PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL COMMUNITY

AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

Docket #: DOT-OST-2010-0124 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport 

Columbia, South Carolina 

Legal sponsor: RichlandLexington Airport District 

DUNS: 0737071680000 

Congressional District Code: 

SC-02 

Contact: Dan Mann, AAE 

Executive Director 

PO Box 280037 

Columbia, SC 29228-0037 

Phone: (803) 822-5019 

Fax: (803) 822-5138 

d.mann@columbiaairport.com


TABLE OF CONT

Summary Information ................................

Proposal Highlights ................................

Higher than Average Airfares ................................

Community Cost Contribution ................................

Public-Private Partnership................................

Material Benefits ................................

Use of Funds in a Timely Fashion ................................

Air Service Environment ................................

Airport Catchment Area and Market Potential

Strong and Diverse Economy ................................

Population and Business Growth ................................

Air Service – Existing/Historical

Existing Air Service ................................

Historical Air Service ................................

Past Air Service Development Efforts

Air Service Needs and Deficiencies

Major Origin/Destination Markets Not Served Adequately

High Airfares ................................................................

Strategic Plan – Air Service ................................

Project Goals ................................................................

Proposed Air Service ................................

Airline Participation ................................

Market Analysis ................................

Alternate Plan ................................................................

Strategic Plan – Implementation and Funding

Public-Private Partnership................................

Incentive and Support Plan ................................

Strategic Plan Funding ................................

Project Continuation and Sustainability

Schedule and Monitoring ................................

Critical Milestones ................................

Monitoring Program ................................

Appendix A. Letters of Support

Appendix B. Related News Article

TENTS

............................................................. 1

.................................................................. 2

........................................................................... 2

......................................................................... 2

................................................................................. 2

............................................................................................. 3

..................................................................... 3

.......................................................... 4

Airport Catchment Area and Market Potential ................................................. 4

........................................................................... 4

..................................................................... 6

Existing/Historical ............................................... 7

.......................................................................................... 7

........................................................................................ 7

Past Air Service Development Efforts ................................................................ 9

Air Service Needs and Deficiencies ....................................... 10

Major Origin/Destination Markets Not Served Adequately .............................. 10

................................................................. 11

.................................................... 12

................................................................. 12

...................................................................................... 12

....................................................................................... 13

............................................................................................. 13

............................................................... 15

Implementation and Funding .................... 16

............................................................................... 16

............................................................................ 16

................................................................................... 17

Project Continuation and Sustainability .......................................................... 18

...................................................... 19

......................................................................................... 19

...................................................................................... 20

Appendix A. Letters of Support ............................................ 21

Appendix B. Related News Article ........................................ 45

PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Prepared by 
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

1 

SUMMARY INFORMATION

A. Applicant Information: 

(Check all that apply) 

X 

Not a 

Consortium 

Interstate 

Consortium 

Intrastate 

Consortium 

Community now receives EAS subsidy 

Community (or Consortium member) previously 

received a Small Community Grant 

If previous recipient, date of grant: N/A 

B. Public/Private Partnerships: 

(List organization names) 

Public Private

Columbia Metropolitan 

Airport 

Greater Columbia Chamber 

of Commerce (Navigating 

from Good to Great 

Foundation) 

C. Project Proposal: 

(Check all that apply) 

X Marketing Regional Service 

Personnel Launch New Carrier 

Travel Bank First Service 

Surface Transportation Secure Additional 

Carrier 

Revenue Guarantee New Route 

Start Up Cost Offset Low Fare Service 

Study X Subsidy 

 X Upgrade Aircraft Other (specify): 

__________ 

Increase Frequency 

Service Restoration 

D. Existing Landing Aids at Local Airport: 

X Full ILS X Published Instrument Approach 

X Localizer Outer/Middle Marker 

 Other (specify): 

E. Project Cost: 

1. Federal amount requested: $750,000

2. State cash financial contribution: $0

3. Local cash financial contribution...

3a. Airport cash funds: $180,000

3b. Non-airport cash funds: $83,000

3c. Total local cash funds (3a.+3b.) $263,000

4. TOTAL CASH FUNDING (1.+2.+3c.) $1,013,000

5. Local funds contributed from alreadyexisting programs or projects included 

in line 3c. amount: $0 

6. Local funds contributed from new

commitments or new resources 

included in line 3c. amount: $263,000 

7. Airport In-Kind contribution: 

(Monitoring/Marketing) $8,700 

8. Other In-Kind contribution:

(Program administration/Marketing) $211,950 

9. TOTAL IN-KIND CONTRIBUTION 

(7.+8.): $220,650 

10. TOTAL PROJECT COST (4.+9.): $1,233,650

F. Enplanements: 

2000 600,020 2005 732,625

2001 531,619 2006 642,848

2002 503,790 2007 613,233

2003 509,082 2008 568,520

2004 634,105 2009 519,374

G. Is this application 

subject to review by 

State under Executive 

Order 12372 process? 

c. Program is not 

covered by E.O. 

12372. 

H. Is the Applicant 

delinquent on any 

Federal debt? (if “yes”, 

provide explanation) 

No 

Yes 

X

X
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

2 

PROPOSAL HIGHLIGHTS

olumbia Metropolitan Airport has never applied for, nor received a Small 

Community Air Service Development Program grant. This grant application for 

the Columbia Metropolitan Airport meets the criteria of Docket DOT-OST-2010-

0124. Columbia Metropolitan Airport, the legal sponsor, is requesting $750,000 in 

federal assistance to implement a $1,233,650 air service initiative. 

The project goals are: 

1. Upgrade high-priority hub service to mitigate the impact of 

Southwest Airlines planned service at nearby competing airports 

Greenville/Spartanburg and Charleston 

2. Increase seats and competition to reduce airfares 

3. Reduce the need to drive to alternate airports to access adequate 

air service and competitive fares 

Improved Atlanta hub service is a top priority of the community. The 

Strategic Plan, upgrading Delta Air Lines’ Atlanta service, will achieve 

the project goals. 

HIGHER THAN AVERAGE AIRFARES

The Columbia Metropolitan Airport is currently overpriced and 

underserved when compared to nearby competing airports. Columbia 

Metropolitan Airport’s average fares are higher than those of other 

airports in the geographic area. Columbia is significantly overpriced 

compared to other communities in the region ranging from 23 percent 

higher than Savannah to 64 percent higher than Raleigh/Durham in 

calendar year 2009. 

COMMUNITY COST CONTRIBUTION

To support this air service initiative, the Airport and community will fund 39 percent of 

the proposed $1,233,650 Strategic Plan. Non-airport revenue sources will fund eight 

percent ($83,000) of the $1,013,000 cash requirement. This is a strong commitment by 

the local community to be proactive and improve local service. 

 

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

Local businesses and the public-private partnership have the ability to successfully 

implement this project. Columbia Metropolitan Airport has partnered with the Greater 

Columbia Chamber of Commerce (also known as Navigating from Good to Great 

Foundation) for purposes of air service development. This is not a new partnership. This 

public-private partnership has worked successfully together for many years partnering on 

C

This section addresses: 

• Project goals 

• Description of the 

Strategic Plan 

• Highlights of the grant 

application 

Improved Atlanta

hub service is a top

priority of the

community. The

Strategic Plan,

upgrading Delta Air

Lines’ Atlanta

service, will achieve

the project goals.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

3 

new air service initiatives. The Airport and the community are 

committed to the successful development of air service at Columbia. 

MATERIAL BENEFITS

Columbia’s metropolitan area is the largest in the state with a 

population of 785,000. Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s catchment 

area has a population of almost 1,040,000. Columbia’s strength is 

through its diverse base of businesses and institutions all of which 

depend on the local airport. As the capital of South Carolina, the 

economy has a strong government, military, academic and corporate 

base. The air service improvement plan proposed in this grant application will benefit a 

broad segment of the traveling public, including business, education institutions and 

other enterprises. 

USE OF FUNDS IN A TIMELY FASHION

The public-private partnership has a solid schedule and Strategic Plan to ensure timely 

use of the funds. An initial meeting was held with the targeted airline in anticipation of 

this grant application, and the Strategic Plan proposal is under consideration.

As the capital of

South Carolina, the

economy has a

strong government,

military, academic

and corporate base.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

4 

AIR SERVICE ENVIRONMENT

olumbia, South Carolina, is the capital of the state and home to a wide range of 

institutions and businesses. The strength of Columbia and by extension the 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport is the diversity of the economy. The economy has a 

strong government, military, academic and corporate base. This base is dependent on air 

service and has a strong need for travel. 

AIRPORT CATCHMENT AREA AND MARKET 

POTENTIAL

The Columbia Metropolitan Airport, as shown in 

Exhibit 3.1, encompasses the majority of the 

state of South Carolina as the metropolitan area is

the largest in the state with a population of 

785,000. The area displayed in Exhibit 3.1 is the 

area that the Airport should ideally serve and has a 

population of almost 1,040,000. An estimated 60 

percent of catchment area passengers use the local 

airport. For the 12-months ended July 31, 2010, 

the Airport served approximately 925,000 

passengers. With an estimated 60 percent 

passenger retention rate, roughly 617,000 

passengers use other airports. 

Given the fare environment for Columbia, diverting 

passengers were likely enticed by lower fares 

elsewhere. The entry and expansion of Southwest 

Airlines into neighboring airports is an event that

will likely exacerbate this trend. Diversion to 

competing airports represents a significant 

economic loss for the Columbia metropolitan area. 

STRONG AND DIVERSE ECONOMY

Columbia’s strength is through its diverse base of businesses and institutions all of which 

depend on the local airport. The following is an overview of the different sectors of the 

local economy including educational institutions. 

Military 

Columbia is home to the US Army’s largest basic combat training base, Fort Jackson. Fort 

Jackson trains 50 percent of all soldiers and 80 percent of the women entering the Army 

each year. This requires training as many as 45,000 basic and advanced soldiers annually. 

Fort Jackson encompasses 52,000 acres of land and has over 1,000 buildings. In addition, 

C

This section addresses: 

Description of the Columbia 

community in relation to air 

service to demonstrate the 

benefit of the Strategic Plan 

to a broad segment of the 

traveling public.

EXHIBIT 3.1 COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT CATCHMENT AREA 

The Columbia

metropolitan area is

the largest in the

state with a

population of

785,000. The

expanded airport

catchment area has a

population of almost

1,040,000.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

5 

Fort Jackson has added new schools such as: the US Army Chaplain 

Center and School, the Defense Academy for Credibility Assessment 

and Drill Sergeant School. 

Fort Jackson naturally creates a community around it within Columbia. 

On top of the approximately 45,000 soldiers trained annually, an 

additional 14,000 soldiers attend courses at the schools and 3,600 

active duty soldiers are based at Fort Jackson along with their 10,000 

family members. Fort Jackson employs an additional 4,400 civilians 

and provides services for more than 115,000 retirees and their family 

members. 

The economic impact on Columbia’s economy is substantial. Fort Jackson’s direct impact 

through its expenditures exceeds $717 million. The indirect impact is far greater than that 

as hundreds of thousands of individuals and their families cycle through Fort Jackson each 

year and use hotels, restaurants and other services. Fort Jackson will continue to grow in 

the future, has an extraordinarily high demand for air service and is dependent on Columbia 

Metropolitan Airport. 

Government 

State capitals inherently have a great need for air

travel with links between Washington DC, other 

state capitals and other individuals visiting Columbia 

to access the state’s political center. The state’s

departments and institutions when totaled are the 

largest employers in Columbia. As shown in Table 

3.1, the state of South Carolina employs almost 

14,500 people within Columbia. The employment 

estimate only includes state agencies that employ 

over 1,000 people. State government will always 

produce high demand for air travel and is a 

permanent, stable fixture of the local economy. 

 

Local Businesses 

Given the presence of state government and a large 

military instillation, it is no surprise that private 

business thrives in Columbia. The Columbia 

metropolitan area represents all major industries 

from banking and technology to education, 

healthcare and manufacturing. Table 3.1 shows the 

top employers in central South Carolina. These 

employers have a national and international 

presence and require a strong transportation system. 

TABLE 3.1 LARGEST REGIONAL EMPLOYERS 

EMPLOYER SECTOR EMPLOYEES 

State of South Carolina* State 14,434 

Palmetto Health Alliance Health Care 9,300 

Blue Cross & Blue Shield of S.C. Insurance 6,900 

University of South Carolina Education 4,755 

Wal-Mart Retail 4,500 

United Parcel Service Distribution 3,788 

Lexington Medical Center Health Care 4,000 

Department of Mental Health State 4,917 

AT&T Utility 2,852 

Department of Corrections State 3,160 

Gold Kist Inc Manufacturing 2,210 

Husqvarna Manufacturing 2,300 

Department of Health 

and Environmental Control State 2,121 

Scana & SCE&G Utility 2,210 

Humana/TriCare Insurance 2,100 

Department of Transportation State 1,966 

Providence Hospital Health Care 1,790 

Michelin Tire Corp. Manufacturing 1,650 

Toumey Healthcare System Health Care 1,600 

Verizon Telecommunications 1,550 

Wachovia Bank Banking 1,475 

Dorn VA Medical Center Health Care 1,457 

Kraft Foods Global Inc Manufacturing 1,375 

Westinghouse Electric Manufacturing 1,200 

Budget and Control Board State 1,142 

Department of Juvenile Justice State 1,128 

CSC Corporation Insurance 1,100 

Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Insurance 1,032 

Bose Corporation Technology/

Manufacturing 870 

Bank of America Banking 750 

Source: Central SC Alliance 

* Inclusive of all state agencies that employ over 1,000 
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

6 

Education 

In addition to a strong business climate and government and military 

presence, higher education is also well represented in the Columbia 

area. Columbia is home to the University of South Carolina, Benedict 

and Allen Colleges, Columbia College, Columbia International 

University, Midlands Technical College and Newberry College. Each 

college offers educational opportunities ranging from a two-year 

vocational degree to advanced degrees. The University of South 

Carolina, in particular, enrolls almost 28,000 students annually and 

employs almost 4,800 staff in central South Carolina. 

Tourism 

Table 3.2 shows that the Columbia 

Metropolitan Convention and Visitors Bureau 

has experienced a significant economic 

impact as a result of an underserved and 

overpriced market. More than $1.5 million 

in lost business can be directly attributed to 

inadequate local air service. Absent a strong 

air service retention and improvement 

program such as the Strategic Plan proposed 

herein, losses associated with inadequate air 

service can only be expected to increase. 

POPULATION AND BUSINESS GROWTH 

A fundamentally sound economy with strong 

ties to government, military, academic and 

private institutions provides the stability 

needed for continued growth. Over the last 

decade, the population of the ColumbiaNewberry metro area has grown by 15 

percent and is poised to continue to do so. 

In 2010 alone, over $133 million has been 

invested into future growth industries such 

as hydrogen fuel cells, the IT sector and 

distribution (Table 3.3). The demand for air 

service will increase and the Columbia 

Metropolitan Airport must be capable of 

meeting the increased demand. 

TABLE 3.2 LOST BUSINESS DUE TO AIR SERVICE ACCESS/HIGH FARES 

MEETING NAME 

SHOW 

ATTENDEES 

LEAD EEI 

CALCULATION REQUESTED 

ROOMS 

Leadership Workshop 175 $73,500 280 

Environment Committee 25 $10,500 40 

POD Committee 50 $15,750 60 

Safety Committee 25 $10,500 40 

USA Rugby 2008 Men's Div I, II & 

III Playoffs 2,000 $218,750 700 

USA Rugby South Club 7's 

Tournament 400 $62,500 200 

2009 ISHIB Annual Conference 400 $131,250 500 

15th Annual Software Users 

Conference 250 $116,813 445 

The National Symposium on 

Student Retention 300 $149,363 569 

National Sales Meeting 100 $78,750 300 

2011 Annual Meeting 900 $440,475 1,678 

2012 National Alliance of 

Preservation Commissions 300 $237,563 905 

Total 4,925 $1,545,713 5,717 

Source: Columbia Metropolitan Convention & Visitors Bureau 

TABLE 3.3 2010 COLUMBIA INVESTMENT 

COMPANY 

INVESTMENT 

($000s) TYPE PRODUCT SERVICE 

Akebono Brake Corp. 35,600 Expansion Aluminum Brake calipers 

International Paper 25,000 Expansion Fine Paper 

Undisclosed 23,000 New Beef Products 

Republic National

Distributing Co. 11,800 Expansion Wine/LiquorDistribution 

TB Kawashima USA 9,000 Expansion Automotive Textiles 

Kaydon

Corporation 8,900 Expansion Custom Bearings& Assemblies 

FPL Food LLC 8,900 New Beef Products 

Trulite 5,000 Expansion Hydrogen Fuel Cells 

Palmetto State

Armory LLC 3,000 Expansion Distribution of Ammo& Gun Parts 

Immedion 2,000 New Data Center 

DentaQuest 750 New Call Center 

Quality Software

Services 480 New IT Services and Systems Integration 

Total 133,430 

Source: Central SC Alliance 
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

7 

AIR SERVICE –

EXISTING/HISTORICAL

his section provides an overview of existing air service. Carriers providing service, 

service frequency, nonstop destinations offered, fares and equipment types are 

included in the discussion. A summary of historical air service is also included with 

destinations, traffic levels, service providers and average airfares. A description of air service 

development efforts concludes the section. 

EXISTING AIR SERVICE

Columbia Metropolitan Airport is served by 

five airlines to 10 nonstop destinations. 

American Airlines, Continental Airlines, 

Delta Air Lines, United Airlines and US 

Airways serve the market. US Airways is 

the only airline using turboprop aircraft at 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport. There are 

an average of 269 weekly flights and an 

average weekly capacity of 14,228 seats 

(Table 4.1). 

HISTORICAL AIR SERVICE

Columbia Metropolitan Airport has 

suffered from a decline in air service over 

the last five years. This subsection 

summarizes Columbia Metropolitan 

Airport’s air service history including: 

destinations, traffic levels, service providers 

and airfares. Extenuating factors that have 

affected air service over time are also 

reviewed. 

Destinations, Service Providers and Traffic Levels 

From 2005 to 2009, Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s air service declined significantly. Total 

departures over the five-year period declined 24 percent. Columbia Metropolitan Airport 

lost air service to several hub/destination markets including: 

• Allegiant Air to Ft. Lauderdale (July 2009), Orlando (September 2009) and Tampa 

(February 2007) 

• Continental Airlines to Newark (June 2009) 

T

TABLE 4.1 EXISTING AIR SERVICE 

NONSTOP

DESTINATION 

MARKETING 

CARRIER AIRCRAFT 

WEEKLY 

DEPARTURES 

WEEKLY 

SEATS 

Atlanta, GA Delta 

CRJ-200 (Jet) 70 3,500 

CRJ-700 (Jet) 1 70 

CRJ-900 (Jet) 3 228 

MD-88 (Jet) 3 426 

737-800 (Jet) 4 604 

Charlotte, NC US Airways 

CRJ-200 (Jet) 27 1,350 

ERJ-145 (Jet) 14 700 

Dash 8-300 

(Turboprop) 6 300 

Chicago, IL (ORD) United CRJ-200 (Jet) 13 650 

ERJ-145 (Jet) 8 400 

Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX American ERJ-145 (Jet) 21 1,050 

Detroit, MI Delta CRJ-200 (Jet) 11 550 

ERJ-145 (Jet) 3 150 

Houston, TX (IAH) Continental ERJ-145 (Jet) 14 700 

New York, NY (LGA) Delta CRJ-200 (Jet) 6 300 

Philadelphia, PA US Airways CRJ-200 (Jet) 19 950 

Washington, DC 

(DCA) US Airways CRJ-200 (Jet) 7 350 

ERJ-145 (Jet) 12 600 

Washington, DC 

(IAD) United CRJ-200 (Jet) 25 1,250 

ERJ-145 (Jet) 2 100 

Total 269 14,228 

Source: apgDat, August 2010 

This section addresses: 

• Description of existing 

air service 

• Synopsis of historical air 

service 

• Description of air service 

development efforts 

From 2005 to 2009,

Columbia

Metropolitan

Airport’s air service

declined significantly

with total departures

over the five-year

period decreasing 24

percent.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

8 

• Delta Air Lines to Dallas/Ft. Worth (January 2005), Memphis 

(October 2009), Orlando (April 2008) and Tampa (November 2005) 

• Independence Air to Orlando (April 2005), Tampa (April 2005) and 

Washington Dulles (December 2005) 

• Spirit Airlines to Ft. Lauderdale (February 2009) 

In 2010, additional service losses occurred including Delta’s Cincinnati 

service. Some limited service gains offset the losses with Delta 

increasing departures at Atlanta and American adding Dallas/Ft. Worth 

service in November 2005. The impact of the departure gains were 

partially offset by decreases in aircraft size, particularly to Atlanta.

 

While departures declined since 2005, enplanements also declined. Since 2005, 

enplanements have decreased 29 percent. The five-year high in enplanements occurred in 

2005 when departures also peaked (Table 4.2). 

TABLE 4.2 HISTORICAL DESTINATIONS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS 

DESTINATION AIRLINE 

DEPARTURES - CALENDAR YEAR % CHANGE 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2005-09 

Atlanta, GA Delta 3,008 2,681 2,458 2,593 3,419 14 

Charlotte, NC US Airways 2,609 2,568 2,538 2,779 2,492 (4) 

Chicago, IL (ORD) American 0 94 0 0 0 0 

United 1,094 1,451 1,512 1,433 1,180 8 

Cincinnati, OH Delta 2,323 1,184 1,225 1,070 750 (68) 

Dallas, TX (DFW) American 184 1,072 1,065 1,130 1,071 482 

Delta 29 0 0 0 0 (100) 

Detroit, MI Delta 974 712 690 691 499 (49) 

Ft. Lauderdale, FL Allegiant 0 0 0 0 24 100 

Spirit 0 0 0 157 28 100 

Houston, TX (IAH) Continental 747 907 925 908 876 17 

Memphis, TN Delta 166 680 680 683 376 127 

New York, NY (LGA) Delta 990 591 565 579 346 (65) 

Newark, NJ Continental 694 809 641 621 275 (60) 

Orlando, FL (MCO) Delta 690 356 343 116 0 (100) 

Independence 152 0 0 0 0 (100) 

Orlando, FL (SFB) Allegiant 0 0 0 0 85 100 

Philadelphia, PA US Airways 987 1,077 999 947 900 (9) 

Tampa, FL (PIE) Allegiant 0 8 16 0 0 0 

Tampa, FL (TPA) Delta 152 0 0 0 0 (100) 

Independence 430 0 0 0 0 (100) 

Washington, DC (DCA) Delta 865 886 931 1,032 952 10 

Washington, DC (IAD) Independence 1,999 0 0 0 0 (100) 

United 1,420 1,475 1,469 1,462 1,510 6 

Total departures 20,094 17,077 16,593 16,742 15,281 (24) 

Enplanements 732,625 642,848 613,233 568,520 519,374 (29) 

Source: apgDat; Columbia Metropolitan Airport records 

 
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

9 

Airfares 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport has a significant fare 

discrepancy with other South Carolina airports, the Southeast 

region and the national average as shown in Table 4.3. In 

2009, Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s one-way average fare 

was $50 higher than Greenville/Spartanburg, $48 higher than 

Charleston, $70 higher than the Southeast region and $64 

higher than the US average. The average fare of $208 in a 

large metropolitan area is too high for the local economy. 

Extenuating Factors that have Affected Air Service 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport has largely been free of extenuating factors that have 

affected air service. Greenville/Spartanburg International Airport and Charleston 

International Airport are approximately 110 miles away. Air service at each of the three 

airports is very similar. The only factor affecting Columbia Metropolitan Airport is that their 

geographic location tends to limit the airport catchment area to a maximum radius of 50 to 

60 miles. This has proven to have little impact on Columbia’s air service since this air service 

generally parallels the air service at the other two airports. 

The recent announcement that Southwest Airlines will introduce service at Charleston and 

Greenville/Spartanburg reportedly with five roundtrips in each market has introduced a new 

extenuating factor that will negatively affect Columbia’s air service. This new low-fare 

service, the first in the state of South Carolina, normally draws passengers from as much as 

100 miles away. Absent defensive measures, Southwest’s service at the two airports can be 

expected to poach Columbia Metropolitan Airport catchment area passengers away from 

the local airport. A proactive response is required to avoid a possible deterioration in quality 

and quantity of service at Columbia Metropolitan Airport which serves the state’s capital. 

PAST AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS 

The Columbia Metropolitan Airport and its community

supporters have been very proactive over the last five years to 

maintain and improve air service. Table 4.4 highlights the 

extensive ongoing air service development efforts. Columbia 

Metropolitan Airport has been very active with respect to a 

broad range of airline meetings including airline conferences 

such as Network USA and ACI-NA JumpStart and meetings with 

both low-cost and legacy airline meetings at their headquarters. 

One recent example of Columbia’s ongoing efforts is the very 

successful June 2010 community meeting where a large 

contingent (approximately 175 people) of business and political 

leaders attended the session held to address the Southwest 

Airlines’ impact to Columbia and to develop an air service 

retention strategy. This grant application is one more example 

of a community fully engaged in its air service development. 

TABLE 4.3 AVERAGE ONE-WAY FARE PAID 

 

AVERAGE FARE 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 

Columbia $161 $208 $205 $228 $208 

Greenville/Spartanburg $160 $194 $186 $194 $158 

Charleston $155 $197 $172 $175 $160 

Southeast Region $132 $147 $146 $153 $138 

US $137 $149 $149 $160 $144 

Source: Data Base Products, Inc. 

TABLE 4.4 PAST AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT EFFORTS 

YEAR INITIATIVE 

2005 ACI-NA JumpStart (AA, B6, CO, UA, US) 

Delta Air Lines Meeting (headquarters) 

2006 ACI-NA JumpStart (AA, G4, NW) 

Frontier Airlines Meeting (Headquarters) 

2007 

ACI-NA JumpStart (AX, B6, NW) 

American Airlines Meeting (Headquarters) 

Delta Air Lines Meeting (Headquarters) 

Gulfstream Airlines Meeting (Headquarters) 

Spirit Airlines Meeting (Headquarters) 

2008 

ACI-NA JumpStart (DL, G7, NW, PGX) 

Delta Air Lines Meeting (Headquarters) 

Southwest Airlines Meeting (Headquarters) 

2009 

ACI-NA JumpStart (9E, PGX, UA) 

Allegiant Air Meeting (Headquarters) 

Delta Air Lines Meeting (Headquarters) 

JetBlue Airways Meeting (Headquarters) 

Southwest Airlines Meeting (at CAE) 

2010 

ACI-NA JumpStart (B6, F9, FL) 

Air Service Community Meeting 

Network USA (AA, DL, FL, UA, US, WN) 

Absent defensive

measures,

Southwest’s service

at Charleston and

Greenville/

Spartanburg can be

expected to poach

Columbia

Metropolitan Airport

catchment area

passengers away

from the local

airport.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

10 

AIR SERVICE NEEDS AND

DEFICIENCIES

he Air Service Needs and Deficiencies section identifies the major origin/destination 

markets that are not served adequately and fare levels. Columbia Metropolitan 

Airport’s air service has in the past generally met its catchment area’s needs. 

However, the entry of Southwest Airlines’ low-fare service at Charleston International 

Airport and Greenville/Spartanburg International Airport will accentuate previous modest 

service shortcomings and create others. 

MAJOR ORIGIN/DESTINATION MARKETS NOT SERVED 

ADEQUATELY

With nonstop service to 10 markets including eight hubs and nonstop 

service in eight of the catchment area’s 11 largest markets, the array of 

nonstop destinations has been adequate and similar to service at its two 

primary competing airports. Even with the amount of service in the 

market a 2008 Catchment and Leakage Analysis completed by OAG 

Aviation Solutions determined that Columbia Metropolitan Airport 

retained only 60 percent of passengers within a 90-minute drive 

catchment area. It is expected that Southwest’s entry into the Charleston and 

Greenville/Spartanburg, South Carolina markets will reduce Columbia’s retention by 

increasing passenger diversion and likely cause service reductions in the Columbia market. 

Historical Impact of Southwest Airlines 

Absent an aggressive defensive strategy, Southwest market entry has resulted in diversion of 

traffic from adjacent airports. When Southwest entered the Buffalo market in 2000 with 

four nonstop destinations and 10 departures per day, passengers at Buffalo Niagara 

International Airport increased 25 percent in 2001 compared to 1999 while the average 

airfare declined 21 percent. However, at the adjacent airports, Greater Rochester 

International Airport’s passengers declined seven percent without experiencing the same 

level of fare decline as Buffalo. At Erie International Airport, passengers declined 24 percent 

with virtually no impact on airfares. From July 2000 to July 2001, Erie’s departures declined 

17 percent and seats declined 38 percent. Rochester is located approximately 70 miles from 

Buffalo Niagara International Airport, and Erie is located approximately 100 miles. With 

distances similar to the distance between Columbia and Charleston and 

Greenville/Spartanburg, negative impacts on Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s passengers 

and service levels are anticipated. 

Similarly, Southwest’s entry into the Norfolk market to four nonstop destinations and 12 

daily departures in 2001 resulted in 2002 average fares declining 23 percent and passengers 

increasing 16 percent. At the adjacent Richmond International Airport about 100 miles 

T

This section addresses: 

Description of Columbia’s air 

service needs and 

deficiencies 

It is expected that

Southwest’s entry

into the Charleston

and Greenville/

Spartanburg markets

will reduce

Columbia’s retention

by increasing

passenger diversion

and likely cause

service reductions in

the Columbia

market.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

11 

from Norfolk, Richmond’s passengers declined 13 percent with a 

corresponding decrease in departures and seats of 14 percent. 

Based on these examples and many others where Southwest has 

entered the market at an adjacent airport, Columbia Metropolitan 

Airport anticipates a negative impact on service levels and 

passengers. This air service initiative will assist in countering the 

Southwest impact. 

Additional Capacity Will Be Needed 

In response to Southwest’s entry into the Charleston and Greenville/Spartanburg markets, 

Columbia’s airfares will likely be adjusted downward somewhat from their current high level 

to remain competitive and protect their market position in the catchment area which will 

create passenger demand. The need for capacity will increase, particularly if existing carriers 

reduce capacity in reaction to Southwest’s entry. Load factors in the Atlanta, Charlotte and 

Dallas markets of 77, 72 and 74 percent, respectively, for the year ended April 30, 2010, are 

high enough that they are likely unable to absorb the additional market demand. In July 

2010, the Atlanta market capacity represented approximately a third of the total Columbia 

Metropolitan Airport seat capacity with 12 roundtrips in the market. The market’s 77 

percent load factor indicates little or no seat availability on many or most peak flights. 

Since the Atlanta hub is the dominant routing for Columbia air travelers, it is critical that 

sufficient capacity be available or traffic will divert to the new low-fare Southwest service at 

Charleston and Greenville/Spartanburg. Columbia Metropolitan Airport needs to be 

proactive in protecting airport revenue by minimizing diversion to the new Southwest 

service and providing the convenient air service deserved and needed by its catchment area. 

The key factor in accomplishing this defensive strategy is creating and maintaining a 

reasonable level of seat availability via the high demand Atlanta hub gateway. With 12 

roundtrips in the market, 11 regional jets and one mainline jet, capacity increases should be 

achieved by substituting larger aircraft rather than frequency additions. 

HIGH AIRFARES

While Southwest’s entrance into Charleston and 

Greenville/Spartanburg will likely impact 

Columbia’s average airfares, currently Columbia’s 

average fares are markedly higher than those of 

other airports in the geographic area. Table 5.1

compares Columbia’s average airfares with other 

airports in the area. The airfares do not include 

Allegiant Air’s service impact which may dramatically 

lower airfares in some markets causing a larger fare 

disparity. It is clear that Columbia is significantly 

overpriced compared to other communities in the 

region ranging from 23 percent higher than 

Savannah to 64 percent higher than 

Raleigh/Durham in calendar year 2009. 

TABLE 5.1 COMPARISON OF AVERAGE ONE-WAY FARE PAID

COMPARISON 

AIRPORT 

AVERAGE FARE CAE % 

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 HIGHER 

Columbia, SC $161 $202 $205 $228 $208

Asheville, NC $162 $195 $194 $195 $165 26%

Chattanooga, TN $177 $204 $177 $179 $146 42%

Charleston, SC $155 $197 $172 $175 $160 29%

Charlotte-Douglas, NC $164 $165 $163 $178 $152 37%

Greensboro, NC $146 $176 $162 $167 $150 39%

Greenville/

Spartanburg, SC $160 $194 $186 $194 $158 31%

Wilmington, NC $144 $181 $167 $171 $147 41%

Raleigh/Durham, NC $122 $142 $137 $143 $127 64%

Savannah, GA $135 $169 $162 $171 $169 23%

Knoxville, TN $157 $191 $182 $199 $164 27%

Southeast Region $132 $147 $146 $153 $138 19%

U.S. $137 $149 $149 $160 $144 15%

Source: Data Base Products, Inc. 

The need for

capacity at Columbia

Metropolitan Airport

will increase when

Southwest begins

service, particularly if

existing carriers

reduce capacity in

reaction to

Southwest’s entry.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

12 

STRATEGIC PLAN – AIR SERVICE

he Strategic Plan proposed by the Columbia Metropolitan Airport will achieve the 

community’s goals and help to alleviate the pending air service deficiencies of this 

community by keeping it competitive with nearby competing airports. This Strategic 

Plan section provides a detailed description of the goals of the project and a primary and 

alternate plan for attaining those goals. Though the addition of seats to existing hub service 

is the primary goal, the accompanying goal is the reduction of fares to remain competitive 

with nearby alternative airports. 

PROJECT GOALS

The following project goals will be met by the proposed Strategic Plan: 

• Increase incumbent airline high-priority hub service to mitigate the 

impact of Southwest Airlines planned service at nearby competing 

airports Greenville/Spartanburg and Charleston 

• Provide additional capacity and competition in the marketplace to 

reduce airfares 

• Mitigate the need to use alternate airports to access adequate air 

service and competitive fares 

PROPOSED AIR SERVICE

With existing service to nearby hubs Atlanta and Charlotte, Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s 

primary air service need is larger aircraft to Atlanta. Higher than average fares and high 

diversion of catchment area travelers support the need for this air service initiative, 

particularly with the expected arrival of Southwest Airlines into nearby 

Greenville/Spartanburg and Charleston. Delta Air Lines, rather than US Airways, is the 

highest priority given the level of current diversion to US Airways’ Charlotte hub and would 

provide Columbia with optimal competitive air service access. 

Recent dialogue with the community indicates that there is strong support for larger planes 

in and out of Columbia with Atlanta service being the number one priority of the Columbia 

community. 

This plan will achieve the project goals by: 

• Providing an airline incentive package to obtain larger plane service to an existing highpriority hub 

• Maintain and improve air service choices at the local airport and provide additional 

competition in the marketplace to reduce airfares 

• Reduce the need to use alternate airports to access adequate air service and 

competitive fares 

T

This section addresses: 

• A Strategic Plan for 

meeting Columbia’s air 

service needs and 

deficiencies 

• Alternate plan to meet 

the goals 

With existing service

to nearby hubs

Atlanta and

Charlotte, Columbia

Metropolitan

Airport’s primary air

service need is larger

aircraft to Atlanta.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

13 

AIRLINE PARTICIPATION

Over the past five years, members of the public-private partnership have met with Delta Air 

Lines regarding Columbia’s service. Recent discussions with the airline have been 

encouraging as Delta will be greatly impacted by the arrival of a new low-fare competitor in 

the state of South Carolina. In particular, Delta has expressed interest in a plan such as this 

grant application to remain competitive in the near term, and the community’s concerns 

have been shared with the carrier. The community support package proposed in the 

Strategic Plan is critical in Delta’s decision to upgrade service to the Columbia market. If 

Delta is slow to commit to upgrading aircraft into Atlanta, the community will pursue US 

Airways or one of the other Airport’s incumbent carriers to meet the goals of this Small 

Community Air Service Development Program grant application. 

MARKET ANALYSIS

A financial analysis and incremental cost forecast has been developed for upgrading existing 

Atlanta regional jet service to larger mainline aircraft. Results of the service improvement 

analysis targeting Delta Air Lines, the primary target for improved high-priority hub service, 

is summarized below: 

Aircraft Upgrade Results 

Table 6.1 shows that Columbia’s current Atlanta service is made up of 

11 daily regional jet flights along with one larger 142-seat MD-88 

flight. The Atlanta market is currently operating at 4,828 seats per 

week each way based on the accompanying schedule, comprising 

approximately 34 percent of Columbia’s total weekly seats as shown in 

Table 6.2. The Atlanta market represents the largest amount of seats 

of any market served out of Columbia and therefore has the potential 

for the greatest impact to Columbia’s capacity going forward. 

In order for Columbia to achieve capacity parity with Charleston and 

Greenville/Spartanburg following Southwest Airlines entrance into 

those competing markets, Columbia Metropolitan Airport will need to 

increase its capacity by at least 20 percent to 

remain competitive. Table 6.3, next page, 

indicates that the increase in available seats out of 

Charleston and Greenville/ Spartanburg is 

expected to be between 19 and 28 percent. 

For Columbia Metropolitan Airport to remain 

competitive, it must convince one or more of its 

incumbent carriers to upgrade existing service. As

shown in Table 6.3, next page, at least eight of 

the current 11 daily regional jet flights to Atlanta 

would need to be upgraded to mainline aircraft to 

maintain capacity parity. 

TABLE 6.1 DELTA AIR LINES' CAE-ATL SCHEDULED 

SERVICE 

EQUIPMENT 

SEAT 

CAPACITY 

DEPARTURE 

TIME 

ARRIVAL 

TIME 

CRJ 50 5:40 6:43

CRJ 50 6:40 7:55

M88 142 7:40 9:00

CRJ 50 8:45 10:01

CRJ 50 10:19 11:27

CRJ 50 11:35 12:51

CRJ 50 12:35 14:03

CRJ 50 13:43 14:59

CRJ 50 15:10 16:26

CRJ 50 16:42 18:03

CRJ 50 18:10 19:23

CRJ 50 19:38 20:55

Source: apgDat, August 2010 schedules 

TABLE 6.2 COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN AIRPORT SCHEDULED SEATS 

DESTINATION AIRLINE 

DEPARTURES 

PER WEEK 

SEATS 

PER 

WEEK 

% 

TOTAL 

SEATS 

Atlanta, GA Delta 81 4,828 34%

Charlotte, NC US Airways 47 2,350 17%

Chicago, IL (ORD) United 21 1,050 7%

Dallas, TX (DFW) American 21 1,050 7%

Detroit, MI Delta 14 700 5%

Houston, TX (IAH) Continental 14 700 5%

New York, NY (LGA) Delta 6 300 2%

Philadelphia, PA US Airways 19 950 7%

Washington, DC (DCA) US Airways 19 950 7%

Washington, DC (IAD) United 27 1,350 9%

Source: apgDat, August 2010 schedules 

Delta has expressed

interest in a plan

such as this grant

application to remain

competitive in the

near term.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

14 

Convincing an existing airline to replace lower cost regional jet operations with higher cost 

mainline jet operations to keep Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s service competitive is 

inherently costly and risky if the assumed passenger loads don’t materialize. As Table 6.4

indicates, upgrading just one daily roundtrip flight in the Columbia-Atlanta market increases 

the airline’s direct operating cost by as much as $2.2 million annually. Upgrading eight daily 

flights quickly becomes an extremely expensive undertaking. 

TABLE 6.4 CAE-ATL REGIONAL JET UPGRADE COST ESTIMATE 

AIRCRAFT 

TYPE 

DOC PER 

BLOCK 

HOUR 

DIFFERENCE PER ROUNDTRIP 

ANNUAL COST 

INCREASE 

$ % 

BLOCK 

HOUR 

DAILY 

COST 

INCREASE 

ANNUAL 

COST 

INCREASE 

UPGRADE 

8 RJ TO 8 

MAINLINE 

UPGRADE 

8 RJ TO 4 

MAINLINE 

CRJ $1,392 N/A N/A 2.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A

MD-88 $3,683 $2,291 165% 2.6 $5,957 $2.2M $17.4M $3.4M

Source: APGDat Carrier Form 41 and August, 2010 schedules 

A more realistic scenario is a trade-off where two regional jets (100 seats) are upgraded to 

one mainline jet (142 seats), increasing overall capacity but on a much lower cost basis. 

Swapping eight regional jets for four mainline jets still has an incremental cost increase of 

approximately $3.4 million annually. Approximately $833,000 (or 25 percent) of the 

estimated cost increase will be mitigated by this Strategic Plan with the remainder being 

covered by incremental passenger revenue. 

Airline Risk During Ramp-Up 

Columbia is being squeezed on both sides of its air service catchment area by Southwest’s 

entry into the Charleston and Greenville/Spartanburg, South Carolina markets. Southwest’s 

market reach has been demonstrated to be far-reaching and is expected to severely 

negatively impact Columbia’s already low passenger retention rate by increasing passenger 

diversion and decreasing existing air service as passengers are initially drawn by Southwest’s 

low introductory pricing and marketing blitz. 

It is during this initial service launch phase that Columbia’s incumbent airlines are most 

vulnerable to passenger poaching at nearby airports. Without this critically important 

strategic, proactive program to promote, maintain and improve existing service levels, 

Columbia’s vitally important air service is expected to deteriorate as a result of declining 

passengers and revenue. 

TABLE 6.3 EXPECTED CHANGE IN SEATS 

AIRPORT 

CURRENT 

SEATS PER 

WEEK 

MARCH SEATS 

PER WEEK WITH 

WN IN CHS/GSP 

% CHANGE 

WITH WN 

 IN CHS/GSP 

DL CAEATL RJ 

UPGRADES 

ADDITIONAL 

WEEKLY 

SEATS 

% CHANGE WITH 

DL CAE UPGRADE 

AND WN IN CHS/GSP 

CAE 14,228 14,228 0% 8 2,982 21%

CHS 27,743 32,993 19% 0 5,250 19%

GSP 18,898 24,148 28% 0 5,250 28%

Source: apgDat, August 2010 Schedules; Press release on CHS and GSP service announcement 
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN AIRPORT

Page 

15 

ALTERNATE PLAN

If Columbia Metropolitan Airport fails to secure aircraft upgrades to 

Atlanta, US Airways or one of the other existing incumbent airlines will 

be approached to provide the extra seats needed to remain competitive 

with the nearby Charleston and Greenville/Spartanburg service 

improvements. Consistent with the intent of the air service initiative 

proposed, obtaining larger aircraft on existing high-priority hub service 

and competitive airfares is the best option for Columbia Metropolitan 

Airport catchment area passengers. Increased capacity to Atlanta or 

Charlotte on either Delta Air Lines or US Airways would provide the 

competitive service needed in the community and fulfill the goals of this 

grant application. 
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

16 

STRATEGIC PLAN –

IMPLEMENTATION AND FUNDING

his section, Strategic Plan - Implementation and Funding, provides the detailed 

incentive and support plan required to implement the Strategic Plan. A legal sponsor 

responsible for administering the program has been designated, and a public-private 

partnership has been formed to actively participate in implementing the proposed project. 

In addition, this section identifies self-sufficiency of the service as an integral part of the 

community’s goals and provides a description of the community’s plan to continue with the 

project if it is not self-sustaining after the grant award expires. A detailed description of the 

funding necessary for implementation of the Strategic Plan, including federal and nonfederal contributions, is included. 

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP

Columbia Metropolitan Airport has been designated as the 

sponsor of this grant application. For the purpose of this 

application, Columbia Metropolitan Airport and the Greater 

Columbia Chamber of Commerce (Navigating from Good to Great 

Foundation) have formed a public-private partnership (refer to 

community support letters in Appendix A). Collectively, the 

partnership is committed to completing the Strategic Plan outlined 

herein. 

All partners in the public-private partnership will be fully involved in the execution of the 

Strategic Plan (Table 7.1). Columbia Metropolitan Airport will execute all federal grant 

offers, process all associated reimbursement requests, oversee grant administration and 

administer the airline subsidy. Columbia Metropolitan Airport, with the assistance of 

Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce, will be responsible for administering the 

marketing campaign. Together these partners form a team committed to improving air 

service at Columbia Metropolitan Airport and seeing this Strategic Plan through to 

completion. 

INCENTIVE AND SUPPORT PLAN

The current industry status filled with recent and ongoing airline mergers and buyouts, 

limited fleet availability, volatile fuel prices and an uncertain economy is challenging for 

many communities like Columbia. These obstacles work against new service and extend the 

time it takes for new or increased service to gain profitability. Accordingly, airlines are 

cautious and highly risk adverse requiring communities to partner with them to reduce 

economic uncertainty. In today’s industry, community risk mitigation programs have 

become an expectation. To be effective, airline support packages must be structured to 

address the realities of today’s industry and ensure that investments made are quick to 

respond. 

T

TABLE 7.1 PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNER ROLES 

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNER ROLE 

Columbia Metropolitan 

Airport 

Grant and airline subsidy 

administration, marketing 

program 

Greater Columbia Chamber 

of Commerce (Navigating 

from Good to Great 

Foundation) 

Assist with the marketing 

program 

This section addresses: 

• Description of the 

public-private 

partnership 

• Designation of a legal 

sponsor 

• Funding necessary for 

implementation of the 

Strategic Plan 

• Sustainability of the 

project 

Columbia

Metropolitan Airport

and the Greater

Columbia Chamber

of Commerce have

formed a publicprivate partnership.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

17 

The public-private partnership proposes an 

airline incentive program that has been tested 

and proved to be successful. To reduce 

Delta’s breakeven period and offset the 

economic risk during start-up, the publicprivate partnership proposes the following 

incentives (Exhibit 7.1): 

• Airline subsidy: reduce airline economic 

risk 

• New service marketing campaign: create 

improved service awareness 

Airline Subsidy 

To reduce airline risk and provide incentive to 

Delta to upgrade existing high-priority hub 

service, this Strategic Plan includes an airline 

subsidy as part of the community support 

package. Incremental cost projections for 

upgrading service are expected to be 

approximately $3.4 million annually. Filling additional seats typically has a ramp-up period 

associated with service upgrades, particularly in a market with significant low-fare 

competition at two nearby competing airports, but incremental costs will be incurred 

immediately. It is anticipated that Delta would require at least an $833,000 airline subsidy 

to consider upgrading service to its Atlanta hub. Exact terms of the airline subsidy 

agreement are subject to further discussions and negotiation. 

Marketing Campaign 

A specific, targeted marketing campaign will be utilized to increase general 

awareness of what the Columbia Metropolitan Airport has to offer. The target 

audience is business travelers and mid-to-upper income households. The Airport 

has established a partnership agreement with local media outlets. Table 7.2

provides a breakdown of targeted marketing dollars to be spent on maximizing 

passenger utilization of improved service between Columbia and Atlanta. This 

$359,650 campaign will be funded by airport sources ($150,000 cash and 

$2,500 in-kind) and non-airport sources ($207,150 in-kind). The Columbia Metropolitan 

Airport, with the assistance of the Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce, will be 

responsible for oversight of the marketing campaign. 

STRATEGIC PLAN FUNDING

The public-private partnership is requesting US Department of Transportation assistance in 

funding 61 percent, or $750,000, of the Strategic Plan. Specifically, US Department of 

Transportation funding will be used to partially fund the airline subsidy. The balance of the 

airline subsidy and all other elements including the marketing campaign, Strategic Plan 

monitoring and airline meetings will be funded by the community. 

TABLE 7.2 MARKETING BUDGET 

MEDIA BUDGET 

Radio $150,000 

In-Kind Media $150,000 

Community Partners $57,150 

Inaugural Event $2,500 

Total $359,650 

To reduce airline risk

and provide incentive

to Delta Air Lines to

upgrade existing

high-priority hub

service, this Strategic

Plan includes an

airline subsidy.

Equipment 

Upgrade

Airline 

subsidy

US DOT

Airline 

subsidy/ 

Marketing 

program

Community/ 

Airport

EXHIBIT 7.1 INCENTIVE AND SUPPORT PLAN
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

18 

Table 7.3 provides the Strategic Plan budget by element and sources of funding. The 

Airport and community will fund 39 percent of the total proposed air service program. 

Non-airport funding sources will provide eight percent of the cash requirement and 24 

percent of the funding for the total program including in-kind services. 

TABLE 7.3 STRATEGIC PLAN BUDGET 

DESCRIPTION 

FUNDING SOURCE 

TOTAL 

US DOT AIRPORT NON-AIRPORT 

CASH CASH IN-KIND CASH IN-KIND 

Airline incentive program:

 Subsidy $750,000 $83,000 $833,000 

 Marketing campaign $150,000 $2,500 $207,150 $359,650 

Strategic Plan monitoring $20,000 $4,800 $24,800 

Airline meeting/negotiations $10,000 $1,400 $11,400 

Program administration $4,800 $4,800 

Total $750,000 $180,000 $8,700 $83,000 $211,950 $1,233,650 

Percent of total project 61% 15% 1% 7% 17% 100%

Percent of cash contribution 74% 18% N/A 8% N/A 100%

As Table 7.4 indicates, non-airport cash contributions are coming from nine different 

entities, indicating wide-ranging support for this critically important community initiative. 

TABLE 7.4 NON-AIRPORT CASH CONTRIBUTIONS 

BUSINESS/ORGANIZATION AMOUNT 

Navigating from Good to Great Foundation

(Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce) $40,000 

City of Columbia $10,000 

Richland County $10,000 

Lexington County $10,000 

Lexington Chamber of Commerce $5,000 

Town of Lexington $3,000 

City of West Columbia $2,000 

City of Cayce $2,000 

Town of Springdale $1,000 

Total $83,000 

PROJECT CONTINUATION AND SUSTAINABILITY

Based on a strong marketing campaign for promoting upgraded Delta Air Lines Atlanta hub 

service, it is anticipated that hub service upgrades will be self-sustaining after the start-up 

period which can take up to a year. However, a leading cause of service failure is lack of 

awareness in the community. The public-private partnership will fund an additional 

$100,000 marketing campaign if at the end of the first year of service the market average 

load factor for the 12-month period averaged less than 65 percent. The public-private 

partnership and the Columbia business community are committed to the success of this 

project and understand the difficulties associated with profitably operating air service to the 

Columbia market following Southwest’s entrance into Charleston and 

Greenville/Spartanburg and will continue to work to ensure its success. 
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

19 

SCHEDULE AND MONITORING

he public-private partnership has developed a realistic timetable to achieve the 

goals of this proposal. This section provides critical milestones to be achieved by 

the public-private partnership. A monitoring program is also provided to track the 

progress of the project. 

CRITICAL MILESTONES

The following milestones are proposed to track the progress of this air 

service initiative. The timeline is highly dependent on the date of the US 

Department of Transportation’s grant award and the service start date. 

Marketing Campaign Development/Initiation 

January 2011: Development of the marketing campaign will be 

completed in January 2011 in order to begin the marketing campaign 

30 to 60 days prior to new service initiation estimated to be March 1, 

2011. Development of the marketing campaign is dependent on air 

service announcement and start-up. It is anticipated that the marketing 

campaign will begin by February 1, 2011, and continue throughout the 

first year of new service. 

Service Improvement Initiation 

March 2011: The service start date is the critical date for the rest of the Strategic Plan. It 

is anticipated that Delta will upgrade to mainline jets in March 2011 to coincide with the 

anticipated Southwest Airlines’ service initiation at Charleston and Greenville/ 

Spartanburg. Air service initiation is dependent on airline route planning and availability 

of aircraft. 

 

Alternate Plan 

May 2011: If Delta Air Lines has not committed to upgrading their Atlanta service by 

May 1, 2011, Columbia Metropolitan Airport will contact alternate carriers that would 

meet the goals of this grant application. Upgrading of US Airways’ service is the top 

priority following the upgrade of Delta’s Atlanta service. 

End of First Year of Service 

March 2012: At the end of the first year of service, the airline subsidy will be provided 

to Delta. If the service start date changes due to airline circumstances and/or equipment 

availability, the contract term will change accordingly. 

T

This section addresses: 

• How the community will 

monitor the progress of 

the project 

• The plan/schedule for 

timely completion of the 

project 

It is anticipated that

Delta will upgrade to

mainline jets in

March 2011 to

coincide with the

anticipated

Southwest Airlines’

service initiation at

Charleston and

Greenville/

Spartanburg.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

20 

April 2012: If the load factor for the first 12 months of service does not 

reach an average of 65 percent, Columbia Metropolitan Airport will 

invest $100,000 in supplementary marketing for an additional 12 

months to help the service reach the potential passenger levels required 

for carrier success. Additionally, a community business coalition made 

up of the Central SC Alliance, Greater Columbia Chamber of 

Commerce, Lexington Chamber of Commerce and Midlands Business 

Leadership will allocate at least 10 percent of their annual travel budget 

towards this vital community program. 

MONITORING PROGRAM

The monitoring program proposed is aggressive and comprehensive. The monitoring 

program includes: service performance tracking, assessing the effectiveness of the 

marketing campaign, and determining the impact of the service on retention of 

catchment area passengers at Columbia Metropolitan Airport. 

The following will be completed: 

• Review aircraft departures, enplaned passengers and load factors on a monthly 

basis. Airport data, US Department of Transportation airline reported data and data 

obtained directly from the airline will be used. 

• Average airfares will be reviewed on a quarterly basis and compared and evaluated 

to prior quarters. Published airfares will also be tracked via one of the Global 

Distribution/Computer Reservations Systems (GDS/CRS) or through airline web sites. 

• A follow-up diversion study will be performed to determine changes in passenger 

diversion/retention after the first 12 months of service. By comparing post service 

improvement retention levels to pre service retention levels, the diversion study will 

determine the impact of the air service improvements on retention/diversion at 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport. It will also help to determine the impact of 

Southwest Airlines’ service at Charleston and Greenville/Spartanburg on the 

Columbia market. 

To assist in these monitoring efforts, Columbia Metropolitan Airport is currently planning 

on spending approximately $20,000 on a new data tool to monitor this service.
PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

21 

APPENDIX A. LETTERS OF

SUPPORT

ppendix A includes letters of support for Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s 

application to the US Department of Transportation to increase incumbent 

airline high-priority hub service to mitigate the impact of Southwest Airlines 

planned service at nearby competing airports. Support letters were 

submitted by participants in the public-private partnership, government officials and 

members of the Columbia area. The letters of support are included on the following 

pages of this Appendix A and are listed below. 

Public-private partnership

Columbia Metropolitan Airport (refer to cover letter) 

Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce (Navigating from Good to Great Foundation) 

Government

United States Senate – Senator Jim DeMint 

United States Army Garrison, Fort Jackson 

Lexington County Legislative Delegation 

Richland County Legislative Delegation 

County of Lexington – Chairman James Kinard, Jr. 

City of Cayce – Mayor Elise Partin 

City of Columbia – Mayor Stephen Benjamin 

City of West Columbia – Mayor Bobby Horton 

Town of Lexington – Mayor Randy Halfacre 

Town of Pine Ridge – Mayor David Busby 

Town of Springdale – Mayor Pat Smith 

Businesses and Organizations

Clear Channel 

Greater Chapin Chamber of Commerce & Visitors Center 

Greater Lexington Chamber and Visitors Center 

West Metro Chamber of Commerce & Visitor’s Center

A

This section addresses: 

Letters of support from 

members of the publicprivate partnership, the local 

business community and 

state government. 
August 25, 2010 

Aloha Ley 

Acting Associate Director, X-50 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave, SE W86-310 

Washington, DC 20590 

Subject: Small Community Air Service Development Grant Application 

 Docket OST-2010-0124 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport – Columbia, SC 

Dear Ms. Ley: 

The Navigating from Good to Great Foundation is pleased to submit this letter of support for the 

Columbia Metropolitan Airport’s grant application for US Department of Transportation funding. 

Effective this date, the Navigating from Good to Great Foundation has authorized a commitment 

of up to $40,000 for the purpose of assisting the Columbia Metropolitan Airport in obtaining 

additional scheduled commercial air service. We fully support the proposed plan to establish a 

program that will aid in attracting additional air service to Columbia. 

We can confirm that a “public-private” partnership has been formed between Columbia 

Metropolitan Airport and the Navigating from Good to Great Foundation for the purpose of 

supporting air service improvements. This air service initiative has our full support. If you decide 

to fund this application, we have every confidence that the program will have the full support of 

the Columbia community. 

We are pleased to have the opportunity to support this grant application, and we assure you that 

we will work diligently to insure the long-term success of this improvement in air service to our 

community. 

Sincerely, 

Charles T. Speth 

Chairman of the Board 






















PROPOSAL UNDER THE SMALL 

COMMUNITY 

AIR SERVICE 

DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

COLUMBIA 

METROPOLITAN 

AIRPORT

Page 

45 

APPENDIX B. RELATED NEWS

ARTICLE

ppendix B includes a copy of a recent news article about Southwest Airlines’ 

entrance into Charleston and Greenville/Spartanburg. The article discusses 

the impact and challenges Columbia Metropolitan Airport and the Columbia A

community will face when Southwest begins service. 

This section addresses: 

Related news article 

demonstrating Southwest 

Airlines’ impact on the 

Columbia community. 
Posted on Wed, May. 12, 2010 

Southwest decision leaves Columbia high and dry 

By ANDREW SHAIN 

ashain@thestate.com

Columbia leaders are seeking answers after low-cost giant Southwest Airlines said Tuesday it would start flying to 

Charleston and Greenville - but not the Midlands - next year. 

Southwest poses a bigger threat to the Midlands economy than the possibility of losing Fort Jackson five years 

ago, said Ike McLeese, president of the Greater Columbia Chamber of Commerce. 

While praising a win for the state in landing Southwest for the first time, Midlands leaders said they fear the 

airline's low fares will draw more passengers away from Columbia Metropolitan Airport, which has some of the 

nation's highest average ticket prices. 

Already, about four in 10 Midlands passengers drive to Charlotte for flights, airport official said. 

"This will be more of a slow, grinding death economically," McLeese said. 

Midlands officials have said they would try to attract another low-cost airline to Columbia. However, aviation 

consultant Mike Boyd said Columbia has no chance of doing that with Southwest claiming two nearby airports. 

"You can't go to the low-cost airline store and pick one out," he said. "It's not going to kill air service there, but it's 

going to be a challenge." 

Dan Mann, executive director of the Columbia airport, said he would try to work with airlines, including Delta and 

US Airways, that already serve the Midlands to lower fares. 

"Is there an appetite to generate incentives locally so we can have low fares? We'll see," Mann said. 

Columbia Mayor Bob Coble said the community will approach the problem like it did when the government 

considered closing Fort Jackson in 2005. Business and political leaders gathered with experts to come up with a 

plan to help the fort escape Pentagon cuts. 

The community also raised $3.5 million to help the Fort Jackson effort, McLeese said, and could try to collect 

money again to help improve air service. 

Don Herriott, who oversees USC's Innovista research campus, said he has heard some local companies complain 

about Columbia's airfares. 

But until a solution is found, the Midlands could tout its proximity to Charlotte, which has a US Airways hub, as an 

alternative to businesses considering locating here. "We have to be realistic." 

Southwest said it is coming to South Carolina without major state or county incentives. State lawmakers had been 

considering $15 million in incentives to draw a low-cost carrier to the state. 

But that plan - along with other efforts to raise money in Greenville and Charleston counties for incentives - now 

are on hold. 

The airline might have liked to get the incentives, but the longer the legislative debate over them dragged on, the 

more counterproductive it became for Southwest, said Greenville County Council chairman Butch Kirven. So 

Southwest executives made their move, taking the incentives issue off the table. 

Southwest said it will release details on when it will start flying from South Carolina, destinations, fares and the 

number of departures later. Southwest's average one-way fare costs less than $115, the airline said. 

The confirmation of Southwest's arrival should help bring more businesses to the state. 

State Rep. Dan Cooper, who is chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said "there were five projects 

within Greenville County, three within the city, that were significantly tied" to Southwest's decision. 

"I think it could help make those decisions to come here and maybe bring some headquarters here," said Cooper, 

Back to web version

Wednesday, Aug 25, 

The State | 05/12/2010 | Southwest decision leaves Columbia high and dry Page 1 of 2

http://www.thestate.com/2010/05/12/v-print/1282845/southwest-decision-leaves-columbia.... 8/25/2010
R-Anderson. 

Southwest potentially will bring 200,000 new passengers through the Charleston airport each year, forcing 

competing carriers to lower their fares. 

State Sen. Larry Grooms, who worked with Charleston-area business leaders to attract the airline, said the air 

service expansion is "a flat-out home run" in a recent string of statewide economic development successes, 

including landing a Boeing factory for North Charleston. 

"This is just another chapter in the economic development of the Lowcountry and also all of South Carolina," said 

Grooms, R-Berkeley. "Having a company like Southwest sends a signal that the economy is strong and growing." 

The (Charleston) Post and Courier and The Greenville News contributed to this story. 

© 2010 TheState.com and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved. http://www.thestate.com

The State | 05/12/2010 | Southwest decision leaves Columbia high and dry Page 2 of 2

http://www.thestate.com/2010/05/12/v-print/1282845/southwest-decision-leaves-columbia.... 8/25/2010