Talented Professionals Challenging Projects Quality Services

URS Corporation 2003 Annual Report The Company

URS is one of the largest design services firms worldwide and one of the leading U.S. federal government contractors. We execute large and complex engineering projects, and provide a comprehensive range of professional planning and design, systems engineering and technical assistance, program and management, and operations and maintenance services.

URS has approximately 26,000 employees in two divisions: the URS Division and the EG&G Division. Through our extensive network of more than 300 principal offices and contract-specific job sites across the U.S. and in more than 20 countries, we serve the U.S. federal government, state and local government agencies in the U.S. and abroad, and private-industry clients, including Fortune 500 companies worldwide.

The URS Division provides the full range of services required to build, maintain and improve infrastructure, including highways, bridges, mass transit systems, airports, and water supply and wastewater treatment facilities, as well as schools, healthcare complexes and other public buildings. We also provide a variety of environmental services for military, commercial and industrial facilities.

The EG&G Division’s activities range from assisting in the design and development of new weapons systems to main- taining and upgrading military aircraft, vehicles and equipment. We operate and manage military installations, provide flight training to the U.S. armed forces and its allies, and provide logistics support for government warehousing and distribution centers. We also provide a variety of technical support services for global threat reduction programs.

Headquartered in , URS Corporation is a publicly held company listed on the New York Stock Exchange and the Pacific Exchange under the symbol URS. For more information about URS, please see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2003.

Table of Contents 01 Financial Highlights 02 Chairman’s Letter to Stockholders 04 About the URS Division 06 Representative URS Projects 16 About the EG&G Division 18 Representative EG&G Projects 24 Office Locations Worldwide 25 Summary Financial Statements 31 Reports of Management and Independent Auditors 32 Corporate Directory IBC Corporate Information

URS Corporation’s 2003 Annual Report contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those discussed in this Annual Report. Factors that might cause such a difference include, but are not limited to, those discussed under Risk Factors in URS Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Copies of URS’ Form 10-K may be obtained without charge by contacting our Investor Relations Department via e-mail at [email protected], by calling 1-877-877-8970, or by accessing the Investor Relations section of the URS Web site at www.urscorp.com.

Front cover (left to right), Front row: Johan Schor, Calvin Lee, Rahul Saggar, Middle row (left to right): Izabella Skuratovsky, Kazem Oryani, Diana Gitonga, Front row (sitting): Steve Collegio. Back cover (clockwise from left): Mellanie Bennett, Shawn Savage, Samuil Kizhnerman, Shelley Sprung, Mariana Shefler, (sitting): Bill Bain. Financial Highlights

Financial data for the past five years are summarized below. This financial data should be read in conjunction with the information contained in our financial statements and the accompanying notes, and the section entitled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended October 31, 2003.

Years Ended October 31, 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 (In thousands, except per share data)

Operations: Revenues $3,186,714 $2,427,827 $2,319,350 $2,205,578 $1,418,522 Costs and Expenses $3,089,880 $2,336,716 $2,215,198 $2,113,980 $1,352,241 Income Before Taxes $ 96,834 $ 91,111 $ 104,152 $ 91,598 $ 66,281 Net Income $ 58,104 $ 55,171 $ 57,852 $ 49,898 $ 36,581 Earnings Per Share $ 1.76 $ 2.03 $ 2.41 $ 2.27 $ 1.98

As of October 31, 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 (In thousands, except per share data)

Financial Position: Cash $ 15,508 $ 9,972 $ 23,398 $ 23,693 $ 45,687 Working Capital $ 447,630 $ 473,149 $ 427,417 $ 394,560 $ 366,125 Total Assets $2,167,612 $2,229,092 $1,463,376 $1,427,134 $1,444,525 Preferred Stock $ — $ 46,733 $ 120,099 $ 111,013 $ 103,333 Stockholders’ Equity $ 765,073 $ 633,852 $ 322,502 $ 257,794 $ 207,169

$3,187 $765.1 $3,662

$633.9 $2,428 $57.9 $58.1 $2,319 $55.2 $2,828 $2,206 $49.9

$36.6 $1,926 $1,958 $1,419 $322.5 $1,460 $257.8 $207.2

’99 ’00 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’99 ’00 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’99 ’00 ’01 ’02 ’03 ’99 ’00 ’01 ’02 ’03 Revenues Net Income Stockholders’ Equity Backlog (in millions) (in millions) (in millions) (in millions)

URS 01 To Our Stockholders:

URS PERFORMED well in 2003. We delivered record this market. We also serve a portion of our federal “URS has revenues, net income and operating cash flow, while business through our URS Division, providing continuing to build on our reputation for quality, services for facilities and environmental programs not only reliability and specialized expertise. URS has not for the Departments of Defense, Homeland Security weathered only weathered the economic slowdown, we have and Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, emerged as a much stronger company overall, well the General Services Administration and the U.S. the economic positioned for continued growth and improved prof- Postal Service. Our business in this portion of slowdown, itability, particularly as state and local government the federal market continued to grow during 2003, budgets stabilize and private-sector capital spending as we successfully maximized our work under we have returns to historic levels. indefinite delivery contracts. emerged as a much To understand why URS is a preferred partner for We expect our federal business to continue performing government agencies and blue-chip corporations, it well based on our competitive strength, positive stronger is necessary to appreciate our key strengths—the funding trends and federal government initiatives company.” first of which is the scale and diversity of our business. to increase outsourcing to private-sector companies. With our size and comprehensive service offering, In addition, we see continuing potential in homeland URS is one of the few companies that can success- security where we are already performing a number of fully perform large-scale, multi-service contracts projects, ranging from designing baggage-screening around the world. And we are at the forefront of an systems at airports to helping state and local gov- even smaller group that can perform major projects ernments with specific security requirements. over their full life cycles—from planning and design to long-term operations and maintenance. The state and local government sector presented URS with a significant challenge in 2003, as states We are also diverse in terms of the clients we serve. and municipalities across the country faced record With a balanced portfolio of clients in the federal revenue shortfalls, resulting in the worst overall government, the state and local government, the budget situation in more than 50 years. But again, private sector and our international operations, we the scale and diversity of our business proved have the ability to balance our workload during invaluable, as we shifted resources away from par- temporary downturns and the flexibility to respond ticularly hard hit portions of the market, such as quickly to increased demand in growth markets. surface transportation, to areas where funding was stable or growing, such as K–12 schools and water One of these growth markets has been the federal sector, which was a key driver for our business in 2003. Our new EG&G Division, which we acquired U.S. Federal Government: 43% in 2002, primarily serves U.S. federal government U.S. State and Local Governments: 22% clients, including Department of Defense agencies Private Industry: 27% such as the Army, Navy and Air Force, and the International: 8% Departments of Homeland Security and Justice. The increased demand for systems engineering, tech- nical assistance, and operations and maintenance services from these clients helped to fuel growth in

02 URS “We intend to use our strong cash flow to continue deleveraging, moving our debt to capital ratio towards our long-term goal of below 40%.”

and wastewater programs. As the economy improves At the same time, we will continue to invest in the and states begin to restore funding for infrastructure systems required to meet the needs of our diverse programs—which they must—URS is well positioned client base. In 2003, we invested $32 million in to win new work in this market. systems improvements, software and equipment to support our continued growth. Finally, in the private sector, we work with more than half of the Fortune 500, helping them meet their Ultimately, though, our most important investments engineering and environmental needs globally. In are in our people. With approximately 26,000 profes- 2003, URS signed or renewed Master Service sional and technical employees—representing the Agreements (MSAs) with Georgia Pacific, Bayer, Air top talent in their fields—and over 300 offices in more Products, Ashland, Wyeth, Rohm and Haas, and than 20 countries throughout the world, our compa- Eastman Chemical, among others, allowing these ny is a formidable competitor in the markets we companies to turn to URS for a variety of needs at serve. That’s why the theme of this year’s Annual sites around the world. Today, revenue from MSAs Report is “Talented Professionals, Challenging represents more than 50% of our total private-sector Projects and Quality Services.” In the subsequent business, compared with just one-third of private- pages of this Annual Report, we have highlighted the sector revenues just two years ago. Despite reduced extraordinary work being performed by employees in capital expenditures by corporations worldwide, MSAs both of our divisions: the URS Division and the kept our work in this market stable in fiscal 2003. EG&G Division. I encourage you to read their stories and learn more about the people, the projects and In addition to providing key competitive benefits, our the services that comprise URS. scale and diversity also have contributed to our strong financial position. Despite slowdowns in the Across the company and across our key markets, state and local government and private-sector mar- URS has never been stronger or more competitive. kets in 2003, URS delivered steady, consistent As the economy recovers and our clients are able to financial results in line with expectations, increased resume spending, I am confident that we can continue cash flow from operations by 88% over fiscal 2002, to build and deliver on our strategic position. and accelerated the repayment of our debt. I would like to thank our stockholders, employees After nearly a decade of using debt to finance a series and clients for their continued support. We look of strategic acquisitions and build our business, we forward to updating you in 2004. are now poised to achieve a more mature balance sheet. In 2003, we paid down $144 million in debt— far exceeding our mandatory debt repayment of $30 million. As a result, we reduced our debt to total cap- italization ratio from approximately 58% at the end Martin M. Koffel of fiscal 2002 to approximately 52% at the end of Chairman and Chief Executive Officer fiscal 2003. We intend to use our strong cash flow to continue deleveraging, moving our debt to capital ratio towards our long-term goal of below 40%.

URS 03 URS Division Talented Professionals, Challenging Projects,Quality Services

Over the past 100 years, through internal growth and strategic acquisitions,URS Corporation has grown into one of the industry’s largest engineering design services firms. When we expanded our capabilities with the acquisition of EG&G, the Company was restructured into two operating divisions: the URS and EG&G Divisions.

THROUGH THE URS DIVISION, we provide engineering activities at Superfund sites and military bases and related services to government and industrial to engineering and design services for military clients around the globe. URS designs and main- housing, courthouses and other facilities. tains the critical infrastructure on which we all depend. From transportation systems to reservoirs, For state and local government agencies, we wastewater treatment plants and landmark public plan and design bridges, highways, mass transit buildings, we work on some of the most challeng- systems and airports, as well as water supply, ing and complex assignments in the world. treatment and distribution systems. Our archi- tects design schools, hospitals, correctional We design commercial and industrial facilities facilities and other public buildings. that meet the needs of our clients and the com- munities they serve. Our environmental specialists More than half of the Fortune 500 companies rely help preserve ecosystems and implement indus- on URS’ engineering and environmental services, trial processing technologies that reduce waste and we have formed strategic alliances with many and protect the environment. of our clients—DuPont, Ashland, Dow, Rohm and Haas, and Mitsubishi, among others. Our planning and design work for the U.S. federal government spans assessment and remediation

MARKETS

URS employees provide Transportation: 35% a broad range of plan- Hazardous Waste: 18% ning, design, and program Facilities and Logistics Support: 14% and construction manage- Industrial Process: 24% ment services in a variety Water/Wastewater Treatment: 9% of markets.

04 URS U.S. Federal Government: 21% U.S. State and Local Governments: 31% U.S. Private Clients: 38% International Clients: 10%

CLIENTS Private-industry assignments include site reme- and commitment to excellence are the foundation

The URS Division diation, hazardous waste management and of everything we do and the basis of our high serves a balanced roster pollution prevention, due diligence and process standing in the industry. of clients in the U.S. engineering. We provide on-site environmental and internationally. support at industrial facilities to help clients comply The following pages feature a selection of out- with more stringent standards and regulations. standing URS projects, from our work upgrading a dangerously outdated expressway in New York Our program and construction management work City to an important study for a consortium of covers every conceivable project and facility, industry and government representatives headed including multimillion-dollar capital improvement by the World Bank. We also profile the design of programs for mass transit systems, urban school the first radiology facility for children in western districts and regional wastewater treatment systems. Michigan, our global environmental services alliance with chemicals giant Rohm and Haas The URS Division is staffed by approximately and our management of a $1.5 billion school 16,000 talented professionals, including planners, improvement program in San Diego. We are proud engineers, architects, scientists, environmental of these accomplishments. They demonstrate specialists, and program and construction man- the talent of our professionals and the breadth agers. Our technical proficiency, enthusiasm of our achievements.

URS 05 KEY FACTS • URS designed the reconstruction of 1.6 miles of the BQE and is providing construction Brooklyn-Queens support services • Heavily traveled Expressway Rehabilitation expressway bisects highly populated urban New York, New York neighborhoods • Intensive community outreach involved local residents • Project team coordinated with more than 30 government agencies to complete project on time and within budget

KNOWN AS THE MOST dangerous corridor in the New intersection that impeded traffic and endangered York City region, it was long obvious that the pedestrians. The first SPUI design was conceived 50-year-old Brooklyn-Queens Expressway (BQE) by URS in the 1970s. It allows simultaneous left- was in dire need of modernization. Originally hand turns and now is used in many urban areas designed for cars traveling at 35 miles an hour, to improve safety and traffic flow. the BQE’s pavement and walls had deteriorated. Its bridges were damaged and had inadequate Local residents recognized the need for rehabili- clearance. With narrow lanes and no shoulders, tating the BQE. Nevertheless, they worried about traffic accidents occurred on a regular basis, the impact of construction on the densely pop- bringing cars and trucks to a standstill or forcing ulated urban community. This stretch of the them off the expressway onto local streets. expressway bisected their landmark neighborhood in extremely tight proximity to apartments, private The New York State Department of Transportation homes, and retail and industrial buildings. (NYSDOT) selected URS to redesign a 1.6-mile section of the BQE in northwestern Queens. The URS and the NYSDOT conducted an extensive reconstruction of this major north-south access public outreach program that involved resi- roadway to New York City is the largest infra- dents, community boards and civic groups in the structure project in the NYSDOT’s history. planning and design process. One aesthetic enhancement resulting from this group effort The URS project team designed a complete high- will be a huge $1 million granite carving cover- way realignment, 15 new highway and railway ing the facade walls of the new interchange. bridges, new retaining walls and many other This artwork by Wopo Holup, called “Common improvements. All of these components were Ground,” exemplifies the sense of civic partner- built while maintaining existing traffic on the ship that characterizes the neighborhood. In this expressway and creating no detours. A highlight spirit, URS helped to modernize an outdated of the project is the design of a new Single Point transportation corridor, while contributing to Urban Interchange (SPUI) at a highly congested local urban renewal efforts.

06 URS “This was both a transportation and an urban renewal Left to right: Nelson project. The community will enjoy a variety of safety-related Hernández, Gill Mosseri, and aesthetic enhancements.” Mark Work, Lisa MacKay, Stephen Hadrava, Isak Vitkin, Mark Work (sitting): Janice Yuvan Design Project Manager, URS Division

URS 07 KEY FACTS • Utilization of gas currently vented and flared can provide a valuable and clean International Gas energy source • The World Bank, major Flaring Reduction Standard oil companies and many governments have joined Worldwide forces to develop alter- natives to the practice • URS is developing a voluntary standard that will be acceptable to both governments and industry

THE PRACTICE OF flaring or venting natural gas that for help developing a standard to control flaring and is released as a byproduct when crude oil is venting, and identifying alternate uses for the gas. extracted from the ground is an important issue facing the oil and gas industry. For more than On behalf of the GGFR, URS has assembled an a century, burning off this gas or simply releasing international team of our experts to review vent- it into the atmosphere was considered a practical ing and flaring regulations worldwide, current oil alternative for disposing of a resource that was company policies and best practices regarding otherwise difficult and uneconomical to recover. these activities. Based on this review and in con- sultation with the World Bank Partnership, URS With the increased emphasis on conserving is developing a set of voluntary guidelines that energy and safeguarding the environment, flar- encourage and provide direction to industry and ing and venting have been recognized as major governments to reduce flaring. sources of greenhouse gases, which contribute to global climate change. In most industrialized The new standard will include requirements for nations, the practice has been abandoned, and venting and flaring reductions, as well as moni- these gases are now used as a viable, clean toring to measure the progress of participating energy alternative. But, in parts of the world lacking companies and countries. It will be structured the infrastructure or markets for natural gas, it is to encourage practical uses for the gas, including still burned onsite as a waste product or released the development of infrastructure and markets into the atmosphere. in locations where gas is currently flared or vented.

In response, a consortium consisting of the World Resource conservation and climate change are Bank, major oil companies and the governments global problems. As part of an international coali- of many nations has convened to address the tion of government and industry, URS is helping issue. Known as the Global Gas Flaring Reduction the GGFR to develop new solutions for meeting (GGFR) Public-Private Partnership, the consortium energy needs and protecting the environment in has turned to the environmental specialists at URS many regions of the world.

08 URS “The ‘lost gas’ due to gas flaring and venting represents Left to right: Al Spiers, a vast opportunity for industry and governments to utilize a John Lague, Ed Orloski valuable, clean energy resource while alleviating a serious environmental issue.”

Lisa Campbell Project Manager, URS Division

URS 09 KEY FACTS • URS designed western Michigan’s first dedicated children’s radiology department DeVos Children’s Hospital • Nature theme with child-friendly elements appeals to Radiology Center young patients and Grand Rapids, Michigan their families • Thorough program- ming and planning assured on-time, on-budget results • Flexible design accom- modates future advances in technology

PEDIATRIC PROFESSIONALS recognize that the smaller The natural setting helps put patients and their the patients, the larger their needs. Hospital visits families at ease. A large fish tank and a children’s can be extremely distressing for children, and playroom with a painted mural and child-size meeting their physical and psychological require- furniture welcome and engage young visitors. For ments in traditional adult-care facilities present older children, a separate waiting room offers difficult challenges for health care workers. music and books geared to their tastes.

When the decision was made to build western Throughout the design, URS kept flexibility and Michigan’s first children’s radiology department, future expansion in mind. With rapid advances DeVos Children’s Hospital, part of Spectrum in medicine, radiology technology can quickly Health System, selected URS to transform its ideas become obsolete. Travel paths for new equip- into a high-tech design that is both functional ment—like MRI magnets weighing several and child friendly. The URS team worked closely thousand pounds apiece—were predetermined with DeVos Children’s doctors, nurses, board and structurally reinforced to accommodate members and the community at every stage of future installation needs. the project to ensure a design solution that met the complex requirements of a radiology depart- Today, thanks to the commitment of DeVos ment intended specifically for the young. Children’s Hospital, the support of the community and the vision of URS’ design team, young URS selected a nature theme for the design, incor- patients in western Michigan receive radiology porating architectural features and a color palette treatment in a highly functional and inviting that evoke the local landscape. Entering the new health care environment. The hospital also is pediatric radiology department feels like stepping equipped to grow as medical science and the outdoors. Corridor walls are lined with stylized trees, needs of the community change. giving visitors the feeling of walking along a wood- land path. Fiber optic lighting illuminates the wait- ing room ceiling like stars twinkling in the night sky.

10 URS “This project shows that a high-tech radiology department can be Left to right: Tom Gasser, designed to put people at ease, allowing for a positive, less stressful Jeff Evers, George Lewis, experience. It moves DeVos Children’s staff one step closer to real- Mary Bamborough izing its dream of a comprehensive children’s hospital.”

David Byl Project Manager, URS Division

URS 11 KEY FACTS • Relationship with Rohm and Haas started in Philadelphia more than 20 years ago Rohm and Haas Company • URS has recently worked with Rohm and Haas Environmental Services Alliance at 50 manufacturing facilities in 15 countries Worldwide on five continents • URS project teams combine global capabili- ties and local resources to staff environmental and remediation projects as needed

FROM ITS ROOTS in Philadelphia nearly 100 years In the past three years, URS teams have per- ago, Rohm and Haas Company has grown into formed hundreds of projects for Rohm and Haas a global leader in the specialty chemicals business. in the U.S. and around the world. These projects Rohm and Haas’ operations now span the globe range from implementing an environmental with manufacturing and research facilities management system, addressing air quality throughout North and South America, , issues and cleaning up contaminated industrial Asia and . sites to designing pollution control technology and wastewater treatment systems that help With this success have come the challenges of protect the environment. sustaining Rohm and Haas’ tradition of respect and support for the environment. A long-standing The success of the alliance has been fostered by component of the Rohm and Haas Company cul- several key factors. URS has organized its staff ture is a dedication to environmental responsibility into local, regional and global teams to mirror and working effectively in a variety of cultural, Rohm and Haas’ operations. Also, URS’ extensive geopolitical and regulatory environments, while technical and communications capabilities allow remaining competitive in the global marketplace. highly skilled, multinational project teams to share information and ideas easily across the miles. To meet the diverse needs of its environmental program, Rohm and Haas chose URS as an Results are the true measure of success, and Environmental Alliance Partner. URS offers Rohm and Haas continues to win recognition for extensive experience in the chemical industry, conservation, waste reduction, environmentally a highly qualified work force and worldwide sound management and community involvement. operations closely matching the chemical man- As Rohm and Haas continues to compete in the ufacturer’s geographic profile. The alliance has global marketplace under the highest corporate transformed a regional business relationship standards, URS will be there to help. that began in Philadelphia more than 20 years ago into a global partnership.

12 URS “Through this environmental alliance, URS is helping Rohm Left to right: Rob Schwar, and Haas maintain its goal of operating under the principles Geoff Arbogast, Stephanie of Responsible Care® and sustainable development.” Everett, Rebecca Herr, Jim Husted, Jon Parker Andrew Leitzinger Strategic Alliance Manager, URS Division

URS 13 KEY FACTS • URS is providing program management services for the second largest public works program in San Diego City Schools California history Improvement Program • $1.5 billion program to repair and modernize San Diego, California existing schools and build new facilities • URS is responsible for maintaining budgets, schedules and quality for all projects in the program • Project team recog- nized for efficient use of taxpayer dollars

THE SAN DIEGO Unified School District is not simultaneously. The project management team immune to the problems facing most city schools manages the design, tracks the progress and nationwide: overcrowded classrooms, inadequate schedules of all projects, reviews budgets and cost facilities, increasing operating costs and budg- estimates, provides technical oversight and coor- etary constraints. The San Diego school system dinates the activities of hundreds of contractors. serves more than 138,000 students and is the URS inspectors and construction managers also eighth largest urban district in the country, but help oversee the district’s quality control program. many of its schools are in desperate need of renovation or replacement. Work varies from simple repairs and technology upgrades to the replacement of portable class- In November 1998, an overwhelming majority rooms with permanent facilities. It also includes of San Diego voters approved Proposition MM, construction of new libraries, science classrooms a $1.5 billion bond measure to fund the repair and laboratories, like the Nierenberg Family and modernization of 165 schools, as well as the Science and Technology Center at La Jolla construction of 16 new schools. But, managing High School. The program calls for 12 of the 16 the second largest public works effort in the new schools to be completed in the next two state of California requires in-depth construction and a half years. expertise and proven experience directing billion- dollar capital improvement programs—qualifi- In 2002, the San Diego County Taxpayers cations that few firms offer. Association honored the San Diego City Schools/URS team with the Regional Golden For much-needed assistance with this massive Watchdog Award for efficient use of taxpayer undertaking, the district selected URS to help dollars. The award is evidence of the successful manage the entire school improvement program partnership between one of the country’s largest and to consult on environmental and geotech- school districts and the industry’s leading engi- nical issues. Today, URS construction specialists neering and construction management firms to are overseeing work at more than 80 schools improve the educational experience of students.

14 URS “Our goal is to help San Diego City Schools provide Left to right (top): Scott Ellis, children with the educational facilities they need and Matt Gates, Daniel Sicile-Kira, lay the groundwork for future generations.” (bottom): Barbara Faulwetter, Phuong Zahirovic, Alberto Lau Rob Robinson Program Manager, URS Division

URS 15 EG&G Division Talented Professionals, Challenging Projects,Quality Services

In 2002, URS Corporation acquired EG&G, a leading provider of technical and management services to U.S. federal government agencies. EG&G’s long history of supporting the U.S. government began during World War II with one of the most sensitive national security projects—nuclear weapons research.

TODAY, WITH EXPERTISE in operations and main- Customs Service manage and dispose of seized tenance, systems engineering and technical and forfeited property that has been confiscated assistance, EG&G continues to assist the U.S. by law enforcement agencies. EG&G operates and its allies as a division of URS Corporation. many government supply and distribution net- With a talented staff numbering more than 10,000, works, which involve the warehousing, packaging our EG&G Division is one of the nation’s leading and delivery of vast stores of equipment and mate- contractors to the U.S. Department of Homeland rials. We also maintain and overhaul military aircraft Security and the Department of Defense. We and ground vehicles at locations worldwide. also serve the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the Departments of Energy, EG&G provides military platforms support to all Treasury and Transportation, and the National branches of the U.S. armed forces, assisting Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. in the development of state-of-the-art combat and surveillance systems, and providing flight EG&G’s experience encompasses all areas of training to military pilots facing potential combat facilities and logistics support. We manage situations. EG&G was one of the first companies military and government installations, including named to directly assist in U.S. homeland more than 250 facilities that comprise NASA’s defense initiatives after the September 11th Marshall Space Flight Center. We help the U.S. attacks. We completed the first analysis of how the

MARKETS

The EG&G Division offers a wide range of defense- Hazardous Waste Management: 12% related services to the Military Platforms Support: 65% U.S. federal government Facilities and Logistics Support: 23% in three key markets.

16 URS U.S. Army: 39% U.S. Navy: 19% U.S. Air Force: 20% Homeland Security: 7% Other: 15%

CLIENTS nation would respond to a radiological dispersal of a series of homeland security exercises in the

EG&G is a major con- or “dirty bomb” emergency, and have conducted state of Florida, which are prototypes of drills tractor to every branch homeland security drills and evaluation programs we are conducting in communities around the of the U.S. Department of in 13 states and 3 territories in the Pacific. U.S. The second is the renowned helicopter Defense, the Department flight-training program at Fort Rucker, Alabama, of Homeland Security EG&G also plays an active role in global threat where EG&G instructors teach Army, Air Force and other federal agencies. reduction by providing management and oversight and NATO pilots to fly. The third involves our role services for the destruction of chemical weapons. as primary support contractor for a cutting-edge We are one of the few companies that has the U.S. Naval defense system. specialized hazardous waste management expertise necessary to handle and dispose of As you will see in the pages that follow, the work live chemical and biological warfare agents, and we do at EG&G is making a measurable differ- to train others to do so. ence as we help prepare the U.S. to meet new challenges in an increasingly dangerous world. This year’s Annual Report highlights three pro- grams that depend on the efforts of EG&G—each having critical defense implications. The first examines our role in the planning and execution

URS 17 KEY FACTS • EG&G and URS are planning and conducting a series of emergency preparedness exercises Homeland Security in Florida • Full-scale mock terrorist Preparedness Programs attacks will simulate the response of government Florida, Statewide agencies, emergency operations centers and ordinary citizens • Purpose is to assess resources and establish a well-coordinated, integrated emergency management program in the state of Florida

WHAT IF A MYSTERIOUS EXPLOSION in the business The exercises will proceed on a “building block” district of an American city destroyed several principle, beginning with public officials meeting buildings and caused mass confusion as people to analyze the situation and ending in a full-scale fled the scene? What if initial reports indicated that drill involving community leaders, first responders a man-made device caused the explosion and and ordinary citizens. The objective is to test that radiation levels in the area were extremely existing crisis management plans, as well as the high? How would authorities respond? response of emergency crews, the capacity of local hospitals and the effectiveness of commu- Ever since the devastating attacks on September nications centers. 11, 2001, there has been the possibility of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil. As a consequence, the Both EG&G and URS have long-standing rela- U.S. Department of Homeland Security has initi- tionships with homeland security agencies. ated and funded anti-terrorism and emergency URS has unparalleled experience in disaster preparedness initiatives in communities through- response on behalf of the U.S. Federal Emergency out the country to respond to potential chemical, Management Agency. EG&G participated in the biological, radiological, nuclear or high-explosive largest terrorism exercise ever carried out in the threats, as well as cyber- or agro-terrorism. U.S. This five-day event tested the response to a bio-terror attack in Chicago and a “dirty bomb” In Florida, a series of exercises will be held in attack in Seattle and involved more than 28 2004 to test the effectiveness of emergency federal agencies, the government of Canada response systems in each of the state’s seven and 8,000 participants. The lessons learned in regions. The exercises are being planned and Chicago and Seattle, as well as in the upcoming coordinated by the EG&G and URS Divisions. Florida exercises, are helping cities nationwide Specific scenarios are being developed for each to develop more integrated and effective emer- Regional Domestic Security Task Force—for gency response procedures for potential terrorist example, a terrorist chemical explosion in an attacks in the . urban area or a crop poisoning in a rural one.

18 URS “Exercises planned throughout Florida are designed to Left to right: Dale Lehman, address the challenges of responding effectively to terrorist Gordon Drescher, Mike Nardone attacks and improving the performance of emergency response systems.”

Dennis Hunt Project Manager, EG&G Division

URS 19 KEY FACTS • EG&G is the prime training contractor to the U.S. Army at Fort Rucker U.S. Army Helicopter • Fort Rucker houses the largest helicopter train- Pilot Training ing school in the world • EG&G trains helicopter Fort Rucker, Alabama pilots for both the U.S. Army and Air Force • The U.S. Army has given EG&G numerous awards for its training safety record

FLYING HELICOPTERS REQUIRES special skills and million hours of flight instruction have been rigorous training. The men and women who pilot completed without a single pilot error fatality U.S. Army helicopters are called upon day and or loss of aircraft. night to fly difficult missions, often under danger- ous battle conditions. They command the largest Classes are conducted in shifts, starting at five and most sophisticated fleet in the world— o’clock in the morning and ending well after Apaches, Blackhawks, Chinooks and Kiowas—in midnight, in a training area encompassing more reconnaissance, transport and combat operations. than 40,000 square miles. Student pilots are trained to fly in combat, so developing leadership At the U.S. Army Aviation Center at Fort Rucker, skills is another important aspect of the program. Alabama, aviation experts from EG&G train all Army helicopter pilots, turning out approximately The training program occurs at an Army instal- 1,500 graduates annually. Since 1989, EG&G lation with a multinational student population, instructors have trained more than 20,000 student and is managed as a partnership between the pilots, most of them entry-level soldiers with little Army and EG&G. It is just one of many instances or no flying experience. Fort Rucker is the largest where the Department of Defense has outsourced rotary wing flight school in the world, not just mission-critical technical and management for the U.S. Army but also for the Air Force, assignments to EG&G. As one of the nation’s NATO and other allied countries. leading defense contractors, EG&G proudly works in tandem with the armed forces to pro- From aviation theory and simulator instruction to tect American interests at home and abroad. actual flight training, EG&G instructors lead undergraduate student pilots through months of thorough training to prepare them for the perils of combat. Safety is paramount in every aspect of the training, and the program boasts an unprecedented safety record. More than 1.6

20 URS “We train the U.S. Army to fly. The military helicopters you Left to right: Michelle Rodgers, see on the evening news are flown by men and women EG&G Chip Weakley, Henry Witmer, instructors have trained. They are our credentials.” Lisa Bailey

Larry Turnage Program Manager, EG&G Division

URS 21 KEY FACTS • EG&G is the primary support contractor for the Navy’s CEC Program • EG&G is helping the Cooperative Engagement Navy manage the devel- opment, production and Capability Program fielding of this network- centric capability U.S. Naval Sea • CEC combines data from multiple sensors Systems Command to be transmitted to every CEC-equipped ship and aircraft in the battle zone • This technology helps protect our joint forces and defeat air threats

A KEY TO RESPONDING successfully to a threat detect incoming missiles with unprecedented during warfare is the ability to share information speed and accuracy, and to relay this informa- quickly, accurately and simultaneously. tion to all CEC-equipped ships and aircraft in the area. URS’ EG&G Division is at the forefront of the U.S. Navy’s efforts to move into the world of network- As the primary support contractor for the program, centric warfare, where sensor data about threats EG&G is involved in almost every phase of the are distributed to every ship and aircraft equipped Navy’s CEC implementation. EG&G engineers and with Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) computer scientists provide both management technology. EG&G is helping the U.S. Naval Sea and technical support services at Navy facilities Systems Command (NAVSEA) manage the devel- in Washington, D.C., Dahlgren, Virginia, and opment and deployment of this next-generation Crane, Indiana. The EG&G team is assisting in defense system. CEC’s war fighting advantage the budgeting, planning, procuring and fielding is being accomplished not with additional of the system hardware and software, and in weapons systems, but with new technology that performing functional and system-level testing integrates existing radar and weapons data from at locations around the country. multiple sensors, producing information that can be used by all units. The implementation of this next-generation technology increases the Navy’s effectiveness CEC technology assists naval forces in defending in targeting and destroying incoming weapons against air attacks, including assaults by difficult- faster and at safer distances. EG&G is proud to be to-detect, low-flying cruise missiles. Sensor assisting the Navy with this important program to networking capabilities enable a battle group to help protect our military personnel.

22 URS “Our ability to protect American assets—military Left to right: Holly Steussy, personnel, aircraft and ships—will be greatly enhanced Gene Robinson, Ernest Coleman by this technology.”

Alan Weakley Vice President, EG&G Division

URS 23 Office Locations Worldwide

UNITED STATES Mississippi NORTH & SOUTH EUROPE ASIA/PACIFIC Alabama Missouri AMERICA Belgium Australia Alaska Montana Argentina France China Arizona Nebraska Bolivia Germany Indonesia Arkansas Nevada Canada Ireland New Zealand California New Hampshire Mexico Italy Singapore Colorado New Jersey Panama Netherlands South Korea Connecticut New Mexico Spain Delaware New York Sweden District of Columbia North Carolina United Kingdom Florida Ohio Georgia Oklahoma MIDDLE EAST Guam Oregon Azerbaijan Hawaii Pennsylvania Qatar Idaho Puerto Rico Saudi Arabia Illinois Rhode Island Indiana South Carolina Iowa Tennessee Kansas Texas Kentucky Utah Louisiana Virginia Maine Washington Maryland West Virginia Massachusetts Wisconsin Michigan Wyoming Minnesota

24 URS Consolidated Summary of Financial Statements

The following pages contain summary financial data for URS’ 2003 fiscal year ended October 31, 2003. Complete financial information can be found in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Copies of URS’ Form 10-K may be obtained without charge by contacting our Investor Relations Department via e-mail at [email protected], by calling 1-877-877-8970, or by accessing the Investor Relations section of the URS Web site at www.urscorp.com.

Table of Contents 26 Summary of Selected Financial Information 27 Consolidated Balance Sheets 28 Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income 29 Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity 30 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 31 Reports of Management and Independent Auditors 32 Corporate Directory IBC Corporate Information Summary of Selected Financial Information

The following summary of selected financial data for the five years ended October 31, 2003 is derived from our audited con- solidated financial statements and reflects our August 2002 acquisition of EG&G and our June 1999 acquisition of Dames & Moore Group, both of which were accounted for under the purchase method of accounting. The summary of selected finan- cial data also reflects a $7.6 million loss on early retirement of debt, which we recorded in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended October 31, 2002. You should read the “Summary of Selected Financial Data” presented below in conjunction with the information contained in our complete set of consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes, and the section entitled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2003.

Summary of Selected Financial Data

Years Ended October 31, 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 (In thousands, except per share data) Income Statement Data: Revenues $3,186,714 $2,427,827 $2,319,350 $2,205,578 $1,418,522 Direct operating expenses 2,005,339 1,489,386 1,393,818 1,345,068 854,520 Gross profit 1,181,375 938,441 925,532 860,510 564,002 Indirect expenses: Indirect, general and administrative 1,000,970 791,625 755,791 697,051 463,132 Interest expense, net 83,571 55,705 65,589 71,861 34,589 1,084,541 847,330 821,380 768,912 497,721 Income before taxes 96,834 91,111 104,152 91,598 66,281 Income tax expense 38,730 35,940 46,300 41,700 29,700 Net income 58,104 55,171 57,852 49,898 36,581 Preferred stock dividend — 5,939 9,229 8,337 3,333 Net income available for common stockholders 58,104 49,232 48,623 41,561 33,248 Other comprehensive income (loss): Foreign currency translation adjustments 4,226 (1,170) (1,550) (2,609) 197 Comprehensive income $ 62,330 $ 48,062 $ 47,073 $ 38,952 $ 33,445 Net income per common share: Basic $ 1.78 $ 2.18 $ 2.79 $ 2.55 $ 2.14 Diluted $ 1.76 $ 2.03 $ 2.41 $ 2.27 $ 1.98

As of October 31, 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 (In thousands) Balance Sheet Data: Total assets $2,167,612 $2,229,092 $1,463,376 $1,427,134 $1,444,525 Total debt $ 812,593 $ 955,563 $ 631,129 $ 648,351 $ 688,380 Preferred stock $ — $ 46,733 $ 120,099 $ 111,013 $ 103,333 Stockholders’ equity $ 765,073 $ 633,852 $ 322,502 $ 257,794 $ 207,169 Refer to the URS 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete set of consolidated financial statements and their accompanying notes that are an integral part of the above condensed financial statements.

26 URS URS Corporation and Subsidiaries Consolidated Balance Sheets

October 31, 2003 2002 (In thousands, except per share data) Assets Current assets: Cash and cash equivalents $ 15,508 $ 9,972 Accounts receivable, including retainage amounts of $42,617 and $50,552, respectively 528,037 571,833 Costs and accrued earnings in excess of billings on contracts in process 393,670 399,093 Less receivable allowances (33,106) (30,710) Net accounts receivable 888,601 940,216 Deferred income taxes 13,315 17,895 Prepaid expenses and other assets 22,241 20,248 Total current assets 939,665 988,331 Property and equipment at cost, net 150,553 156,524 Goodwill, net 1,004,680 1,001,629 Purchased intangible assets, net 11,391 14,500 Other assets 61,323 68,108 $2,167,612 $2,229,092

Liabilities, Mandatorily Redeemable Securities, and Stockholders’ Equity Current liabilities: Current portion of long-term debt $ 23,885 $ 30,298 Accounts payable and subcontractor payable, including retainage of $7,409 and $5,190, respectively 172,500 199,728 Accrued salaries and wages 125,774 101,287 Accrued expenses and other 86,874 91,634 Billings in excess of costs and accrued earnings on contracts in process 83,002 92,235 Total current liabilities 492,035 515,182 Long-term debt 788,708 925,265 Deferred income taxes 55,411 40,629 Deferred compensation and other 66,385 67,431 Total liabilities 1,402,539 1,548,507 Commitments and contingencies Mandatorily redeemable Series D senior convertible participating preferred stock, par value $.01; authorized 100 shares; issued and outstanding 0 and 100, respectively; liquidation preference $0 and $0, respectively — 46,733 Stockholders’ equity: Common stock, par value $.01; authorized 50,000 shares; issued and outstanding 33,664 and 30,084 shares, respectively 336 301 Treasury stock, 52 shares at cost (287) (287) Additional paid-in capital 487,824 418,705 Accumulated other comprehensive loss (906) (5,132) Retained earnings 278,106 220,265 Total stockholders’ equity 765,073 633,852 $2,167,612 $2,229,092 Refer to the URS 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete set of consolidated financial statements and their accompanying notes that are an integral part of the above condensed financial statements.

URS 27 URS Corporation and Subsidiaries Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income

Years Ended October 31, 2003 2002 2001 (In thousands, except per share data) Revenues $3,186,714 $2,427,827 $2,319,350 Direct operating expenses 2,005,339 1,489,386 1,393,818 Gross profit 1,181,375 938,441 925,532 Indirect expenses: General and administrative 1,000,970 791,625 755,791 Interest expense, net 83,571 55,705 65,589 1,084,541 847,330 821,380 Income before taxes 96,834 91,111 104,152 Income tax expense 38,730 35,940 46,300 Net income 58,104 55,171 57,852 Preferred stock dividend — 5,939 9,229 Net income available for common stockholders 58,104 49,232 48,623 Other comprehensive income (loss): Foreign currency translation adjustments 4,226 (1,170) (1,550) Comprehensive income $ 62,330 $ 48,062 $ 47,073 Net income per common share: Basic $ 1.78 $ 2.18 $ 2.79 Diluted $ 1.76 $ 2.03 $ 2.41 Weighted average shares outstanding: Basic 32,688 22,554 17,444 Diluted 33,041 27,138 23,962 Refer to the URS 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete set of consolidated financial statements and their accompanying notes that are an integral part of the above condensed financial statements.

28 URS URS Corporation and Subsidiaries Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity

Accumulated Additional Other Total Common Stock Treasury Paid-in Comprehensive Retained Stockholders’ Shares Amount Stock Capital Income (loss) Earnings Equity (In thousands) Balances, October 31, 2000 16,834 $168 $(287) $137,389 $(2,412) $122,936 $257,794 Employee stock purchases 1,364 14 — 13,722 — — 13,736 Tax benefit of stock options — — — 3,899 — — 3,899 Quasi-reorganization NOL carryforward — — — 263 — (263) — Total comprehensive loss: Foreign currency translation — — — — (1,550) — (1,550) Net income — — — — — 57,852 57,852 In-kind preferred stock dividends — — — — — (9,229) (9,229)

Balances, October 31, 2001 18,198 182 (287) 155,273 (3,962) 171,296 322,502 Employee stock purchases 1,084 11 — 19,327 — — 19,338 Tax benefit of stock options — — — 3,745 — — 3,745 Conversion of preferred stock to common stock 5,845 58 — 126,780 — — 126,838 Issuance of common stock in connection with the EG&G acquisition 4,957 50 — 112,250 — — 112,300 Issuance of preferred stock in connection with the EG&G acquisition — — — 1,067 — — 1,067 Quasi-reorganization NOL carryforward — — — 263 — (263) — Total comprehensive loss: Foreign currency translation — — — — (1,170) — (1,170) Net income — — — — — 55,171 55,171 In-kind preferred stock dividends — — — — — (5,939) (5,939)

Balances, October 31, 2002 30,084 301 (287) 418,705 (5,132) 220,265 633,852 Employee stock purchases 931 9 — 13,432 — — 13,441 Tax benefit of stock options — — — 12 — — 12 Conversion of preferred stock to common stock 2,107 21 — 46,712 — — 46,733 Issuance of over-allotment of common shares in connection with the conversion of preferred stock 480 5 — 8,700 — — 8,705 Quasi-reorganization NOL carryforward — — — 263 — (263) — Total comprehensive income: Foreign currency translation — — — — 4,226 — 4,226 Net income — — — — — 58,104 58,104 Balances, October 31, 2003 33,602 $336 $(287) $487,824 $ (906) $278,106 $765,073 Refer to the URS 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete set of consolidated financial statements and their accompanying notes that are an integral part of the above condensed financial statements.

URS 29 URS Corporation and Subsidiaries Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

Years Ended October 31, 2003 2002 2001 (In thousands) Cash flows from operating activities: Net income $ 58,104 $ 55,171 $ 57,852 Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation and amortization 42,349 32,799 42,143 Amortization of financing fees 7,496 4,220 3,663 Loss on extinguishment of debt — 7,620 — Receivable allowances 2,396 1,694 (8,254) Deferred income taxes 19,362 2,373 (3,894) Stock compensation 4,187 2,345 1,964 Tax benefit of stock options 12 3,745 3,899 Changes in current assets and liabilities, net of business acquired: Accounts receivable and costs and accrued earnings in excess of billings on contracts in process 49,219 (59,658) (27,920) Income taxes recoverable — — 4,997 Prepaid expenses and other assets (1,993) 8,738 (5,544) Accounts payable, accrued salaries and wages and accrued expenses (11,429) (7,058) (8,484) Billings in excess of costs and accrued earnings on contracts in process (9,233) (3,721) 5,045 Deferred compensation and other (1,046) 33,465 (6,906) Other, net 5,077 5,839 (11,511) Total adjustments 106,397 32,401 (10,802) Net cash provided by operating activities 164,501 87,572 47,050 Cash flows from investing activities: Payment for business acquisition, net of cash acquired — (340,540) — Proceeds from sale of subsidiaries and divisions — 5,840 3,530 Capital expenditures (16,607) (52,458) (19,778) Net cash used by investing activities (16,607) (387,158) (16,248) Cash flows from financing activities: Proceeds from issuance of debt — 195,280 — Principal payments on long-term debt (118,413) (381,648) (33,522) Borrowings of long-term debt 212 476,101 — Net borrowings (payments) under the line of credit (27,259) 27,259 — Capital lease obligations payments (14,594) (14,794) (7,530) Short-term note borrowings 1,257 278 5,830 Short-term note payments (1,413) (3,680) (7,647) Proceeds from sale of common shares and exercise of stock options 17,852 17,003 11,772 Payment of financing fees — (29,639) — Net cash provided (used) by financing activities (142,358) 286,160 (31,097) Net increase (decrease) in cash 5,536 (13,426) (295) Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 9,972 23,398 23,693 Cash and cash equivalents at end of year $ 15,508 $ 9,972 $ 23,398 Supplemental information: Interest paid $ 63,414 $ 50,084 $ 75,434 Taxes paid $ 17,180 $ 30,513 $ 33,882 Equipment acquired with capital lease obligations $ 15,712 $ 23,419 $ 25,084 Non-cash dividends paid in-kind $ — $ 6,740 $ 9,086 Conversion of Series B preferred stock to common stock $ — $126,838 $ — Net book value of business sold $ — $ 5,840 $ 3,530 Refer to the URS 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete set of consolidated financial statements and their accompanying notes that are an integral part of the above condensed financial statements.

30 URS Reports of Management and Independent Auditors

Report of Management

The management of URS Corporation is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of its Consolidated Financial Statements, which have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, and include amounts based on the best judgment of management. The Company’s management also is responsible for the accuracy and consistency of other financial information included in this Annual Report.

Management is responsible for maintaining a system of internal accounting controls and procedures to provide reasonable assur- ance that assets are safeguarded and transactions are authorized, recorded and reported properly. The internal accounting control system is augmented by a program of internal audits and appropriate reviews by management, written policies and guidelines and a written Code of Business Conduct and Ethics adopted by our Board of Directors and applicable to all employees of the Company.

In fulfilling its oversight responsibilities, the Audit Committee reviewed the audited financial statements in the Annual Report on Form 10-K with management including a discussion of the accounting principles, the reasonableness of significant judgments, and the clarity of disclosures in the financial statements. The Committee discussed with our independent auditors the overall scope and plans for their audit. The Committee meets with the independent auditors to discuss the results of their examination, their evaluation of our internal controls, and the overall quality of our financial reporting.

Martin M. Koffel Kent P. Ainsworth Chairman of the Board and Executive Vice President, Chief Executive Officer Chief Financial Officer and Secretary

Report of Independent Auditors

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of URS Corporation: We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the consolidated balance sheets of URS Corporation and its subsidiaries (“the Company”) as of October 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related con- solidated statements of operations and comprehensive income, of changes in stockholders’ equity and of cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended October 31, 2003 (not presented herein) included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K; and in our report dated January 20, 2004, in which we indicated that the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets as of November 1, 2001, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.

In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the consolidated financial statements from which it has been derived.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

San Francisco, California January 20, 2004

URS 31 Corporate Directory

DIRECTORS John D. Roach David C. Nelson James R. Miller Martin M. Koffel Chairman and Vice President and Executive Vice President, Chairman of the Board Chief Executive Officer, Corporate Treasurer International Division and Chief Executive Officer Stonegate International Olga Perkovic´ Jean-Yves Perez H. Jesse Arnelle Irwin L. Rosenstein Vice President, Executive Vice President, Of Counsel, Chairman, Corporate Planning Private Sector Marketing Womble,Carlyle, URS Division Irwin L. Rosenstein Michael C. Richards Sandridge and Rice William D. Walsh Chairman, URS Division, Senior Vice President, Richard C. Blum Chairman, Vice President and Director West Division Vice Chairman of the Board Sequoia Associates, LLC Mary E. Sullivan Martin S. Tanzer and Chairman, Vice President, Executive Vice President, Blum Capital Partners, L.P. CORPORATE OFFICERS Human Resources Public Sector Marketing Armen Der Marderosian Martin M. Koffel Carol J. Brummerstedt Executive Vice President, Chief Executive Officer, Assistant Secretary EG&G DIVISION Technology,GTE Corporation (Ret.) President and and President and CEO, Chairman of the Board Maria Seto George R. Melton GTE Government Systems Director, President Corporation (Ret.) Kent P. Ainsworth Financial Reporting Executive Vice President, Lex N. Allen Mickey P. Foret Chief Financial Officer Wayne H. Silva Vice President and Executive Vice President and Secretary Director, Internal Audit General Manager, and Chief Financial Officer, Aerospace Technical Northwest Airlines,Inc.(Ret.) Thomas W. Bishop Services Division and Chairman and Senior Vice President, OPERATING MANAGEMENT Chief Financial Officer, Construction Services Division Edward A. Katkic URS DIVISION Northwest Airlines Cargo,Inc.(Ret.) and Vice President, Strategy Vice President, Irwin L. Rosenstein Plans and Programs Marie L. Knowles Reed N. Brimhall Chairman Executive Vice President Vice President, David W. Wallace Jr. and Chief Financial Officer, Corporate Controller Gary V. Jandegian Vice President, ARCO (Ret.) President Marketing Gary V. Jandegian Richard B. Madden President, URS Division, Thomas W. Bishop Randall A. Wotring Chairman and Vice President Senior Vice President, Vice President and Chief Executive Officer, Construction Services Division General Manager, Potlatch Corporation (Ret.) Susan B. Kilgannon Engineering & Technology Vice President, Dhamo S. Dhamotharan Services Division George R. Melton Communications Senior Vice President, President, Central Division EG&G Division Joseph Masters Vice President and Robert M. Gallen Gen. Joseph W. Ralston General Counsel Senior Vice President, Vice Chairman, East Division The Cohen Group George R. Melton President, EG&G Division, Vice President and Director

32 URS Corporate Information

CORPORATE OFFICE STOCK LISTING 600 Montgomery Street, 26th Floor The shares of our common stock are listed on the New York San Francisco, CA 94111-2727 Stock Exchange and the Pacific Exchange (under the symbol Tel: (415) 774-2700 URS). At January 30, 2004, we had approximately 5,200 stock- Fax: (415) 398-1905 holders of record. The following table sets forth the high and e-mail: [email protected] low closing sale prices of our common stock, as reported by for the periods indicated. WEB SITE: www.urscorp.com MARKET PRICE INDEPENDENT AUDITORS LOW HIGH PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Fiscal Period:

REGISTRAR AND TRANSFER AGENT 2002: Mellon Investor Services LLC First Quarter $23.40 $30.18 P.O. Box 3315 Second Quarter $28.65 $34.25 South Hackensack, NJ 07606 Third Quarter $19.89 $32.19 or Fourth Quarter $15.19 $25.25 85 Challenger Road 2003: Ridgefield Park, NJ 07650 First Quarter $10.89 $21.20 (800) 522-6645 Second Quarter $ 8.10 $14.36 Third Quarter $14.20 $21.79 TDD for Hearing Impaired: (800) 231-5469 Fourth Quarter $19.00 $23.38 Foreign Stockholders: (201) 329-8660 2004: TDD for Foreign Stockholders: (201) 329-8354 First Quarter $21.87 $28.07 www.melloninvestor.com (through January 30, 2004)

LEGAL COUNSEL We have not paid cash dividends since 1986, and at the present Cooley Godward LLP time, we do not anticipate paying dividends on our outstanding common stock in the near future. In addition, we are precluded FORM 10-K from paying dividends on our outstanding common stock pursuant Copies of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended to our Senior Secured Credit Facility with our lender and the October 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange indentures governing our 8 5/8% Senior Subordinated Debentures, Commission may be obtained without charge. Requests should our 12 1/4% Senior Subordinated Notes and our 111/2% Senior be sent to our Investor Relations Department via e-mail at Notes. Please refer to Note 6, “Current and Long-Term Debt” and [email protected] or by calling 1-877-877-8970. Note 11, “Stockholders’ Equity” to our “Consolidated Financial The Form 10-K also can be accessed on the URS Web site at Statements and Supplementary Data” included in our Annual www.urscorp.com. Report on Form 10-K for the year ended October 31, 2003.

ANNUAL MEETING Information about our equity compensation plans can be found The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of URS Corporation will under the caption “Equity Compensation Plan Information” in our be held at 9:30 A.M. on Tuesday, March 23, 2004, at the offices definitive proxy statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Cooley Godward LLP, One Maritime Plaza, 20th Floor, to be held on March 23, 2004. San Francisco, California.

NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE CERTIFICATION Our Chief Executive Officer will be required to certify to the New York Stock Exchange that, as of the date of the certification, he is not aware of any violation by URS of New York Stock Exchange corporate governance listing standards. Our Chief Executive Officer intends to make the applicable certification when the New York Stock Exchange makes the certification form available. URS Corporation 600 Montgomery Street, 26th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-2727 www.urscorp.com