April 7, 2010

Duane Owens
Vice President, Finance
Post Office Box 1028
Greenville, SC 29602-1028
864271-7733

RE: Appointment of an Equity Committee and follow-up on Trading Irregularities

Dear Mr. Owens:

We appreciated your earlier response to our packet detailing the apparent trading irregularities of
AbitibiBowater stock that we identified which were in part responsible for the merged company
going into bankruptcy and for keeping the stock price low afterwards. While we did not
anticipate an ongoing dialog, we were disappointed that this useful data was met with the
complete lack of detail in your response and your statement that there would be no further public
dialogue.

We wanted to make you aware of the fact that an alliance of shareholders has banded together to
request an equity committee. A formal request was presented to the U.S. Trustee, Canadian
Monitor, and the two Judges in this case. All four also received the same packet we sent you
regarding trading irregularities and an additional packet detailing the reasons we believe an
equity committee is both warranted and necessary. Copies of all of these documents may be
found at the blog used to maintain communications for the alliance:
http://abitibibowater.blogspot.com/.

We wanted to make you aware of some of the issues in the equity committee (EC) request as
well as some of the issues which have come to light lately and again request your comment.

The shareholders making the EC request is currently an informal, non-represented alliance of

eighty-three (83) different common shareholders controlling 13,348,056 million shares or 24.4%
of the outstanding shares of ABWTQ making this group the second largest block of outstanding
shareholders, second only to Fairfax Financial Holdings LTD. Our shareholders have held
shares since before merger, after merger and before and after bankruptcy.

This alliance has concerns regarding the security of its investments as the company emerges
from bankruptcy for several reasons. First, there has been a history of apparent naked shorting,
credit default swaps, and short selling causing price manipulation that has been brought to your
attention, but so far no action seems to be taken and/or communicated to us. Second, though the
company appears to have significant equity and made statements regarding maintaining value for
the shareholders there has yet to be any engagement of the common shareholders in this
reorganization process. Third, there are no preferred shares in this company meaning the shares
this alliance holds have the same priority for equity after emergence as the Directors, Union and
non-union pensioners, mutual funds, management and others.
In spite of this equal priority for equity, each of those groups has been provided representation in
the proceedings and we have not.

In the Thirty-Fifth Monitor Report (March 9, 2010), Hon. Mr. Justice C. Gascon, J.S.C.,
approved the ad hoc consultative committee of the non-unionized current and former employees
arguing that the Petitioners have either taken actions or have had actions imposed on them that
will impact various and diverse groups of stakeholders. The motion argues that the non-
unionized employees need a formal relationship with the Petitioners to assist in meeting the
needs of the Petitioners and mitigate the impact to the stakeholders and that the creation of this
consultative committee establishes a framework for other committees.

Recently, we were interested to see in the court filings an emergency notice regarding shortening
the notification time of a meeting to be held to extend the granting of the sixth amendment to the
Bowater DIP Facility fund. What interested us was that in order to be granted an extension to
the Bowater DIP Facility fund due date, a plan of reorganization (POR) had to be filed with the
creditors. The motion further stated the POR is being negotiated now and several groups were
being consulted. In fact, one of the groups involved in those negotiations are the same creditors
responsible for the credit default swaps which were partially responsible for AbitibiBowater
going into bankruptcy. Yet, the groups involved did not include the common shareholders again
demonstrating that the second largest holder of shares in your company is not being involved in
the POR negotiations. At the same time, the 10K recently filed showed $639,000,000 USD for
reorganization costs which directly impacts the amount of equity available after emergence, but
the common shareholders had no opportunity to understand those costs or work with the
company to mitigate some of them.

We are very interested in the continued success of AbitibiBowater, Inc., and look forward to
supporting your emergence from bankruptcy. We are encouraged by the company’s website
stating the following:

“By delivering on our business goals and commitments, we are confident that we
can create significant long-term value for shareholders.”

Furthermore, your own company’s Code of Business Conduct states the following in its
introductory paragraph:

“At AbitibiBowater Inc., we value our relationships with our customers,

suppliers, fellow employees, the communities in which we do business and our
shareholders. To maintain these relationships, it is imperative that all of our
business be conducted with absolute integrity in an atmosphere of candor and
good faith.”

All we ask is that you follow the values shown here and treat your second largest shareholder
with candor and good faith by supporting our request for an equity committee and communicate
more fully with us in the future.
We anticipate a response to this request and would appreciate an opportunity to discuss this with
you by teleconference at your convenience during the week of April 12, 2010. Please feel free to
send us a time you will be available or we can call you during normal business hours.

Respectfully submitted,

Elizabeth L. Romero, MSc

Dr. Henry Romero, CPE, CSP
115 Bristol Bend Lane
Dickinson, TX 77539