Order 2014-12-8

Served: December 12, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 12th day of December, 2014 

Notice of

 SKY KING, INC.

of intent to resume operations under 14 CFR § 204.7

 Dockets DOT-OST-1997-3017

 and

 DOT-OST-1997-3113

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Summary

By this order, we tentatively find Sky King, Inc. (“Sky King”) fit, willing, and able to resume 

interstate and foreign charter air transportation as a certificated air carrier, subject to conditions. 

Before we issue a final decision on Sky King’s application for authority to resume operations, we 

will afford interested parties an opportunity to show cause why we should not adopt as final 

these tentative findings and conclusions.

Background

Pursuant to section 41102 of Title 49 of the United States Transportation Code (Transportation) 

(the “Statute”), any company proposing to provide air transportation as an air carrier must be 

found “fit, willing, and able” to conduct the services proposed. Moreover, once an air carrier is 

found fit initially, it must remain fit in order to retain its authority.1 If an air carrier ceases 

operations under its certificate authority, section 204.7 of the Department’s Aviation Economic 

Regulations (14 CFR § 204.7) provides that its authority to conduct those operations is 

automatically suspended as of the date those operations ceased and the air carrier may not 

recommence operations until its fitness to do so has been re-established by the Department.

When conducting a redetermination of an air carrier’s fitness under section 204.7, the 

Department applies the same three part-test that it uses to determine fitness of new air carrier 

applicants. The three areas of inquiry that must be addressed in order to determine a company’s 

fitness to resume operations are whether it (1) will have the managerial skills and technical 

ability to conduct the proposed operations, (2) will have access to resources sufficient to 

commence operations without posing an undue risk to consumers, and (3) will comply with the 

Transportation Code and regulations imposed by Federal and State agencies. We must also 

determine that the air carrier remains a U.S. citizen.

 1 See 49 U.S.C. § 41110(e).
2

On January 26, 2014, Sky King, a certificated air carrier, ceased all of its operations.2 On June 

30, 2014, the air carrier filed a notice of its intent to resume its charter passenger services. Sky 

King accompanied its application with the fitness information required by section 204.3 of our 

regulations3 and supplemented its application with additional information on July 16, 2014. 

No answers opposing Sky King’s application were filed and no special issues regarding the 

applicant have come to our attention. Under these circumstances, we propose to decide the issue 

of the applicant’s fitness on the basis of the written record and we tentatively conclude that Sky 

King is a U.S. citizen and is fit, willing, and able to resume interstate and foreign charter air 

transportation using large aircraft. However, we will give interested persons an opportunity to 

show cause why we should not adopt as final these tentative findings and conclusions.

FITNESS

The Company

Sky King was incorporated under the laws of the State of California in September 1990. In 

1998, the company was awarded certificates of public convenience and necessity authorizing it 

to engage in interstate and foreign charter air transportation of persons, property, and mail. The 

air carrier conducted air transportation under these certificates until January 26, 2014, when it 

ceased all of its operations following a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing.

Sky King states in its application that on May 23, 2014, pursuant to a United States Bankruptcy 

Court approved bidding process, the Chapter 11 Trustee overseeing Sky King’s reorganization 

determined that AerLine Holdings, LLC (“Holdings”), a Delaware limited liability company, 

owned by Messrs. Nicholas Finazzo and Robert B. Nichols, was the successful bidder for the 

rights to purchase the stock and certain assets of Sky King. The air carrier notes that if 

authorized to resume operations under its new ownership that it intends to conduct interstate and 

foreign charter air transportation on behalf of public charter operators and other chartering 

entities, using a fleet of 10 Boeing 737-300/400 aircraft.

Managerial Competence

Sky King’s key management personnel consist of the following individuals, all of whom are U.S. 

citizens:

Nicolas Finazzo Board Member

Robert B. Nichols Board Member

Frank Visconti Board Member, President, and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”)

 2 See Order 98-3-26, served April 1, 1998, and Order 98-4-14, served Apri1 17, 1998. Sky King’s certificate 

authority was subsequently made effective by oral action taken on October 15, 2002, and reissued to reflect the 

effective date of its authority (See Order 2002-10-39, issued October 30, 2002).

3 Contemporaneously with its application, Sky King filed a motion for confidential treatment under 

14 CFR § 302.12 to withhold from public disclosure certain information filed in support of its application. By this 

order, we grant the applicant’s request for confidential treatment. See the CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT

section of this order for a more detailed discussion.
3

Alan Brandon Director of Operations

Angel Marcano Chief Pilot

Elizabeth Sukie Director of Quality Control

Michael Wampler Director of Maintenance

Timothy J. Camelin Director of Safety

Mr. Nicolas Finazzo is the CEO, co-founder, and co-owner of AerSale, Inc. (“Aersale”), a large 

commercial jet aircraft leasing company and a Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) Part 

145 repair station based in Roswell, New Mexico. In addition to serving as a board member of 

Sky King, Mr. Finazzo will continue to serve as the CEO of AerSale following the bankruptcy 

court’s final approval of the sale of Sky King to Holdings. Mr. Finazzio co-founded AerSale in 

2008 along with Mr. Robert B. Nichols. Prior to this, Mr. Finazzo was the CEO of AeroTurbine, 

Inc., a large commercial jet aircraft leasing company and an FAA Part 145 repair station that he 

co-owned and co-founded with Mr. Nichols (1997-2008). He has also served as the Vice 

President and General Counsel of AeroThrust, Inc. (“AeroThrust”), an FAA Part 145 repair 

station based in Miami, Florida (1997); Vice President and General Counsel of International Air 

Leases, Inc., a large commercial jet aircraft leasing company (1991-1997); Vice President of 

Contracts at Greenwich Air Services, a FAA Part 145 repair station (1987-1991); and President 

of Southern Express Airways, Inc. (1981-1987).

Mr. Robert B. Nichols is the Chief Operating Officer (“COO”) of AerSale, a position he intends 

to continue holding while also serving as a Sky King board member. As previously mentioned, 

Mr. Nichols co-founded AerSale in 2008 along with Mr. Finazzio. Prior to this, Mr. Nichols was 

the COO of AeroTurbine, an FAA repair station that he and Mr. Finazzo founded in 1997. He 

also served as the Vice President of Engine Sales and Leasing at AeroThrust (1990-1997); 

Director of Engine Sales and Leasing at Greenwich Air Services, (1989-1990); Manager of 

Powerplant and Warranty Administration at Braniff, Inc. (1989); and Account Manager at 

Aviall, Inc. (1982-1989).

Mr. Frank Visconti, Sky King’s CEO, has almost 25 years of executive aviation management 

experience. He previously served as Sky King’s CEO from February 2012 to January 2014. 

Prior to joining Sky King, Mr. Visconti owned and operated Centauri Aviation Services, LLC 

(“CAS”), an aviation services consulting firm (2009-2014) and he has also previously served as

President and CEO at Arrow Air, Inc., a now defunct certificated cargo air carrier, (2000-2005). 

In addition to his prior executive management experience with certificated air carriers, 

Mr. Visconti also held executive positions with numerous other aviation service companies, 

including Aeroservice Aviation Center, LLC; Cargo Holdings International; LGSTX Services;

Air Global Transport; and Air Cargo Associates.

Mr. Alan Brandon, an Airline Transport Pilot with more than 17,500 total flight hours, joined 

Sky King as its Director of Operations in May 2014. Before this, Mr. Brandon was employed by 

Vision Airlines, Inc., a certificated air carrier, as its Director of Operations (January 2012 to 

March 2013). He also held numerous FAA key management positions with several other

certificated air carriers during his nearly 40-year career in the aviation industry. Mr. Brandon is 

type rated for the Boeing 737 aircraft that Sky King intends to use in its operations.
4

Mr. Angel Marcano, an Airline Transport Pilot with more than 10,000 total flight hours, became

Sky King’s Chief Pilot in May 2014. He began with Sky King in 2007 as its Director of Flight 

Standards and held that position until the air carrier ceased its operation in January 2014. In 

addition to his work experience at Sky King, Mr. Marcano was previously employed by Pan Am 

International Flight Academy as a Ground and Simulator Instructor for the Boeing 737 and 727 

aircraft (2008-2009); by Amerijet International, Inc., as a Boeing 727 First Officer (2007); by 

Falcon Air Express as a Boeing 727 First Officer and Captain (2001-2006); by Avesa-Servivensa 

Airlines as a First Officer (1996-2001); by Turansa Tours & Travel as a PA-28 Captain (1994-

1996); and by Servicios Riut as a PA-31 co-pilot (1993-1996).

Ms. Elizabeth Sukie, an FAA licensed Airframe and Powerplant Mechanic, has served as Sky 

King’s Director of Quality Control since November 2012. She previously served as the 

company’s Manager of Maintenance Planning (2011-2012). Before joining Sky King, she was 

employed by a number of companies in her more than 20 year career in aviation maintenance 

and inspection, including Centurion Air Cargo, Miami Air International, Focus Air Cargo, and 

Fine Airlines. In addition, Ms. Sukie has experience inspecting and maintaining large aircraft, 

including the Boeing 737 aircraft.

Mr. Michael Wampler, an FAA licensed Airframe and Powerplant Mechanic, has served as Sky 

King’s Director of Maintenance since October 2011. Prior to this, he was employed by Vision 

Airlines as its Vice President of Maintenance (2011-2013). Previously, Mr. Wampler served as 

Vice President and Director of Maintenance at Air Transport International, LLC (2006-2010), a 

certificated air carrier, where he was employed for more than 20 years holding various 

maintenance and inspection roles. 

Mr. Timothy J. Camelin, an FAA licensed Commercial Pilot and Instructor, joined Sky King in 

June 2013 as its Director of Safety. He briefly left Sky King in April 2014 to serve as the 

Director of Safety at Orange Air, a certificated air carrier, but returned to Sky King in July 2014. 

Prior to joining Sky King, Mr. Camelin was employed at Army Fleet Support as a Flight Safety 

Standardization Pilot (2010-2013); at Presidential Airways as Program Manager (2008-2010); 

and at Aviation Worldwide Service as Manager of Safety and Security (2008-2010). 

Mr. Camelin also has additional experience as an aviator, having worked as an EMS Pilot for 

Omni Helicopters (2006-2008) and as a Test Pilot for Lockheed Martin (2004-2006). In addition 

to his civilian aviation experience, Mr. Camelin served for more than 20 years in the U.S. Army 

as a helicopter pilot and safety officer.

Based on the background and experience of the above individuals, coupled with the fact that the

FAA must also review the qualifications of certain of the company’s key technical personnel, we 

tentatively find that Sky King’s management team is qualified to manage its proposed scheduled 

passenger operations.4

 4 We also note that the FAA evaluates the air carrier’s Directors of Operations, Maintenance and Safety, Chief 

Pilot, and Chief Inspector with respect to the minimum qualifications for those positions as prescribed in the Federal 

Aviation Regulations (“FARs”). The FAA’s evaluation of these key personnel provides an added practical and inperson test of the skills and technical ability of these individuals. 
5

Operating Plan and Financial Position

If authorized to resume operations, Sky King intends to conduct interstate and foreign charter air 

transportation between U.S. points, as well as points in the Caribbean and Central America on 

behalf of 14 CFR Part 380 public charter operators and other chartering entities using a fleet of 

as many as 10 Boeing 737-300/400 aircraft within its first 12-months of operations.

Sky King provided a detailed listing of the costs it expects to incur prior to the resumption of 

charter operations, as well as a forecast profit and loss statement for the first year of resumed 

operations. Specifically, the air carrier forecasts that it will incur approximately $1.4 million in 

pre-operating expenses, and approximately $28.7 million in first-year expenses. We have 

reviewed these forecasts and find them to be reasonable for the operations proposed. Thus, we 

estimate that Sky King will need approximately $8.575 million to meet our financial fitness 

criteria.5 

Sky King’s September 30, 2014, pro forma projected balance sheet indicates that, at that date, 

the air carrier will have $750,000 in cash, working capital of $723,000 (for a current assets to 

current liabilities ratio of 3:17 to l), negative retained earnings of approximately $2.25 million, 

and positive stockholders’ equity of $1.25 million. To support its resumption of operations, Sky 

King is relying on funds provided by Messrs. Finazzo and Nicholas. Mr. Finazzo and 

Mr. Nicholas have committed up to $14 million to support Sky King’s proposed operations and 

provided the appropriate third-party verification evidencing the availability of the funds pledged. 

On the basis of the above, we tentatively conclude that Sky King has a funding plan that will 

provide the company with access to sufficient financial resources to recommence its charter

operations without posing undue risk to consumers or their funds.

Compliance Disposition 

Sky King states in its application that there have been no charges of fraud, felony or antitrust 

violations, or of unfair, anticompetitive, or deceptive business practices filed against it, its 

owners, any relevant corporation, or its key personnel in the past 10 years. In addition, Sky King

states that, other than claims that relate to the ongoing bankruptcy proceeding, which will be 

extinguished when the air carrier exits bankruptcy, there are no outstanding judgments against it, 

its owners, its key personnel, or any relevant corporation.

Sky King also states that there are no pending investigations, enforcement actions, or formal 

complaints filed by the Department against it, its key personnel, or persons having a substantial 

interest in it with respect to compliance with the Transportation Code or the Department’s 

regulations and that neither it nor any of its key personnel have been involved in an accident or

incident in the year preceding its application or at any time in the past which remains under

 5 To meet the Department’s financial fitness criteria, an applicant should have access to financial resources 

sufficient to cover its pre-operating expenses and the expenses that are reasonably projected to be incurred during 

three months of operations. In calculating available resources, projected revenues cannot be used. In this case, the 

$8.575 million figure is the sum of the $1.4 million in forecasted pre-operating expenses plus $7.175 million, which 

is one-quarter of the applicant’s $28.7 million first-year forecasted expenses.
6

investigation by the FAA, the National Transportation Safety Board, or the company itself. 

Moreover a review of our records reveals that Sky King has been involved in no accidents and 

only one incident in the past five years.6 

Although Sky King states in its application that there are no pending Department or FAA 

investigations, the air carrier did identify a June 16, 2014, letter that it received from the FAA 

proposing to revoke its Air Carrier Certificate and seeking certain information regarding the 

status of the air carrier’s operations. The FAA has informed us that while this matter is ongoing, 

Sky King is currently working with that agency to resolve the matter and that the process is

proceeding satisfactorily. 

We also note that while Sky King contends in its application that there have been no charges of 

fraud, felony or antitrust violations, or unfair, anticompetitive, or deceptive business practices 

filed against it, its key personnel, or any relevant corporation in the past 10 years, there have 

been two instances in the past where Sky King has failed to comply with our consumer 

protection and financial reporting requirements. By Order 2013-2-7, issued February 7, 2013, 

the Department found that Sky King violated various economic regulations after the air carrier 

transported passengers for a public charter operator without having first received full payment of 

the total charter price from the charter operator as required by the Department’s regulations. Sky 

King did not first receive full payment of the total charter price from the charter operator and the 

air carrier consequently chose to cancel flights less than ten days before the scheduled departure 

date. This resulted in passengers who purchased round-trip transportation on the charter 

operator’s flights not being returned to their point of origin as scheduled. Moreover, the 

Department found that these regulatory violations also constitute unfair and deceptive practices 

and unfair methods of competition in violation of 49 U.S.C. § 41712. By order 2014-3-18 issued 

March 31, 2014, the Department found that Sky King failed to comply with financial and traffic 

reporting requirements.7 

Despite the above noted deficiencies, we do not believe that the record warrants a negative 

finding of fitness for Sky King. Although many of Sky King’s key management and technical 

personnel were employed with the company at the time it cancelled the aforementioned flights, 

we note that Sky King is under new ownership and that the owners, Messrs. Finazzo and 

Nichols, having substantial aviation experience, appear to have the managerial competency to 

oversee and manage an operating air carrier. In addition, we note that in each of the above cases,

the Department issued Sky King substantial civil penalties and ordered the air carrier to cease 

and desist from similar violations of the Department’s rules. Moreover, as discussed more fully 

in the CERTIFICATE CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS section of this order, given the 

record of this case, we are proposing certain reporting requirement so that we may more closely 

monitor the compliance disposition of the air carrier, its management, and its owners.

A review of our records and other information available to us has uncovered no other

information which would lead us to conclude that the applicant or any of its key personnel lacks 

 6 On May 19, 2012, a Sky King Boeing 737 carrying 119 passengers and 5 crew members experienced a hard 

landing at Charlotte Douglas International Airport. Five passengers reported an injury as a result of the incident.

7 See Order 2014-3-18, issued March 31, 2014, in Docket DOT-OST-2014-0001.
7

the proper compliance disposition to be found fit. In addition, according to the FAA, the air 

carrier has conducted its operations satisfactorily and the agency knows of no reason why the air 

carrier should not be granted the authority it is seeking. Furthermore, the Enforcement Office 

has informed us that it has no pending enforcement matters against the company. 

In light of these circumstances, we tentatively conclude that Sky King has the proper regard for 

the laws and regulations governing its services to ensure that its aircraft and personnel conform 

to applicable safety standards and that acceptable consumer relations practices will be followed. 

CITIZENSHIP

Section 41102 of the Transportation Code requires that certificate authority to engage in air 

transportation be held only by citizens of the United States as defined in 

49 U.S.C. § 40102(a)(15). The Statute also requires that the president and two-thirds of the 

Board of Directors and other managing officers be U.S. citizens, that at least 75 percent of the 

outstanding voting interest be owned by U.S. citizens, and that the air carrier must be under the 

actual control of U.S. citizens. 

As noted earlier, Sky King is organized under the laws of the State of California, as a 

corporation. The company is wholly owned by Holdings, a Delaware limited liability company. 

Holdings, in turn, is equally owned Messrs. Nicolas Finazzo and Robert B. Nichols, each of 

whom is a citizen of the United States. In addition, the applicant has submitted an affidavit 

attesting that it is a citizen of the United States within the meaning of the Statute and that it is 

owned and controlled by U.S. citizens. Finally, there is no other information before us that 

would lead us to conclude that Sky King is not controlled by U.S. Citizens.

In view of the foregoing, we tentatively conclude that Sky King is owned and controlled by U.S. 

citizens, consistent with 49 U.S.C. 40102(a)(15).

REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT

On June 30, 2014, Sky King filed a motion for confidential treatment under 14 CFR § 302.12 

(“Rule 12”) of our rules seeking to withhold from public disclosure (1) revenue and profit 

projections contained in its first-year profit and loss forecast and (2) information pertaining to the 

personal financial accounts of Messrs. Nicolas Finazzo and Robert B. Nichols. 

In support of its request for confidential treatment of the above documents, Sky King states that 

these documents are financial and/or confidential in nature that fall within the parameters of 

Exemption 4 to the Freedom of Information Act.

Rule 12 instructs us to evaluate requests for confidential treatment by the standards of disclosure 

found in the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. section 552). Information may be withheld 

from disclosure under 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(4) if it is (1) commercial or financial, (2) obtained from 

a person outside of government, and (3) privileged or confidential (Gulf and Western Industries,

Inc. v. United States, 615F.2d 527, 529 (D.C. Cir. 1979)).
8

There is no question that the information for which Sky King seeks confidential treatment is 

financial or commercial in nature and that it was obtained from a person outside the government. 

The remaining question is whether the information is privileged or confidential--whether 

“disclosure of the information is likely to have either of the following effects: (1) impair the 

Government’s ability to obtain necessary information; or (2) cause substantial harm to the 

competitive position from whom the information was obtained” (National Parks and 

Conservation Association v. Morton, 498 F.2d 765,770 (D.C. Cir.1974)). Further, to be 

privileged or confidential, the information must not be of the type that is usually released to the 

public (Gulf and Western Industries, Inc. v. United States, 615F.2d 527,530 (D.C. Cir. 1979)). 

We have reviewed the material submitted and determined that in the past the Department has 

granted confidential treatment to material of this type, having found that public disclosure of 

personal financial information and an applicant’s revenue and income projections could cause 

substantial harm to the competitive position of the applicant or the person from whom it was 

obtained. Thus, we will grant confidential treatment to the information for which such treatment 

is sought.

CERTIFICATE CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS

If Sky King is found fit to resume operations, we remind the air carrier that its authority is only 

effective to the extent that it complies with the terms and conditions attached to its certificates. 

Among other things, this includes the air carrier’s receipt of appropriate safety approvals from 

the FAA, as well as the air carrier obtaining a fully executed OST Form 6410 evidencing liability 

insurance coverage that meets the requirements of section 14 CFR 205.5(b).

We also wish to remind Sky King of the requirements of 49 U.S.C. § 41110(e). Specifically, that 

section requires that, once an air carrier is found fit initially, it must remain fit in order to hold its 

authority. To be assured that certificated air carriers continue to be fit after effective authority 

has been issued to them, the Department adopted sections 204.5 and 204.6 of our rules, which 

requires air carriers supply information describing any subsequent changes they may undergo in 

areas affecting fitness. Therefore, if Sky King is found fit to resume operations and should it 

subsequently propose a substantial change in its ownership, management, or operations, it must 

first comply with the requirements of § 204.5.8 Moreover, as noted in the COMPLIANCE 

DISPOSTION section of this order, any change in these circumstances of this case, in particular 

the compliance disposition of Sky King, its management, or its owners, may affect our 

determination of fitness. Therefore, in addition to the reporting requirement enumerated in 

section 204.5, we will also require, pursuant to section 204.6 of our rules, that Sky King report 

within 7 days of occurance (1) any charge of unfair or deceptive or anticompetitive business 

 8 The air carrier may contact our Air Carrier Fitness Division to report proposed substantial changes in its 

operations, ownership, or management, and to determine what additional information, if any, will be required under 

§ 204.5. In addition, by notice dated July 21, 1998, the Department requested air carriers to provide a 30-day 

advance notification of any proposed change in ownership, restructuring, or recapitalization. If the air carrier fails to 

file this updated information or if the information fails to demonstrate that the air carrier will continue to be fit upon 

implementation of the substantial change, the Department may take such action as is appropriate, including 

enforcement action or steps to modify, suspend, or revoke the air carrier's certificate authority.
9

practices, or of fraud, felony or antitrust violation, brought against any relevant corporation,9 or 

member of the key personnel10 employed (or to be employed) by any relevant corporation; 

(2) investigations, enforcement actions, or formal complaints filed by the Department or other 

government agency, involving any relevant corporations, personnel employed (or to be 

employed) by any relevant corporations or person having a substantial interest11 in any relevant 

corporation; and (3) any aircraft accidents or incidents experienced by Sky King, its personnel, 

or any relevant corporation. The compliance of the company with this requirement is essential if 

we are to carry out our responsibilities under § 41110(e).12

Additionally, as discussed in the FITNESS section of this order, our tentative findings here are 

based on Sky King operating no more than 10 large aircraft.13 Should Sky King wish to expand 

beyond the 10 large aircraft proposed in its application, it is not clear that our fitness finding 

would remain the same. Therefore, we intend to require Sky King to provide the Department 

with 45-days’ notice prior to implementing any expansion that would result in the operation of 

more than 10 large aircraft.

Finally, if Sky King is found fit to resume operations, it would be required to submit a detailed 

progress report, within 45 days following the end of its first year of certificated flight operations, 

to the Air Carrier Fitness Division. The report should include a description of the air carrier’s 

current operations (number and type of aircraft, principal markets served, total number of fulltime and part-time employees), a summary of how these operations have changed during the 

year, a discussion of any changes it anticipates from its current operations during its second year, 

current financial statements,14 and a listing of current senior management and key technical 

personnel. The air carrier should also be prepared to meet with staff members of the Fitness 

Division to discuss its current and future operations.

 9 Section 204.2(k) of our rules (14 CFR 204.2(k)) defines a relevant corporations as the air carrier, any subsidiary 

thereof, any predecessor thereof (i.e., any air carrier in which any directors, principal officers or persons having a 

substantial interest have or once had a substantial interest), and any company (including a sole proprietorship or 

partnership) which has a significant financial or managerial influence on the applicant or air carrier. The latter 

includes any company (including a sole proprietorship or partnership) holding more than 50 percent of the 

outstanding voting stock of the air carrier; and any company (including a sole proprietorship or partnership) holding 

between 20 percent and 50 percent of the outstanding voting stock of the air carrier and which has significant 

influence over the air carrier as indicated, for example, by 25 percent representation on the board of directors, 

participation in policy-making processes, substantial inter-company transactions, or managerial personnel with 

common responsibilities in both companies (See 14 CFR § 204.2(k)).

10 See 14 CFR § 204.2(i).

11 See 14 CFR § 204.2(m).

12 We also remind Sky King about the requirements of § 204.7 of our rules. This section provides, among other 

things, that (1) the certificate authority granted to a company shall be revoked if the company does not commence 

actual flying operations under that authority within one year of the date of the Department's determination of its

fitness; (2) if the company commences operations for which it was found fit and subsequently ceases such 

operations, it may not resume certificated operations unless its fitness has been redetermined; and (3) if the company 

does not resume operations within one year of its cessation, its authority shall be revoked for dormancy.

13 Section 298.2 of our rules defines large aircraft as any aircraft originally designed to have a maximum 

passenger capacity of more than 60 seats or a maximum payload capacity of more than 18,000 pounds.

14 These financial statements should include a balance sheet as of the end of the company’s first full year of actual 

flight operations and a twelve-month income statement ending that same date.
10

OBJECTIONS

On November 21, 2014, Sky King filed a Motion requesting to shorten the public comment 

period for filing of answers to the Department’s tentative decision from the standard 14 day 

objection and 7 day answer period to 5 days and 3 days respectively. Sky King states that it is 

now in compliance with Federal Aviaiton Administration regulatory and operation specification 

requirements and that the requested relief would permit it an opportunity to initiate its passenger 

operations immediately.

On December 3, 2014, Sky King advised the Department that there were no objections to 

shortening the answer period. Under these circumstances and under authority assigned in 

14 CFR 385.12, we have decided to grant Sky King's request for a shortened answer period in 

this case. We will give interested persons 5 business days following the service date of this order 

to show cause why the tentative findings and conclusions set forth here should not be made final; 

answers to objections will be due within 3 business days thereafter. We expect such persons to 

direct their objections, if any, to the application and points at issue and to support such objections 

with detailed economic analyses. If an oral evidentiary hearing or discovery procedures are 

requested, the objector should state in detail why such a hearing or discovery is considered 

necessary, and what material issues of decisional fact the objector would expect to establish 

through a hearing or discovery that cannot be established in written pleadings. The objector 

should consider whether discovery procedures alone would be sufficient to resolve material 

issues of decisional fact. If so, the type of procedure should be specified (See Part 302, Rules 19 

and 20); if not, the reasons why not should be explained. We will not entertain general, vague, 

or unsupported objections. If no substantive objections are filed, we will issue an order that will 

make final our tentative findings and conclusions with respect to Sky King’s fitness.

ACCORDINGLY,

1. We direct interested parties to show cause why we should not issue an order finding that 

Sky King, Inc., is a U.S. citizen and fit, willing and able to resume interstate and foreign charter 

air transportation of persons, property and mail.

2. We direct any interested persons having objections to the issuance of an order making final 

any of the proposed findings or conclusions set forth here to file them with Department of 

Transportation Dockets, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Room W12-140, Washington, D.C. 

20590, in Dockets DOT-OST-1997-3017 and DOT-OST-1997-3113 and serve them upon all 

persons listed in Attachment A no later than 5 business days after the service date of this order; 

answers to objections shall be filed no later than 3 business days thereafter. 

3. We grant the motion of Sky King, Inc., in Dockets DOT-OST-2014-3017 and DOT-OST1997-3113 to shorten the public comment period for filing objections to 5 business days and for 

the filing of answers to 3 business days.
11

4. We direct that should Sky King, Inc., want to operate more than 10 large aircraft, it must first 

provide the Department with at least 45 days’ notice and demonstrate its fitness for such 

operations.

5. If timely and properly supported objections are filed, we will accord full consideration to the 

matters or issues raised by the objections before we take further action.15

6. In the event that no objections are filed, we will consider all further procedural steps to be 

waived and we will enter an order making final our tentative findings and conclusions.

7. We direct Sky King, Inc. to submit to the Air Carrier Fitness Division a first year progress 

report within 45 days following the end of its first year of actual certificated flight operations.

8. We grant the motion for confidential treatment filed by Sky King, Inc., on June 30, 2014.

9. We will serve a copy of this order on the persons listed in Attachment A.

By:

SUSAN L. KURLAND

Assistant Secretary

for Aviation and International Affairs

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at:

http://www.regulations.gov

 15 Since we have provided for the filing of objections to this order, we will not entertain petitions for 

reconsideration.
Attachment A

SERVICE LIST FOR

SKY KING, INC.

FRANK J. VISCONTI

PRESIDENT & CEO

SKY KING INC

800 NORTH MAGNOLIA DRIVE

SUITE 510

ORLANDO FL 32803

OFFICE OF AIRLINE INFORMATION

DOT/RSPA/BTS E-36

1200 NEW JERSEY AVE SE

WASHINGTON DC 20590

PETER LYNCH AGC-300

ASST CHIEF COUNSEL FOR ENFORCEMENT

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

800 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW

WASHINGTON DC 20591

MARK MAZOR

CERTIFICATION SECTION MANAGER

FAA AFS-900

45005 AVIATION DRIVE, SUITE 131

DULLES VA 20166

PIERRE MURPHY

LAW OFFICES OF PIERRE MURPHY

1200 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE, NW

SUITE 590

WASHINGTON DC 20036

MARTIN POLOMSKI

CMO MANAGER

SOUTH FLORIDA CERTIFICATE 

 MANAGEMENT OFFICE

5950 HAZELTINE NATIONAL DRIVE

SUITE 410

ORLANDO FL 32822

KATHERINE TATUM

TECHNICAL PROGRAMS BRANCH

AFS 260

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

800 INDEPENDENCE AVE SW

WASHINGTON DC 20591