Seriously? You actually can write with a straight face,
We have no evidence that Lockheed provided anything but the inner boundary.
when the report says explicitly, "Lockheed Aircraft Corporation...provided a study of the flightpath based both on L-188 performance data and information disclosed during the investigation. Their study encompassed a ground envelope of reported flightpaths..."
That's flightpaths plural.
In other words the report states flat out that Lockheed provided an analysis that considered more than one flight path, so they obviously didn't provide the inner boundary only. And again, there can be no inner boundary without something to be the inner boundary OF.
If you've gotten to the point that absolutely clear statements don't count as "evidence" in your mind simply because they're in the CAB report, then objectivity and analysis both have now gone completely out the window.