A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Primary Credit Analyst: Joseph J Pezzimenti, New York (1) 212-438-2038; joseph.pezzimenti@standardandpoors.com Secondary Contacts: Mario Angastiniotis, Toronto (1) 416-507-2520; mario.angastiniotis@standardandpoors.com Olli Rouhiainen, London (44) 20-7176-3769; olli.rouhiainen@standardandpoors.com Thomas Jacquot, Sydney (61) 2-9255-9872; thomas.jacquot@standardandpoors.com Veronica Yanez, Mexico City (52) 55-5081-4485; veronica.yanez@standardandpoors.com

Table Of Contents
U.S. Airport Ratings Will Likely Maintain Their Altitude, Despite Some Turbulence Canadian Airport Authorities Are Performing In Line With Expectations After The Turbulence, Rated European Airports Report Smooth Flying Growth At Asia-Pacific Airports Is Likely To Continue, But At Levels Closer To Long-Term Historical Averages Latin American Airports Are Performing As Forecast Overall, We Are Forecasting Credit Stability Related Criteria And Research

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 1
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014
Across the world, air travel demand, leverage, and capital investments are key factors Standard & Poor's Ratings Services considers when analyzing airports and related infrastructure. The relative importance of each depends on other factors such as the condition of the local economy the airport serves, regulation, the airport's competitive environment, its management, and the ownership structure. In general, improving economic conditions globally supported our ratings across the sector, and we expect this to continue in 2014. This was especially true in Europe, where demand rebounded following the continent's economic turmoil. Airport results in Australia and New Zealand benefited from strong competition between airlines, but with that abating, we expect airports there to return to regular growth levels. Elsewhere, most airports reported results that were generally in line with our expectations and consistent for the ratings. We expect economic growth in 2014 will support modest passenger traffic growth for most airport operators, leading to higher earnings and generally stable financial results. This should come despite increasing leverage to fund capital programs. However, some airports might face credit stress if demand is lower than expected or if they have to deal with external unexpected shocks (such as health scares that lead to limited travel, natural disasters, political unrest, or security concerns). In these cases, airports' ability and willingness to adjust rates, operating expenses, capital spending, and (in some cases) shareholders' distributions will be critical for them to maintain the ratings we have on them. Overview We expect credit stability to continue for most airport operators around the world. Airports, particularly those in Europe, have rebounded from the recession and its aftershocks. Overall, we believe credit quality might take a hit for airports experiencing fluctuating or declining demand and increasing leverage that do not adjust rates, expenses, and capital spending to maintain or improve financial margins and liquidity.

U.S. Airport Ratings Will Likely Maintain Their Altitude, Despite Some Turbulence
In our opinion, U.S. airport credit quality has been generally strong and relatively stable, and we don't think this will change. Standard & Poor's has underlying ratings on 72 airport credits (see tables 1 and 3). From Sept. 1, 2012, through Jan. 1, 2014, positive rating actions outnumbered negative ones 12 to four (see table 2). Of the 94 general airport revenue bond ratings (see table 1) we maintain, 97% have a stable outlook, 2% have a negative one, and 1% have a positive one. All are investment-grade ('BBB-' or higher). Approximately 14% are in the 'AA' category, 72% are in the 'A' category, and the remaining 14% are in the 'BBB' category. Upgrades and downgrades that did occur were modest, just one notch (see tables 2 and 4). The positive rating actions,

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 2
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

in most cases, were due to one or more of the following: strong historical coverage that we expect will continue, strong or improving demand, little or no additional debt plans, and lower leverage than we expected. We took negative rating actions for several reasons. These included continually declining or fluctuating demand due to competition or high air carrier concentration, declining debt service coverage, below-average liquidity, or high leverage. Overall U.S. demand continues to recover, but it remains lower than it was before the Great Recession. After falling in 2008 and 2009, total systemwide enplanements have gradually increased from 2010-2012, and we expect this to continue. Through October 2013, enplanement growth for the year was a modest 1%, matching the 2012 annual growth rate, but still 2% below prerecession 2007 levels, which were at an all-time peak. Reflecting an economy that is still recovering from the recession, domestic enplanements, which make up the bulk of systemwide traffic, were 5% below 2007 levels through October 2013. Strong growth in the much smaller international traffic segment has helped to partially offset this. International enplanements, which increased 3.7%-5.5% per year from 2010-2012 and 4% through October 2013, were 14% above 2007 levels. Based on what we forecast for the U.S. economy as a whole, we expect the recovery in overall demand to continue. Our economic forecast for the U.S. assumes 2.8% GDP growth in 2014, like that in 2012 and up from the 1.9% estimated GDP growth for 2013. (For more information see "Economic Research: U.S. Forecast Update: Ringing In An Improving New Year," published Jan. 3, 2014, on RatingsDirect.) Still, we believe the credit quality of some U.S. airports such as small and medium-hub airports could be tested, depending on economic conditions, fuel prices, airline strategies, limited or unpredictable federal support, and airline consolidation. Airports that are experiencing fluctuating or declining demand and increasing leverage that we believe are unwilling or unable to adjust rates, expenses, and capital spending to maintain or improve debt service coverage and liquidity might be more at risk. In general, we expect large hub airports will fare better because of the size of their markets, their importance to the national system, and their strategic importance to some of the country's largest airlines.

Canadian Airport Authorities Are Performing In Line With Expectations

Canadian airport authorities (CAAs) that Standard & Poor's rates performed in line with our base-case expectations in 2013 and we estimate that overall had slower growth in 2013 of about 2% on average. Although this is significantly slower than the average growth of 4.1% in 2012, it is in line with our base-case scenario, which assumed slow economic growth in Canada through 2013. Growth in passenger travel were mostly due to continued gains in the domestic and transborder passenger segments. The international passenger segment for most Canadian CAAs that we rate pulled back in 2013, reflecting generally softer conditions in international passenger travel. We rate six of the eight largest CAAs, which account for more than 70% of overall passenger traffic. We believe that CAAs have been very resilient in weathering the risks to their financial risk profiles from slower economic activity. Although the Canadian economy has continued to grow in 2013, albeit more slowly, we believe CAAs remain at risk from a further economic slowdown in the first half of 2014, reflecting the global economy's continued sluggish performance. If passenger traffic declines significantly, we believe airports that rely more on interconnecting traffic and have a larger international focus, such as the Greater Toronto Airports Authority, will be more at risk than those with a strong origin-and-destination focus, such as the Halifax International Airport Authority,

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 3
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

where the airport is either the starting or ending point of the traveler's journey. Also, airports with regional economies that rely on the natural resource sector, such as the Edmonton Regional Airports Authority, will be at higher risk of bigger passenger declines. Nevertheless, we expect CAAs to mitigate any pressure on their financial profiles in 2014, allowing credit quality to remain intact, in most cases, given the authorities' full rate-setting autonomy, protected monopolies, and previous success navigating through volatile conditions. An inability to conserve cash, postpone capital projects, and raise aeronautical fees could lead us to reevaluate some ratings, especially if operating conditions worsen.

After The Turbulence, Rated European Airports Report Smooth Flying

Traffic performance at rated European airports was above our base-case forecast in 2013 as most markets improved, although the 10 airports we rate are largely in the stronger European economies. We have seen passenger traffic growth in all but one of our rated airports, with the average being about 2% in Western Europe and 11% in Russia. Even Italy's Aeroporti di Roma, the only airport with declining passenger volumes, outperformed our base-case forecast in 2013. This, combined with material tariff increases, is likely to have led to a significant profit improvement in 2013. This assumes that there are no material disruptions to the operations of Alitalia -- Italy's main carrier, which has been facing financial difficulties for some time. We upgraded two airport operators in Europe, Aeroporti di Roma and N.V. Luchthaven Schiphol, mainly because of improving profitability and prudent debt management. We took a negative rating action on Aeroports de Paris, which operates Paris-Charles de Gaulle and Paris-Orly airports, as a direct result of a downgrade to France. In addition, we assigned ratings to Avinor S.A. (the Norwegian state owned airport and air navigation services provider), DME Ltd. (the operator of Moscow-Domododevo airport), and OAO Khabarovsky Airport (the operator of Khabarovsk-Novy airport in the Russia's far east). We believe that traffic growth in 2014 will continue to be healthy, with the rated airports in Western Europe on average reporting passenger volume growth of about 2%. Supporting this is our economic outlook for Europe, which sees improvement throughout the year (for more information, see "These Green Shoots Will Need A Lot Of Watering," published Dec. 12, 2013). We expect passenger growth in rated Russian airports to be in the high single-digits, reflecting higher-than-average GDP growth. Our base case also forecasts a material increase in investments across rated European airports as they get more comfortable with passenger volume forecasts, which directly affect investment plans. We expect capital expenditures in 2013 and 2014 to be higher than in 2012 at a majority of our rated airports, mainly because of investments to increase capacity and reduce connection times. Airport growth in Europe could be slower than our base-case forecast should our alternative economic scenario for the European economies unfold. In this scenario, we expect to see average passenger volumes across the rated airports to either be flat or fall slightly in 2014. Some airports could face bigger shocks if major carriers cease operations. For example, Alitalia, Aeroporti di Roma's main carrier, continues to look for further funds. However, for now, we believe the downside economic scenario is unlikely to threaten the ratings on the rated airports because among them, only one has a negative outlook.

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 4
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Growth At Asia-Pacific Airports Is Likely To Continue, But At Levels Closer To Long-Term Historical Averages
Airports in the Asia-Pacific region have performed marginally better than we expected, thanks to strong domestic growth in Australia and New Zealand and recovery in Japanese demand following the March 2011 earthquake. Starting in late 2012, renewed competition between the two major airlines in Australia brought more capacity to the market, benefiting domestic growth. Since then, competitive tensions have softened, and growth is slowly returning to historical averages. Although this intense domestic competition was a factor in our recent downgrade of Qantas Airways Ltd., we do not believe the rating action represents increased immediate risk for the sector in Australia, which remains more exposed to domestic and regional growth. The same phenomenon is happening in New Zealand, albeit with a 6-12 month lag, and we believe the current domestic growth rates of 6%-8% will fall gradually. Although a material slowdown of regional economies would negatively affect passenger levels in the Asia-Pacific region, we believe that there is limited risk that government policies would materially affect the sector's performance in the next year. For example, we think the upcoming increase in the consumer tax in Japan in April 2014 could affect discretionary spending, and by extension outbound tourism in the country. But this does not take into account any policies the Japanese government might use to boost business and consumer confidence. Even in the low likelihood of Japanese tourism traffic decreasing, airports in the region with exposure to the Japanese market have seen continued strong growth from the rest of the area, especially from countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, and India. At this stage, we do not believe that the tax increase would have an immediate impact on inbound traffic to Japan.

Latin American Airports Are Performing As Forecast

Latin America air traffic continued to increase in 2013, buoyed by solid trade growth, an increase in tourism, and higher business-related travels. Although Brazil might not be growing as quickly as in recent years, we believe it remains a priority growth market given the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Summer Olympics. In Panama, Tocumen airport's performance has mirrored the country economy's sound growth, with significantly higher tourism and the expansion of Copa airline routes within the region benefiting the operator. We believe Peru's economy will continue increasing in the next few years, with increasing interest as a tourism destination, which will positively affect Jorge Chavez Lima International Airport traffic growth. We believe the airport will continue to be a strategic hub, allowing its operating performance to remain solid in the next two to three years. Although international traffic in Mexico's airports hasn't fully recovered from its struggles with security concerns, we continue to believe traffic could increase, mainly due to airlines' investments plans to increase their fleets. On the other hand, total passengers for Aeropuertos Dominicanos Siglo XXI, which services the Dominican Republic, decreased in 2013 as a result of capacity reductions on some routes and higher ticket prices. In Argentina, although Aeropuertos Argentina 2000 S.A. showed an increase on its consolidated revenues from higher traffic levels and aeronautical revenues, its results continue to reflect the company's exposure to Argentina, and our

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 5
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

rating on it follows that on the sovereign.

Overall, We Are Forecasting Credit Stability

For the most part, Standard & Poor's expects the airport industry's credit quality to remain stable for the next two years. But that isn't universal, nor is it a given. We also believe some airports might face reduced financial flexibility from increased leverage, lower demand from a weak economic recovery, more intense competition, higher fuel prices, and airline service changes and pricing strategies. Airports that are unable or unwilling to adjust rates, expenses, and capital spending to protect their financial margins and liquidity could be at risk of negative rating actions.
Table 1

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Ratings

As of Jan. 1, 2014 Long-term rating BBB+ A+ A (second lien) A BBB+ AAA-

Obligor Albany International Airport Albuquerque International Sunport Albuquerque International Sunport Austin Bergstrom International Airport Bishop International Airport Boston Logan International Airport Bradley International Airport

Issuer Albany County Airport Authority Albuquerque Department of Aviation Albuquerque International Sunport Austin Bishop International Airport Authority Massachusetts Port Authority Connecticut Department of Transportation (Bureau of Aviation and Ports) Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Houston Department of Aviation Houston Department of Aviation Charleston County Airport District Charleston County Airport District Charlotte Aviation Department Chicago Department of Aviation Chicago Department of Aviation Chicago Department of Aviation

State New York New Mexico New Mexico Texas Michigan Massachusetts Connecticut

Outlook Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable

Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority Bush Intercontinental Airport and Hobby Airport Bush Intercontinental Airport and Hobby Airport Charleston County Airport Charleston County Airport Charlotte/Douglas International Airport Chicago Midway International Airport Chicago Midway International Airport Chicago O'Hare International Airport

California Texas Texas South Carolina South Carolina North Carolina Illinois Illinois Illinois Kentucky Ohio Colorado Texas Ohio Colorado Colorado

A+ AAA (second lien) A+ A (second lien) A+ A A- (second lien) AAABBB+ A+ AA+ A (second lien)

Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Negative Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable

Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International Airport Kenton County Airport Board Cleveland Hopkins Intl Arpt Colorado Springs Airport Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport Dayton International Airport Denver International Airport Denver International Airport Cleveland Department of Port Control Colorado Springs Dallas-Fort Worth Airport Board Dayton Denver Department of Aviation Denver Department of Aviation

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 6
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 1

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Ratings (cont.)

Des Moines International Airport Detroit Metro Wayne County Airport Detroit Metro Wayne County Airport El Paso International Airport Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport Fresno Yosemite International Airport Guam International Airport Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport Honolulu International Airport Honolulu International Airport Indianapolis International Airport Jacksonville Aviation Authority John Wayne Airport Kansas City International Airport Kansas City International Airport Lambert-St. Louis International Airport Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport Little Rock National Airport Los Angeles International Airport Los Angeles International Airport Louisville International Airport Manchester Boston Regional Airport Memphis International Airport Metropolitan Knoxville Airport Authority Miami International Airport Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport Mobile Airport Authority Myrtle Beach International Airport Nashville International Airport New Orleans International Airport Okaloosa County Airport System Omaha Airport Authority Ontario International Airport Des Moines International Airport Wayne County Airport Authority Wayne County Airport Authority El Paso Broward County Department of Aviation Fresno Guam Airport Authority Atlanta Department of Aviation Atlanta Department of Aviation Hawaii Department of Transportation (Hawaii Airport System) Hawaii Department of Transportation (Hawaii Airport System) Indianapolis Airport Authority Jacksonville Aviation Authority Orange County Kansas City International Airport Kansas City International Airport St. Louis Clark County Department of Aviation Clark County Department of Aviation Clark County Department of Aviation Little Rock Los Angeles Department of Aviation Los Angeles Department of Aviation Louisville Regional Airport Authority Manchester Iowa Michigan Michigan Texas Florida California Guam Georgia Georgia Hawaii Hawaii Indiana Florida California Missouri Missouri Missouri Nevada Nevada Nevada Arkansas California California Kentucky New Hampshire A A A- (second lien) A+ A+ BBB BBB A+ A+ (second lien) A A- (second lien) A A AAA+ A (second lien) AAAA+ (second lien) A (third lien) A AA AA- (second lien) A+ BBB+ AAA AAA (second lien) BBB AA ABBB+ AAAStable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable

Memphis-Shelby County Airport Authority Tennessee Sevier County Public Buidling Authority Dade County Aviation Department Minneapolis-St. Paul Metro Airports Commission Minneapolis-St. Paul Metro Airports Commission Mobile Airport Authority Horry County Metropolitan Nashville Airport Authority New Orleans Aviation Board Okaloosa County Omaha Eppley Airfield Los Angeles Department of Aviation Tennessee Florida Minnesota Minnesota Alabama South Carolina Tennessee Louisiana Florida Nebraska California

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 7
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 1

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Ratings (cont.)

Orlando International Airport Palm Beach International Airport Pensacola Regional Airport Philadelphia International Airport Piedmont Triad International Airport Pittsburgh International Airport Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (JFK International, La Guardia Airport, and Newark International) Port Columbus International Airport Port of Oakland (Metropolitan Oakland International Airport) Port of Oakland (Metropolitan Oakland International Airport) Port of Seattle (Seattle-Tacoma International Airport) Port of Seattle (Seattle-Tacoma International Airport) Port of Seattle (Seattle-Tacoma International Airport) Portland International Airport Portland International Jetport Sacramento International Airport Sacramento International Airport San Antonio International Airport San Antonio International Airport San Diego International Airport San Diego International Airport San Francisco International Airport San Jose International Airport Sky Harbor International Airport Sky Harbor International Airport Southwest Florida International Airport Spokane Airport Authority T.F. Green International Airport Tampa International Airport Tampa International Airport Tulsa International Airport Tulsa International Airport Greater Orlando Aviation Authority Palm Beach County Department of Aviation Pensacola Philadelphia Department of Aviation Piedmont Triad Airport Authority Allegheny County Airport Authority Port Authority of New York and New Jersey Columbus Regional Airport Authority Port of Oakland Port of Oakland Port of Seattle Port of Seattle Port of Seattle Port of Portland Portland Sacramento County Airport System Sacramento County Airport System San Antonio Airport System San Antonio Airport System California Maritime Infrastructure Authority California Maritime Infrastructure Authority San Francisco Airports Commission San Jose Department of Aviation Phoenix Aviation Department Phoenix Aviation Department Lee County Port Authority Spokane County Rhode Island Economic Development Corp. Hillsborough County Aviation Authority Hillsborough County Aviation Authority Tulsa Airports Improvement Trust Tulsa Airports Improvement Trust Florida Florida Florida Pennsylvania North Carolina Pennsylvania New York A+ A BBB A+ AAAAStable Stable Negative Stable Stable Stable Stable

Ohio California California Washington Washington Washington Oregon Maine California California Texas Texas California California California California Arizona Arizona Florida Washington Rhode Island Florida Florida Oklahoma Oklahoma

A+ A+ A (second lien) AAA+ (second lien) A (third lien) AABBB+ A A- (second lien) A+ A- (second lien) A+ A (second lien) A+ AAAA+ (second lien) AA+ BBB+ A+ A (second lien) BBB+ BBB (second lien)

Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 8
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 1

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Ratings (cont.)

Washington Dulles International Airport and Reagan National Airport Will Rogers World Airport Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority Oklahoma City Airport Trust Washington, D.C. Oklahoma AAA+ Stable Positive

Table 2

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Rating Actions

Obligor Upgrades Charleston County Airport Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport (second lien) Des Moines International Airport Little Rock National Airport Miami International Airport Port of Oakland (Metropolitan Oakland International Airport) South Carolina A+/Stable Georgia Iowa Arkansas Florida California A+/Stable A/Stable A/Stable A/Stable A+/Stable A/Stable A/Stable A/Stable A-/Stable A-/Positive A-/Stable A/Positive A-/Positive July 24, 2013 July 1, 2013 May 23, 2013 Oct. 2, 2012 Oct. 19, 2012 Sept. 14, 2012 Sept. 14, 2012 State To From Date*

Port of Oakland (Metropolitan Oakland International Airport; second lien) California Downgrades Colorado Springs Airport Bishop International Airport Outlook revisions T.F. Green International Airport Will Rogers World Airport (second lien) Kansas City International Airport Kansas City International Airport (second lien) Lambert-St. Louis International Airport Pensacola Regional Airport Portland International Jetport New ratings Honolulu International Airport (second lien) Tampa International Airport (second lien) Charleston County Airport (second lien) Denver International Airport (second lien) Las Vegas-McCarren International Airport (third lien) Hawaii Florida Rhode Island Oklahoma Missouri Missouri Missouri Florida Maine Colorado Michigan

BBB+/Stable BBB+/Stable

A-/Stable A-/Stable

Sept. 13, 2013 Feb. 28, 2013

BBB+/Stable A+/Positive A+/Stable A/Stable A-/Stable

BBB+/Negative Nov. 15, 2013 A+/Stable A+/Negative A/Negative A-/Negative Aug. 26, 2013 June 28, 2013 June 28, 2013 May 20, 2013 March 26, 2013 Feb. 25, 2013

BBB/Negative BBB/Stable BBB+/Stable BBB+/Positive

A-/Stable A/Stable

N.R. N.R. N.R. N.R. N.R.

Dec. 2, 2013 Sept. 25, 2013 July 24, 2013 June 25, 2013 May 23, 2013

South Carolina A/Stable Colorado Nevada A/Stable A/Stable

*Dates represent the period from Sept. 1, 2012, to Jan. 1, 2014, covered by this report. N.R.--Not rated.

Table 3

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure PFC And Other Non-GARB Ratings
As of Jan. 1, 2014 Long-term rating BB A+

Obligor APCOA Bradley Parking Co. LLC (Bradley International Airport) Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport

Issuer Connecticut Maryland Transportation Authority

State Connecticut Maryland

Outlook Stable Stable

Note Parking PFC

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 9
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 3

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure PFC And Other Non-GARB Ratings (cont.)
Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport Boston Logan International Airport Chicago O'Hare International Airport Consolidated rental car facility project (Bush Intercontinental Airport) Consolidated rental car facility project (Boston Logan International Airport) Consolidated rental car facility project (Charlotte Douglas International Airport) Consolidated rental car facility project (Hartsfield Jackson Atlanta International Airport) Ft. Lauderdale Fuel Facilities LLC (Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport) John F. Kennedy Internationatl Air Terminal LLC Maryland Transportation Authority Massachusetts Port Authority Chicago Department of Aviation Houston Department of Aviation Maryland Massachusetts Illinois Texas A (second lien) A AAStable Stable Stable Stable Parking PFC PFC Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project PFC Parking

Massachusetts Port Authority

Massachusetts

Stable

Charlotte

North Carolina

Stable

Atlanta

Georgia

A-

Stable

Broward County

Florida

A-

Stable

Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

New York

BBB-

Stable

Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport Clark County Department of Aviation LAX Fuel Corp. special facility (Los Angeles International Airport) Nashville International Airport Los Angeles Regional Airport Improvement Corp. Nashville

Nevada

Stable

California

Stable

Tennessee

A-

Stable

New Orleans Aviation Board

New Orleans Aviation Board

Louisiana

A-

Stable

New Orleans International Airport Parking Facilities Corp.

New Orleans Aviation Board Louisiana Local Government Environmental Facilities & Community Development Authority Philadelphia Parking Authority Port of Portland Phoenix Aviation Department

Louisiana Louisiana

ABBB+

Stable Stable

Philadelphia Parking Authority Portland International Airport Rental car facility (Sky Harbor International Airport) Rental car special facility (T.F. Green International Airport)

Pennsylvania Oregon Arizona

A A A-

Stable Stable Stable

Parking PFC Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project Special facility project

Rhode Island Economic Development Corp.

Rhode Island

BBB+

Stable

Rental car special facility (Chicago O'Hare Chicago International Airport) Rental car special facility (Chicago O'Hare Chicago International Airport)

Illinois

BBB

Stable

Illinois

BBB

Stable

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 10
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 3

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure PFC And Other Non-GARB Ratings (cont.)
Rental car special facility (Austin-Bergstrom International Airport) SEATAC Fuel Facilities LLC Austin Texas AStable Special facility project Special facility project PFC Special facility project Special facility project

Port of Seattle

Washington

A-

Stable

Seattle-Tacoma International Airport SFO Fuel Co. LLC special facility (San Francisco International Airport) Terminal One Group Association L.P. (JFK International Airport) PFC--Passenger facility charge.

Port of Seattle San Francisco Airport Commission

Washington California

A+ BBB+

Stable Stable

New York City Industrial New York Development Agency (Port Authority of New York and New Jersey)

BBB

Positive

Table 4

U.S. Airports And Aviation Infrastructure PFC And Special Facilities Rating Actions
Obligor New ratings Rental Car Special Facility (Chicago O'Hare International Airport) Rental Car Special Facility (Chicago O'Hare International Airport) Ft. Lauderdale Fuel Facilities LLC (Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport) Rental Car Special Facility (Austin-Bergstrom International Airport) Upgrades Baltimore/Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport LAX Fuel Corp. Special Facility (Los Angeles International Airport) Outlook revisions Terminal One Group Association L.P. (JFK International Airport) BBB/Positive BBB/Stable Oct. 23, 2012 N/A A+/Stable A/Stable A/Stable A-/Stable Nov. 15, 2012 Aug. 31, 2012 Parking Parking BBB/Stable BBB/Stable A-/Stable A-/Stable N.R. N.R. N.R. N.R. July 16, 2013 July 16, 2013 April 22, 2013 Jan. 17, 2013 Senior CFC bonds TIFIA loan Fuel facility CFC To From Date* Comment

*Dates represent the period from Sept. 1, 2012, to Jan. 1, 2014, covered by this report. CFC--Customer facility charge. N.R.--Not rated. N/A--Not applicable.

Table 5

International Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Ratings

As Of Jan. 1, 2014 Long-term credit rating BBB AAA BBB Short-term credit rating N/A A-1+ N/A

Obligor/project Adelaide and Parafield Airports Airservices Australia Brisbane Airport

Issuer/company Adelaide Airport Ltd. Airservices Australia Brisbane Airport Corp. Pty Ltd.

Location Australia Australia Australia

Outlook Negative Stable Stable

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 11
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 5

International Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Ratings (cont.)

Melbourne Airport (major asset) and Launceston Airport Perth International Airport Australia Pacific Airports Corp. Ltd. & Australia Pacific Airports (Melbourne) Pty Ltd. Perth Airport Pty Ltd. (formerly Westralia Airports Corp. Pty Ltd.) Southern Cross Airports Corp. Holdings Ltd. Edmonton Regional Airports Authority Halifax International Airport Authority Greater Toronto Airports Authority Nav Canada Ottawa Macdonald Cartier International Airport Authority Vancouver Airport Authority Winnipeg Airports Authority Inc. Australia AN/A Stable

Australia

BBB

N/A

Stable

Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport* Edmonton International Airport Halifax International Airport Lester B. Pearson International Airport Nav Canada Ottawa International Airport Vancouver International Airport Winnipeg James Armstrong Richardson International Airport

Australia Canada Canada Canada Canada Canada Canada Canada Dominican Republic France Germany Hong Kong Ireland Italy Japan The Netherlands New Zealand New Zealand New Zealand Norway Peru Argentina

BBB A A+ A AA A+ AA A BB-

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Stable Positive Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable Watch Neg

Aeropuertos Dominicanos Siglo XXI Latin American Airports S.A. (five international and one domestic Holdings Ltd. airport) Paris-Orly, Paris Charles de Gaulle and Paris-Le-Bourget Airports German Air Traffic Control System Hong Kong International Airport* Dublin, Shannon, and Cork Airports Ciampino and Fiumicino Airports in Rome Narita International Airport Amsterdam Airport Schiphol Auckland International Airport Christchurch International Airport Wellington International Airport Oslo Airport and 45 other airports in Norway Aeroports de Paris DFS Deutsche Flugsicherung GmbH Airport Authority Hong Kong Dublin Airport Authority PLC Aeroporti di Roma SpA Narita International Airport Corp. N.V. Luchthaven Schiphol (Schiphol Group) Auckland International Airport Ltd. Christchurch International Airport Ltd. Wellington International Airport Ltd. Avinor AS

A AAA AAA BBB BBB+ AAA+ ABBB+ BBB+ AABBB CCC+

N/A A-1+ N/A A-2 A-2 A-1+ A-1 A-2 A-2 A-2 A-1+ N/A N/A

Stable Stable Stable Stable Negative Negative Stable Stable Stable Positive Stable Stable Negative

Jorge Chavez Lima International Airport Lima Airport Partners SRL International Airport Ministro Pistarini (Ezeiza), Aeroparque Jorge Newbery and other 31 airports in Argentina. Aeropuertos Argentina 2000 S.A.

Monterrey International Aiport and Grupo Aeroportuario del other 12 international airports in Central Centro Norte S.A.B. de C.V. and Northern Mexico. Aeropuerto Internacional de Tocumen Aeropuerto Internacional de Tocumen S.A.

Mexico

mxAA+ (national scale rating) BBB

N/A

Stable

Panama

N/A

Stable

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 12
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 5

International Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Ratings (cont.)

Five International Airports and 1 Domestic Airport Moscow-Domodedovo Airport Khabarovsk Novy Airport Zurich Airport London Heathrow Airport London Heathrow Airport London Gatwick Airport U.K. Air Traffic Control System Aeropuertos Dominicanos Siglo XXI S.A DME Ltd. OAO Khabarovsky Airport Flughafen Zurich AG Heathrow Funding Ltd. (corporate securitization) Heathrow Funding Ltd. (corporate securitization) Gatwick Funding Ltd. (corporate securitization) NATS (En Route) PLC Dominican Republic Russia Russia Switzerland U.K. U.K. U.K. U.K. BBBB+ B+ A A- (class A) BBB (class B) BBB+ (class A) AAN/A B N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Watch Negative Stable Stable Stable Stable Stable N/A Negative

*'AA+' foreign currency rating. Represents senior debt rating only. Subordinate-lien bonds: 'BBB-'; corporate credit rating: BBB-/Positive/--. A government-related entity under our criteria. N/A--Not applicable.

Table 6

International Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Rating Actions

Issuer/Obligor New ratings DME Ltd. Aeropuerto Internacional de Tocumen S.A. Avinor AS OAO Khabarovsky Airport Upgrades N.V. Luchthaven Schiphol Aeroporti di Roma SpA Lima Airport Partners SRL The Brussels Airport Co. and Brussels Airport Holding S.A./N.V. Aeroporti di Roma SpA Perth Airport Pty Ltd. Downgrades Aeroports de Paris Aeropuertos Argentina 2000 S.A. Christchurch International Airport Ltd. Aeropuertos Argentina 2000 S.A. Outlook revisions Auckland International Airport Ltd. Winnipeg Airports Authority Inc. Latin American Airports Holdings Ltd. A-/Stable/-A/Stable/-BB-/Watch Neg/-A-/Positive/-A/Negative/-BB-/Stable/-BBB-/Negative/-AA-/Stable/-BBB/Negative/A-2 BBB/Stable/-Dec. 2, 2013 Nov. 28, 2013 Oct. 4, 2013 Dec. 21, 2012 Dec. 17, 2012 May 14, 2013 Dec. 14, 2012 A/Stable/-CCC+/Negative/-BBB+/Stable/-B-/Negative/-A+/Negative/-B-/Negative/-A-/Negative/-B/Negative/-Nov. 12, 2013 Sept. 13,2013 Dec. 18, 2012 Nov. 1, 2012 A+/Stable/A-1 A/Watch Pos/A-1 Dec. 6, 2013 Dec. 2, 2013 Aug. 26, 2013 April 22, 2013 March 7, 2013 Sept. 27, 2012 BB+/Stable/B BBB/Stable/-AA-/Stable/A-1+ B+/Stable/-N.R. N.R. N.R. N.R. Nov 6, 2013 Sept. 12, 2013 July 4, 2013 May 23, 2013 To From Date*

BBB+/Negative/A-2 BBB-/Watch Pos/A-3 BBB/Stable/-BBB-/Stable/-BBB-/Positive/A-3 BBB/Stable/-BBB-/Stable/-BB+/Positive/-BB+/Positive/B BBB-/Stable/--

Copenhagen Airport A/S and Copenhagen Airports Denmark ApS BBB-/Stable/-NATS (En Route) PLC Dublin Airport Authority Adelaide Airport Ltd AA-/Negative/-BBB/Stable/A-2 BBB/Negative/--

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 13
1253867 | 300001268

A Fairly Smooth Flight For Most Global Airport Operators' Credit Quality In 2014

Table 6

International Airports And Aviation Infrastructure Rating Actions (cont.)

Auckland International Airport Ltd. Ratings withdrawn Birmingham Airport Holdings Ltd. N.R. BBB+/Stable/A-2 BBB-/Stable/-BBB-/Stable/-BBB/Stable/-Nov. 8, 2013 June 10, 2013 June 5, 2013 Feb. 18, 2013 A-/Positive/-A-/Stable/-Sept. 26, 2012

Copenhagen Airport A/S and Copenhagen Airports Denmark ApS N.R. The Brussels Airport Co. and Brussels Airport Holding S.A./N.V. The Manchester Airport Group PLC N.R. N.R.

*Dates represent the period from Sept. 1, 2012, to Jan. 1, 2014, covered by this report. N.R.--Not rated.

Related Criteria And Research

Related Research
For U.S. Public Transportation Issuers, Funding Questions And Budget Strains Cloud The Stable Outlook For 2014, Jan. 14, 2014 Top 10 Global Investor Questions For 2014: Transportation Infrastructure Sector, Jan. 9, 2014. Economic Research: U.S. Forecast Update: Ringing In An Improving New Year, Jan. 3, 2014

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 14
1253867 | 300001268

Copyright 2014 Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC, a part of McGraw Hill Financial. All rights reserved. No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an "as is" basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT'S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages. Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P's opinions, analyses, and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw, or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal, or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof. S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information received in connection with each analytical process. S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription) and www.spcapitaliq.com (subscription) and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees.

WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT

FEBRUARY 3, 2014 15
1253867 | 300001268