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 (the “Fourth Amended Plan”) in the USBC on October 24, 2003.

On December 31, 2005, the Debtors, together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed a proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization in the USBC along with a related disclosure statement and, on March 29, 2006, filed certain proposed modifications of such plan and such disclosure statement (as so amended through such modified fifth amendment and such modified disclosure statement, such documents are referred to herein as the “Plan” and the “Disclosure Statement”, respectively). The steering committee of holders of obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility supports the Plan pursuant to the terms of the letter, dated December 30, 2005, appended as Appendix K to the Disclosure Statement. Certain other members of the major non-asbestos creditor groups have indicated that they may oppose the Plan. There can be no assurance that the Plan or any other plan supported by Owens Corning and less than all of the major creditor groups will be ultimately confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court and consummated. The Debtors have the exclusive right to file and solicit acceptances to a plan of reorganization through July 31, 2006. In addition, Owens Corning is unable to predict what impact the disposition of any of the litigation and other matters described below will have on the timing of the confirmation of the Plan (or any other plan of reorganization) or its effect, if any, on the terms thereof. The Plan (and any other plan of reorganization) is subject to confirmation by the Bankruptcy Court.

- 8 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

The Plan has been significantly amended from the Fourth Amended Plan. In particular, the Plan is no longer premised upon the substantive consolidation of Owens Corning and certain of its direct and indirect subsidiaries 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. On October 5, 2004, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order Concerning Substantive Consolidation (the “Substantive Consolidation Order”). In the Substantive Consolidation Order, the District Court granted the Debtors’ motion for substantive consolidation. On October 13, 2004, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility filed an appeal of the Substantive Consolidation Order with the Third Circuit. On August 15, 2005, the Third Circuit reversed the Substantive Consolidation Order. The Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos personal injury claimants and certain designated members of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors subsequently filed petitions for rehearing en banc of the Third Circuit’s decision. Those petitions for rehearing were denied by the Third Circuit on September 28, 2005. The Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos personal injury claimants and certain bondholders have filed petitions for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court with respect to the Third Circuit’s decision on the Substantive Consolidation Order.

As previously disclosed, as a result of the Third Circuit’s reversal of the District Court’s Substantive Consolidation Order, Owens Corning’s evaluation of the distributable values (considered on a non-substantively consolidated basis) of Owens Corning and certain of its Debtor and non-Debtor subsidiaries, and the terms of the proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization as filed in the USBC on December 31, 2005, Owens Corning previously has recorded expenses with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility for the period from the Petition Date through December 31, 2005 in the amount of $735 million relating to post-petition interest and certain other post-petition fees. With respect to post-petition interest, such expenses reflected the application of the Base Rate plus 2% (as described below) applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly); with respect to post-petition fees, such expenses reflected no compounding. The Plan (as modified on March 29, 2006) provides that, if the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are deemed unimpaired, or are deemed to be impaired and the class of such holders accepts the Plan, (and the Plan is confirmed and becomes effective) then the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility will be paid an amount in cash equal to the sum of (i) the amount of interest accrued through the date of delivery of the initial distribution under the Plan to holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (the “Initial Bank Holders’ Distribution”) on the amounts outstanding under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility as of the Petition Date, at the Base Rate plus 2% (as defined below) on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and (ii) the amount of any accrued and unpaid post-petition fees payable under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility through the date of delivery of the Initial Bank Holders’ Distribution, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility), plus accrued interest thereon pursuant to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). In light of such terms of the Plan, Owens Corning (i) has recorded, for the period ended March 31, 2006, additional expenses of $12 million for the period from the Petition Date through December 31, 2005, and (ii) has recorded, for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, additional expenses of $54 million reflecting post-petition interest with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). However, this estimate is based on numerous factual and legal uncertainties, including the interpretation of contractual provisions concerning such interest and other fees, and Owens Corning reserves the right to object, if and as appropriate in its judgment, to the ultimate entitlements to such interest and other fees and to the amount of such interest and other fees in the Chapter

- 9 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

11 Cases (or other proceedings), subject to the terms and conditions of the Interim Unimpairment Order (as defined below). Absent developments that alter Owens Corning’s view of the likelihood of amounts that may be paid under the Plan to holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, Owens Corning expects to continue to accrue interest on the Pre-Petition Credit Facility in future periods, to the extent required under applicable law, at a rate equal to the Base Rate plus 2%, applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). The Base Rate (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) is a floating rate equal to the higher of (i) the prime commercial lending rate of Credit Suisse First Boston and (ii) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50% per annum.

On April 7, 2006, upon motion of the agent for the holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (which motion was subsequently joined by certain of the Debtors and Non-Debtor Subsidiaries), the USBC issued an interim order (the “Interim Unimpairment Order”) providing among other things that, if claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are paid in full and in cash as provided in the Plan as modified, then (i) such claims are rendered unimpaired and the classes of such claims are conclusively presumed to have accepted the Plan and (ii) such claims shall be paid in full and all claims and remedies arising under or related to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, including any guarantees executed or delivered in connection therewith, shall be extinguished. The Interim Unimpairment Order provides that it will become a final order unless an objection is timely filed with the USBC, in which event a hearing to consider approval of the order on a final basis will be held on May 10, 2006.

A six-day claims estimation hearing was held before the District Court beginning January 13, 2005 to establish the amount of Owens Corning’s and Fibreboard’s current and future asbestos liability in the Chapter 11 Cases. In general, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility argued that the amount of such asbestos liability should be set at an amount significantly lower than the amounts reserved for asbestos claims on the financial statements of the Debtors, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants argued that such asbestos liability should be set at a significantly higher level. On March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit. As a result of the District Court’s estimation, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $3.435 billion for the period ended March 31, 2005, so that its recorded reserve equaled the level of asbestos liability estimated by the District Court (see Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens Corning, Owens Corning also increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million for the period ended March 31, 2005.

- 10 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

Related Developments

PROPOSED ASBESTOS LEGISLATION

Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) co-sponsored an asbestos litigation reform bill (S-852) introduced in the United States Senate on April 19, 2005. The proposed legislation is entitled the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005 (the “FAIR Act”).

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 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 proposed legislation was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 26, 2005. On February 14, 2006, the U.S. Senate failed to secure the votes required to waive a budget point of order that was raised against the proposed legislation. The proposed legislation has since been removed from the floor and recommitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislative fate of the FAIR Act remains uncertain, and Owens Corning is unable to predict 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 the Plan (or any other plan of reorganization), including in the event that the effective date of the Plan has not occurred prior to the enactment of the FAIR Act. 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 less than the amounts reserved for in Owens Corning’s financial statements.

OTHER MATTERS FILED IN THE USBC

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 supplement to the motion of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors was filed on May 28, 2004, and various filings in opposition to such supplemented motion were filed by the Debtors, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants. Further proceedings on this matter had been voluntarily continued by the movants on a monthly basis. On March 23, 2006, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors authorized the withdrawal of the motion.

On or about May 24, 2004, Credit Suisse First Boston, Kensington International Limited, Springfield Associates LLC and Angelo Gordon filed a motion in the USBC requesting the appointment of a Chapter 11 examiner to examine (i) allegations of improper conduct by management of the Debtors, (ii) alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by management of the Debtors resulting from the influence of the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants and the Official Committee of Asbestos

- 11 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

Claimants on the process of developing a plan and the tort estimation process, (iii) alleged connections between the asbestos plaintiffs’ interests, a Court appointed mediator, and the Debtors’ asbestos liability estimation firm, and (iv) other alleged improper conduct. Owens Corning, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants have each filed responsive pleadings to the motion. The USBC has continued further proceedings on the motion pending issuance of a final order on the motion (described in the preceding paragraph) requesting appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee. The Debtors believe that the motion requesting appointment of an examiner is without merit and intend to continue to vigorously oppose it in appropriate proceedings.

The Plan of Reorganization

As described above, on March 29, 2006, the Debtors, together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed the Plan and the related Disclosure Statement. The steering committee of holders of obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility supports the Plan pursuant to the terms of the letter, dated December 30, 2005, appended to the Disclosure Statement as Appendix K. In light of the Third Circuit’s reversal of the Substantive Consolidation Order described above, the current Plan is premised upon non-consolidation of the Debtors, including separate classification and treatment of the claims against and interests in each of the Debtors. In addition, 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 USBC has set July 10, 17 and 18, 2006 as hearing dates on the confirmation of the Plan. At this time, Owens Corning is unable to predict the outcome of the hearing on the confirmation of the Plan or the final terms of the Plan (or other plan of reorganization) as may ultimately be confirmed.

As set forth in the Plan and the Disclosure Statement, the Plan currently provides that, after the payment of secured and priority claims, the residual distributable value of Owens Corning will generally be allocated ratably in the form of cash and new common stock to holders of allowed general unsecured claims against Owens Corning (other than holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, which will receive the treatment described below), including asbestos claimants, bondholders, trade creditors and other general unsecured creditors. The percentage recovery and value of the payments ultimately made under the Plan to each class of creditors will depend upon a number of factors. Those factors, which are described in detail in the Disclosure Statement, include, among other things, the value of the shares of new common stock and notes to be issued by Owens Corning, the amount of cash available for distribution, and the outcome of the voting on the Plan. As to Fibreboard, the Plan contemplates that the assets available to satisfy Fibreboard liabilities (which are primarily asbestos-related liabilities) will be limited to the assets of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and certain other specified assets.

As described in greater detail in the Plan and Disclosure Statement, if the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are deemed unimpaired, or are deemed to be impaired and the class of such holders accepts the Plan, (and the Plan is confirmed and becomes effective) then the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility will be paid cash in an aggregate amount equal to the amount of their allowed claims plus post-petition interest on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility), plus interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. If the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are deemed to be impaired and the class of such holders rejects the Plan, then the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility will be paid cash and cash pay notes in an amount to be determined by the Bankruptcy

- 12 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

Court. As previously disclosed, as of March 31, 2006, Owens Corning has recorded expenses of $801 million reflecting post-petition interest with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). However, this estimate is based on numerous factual and legal uncertainties, including the interpretation of contractual provisions concerning such interest and other fees, and Owens Corning reserves the right to object, if and as appropriate in its judgment, to the ultimate entitlements to such interest and other fees and to the amount of such interest and other fees in the Chapter 11 Cases (or other proceedings), subject to the terms and conditions of the Interim Unimpairment Order. Absent developments that alter Owens Corning’s view of the likelihood of amounts that may be paid under the Plan to holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, Owens Corning expects to continue to accrue interest on the Pre-Petition Credit Facility in future periods, to the extent required under applicable law, at a rate equal to the Base Rate plus 2%, applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). The Base Rate (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) is a floating rate equal to the higher of (i) the prime commercial lending rate of Credit Suisse First Boston and (ii) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50% per annum.

On April 7, 2006, upon motion of the agent for the holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (which motion was subsequently joined by certain of the Debtors and Non-Debtor Subsidiaries), the USBC issued the Interim Unimpairment Order providing among other things that, if claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are paid in full and in cash as provided in the Plan as modified, then (i) such claims are rendered unimpaired and the classes of such claims are conclusively presumed to have accepted the Plan and (ii) such claims shall be paid in full and all claims and remedies arising under or related to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, including any guarantees executed or delivered in connection therewith, shall be extinguished. The Interim Unimpairment Order provides that it will become a final order unless an objection is timely filed with the USBC, in which event a hearing to consider approval of the order on a final basis will be held on May 10, 2006.

As described above, the Plan (which is co-proposed by the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants) provides that Owens Corning asbestos claimants will receive a partial payment proportionately similar to other general unsecured creditors of Owens Corning. In order to estimate the amount of the current and future asbestos personal injury claims in the Chapter 11 Cases, a six-day claims estimation hearing was held before the District Court beginning January 13, 2005. In general, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility argued that the amount of the Company’s current and future asbestos liability should be set at an amount significantly lower than the amounts reserved for asbestos claims on the financial statements of the Debtors, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants argued that such asbestos liability should be set at a significantly higher level. On March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. As a result of the District Court’s estimation, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $3.435 billion for the period ended March 31, 2005, so that its recorded reserve equaled the level of asbestos liability estimated by the District Court. Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens

- 13 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

Corning, Owens Corning also increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million for the period ended March 31, 2005. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s estimation ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit.

Under the Plan, a trust, which is intended to qualify under section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “524(g) Trust”), will be created from which asbestos claimants will be paid. The Plan provides that a majority of the newly issued common stock of reorganized Owens Corning, as well as cash, the assets of the existing Fibreboard Settlement Trust (see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements) and specified other assets, will fund the 524(g) Trust. The 524(g) Trust will, through separate sub-accounts for Owens Corning and Fibreboard, assume all asbestos-related liability of Owens Corning, Fibreboard and the other entities set forth in the Plan and will, through those separate sub-accounts, make payments to claimants in accordance with the trust distribution procedures included as part of the Plan. The Plan contemplates that the assets of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and certain other specified assets will fund only the separate Fibreboard sub-account and, as a result, those amounts will not be available under the Plan to pay claims against Owens Corning. Conversely, only the assets in the Fibreboard sub-account will be available to pay claims against Fibreboard. 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, their respective subsidiaries, and certain of their affiliates, for the purpose of, directly or indirectly, collecting, recovering or receiving payment of, on, or with respect to any asbestos claims which will be subject to the 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 permanent injunction barring the assertion of asbestos-related claims or demands against the reorganized company and channeling those claims to an independent trust.

As previously noted, the Plan currently contemplates that most classes of pre-petition unsecured creditors of Owens Corning will be impaired. Therefore, the Plan 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.

In general, in light of the Third Circuit’s reversal of the Substantive Consolidation Order, intercompany claims are classified separately under the Plan but receive treatment similar to that of other unsecured claims. However, as described more fully in the Plan, holders of allowed intercompany claims do not receive distributions of new common stock and cash on account of such claims but, instead, are credited with value on account of such claims. In addition, the arrangements, transactions and relationships that gave rise to certain intercompany claims 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 any other plan ultimately confirmed and on the respective assets, liabilities and results of operations of Owens Corning and its direct and indirect subsidiaries.

Although they have not filed Chapter 11 Cases at the present time, Owens Corning reserves the right to initiate Chapter 11 proceedings on behalf of three subsidiaries, IPM Inc., Vytec Corporation and Owens-Corning Fiberglas Sweden Inc., that issued guarantees with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, in

- 14 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

the event Owens Corning deems it necessary to do so in order for such subsidiaries to be covered by the terms of the Plan in order to resolve such entities’ potential liability under such guarantees. The timing of any such filing would permit the inclusion of such entities as part of the Plan confirmation process.

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 Petition Date. 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.

Any disagreements raised by creditors with the terms of the Plan are expected to be handled through negotiation or litigation as part of the confirmation process. Owens Corning is unable to predict the timing or outcome of such negotiation or litigation.

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. In this respect, the Plan provides for certain “cramdown” provisions, whereby the Plan may be confirmed over the objections of one or more classes of unapproving creditors in the event that certain percentages in dollar amount and in number of specified classes of creditors accept the plan and vote in favor of it.

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). Generally, 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 $16.6 billion, alleging a right to payment from a Debtor were filed with the Bankruptcy Court in response to the General Bar Date. As to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, the claim total reflects only a single claim (in the amount of approximately $1.6 billion) although the holders have asserted this claim against Owens Corning and each of six other Debtors that issued a guarantee with respect to the facility. Owens Corning continues to investigate the filed 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 15,600 claims, totaling approximately $8.6 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, 2006, approximately 12,800 of the Objectionable Claims, totaling approximately $5.9 billion, had either been withdrawn by the claimants or disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court, and other of such claims had been reduced by the claimants by

- 15 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

approximately $1.8 billion. 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 9,400 claims, totaling approximately $8.0 billion. As of March 31, 2006, approximately 1,600 of these claims, totaling approximately $0.5 billion, had either been withdrawn by the claimants, disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court, or otherwise resolved, and other of such claims had been reduced by the claimants by approximately $0.3 billion. The remaining claims consist of:

• Approximately 2,900 claims, totaling approximately $1.4 billion, associated with asbestos-related contribution, indemnity, reimbursement, or subrogation claims. Owens Corning will address all asbestos-related personal injury and wrongful death claims in the future as part of the Chapter 11 Cases. See Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information concerning asbestos-related liabilities.

• Approximately 100 claims, totaling approximately $0.6 billion, alleging asbestos-related property damage. Most of these claims were submitted with insufficient documentation to assess their validity. Owens Corning expects to vigorously defend any asserted asbestos-related property damage claims in the Bankruptcy Court. Based upon its historic experience in respect of asbestos-related property damage claims, Owens Corning does not anticipate significant liability from any such claims.

• Approximately 4,800 claims, totaling approximately $5.2 billion, alleging rights to payment for financing, environmental, trade debt and other matters (the “General Claims”). The Company has recorded approximately $3.5 billion in liabilities for these claims. Based upon the claims information submitted, the General Claims with the largest variance from the recorded amounts are: claims by the United States Department of Treasury, totaling approximately $534 million, in connection with taxes (see discussion regarding the tax claims and related settlement under the heading “Tax Claim” in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements); a contingent claim for approximately $458 million by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, as described more fully under the heading “PBGC Claim” in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements; a $275 million class action claim involving alleged problems with a specialty roofing product (see discussion of this claim and pending settlement under the heading “Specialty Roofing Claim” in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements); environmental claims totaling approximately $109 million; and claims for contract rejections, totaling approximately $95 million, of which approximately $28 million are protective claims covering contracts which have not been rejected by the Debtors as of March 31, 2006.

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

- 16 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

and results of operations in any given period. For a discussion of liability amounts in respect of asbestos personal injury claims, see Note 9 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 3,300 proofs of claim (in addition to claims described above under “General Bar Date”), totaling approximately $2.6 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. See Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information concerning asbestos-related liabilities.

As described above, on March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit. The Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard. In addition, the Memorandum and Order did not address whether a bar date would be established for asbestos-related personal injury or wrongful death claims as to either Owens Corning or Fibreboard.

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 Cases. 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

- 17 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

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 Cases.

The Debtors have executed tolling agreements with all 12 present and former officers and the director, as well as with certain other parties identified as having received potentially avoidable transfers. After initially being covered by a tolling agreement, the claim against the joint venture affiliate was subsequently released as part of a Bankruptcy Court approved settlement with the affiliate, entered into in connection with the affiliate’s separate bankruptcy proceedings.

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. On January 20, 2006, the official representatives of the bondholder and trade creditor constituencies of Owens Corning filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint in intervention in connection with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action and to seek authority to prosecute existing claims and commence others on behalf of the Debtors’ estates (the “Derivative Complaint”). On March 21, 2006, the Debtors filed an opposition to the Derivative Complaint.

The Plan contemplates that the claims belonging to the Debtors under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action, which are the subject of the Derivative Complaint, will be released. Therefore, on February 3, 2006, the Debtors filed a motion to refer the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action to the USBC so that the USBC may administer the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action consistent with proceedings in connection with confirmation of the Plan. Certain holders of Owens Corning debt securities have opposed this motion. Owens Corning is currently unable to predict the outcome of the hearing on the confirmation of the Plan or the final terms of the Plan (or other plan of reorganization), including the applicable release provisions, as may ultimately be confirmed.

Separately, and at the request of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and the direction of the Bankruptcy Court, the Debtors either obtained tolling agreements from, or filed actions against,

- 18 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

approximately 115 law firms that entered into NSP or non-NSP agreements (see Note 9 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. On or about October 3, 2005 similar lawsuits were brought against 2 additional law firms whose tolling agreements were about to expire and who could not be contacted to extend the tolling agreements because of Hurricane Katrina. The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors 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 Committee of Unsecured Creditors and Bankruptcy Court approval.

By motions filed on various dates, the Debtors have requested a stay of the foregoing litigation pending its disposition in the Plan (or any other plan of reorganization). Pursuant to rulings of the Bankruptcy Court, all of the foregoing litigation, other than the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action and two commercial preference actions, has been stayed until August 31, 2006.

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.

While operating in Chapter 11 proceedings, a debtor company is generally prohibited from paying interest on unsecured pre-petition debts. As a result of the Filing, contractual interest expense on pre-petition debt of the Debtors other than the Pre-Petition Credit Facility has not been accrued or recorded since the Petition Date. From the Petition Date through March 31, 2006, the contractual interest expense not accrued or recorded on such pre-petition debt (calculated using ordinary, non-default interest rates and without regard to debt maturity) totaled approximately $564 million, of which $26 million relate to the first quarter of 2006 and $26 million relate to the first quarter of 2005. As previously disclosed, as a result of the Third Circuit’s reversal of the District Court’s Substantive Consolidation Order, Owens Corning’s evaluation of the distributable values (considered on a non-substantively consolidated basis) of Owens Corning and certain of its Debtor and non-Debtor subsidiaries, and the terms of the proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization as filed in the USBC on December 31, 2005, Owens Corning previously has recorded expenses with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility for the period from the Petition Date through December 31, 2005 in the amount of $735 million relating to post-petition interest and certain other post-petition fees. With respect to post-petition interest, such expenses reflected the application of the Base Rate plus 2% applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly); with respect to post-petition fees, such expenses reflected no compounding. Owens Corning notes that the Plan (as modified on March 29, 2006) provides that, if the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are deemed unimpaired, or are deemed to be impaired and the class of such holders accepts the Plan, (and the Plan is confirmed and becomes effective) then the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit

- 19 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

Facility will be paid an amount in cash equal to the sum of (i) the amount of interest accrued through the date of delivery of the Initial Bank Holders’ Distribution on the amounts outstanding under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility as of the Petition Date, at the Base Rate plus 2% (as defined below) on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and (ii) the amount of any accrued and unpaid post-petition fees payable under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility through the date of delivery of the Initial Bank Holders’ Distribution, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility), plus accrued interest thereon pursuant to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). In light of such terms of the Plan, Owens Corning (i) has recorded, for the period ended March 31, 2006, additional expenses of $12 million for the period from the Petition Date through December 31, 2005, and (ii) has recorded, for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, additional expenses of $54 million reflecting post-petition interest with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). However, this estimate is based on numerous factual and legal uncertainties, including the interpretation of contractual provisions concerning such interest and other fees, and Owens Corning reserves the right to object, if and as appropriate in its judgment, to the ultimate entitlements to such interest and other fees and to the amount of such interest and other fees in the Chapter 11 Cases (or other proceedings), subject to the terms and conditions of the Interim Unimpairment Order. Absent developments that alter Owens Corning’s view of the likelihood of amounts that may be paid under the Plan to holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, Owens Corning expects to continue to accrue interest on the Pre-Petition Credit Facility in future periods, to the extent required under applicable law, at a rate equal to the Base Rate plus 2%, applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). The Base Rate (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) is a floating rate equal to the higher of (i) the prime commercial lending rate of Credit Suisse First Boston and (ii) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50% per annum

On April 7, 2006, upon motion of the agent for the holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (which motion was subsequently joined by certain of the Debtors and Non-Debtor Subsidiaries), the USBC issued the Interim Unimpairment Order providing among other things that, if claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are paid in full and in cash as provided in the Plan as modified, then (i) such claims are rendered unimpaired and the classes of such claims are conclusively presumed to have accepted the Plan and (ii) such claims shall be paid in full and all claims and remedies arising under or related to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, including any guarantees executed or delivered in connection therewith, shall be extinguished. The Interim Unimpairment Order provides that it will become a final order unless an objection is timely filed with the USBC, in which event a hearing to consider approval of the order on a final basis will be held on May 10, 2006.

At March 31, 2006, the Company had $1.360 billion 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. Effective September 20, 2004, the DIP Financing was further amended by a Second Amendment which, among other things, extended the scheduled expiration to November 15, 2006. There were no borrowings outstanding under the DIP Financing at March 31,

- 20 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

2006; however, approximately $171 million of the availability under this credit facility was utilized as a result of the issuance of standby letters of credit and similar uses.

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 the Plan (or any other plan 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, the Plan (or any other 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 $1.5 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” refers 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

- 21 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

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.

As noted above, the Consolidated Financial Statements reflect expenses with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility in the amount of $801 million relating to post-petition interest and certain other post-petition fees for the period from the Petition Date through March 31, 2006. Since the Company is in default on the debt underlying these amounts, the accrual is recorded as a current liability on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

- 22 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION STATEMENTS OF INCOME (LOSS)

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
NET SALES	$	1,374		$	1,196
COST OF SALES		1,170			1,031
Gross margin		204			165
OPERATING EXPENSES
Marketing and administrative expenses		108			107
Science and technology expenses		14			11
Chapter 11 related reorganization items		10			36
Provision (credit) for asbestos litigation claims (recoveries) – Owens Corning		(3	)		3,435
Provision for asbestos litigation claims – Fiberboard		—			907
Other		(21	)		(18	)
Total operating expenses		108			4,478
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS		96			(4,313	)
Interest expense		66			1
Interest income from non-Debtors		(14	)		(14	)
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAX BENEFIT		44			(4,300	)
Income tax benefit		(21	)		(53	)
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE EQUITY IN NET INCOME OF AFFILIATES		65			(4,247	)
Equity in net income of affiliates		—			1
NET INCOME (LOSS)	$	65		$	(4,246	)

- 23 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION BALANCE SHEETS

ASSETS	March 31, 2006			December 31, 2005
	(dollars in millions)
CURRENT
Cash and cash equivalents	$	979		$	1,126
Receivables (net of allowance for doubtful accounts)		566			458
Receivables – non-Debtors		1,188			1,165
Inventories		348			320
Other current assets		28			46
Total current		3,109			3,115
OTHER
Restricted cash – asbestos and insurance related		198			189
Restricted cash, securities, and other — Fibreboard		1,436			1,433
Deferred income taxes		1,358			1,326
Pension-related assets		370			387
Goodwill		67			66
Investment in affiliates		31			31
Investment in non-Debtor subsidiaries		765			762
Other noncurrent assets		144			154
Total other		4,369			4,348
PLANT AND EQUIPMENT, at cost
Land		37			37
Buildings and leasehold improvements		600			593
Machinery and equipment		2,357			2,342
Construction in progress		113			121
Total plant and equipment		3,107			3,093
Accumulated depreciation		(1,745	)		(1,723	)
Net plant and equipment		1,362			1,370
TOTAL ASSETS	$	8,840		$	8,833

- 24 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION BALANCE SHEETS (continued)

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT	March 31, 2006			December 31, 2005
	(dollars in millions)
CURRENT
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities	$	674		$	797
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities – non-Debtors		21			19
Accrued post-petition interest/fees on pre-petition debt		801			735
Long-term debt – current portion		1			1
Total current		1,497			1,552
LONG-TERM DEBT		12			12
OTHER
Pension plan liability		577			577
Other employee benefits liability		390			393
Other		198			184
Total other		1,165			1,154
LIABILITIES SUBJECT TO COMPROMISE		14,180			14,180
STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT
Common stock		6			6
Additional paid in capital		692			692
Accumulated deficit		(8,365	)		(8,430	)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(341	)		(328	)
Other		(6	)		(5	)
Total stockholders’ deficit		(8,014	)		(8,065	)
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ DEFICIT	$	8,840		$	8,833

- 25 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
NET CASH FLOW FROM OPERATIONS
Net income (loss)	$	65		$	(4,246	)
Reconciliation of net cash flow used for operations
Noncash items:
Provision for asbestos litigation claims		—			4,342
Provision for depreciation and amortization		43			43
Provision for impairment of fixed assets		—			3
Credit for deferred income taxes		(26	)		(51	)
Provision for pension and other employee benefits liabilities		21			27
Provision for post-petition interest/fees on pre-petition debt		66			—
Other		8			9
Increase in receivables and receivables – non-Debtors		(131	)		(121	)
Increase in inventories		(28	)		(54	)
Decrease in accounts payable and accrued liabilities and accounts payable and accrued liabilities – non-Debtors		(125	)		(31	)
Proceeds from insurance for asbestos litigation claims, excluding Fibreboard		9			1
Payments for other employee benefits liabilities		(7	)		(6	)
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash – asbestos and insurance related		(9	)		1
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash, securities, and other – Fibreboard		(3	)		6
Other		4			(9	)
Net cash flow used for operations		(113	)		(86	)
NET CASH FLOW FROM INVESTING
Additions to plant and equipment		(43	)		(34	)
Investment in subsidiaries and affiliates		(1	)		(1	)
Proceeds from the sale of assets or affiliate		10			—
Net cash flow used for investing		(34	)		(35	)
NET CASH FLOW FROM FINANCING
Net cash flow from financing		—			—
NET DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS		(147	)		(121	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		1,126			725
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD	$	979		$	604

- 26 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

1. VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11 (continued)

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

	March 31, 2006		December 31, 2005
	(dollars in millions)
Accounts payable	$	227	$	227
Accrued interest payable		40		40
Debt		2,952		2,952
Income taxes payable		85		85
Reserve for asbestos litigation claims – Owens Corning		7,000		7,000
Reserve for asbestos-related claims — Fibreboard		3,216		3,216
Total consolidated		13,520		13,520
Payables to non-Debtors		660		660
Total Debtor	$	14,180	$	14,180

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

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Professional fees	$	20		$	27
Payroll and compensation		4			5
Investment (income) loss		(14	)		4
Total	$	10		$	36

- 27 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

2. SEGMENT DATA

The Company has reviewed its segments in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 131 “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information” (“SFAS No. 131”) and concluded that the aggregation of its operating segments into two reportable segments remained appropriate. 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.

	Quarter Ended March 31,
NET SALES	2006		2005
	(dollars in millions)
Reportable Segments
Building Materials Systems
United States	$	1,178	$	998
Europe		1		1
Canada and other		91		75
Total Building Materials Systems		1,270		1,074
Composite Solutions
United States		172		166
Europe		96		106
Canada and other		63		56
Total Composite Solutions		331		328
Total reportable segments	$	1,601	$	1,402
External Customer Sales by Geographic Region
United States	$	1,350	$	1,164
Europe		97		107
Canada and other		154		131
NET SALES	$	1,601	$	1,402

- 28 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

2. SEGMENT DATA (continued)

Sales by product within the Building Materials Systems segment are provided in the table below:

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Products within Building Materials Systems
Insulating systems	$	518		$	450
Exterior systems for the home and other		752			624
Total Building Materials Systems sales	$	1,270		$	1,074
	Quarter Ended March 31,
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAX BENEFIT	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Reportable Segments
Building Materials Systems	$	148		$	92
Composite Solutions		14			31
Total reportable segments	$	162		$	123
Reconciliation to Consolidated Income Before Income Tax Benefit
Chapter 11 related reorganization items	$	(10	)	$	(36	)
(Provision) credit for asbestos litigation (claims) recoveries		3			(4,342	)
General corporate expense		(40	)		(26	)
Interest expense, net		(65	)		(1	)
CONSOLIDATED INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAX BENEFIT	$	50		$	(4,282	)

Income for the Composite Solutions segment includes $8 million of gains related to the disposition of assets.

- 29 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

3. GENERAL

The consolidated financial statements included in this Report are unaudited, pursuant to certain rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and include, in the opinion of the Company, adjustments necessary for a fair statement of the results for the periods indicated, which, however, are not necessarily indicative of results which may be expected for the full year. The December 31, 2005 balance sheet data was derived from audited financial statements, but does not include all disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Certain reclassifications have been made to the period presented for 2005 to conform to the classifications used in the period presented for 2006.

In connection with the consolidated financial statements and notes included in this Report, reference is made to the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained in the Company’s 2005 annual report on Form 10-K, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

4. INVENTORIES

Inventories are summarized as follows:

	March 31, 2006			December 31, 2005
	(dollars in millions)
Finished goods	$	463		$	457
Materials and supplies		204			166
FIFO inventory		667			623
Excess of FIFO over LIFO		(151	)		(146	)
Total inventories	$	516		$	477

Approximately $313 million and $310 million of total inventories were valued using the LIFO method at March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, respectively.

5. GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLES

The Company complies with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” (“SFAS No. 142”), to account for goodwill and other intangibles. SFAS No. 142 requires at least an annual review for impairment using a fair value methodology. The Company conducts its annual review for impairment in the second quarter. No impairments were identified during the 2005 review.

The only significant change in goodwill during the three month period ended March 31, 2006 was the result of fluctuations in currency. The $214 million balance of goodwill at March 31, 2006 was comprised of $166 million for the Building Materials Systems segment and $48 million for the Composite Solutions segment.

Substantially all of the Company’s acquired other intangible assets are subject to amortization. Other intangible asset amortization expense was approximately $1 million in the first quarter of 2006 and 2005. The Company estimates that amortization of intangibles will be approximately $2 to $3 million annually for each of the next five years. As of March 31, 2006, the weighted average lives of intangibles ranged between 7 and 13 years, with a net carrying amount of approximately $11 million.

- 30 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

6. WARRANTIES

The Company records a liability for warranty obligations at the date the related products are sold. Adjustments are made as new information becomes available. A reconciliation of the warranty liabilities for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 is as follows:

	(dollars in millions)
Balance at December 31, 2005	$	62
Amounts accrued for current year		5
Adjustment of preexisting accrual estimates		3
Settlements of warranty claims		(4	)
Balance at March 31, 2006	$	66

7. PENSION PLANS AND OTHER POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS

Pension Plans

The Company has several defined benefit pension plans covering most employees. Under the plans, pension benefits are based on an employee’s years of service and, for certain categories of employees, qualifying compensation. Company contributions to these pension plans are determined by an independent actuary. Contributions to the U.S. pension plan are based on amounts needed to meet or exceed minimum funding requirements. The unrecognized cost of retroactive amendments and actuarial gains and losses are amortized over the average future service period of plan participants expected to receive benefits.

The following table provides information regarding pension expense recognized during the quarter:

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006									2005
	U.S.			Non-U.S.			Total			U.S.			Non-U.S.			Total
	(dollars in millions)
Components of Net Periodic Pension Cost
Service cost	$	5		$	1		$	6		$	5		$	1		$	6
Interest cost		14			5			19			14			5			19
Expected return on plan assets		(14	)		(5	)		(19	)		(15	)		(5	)		(20	)
Amortization of loss		10			2			12			11			2			13
Amortization of prior service cost		2			—			2			—			—			—
Net periodic pension cost	$	17		$	3		$	20		$	15		$	3		$	18

Owens Corning expects to contribute $40 to $60 million in cash to the U.S. pension plans during 2006.

- 31 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

7. PENSION PLANS AND OTHER POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS (continued)

Postemployment and Postretirement Benefits Other than Pension Plans

The Company and its subsidiaries maintain health care and life insurance benefit plans for certain retired employees and their dependents. The health care plans in the U.S. are non-funded and pay either (1) stated percentages of covered medically necessary expenses, after subtracting payments by Medicare or other providers and after stated deductibles have been met, or (2) fixed amounts of medical expense reimbursement.

The following table provides the components of net periodic benefits cost for aggregated U.S. and Non-U.S. Plans for the quarter:

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Components of Net Periodic Benefits Cost
Service cost	$	1		$	2
Interest cost		5			6
Amortization of loss		—			1
Amortization of prior service cost		(3	)		(1	)
Net periodic benefits cost	$	3		$	8

8. STOCK COMPENSATION

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS No. 123R”), which eliminates the alternative to apply the intrinsic value method of accounting for stock based compensation permitted under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation” (“SFAS No. 123”). The Company adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 123R during the second quarter of 2005. None of the Company’s previously issued stock-based awards were materially impacted by the adoption of this standard and the Company does not expect to issue additional stock-based compensation while it remains in Chapter 11 proceedings.

Prior to adoption of SFAS No. 123R, the Company utilized the intrinsic value method of accounting for expense recognition related to its stock-based compensation plans as permitted by SFAS No. 123. In accordance with pro forma disclosures required by SFAS No. 123, there would have been no impact to reported net income (loss) for the first quarter of 2005 had compensation cost for the Company’s stock-based compensation plans been determined based on the fair value at the grant dates for awards under those plans.

- 32 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS

Asbestos Liabilities

ITEM A.—OWENS CORNING (EXCLUDING FIBREBOARD)

Numerous claims have been asserted against Owens Corning alleging personal injuries arising from inhalation of asbestos fibers. Virtually all of these claims arise out of Owens Corning’s manufacture, distribution, sale or installation of an asbestos-containing calcium silicate, high temperature insulation product, the manufacture and distribution of which was discontinued in 1972. Owens Corning received approximately 18,000 asbestos personal injury claims during 2000, approximately 32,000 such claims during 1999 and approximately 69,000 such claims during 1998. Owens Corning cautions that it has limited information about many of such claims, and the actual numbers of claims asserted remain subject to adjustment.

Prior to October 5, 2000, when the Debtors, including Fibreboard (see Item B below), filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, the vast majority of asserted asbestos personal injury claims were in the process of being resolved through the National Settlement Program described below. As a result of the Filing, all pre-petition asbestos claims and pending litigation against the Debtors, including without limitation claims arising under the National Settlement Program, were automatically stayed (see Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

As more fully discussed in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the Debtors, together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed on December 31, 2005 a proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization for the Debtors and filed certain proposed modifications thereto on March 29, 2006. The steering committee of holders of obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility supports the Plan pursuant to the terms of the letter, dated December 30, 2005, appended as Appendix K to the disclosure statement filed with respect to the Plan on December 31, 2005. Owens Corning expects that all pending and future asbestos claims against Owens Corning and Fibreboard will be resolved pursuant to the Plan (or another plan of reorganization).

A six-day claims estimation hearing to establish the amount of current and future asbestos liability in the Chapter 11 Cases was held before the District Court beginning January 13, 2005. In general, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility argued that the amount of the Company’s current and future asbestos liability should be set at an amount significantly lower than the amounts reserved for asbestos claims on the financial statements of the Debtors, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants argued that it should be set at a significantly higher level. On March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit. The $7 billion asbestos liability estimated by the District Court for Owens Corning exceeded the high end of the range of estimates of Owens Corning’s liability for asbestos claims that had been provided by Owens Corning’s asbestos valuation experts but was below the range of estimates of such liability provided by the valuation experts of the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants. As described more

- 33 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

fully under the heading “Reserve” below, as a result of the District Court’s estimation, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $3.435 billion for the period ended March 31, 2005, so that its recorded reserve equaled the level of asbestos liability estimated by the District Court. Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens Corning, Owens Corning also increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million for the period ended March 31, 2005.

National Settlement Program Claims

Beginning in late 1998, Owens Corning implemented a National Settlement Program (“NSP”) to resolve personal injury asbestos claims through settlement agreements with individual plaintiffs’ law firms. The NSP was intended to better manage the asbestos liabilities of Owens Corning and Fibreboard (see Item B below), and to help Owens Corning better predict the timing and amount of indemnity payments for both pending and future asbestos claims.

The number of law firms participating in the NSP expanded from approximately 50 when the NSP was established to approximately 120 as of the Petition Date. Each of these participating law firms agreed to a long-term settlement agreement which varied by firm (“NSP Agreement”) extending through at least 2008 which provided for the resolution of their existing asbestos claims, including unfiled claims pending with the participating law firm at the time it entered into an NSP Agreement (“Initial Claims”). The NSP agreements also established procedures and fixed payments for resolving, without litigation, claims against either Owens Corning or Fibreboard, or both, arising after a participating firm entered into an NSP Agreement (“Future Claims”).

As of the Petition Date, the NSP covered approximately 239,000 Initial Claims against Owens Corning, approximately 150,000 of which had satisfied all conditions to final settlement, including receipt of executed releases, or other resolution (the “Final NSP Settlements”) at an average cost per claim of approximately $9,300. As of the Petition Date, approximately 89,000 of such Final NSP Settlements had been paid in full or otherwise resolved, and approximately 61,000 were unpaid in whole or in part. As of such date, the remaining balance payable under NSP Agreements in connection with these unpaid Final NSP Settlements was approximately $510 million. Through the Petition Date, Owens Corning had received approximately 6,000 Future Claims under the NSP.

The claims covered by the NSP Agreements were taken into account by the District Court in estimating the amount of Owens Corning’s current and future asbestos liability at $7 billion. Pursuant to the Plan, a trust intended to qualify under section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code will be created and funded by the Debtors, as described above, and will assume all asbestos-related liability of Owens Corning, Fibreboard and the other entities set forth in the Plan. In general, under the terms of the Plan, asbestos personal injury claims against Owens Corning, including claims previously covered by the NSP Agreements, will be administered, and distributions on account of such claims will be made from the 524(g) Trust, pursuant to the trust distribution procedures attached to the Plan.

Non-NSP Claims

As of the Petition Date, approximately 29,000 asbestos personal injury claims were pending against Owens Corning outside the NSP. This compares to approximately 25,000 such claims pending on December 31, 1999. The information needed for a critical evaluation of pending claims, including the nature and severity of disease and definitive identifying information concerning claimants, typically

- 34 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

becomes available only through the discovery process or as a result of settlement negotiations, neither of which have occurred since the Filing. As a result, Owens Corning has limited information about many of such claims.

Owens Corning resolved (by settlement or otherwise) approximately 10,000 asbestos personal injury claims outside the NSP during 1998, 5,000 such claims during 1999 and 3,000 such claims during 2000 prior to the Petition Date. The average cost of resolution was approximately $35,900 per claim for claims resolved during 1998, $34,600 per claim for claims resolved during 1999, and $44,800 per claim for claims resolved during 2000 prior to the Petition Date. Generally, these claims were settled as they were scheduled for trial, and they typically involved more serious injuries and diseases. Accordingly, Owens Corning does not believe that such average costs of resolution are representative of the value of the non-NSP claims then pending against the Company.

In general, under the terms of the current Plan, asbestos personal injury claims against Owens Corning, including non-NSP claims, will be administered, and distributions on account of such claims will be made from the 524(g) Trust, pursuant to the trust distribution procedures attached to the Plan.

Asbestos-Related Payments

As a result of the Filing, Owens Corning has not made any asbestos-related payments since the Petition Date except for approximately $20 million paid on its behalf by third parties pursuant to appeal bonds issued prior to the Petition Date. During 1999 and 2000 (prior to the Petition Date), Owens Corning (excluding Fibreboard) made asbestos-related payments falling within four major categories: (1) Settlements in respect of verdicts incurred or claims resolved prior to the implementation of the NSP (“Pre-NSP Settlements”); (2) NSP settlements; (3) Non-NSP settlements covering cases not resolved by the NSP; and (4) Defense, claims processing and administrative expenses, as follows:

	1999		2000 (through October 4, 2000)
	(dollars in millions)
Pre-NSP Settlements	$	170	$	51
NSP Settlements		570		538
Non-NSP Settlements		30		42
Defense, Claims Processing and Administrative Expenses		90		54
	$	860	$	685

All amounts discussed above are before tax and application of insurance recoveries.

Prior to the Petition Date, Owens Corning deposited certain amounts in escrow accounts to facilitate claims processing under the NSP (“Administrative Deposits”). Amounts deposited into escrow in Administrative Deposits during a reporting period are included in the payments shown for NSP Settlements during the period. At March 31, 2006, approximately $106 million of Administrative Deposits previously made by Owens Corning had not been finally distributed to claimants (“Undistributed Administrative Deposits”) and, accordingly, are reflected in Owens Corning’s Consolidated Balance Sheet as restricted assets (under the caption “Restricted cash—asbestos and insurance related”) and have not been subtracted from Owens Corning’s reserve for asbestos personal injury claims (discussed below).

- 35 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

In 2001, the holder of approximately $49 million of Undistributed Administrative Deposits for Owens Corning (and approximately $28 million of similar Undistributed Administrative Deposits for Fibreboard) filed a motion with the Bankruptcy Court requesting an order authorizing distribution of the deposits it holds (“Subject Deposits”) to the escrow beneficiaries. As the result of hearings held on June 20 and July 22, 2002, the Bankruptcy Court has ruled that escrow beneficiaries that had received both written notice of approval for payment and an initial payment from the Subject Deposits prior to the Petition Date would be entitled to receive their remaining payments (plus post-judgment interest after June 20, 2002) from the principal of the Subject Deposits, with the balance of the Subject Deposits, if any, plus any other investment proceeds to be returned to Owens Corning (or Fibreboard, as appropriate) as contributor of the deposits. The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants have each filed a notice of appeal from the order, and the matter has been fully briefed but has not been decided by the District Court. The Plan currently contemplates that any funds held in Undistributed Administrative Deposits will ultimately be distributed in a manner consistent with the Bankruptcy Court ruling. However, Owens Corning is currently unable to predict the outcome of the hearing on the confirmation of the Plan or the final terms of the Plan (or other plan of reorganization) as may ultimately be confirmed.

Reserve

Owens Corning estimates a reserve in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles to reflect asbestos-related liabilities that have been asserted or are probable of assertion, in which liabilities are probable and reasonably estimable. This reserve was established initially through a charge to income in 1991, with additional charges to income of approximately $1.1 billion in 1996, $1.4 billion in 1998, $1.0 billion in 2000 and $1.4 billion in 2002. For the reasons stated below, as a result of the Memorandum and Order of the District Court issued on March 31, 2005, estimating the total asbestos-related liability of Owens Corning at $7 billion, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liabilities by $3.435 billion for the first quarter of 2005, so that its recorded reserve for Owens Corning’s asbestos-related liabilities equaled the District Court’s estimate. Consequently, as of March 31, 2006, a reserve of $7 billion in respect of Owens Corning’s asbestos-related liabilities was one of the items included in Owens Corning’s Consolidated Balance Sheet under the category “Liabilities Subject to Compromise”.

As Owens Corning has discussed in previous public filings, and as the District Court emphasized in its March 31, 2005 Memorandum and Order, any estimate of its liabilities for pending and expected future asbestos claims is subject to considerable uncertainty because such liabilities are influenced by numerous variables that are inherently difficult to predict. Prior to the Petition Date, such variables included, among others, the cost of resolving pending non-NSP claims; the disease mix and severity of disease of pending NSP claims; the number, severity of disease, and jurisdiction of claims filed in the future (especially the number of mesothelioma claims); how many future claimants were covered by an NSP Agreement; the extent, if any, to which individual claimants exercised a right to opt out of an NSP Agreement and/or engage counsel not participating in the NSP; the extent, if any, to which counsel not bound by an NSP Agreement undertook the representation of asbestos personal injury plaintiffs against Owens Corning; the extent, if any, to which Owens Corning exercised its right to terminate one or more of the NSP Agreements due to excessive opt-outs or for other reasons; and Owens Corning’s success in controlling the costs of resolving future non-NSP claims.

The Chapter 11 Cases significantly increased the inherent difficulties and uncertainties involved in estimating the number and cost of resolution of present and future asbestos-related claims against Owens Corning. As described more fully below in Items A and B, however, the District Court’s order on

- 36 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

March 31, 2005, estimating Owens Corning’s personal injury asbestos-related liability has served to narrow the range of possible values of asbestos-related liabilities for both Owens Corning and Fibreboard.

In connection with the process of negotiating the Plan, or other resolution of the Chapter 11 Cases by the Bankruptcy Court, a number of interested constituencies, including the representatives of the pre-petition and future asbestos claimants and other pre-petition creditors, have developed analyses of liability for both pre-petition and future asbestos claims. Owens Corning and Fibreboard also developed their own analyses in connection with the Chapter 11 Cases. Such analyses by the Debtors and other interested constituencies are required in connection with the establishment, as part of the Plan, of a section 524(g) trust for the benefit of asbestos claimants. In this regard, in October 2002, Owens Corning and Fibreboard completed analyses of liability for pre-petition and future asbestos claims, which, as to future asbestos claims, were prepared by an outside consultant experienced in estimating asbestos-related claims in asbestos-related bankruptcies. These analyses indicated net present values for pre-petition and future asbestos claims of Owens Corning and Fibreboard combined of approximately $5.874 billion, if NSP settlement values were assumed, and $8.547 billion, if 5-year historical settlement values for Owens Corning and Fibreboard, respectively, were used. Based upon these analyses and the information then available from Owens Corning’s discussions and negotiations with the various creditor constituencies concerning their relative positions on the terms of an acceptable plan of reorganization, Owens Corning decided, in connection with its financial statements for the third quarter of 2002, to increase its and Fibreboard’s aggregate asbestos-related reserve to the lower of the two net present value numbers indicated by Owens Corning’s and Fibreboard’s analyses. In addition, since the reserve for Fibreboard asbestos-related liabilities exceeded the funds held in the Fibreboard Settlement Trust, the residual amount payable to charity under the terms of the Trust (see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements) was reduced to zero as of September 30, 2002.

As part of the District Court’s order scheduling the estimation hearing for January 13, 2005, the District Court ordered that all parties intending to present expert testimony at such hearing file any expert reports by October 15, 2004. In response, in addition to the analyses of liability prepared on behalf of Owens Corning and Fibreboard (described above), asbestos liability estimates were filed with the District Court on behalf of various interested parties, including the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, and the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The net present values of the aggregate asbestos liabilities estimated in such filings ranged from approximately $2.2 billion to approximately $11.1 billion for Owens Corning, and up to approximately $7.5 billion for Fibreboard.

Owens Corning notes that the amounts estimated in the above analyses of asbestos liabilities varied substantially from one another, and certain of them varied substantially from the amounts then recorded in Owens Corning’s and Fibreboard’s respective asbestos reserves. Owens Corning further notes that such analyses generally do not involve the same type of estimation process required in connection with the preparation of financial statements under generally accepted accounting principles. In general, such accounting principles require accruals with respect to contingent liabilities (including asbestos liabilities) only to the extent that such liabilities are both probable and reasonably estimable. With respect to such liabilities that are probable as to which a reasonable estimate can be made only in terms of a range (with no point within the range determined to be more probable than any other point in such range), such accounting principles require only the accrual of the amount representing the low point in such range. In contrast, analyses prepared by interested constituencies in asbestos-related bankruptcy cases (including those developed by Owens Corning and Fibreboard) customarily cover potential liabilities over a 50-year period (at the end of which it is anticipated that potential asbestos claimants would in any event have died as a result of other non-asbestos-related causes). Owens Corning believes, and the District Court

- 37 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

emphasized in its March 31, 2005 Memorandum and Order, that any such analyses, and any assumptions utilized in the preparation of such analyses, are inherently speculative for a number of reasons, including the variables and uncertainties described in this Note. Moreover, because such analyses are prepared solely for use in the negotiation of a plan of reorganization or otherwise resolving the Chapter 11 Cases, they naturally reflect the respective interests of the different constituencies putting them forward. Certain constituencies, for example, may have an interest in presenting an analysis that estimates such liability at the highest level that can arguably be justified; others may have an interest in estimating such liability at the lowest possible level; while others may have an interest in estimating such liability at a point between the two extremes, in an effort to achieve consensus in the negotiation of the plan of reorganization or otherwise facilitate resolution of the Chapter 11 Cases. In addition, interested constituencies in the Chapter 11 Cases may also take into account the implications of any such analyses prepared for use in the Chapter 11 Cases on their position in one or more of the other asbestos-related bankruptcy cases pending in the District of Delaware or elsewhere.

On March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. In its March 31, 2005 Memorandum and Order, the District Court observed that the range of projected liabilities that were reflected in the various expert reports submitted to it resulted from the attempt to make predictions based upon other predictions and assumptions, and that relatively minor variations in underlying assumptions can skew the end result enormously. The District Court further noted that it was estimating not how much each potential claimant would actually be entitled to receive but rather the total amount that the claimants, as a group, could legitimately have claimed as compensation (or, in the case of future claimants, what their claims would have been worth in the tort system) as of the Petition Date. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit.

Despite the District Court’s estimation order, Owens Corning notes that there continues to be uncertainty about the ultimate size of Owens Corning’s asbestos-related liabilities, including due to the possibility of consensual agreement of the parties or asbestos reform legislation. However, Owens Corning believes that the District Court’s estimation serves to establish an amount within the range of possible values of Owens Corning’s asbestos liability that is more probable than other possible values in the context of Chapter 11 cases. Accordingly, as a result of the District Court’s estimation, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $3.435 billion for the period ended March 31, 2005, so that its recorded reserve equaled the level of asbestos liability estimated by the District Court. Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens Corning, Owens Corning also increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million for the period ended March 31, 2005 (see Item B below).

As described above, since Owens Corning believes that the District Court’s estimation serves to establish an amount within the range of possible values of Owens Corning’s asbestos liability for personal injury or death that is more probable than the other possibilities, Owens Corning’s reserve for asbestos-related liabilities has been set equal to such estimate. Given the nature of the Chapter 11 proceedings, described above, Owens Corning cautions that the total asbestos-related liability ultimately established in the Chapter 11 Cases may be either higher or lower than the Company’s reserve. Owens Corning will continue to review its asbestos reserve on a periodic basis and make such adjustments as may be

- 38 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

appropriate in light of such information and future developments in the Chapter 11 Cases. Any such revision could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations in any given period.

Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) co-sponsored an asbestos litigation reform bill (S-852) introduced in the United States Senate on April 19, 2005. The proposed legislation is entitled the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005 (the “FAIR Act”).

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 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 proposed legislation was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 26, 2005. On February 14, 2006, the U.S. Senate failed to secure the votes required to waive a budget point of order that was raised against the proposed legislation. The proposed legislation has since been removed from the floor and recommitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislative fate of the FAIR Act remains uncertain, and Owens Corning is unable to predict 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 any other plan of reorganization) in the event that the effective date of the Plan has not occurred prior to the enactment of the FAIR Act. 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 less than the amounts reserved for in Owens Corning’s financial statements.

ITEM B. - FIBREBOARD (EXCLUDING OWENS CORNING)

Prior to 1972, Fibreboard manufactured asbestos containing products, including insulation products. Fibreboard has since been named as defendant in many thousands of personal injury claims for injuries allegedly caused by asbestos exposure. Fibreboard received approximately 22,000 asbestos personal injury claims during 2000. Prior to the Petition Date, the vast majority of Fibreboard asbestos personal injury claims were in the process of being resolved through the NSP, as described below. As a result of the Filing, all pre-petition asbestos claims and pending litigation against the Debtors were automatically stayed (see Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).

As discussed in Item A above, the Debtors (including Fibreboard), together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed on December 31, 2005 a proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization for the Debtors (including Fibreboard) and filed certain proposed modifications thereto on March 29, 2006. The steering committee of holders of obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility supports the Plan pursuant to the terms of the letter dated December 30, 2005, appended as Appendix K to the disclosure statement filed with respect to the Plan on December 31, 2005. Owens Corning expects that all pending and future asbestos claims against Owens Corning and Fibreboard will be resolved pursuant to the Plan (or another plan of reorganization).

- 39 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

National Settlement Program Claims

Fibreboard is a participant in the NSP and is a party to the NSP Agreements discussed in Item A. The NSP Agreements became effective as to Fibreboard in the fourth quarter of 1999, when the Insurance Settlement (discussed below) became effective. The NSP Agreements settled asbestos personal injury claims that had been filed against Fibreboard by participating plaintiffs’ law firms and claims that could have been filed against Fibreboard by such firms following the lifting, in the third quarter of 1999, of an injunction which had barred the filing of asbestos personal injury claims against Fibreboard.

As of the Petition Date, the NSP covered approximately 206,000 Initial Claims against Fibreboard, approximately 118,000 of which had satisfied all conditions to final settlement, including receipt of executed releases, or other resolution as Final NSP Settlements at an average cost per claim of approximately $7,400. As of the Petition Date, approximately 62,000 of such Final NSP Settlements had been paid in full or otherwise resolved and approximately 56,000 were unpaid in whole or in part. As of such date, the remaining balance payable under NSP Agreements in connection with these unpaid Final NSP Settlements was approximately $330 million. The NSP Agreements also provided for the resolution of Future Claims against Fibreboard through the administrative processing arrangement described in Item A. Through the Petition Date, Fibreboard had received approximately 6,000 Future Claims under the NSP.

Pursuant to the Plan, a trust intended to qualify under section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code will be created and funded by the Debtors, as described above, and will assume all asbestos-related liabilities of Owens Corning, Fibreboard, and the other entities set forth in the Plan. In general, under the terms of the Plan, asbestos personal injury claims against Fibreboard, including claims previously covered by the NSP Agreements, will be administered, and distributions on account of such claims will be made from the 524(g) Trust, pursuant to the trust distribution procedures attached to the Plan.

Non-NSP Claims

As of the Petition Date, approximately 9,000 asbestos personal injury claims were pending against Fibreboard outside the NSP. This compares to approximately 1,000 such claims pending on December 31, 1999. Fibreboard resolved (by settlement or otherwise) approximately 2,000 asbestos personal injury claims outside the NSP during 2000 prior to the Petition Date at an average cost of resolution of approximately $45,000 per claim. Generally, these claims were settled as they were scheduled for trial, and they typically involved more serious injuries and diseases. Accordingly, Owens Corning does not believe that such average cost of resolution is representative of the value of the non-NSP claims then pending against Fibreboard.

In general, under the terms of the current Plan, asbestos personal injury claims against Fibreboard, including Fibreboard non-NSP claims, will be administered, and distributions on account of such claims will be made from the 524(g) Trust, pursuant to the trust distribution procedures attached to the Plan.

Insurance Settlement

In 1993, Fibreboard and two of its insurers, Continental Casualty Company (“Continental”) and Pacific Indemnity Company (“Pacific”), entered into the Insurance Settlement. The Insurance Settlement became effective in the fourth quarter of 1999.

- 40 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

Since 1993, Continental and Pacific paid, either directly or through an escrow account funded by them, for substantially all settlements of asbestos claims reached prior to the initiation of the NSP. Under the Insurance Settlement, Continental and Pacific provided $1.873 billion during the fourth quarter of 1999 to fund costs of resolving pending and future Fibreboard asbestos-related liabilities, whether under the NSP, in the tort system, or otherwise.

As of March 31, 2006, the remaining Insurance Settlement funds were held in and invested by the Fibreboard Settlement Trust. As of that date, $1.309 billion was held in the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and $127 million was held in Undistributed Administrative Deposits in respect of Fibreboard claims. On an ongoing basis, the funds held in the Fibreboard Settlement Trust will be subject to investment earnings/losses and will be reduced if and as applied to satisfy asbestos-related liabilities. Under the terms of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust, any of such assets that ultimately are not used to fund Fibreboard’s asbestos-related liabilities must be distributed to charity. However, since the reserve for Fibreboard asbestos-related liabilities exceeds the funds held in the Fibreboard Settlement Trust, the residual amount payable to charity under the terms of the Trust (see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements) was reduced to zero as of September 30, 2002.

Funds held in the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and Fibreboard’s Undistributed Administrative Deposits are reflected on Owens Corning’s Consolidated Balance Sheet as restricted assets. At March 31, 2006, these assets were reflected as non-current assets, under the category “Restricted cash, securities and other - Fibreboard”. See Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information concerning the Fibreboard Settlement Trust.

The Plan currently contemplates that the funds held in the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and certain of the funds in the Undistributed Administrative Deposits in respect of Fibreboard claims (see Item A) will be transferred and assigned to the 524(g) Trust for subsequent distribution to holders of asbestos personal injury claims against Fibreboard pursuant to the trust distribution procedures attached to the Plan. However, Owens Corning is currently unable to predict the outcome of the hearing on the confirmation of the Plan or the final terms of the Plan (or other plan of reorganization) as may ultimately be confirmed.

Asbestos-Related Payments

As a result of the Filing, Fibreboard has not made any asbestos-related payments since the Petition Date. During 2000 (prior to the Petition Date), gross payments for asbestos-related claims against Fibreboard, all of which were paid/reimbursed by the Fibreboard Settlement Trust, fell within four major categories, as follows:

	2000 (through October 4, 2000)
	(dollars in millions)
Pre-NSP Settlements	$	29
NSP Settlements		705
Non-NSP Settlements		41
Defense, Claims Processing and Administrative Expenses		45
	$	820

The payments for NSP Settlements include Administrative Deposits during the reporting period in respect of Fibreboard claims.

- 41 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

Reserve

Owens Corning estimates a reserve for Fibreboard in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles to reflect asbestos-related liabilities. As described in Item A above, on March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos. The amount estimated by the District Court exceeded the high end of the range of estimates of Owens Corning’s liability for asbestos claims that had been provided by Owens Corning’s asbestos valuation experts but was below the range of estimates of such liability provided by the valuation experts of the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants. Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens Corning, Owens Corning increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2005, so that it equaled the high end of the range of estimates of Fibreboard’s liability for asbestos claims that had been provided by Owens Corning’s valuation experts for use in the estimation hearing. Consequently, as of March 31, 2006, a reserve of approximately $3.216 billion in respect of Fibreboard’s asbestos-related liabilities was one of the items included in Owens Corning’s Consolidated Balance Sheet under the category “Liabilities Subject to Compromise”.

As noted in Item A above as to Owens Corning, the estimate of Fibreboard’s liabilities for pending and expected future asbestos claims is subject to considerable uncertainty because such liabilities are influenced by numerous variables that are inherently difficult to predict. Ultimately, it is anticipated that the aggregate distributions with respect to Fibreboard’s current and future asbestos personal injury claims will be determined through the plan of reorganization confirmation process.

The Plan provides that a trust intended to qualify under section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code will be created and funded by the Debtors, as described above, and will assume all asbestos-related liability of Owens Corning, Fibreboard and the other entities set forth in the Plan. The Plan also provides that distributions on account of such claims will be made from the 524(g) Trust, pursuant to the trust distribution procedures attached to the Plan. Owens Corning is currently unable to predict the outcome of the hearing on the confirmation of the Plan or the final terms of the Plan (or other plan of reorganization) as may ultimately be confirmed.

Owens Corning believes that Fibreboard’s reserve for asbestos claims represents at least a minimum in a range of possible outcomes of the plan negotiation process as to the amount of Fibreboard’s total liability for asbestos-related claims against it as determined through the Chapter 11 process. Given the nature of the Chapter 11 proceedings, described above, Owens Corning cautions that the total asbestos-related liability ultimately established in the Chapter 11 Cases may be either higher or lower than Fibreboard’s reserve. Owens Corning will continue to review Fibreboard’s asbestos reserve on a periodic basis and make such adjustments as may be appropriate in light of such information and future developments in the Chapter 11 Cases. Any such revision could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations in any given period.

As noted in Item A above, Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) co-sponsored an asbestos litigation reform bill (S-852) introduced in the United States Senate on April 19, 2005. The proposed legislation is entitled the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005 (the “FAIR Act”).

- 42 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

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 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 proposed legislation was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 26, 2005. On February 14, 2006, the U.S. Senate failed to secure the votes required to waive a budget point of order that was raised against the proposed legislation. The proposed legislation has since been removed from the floor and recommitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislative fate of the FAIR Act remains uncertain, and Owens Corning is unable to predict 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 any other plan of reorganization) in the event that the effective date of the Plan has not occurred prior to the enactment of the FAIR Act. 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 less than the amounts reserved for in Owens Corning’s financial statements.

ITEM C. - OTHER ASBESTOS-RELATED MATTERS

Other Asbestos-Related Litigation

As previously reported, the Company believes that it has spent significant amounts to resolve claims of asbestos claimants whose injuries were caused or exacerbated by cigarette smoking. As described below, Owens Corning and Fibreboard instituted litigation against tobacco companies to obtain payment of monetary damages (including punitive damages) for payments made by Owens Corning and Fibreboard to asbestos claimants who developed smoking-related diseases.

In October 1998, the Circuit Court for Jefferson County, Mississippi granted leave to file an amended complaint in an existing action to add claims by Owens Corning against seven tobacco companies and several other tobacco industry defendants. On June 17, 2001, the Jefferson court entered an order dismissing Owens Corning’s case in response to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment on the basis that Owens Corning’s injuries were indirect and thus too remote under Mississippi law to allow recovery. The Supreme Court of Mississippi issued an opinion upholding the dismissal on March 18, 2004.

In addition to the Mississippi lawsuit, a lawsuit brought in December 1997 by Owens Corning and Fibreboard is pending in the Superior Court for Alameda County, California against the same tobacco companies. In August 2001, the defendants filed motions to dismiss Owens Corning’s and Fibreboard’s claims on the basis of the decision in the Mississippi lawsuit as well as California law. As the result of a hearing on these motions on November 20, 2001, the California court denied the motion to dismiss Fibreboard’s claims on the basis of the decision in the Mississippi lawsuit and otherwise stayed the proceeding pending the outcome of the Mississippi suit. The proceeding remains stayed. There can be no assurance that this litigation will go to trial or be successful.

- 43 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

Insurance

Since the Filing, Owens Corning has reached settlements with more than ten excess level insurance carriers with respect to non-products insurance coverage applicable to asbestos personal injury claims. A portion of the insurance payments to be made pursuant to such settlements are deferred. Under the settlements, the insurance payments paid have been made, and the deferred insurance payments when paid will be made, into escrow accounts, to be disbursed in accord with an approved plan of reorganization. The escrowed funds, including earnings, are reflected on Owens Corning’s Consolidated Balance Sheet as restricted assets, under the category “Restricted cash—asbestos and insurance related”. The receivables relating to the deferred insurance payments, in the amount of $71 million as of March 31, 2006, along with $4 million of unconfirmed potential non-products coverage as to which Owens Corning has estimated probable recovery, are reflected on Owens Corning’s Consolidated Balance Sheet under the category “Other noncurrent assets”.

Subsequent to March 31, 2006, Owens Corning received payments of approximately $3 million in respect of previous settlements with insolvent insurance carriers concerning coverage for asbestos-related personal injury claims. Receivables relating to such payments were recorded in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements as of March 31, 2006.

Other Matters

SECURITIES AND CERTAIN OTHER LITIGATION

On or about April 30, 2001, certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers, as well as certain underwriters, were named as defendants in a lawsuit captioned John Hancock Life Insurance Company, et al. v. Goldman, Sachs & Co., et al. in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. An amended complaint was filed by the plaintiffs on or about July 5, 2001. Owens Corning is not named in the lawsuit. The suit purports to be a securities class action on behalf of purchasers of certain unsecured debt securities of Owens Corning in offerings occurring on or about April 30, 1998 and July 23, 1998. The complaint alleges that the registration statements pursuant to which the offerings were made contained untrue and misleading statements of material fact and omitted to state material facts which were required to be stated therein and which were necessary to make the statements therein not misleading, in violation of sections 11, 12(a)(2) and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933. The amended complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages or, where appropriate, rescission of the plaintiffs’ purchases. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the action on November 20, 2001. A hearing was held on this motion on April 11, 2002, and the Court issued a decision denying the motion on August 26, 2002. On March 9, 2004, the Court granted class certification as to those claims relating to written representations but denied certification as to claims relating to alleged oral representations. A status conference was held on this matter on November 8, 2005 and a trial has been scheduled for September 11, 2006, as to certain defendants. Owens Corning believes that the claim is without merit.

On or about January 27, 2003, certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers were named as defendants in a lawsuit captioned Robert Greenburg, et al. v. Glen Hiner, et al. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Western Division. Subsequent to January 27, 2003, three substantially similar actions, with named plaintiffs Nicholas Radosevich, Howard E. Leppla, and William Benanchietti, respectively, were filed against the same defendants in the same court. On July 30, 2003, the court consolidated the four cases under the caption Robert Greenburg, et al. v. Glen Hiner, et al., and appointed lead plaintiffs JKF Investment Co., Icarus Trading, Inc. and HGK Asset Management. An amended complaint was filed by the plaintiffs on or about September 8, 2003. Owens

- 44 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

Corning was not named in the lawsuit. The suit purported to be a class action for securities fraud under sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, on behalf of a class comprised of persons who purchased stock of Owens Corning during the period from September 20, 1999, through October 4, 2000. The complaint sought an unspecified amount of damages and/or, where appropriate, rescission. On March 3, 2005, the Court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the action, on the grounds that the plaintiffs’ claims are time-barred under the applicable statute of limitations. The plaintiffs appealed the dismissal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. On February 24, 2006, the Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal.

On or about September 2, 2003, certain of the Company’s current and former directors and officers were named as defendants in a lawsuit captioned Kensington International Limited, et al. v. Glen Hiner, et al. in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York. Owens Corning is not named in the lawsuit. The suit, which was brought by Kensington International Limited and Springfield Associates, LLC, two assignees of lenders under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, alleges causes of action (1) against all defendants for breach of fiduciary duty, and (2) against certain defendants for fraud in connection with certain loans made under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. The complaint seeks an unspecified amount of damages. On October 6, 2003, the Company filed in the USBC a Complaint for Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction and Enforcement of the Automatic Stay, requesting a preliminary injunction against further prosecution of the suit until after confirmation of a plan of reorganization for the Company. By order of the USBC, the New York action was preliminarily enjoined, with limited exceptions, until the earlier of the entry of an order confirming a plan of reorganization for the Company or further order of the USBC. On February 7, 2005, all defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss. A hearing on the motion to dismiss was held on May 2, 2005. No decision has been issued. Owens Corning believes that the claim is without merit.

Owens Corning holds an indirect ownership interest in ServiceLane.com, Inc. (“ServiceLane”), which is in Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceedings in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, Case No. 01-36044-HCA-7 (Abrahamson, B.J.). Two former employees of ServiceLane (the “SL Plaintiffs”) have filed proofs of claim (Claims No. 8651 and 8622) against Owens Corning in the Chapter 11 Cases, alleging fraud and misrepresentation. Additionally, on July 24, 2003, the SL Plaintiffs, along with ServiceLane’s Chapter 7 trustee, brought suit against two Owens Corning officers, who also were directors of ServiceLane, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Western Division, under the caption ServiceLane.com, Inc., et al. v. Stein, et al. In the complaint, ServiceLane alleged a breach of fiduciary duty against both officers and the SL Plaintiffs alleged fraud against one officer. Owens Corning was not named in the lawsuit. On September 10, 2003, Owens Corning filed in the USBC an objection to the proofs of claim filed by the SL Plaintiffs as well as a counterclaim seeking declaratory relief in the form of a declaration that neither Owens Corning nor the two officers harmed the SL Plaintiffs. On October 1, 2003, the two officers filed a similar adversary proceeding in the USBC. In October 2003, the SL Plaintiffs filed a motion to dismiss Owens Corning’s counterclaim and, in November 2003, the SL Plaintiffs filed a motion to dismiss the adversary proceeding by the two officers. Hearings on both motions to dismiss were held on January 23, 2004. The USBC denied the motion to dismiss Owens Corning’s counterclaim and deferred action on the other motion to dismiss. Subsequently, the SL Plaintiffs and the two officers agreed to a dismissal of the Ohio action and a refiling in the USBC. As a result, all such proceedings are now pending in the USBC. On January 19, 2005, the USBC denied the motion of the SL Plaintiffs for leave to amend their complaint. On December 21, 2005, the USBC issued an order dismissing the breach of fiduciary duty claim against the two officers. Owens Corning believes that the remaining claim of the SL Plaintiffs (alleging fraud against one officer) is without merit.

- 45 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

The named officer and director defendants in each of the above proceedings have each filed contingent indemnification claims with respect to such litigation against Owens Corning pursuant to the General Bar Date process described below.

On or about January 6, 2006, the official representatives of the bondholders and trade creditors of Owens Corning filed, without leave of Court, the Complaint of Official Representatives of the Owens Corning Bondholder and Trade Creditor Constituencies for Equitable Subordination and to Pierce the Corporate Veil (the “Bond/Trade Complaint”). The Bond/Trade Complaint seeks, among other things, to (i) subordinate the claims of holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility against Owens Corning to the claims of certain bondholders and trade creditors of Owens Corning and to subordinate the claims of holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility against the guarantors of the Pre-Petition Credit Facility to claims of Owens Corning, (ii) subordinate the claims of certain Non-Debtor Subsidiaries that are guarantors of the Pre-Petition Credit Facility against Owens Corning to the claims of certain bondholders and trade creditors of Owens Corning and (iii) pierce the corporate veil of certain Non-Debtor Subsidiaries that are guarantors of the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. On or about March 22, 2006, the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility filed a motion to dismiss the Bond/Trade Complaint. A pre-trial conference in the USBC was held on March 27, 2006 and, on March 28, 2006, Owens Corning filed a motion to dismiss the Bond/Trade Complaint. The USBC has scheduled oral argument on the motion to dismiss for May 10, 2006. Owens Corning believes that the claims set forth in the Bond/Trade Complaint are without merit and should be considered, if at all, in conjunction with the Plan confirmation process.

GENERAL BAR DATE CLAIMS

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). Approximately 25,000 proofs of claim (including the claims described below under the headings “PBGC Claim”, “Tax Claim” and “Specialty Roofing Claim”), totaling approximately $16.6 billion, alleging a right to payment from a Debtor were filed with the Bankruptcy Court in response to the General Bar Date. As to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, the claim total reflects only a single claim (in the amount of approximately $1.6 billion) although the holders have asserted this claim against Owens Corning and each of six other Debtors that issued a guarantee with respect to the facility. For further information concerning the filed claims, see Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, under the heading “General Bar Date”.

PBGC CLAIM

In connection with the General Bar Date described above, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (“PBGC”), an agency of the United States, has filed a claim, in the amount of approximately $458 million, in connection with statutory liability for unfunded benefit liabilities of the Owens Corning Merged Retirement Plan (the “Pension Plan”). The claim states that it is contingent upon termination of the Pension Plan. Since Owens Corning does not anticipate that the Plan (or any other plan of reorganization) as ultimately confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court will provide for termination of the Pension Plan, it believes that this claim ultimately will become moot.

- 46 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

TAX CLAIM

Owens Corning’s federal income tax returns typically are audited by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) in multi-year audit cycles. The audit for the years 1992-1995 was completed in late 2000. Due to the Filing, the IRS also accelerated and completed the audit for the years 1996-1999 by March of 2001. As the result of these audits and unresolved issues from prior audit cycles, the IRS asserted claims for unpaid income taxes plus interest thereon. As the result of settlement negotiations, in the fourth quarter of 2004 the Company and the IRS reached an agreement in principle to settle such claims in return for total settlement payments by the Company of approximately $69 million, plus interest of approximately $30 million, as calculated by the Company. The settlement was approved by the Bankruptcy Court by order dated November 15, 2004 and by the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation on May 17, 2005. The IRS is currently in the process of implementing the settlement, including performing its calculation of the interest component, which could vary from the amount of interest as calculated by the Company.

Pending audit of Owens Corning’s federal income tax return for the year 2000, the IRS has also filed a protective claim in the amount of approximately $50 million plus interest, covering a tax refund received by Owens Corning for such year.

As described in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, under the heading “General Bar Date”, the United States Department of Treasury has filed proofs of claim, totaling approximately $534 million, in connection with these tax claims. As part of the implementation of the settlement described above, the filed proofs of claim will be amended appropriately.

In accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, Owens Corning maintains tax reserves to cover audit issues. While Owens Corning believes that the existing reserves are appropriate in light of the audit issues involved, its defenses, its prior experience in resolving audit issues, and its ability to realize certain challenged deductions in subsequent tax returns if the IRS were successful, there can be no assurance that such reserves will be sufficient. Owens Corning will continue to review its tax reserves on a periodic basis and make such adjustments as may be appropriate. Any such revision could be material to the Company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations in any given period.

SPECIALTY ROOFING CLAIM

Three purchasers of a specialty roofing product have filed proofs of claim in the aggregate amount of $275 million on behalf of themselves individually and on behalf of a purported class of pre-petition claimants with respect to such product, and have moved the USBC to certify such class. In addition, Owens Corning has been named a defendant in a purported class action, originally filed in the Superior Court for the County of San Joaquin, California, on behalf of post-petition claimants with respect to such product. Subsequently, Owens Corning removed the California proceeding to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California (“CBC”), and the CBC, upon Owens Corning’s motion, ordered that the proceeding be transferred to the USBC. In late October, 2005, Owens Corning reached an agreement in principle to settle both purported class actions for a total of $11 million. The settlement is subject to final documentation and to approval by the Bankruptcy Court. The settlement amount is fully reserved in the Consolidated Financial Statements as of March 31, 2006.

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

- 47 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

made by the Debtors to certain parties within a prescribed period prior to the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases. 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 Cases.

The Debtors have executed tolling agreements with all 12 present and former officers and the director, as well as with certain other parties identified as having received potentially avoidable transfers. After initially being covered by a tolling agreement, the claim against the joint venture affiliate was subsequently released as part of a Bankruptcy Court approved settlement with the affiliate, entered into in connection with the affiliate’s separate bankruptcy proceedings.

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. On January 20, 2006, the official representatives of the bondholder and trade creditor constituencies of Owens Corning filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint in intervention in connection with the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action and to seek authority to prosecute existing claims and commence others on behalf of the Debtors’ estates (the “Derivative Complaint”). On March 21, 2006, the Debtors filed an opposition to the Derivative Complaint.

The Plan contemplates that the claims belonging to the Debtors under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action, which are the subject of the Derivative Complaint, will be released. Therefore, on February 3, 2006, the Debtors filed a motion to refer the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action to the USBC so that the USBC may administer the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action consistent with proceedings in connection with confirmation of the Plan. Certain holders of Owens Corning debt securities have opposed this motion. Owens Corning is currently unable to predict the outcome of the hearing on the confirmation of the Plan or the final terms of the Plan (or other plan of reorganization), including the applicable release provisions, as may ultimately be confirmed.

- 48 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

9. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND OTHER MATTERS (continued)

Separately, and at the request of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors 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 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. On or about October 3, 2005 similar lawsuits were brought against 2 additional law firms whose tolling agreements were about to expire and who could not be contacted to extend the tolling agreements because of Hurricane Katrina. The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors 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 Committee of Unsecured Creditors and Bankruptcy Court approval.

By motions filed on various dates, the Debtors have requested a stay of the foregoing litigation pending its disposition in the Plan (or any other plan of reorganization). Pursuant to rulings of the Bankruptcy Court, all of the foregoing litigation, other than the Pre-Petition Credit Facility Action and two commercial preference actions, has been stayed until August 31, 2006.

OTHER BANKRUPTCY RELATED MATTERS

See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of other bankruptcy related matters.

TALOJA, INDIA MANUFACTURING FACILITY

During the week of July 24, 2005, the Company experienced a flood at its Taloja, India manufacturing facility, a 60% owned joint venture. This facility is insured for property damage and business interruption losses related to such events, subject to deductibles and policy limits. The Company estimates it has incurred, and expects to recover, approximately $25 million to $35 million of property damage costs and business interruption losses in 2005 and 2006 associated with the Taloja flood. However, should the expected recoveries not be received, the unrecovered costs and losses could have a material adverse impact on the Composite Solutions business. Also, the timing of any recoveries may result in expenses being taken in periods before the insurance receipts are recorded or received.

10. FIBREBOARD SETTLEMENT TRUST

Under the Insurance Settlement described in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, two of Fibreboard’s insurers provided $1.873 billion during the fourth quarter of 1999 to fund the costs of resolving pending and future Fibreboard asbestos-related liabilities. As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the remaining Insurance Settlement funds were held in and invested by the Fibreboard Settlement Trust (the “Trust”). On an ongoing basis, the funds held in the Trust will be subject to investment earnings/losses and will be reduced if and as applied to satisfy Fibreboard asbestos-related liabilities. Under the terms of the Trust, any Trust assets that ultimately are not used to fund Fibreboard’s asbestos-related liabilities must be distributed to charity. Based on currently available information,

- 49 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

10. FIBREBOARD SETTLEMENT TRUST (continued)

Owens Corning does not believe that any such assets will remain for distribution at the conclusion of the Chapter 11 Cases.

The Trust is a qualified settlement fund for federal income tax purposes, and is taxed separately from Owens Corning on its net taxable income, after deduction for related administrative expenses.

At this time, Owens Corning is unable to predict what the treatment of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust will ultimately be under the terms of any plan or plans of reorganization confirmed in the Chapter 11 Cases.

General Accounting Treatment

The assets of the Trust are comprised of cash and marketable securities (collectively, the “Trust Assets”) and, with Fibreboard’s Undistributed Administrative Deposits, are reflected on Owens Corning’s consolidated balance sheet as restricted assets. At March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, these assets were reflected as non-current assets, under the category “Restricted cash, securities and other—Fibreboard”. Owens Corning estimates a reserve for Fibreboard in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles to reflect asbestos-related liabilities (see Note 9, Item B, to the Consolidated Financial Statements). As of March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, these liabilities were one of the items included in Owens Corning’s consolidated balance sheet under the category “Liabilities Subject to Compromise”. At March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, the Consolidated Financial Statements reflect Fibreboard’s reserve for asbestos litigation claims of $3.216 billion.

For accounting purposes, the Trust Assets are classified as “trading securities” and are reported in the Consolidated Financial Statements in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities”. Accordingly, marketable securities classified as trading securities are recorded at fair market value.

Any earnings, realized gains/losses and unrealized increases/decreases in fair market value of the Trust Assets are reflected as an increase/decrease in the carrying amount of such assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as well as a decrease/increase in Chapter 11 related reorganization items on the Consolidated Statement of Income (Loss). Cost for purposes of computing realized gains/losses is determined using the specific identification method.

The residual obligation to charity is included within Fibreboard’s reserve for asbestos litigation claims as the asbestos-related liabilities have exceeded the Trust Assets. Consequently, no amounts have been recorded to the residual obligation to charity, and earnings/losses on Trust Assets have been recorded as Chapter 11 related reorganization items.

Results for the Quarters Ended March 31, 2006 and 2005

During the first quarter of 2006, Trust Assets generated interest/dividend earnings of approximately $15 million compared to $15 million in 2005 which was recorded in Chapter 11 related reorganization items in the Consolidated Statement of Income (Loss).

- 50 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

10. FIBREBOARD SETTLEMENT TRUST (continued)

At March 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair market value adjustment for those securities designated as trading securities resulted in an unrealized loss of approximately $3 million and $19 million, respectively, recorded as a change in the carrying amount of the assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. These losses were recorded as Chapter 11 related reorganization items on the Consolidated Statement of Income (Loss).

As a result of the Filing, there were no payments for asbestos litigation claims from the Trust during the first quarter of 2006 or 2005. There were also no payments made during the first quarter of 2006 or 2005 for taxes related to earnings of the Trust. The sale of securities in the first quarter of 2006 and 2005 resulted in realized losses of approximately $9 million and $3 million, respectively. Realized gains or losses from the sale of securities are reflected on the Company’s consolidated financial statements in the same manner as actual returns on Trust Assets, described above.

During the first quarter of 2005, the Company increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million, to an aggregate $3.216 billion.

At March 31, 2006, the fair value of Trust Assets and Administrative Deposits was $1.436 billion, which was comprised of Trust Assets of $1.309 billion of marketable securities and Administrative Deposits of $127 million. The table below summarizes Trust and Administrative Deposits activity for the three months ended March 31, 2006:

	Balance 12/31/05			Interest and Dividends		Unrealized Loss			Realized Loss			Balance 3/31/06
Assets
Trust Assets:
Marketable securities – trading	$	1,306		$	15	$	(3	)	$	(9	)	$	1,309
Administrative Deposits		127			—		—			—			127
Total assets	$	1,433		$	15	$	(3	)	$	(9	)	$	1,436
Liabilities
Accounts payable	$	19		$	—	$	—		$	—		$	19
Asbestos litigation claims		3,216			—		—			—			3,216
Total Trust liabilities		3,235			—		—			—			3,235
Liabilities in excess of assets		(1,802	)		15		(3	)		(9	)		(1,799	)
Total Trust liabilities net of liabilities in excess of assets	$	1,433		$	15	$	(3	)	$	(9	)	$	1,436

- 51 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

11. EARNINGS PER SHARE

The following table reconciles the weighted average number of shares used in the basic earnings per share calculation to the weighted average number of shares used to compute diluted earnings per share:

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006		2005
Net income (loss), in millions	$	63	$	(4,237	)
Weighted-average number of shares outstanding used for basic earnings per share (thousands)		55,334		55,319
Non-vested restricted shares (thousands)		7		—
Deferred awards (thousands)		24		—
Shares from assumed conversion of preferred securities (thousands)		4,566		—
Weighted-average number of shares outstanding and common equivalent shares used for diluted earnings per share (thousands)		59,931		55,319
Net income (loss) per common share:
Basic net income (loss) per share	$	1.14	$	(76.59	)
Diluted net income (loss) per share	$	1.05	$	(76.59	)

The number of shares used in the calculation of diluted earnings per share for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 did not include 15 thousand common equivalent shares of non-vested restricted shares, 24 thousand common equivalent shares of deferred awards, and 4,566 thousand common equivalent shares from assumed conversion of preferred securities due to their anti-dilutive effect.

- 52 -

OWENS CORNING AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

(unaudited)

12. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME/LOSS

The following table presents comprehensive income (loss) for the periods indicated:

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Net income (loss)	$	63		$	(4,237	)
Other comprehensive loss		(12	)		(2	)
Comprehensive income (loss)	$	51		$	(4,239	)

The Company’s other comprehensive income (loss), during the first quarter of 2006 and 2005, includes foreign currency adjustments and deferred gains and losses on certain hedging transactions recorded at fair value.

13. INCOME TAXES

On an on-going basis, the Company records valuation allowances related to realization of certain tax assets, including deferred tax assets related to asbestos-related liabilities. In light of the Company’s financial position and Chapter 11 proceedings, including the current plan of reorganization, the Company decreased its valuation allowance for tax assets related to asbestos-related liabilities by $40 million during the first quarter of 2006, resulting in a $40 million tax benefit in the quarter and an effective tax rate of negative 20%.

In the first quarter of 2005, the Company increased its asbestos-related reserves through charges to income of $3.435 billion for Owens Corning asbestos-related liabilities and $907 million for Fibreboard asbestos-related liabilities, for an aggregate charge of $4.342 billion. Management evaluated the realization of the $1.720 billion deferred tax assets resulting from the aggregate $4.342 billion charge in light of the Company’s financial position and the Chapter 11 proceedings. As a result of such assessment, management increased its valuation allowance related to charges for asbestos-related liabilities by $1.645 billion, resulting in a $75 million net tax benefit in the first quarter of 2005.

14. ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In November 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 151, “Inventory Costs—an amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4” (“SFAS No. 151”). SFAS No. 151 amends the guidance in ARB No. 43 and clarifies accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted material (spoilage). This statement became effective for the Company as of January 1, 2006. The effect of adoption of this standard was not material.

15. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

On May 1, 2006, the Company completed its previously announced acquisition of Asahi Glass Co. Ltd.’s composite manufacturing facility located near Tokyo, Japan. The purchase price was approximately $8 million, subject to adjustment up to an additional $5 million, to be paid out in the future, if certain income thresholds are met.

- 53 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

(All per share information discussed below is on a diluted basis. References in this Report to the “Consolidated Financial Statements” refer to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Report.)

OVERVIEW

Chapter 11 Overview

Since the Company’s filing for Chapter 11 protection on October 5, 2000, we have worked diligently and consistently to formulate a plan of reorganization that would serve to resolve our Company’s historic asbestos liability in a manner that treats all of our creditors fairly and equitably. Our objective has been to work with all of our creditor groups in an attempt to reach a consensus as to the terms of such a plan of reorganization so that it could be fully supported (“Consensual Plan”) as we move toward emerging from Chapter 11. On December 31, 2005, we filed a Fifth Amended Plan of Reorganization and an accompanying disclosure statement. On March 29, 2006, we filed proposed modifications of such plan and such disclosure statement (as so modified, such documents are referred to herein as the “Plan” and the “Disclosure Statement”). While we did not receive a full consensus, we did achieve the support of the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, who agreed to act as co-proponents of the Plan. We also received the written support of the steering committee of holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. We have not yet received the support of the holders of our bond and trade debt, but we continue to discuss the framework for a Consensual Plan with their representatives.

On January 30, 2006, the USBC scheduled a hearing on our Disclosure Statement for April 5, and a hearing on the confirmation of our Plan for July 10, 17 and 18, 2006. The USBC also extended our exclusive right to file a plan of reorganization through July 31, 2006.

On April 7, 2006, the USBC issued an interim order holding among other things that, if the holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are paid in full and in cash as provided in the Plan, then (i) such claims are rendered unimpaired and the holders of such Bank Group claims are conclusively presumed to have accepted the Plan and (ii) such claims shall be deemed to be paid in full and all of such claims shall be extinguished, thereby avoiding, for now, the need for any additional subsidiaries of the Company to file for bankruptcy to resolve their potential liability with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. Unless an objection to the interim order is successfully asserted, it will become final on May 10, 2006.

In conjunction with the USBC’s consideration of the interim order, the UBSC granted the Debtors’ request to continue the hearing on our Disclosure Statement until May 10, 2006. The confirmation hearing for our Plan continues to be scheduled for July. We are committed to confirming a plan of reorganization on that schedule, even if our plan does not enjoy the support of all of our creditor groups and it is necessary to seek its confirmation over the objections of certain creditors. However, we continue to believe that a Consensual Plan is feasible and preferable, and we will continue to negotiate with all creditors in an attempt to reach a full consensus prior to the scheduled confirmation hearing.

Over the past few years, uncertainty surrounding two primary issues slowed progress in our case. Those issues were (1) the substantive consolidation of Owens Corning and its Debtor subsidiaries for purposes of our Chapter 11 proceedings, and (2) estimation of the total amount of the Company’s asbestos liabilities. In 2005, the uncertainty related to those two issues was largely resolved and cleared the way for substantial progress to be made towards emerging from Chapter 11.

- 54 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

Substantive Consolidation

Applying substantive consolidation in our case would result in all of the distributable value of our estate, whether held at the parent company or subsidiary level, being consolidated for purposes of our plan of reorganization. All creditors having claims against Owens Corning or any of its Debtor subsidiaries would then seek recovery from the consolidated estate rather than from the individual debtor entities.

The plan of reorganization that we originally filed in 2003 (“Fourth Amended Plan”) was premised upon substantive consolidation. The holders of the Company’s pre-petition bank debt, however, took the position that the Company’s estate should not be substantively consolidated. They argued that certain pre-petition loan guarantees provided to them by subsidiaries of Owens Corning should entitle them to a preferred recovery over all other unsecured creditors to the extent of the value in those subsidiaries.

Judge Fullam, the Federal District Court Judge overseeing our case, issued an Order in 2004 granting the Company’s motion requesting substantive consolidation. The holders of the Company’s pre-petition bank debt then appealed Judge Fullam’s Order to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. On August 15, 2005, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed Judge Fullam’s decision. The Third Circuit created a new test and, when applied to the facts of our case, the Third Circuit held that substantive consolidation was not appropriate. The Third Circuit also denied a motion for reconsideration of its decision that was filed by the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants and holders of the bond debt in our case. Several parties, including the bondholders, have appealed the Third Circuit’s decision to the United States Supreme Court. While some uncertainty will remain regarding this issue until the Supreme Court decides whether or not to accept that appeal, we intend to continue moving our Plan forward towards emergence.

The Plan recognizes the Third Circuit’s ruling, and therefore does not provide for substantive consolidation. Instead, our Plan contemplates an entity-by-entity analysis of the assets and liabilities of the Company and its Debtor subsidiaries and then a determination of each creditor’s recovery based on those facts. As a result, the Plan contemplates that the bank creditors will receive full principal and compounded interest on their claims, and they will receive a significantly greater recovery than they would have received under the Fourth Amended Plan. The asbestos claimants and bondholder/trade creditors will then generally share equally and ratably under the Plan. Because the value of the Company has grown over the past few years, however, it is contemplated that all creditors should receive a higher percentage recovery under the Plan than they would have received under the Fourth Amended Plan.

Asbestos Estimation

The other primary issue which created uncertainty in our Chapter 11 was the determination of the Company’s current and future asbestos liability. Judge Fullam conducted a six-day asbestos estimation hearing in mid-January of 2005. On March 31, 2005, he then issued an Order estimating Owens Corning’s asbestos liability at $7 billion. Judge Fullam’s Order did not specifically address the asbestos liability of Fibreboard. However, based on the reasoning of his decision regarding Owens Corning’s liability, it should not be necessary for him to assign a specific number to Fibreboard’s liability to enable Owens Corning to emerge from Chapter 11 under either a Consensual or non-Consensual Plan.

Holders of the Company’s bank debt and bond debt and certain insurance companies have appealed Judge Fullam’s order to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, but the Third Circuit has not yet ruled on that appeal.

An additional factor that has also weighed upon the negotiations among our various creditor groups has been the proposed Federal asbestos reform legislation pending in the United States Senate (the “FAIR Act”). The Company’s non-asbestos creditors have believed that the FAIR Act would reduce the amount

- 55 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

of asbestos liability owed by the Company, and would therefore increase the recoveries of non-asbestos creditors.

Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) co-sponsored the FAIR Act introduced in the United States Senate as S-852 on April 19, 2005. The proposed legislation was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 26, 2005. On February 14, 2006, the U.S. Senate failed to secure the votes required to waive a budget point of order that was raised against the proposed legislation. The legislative fate of the FAIR Act continues to remain uncertain, and Owens Corning is unable to predict 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.

As a result of the uncertainty surrounding the FAIR Act, and given the confirmation schedule set by the Bankruptcy Court, the Company will continue to move forward in our Chapter 11. The Company will continue to monitor the legislative progress of the FAIR Act, and we will evaluate any significant developments and their potential impact on our Chapter 11 Cases.

Our strategy going forward continues to be two-fold: (1) look for a continued compromise that will result in a Consensual Plan supported by all rather than most of our creditors and (2) in the absence of a Consensual Plan, proceed to confirm our plan of reorganization on the schedule set by the Bankruptcy Court, even if the Plan does not have the support of all creditor groups. With confirmation of a Plan and emergence from Chapter 11 more clearly in sight, we intend to continue to drive aggressively toward that goal. While several potential obstacles remain to be overcome, we believe that we have made significant progress toward that end.

Operations Overview

The table below provides a summary of our sales and income (loss) from operations for the first quarter of 2006 and 2005:

	Quarter ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Sales	$	1,601		$	1,402
Percent change from prior year		14.2	%		16.0	%
Income (loss) from operations	$	115		$	(4,281	)
Income (loss) from operations as percent of sales		7.2	%		(305.3	)%

The 14% increase in sales compared to 2005 was driven by strong demand in many of our Building Material Systems segment markets combined with year over year price increases for certain products, largely reflective of the higher costs of producing these products.

- 56 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

Some of the significant items impacting the year over year comparability of reported income from operations are noted in the table below:

	Quarter ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Chapter 11 related reorganization items	$	10		$	36
Provision for asbestos litigation claims		(3	)		4,342
Total of items	$	7		$	4,378

As previously disclosed, in March of 2005 the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating our asbestos liability at $7 billion. Based upon such estimation, we increased our provision for Owens Corning and Fibreboard asbestos litigation claims by $4,342 million. The decrease in Chapter 11 related reorganization items was primarily due to higher investment returns on the Fiberboard Trust assets and cash and cash equivalents during 2006.

Excluding the impact of the items noted in the table above, operating performance improved approximately 26% in 2006 compared to 2005, reflecting a strong demand in the Building Materials Systems segment, our ability to leverage costs over a larger sales base, and favorable year over year pricing for building materials, offset by higher energy, material and delivery costs. The items noted above are related primarily to the Chapter 11 process, liabilities that are not the result of our current operations, and activities necessitated by our anticipated plan of reorganization. We do not expect these costs and expenses to continue on an ongoing basis after we emerge from bankruptcy.

Due to the nature of the costs associated with the items noted above, we do not find reported income from operations to be the most useful financial measure of our year-to-year operational performance. We measure operating performance by excluding Chapter 11 related reorganization items, provisions for asbestos litigation claims and the other costs and expenses referenced in the table above for various purposes, including reporting results to our Board of Directors, and for analysis of performance and related employee compensation measures. Although we believe that these adjustments to income from operations provide a more meaningful representation of our year-over-year performance, our operating performance excluding these items should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for income from operations prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. In addition, such presentation is not necessarily indicative of the results that we would have achieved if we were not subject to Chapter 11 proceedings.

Major factors affecting the performance of our Building Materials Systems segment during the first quarter of 2006 compared to the prior year include the following:

• Continued strength in the United States housing markets resulted in continued high demand for our products. While prices are higher compared to the first quarter of 2005, they are largely reflective of our higher energy and material costs. Prices have remained relatively flat from the beginning of the year.

• Increases in costs for energy-related commodities (including natural gas, asphalt, and resin) and services (including delivery costs) impacted all of our product lines within this segment. While not the case for each product line, in total we have been able to mitigate the impact of these higher costs through improved operating efficiencies and by achieving price increases where appropriate.

• Continued high demand for our products has allowed us to maintain many manufacturing facilities at high utilization rates, a primary contributor to improved operating efficiency.

- 57 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

• The residual impact of the Gulf Coast hurricanes in 2005, along with unseasonably warmer weather drove an increased demand for our residential roofing products.

Major factors affecting the performance of our Composite Solutions segment during the first quarter of 2006 compared to the prior year include the following:

• Because of the increasingly competitive global environment in the glass fiber materials market, prices have decreased slightly while volume has remained relatively flat.

• Continued increases in costs of energy-related commodities and services, partially offset by productivity gains, adversely impacted this segment and created margin compression.

• The ratio of metals comprising an alloy used in certain production tooling is being changed to take advantage of favorable market conditions. As a result, the Company disposed of a certain amount of one metal and purchased an equal dollar amount of another, which resulted in $8 million of gains in the quarter with no resulting impact to cash. Depending on market conditions, this program may continue throughout the year.

• In the first quarter of 2006 we stopped incurring losses related to the 2005 flood of our manufacturing facility in Taloja, India. However, we are expanding the capacity of the facility and as a result it continues to be shut down. We estimate that comparable results were negatively impacted by approximately $6 million as a result of this facility shutdown during the first quarter of 2006.

Liquidity

Due to the seasonality of our business, we typically invest cash in working capital during the first quarter; receivables from customers increase due to higher sales and we build inventories to serve customer demand in future quarters. Cash flow used for operations was $147 million, while our cash used for operations combined with capital spending for plant and equipment was $209 million. We ended the quarter with a cash balance of $1.360 billion.

Safety

We have made safety a top priority. We measure our progress on safety based on two measures, the Recordable Incidence Rate as defined by OSHA (“RIR”) and the Combined Occupational Disability Index (“CODI”). CODI is a subset of RIR and includes the more severe incidents that involve lost or restricted time. The table below provides our performance for the first quarter of 2006 and the years ending 2005 and 2004. The numbers shown reflect information available as of March 31, 2006, and are based on the Company’s active work sites for 2006; such numbers are subject to change based upon receipt of additional information or change in the Company’s active work sites.

	Three Months Ended March 31,		Year Ended
	2006		2005
RIR	1.56		2.01
Percent improvement	22	%
CODI rate	1.02		1.23
Percent improvement	17	%

Our goal for the remainder of 2006 and beyond continues to be the elimination of all injuries.

- 58 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

Outlook

Our building materials markets remained strong through the first quarter of 2006. Sales in some of our markets are constrained due to currently available production capacity. Recent increases in United States housing inventory and interest rates are expected to exert pressure on demand, which could impact prices for certain products.

Offsetting the potential softening of demand, we believe that the Energy Policy Act of 2005 may serve to stimulate demand for our products in the United States due to the potential tax credits offered to homebuilders for the construction of more energy efficient homes, and to home-owners for certain energy efficient home improvements.

Global demand for energy related commodities and services has caused us to continue to experience cost inflation. We anticipate such inflation may not be recovered completely through price increases and will require us to achieve additional productivity gains in order to avoid margin compression. We will continue to focus on managing our capacity, introducing product offerings, maintaining cost control, and eliminating inefficiencies in our business and manufacturing processes to offset the effects of any softening in demand and to achieve planned results. If we cannot achieve targeted productivity gains, our margins, results of operations, and financial condition could be adversely affected.

On May 1, 2006, the Company completed its previously announced acquisition of Asahi Glass Co. Ltd.’s composite manufacturing facility located near Tokyo, Japan. The purchase price was approximately $8 million, subject to adjustment up to an additional $5 million, to be paid out in the future, if certain income thresholds are met.

We believe this acquisition will support the growth of customers in the automotive, consumer and electrical, building and construction, and infrastructure markets and will position us to capitalize on emerging opportunities within the Asia Pacific region.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Sales and Profitability for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2006 and 2005

NET SALES

Net sales for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 were $1.601 billion, a 14.2% increase from the 2005 level of $1.402 billion. This increase was primarily the result of favorable pricing actions and higher volumes in our Building Materials Systems segment. The increased volumes are a result of continued strength in the United States housing and remodeling markets.

Sales outside the United States represented 16% of total sales for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, compared to 17% during the same time period in 2005.

- 59 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

PROFITABILITY

	Quarter ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Sales	$	1,601		$	1,402
Gross margin	$	269		$	235
As a percent of Sales		16.8	%		16.8	%
Marketing and administrative	$	131		$	124
As a percent of Sales		8.2	%		8.8	%
Provision (credit) for asbestos litigation claims (recoveries)	$	(3	)	$	4,342
Income (loss) from operations	$	115		$	(4,281	)
Interest expense, net	$	65		$	1
Income tax benefit	$	(10	)	$	(48	)
Net income (loss)	$	63		$	(4,237	)

GROSS MARGIN

In the first quarter of 2006, gross margin as a percent of sales remained relatively flat as compared to the first quarter of 2005. Strong demand in the markets in which our Building Materials segment operates enabled us to improve our margin through increased pricing for some of our products and realization of some operating efficiencies. However, these price increases and efficiency improvements were substantially offset by higher costs associated with energy related commodities (particularly oil, natural gas, and resin), transportation, and the impact of the Taloja, India facility shutdown during expansion.

MARKETING AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES

Marketing and administrative expenses as a percent of sales declined to 8.2% for the first quarter of 2006, compared to 8.8% for the first quarter of 2005, due to our ability to distribute costs over a larger sales base.

PROVISION FOR ASBESTOS LITIGATION CLAIMS

During the first quarter of 2005, the District Court provided an estimate of $7 billion for Owens Corning’s contingent personal injury asbestos liability. While uncertainty remains concerning the amount of such liability, as a result of this ruling, the Company determined that this estimate was a more likely outcome than any other in the range of possible outcomes and recorded an additional provision for asbestos litigation claims for Owens Corning of $3.435 billion, bringing the total reserve recorded for Owens Corning to $7 billion. The Company also re-evaluated its reserve for Fibreboard’s asbestos claims. Although the Court did not provide an estimate for Fibreboard’s liability, management evaluated the Court’s process for determining Owens Corning’s liability and determined that the range of possible outcomes had narrowed. Consequently, the Company determined that an additional $907 million liability should be recorded for Fibreboard, bringing the total reserve recorded for Fibreboard to $3.216 billion. The total provision recorded for asbestos litigation claims during the first quarter of 2005 was $4.342 billion. See Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information concerning the provision for asbestos litigation claims.

- 60 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

INCOME FROM OPERATIONS

The increase in income from operations in 2006 was primarily due to the $4.342 billion provision for asbestos litigation claims recorded in 2005, and a decrease of $26 million in Chapter 11 related reorganization items due to higher investment returns on the Fiberboard Trust assets and cash and cash equivalents during 2006. Income was also positively impacted by strong sales and our ability to achieve some operating efficiencies derived from the strong demand in our largest markets. Additionally, our Composites Solution segment also recognized approximately $8 million in gains in the United States related to the disposition of certain assets. Offsetting these gains were $9 million in losses related to a mark to market adjustment on energy related derivative instruments in the first quarter of 2006.

INTEREST EXPENSE

The 2006 results include expenses of $66 million with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 relating to post-petition interest and certain other fees. Of these expenses, (a) $12 million were recorded as an additional adjustment for the period ended December 31, 2005, and (b) the remaining $54 million were recorded for the period ended March 31, 2006, in light of the terms of the Company’s revised Plan, and Owens Corning’s evaluation of the distributable values (considered on a non-substantively consolidated basis) of Owens Corning and certain Debtor and non-Debtor subsidiaries.

While operating in Chapter 11 proceedings, a debtor company is generally prohibited from paying interest on unsecured pre-petition debts. As a result of the Filing, contractual interest expense on pre-petition debt of the Debtors other than the Pre-Petition Credit Facility has not been accrued or recorded since the Petition Date. From the Petition Date through March 31, 2006, the contractual interest expense not accrued or recorded on such pre-petition debt (calculated using ordinary, non-default interest rates and without regard to debt maturity) totaled approximately $564 million, of which $26 million relate to the first quarter of 2006 and $26 million relate to the first quarter of 2005.

INCOME TAX EXPENSES

On an on-going basis, the Company records valuation allowances related to realization of certain tax assets, including deferred tax assets related to asbestos-related liabilities. In light of the Company’s financial position and Chapter 11 proceedings, including the current plan of reorganization, the Company decreased its valuation allowance for tax assets related to asbestos-related liabilities by $40 million during the first quarter of 2006, resulting in a $40 million tax benefit in the quarter.

During the first quarter of 2005, management evaluated the realization of the $1.720 billion deferred tax assets resulting from the aggregate $4.342 billion asbestos related charge in light of the Company’s financial position and the Chapter 11 proceedings. As a result of such assessment, management increased its valuation allowance related to charges for asbestos-related liabilities by $1.645 billion, resulting in a $75 million net tax benefit in the first quarter of 2005.

NET INCOME

For the quarter ended March 31, 2006, Owens Corning reported net income of $63 million, or $1.05 per share, compared to a net loss of $4.237 billion, or ($76.59) per share, for the first quarter of the prior year. The increase in 2006 primarily reflected the $4.342 billion provision for asbestos litigation claims in 2005 and the other items mentioned above.

- 61 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

TALOJA, INDIA MANUFACTURING FACILITY

During the week of July 24, 2005, the Company experienced a flood at its Taloja, India manufacturing facility, a 60% owned joint venture. This facility is insured for property damage and business interruption losses related to such events, subject to deductibles and policy limits. The Company estimates it has incurred, and expects to recover, approximately $25 million to $35 million of property damage costs and business interruption losses in 2005 and 2006 associated with the Taloja flood. However, should the expected recoveries not be received, the unrecovered costs and losses could have a material adverse impact on the Composite Solutions business. Also, the timing of any recoveries may result in expenses being taken in periods before the insurance receipts are recorded or received.

LIQUIDITY, CAPITAL RESOURCES AND OTHER RELATED MATTERS

Due to the seasonality of our business and the timing of certain expenses, our operations generally utilize cash during the first quarter of the year. The first quarter of 2006 was no different as we ended with a cash balance of $1.360 billion, a decrease of $199 million from December 31, 2005. The following table provides information regarding our liquidity:

	Quarter Ended March 31,
	2006			2005
	(dollars in millions)
Cash balance	$	1,360		$	930
Cash used for operations	$	(147	)	$	(132	)
Cash used for investing activities	$	(53	)	$	(47	)
Unused committed credit lines	$	79		$	103

Cash flow used for operations was $147 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, compared to $132 million for the first quarter of 2005. Net working capital and the current ratio at March 31, 2006 were $938 million and 1.54, respectively, compared to $1,250 million and 2.42 as of March 31, 2005. The decrease in net working capital and the current ratio year-over-year is primarily related to the accrual of post-petition interest on the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, more fully described below under “Voluntary Petition for Relief Under Chapter 11”.

Investing activities consumed $53 million in cash during the first quarter of 2006, compared to $47 million during the same period in 2005. Under expected market conditions, we anticipate spending approximately $300 million in capital investments in the last three quarters of 2006, substantially all of which is uncommitted as of March 31, 2006. We expect these expenditures will be funded from the Company’s operations and existing cash on hand.

Financing activities during the first quarter of 2006 resulted in no use of cash, compared to a use of cash of $12 million for the same period in 2005. The use of cash in 2005 primarily related to payments of outstanding debt in India.

At March 31, 2006 and December 31, 2005, we had $2.952 billion of debt subject to compromise and $55 million of other debt.

The Company has several defined benefit pension plans. The Company expects to make contributions to its United States pension plans in the range of $40 million to $60 million in 2006. Contributions will be made from the Company’s current cash balance and cash generated from operations. The Company’s pension related assets decreased to $455 million at March 31, 2006, from $484 million at March 31, 2005,

- 62 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

primarily due to additional service costs, interest cost accrued and amortization of prior actuarial losses, partially offset by contributions to the pension plans and return on plan assets. The Company’s recorded long-term pension plan liability decreased to $684 million at March 31, 2006, from $732 million at March 31, 2005. The ultimate cash flow impact to the Company, if any, of the pension plan liability and the timing of any such impact will depend on numerous variables, including future changes in actuarial assumptions and market conditions.

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. In October 2002, the Debtors reached agreement with the lenders to renew the DIP Financing for an additional term of two years, with a reduced maximum availability of $250 million. In September 2004, the credit facility was renewed for an additional 2 years. There were no borrowings outstanding under the DIP Financing at March 31, 2006; however, approximately $171 million of the availability under this facility was utilized as the result of the issuance of standby letters of credit and similar uses.

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

The Company believes, based on information currently 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 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 achieve profitability following such confirmation.

OFF BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS

The Company enters into certain off balance sheet arrangements in the ordinary course of business, such as securitization of accounts receivable and guarantees with respect to unconsolidated affiliates and other entities. There have been no significant changes in the Company’s off balance sheet arrangements during the quarter ended March 31, 2006.

Other than those effects inherent to the types of arrangements described, the Company does not believe these arrangements will have a material effect on the Company’s financial condition, changes in financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.

CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

In the course of business, the Company enters into contractual obligations to make payments to third parties. During the first quarter of 2006, there were no material changes to such contractual obligations outside the ordinary course of the Company’s business.

- 63 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

CASH FLOW HEDGES

To mitigate some of the near term volatility in our operating results, we partially hedge our exposures to the cost of energy and some energy related commodities. As a result of the decrease in natural gas prices during the first quarter of 2006, the fair value of our U.S. natural gas hedge portfolio decreased by approximately $22 million. This decrease relates to hedge contracts executed prior to 2006 that were outstanding as of the end of the first quarter.

ADOPTION OF NEW ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

In November 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 151, “Inventory Costs—an amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4” (“SFAS No. 151”). SFAS No. 151 amends the guidance in ARB No. 43 and clarifies accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted material (spoilage). This statement became effective for the Company as of January 1, 2006. The effect of adoption of this standard was not material.

ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS

The Company has been deemed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to be a Potentially Responsible Party (“PRP”) with respect to certain sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“Superfund”). The Company has also been deemed a PRP under similar state or local laws. In other instances, other PRPs have brought suits against the Company as a PRP for contribution under such federal, state or local laws. At March 31, 2006, a total of 61 such PRP designations remained unresolved by the Company. In most cases the Company is only one of many PRPs with potential liability for investigation and remediation at the applicable site. The Company is also involved with environmental investigation or remediation at a number of other sites at which it has not been designated a PRP.

The Company estimates a reserve in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles to reflect environmental liabilities that have been asserted or are probable of assertion, in which liabilities are probable and reasonably estimable. At March 31, 2006, the Company’s reserve for such liabilities was $13 million. In connection with the Filing, the Company initiated a program to identify and discharge contingent environmental liabilities as part of its plan or plans of reorganization. Under the program, the Company is seeking settlements, subject to approval of the Bankruptcy Court, with various federal, state and local authorities, as well as private claimants. On July 23, 2003, the Bankruptcy Court approved one such settlement agreement with the United States resolving certain environmental liabilities with respect to the EPA, including liabilities associated with some of the PRP designations noted above. The Company will continue to review its environmental reserve in light of such program and make such adjustments as may be appropriate.

The 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (the “Act”) provide that the EPA will issue regulations on a number of air pollutants over a period of years. The EPA issued final regulations for wool fiberglass and mineral wool in June 1999, for amino/phenolic resin manufacturing in January 2000, for wet formed fiberglass mat production in April 2002, and for reinforced plastic composites production and asphalt roofing and processing in April 2003. The Company anticipates that other relevant sources to be regulated in the near future include large burners and boilers. Based on information now known to the Company, including the nature and limited number of regulated materials Owens Corning emits, we do not expect the Act to have a materially adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or long-term liquidity.

VOLUNTARY PETITION FOR RELIEF UNDER CHAPTER 11

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”):

- 64 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

CDC Corporation	Integrex Testing Systems LLC
Engineered Yarns America, Inc.	HOMExperts LLC
Falcon Foam Corporation	Jefferson Holdings, Inc.
Integrex	Owens-Corning Fiberglas Technology, Inc.
Fibreboard Corporation	Owens Corning HT, Inc.
Exterior Systems, Inc.	Owens-Corning Overseas Holdings, Inc.
Integrex Ventures LLC	Owens Corning Remodeling Systems, LLC
Integrex Professional Services LLC	Soltech, Inc.
Integrex Supply Chain Solutions LLC

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”, it is possible that certain of such Non-Debtor Subsidiaries, namely IPM Inc., Vytec Corporation and Owens-Corning Fiberglas Sweden Inc., that issued guarantees with respect to Owens Corning’s primary pre-petition bank credit facility (the “Pre-Petition Credit Facility”), may initiate Chapter 11 proceedings in order to be covered by the terms of the Plan (as defined below) in order to resolve such entities’ potential liability under such guarantees. The timing of any such filing would permit the inclusion of such entities as part of the Plan confirmation process.

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 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Overseeing Federal District Court

In late 2001, all of 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 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”).

On May 27, 2004, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) assigned Judge John P. Fullam of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to replace Judge Wolin in the Chapter 11 Cases. In addition, the Third Circuit assigned other judges to sit on other of the cases that had previously been consolidated under the terms of the Administrative Consolidation, effectively terminating the consolidation.

Consequence of the 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

- 65 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

leases, and other parties to contracts or leases that are rejected may assert rejection damages claims as permitted by the Bankruptcy Code.

Two creditors’ committees, one representing asbestos claimants (the “Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants”) and the other representing unsecured creditors (the “Official Committee of 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.

Owens Corning anticipates that substantially all liabilities of the Debtors as of the Petition Date will be resolved under the Plan (as defined below) or some other Chapter 11 plan of reorganization to be voted on in the Chapter 11 Cases in accordance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. 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 (the “Fourth Amended Plan”) in the USBC on October 24, 2003.

On December 31, 2005, the Debtors, together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed a proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization in the USBC along with a related disclosure statement and, on March 29, 2006, filed certain proposed modifications of such plan and such disclosure statement (as so amended through such modified fifth amendment and such modified disclosure statement, such documents are referred to herein as the “Plan” and the “Disclosure Statement”, respectively). The steering committee of holders of obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility supports the Plan pursuant to the terms of the letter, dated December 30, 2005, appended as Appendix K to the Disclosure Statement. Certain other members of the major non-asbestos creditor groups have indicated that they may oppose the Plan. There can be no assurance that the Plan or any other plan supported by Owens Corning and less than all of the major creditor groups will be ultimately confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court and consummated. The Debtors have the exclusive right to file and solicit acceptances to a plan of reorganization through July 31, 2006. In addition, Owens Corning is unable to predict what impact the disposition of any of the litigation and other matters described below will have on the timing of the confirmation of the Plan (or any other plan of reorganization) or its effect, if any, on the terms thereof. The Plan (and any other plan of reorganization) is subject to confirmation by the Bankruptcy Court.

The Plan has been significantly amended from the Fourth Amended Plan. In particular, the Plan is no longer premised upon the substantive consolidation of Owens Corning and certain of its direct and indirect subsidiaries 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. On October 5, 2004, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order Concerning Substantive Consolidation (the “Substantive Consolidation Order”). In the Substantive Consolidation Order, the District Court granted the Debtors’ motion for substantive consolidation. On October 13, 2004, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility filed an appeal of the Substantive Consolidation Order with the Third Circuit. On August 15, 2005, the Third Circuit reversed the Substantive Consolidation Order. The Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos personal injury claimants and certain designated members of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors subsequently filed petitions for rehearing en banc of the Third Circuit’s decision. Those petitions for rehearing were denied by the Third Circuit on September 28, 2005. The Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos

- 66 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

personal injury claimants and certain bondholders have filed petitions for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court with respect to the Third Circuit’s decision on the Substantive Consolidation Order.

As previously disclosed, as a result of the Third Circuit’s reversal of the District Court’s Substantive Consolidation Order, Owens Corning’s evaluation of the distributable values (considered on a non-substantively consolidated basis) of Owens Corning and certain of its Debtor and non-Debtor subsidiaries, and the terms of the proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization as filed in the USBC on December 31, 2005, Owens Corning previously has recorded expenses with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility for the period from the Petition Date through December 31, 2005 in the amount of $735 million relating to post-petition interest and certain other post-petition fees. With respect to post-petition interest, such expenses reflected the application of the Base Rate plus 2% (as described below) applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly); with respect to post-petition fees, such expenses reflected no compounding. The Plan (as modified on March 29, 2006) provides that, if the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are deemed unimpaired, or are deemed to be impaired and the class of such holders accepts the Plan, (and the Plan is confirmed and becomes effective) then the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility will be paid an amount in cash equal to the sum of (i) the amount of interest accrued through the date of delivery of the initial distribution under the Plan to holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (the “Initial Bank Holders’ Distribution”) on the amounts outstanding under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility as of the Petition Date, at the Base Rate plus 2% (as defined below) on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and (ii) the amount of any accrued and unpaid post-petition fees payable under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility through the date of delivery of the Initial Bank Holders’ Distribution, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility), plus accrued interest thereon pursuant to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). In light of such terms of the Plan, Owens Corning (i) has recorded, for the period ended March 31, 2006, additional expenses of $12 million for the period from the Petition Date through December 31, 2005, and (ii) has recorded, for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, additional expenses of $54 million reflecting post-petition interest with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). However, this estimate is based on numerous factual and legal uncertainties, including the interpretation of contractual provisions concerning such interest and other fees, and Owens Corning reserves the right to object, if and as appropriate in its judgment, to the ultimate entitlements to such interest and other fees and to the amount of such interest and other fees in the Chapter 11 Cases (or other proceedings), subject to the terms and conditions of the Interim Unimpairment Order (as defined below). Absent developments that alter Owens Corning’s view of the likelihood of amounts that may be paid under the Plan to holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, Owens Corning expects to continue to accrue interest on the Pre-Petition Credit Facility in future periods, to the extent required under applicable law, at a rate equal to the Base Rate plus 2%, applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). The Base Rate (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) is a floating rate equal to the higher of (i) the prime commercial lending rate of Credit Suisse First Boston and (ii) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50% per annum.

On April 7, 2006, upon motion of the agent for the holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (which motion was subsequently joined by certain of the Debtors and Non-Debtor Subsidiaries), the USBC issued an interim order (the “Interim Unimpairment Order”) providing among other things that, if claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are paid in full and in cash as provided in the Plan as modified, then (i) such claims are rendered unimpaired and the classes of such claims are conclusively presumed to have accepted the Plan and (ii) such claims shall be paid in full and all claims and remedies arising under or related to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, including any guarantees executed or delivered in connection therewith, shall be extinguished. The Interim Unimpairment Order provides that it will

- 67 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

become a final order unless an objection is timely filed with the USBC, in which event a hearing to consider approval of the order on a final basis will be held on May 10, 2006.

A six-day claims estimation hearing was held before the District Court beginning January 13, 2005 to establish the amount of Owens Corning’s and Fibreboard’s current and future asbestos liability in the Chapter 11 Cases. In general, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility argued that the amount of such asbestos liability should be set at an amount significantly lower than the amounts reserved for asbestos claims on the financial statements of the Debtors, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants argued that such asbestos liability should be set at a significantly higher level. On March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit. As a result of the District Court’s estimation, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $3.435 billion for the period ended March 31, 2005, so that its recorded reserve equaled the level of asbestos liability estimated by the District Court (see Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens Corning, Owens Corning also increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million for the period ended March 31, 2005.

Related Developments

PROPOSED ASBESTOS LEGISLATION

Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) co-sponsored an asbestos litigation reform bill (S-852) introduced in the United States Senate on April 19, 2005. The proposed legislation is entitled the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005 (the “FAIR Act”).

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 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 proposed legislation was voted out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 26, 2005. On February 14, 2006, the U.S. Senate failed to secure the votes required to waive a budget point of order that was raised against the proposed legislation. The proposed legislation has since been removed from the floor and recommitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The legislative fate of the FAIR Act remains uncertain, and Owens Corning is unable to predict 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 the Plan (or any other plan of reorganization), including in the event that the effective date of the Plan has not occurred prior to the enactment of the FAIR Act. 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 less than the amounts reserved for in Owens Corning’s financial statements.

- 68 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

OTHER MATTERS FILED IN THE USBC

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 supplement to the motion of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors was filed on May 28, 2004, and various filings in opposition to such supplemented motion were filed by the Debtors, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants. Further proceedings on this matter had been voluntarily continued by the movants on a monthly basis. On March 23, 2006, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors authorized the withdrawal of the motion.

On or about May 24, 2004, Credit Suisse First Boston, Kensington International Limited, Springfield Associates LLC and Angelo Gordon filed a motion in the USBC requesting the appointment of a Chapter 11 examiner to examine (i) allegations of improper conduct by management of the Debtors, (ii) alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by management of the Debtors resulting from the influence of the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants on the process of developing a plan and the tort estimation process, (iii) alleged connections between the asbestos plaintiffs’ interests, a Court appointed mediator, and the Debtors’ asbestos liability estimation firm, and (iv) other alleged improper conduct. Owens Corning, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants have each filed responsive pleadings to the motion. The USBC has continued further proceedings on the motion pending issuance of a final order on the motion (described in the preceding paragraph) requesting appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee. The Debtors believe that the motion requesting appointment of an examiner is without merit and intend to continue to vigorously oppose it in appropriate proceedings.

The Plan of Reorganization

As described above, on March 29, 2006, the Debtors, together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed the Plan and the related Disclosure Statement. The steering committee of holders of obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility supports the Plan pursuant to the terms of the letter, dated December 30, 2005, appended to the Disclosure Statement as Appendix K. In light of the Third Circuit’s reversal of the Substantive Consolidation Order described above, the current Plan is premised upon non-consolidation of the Debtors, including separate classification and treatment of the claims against and interests in each of the Debtors. In addition, 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 USBC has set July 10, 17 and 18, 2006 as hearing dates on the confirmation of the Plan. At this time, Owens Corning is unable to predict the outcome of the hearing on the confirmation of the Plan or the final terms of the Plan (or other plan of reorganization) as may ultimately be confirmed.

As set forth in the Plan and the Disclosure Statement, the Plan currently provides that, after the payment of secured and priority claims, the residual distributable value of Owens Corning will generally be allocated ratably in the form of cash and new common stock to holders of allowed general unsecured claims against Owens Corning (other than holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, which will receive the treatment described below), including asbestos claimants, bondholders, trade creditors and other general unsecured creditors. The percentage recovery and value of the payments ultimately made under the Plan to each class of creditors will depend upon a number of factors. Those factors, which are described in detail in the Disclosure Statement, include, among other things, the value of the

- 69 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

shares of new common stock and notes to be issued by Owens Corning, the amount of cash available for distribution, and the outcome of the voting on the Plan. As to Fibreboard, the Plan contemplates that the assets available to satisfy Fibreboard liabilities (which are primarily asbestos-related liabilities) will be limited to the assets of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and certain other specified assets.

As described in greater detail in the Plan and Disclosure Statement, if the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are deemed unimpaired, or are deemed to be impaired and the class of such holders accepts the Plan, (and the Plan is confirmed and becomes effective) then the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility will be paid cash in an aggregate amount equal to the amount of their allowed claims plus post-petition interest on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility), plus interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility. If the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are deemed to be impaired and the class of such holders rejects the Plan, then the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility will be paid cash and cash pay notes in an amount to be determined by the Bankruptcy Court. As previously disclosed, as of March 31, 2006, Owens Corning has recorded expenses of $801 million reflecting post-petition interest with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly) and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). However, this estimate is based on numerous factual and legal uncertainties, including the interpretation of contractual provisions concerning such interest and other fees, and Owens Corning reserves the right to object, if and as appropriate in its judgment, to the ultimate entitlements to such interest and other fees and to the amount of such interest and other fees in the Chapter 11 Cases (or other proceedings), subject to the terms and conditions of the Interim Unimpairment Order. Absent developments that alter Owens Corning’s view of the likelihood of amounts that may be paid under the Plan to holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, Owens Corning expects to continue to accrue interest on the Pre-Petition Credit Facility in future periods, to the extent required under applicable law, at a rate equal to the Base Rate plus 2%, applied on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly), and post-petition fees, including letter of credit fees and Facility Fees, plus accrued interest thereon calculated on a compounding basis (compounded quarterly). The Base Rate (as defined in the Pre-Petition Credit Facility) is a floating rate equal to the higher of (i) the prime commercial lending rate of Credit Suisse First Boston and (ii) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.50% per annum.

On April 7, 2006, upon motion of the agent for the holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (which motion was subsequently joined by certain of the Debtors and Non-Debtor Subsidiaries), the USBC issued the Interim Unimpairment Order providing among other things that, if claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are paid in full and in cash as provided in the Plan as modified, then (i) such claims are rendered unimpaired and the classes of such claims are conclusively presumed to have accepted the Plan and (ii) such claims shall be paid in full and all claims and remedies arising under or related to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, including any guarantees executed or delivered in connection therewith, shall be extinguished. The Interim Unimpairment Order provides that it will become a final order unless an objection is timely filed with the USBC, in which event a hearing to consider approval of the order on a final basis will be held on May 10, 2006.

As described above, the Plan (which is co-proposed by the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants) provides that Owens Corning asbestos claimants will receive a partial payment proportionately similar to other general unsecured creditors of Owens Corning. In order to estimate the amount of the current and future asbestos personal injury claims in the Chapter 11 Cases, a six-day claims estimation hearing was held before the District Court beginning January 13, 2005. In general, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility argued that the amount of the Company’s current and future asbestos liability should be set at an amount significantly lower than the amounts reserved for asbestos claims on the financial statements of the Debtors, and the

- 70 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants argued that such asbestos liability should be set at a significantly higher level. On March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. As a result of the District Court’s estimation, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $3.435 billion for the period ended March 31, 2005, so that its recorded reserve equaled the level of asbestos liability estimated by the District Court. Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens Corning, Owens Corning also increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million for the period ended March 31, 2005. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s estimation ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit.

Under the Plan, a trust, which is intended to qualify under section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “524(g) Trust”), will be created from which asbestos claimants will be paid. The Plan provides that a majority of the newly issued common stock of reorganized Owens Corning, as well as cash, the assets of the existing Fibreboard Settlement Trust (see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements) and specified other assets, will fund the 524(g) Trust. The 524(g) Trust will, through separate sub-accounts for Owens Corning and Fibreboard, assume all asbestos-related liability of Owens Corning, Fibreboard and the other entities set forth in the Plan and will, through those separate sub-accounts, make payments to claimants in accordance with the trust distribution procedures included as part of the Plan. The Plan contemplates that the assets of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and certain other specified assets will fund only the separate Fibreboard sub-account and, as a result, those amounts will not be available under the Plan to pay claims against Owens Corning. Conversely, only the assets in the Fibreboard sub-account will be available to pay claims against Fibreboard. 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, their respective subsidiaries, and certain of their affiliates, for the purpose of, directly or indirectly, collecting, recovering or receiving payment of, on, or with respect to any asbestos claims which will be subject to the 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 permanent injunction barring the assertion of asbestos-related claims or demands against the reorganized company and channeling those claims to an independent trust.

As previously noted, the Plan currently contemplates that most classes of pre-petition unsecured creditors of Owens Corning will be impaired. Therefore, the Plan 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.

In general, in light of the Third Circuit’s reversal of the Substantive Consolidation Order, intercompany claims are classified separately under the Plan but receive treatment similar to that of other unsecured claims. However, as described more fully in the Plan, holders of allowed intercompany claims do not receive distributions of new common stock and cash on account of such claims but, instead, are credited with value on account of such claims. In addition, the arrangements, transactions and relationships that gave rise to certain intercompany claims 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 any other plan

- 71 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

ultimately confirmed and on the respective assets, liabilities and results of operations of Owens Corning and its direct and indirect subsidiaries.

Although they have not filed Chapter 11 Cases at the present time, Owens Corning reserves the right to initiate Chapter 11 proceedings on behalf of three subsidiaries, IPM Inc., Vytec Corporation and Owens-Corning Fiberglas Sweden Inc., that issued guarantees with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, in the event Owens Corning deems it necessary to do so in order for such subsidiaries to be covered by the terms of the Plan in order to resolve such entities’ potential liability under such guarantees. The timing of any such filing would permit the inclusion of such entities as part of the Plan confirmation process.

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 Petition Date. 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.

Any disagreements raised by creditors with the terms of the Plan are expected to be handled through negotiation or litigation as part of the confirmation process. Owens Corning is unable to predict the timing or outcome of such negotiation or litigation.

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. In this respect, the Plan provides for certain “cramdown” provisions, whereby the Plan may be confirmed over the objections of one or more classes of unapproving creditors in the event that certain percentages in dollar amount and in number of specified classes of creditors accept the plan and vote in favor of it.

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). Generally, 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 $16.6 billion, alleging a right to payment from a Debtor were filed with the Bankruptcy Court in response to the General Bar Date. As to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, the claim total reflects only a single claim (in the amount of approximately $1.6 billion) although the holders have asserted this claim against Owens Corning and each of six other Debtors that issued a guarantee with respect to the facility. Owens Corning continues to investigate the filed 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 15,600 claims, totaling approximately $8.6 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, 2006, approximately 12,800 of the Objectionable Claims, totaling approximately $5.9 billion, had either been withdrawn by the claimants or

- 72 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court, and other of such claims had been reduced by the claimants by approximately $1.8 billion. 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 9,400 claims, totaling approximately $8.0 billion. As of March 31, 2006, approximately 1,600 of these claims, totaling approximately $0.5 billion, had either been withdrawn by the claimants, disallowed by the Bankruptcy Court, or otherwise resolved, and other of such claims had been reduced by the claimants by approximately $0.3 billion. The remaining claims consist of:

• Approximately 2,900 claims, totaling approximately $1.4 billion, associated with asbestos-related contribution, indemnity, reimbursement, or subrogation claims. Owens Corning will address all asbestos-related personal injury and wrongful death claims in the future as part of the Chapter 11 Cases. See Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information concerning asbestos-related liabilities.

• Approximately 100 claims, totaling approximately $0.6 billion, alleging asbestos-related property damage. Most of these claims were submitted with insufficient documentation to assess their validity. Owens Corning expects to vigorously defend any asserted asbestos-related property damage claims in the Bankruptcy Court. Based upon its historic experience in respect of asbestos-related property damage claims, Owens Corning does not anticipate significant liability from any such claims.

• Approximately 4,800 claims, totaling approximately $5.2 billion, alleging rights to payment for financing, environmental, trade debt and other matters (the “General Claims”). The Company has recorded approximately $3.5 billion in liabilities for these claims. Based upon the claims information submitted, the General Claims with the largest variance from the recorded amounts are: claims by the United States Department of Treasury, totaling approximately $534 million, in connection with taxes (see discussion regarding the tax claims and related settlement under the heading “Tax Claim” in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements); a contingent claim for approximately $458 million by the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation, as described more fully under the heading “PBGC Claim” in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements; a $275 million class action claim involving alleged problems with a specialty roofing product (see discussion of this claim and pending settlement under the heading “Specialty Roofing Claim” in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements); environmental claims totaling approximately $109 million; and claims for contract rejections, totaling approximately $95 million, of which approximately $28 million are protective claims covering contracts which have not been rejected by the Debtors as of March 31, 2006.

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 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

- 73 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

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 3,300 proofs of claim (in addition to claims described above under “General Bar Date”), totaling approximately $2.6 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. See Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information concerning asbestos-related liabilities.

As described above, on March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit. The Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard. In addition, the Memorandum and Order did not address whether a bar date would be established for asbestos-related personal injury or wrongful death claims as to either Owens Corning or Fibreboard.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Our disclosure and analysis in this report, including Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements present our current forecasts and estimates of future events. These statements do not strictly relate to historical or current results and can be identified by words such as “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “likely”, “may”, “plan”, “project”, “strategy”, “will”, and other terms of similar meaning or import in connection with any discussion of future operating, financial or other performance. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the statements. Some of the important factors that may influence possible differences include:

• competitive factors

• pricing pressures

• availability and cost of energy and materials

• construction activity

• interest rate movements

• issues involving implementation of new business systems

- 74 -

ITEM 2    MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (continued)

• achievement of expected cost reductions and/or productivity improvements

• developments in and the outcome of the Chapter 11 proceedings described in this report

• general economic and political conditions, including new legislation

• foreign exchange fluctuations

• the success of research and development activities

• difficulties or delays in manufacturing

• labor disputes

In addition to the list above, in connection with the Chapter 11 proceedings and the development of a plan or plans of reorganization, we anticipate that additional restructuring and similar charges, including asset impairment and wind-up costs, may be identified and recorded in future periods. Such charges could be material to the consolidated financial position and results of operations of the Company in any given period. In addition, Owens Corning notes that certain of our businesses are operated wholly or in part through subsidiary entities. To the extent that any restructuring or similar charges impact such subsidiary entities, the financial condition or results of operations of such subsidiary entities, and potentially other entities holding obligations of such subsidiary entities, may be adversely impacted, perhaps materially.

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Please refer to the Company’s 2005 annual report on Form 10-K for the Company’s quantitative and qualitative disclosures about market risk.

ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

The Company maintains (a) disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)), and (b) internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act).

The Company’s management, with the participation of the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

There have not been any changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting during the fiscal quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.

- 75 -

PART II

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Contingent Liabilities and Other Matters

Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, entitled “Contingent Liabilities and Other Matters”, is incorporated here by reference.

Chapter 11 Proceedings

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”):

CDC Corporation	Integrex Testing Systems LLC
Engineered Yarns America, Inc.	HOMExperts LLC
Falcon Foam Corporation	Jefferson Holdings, Inc.
Integrex	Owens-Corning Fiberglas Technology, Inc.
Fibreboard Corporation	Owens Corning HT, Inc.
Exterior Systems, Inc.	Owens-Corning Overseas Holdings, Inc.
Integrex Ventures LLC	Owens Corning Remodeling Systems, LLC
Integrex Professional Services LLC	Soltech, Inc.
Integrex Supply Chain Solutions LLC

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”).

In late 2001, all of 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 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”).

On May 27, 2004, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (the “Third Circuit”) assigned Judge John P. Fullam of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, to replace Judge Wolin in the Chapter 11 Cases. In addition, the Third Circuit assigned other judges to sit on other of the cases that had previously been consolidated under the terms of the Administrative Consolidation, effectively terminating the consolidation.

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

- 76 -

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (continued)

leases, and other parties to contracts or leases that are rejected may assert rejection damages claims as permitted by the Bankruptcy Code.

Two creditors’ committees, one representing asbestos claimants (the “Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants”) and the other representing unsecured creditors (the “Official Committee of 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.

Owens Corning anticipates that substantially all liabilities of the Debtors as of the Petition Date will be resolved under the Plan (as defined below) or some other Chapter 11 plan of reorganization to be voted on in the Chapter 11 Cases in accordance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. 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 (the “Fourth Amended Plan”) in the USBC on October 24, 2003.

On December 31, 2005, the Debtors, together with the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, filed a proposed fifth amended joint plan of reorganization in the USBC along with a related disclosure statement and, on March 29, 2006, filed certain proposed modifications of such plan and such disclosure statement (as so amended through such modified fifth amendment and such modified disclosure statement, such documents are referred to herein as the “Plan” and the “Disclosure Statement”, respectively). The steering committee of holders of obligations under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility supports the Plan pursuant to the terms of the letter, dated December 30, 2005, appended as Appendix K to the Disclosure Statement. Certain other members of the major non-asbestos creditor groups have indicated that they may oppose the Plan. There can be no assurance that the Plan or any other plan supported by Owens Corning and less than all of the major creditor groups will be ultimately confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court and consummated. The Debtors have the exclusive right to file and solicit acceptances to a plan of reorganization through July 31, 2006. The Plan (and any other plan of reorganization) is subject to confirmation by the Bankruptcy Court.

The Plan has been significantly amended from the Fourth Amended Plan. In particular, the Plan is no longer premised upon the substantive consolidation of Owens Corning and certain of its direct and indirect subsidiaries 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. On October 5, 2004, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order Concerning Substantive Consolidation (the “Substantive Consolidation Order”). In the Substantive Consolidation Order, the District Court granted the Debtors’ motion for substantive consolidation. On October 13, 2004, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility filed an appeal of the Substantive Consolidation Order with the Third Circuit. On August 15, 2005, the Third Circuit reversed the Substantive Consolidation Order. The Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos personal injury claimants and certain designated members of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors subsequently filed petitions for rehearing en banc of the Third Circuit’s decision. Those petitions for rehearing were denied by the Third Circuit on September 28, 2005. The Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos personal injury claimants and certain bondholders have filed petitions for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court with respect to the Third Circuit’s decision on the Substantive Consolidation Order.

- 77 -

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (continued)

On April 7, 2006, upon motion of the agent for the holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility (which motion was subsequently joined by certain of the Debtors and Non-Debtor subsidiaries), the USBC issued an interim order (the “Interim Unimpairment Order”) providing among other things that, if claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility are paid in full and in cash as provided in the Plan as modified, then (i) such claims are rendered unimpaired and the classes of such claims are conclusively presumed to have accepted the Plan and (ii) such claims shall be paid in full and all claims and remedies arising under or related to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, including any guarantees executed or delivered in connection therewith, shall be extinguished. The Interim Unimpairment Order provides that it will become a final order unless an objection is timely filed with the USBC, in which event a hearing to consider approval of the order on a final basis will be held on May 10, 2006.

A six-day claims estimation hearing was held before the District Court beginning January 13, 2005 to establish the amount of Owens Corning’s and Fibreboard’s current and future asbestos liability in the Chapter 11 Cases. In general, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility argued that the amount of such asbestos liability should be set at an amount significantly lower than the amounts reserved for asbestos claims on the financial statements of the Debtors, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants argued that such asbestos liability should be set at a significantly higher level. On March 31, 2005, the District Court issued a Memorandum and Order estimating the total amount of contingent and unliquidated claims against Owens Corning for personal injury or death caused by exposure to asbestos (including pending claims, future claims and contract claims) at $7 billion. After the District Court denied their motion for reconsideration, the holders of the debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility, as well as certain other parties, appealed the District Court’s ruling to the Third Circuit. Briefing on the appeals has been completed under the schedule established by the Third Circuit. As a result of the District Court’s estimation, Owens Corning increased its reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $3.435 billion for the period ended March 31, 2005, so that its recorded reserve equaled the level of asbestos liability estimated by the District Court (see Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Although the District Court’s Memorandum and Order did not specifically address the potential asbestos-related liability of Fibreboard, based upon the analysis that the District Court had followed in establishing estimated asbestos liability for Owens Corning, Owens Corning also increased Fibreboard’s recorded reserve for potential asbestos-related liability by $907 million for the period ended March 31, 2005.

The Plan currently provides that, after the payment of secured and priority claims, the residual distributable value of Owens Corning will generally be allocated ratably in the form of cash and new common stock to holders of allowed general unsecured claims against Owens Corning (other than holders of claims under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility), including asbestos claimants, bondholders, trade creditors and other general unsecured creditors. The percentage recovery and value of the payments ultimately made under the Plan to each class of creditors will depend upon a number of factors. Those factors, which are described in detail in the Disclosure Statement, include, among other things, the value of the shares of new common stock and notes to be issued by Owens Corning, the amount of cash available for distribution, and the outcome of the voting on the Plan. As to Fibreboard, the Plan contemplates that the assets available to satisfy Fibreboard liabilities (which are primarily asbestos-related liabilities) will be limited to the assets of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and certain other specified assets.

Under the Plan, a trust, which is intended to qualify under section 524(g) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “524(g) Trust”), will be created from which asbestos claimants will be paid. The Plan provides that a majority of the newly issued common stock of reorganized Owens Corning, as well as cash, the assets of the existing Fibreboard Settlement Trust (see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements) and specified other assets, will fund the 524(g) Trust. The 524(g) Trust will, through separate sub-accounts for Owens Corning and Fibreboard, assume all asbestos-related liability of Owens Corning, Fibreboard

- 78 -

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (continued)

and the other entities set forth in the Plan and will, through those separate sub-accounts, make payments to claimants in accordance with the trust distribution procedures included as part of the Plan. The Plan contemplates that the assets of the Fibreboard Settlement Trust and certain other specified assets will fund only the separate Fibreboard sub-account and, as a result, those amounts will not be available under the Plan to pay claims against Owens Corning. Conversely, only the assets in the Fibreboard sub-account will be available to pay claims against Fibreboard. 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, their respective subsidiaries, and certain of their affiliates, for the purpose of, directly or indirectly, collecting, recovering or receiving payment of, on, or with respect to any asbestos claims which will be subject to the 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 permanent injunction barring the assertion of asbestos-related claims or demands against the reorganized company and channeling those claims to an independent trust.

As previously noted, the Plan currently contemplates that most classes of pre-petition unsecured creditors of Owens Corning will be impaired. Therefore, the Plan 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.

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 supplement to the motion of the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors was filed on May 28, 2004, and various filings in opposition to such supplemented motion were filed by the Debtors, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants. Further proceedings on this matter had been voluntarily continued by the movants on a monthly basis. On March 23, 2006, the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors authorized the withdrawal of the motion.

On or about May 24, 2004, Credit Suisse First Boston, Kensington International Limited, Springfield Associates LLC and Angelo Gordon filed a motion in the USBC requesting the appointment of a Chapter 11 examiner to examine (i) allegations of improper conduct by management of the Debtors, (ii) alleged breaches of fiduciary duty by management of the Debtors resulting from the influence of the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants on the process of developing a plan and the tort estimation process, (iii) alleged connections between the asbestos plaintiffs’ interests, a Court appointed mediator, and the Debtors’ asbestos liability estimation firm, and (iv) other alleged improper conduct. Owens Corning, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, and the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants have each filed responsive pleadings to the motion. The USBC has continued further proceedings on the motion pending issuance of a final order on the motion (described in the preceding paragraph) requesting appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee. The Debtors believe that the motion requesting appointment of an examiner is without merit and intend to continue to vigorously oppose it in appropriate proceedings.

On or about December 20, 2005, an ad hoc committee of preferred and equity security holders filed a motion in the USBC seeking appointment of an official preferred and equity security holders committee. Owens Corning, the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants, the Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants, the United States Trustee and the agent to the holders of debt under the Pre-Petition Credit Facility each filed objections to the motion. At a hearing on January 30, 2006, the USBC denied the motion.

- 79 -

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (continued)

On or about December 20, 2005, an ad hoc committee of preferred and equity security holders filed a motion in the USBC seeking (i) confirmation that Owens Corning shareholders are entitled to prosecute an action in the Delaware Chancery Court to compel a shareholders meeting, or (ii) in the alternative, relief from the automatic stay to prosecute such action. Owens Corning objected to the motion, and the Legal Representative for the class of future asbestos claimants joined in such objection. At a hearing on January 30, 2006, the USBC refused to grant the relief requested in the motion and continued the motion indefinitely, pending further developments with respect to the FAIR Act. The USBC has reconfirmed its continuance at certain subsequent hearings for reasons stated on the record. On February 28, 2006, the ad hoc committee of preferred equity security holders filed a petition for relief in the nature of mandamus in the District Court. On March 23, 2006, the District Court denied the petition. On April 24, 2006, the ad hoc committee filed notice of appeal of the District Court’s decision to the Third Circuit.

Environmental Proceedings Involving Potential Monetary Sanctions

Securities and Exchange Commission rules require us to describe certain governmental proceedings arising under federal, state or local environmental provisions unless we conclude that the proceeding will result in monetary sanctions of less than $100,000. The following proceeding is reported in response to this requirement. Based on the information presently available to us, however, we believe that the costs which may be associated with this matter will not have a materially adverse effect on Owens Corning’s financial position or results of operations.

In March 2006, it came to Owens Corning’s attention that its roofing and asphalt manufacturing plant in Irving, Texas had failed to timely renew its air discharge permit as required by the administrative rules of the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ). The Company immediately disclosed this discovery to the TCEQ and began the permit renewal process. In a letter dated April 11, 2006, the Company was informed by the TCEQ that the TCEQ was initiating an enforcement action against the Company for the failure to timely renew the permit. No potential or proposed penalty amount was included in the enforcement notice.

Notice Procedures and Transfer Restrictions on Trading of Equity Securities

On February 23, 2005, the Debtors filed a motion in the USBC for the entry of interim and final orders pursuant to Sections 105(a), 362(a)(3) and 541 of the Bankruptcy Code to enable the Debtors to avoid limitations on the use of their tax net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes by imposing certain notice procedures and transfer restrictions on the trading of equity securities of Owens Corning. The USBC granted the requested interim order (the “Interim Equity Order”) on March 1, 2005, and granted the requested final order (the “Final Equity Order”) on April 15, 2005.

In general, the Final Equity Order applies to any person or entity that, directly or indirectly, beneficially owns (or would beneficially own as a result of a proposed transfer) at least 4.75% of the outstanding equity securities of Owens Corning. Under the Final Equity Order, all persons or entities who at the time of the Final Equity Order or in the future beneficially own at least 4.75% of the outstanding equity securities of Owens Corning (each a “Substantial Equityholder”) is required to file with the USBC and serve upon the Debtors and the Debtors’ counsel a notice of such status. In addition, the Final Equity Order provides that a person or entity that would become a Substantial Equityholder by reason of a proposed acquisition of equity securities of Owens Corning is also required to comply with the notice and service provisions before effecting that transaction. The Final Equity Order gives the Debtors the right to object in the USBC to certain acquisitions or sales of Owens Corning common stock if the acquisition or sale would pose a material risk of adversely affecting the Debtors’ ability to utilize such tax attributes.

- 80 -

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (continued)

Under the Final Equity Order, prior to any proposed acquisition of equity securities that would result in an increase in the amount of Owens Corning equity securities owned by a Substantial Equityholder, or that would result in a person or entity becoming a Substantial Equityholder, such person, entity or Substantial Equityholder is required to file with the USBC, and serve on the Debtors and the Debtors’ counsel, a Notice of Intent to Purchase, Acquire or Otherwise Accumulate an Equity Security. In addition, prior to effecting any disposition of Owens Corning equity securities that would result in a decrease in the amount of Owens Corning equity securities beneficially owned by a Substantial Equityholder, such Substantial Equityholder is required to file with the USBC, and serve on the Debtors and the Debtors’ counsel, a Notice of Intent to Sell, Trade or Otherwise Transfer Equity Securities.

Any purchase, sale or other transfer of Owens Corning equity securities in violation of the restrictions of the Final Equity Order would be null and void ab initio as an act in violation of the Final Equity Order and would therefore confer no rights on a proposed transferee.

A copy of the Interim Equity Order is filed as Exhibit 99.1 to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K filed March 3, 2005, and is incorporated here by reference. A copy of the Final Equity Order is filed as Exhibit 99.1 to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K filed April 19, 2005, and is incorporated here by reference.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

There have been no material changes to the risk factors as disclosed in the Company’s 2005 annual report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS

The following table provides information about Owens Corning’s purchases of its common stock during each month during the quarterly period covered by this report:

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities*

Period	Total Number of Shares (or Units) Purchased**	Average Price Paid per Share (or Unit)**		Total Number of Shares (or Units) Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs*	Maximum Number (or Approximate Dollar Value) of Shares (or Units) that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs*
January 1-31, 2006	—	$	—	—	$	—
February 1-28, 2006	4,316		4.56	—		—
March 1-31, 2006	—		—	—		—
Total	4,316	$	4.56	—	$	—

* During the quarter ended March 31, 2006, Owens Corning did not have a publicly announced program for repurchase of shares of its common stock and did not repurchase any of its common stock in open-market transactions outside of such a program.

- 81 -

** This column reflects the surrender to Owens Corning of shares of common stock to satisfy tax withholding obligations in connection with the vesting of restricted stock granted to employees prior to the Petition Date.

As a consequence of the Filing and the impact of certain provisions of the Company’s DIP Financing and pursuant to a cash management order entered by the Bankruptcy Court, the Company and its subsidiaries are subject to certain restrictions on their ability to pay dividends and to transfer cash and other assets to each other and to their affiliates. See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES

Substantially all of the Company’s pre-petition debt is now in default due to the Filing. See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. As described in Note 1, the 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 $1.5 billion of other outstanding debt. As required by Statement of Position (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 described in Note 1, the Consolidated Financial Statements reflect expenses with respect to the Pre-Petition Credit Facility in the amount of $801 million relating to post-petition interest and certain other post-petition fees for the period from the Petition Date through March 31, 2006. Since the Company is in default on the debt underlying these amounts, the accrual is recorded as a current liability on the Consolidated Financial Statements. The Consolidated Financial Statements present pre-petition debt of Non-Debtor Subsidiaries that is in default due to the Filing, in the amount of approximately $7 million, as current on the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2006.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

No matter was submitted to a vote of security holders during the quarter ended March 31, 2006.

ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION

No information is reported under this Item.

ITEM 6. EXHIBITS

See Exhibit Index below, which is incorporated here by reference.

- 82 -

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Owens Corning has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

	OWENS CORNING
	Registrant
Date: May 2, 2006	By:	/s/ Michael H. Thaman
		Michael H. Thaman
		Chairman of the Board and
		Chief Financial Officer
		(as duly authorized officer)
Date: May 2, 2006	By:	/s/ Ronald Ranallo
		Ronald Ranallo
		Vice President and Corporate
		Controller

- 83 -

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit Number	Document Description
(2)	Plan of Acquisition, Reorganization, Arrangement, Liquidation or Succession.
	Revised Fifth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization for Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on March 29, 2006 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed March 31, 2006).
	Fourth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on October 24, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed October 27, 2003).
	Third Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on August 8, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed August 8, 2003).
	Second Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on May 23, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed May 27, 2003).
	Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on March 28, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed March 28, 2003).
	Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on January 17, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed January 17, 2003).
(3)	Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws.
	(i) Certificate of Incorporation of Owens Corning, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (3) to Owens Corning’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q (File No. 1-3660) for the quarter ended March 31, 1997).
	(ii) By-Laws of Owens Corning, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (3) to Owens Corning’s annual report on Form 10-K (File No. 1-3660) for the year ended December 31, 1999).

- 84 -

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit Number	Document Description
(4)	Instruments Defining the Rights of Security Holders, Including Indentures.
	Revised Fifth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization for Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on March 29, 2006 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed March 31, 2006).
	Memorandum and Order dated March 31, 2005 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (4) to Owens Corning’s quarterly report on Form 10-Q (File No. 1-3660) for the quarter ended March 31, 2005).
	Final Order Pursuant to Sections 105(a), 362(a)(3) and 541 of the Bankruptcy Code (A) Limiting Certain Transfers of Equity Securities of the Debtors and (B) Approving Related Notice Procedures (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed April 19, 2005).
	Interim Order Pursuant to Sections 105(a), 362(a)(3) and 541 of the Bankruptcy Code (A) Limiting Certain Transfers of Equity Securities of the Debtors and (B) Approving Related Notice Procedures (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to Owens Corning’s current report of Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed March 3, 2005).
	Fourth Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on October 24, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed October 27, 2003).
	Third Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on August 8, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed August 8, 2003).
	Second Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on May 23, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed May 27, 2003).
	Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on March 28, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed March 28, 2003).
	Joint Plan of Reorganization of Owens Corning and Its Affiliated Debtors and Debtors-In-Possession, filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware on January 17, 2003 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (2) to Owens Corning’s current report on Form 8-K (File No. 1-3660), filed January 17, 2003).

- 85 -

(10)	Material Contracts
	The following documents are incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (10) to Owens Corning’s annual report on Form 10-K (File No. 1-3660) for the year ended December 31, 2005:
	- Amended and restated Key Management Severance Agreement with David T. Brown.
	- Amended and restated Key Management Severance Agreement with Michael H. Thaman.
	- Owens Corning Key Employee Retention Plan (2006)
(31)	Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certifications
	Certification of Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) (filed herewith).
	Certification of Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) (filed herewith).
(32)	Section 1350 Certifications
	Certification of Chief Executive Officer (principal executive officer) (filed herewith).
	Certification of Chief Financial Officer (principal financial officer) (filed herewith).