Cn^M P STATE S DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO> f FEDERA LAVIATIO N ADMINISTRATIO N

WASHINGTON , D C PffiLIOPS , LLC .

Complainant , V . NORWOO D MEMORIA LAIRPORT ; NORWOO D AIRPOR T COMMISSION ,

Respondents . Docke t No . 16-09-1 0

TABL E O FEXHIBIT S FO RRESPONDENTS ' ANSWER . PARTIA LMOTIO N T O DISMISS , AN D AFFIRMATIV E DEFENSE S Exhibi t A Exhibi t B Exhibi t C Exhibi t D Exhibi t E

Exhibi t F Exhibi t G Exhibi t H Exhibi t I Exhibi t J Affidavi t

o f Airpor t Manage r Rus s Maguir e Norwoo dAirpor t

Minimu mStandard s Excerp t fro mGeneral Regulation s for Norwoo dMemoria l Airport Marketin g an dInterne t

material s for

Heliop s Emai l fro mLe n Carroll , Manager - FlightLeve l Norwood , t o Rus s Maguire , Norwoo dMemoria l Airpor t Manager , date dMarc h25 , 200 9 Excerp t o f Minute s fromMa y 13 , 200 9 Meetin g o f th e Norwoo dAirport

Commissio n Excerp t o f Minute s fromAugus t

12 , 200 9 Meetin g o f

th e Norwoo dAirpor t

Commissio n Excerp t o f Minute s fromJime 10 , 200 9 Meetin g o f th e Norwoo dAirport

Commissio n Excerp t o f Minute s fromJul y 8 , 200 9 Meetin g o f th e ' Norwoo dAirpor t

Commissio n Lette r fromRus s Maguire , Norwoo dMemoria l Airpor t Manager , t o We s Verkaart , Owner , Heli-Op s Helicopte r Tours , date dJul y 15 , 200 9Exhibi t K Lette r

fromWesle y H . Verkaart , Heliop s LLC , t o Norwoo d Airpor t Commissio n & Rus s Maguire , Airpor t Manager , date dJul y 22 , 200 9 Exhibi t L Lette r

fromRus s Maguire , Norwoo dMemoria l Airpor t Manager , t o We s Verkaart , Heli-op s LLC , date dAugus t 13 , 200 9 Exhibi t M Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n Agenc y Directiv e

No . MA C AD-001 a Exhibi t N Memorandu mfromRober t J . Mallard , P.E. , MA C Executiv e Director , date dNovembe r 16 , 200 1 concernin g Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n Agenc y Directiv e No . MA C A D - 001 a

520402V 1UNITE D STATE S DEP^SJITMENT O FTRANSPORTATIO N FEDERA LAVL\TIO N ADMINISTRATIO N

WASHINGTON , D C HELIOPS , LLC ,

Complainant ,

NORWOO D MEMORIA LAIRPOR T an d NORWOO D AIRPOR T COMMISSION ,

Respondents . Docke t No . 16-09-1 0

RESPONDENTS ' ANSWER , PARTIA LMOTIO N T O DISMISS , AN D

AFFIRB/lATrV E DEFENSE S LINTRODUCTIO N Pursuan t t o 1 4 C.F.R . § 16.23(d) , th e Respondents , th e Norwoo dMemoria l Airpor t ("Norwoo dAirport" ) an dNoi'woo dAirpor t Commissio n ("Airport Commission") , hereb y respon dt o th e Complainant , Heliops , LLC' s ("Heliops") , Complain t

i n th e above-reference ddocket . (Collectively , Norwoo dAirpor t an dth e Airpor t Commissio n ar e referre dt o a s "Respondents") . A s state dbelow , th e Airpor t Commission' s decisio n t o requir e Heliop s t o compl y withit s minimu mstandards , includin g offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirements , an dgenera l regulations , includin g acommercia l permi t requirement , d o no t

violat e Gran t

Assuranc e 2 2 {Economi c Nondiscrimination ) an di s reasonabl e an djustified . Moreover , th e Federa l Aviatio n Adminisfratio n ("FAA" ) doe s no t hav e jurisdictio n i n a1 4 C.F.R . Part 1 6 proceedin g t o resolv e Heliops ' clai mfo r aviolatio n o f th e so-calle ddorman t

Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite dState s Constitution . Assumin garguend o that jurisdictio n doe s exist , th e Minimu mStandard s d o not violat e th e so-calle d dorman t Commerc e Clause . I LFACTUA LAN D PROCEDURA LBACKGROUN D Norwoo dAirpor t

i s apubli c us e airport

owne db y th e Tow n o f

Norwoo d ("Town") , Massachusett s an doversee n b y th e Airport Commission , whic hi s aTow n agenc y ("Town") . Accordingly , th e Tow n i s an airport sponsor , subjec t

t o th e jurisdictio n o f

th e FA A an dMassachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n ("MAC") . Mass . Gen . Law s c . 90 , § § 35(a) , (e) , 39 . A . Norwoo dAirport

Minimu mStandard s I n accordanc e wit hFA A Advisor y Circular 150/5190-7 , th e Airpor t

Commissio n adopte dth e Norwoo dAirpor t Minimu mStandard s ("Minimu mStandards" ) (Ex . B. ) Fro mtim e t o time , th e Commissio n h;i s submitte dthes e Minimu mStandard s t o th e FA A an dMA C for

thei r review . "Fo r

th e airport' s commerciall y permitte dbusines s community , [Norwoo dAirport's ] minimu mstandard s ar e intende dt o promot e fair competitio n b y 'levelin g th e playin g field.'" (Ex . B a t 2. ) "Fo r th e genera l public , th e enforcemen t

o f minimu mstandard s als o discourage s sub-standar dand/o r unsaf e would

b e servic e providers—^thereb y protectin g th e interest s o f [th e Airport's ] patrons. " (Id. ) Thes e Minimu mStandard s constitut e "[t]h e qualification s establishe db y th e [Airport Commission ] a s th e minimu mrequirement s t o b e me t for th e right t o conduc t

a commercia l activity o n th e Norwoo dAirport. " (Id. ) (emphasis added) . Th e term "commercia l activity " i s broadl y define dan dinclude s activitie s corrunonl y performe do n airports , includin g sightseein g an daeria l photography . (Id . at 3. )Th e genera l requirement s o f th e Minimu mStandard s requir e commercia l operators ' t o provid e documentatio n relatin g t o compan y organization , office/hanga r space , an dinsurance . (Id. ) DocumentJitio n for office/hanga

r spac e include s " acop y o f th e applicant' s leas e o r

certificat e o f

title , for lease do r owne dspac e locate do n th e airport , o r adjacen t t o th e Airport' s north/sout hproperty line , alon g Acces s Road ; als o required , i f

necessary , i s acop y o f

th e floor plan. " (Id. ) I n addition , commercia l operator s mus t

fiimishth e Airport

Commissio n withacurren t fmancial statement , proo f o f thre e (3 ) month s o f

operatin g expenses , atw o (2 ) year busines s pla n fo r

th e propose d operation , previou s histor y o f payment , thre e (3 ) credi t references , ta x identificatio n number , ta x re-sal e numbe r (i f applicable) , an dcopies o f an y an dal l pertinen t

certificate s an dlicense s fo r

th e propose doperation . (Id. ) Th e foregoin g requirement s ar e o f genera l applicatio n t o al l commercia l operators , regardles s o f th e underlyin g natur e o f

th e propose dcommercia l activity . (Se e id.) Asid e fromthes e requirements , th e Minimu mStandard s contai n additiona l requirement s base dupo n th e typ e o f propose dcommercia l activity . (Se e id . at 4-8. ) Significantly , acommercia l operato r i n th e category o f

"Fligh t Instruction , Aircraf

t Rental , Sale s an dSightseein g Flights " mus t provid e th e following : 1 . A wel l li t

an dheate doffic e an dclassroo mo f at leas t 20 0 squar e feet , lease do r

owned , wit hfraining equipmen t suc ha s mock-up s an dinstrumen t

trainin g aids . Thi s are ai s t o b e locate dwithi n walkin g distanc e o f

th e compan y aircraft , on , o r adjacen t t o th e airport , o r o n Acces s Roa dbetwee n th e nort han dsouthairport boundary ends . 2 . Suitabl e commercia l tie-dow n o r hangar spac e for al l compan y aircraft .

' A "commercia l operato r i s "[a]n y company/perso n tha t offer s an y commercia l activit y or servic e fo

r compensation. " (Ex . B a t 3) (emphasi s added) .3 . Fo r flight instruction , aminimu mo f tw o aircraft . 4 . A telephon e liste dunde r th e compan y nam e an dattende ddurin g norma l busines s hours . 5 . A n ongoing , demonsfrate dabilit y t o mee t th e certificatio n requirement s o f

FAA , stat e an dloca l authorities . 6 . Premis e liabilit y insuranc e o f $1,000,00 0 combine dsingl e limit , bodil y injur

y an dpropert y damage ; an dcommercia l aircraf t liability insuranc e o f

$1,000,00 0 combine dsingle limi t bodil y injury an dpropert y damag e fo r al l aircraf

t owned , leased , lease d bac k o r rented , wit h$100,00 0 minimu mpe r passenger , als o namin g th e Tow n o f

Norwood , Norwoo dAirpor t Commission , an dth e Norwoo dAirpor t Managemen t

a s additionall y insured . 7 . Fo r flight instruction , aformal an ddocumente dprogra mtha t wil l educat e al l student s an dinstructo r pilot s regardin g th e Airport' s nois e abatemen t

an dsafet y procedures . (Id . at 5 ) (emphasi s i n original).' ^ Significantly , a"transien t commercia l flight

operator " i s prohibite dfromusin g "th e airport a s abas e o f

operation s t o pic k

u p student s o r

clients ; t o advertis e and/o r

us e th e airpor t

a s apoin t

o f origi n o r destinatio n withou t

first obtainin g fromth e [Airport Commission ] acommercia l permit. " (Id . at 6. ) (emphasis added) . Th e Airpor t

Commissio n institute dthi s transien t commercia l flight

operato r permi t requiremen t

i n respons e t o growin g problem s withentitie s (includin g sightseein g businesses ) seekin g t o evad e applicabl e requirement s an doperat e "shadow " businesse s ou t o f Norwoo dAirport . Th e Minimu mStandard s requir e acommercia l operato r engage di n aeria l photography , advertising , surveying , o r othe r suc hservice s (i.e . uniqu e services ) t o fiimis hth e following : 1 . A wel l li t

an dheate doffic e o f

at leas t 20 0 squar e feet , lease do r owned . Thi s are ai s t o b e locate dwithi n walkin g distanc e o f th e

^ Heliop s doe s no t

provid e flight

instructio n an dther e i s no t subjec t t o th e specifi c fligh t

instructio n requirement s o f

th e Airpor t

Minimu mStandards .aircraft , on , o r adjacen t t o th e Aiiport , or , o n Acces s Roa d betwee n th e nort han dsouthend s o f th e Airpor t

boundary . 2 . License s and/o r

authori:satio n t o d o busines s i n th e stat e o f Massachusetts . 3 . A liste dtelephon e numbe r unde r th e company nam e an dmanne d durin g norma l busines s hours . 4 . Premis e liability insuranc e o f $1,000,00 0 combine dsingl e limit , bodil y injur

y an dpropert y damage ; an dcommercia l aircraf t liabilit y insuranc e o f

$1,000,00 0 minimu mpe r passenger , als o namin g th e Tow n o f

Norwood , th e Norwoo dAirpor t Commission , an dNorvs^oo dAirport Managemen t

a s additionall y insured . 5 . A suitabl e commercia l tie-down . (Id . at 7-8 ) (emphasi s i n original) . Thus , th e genera l requirement s mandat e acommercia l operato r t o hav e office/hanga

r space , an dth e minimxu n standard s for commercia l operator s providin g sightseeing , aeria l photography , surveyin g an dothe r uniqu e service s fiirther

defin e thi s requiremen t

a s wel l li t

an dheate doffic e wit hat leas t tw o hundre d(200 ) squar e fee t i n size , "withi n walkin g distanc e o f th e aircraft , on , o r

adjacen t t o th e Airport , or , o n Acces s Roa dbetwee n th e nort han dsouthend s o f th e Airpor t

boundary. " (Id . at

3 , 6-8. ) Commercia l operator s providin g sightseein g service s mus t hav e ahangar

o r suitabl e commercia l tie-down , wherea s commercia l operator s furnishin g aeria l photography , surveyin g an dothe r

uniqu e service s ar e onl y require dt o hav e asuitabl e commercia l tie

down . (1 4 at

3 , 6-8. ) RGenera l Regulation s for Norwoo dMemoria l Airpor t Pursuan t t o Massachusett s Genera l Law s Chapte r 90 , Sectio n 5 1 J , th e Airport Commissio n als o adopte dth e Genera l Regulation s fo r Norwoo dMemoria l Airpor t("Genera l Regulations"). ^ Th e curren t versio n o f

th e Genera l Regulation s wer e revise d o n Septembe r

10 , 200 8 an dapprove db y th e MA C o n o r abou t Novembe r

7 , 2008 . (Ex . C. ) Notably , th e Genera l Regulation s wer e adopte dfor th e followin g purposes : (1 ) "t o ensur e tha t

th e publi c receive s responsible , saf e an dadequat e servic e fromthos e businesse s conductin g permitte dactivitie s at th e Norwoo dMemoria l Airport" ; (2 ) "t o ensur e tha t

al l airport

user s an dcommercia l operator s ar e freatedfairly" ; an d(3 ) "t o ensur e tha t

al l operation s are conducte di n conformity withal l applicabl e stat e an d federal regulations" . (I da t 3. ) Th e Genera l Regulation s provid e tha t "[n] o person , firm, corporatio n o r entit y . . . shal l us e th e Airpor t

o r an y portio n thereo f

a s an FBO , SAS O o r

otherwis e fo r

revenue producin g commercial , busines s o r aeronautica l activitie s withou t first obtainin g consen t an dawritte n permi t

for suc hactivitie s fromth e Commission. ' (Id . a t 12 ) (emphasi s added) . Permit s mus t

b e obtaine dannually , o n o r befor e Jul y 1 o f

an y give n year , an dth e Airport Commissio n establishe s th e permi t fe e o n an annua l basis . (Id. ) Currently , th e annua l permi t

fe e i s thirt y ($30.00 ) dollars , aminima l fe e tha t pale s i n compariso n t o th e

' Massachusett s Genera l Law s Chapte r 90 , Sectio n 51 J state s that "[a] n airport

commissio n shal l adop t rule s an dregulation s for

th e us e o f

municipa l airport s o r

fo r th e safet y o f th e publi c upo n o r

beyon dth e limit s o f aiiport s unde r

it s control , whethe r

suc h airport

facilitie s ar e withi n or

withou t th e territoria l limit s o f th e city o r

town . Suc hrule s an dregulation s shal l no t b e effectiv e imti l approve db y th e Massachusett s aeronautic s commissio n an dpublishe di n th e sam e manne r tha t by-law s an dordinance s ar e require dt o b e published . Suc hrule s an dregulation s shal l conformt o an db e consisten t with th e law s o f

th e commonwealt han dth e rule s an dregulation s o f th e Massachusett s aeronautic s commission , an dshal l no t b e inconsisten t

witho r contrar y t o any ac t

o f th e Congres s o f

th e Unite dState s relatin g t o aeronautic s o r an y regulation s promulgate do r standard s establishe dpursuan t thereto. " * Th e Genera l Regulation s defin e an "aeronautica l service " i s "an y busines s activit y commonly conducte d at o r o n th e Aiipor t

whic hinvolves , makes possibl e o r i s require dfo

r th e operatio n o f

aircraft. " (Ex . C at 6. ) Th e ter m"aeronautica l service " explicitl y include s sightseeing , aeria l photography , an daeria l surveying . (Id. ) Thus , th e defmition s o f "aeronautica l services " unde r th e Genera l Regulation s an d Advisory Circular

150/5190- 7 are virtuall y identical . Th e Genera l Regulation s defin e "commercia l activity " a s "an y activit y conducte dat , on , fromo r i n conjunctio n with th e Airpor t b y an y person , partnership , join t

venture , corporation , o r

compan y o r

othe r entity intende dt o resul t

i n revenue-producin g and/o r monetar y gai n fo

r th e part y conductin g suc h activity. " (Id . at 7. ) A "SASO " include s an y entit y tha t provider s sightseein g rides , perform s aeria l photography , o r aeria l surveying . Qd . at

12-13. )revenue s tha t commercia l operator s suc ha s Heliop s deriv e fromthei r us e o f Norwoo d Airport . I n additio n t o consen t an da^vritten permit , acommercia l permi t applican t mus t satisf y all o f th e applicabl e requirement s o f th e Minimu mStandard s o r obtai n awritte n exemption . (Id . at

12. ) C . Heliop s Heliop s ha s conducte dCF RTitl e 14 , Part 9 1 operation s fromNorwoo dAirport , whic hinclud e sightseein g tour s t o th e genera l public. ^ B y providin g sightseein g an d photograph y service s fromNorwoo dAirport , whethe r basedout

o f Norwoo dAirport , a s a"shadow " operatio n and/o r o n atransien t

basis , Heliop s i s subjec t

t o th e Genera l Regulation s an dMinimu mStandards . I n additio n t o satisfyin g th e Minimu mStandards , includin g th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requiremen t applicabl e t o commercia l operator s providin g sightseein g services , Heliop s als o mus t annuall y obtai n a commercia l permi t

(o r waiver) . Eve n thoug hHeliop s suggest s tha t it s usag e o f

Norwoo d Airpor t i s limited , th e Genera l Regulation s an dMinimu mStandard s requir e Heliop s t o obtai n acommercia l permit , eithe r a s acommercia l operato r o r a"transien t

commercia l flight operator. " (Ex . C at

6. ) T o date , however , th e Airport Commissio n ha s not

grante d acommercia l permi t

(o r waiver ) t o Heliops , no r

ha s Heliop s furnishe dan y evidenc e o f complyin g wit hth e offic e spac e o r hangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirement s o f th e Minimu mStandards .

^ I n it s Complaint , Heliop s represent s itsel f a s an entit y performin g sightseeing , photography , an dsurve y services . However , a

t n o tim e ha s Heliop s hel ditsel f ou t t o th e Airpor t

Commissio n a s anythin g mor e tha n acommercia l provide r

o f sightseein g an dphotograph y services . (Se e Ex . K. ) T o th e exten t tha t Heliop s seek s t o provid e surve y service s fromNorwoo dAirport , i t woul dals o b e subjec t

t o th e "uniqu e services " provision s o f

th e Minimiu n Standards , includin g suitabl e offic e spac e o n o r i n prescribe dclos e proximity t o Norwoo dAirpor t

an dacommercia l tie-down .Despit e it s suggestio n t o th e confrary , Heliop s ha s use dNorwoo dAirpor t a s a bas e o f operations . I n fact , Heliop s advertise s an dhold s itsel f ou t t o th e genera l publi c a s basin g itsel f

ou t o f Norwoo dAirport . (Ex . D. ) Specifically , Heliop s market s a"Bosto n Tour " departin g from"Norwood " - thi s advertisemen t appear s o n Heliops ' websit e an d i n it s marketin g materials. ^ (Id. ) Notably , th e "fransien t commercia l flight

operator " provisio n i n th e Minimu mStandard s mandate s acommercia l permi t for entitie s tha t

pic k u p clients , advertise , and/o r us e Norwoo dAirpor t

a s apoin t

o f origi n o r destinatio n - th e sam e type s o f

use s mad e b y Heliops . Ther e i s n o restrictio n upo n th e frequency upo n whic hHeliop s ca n us e Norwoo d Airport for flight operations , an dan y Eillegation tha t i t conducte dtwent y (20 ) flight operation s fromNorwoo dAirpor t durin g 200 8 mus t

b e viewe dagains t

Heliops ' representation s t o th e genera l publi c an dth e absenc e o f an y uppe r

limitatio n upo n th e tota l numbe r

o f flight operation s i t

can conduc t

fromNorwoo dAirport . I n effect , therefore , Heliop s operate s a"shadow " busines s utilizin g NorwoodAirport , withou t fully complyin g wit hth e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations . Thus , Heliop s i s subjec t

t o th e commercia l permi t requiremen t

a s an entity usin g Norwoo dAirpor t

a s a"shadow " bas e o f

operations , and/o r

a s atransien t

commercia l flight operator . Th e ver y fac t

tha t Heliop s market s it s busines s ou t o f Norwoo dAirport seem s mor e closel y aligne dwit ha"shadow " bas e o f operation s tha n amer e fransient user , wh o ma y onl y us e Norwoo dAirport fo r one-tim e fuel o r

maintenanc e purposes . Th e Airpor t

Commission' s concern s wit hHeliop s dat e bac k t o Marc h2009 , consistin g o f

event s omitte dfro mth e factua l backgroim di n Heliops ' Complaint . Th e

* Heliop s als o advertise s a"Custo mTour " whic h depart s fromwhicheve r locatio n acustomer

chooses . (Ex . D. ) Thus , acustomer coul dselec t

Norwoo dAirpor t

a s hi s o r he r poin t o f departure .Airpor t Commissio n an dNorwoo dAirpor t managemen t

wa s firs t alerte dt o th e actua l exten t o f Heliops ' operation s whe n i t receive dacomplain t

fromLe n Carrol l ("Mr . Carroll") , aManage r

for FlightLeve l Aviatio n ("FlightLevel") , afixed-base operato r at Norwoo dAirport . (Ex . E. ) O n Marc h24 , 2009 , a

t approximatel y 9 p.m . (i.e . "afte r hours") , aHeliop s pilo t lande dat FlightLevel' s transien t

aircraf t parkin g apron . (Id. ) I n particular , Mr . Carrol l reporte dtha t

Heliop s ha ddroppe dof

f severa l individual s insid e th e security fenc e after conductin g apai dphot o shoot . (Id ; Ex . F , G. ) Becaus e thi s inciden t occurre d"afte r hours, " airpor t

personne l wa s limite dan dsecurity wa s o f great concern . Thes e individual s di dnot

hav e asecurity badge , no r wer e the y accompanie db y a n escort witha security badge . (Exs . E , F , G. ) Prope r persorme l t o accoun t

for thes e unauthorize d individual s als o wer e absent . (Exs . E , F , G. ) Separately , asecurity concern existe di n th e Norwoo dAirpor t

parkin g lo t

at thi s time , involvin g othe r individual s tha t

Heliop s droppe doff

. (Exs . E , F , G. ) Yet , th e Heliop s pilo t ha dalread y departe dfromNorwoo d Airport , flying bac k

t o Heliops ' physica l bas e o f operation s at

PlymouthAirport . (Ex . E , F , G. ) A s aresult , th e Norwoo dPolic e Departmen t wa s alerte dan dreporte dt o Norwoo d Airpor t becaus e unauthorize dindividual s wer e presen t i n th e secure dacces s area . Heliop s alon e was responsibl e for th e unauthorize dindividual s presen t i n th e secure dacces s are a"afte r hours " o n Marc h24 , 2009 . I f Heliop s ha dacommercia l permit , however , it s personne l likel y woul dhav e possesse dth e requisit e security badg e an dserve da s aprope r

escort for th e unauthorize dindividuals . Moreover , thi s Marc h24 , 200 9 inciden t

ma y hav e bee n averte di f Heliop s ha dbee n physicall y locate da t Norwoo d Airport (vi acomplianc e withth e ofiTic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-downrequirements) , t o supervise , stan daccountabl e for , an dpreven t th e events tha t

too k place . Instead , Heliop s simpl y use dNorwoo dAirpor t t o game r busines s and , after

whic hit s pilo t departe dfor

th e PlymouthAirport , i t lef t behin daheightene dsecurit y concer n an d nee dfor polic e involvement . Th e Marc h24 , 200 9 inciden t involve dHeliops ' imprope r us e o f a n aircraf

t parkin g apro n o n FlightLevel' s leasehold . I n accordanc e withNorwoo dAirport' s state mandate dsecurity plan , thi s aircraf t parkin g apro n ha dbee n designatedfor us e for fransient aircraft , specificall y t o accommodat e re-fiieling , overnigh t aircraf t parkin g services , mino r

aircraf t parkin g maintenance , an dothe r activitie s at

th e discretio n o f FlightLevel . Thi s fransient parkin g are awas neve r

intende dt o b e use da s asecurit y and/o r commercia l permi t

loophol e for

businesse s lackin g acommercia l permi t and/o r a subsequen t

security identificatio n badg e fro mth e Norwoo dAirport Manager . Durin g aApri l 1 , 200 9 meetin g wit hNorwoo dAirport Manage r Rus s Maguir e ("Mr . Maguire") , Wesle y Verkaart ("Mr . Verkaart") , owner/operator o f Heliops , explaine dtha t

Heliop s ha dbee n regularl y usin g th e transien t parkin g apro n an d FlightLevel' s passenge r

termina l t o shuttl e sightseein g tou r customers . I n fact , Mr . Verkaar t lef t Heliops ' marketin g material s at th e FlightLeve l operation s desk , includin g th e above-describe dadvertisement s listin g Norwoo dAirport a s abas e o f

operations . Mr . Verkaar t

attende dth e Airpor t

Commission' s May 13 , 200 9 meeting^ , at whic htim e h e state dtha t Heliop s wante dt o ru n asatellit e operatio n out o f Norwoo d Airport . (Ex . F. ) Mr . Verkaar t furthe r explaine dtha t

Heliop s ha dbee n operatin g i n an d ou t o f Norwoo dAirpor t

for five (5 ) years . (Id. ) Durin g thi s Ma y 13 , 200 9 meeting , th e

' ' A cop y o f

th e minute s for

th e May 13 , 200 9 meetin g i s attache da s Exhibi t F . Th e Respondent s den y th e accurac y o f

an y allege dstatement s inconsisten t withthes e meetin g minutes . 1 0Airport Commissio n an dMr . Maguir e discusse dth e Airpor t Commission' s consisten t approac hi n requirin g commercia l operators , includin g companie s wh o d o busines s a t Othe r airports , t o mee t

all o f th e Minimu mStandards . (Id. ) Mr . Magufre als o explaine d at th e Ma y 13 , 200 9 meetin g tha t othe r airport s coul dnot

b e compare dt o Norwoo d Airport give n th e difference s betwee n them , includin g th e numbe r o f businesse s operatin g out

o f th e airports , an dtha t

th e minimu mstandard s differe dbetwee n the m accordingly . (Id. ) Mr . Verkaart

appeare dat

th e Airpor t

Commission' s Jxm

e 10 , 200 9 meetin g i n coimectio n wit hHeliops ' informal reques t fo r acommercia l permit . (Ex . H. ) However , Heliop s di dno t

compl y with , an dt o dat e ha s not complie dwith , th e requirement s for an offic e spac e o r

hangar/commercia l tie-down location . (Id. ) Yet , Heliop s sough t t o conduc t 1 4 C.F.R . Part

9 1 busines s at

Norwoo dAirport . (Id. ) I n response , Mr . Magufre explaine dtha t

FA A an dth e MA C agree dtha t th e Airport

Commissio n ha dth e right t o impose minimu mstandard s o n businesse s at th e Airport. ^ (Id. ) Additionally , th e Airport Commissio n discusse dapplyin g th e Minimu mStandard s uniforml y t o al l applicant s or , absen t suc himiformity , th e Airport Commissio n woul db e at risk for aclai mo f

economi c discrimination . (Id. ) Th e Airport Commissio n explaine dtha t i t was no t preventin g Heliop s fromconductin g busines s at Norwoo dAirport , but

tha t th e Airpor t

Commissio n woul dnot

gran t awaive r t o th e Minimu mStandard s for Heliops . (Id. )

* In fact , th e Executiv e Directo r o f th e MA C informe dMr . Maguir e tha t h e supporte dNorwoo dAirport' s Minimu mStandards . (Id." ) ' Durin g th e wee k

o f Jun e 1 , 2009 , Mr . Maguir e spok e withDonn aWitt e ("Ms . Witte" ) a t th e FA A Regiona l Offic e i n Burlington , Massachusett s an dChri s Willenbor g ("Mr . Willenborg") , Executiv e Directo r o f th e MAC . Bot hMs . Witt e an dMr . Willenbor g wer e satisfie dwith Mr . Maguire' s explanatio n that Heliop s ha dno t

me t al l o f th e Minimu mStandards , eve n thoug h i t markete dNorwoo dAirpor t a s a sightseein g bas e o f

operations . 1 1Th e Airpor t Commissio n agai n discusse dHeliops ' reques t fo r acommercia l permi t at it s Jtil y 8 , 200 9 meeting . ^ ° (Ex . I. ) A t

tha t time, Heliop s stil l ha dno t submitte d aformal permi t

application , an dth e Airport Commissio n wa s disincline dt o entertai n discussio n o f

awaive r absen t suc happlication . (Id. ) Nevertheless , Heliop s ha dno t complie dwit hth e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requfrement s o f th e Minimu mStandards . (Id. ) Consisten t withit s prio r

meetings , th e Airpor t

Commissio n acknowledge dtha t

commercia l permi t

application s mus t

b e handle di n auniformmaimer , an dtha t applicant s mus t

mee t al l o f th e minimu mstandards . (Id. ) Th e Airpor t

Commissio n vote dunanimousl y at it s Jul y 8 , 200 9 meetin g t o authoriz e Mr . Maguir e t o notif y Heliop s tha t

i t mus t hav e an offic e spac e an dcommercia l tie-dow n i n orde r

t o qualif y fo r acommercia l permi t

and , i f Heliop s sough t

awaiver , i t shoul dmak e suc harequest . (Id. ) Mi' . Maguir e sen t thi s lette r

t o Heliop s o n Jul y 15 , 2009 . (Ex . J. ) I n alette r date dJul y 22 , 2009 , Heliop s requeste dablanke t waive r fromt o conduc t commercia l 1 4 C.F.R . Part 9 1 flights (sightseein g an dphotography ) originatin g fromNorwoo dAirport

a s anon-base dcommercia l operator . (Ex . K. ) Heliop s state dtha t it s "persorme l woul dmee t passenger s at

an FB O (Fligh t

Leve l o r other ) an descort

the m t o th e aircraft . Fo r

loadin g an dunloading , th e helicopte r woul db e parke deithe r

at th e designate dhelicopte r

parkin g circle s or , withprio r landin g permission , th e designate d airport helipa do r

FB O ramp area. " (Id. ) A s Mr . Maguir e explaine dat th e Airpor t Commission' s Augus t

13 , 200 9 meeting , Heliop s caimo t us e th e FlightLeve l passenge r

' " A cop y o f

th e minute s for

th e Jul y 8 , 200 9 meetin g i s attache da s Exhibi t I . Th e Respondent s den y th e accurac y o f

an y allege dstatement s inconsisten t wit h thes e meetin g minutes . 1 2termina l a s asecurity loophol e t o channe l it s customer s throug han dou t ont o th e restricte dacces s aircraf

t parkin g apron s withou t

acommercia l permit . (Ex . G. ) Durin g it s Augus t

13 , 200 9 meeting , th e Airpor t Commissio n vote dunanimousl y t o den y th e waive r

applicatio n becaus e othe r commercia l operator s complie dwit hth e sam e Minimu mStandard s requfre dfor operatin g at

Norwoo dAirport , includin g th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n provisions . (Id. ) Th e Airport Commissio n decline dt o provid e a n exemptio n t o thes e Minimu mStandard s simpl y becaus e on e (1 ) entity (i.e . Heliops ) mad e arequest . (Id. ) I n alette r date dAugus t

13 , 2009 , Mr . Magufre notifie dHeliop s o f th e Airpor t Commission' s decisio n t o den y it s reques t for awaive r fro mth e Minimu mStandards . (Ex . L. ) A s Mr . Maguir e explained , tiie Airport Commissio n sough t

"t o appl y it s standard s fairl y an duniformly" , particularl y becaus e severedcommercia l permitte d sightseein g tou r

operator s us e Norwoo dAirpor t a s ahom e base , an dal l o f thes e operator s compl y wit hth e sam e standard s for aphysica l presenc e a t

NorwoodAirpor t

tha t appl y t o Heliops . (Id. ) Fro mth e Airpor t

Commission' s adoptio n o f th e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s t o date , th e Airport Commissio n ha s consistentl y require dcommercia l operator s similarl y situate dt o Heliop s (e.g . sightseeing , aeria l photography , and/o r surveyin g services ) t o compl y withal l applicabl e requfrements , includin g but not limite d t o th e offic e space , hangar/commercia l tie-down , an dcommercia l permi t requfrements . Th e Airpor t

Commissio n wil l als o requir e fiiture commercia l operator s similarl y situate d t o Heliop s t o compl y wit hal l applicabl e requfrement s o f th e Minimu mStandard s an d Genera l Regulations .

1 3Heliop s compete s with , o r wil l compet e with , th e followin g entitie s currentl y operatin g ou t

o f Norwoo dAirport : Blu e Hil l Helicopters , LL C ("Blu e Hil l HeUcopters") , whic hprovide s sightseein g services ; an dAeria l Productions , LL C ("Aeria l Productions") , whic hprovide s aeria l photograph y an dsurveyin g services . Althoug h Heliop s compete s wit hBlue Hil l Helicopter s an dAeria l Productions , i t nevertheles s attempt s t o evad e complianc e withth e offic e space , hangar/commercia l tie-down , an d commercia l permi t

requirements . B y confrast . Blu e Hil l Helicopter s an dAeria l Production s currentl y compl y wit hth e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations . Significantly , Blu e HOil

l Helicopter s ha s a n offic e spac e acros s th e stree t fromNorwoo d Airport at 10 6 Acces s Road , Norwood , Massachusetts , whil e Aeria l Production s ha s an offic e spac e at

Norwoo dAirport . Further , Blu e Hil l Helicopter s an dAeria l Production s mee t th e hangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirement s an dposses s commercia l permits . Therefore , Heliop s seek s t o creat e adoubl e standar dfor itsel f a s compare dt o past , curren t an dfuture similarl y situate dcommercia l operator s usin g Norwoo dAirport . III . ARGUMEN T A . Th e Airpor t

Commission' s decisio n t o requir e Heliop s t o compl y wit hth e Minimu mStandard s doe s no t violat e Gran t

Assuranc e 22 . Th e Complainan t

i n a1 4 C.F.R . Part

1 6 proceedin g ha s th e burde n o f proof , vi aa preponderanc e o f

th e evidence , t o establis hthat asponso r

ha s violate dth e applicabl e federal gran t

assurance(s) . SeaSand s Ai r Transport , Inc . v . Huntsville-Madiso n Count y Airport Auth. . FA A Docke t

No . 16-05-1 7 (Aug . 28 , 2006 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) . Here , Heliop s allege s tha t Norwoo dAirpor t

an dth e Airport

Commissio n violate dGran t Assuranc e 2 2 {Economi c Nondiscrimination ) b y denyin g awaive r o r commercia l permit .

1 4"Federa l gran t assuranc e 22 , Economi c Nondiscrimination , (Assuranc e 22 ) deal s wit hbothth e reasonablenes s o f airport ; acces s an dth e prohibitio n o f adoptin g unjustl y discriminatory condition s a s apotential fo r limitin g access. " JetAwa y Aviation , Inc . v . Monfros e County , FA A Docke t No . 16-08-0 1 (Jul y 2 , 2009) . I n pertinen t part , thi s gran t assuranc e require s th e following : [Th e aiipor t

owne r o r sponsor ] wil l mak e th e airport availabl e a s an airport for publi c us e o n reasonabl e term s an dwithou t unjus t discriminatio n t o al l types , kind s an dclasse s o f aeronautica l activities , includin g commercia l aeronautica l activitie s offerin g service s t o th e publi c a t th e airport . [Gran t

Assuranc e 22(a) ]

Th e sponso r

ma y establis hsuc hreasonable , an dno t unjustl y discriminatory , condition s t o b e me t b y al l user s o f

th e airport

a s ma y b e necessar y fo r

th e saf e an defficien t

operatio n o f

th e airport . [Gran t Assuranc e 22(h) ] Th e sponso r

ma y prohibi t

o r limi t any give n type , kin do r

clas s o f aeronautica l us e o f

th e airport

i f suc hactio n i s necessar y for th e saf e operatio n o f

th e airport

o r necessar y t o serv e th e civi l aviatio n need s o f th e public . [Gran t

Assuranc e 22(i) ] "Subsectio n (h ) qualifie s subsectio n (a) , an dsubsectio n (i ) represent s an exceptio n t o subsectio n (a ) t o permi t

th e sponso r

t o exercis e confro l o f

th e airport

sufficient t o preclud e unsaf

e an dinefficien t

condition s tha t

woul db e detrimenta l t o th e civi l aviatio n need s o f th e public. " JetAwa y Aviation , Inc . v . Monfros e Coimty , FA A Docke t No . 16

- 08-0 1 (Jul y 2 , 2009) . A n airpor t

sponso r "ha s discretio n i n drawin g reasonabl e distinction s amon g aeronautica l user s i n settin g airport .. . terms. " Se e Sant aMonic aAirpor t Ass' n v . Santa Monica , FA A Docke t

No . 16-99-2 1 (Nov . 22 , 2000 ) (Director' s Determination) . Gran t Assuranc e 2 2 doe s not

prohibi t al l discriminatio n amon g aeronautica l users , bu t instea di s

1 5limite dt o unjus t economi c discrimination . R/T-182 , LL C v . Portag e Count y Reg . Airport Auth. , FA A Docke t

No . 16-05-1 4 (Nov . 1 , 2006 ) (Director' s Determination) , afTdbv , FA A Docke t

No . 16-05-1 4 (Mar . 29 , 2007 ) (Final Agenc y Decision) . Althoug hth e ter m"unjus t discrimination " i s no t

define db y statute , i t

i s construe d a s occurrin g whe n asimilarl y situate duse r receive s preferentia l treatment . R/T-182 , LL C V . FAA , 51 9 F.3 d307 , 30 9 (6thCfr . 2008) ; R/T-182 , LL C v . Portag e Count y Reg

Airport Auth. . FA A Docke t

No . 16-05-1 4 (Nov . 1 , 2006 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) ; Ashto n V . Concord , FA A Docke t

No . 16-99-0 9 (Jan . 28 , 2000 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) . Th e "similarl y situated " standar ddistinguishe s betwee n legitimat e an d impermissibl e ground s fo r discrimination . R/T-182 , 51 9 F.3 dat 309 . Th e Minimu mStandards , includin g th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie

dow n requirements , carmo t b e viewe di n isolation , bu t rathe r a s par t o f th e Airpor t Commission' s action s take n i n accordanc e wit hAdvisory Circular No . 150/5190- 7 (Augus t 28 , 2006 ) ("A C 150/5190-7") . Whil e optional , th e FA A "highl y recommends " airport sponsor s t o us e an dappl y minimu mstandard s a s amatte r o f prudenc e an d"a s a mean s t o minimiz e th e potentia l for violation s o f

Federa l obligation s a

t federall y obligate dairports. " A C 150/5190- 7 at 1 : Flightlin e Aviation , Inc . v . Shreveport , FA A Docke t No . 16-07- 5 (Mar . 7 , 2008 ) (Director' s Determination) . Minimu mstandard s provid e a"safe , efficien t

an dadequat e leve l o f

operatio n an dservice s . . . offere dt o th e public" , "protec t

airport user s fromunlicense dan dimauthorize dproduct s an dservices , [and ] maintai n an denhanc e th e availabilit y o f adequat e service s for

al l airport

users. " A C 150/5190- 7 at

3 .

1 6A C 150/5190- 7 requfre s minimu mstandard s t o b e reasonabl e an dimplemente d

withou t unjus t discrimination . Id , at

1 . Indeed , A C 150/5190- 7 expressl y caution s airpor t sponsor s t o appl y minimu mstandard s "objectivel y an duniforml y t o al l similarl y situate don-airpor t

aeronautica l servic e providers. " Id . at 3- 6 (emphasis added) ; FA A Orde r 5190.6 B § 10-2 ; Flightlin e Aviation . Inc . v . Shreveport , FA A Docke t No . 16-07- 5 (Mar . 7 , 2008 ) (Director' s Determination) ; Care y v . Afton-Lincol n County Municipa l Airpor t Join t Power s Bd. . FA A Docke t No . 16-06-0 6 (Jan . 19 , 2007 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) . Th e failur e t o s o appl y minimu mstandard s ma y resul t i n aviolatio n o f th e prohibitio n agains t

exclusiv e rights and/o r

unjus t economi c discrimination . A C 150/5190- 7 at

3 ; FA A Orde r

5190.6 B § 10-2 ; Flightiin e Aviation , hic . v . Shreveport , FA A Docke t

No . 16-07- 5 (Mar . 7 , 2008 ) (Director' s Determination ) Th e specifi c Minimu mStandard s tha t Heliop s refuse s t o compl y wit har e th e requirement s for

an offic e spac e o n o r

i n prescribe dclos e proximit y t o Norwoo dAirport an dasuitabl e hangar/commercia l commercia l tie-down . I n turn , complianc e wit hth e Minimu mStandard s i s arequiremen t fo r acommercia l permi t

unde r th e Genera l Regulations . A s explaine di n Sectio n III. B infra , th e subjec t Minimu mStandard s requfrement s ar e "fai r an dreasonabl e t o al l on-airpor t aeronautica l servic e provider s an drelevan t t o th e aeronautica l activit y t o whic hi t i s required, " t o wit , commercia l operator s providin g sightseeing , aeria l photography , and/o r surveyin g services . A C 150/5190- 7 at 3-5 . However , thes e requirement s ar e uniquel y tailore dt o commercia l operator s providin g sightseeing , aeria l photograph y and/o r surveyin g service s an dno t applicabl e t o al l user s

1 7o r

commercia l operators.' ^ Othe r commercia l operator s performin g service s similar t o thos e propose db y Heliop s ar e subjec t t o th e sam e requfrements . I n particular . Blu e Hil l Helicopter s provide s sightseein g service s an dAeria l Production s provide s aeria l photograph y an dsurveying , al l out o f Norwoo dAirport , an deac ho f thes e entitie s i s subjec t t o an dcurrentl y complie s withth e sam e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s tha t

th e Airpor t

Commissio n seek s t o appl y t o Heliops . Pas t commercia l operator s hav e als o bee n subjec t t o thes e sam e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations . Th e Airport

Commissio n i s adhering t o objectivel y an duniforml y applyin g it s Minimu mStandard s t o all similarl y situate daeronautica l servic e providers . A C 150/5190- 7 at

5 . Indeed , th e Airport

Commissio n i s no t

requfrin g Heliop s t o adher e t o al l o f th e Minimim i Standards , but onl y th e genera l requfrement s (whic hHeliop s doe s not contest ) an dthos e specifi c requirement s for specialize daviatio n servic e operation s ("SASO" ) involvui g sightseeing , aeria l photography , o r surveyin g services . Se e A C 150/5190- 7 at

6 . Heliop s ha s no t

substantiate dit s clai mb y showin g tha t similarl y situate duser s wer e freateddissimilarl y withou t adequat e justification . Jimsai r Aviatio n Servs. , Inc . v . San Dieg o County Reg . Airpor t Auth. , FA A Docke t

No . 16-06-0 8 (Apr . 12 , 2007 ) (Director' s Determination) . Rather , th e Airport Commissio n i s uniforml y applyin g it s Minimu mStandard s t o Heliop s an dothe r similarl y situate dSASOs . Th e issu e i s no t whethe r Heliop s an dth e othe r

SASO s ar e th e same , but rathe r whethe r the y ar e similarl y situated .

' ' Fo r example , commercia l operator s performin g fuel storag e an ddispensin g ar e no t subjec t t o th e requiremen t

o f ahangar o r suitabl e commercia l tie-dovm . (Ex . B at 6-7. ) 1 8I n Jimsai r Aviatio n Services , th e FA A applie dth e "similarl y situated " analysi s t o compar e th e service s offere db y acomplainan t fixed-base operato r

an dothe r

providers . Eve n thoug hth e complainan t i n Jimsaf r Aviatio n Service s wa s afixed-base operator , th e FA A focuse dupo n th e performanc e o f under-the-win g groun dhandlin g an drelate d services , an ddetermine dtha t th e fixed-basedoperato r an dothe r

provider s "shoul db e expecte dt o mee t

comparabl e minimu mstandard s an drule s an dregulations. " Althoug h th e fixed-basedoperato r

an dnon-tenan t

aeronautica l servic e provider s performe dgroun d handlin g an drelate dservices , onl y th e fixed-basedoperato r wa s subjec t

t o th e airport' s minimu mstandard s an drule s an dregulations . Give n thi s disparit y i n treatment , th e FA A determine dtha t

th e airport

sponso r violate dGran t

Assuranc e 22 . A t aminimum , Heliop s i s similarl y situate dt o Blu e Hil l Helicopter s (for sightseein g services ) an dAeria l Production s (fo r aeria l photograph y an dsurveyin g services ) becaus e thes e entitie s currentl y provid e commercia l (i.e . revenue-producing ) service s ou t

o f Norwoo dAirport . State dotherwise , Heliop s ha s provided , an dseek s t o provide , th e sam e service s unde r th e sam e o r

similar circumstance s a s currentl y complian t entitie s operatin g at

Norwoo dAirport . I n addition , pas t commercia l operator s hav e been , an dfuture commercia l operator s wil l be , subjec t t o th e sam e Minimu m Standard s an dGenera l Regulation s i f the y ar e similarl y situate dt o Heliops . Heliop s ha s no t presente dan y evidenc e suggestin g an absenc e o f competitio n withBlu e Hil l Helicopter s an dAeria l Production s for sightseein g an dfor

aeria l photograph y an d surveyin g services , respectively . Th e R/T-18 2 an dBM I Salvag e Corp . v . FA A case s cite db y Heliop s ar e inapposit e an ddistinguishable . Botho f thos e case s involve dth e propriet y o f distinction s

1 9betwee n variou s entitie s o r use r groups . I n R/T-182 , th e SixthCfrcui t determine dtha t

a distinctio n betwee n transien t an dbase daircraf

t wa s permissibl e becaus e o f feasibility concern s wit hfee enforcement . B y comparison , i n BM I Salvage , th e Elevent hCfrcui t hel dtha t ther e wa s insufficien t

evidenc e tha t

tw o (2 ) entitie s wer e not similarl y situated . Here , however , th e Airport Commissio n i s holdin g Heliop s t o th e sam e Minimu m Standard s an dGenera l Regulation s i t applies t o similarl y situate dcommercia l SASO s providin g sightseeing , aeria l photography , and/o r surveyin g services . I n fact , i n BM I Salvage , th e Elevent hCircui t eve n note dtha t

th e busines s purpose s betwee n tw o (2 ) entitie s woul db e les s distinc t i f the y bot hoffere daircraf t repaf r services . 27 2 Fed . Appx . 842 , 849( 1 ItiiCir . 2008) . Th e critica l issu e i s not

o n th e basi s o f

discrimination , but

instea dunjus t discrimination . Yet , ther e i s n o basi s t o conclud e tha t Heliop s an dth e othe r

SASO s providin g sightseeing , aeria l photography , and/o r surveyin g ar e not

similarl y situate dfor purpose s o f

applyin g th e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations , particularl y give n th e underlyin g inten t o f thes e loca l requirements . Notably , Heliop s market s itsel f t o th e genera l public , throug hprin t an dInterne t advertising , a s operatin g ou t o f Norwoo dAirport . (Se e Ex . D. ) I n fact , Mr . Verkaar t explaine dt o Mr . Maguir e durin g an Apri l 1 , 200 9 meetin g tha t Heliop s wa s regularl y usin g th e transien t

parkin g apro n an dFlightLevel' s passenge r termina l t o shuttl e sightseein g tou r

customers . Therefore , Heliop s i s mor e tha n amer e fransient commercia l operator , becaus e i t

pick s u p and/o r

drop s of f it s customers at

Norwoo dAirpor t

for sightseeing . Heliops ' operatio n ou t o f Norwoo dAirport

canno t b e regarde da s "episodic" , becaus e thi s characterizatio n i s counterbalance db y Heliops ' us e o f Norwoo d

2 0Airpor t for sightseein g service s ove r th e pas t five (5 ) years . Additionally , Heliops ' contentio n tha t

i t conducte dtwent y (20 ) operation s durin g 2008^• ^ succumb s t o th e realit y tha t thi s i s mor e tha n ad e minimi s numbe r o f operation s an dunconsfraine di n future frequency b y Heliops ' marketin g o f Norwoo dAirport

a s abas e o f

operation s t o th e genera l public . Eve n i f Heliop s characterize s itsel f afransient

operation , th e Airport

Commissio n properl y exercise dit s discretio n t o requir e transien t commercia l operator s t o obtai n commercia l permits . Relyin g upo n it s pas t experienc e (includin g incident s with sightseein g tours) , th e Airport Commissio n impose dapermi t requiremen t

upo n fransient commercia l operator s i n orde r t o ensur e accountabilit y an dpubli c trust . Specifically , th e Airpor t Commissio n wante dabusines s presenc e for commercia l operator s i n orde r t o hol dsuc hentitie s accoimtabl e for an y complianc e issues . In addition , th e Airport Commissio n wante dth e genera l publi c t o kno w tha t acommercia l operato r

doin g busines s at

Norwoo dAirpor t

ha s abusines s presence , sufficient persormel , prope r credential s an dresources , an dcoul db e hel daccountabl e i f an y issue s arose . Th e Airport Commissio n wante dt o avoi dcustomer s fromdealin g withcommercia l operator s wh o simpl y flew int o Norwoo dAirport for abusines s fransaction an dsubsequentl y departe d withou t an y accountability , an dt o avoi dan y uncertaintie s withth e publi c dealin g wit h unknow n entities . Thi s i s consisten t withth e loca l approac hnecessar y for adoptin g an d periodicall y revisin g minimu mstandard s unde r A C 150/5190-7 . Heliops ' Jul y 22 , 200 9 lette r appear s t o reques t

ablanke t waive r o f th e Minimu m Standards , beyon dth e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requfrements . Suc h

' ^ Heliop s ha s no t

substantiate dit s us e o f

Norwoo dAirpor t

for any perio dothe r

tha n 2008 , eve n thoug h it ha s use dNorwoo dAirpor t fo r th e pas t fiv e (5 ) years .

2 1abroa dan dencompassin g swee p o f all applicabl e requirement s unde r th e Minimu m Standard s woul deffectivel y resul t i n unresfraine dan dunregulate dHeliop s doin g busines s out

o f Norwoo dAirport . I n an y event , Heliops ' reques t for awaive r fromth e Minimu mStandard s an d Genera l Regulation s woul db e defrimental t o similarl y situate dcommercia l operator s at Norwoo dAirport , eithe r

o n ablanke t

basi s o r withspecifi c regar dfor

th e offic e space , hangar/commercia l tie-dow n an dcommercia l permi t requfrements . Eve n thoug hBlue Hil l Helicopters , Aeria l Productions , an dsimilarl y situate dentitie s previousl y operatin g ou t o f Norwoo dAirpor t

hav e bee n subjec t

to , an dcomplian t

with , th e applicabl e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations , Heliop s woul deffectivel y uneve n th e playin g fieldb y avoidin g a n investmen t i n abusines s presenc e at Norwoo dAirport , t o wit , b y no t

complyin g withth e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirements . Equall y problemati c i s tha t future similarl y situate dcommercia l operator s coul db e subjec t

t o th e Minimu mStandard s an dth e Genera l Regulations , eve n a s Heliop s seek s ablanke t

waive r o r specifi c waiver s fo r

itself. A s currentl y complian t

entities . Blu e Hil l Helicopter s an dAeria l Production s hav e mad e a

n investmen t

b y mean s o f

suitabl e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie

dow n space . Minimu mstandard s mus t "reasonabl y protec t

th e investmen t

o f provider s o f aeronautica l service s . . . fromcompetitio n no t makin g asimilar

investment. " A C 150-5190- 7 at

4 . I f th e Airpor t

Commissio n grante dawaive r t o Heliops , i t

woul db e jeopardizin g thi s investmen t b y Blu e Hil l Helicopter s an dAeria l Productions . Further , th e Airpor t

Commissio n coul db e subjecte dt o waive r request s b y Blu e Hil l Helicopter s an dAeria l Productions , o r othe r similarl y situate dentities , whic hwoul ddefeat th e

2 2purpose s o f th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n spac e requfrements , includin g safety , accoimtability , security , reliability , accessibility , reputabilit y an d trustworthiness . A waive r t o Heliop s woul dals o establis hadisparit y i n requfrement s an dcreat e a preferenc e for

Heliops , thereb y placin g Blu e Hil l Helicoper , Aeria l Productions , an d future similarl y situate dcommercia l operator s at acompetitiv e disadvantag e with Heliops . Jimsaf

r Aviatio n Servs. , Inc . v . San Dieg o Count y Reg . Airport Auth. . FA A Docke t No . 16-06-0 8 (Apr . 12 , 2007 ) (Director' s Determination) ; Care y v . Afton-Lincol n County Municipa l Airpor t Join t Power s Bd. . FA A Docke t No . 16-06-0 6 (Jan . 19 , 2007 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) . Certainly , suc halac k i n unifor man dobjectiv e enforcemen t o f th e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s woul dconstitut e aviolatio n o f Gran t Assuranc e 22 . Jimsaf

r Aviatio n Servs. , Inc . v . Sa n Dieg o County Reg . Airpor t Auth. . FA A Docke t

No . 16-06-0 8 (Apr . 12 , 2007 ) (Director' s Determination) ; Care y v . Afton

Lincol n Count y Municipa l Airpor t Join t Power s Bd.. FA A Docke t No . 16-06-0 6 (Jan . 19 , 2007 ) (Director' s Determination) . "A n exclusiv e righ t

i s define da s apower , privilege , o r othe r righ t excludin g o r debarrin g anothe r

fro menjoyin g o r

exercisin g alike power , privileg e o r right [and ] may b e conferre d.. . b y impositio n o f unreasonabl e standard s o r requirement s o r

b y anothe r means. " FA A Orde r

5190.6 B § 8.2 . Th e FA A ha s conclude dtha t an imreasonabl e requiremen t

standar dimplemente di n a n unjustl y discriminatory manne r may b e deeme d aconstructiv e gran t

o f a n exclusiv e right. Aviatio n Ctr. , Inc . v . Ajn n Arbor . FAA Docke t No . 16-05-0 1 (Dec . 16 , 2005 ) (Director' s Determination) . A n exclusiv e righ t may als o exis t i f acompetito r

i s subjec t

t o asignifican t

burde n tha t

i s no t impose dupo n another .

2 3Id ; Pompan o Beac hv . FAA . 77 4 F.2 d152 9 (11thCfr . 1985) . Gran t Assuranc e 2 3 requfre s an airport

sponso r t o agre e no t

to , dfrectly o r

indfrectly , "gran t

o r permi t an y person , firm, o r

corporation , th e exclusiv e right at th e airport

t o conduc t

an y aeronautica l activities , includin g but

no t limite dt o . . . sightseeing , aeria l photography , an dsurveyin g .

... " Gran t

Assuranc e 23 ; Jimsaf

r Aviatio n Servs. . Inc . v . San Dieg o Coxmt y Reg . Airport Autii. . FA A Docke t

No . 16-06-0 8 (Apr . 12 , 2007 ) (Director' s Determination) . A waive r t o th e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations , specificall y th e offic e space , hangar/commercia l tie-down , an dcommercia l permi t requfrements , coul db e construe da s th e gran t

o f a n exclusiv e right

t o Heliop s at

th e expens e o f

othe r commercia l operator s tha t

us e Norwoo dAirport

a s abas e o f

operations . Yet , exclusiv e rights ar e prohibite dunde r

4 9 U.S.C . § § 40103(e ) an d47107(a)(4 ) an dGran t Assuranc e 2 3 {Exclusiv e Rights) . T o avoi dgrantin g an exclusiv e right , th e Airport Commissio n caimo t gran t awaive r t o Heliop s o f

th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirement s tha t

appl y withequal , objectiv e an duniformforc e t o othe r similarl y situate dSASOs . Heliop s advance s abroad , speculativ e an dunsupporte dcontentio n tha t othe r airports ' adherenc e t o th e sam e Minimu mStandard s requfre db y th e Airpor t Commissio n woul db e detrimenta l t o commercia l aeronautica l activitie s an dth e genera l public . Suc h asweepin g contentio n i s inconsisten t withth e FAA' s directio n t o airport sponsor s t o develo p minimu mstandard s tha t ar e specificall y tailore dt o thei r airport . A C 150/5190- 7 at 4-5 . Here , th e Minimu mStandard s ar e base dupo n th e statu s o f Norwoo dAirpor t

a s a n activ e airport , wit hmultipl e commercia l operator s providin g flight charter , flight instruction , sightseeing , an dothe r services , i n clos e proximit y t o th e City o f Boston .

2 4Therefore , th e Minimu mStandard s ar e imiquel y tailore dt o Norwoo dAirport , an dma y b e

inappropriat e for

smalle r an dmor e remot e airports . A t n o tim e ha s Heliop s eve r attempted , o r

requeste dpermission , t o operat e ou t o f Norwoo dAirport

a s aPart 13 5 operator . Consequently , Heliop s canno t conten dtha t

i t ha s bee n unjustl y discriminate dbasedupo n th e purporte dtreatmen t o f Part 13 5 operators . I n an y event , commercia l operator s performin g Part 13 5 operation s ar e subjec t t o genera l an dspecifi c requirement s i n th e Minimu mStandards . (Ex . B at 3-4. ) Contrar y t o Heliops ' suggestion , commercia l operator s performin g Part 13 5 activitie s ar e actuall y subjec t t o mor e sfringent

physica l presenc e requirement s tha n Heliops , includin g bu t no t limite dt o awel l li t

an dheate dreceptio n roo mo f a t leas t tw o (200 ) hundredsquar e feet , o n o r adjacen t t o Norwoo dAirport . (Ex . B at 4. ) Part 13 5 commercia l operator s ar e als o subjec t t o mor e sfringent

regulatio n an doversigh t b y th e FA A tha n Heliops . N o commercia l operato r

may conduc t

Part 13 5 operation s withou t

complyin g withth e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s and , t o th e exten t tha t Heliop s contend s tha t suc hactivitie s ar e takin g place , i t ha s not substantiate dit s allegations.^' ' I n addition , Heliop s attempt s t o dra w adistinctio n betwee n commercia l an dnon commercia l operator s performin g Par t 9 1 operations . Suc hadistinctio n i s implici t i n th e applicabilit y o f

th e Minimu mStandards . Th e Minimu mStandard s appl y t o "commercia l operators" , wh o perform"an y commercia l activit y o r servic e for

compensation. " (Ex . B at 3. ) Althoug hth e Minimu mStandard s d o no t addres s non-commercia l operators , Heliop s i s performin g Part 9 1 operation s ou t

o f Norwoo dAirport

a s arevenue-producing , commercia l operation . I n fact , Heliops ' marketin g material s confirmth e absenc e o f an y

'^ A t thi s time , th e onl y commercia l operator s performin g Par t 13 5 activities ou t

o f Norwoo dAirport

ar e Bosto n Ai r

Charte r an dKestre l Aviation , bot h o f who mcurrentl y satisf

y th e Minimu mStandards . 2 5altruisti c intent behin dit s Par t

9 1 activities , insofa

r a s i t charge s customer s for sightseeing . (Ex . D. ) Therefore , Heliops ' contentio n i s unfounde dbecaus e i t i s bein g subjecte dt o th e sam e Minimu mStandard s applicabl e t o it s commercia l competitors . Becaus e Heliop s service s th e genera l publi c vis-a-vi s acommercia l operation , th e nee dfor adherenc e t o th e applicabl e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s i s onl y mor e heightene dan dsignificant , particula r i n th e area s o f

safety , accoimtability , security , reliability , reputability , accessibilit y an dtrustworthiness , a s discusse di n Sectio n III. B infra . Th e Airpor t

Commissio n properl y exercise dit s discretio n consisten t withA C 150/5190- 7 t o distinguis hbetwee n commercia l an dnon-commercia l operators . Specifically , non-commercia l operator s d o no t hav e th e sam e typ e o f

interactio n with , an dnee dfor

protectio n of

, th e genera l publi c a s acommercia l operato r does . A membe r o f th e genera l publi c need s t o b e assure dthat th e entit y h e o r

sh e doe s busines s wit hi s a reputable , experience dan dcomplian t operator , an dtha t

th e operato r

can b e hel d accountable . Give n th e commercia l natur e o f th e activities , i t

i s importan t

for th e genera l publi c t o kno w tha t

the y ar e no t

dealin g wit h"gypsy " o r

"shadow " operation s tha t exploit th e benefit s o f

Norwoo dAirpor t

withou t complyin g wit hth e correspondin g obligations , an d tha t the y ar e not

doin g busines s wit hanoncomplian t entity tha t

simpl y flies i n an dout

o f Norwoo dAirport

t o d o busines s a

t it s convenience . Thus , th e Minimu mStandard s an d Genera l Regulation s discourag e substandar dand/o r unsaf e provider s fromattemptin g t o d o busines s withth e genera l public , aconcern magnifie db y revenue-base dmotive s o f commercia l operators . Th e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s als o creat e a leve l playin g fieldfor

competin g commercia l entities . I n an y event , Heliop s i s similarl y

2 6situate dwit hothe r commercia l operator s performin g Part 9 1 activitie s ou t

o f Norwoo d Airport , wh o ar e subjec t

t o an dhav e complie dwithth e Minimu mStandards . B . Th e Airpor t

Commission' s decisio n t o requfre Heliop s t o compl y withth e Minimu mStandard s i s reasonabl e an djustified . "I t i s reasonabl e t o rel y o n th e interpretatio n o f th e airport

managemen t

i n definin g it s ow n minimu mstandards. " Boc aAirport . Inc . v . Boc aRato n Airpor t Auth. , FA A Docke t

No . 16-00-1 0 (Mar . 20 , 2003 ) (Final Decisio n an dOrder) . Th e FA A advise s airpor t

sponsor s "t o develo p minimu mstandard s tha t ar e fair an dreasonabl e t o al l on-airport

aeronautica l servic e provider s an drelevan t t o th e aeronautica l activity t o whic hi t i s applied. " Airborn e Flyin g Serv. . Inc . v . Ho t Springs . FA A Docke t

No . 16-07

- 0 6 (May 2 , 2008 ) (Fina l Decisio n an dOrder) ; A C 150/5190-7 . Th e Minimu mStandard s at issu e i n thi s matter , specificall y th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirements , ar e fair

an dreasonabl e t o commercia l provider s o f sightseeing , aeria l photography , and/o r

surveyin g service s (i.e . thos e entitie s similarl y situate dt o Heliops) . B y maintainin g offic e spac e o n o r i n prescribe dclos e proximit y t o Norwoo d Airport , th e Airpor t

Commissio n an dit s staf f can contact , hol daccountable , an ddiscus s an y violation s o f

local , stat e an dfederal requfrements , including , inte r alia , th e Genera l Regulations , th e Minimu mStandards , an dth e security pla n for Norwoo dAirpor t ("Security Plan") , withcommercia l operator s an dthef r personnel . Absen t

th e offic e spac e requirement , commercia l operator s coul dus e th e Airpor t an devad e applicabl e requirements , withou t

an y accoimtability . I t

i s reasonabl e for

th e Airport

Commissio n t o expec t acommercia l operato r

generatin g revenu e fromNorwoo dAirport t o compl y wit h al l applicabl e requirements , includin g th e Minimu mStandards , Genera l Regulations , an d th e Security Plan . Thes e concem s canno t b e compromise db y Heliops ' bal dan d

2 7unsubstantiate dallegatio n tha t maintainin g aminima l offic e spac e an d hangar/commercia l tie-dow n i s financiall y impracticable . Th e offic e spac e requfremen t als o discourage s businesse s conductin g transient , "shadov^' , o r

"gypsy " commercia l operation s usin g Norwoo dAirport , withou t complyin g wit hal l applicabl e requfrements , includin g th e Minimu mStandards , Genera l Regulations , an dth e Security Plan . Member s o f th e genera l publi c nee dt o b e assure dan dconfiden t tha t th e commercia l entitie s the y ar e fransacting busines s wit har e safe , trustworth y an d reputable , hav e aphysica l location , mee t al l applicabl e requirements , an dar e experience d an dproperl y credentialed . Absen t th e offic e spac e requfrement , acommercia l operato r coul dfly int o Norwoo dAirport , conduc t abusines s fransaction, an dtak e of f withou t an y fiirther accountabilit y fromth e genera l publi c o r th e Airport

Commission . Entitie s withaphysica l presenc e ar e investe di n Norwoo dAirport , an dwil l b e motivate dt o ensur e complianc e wit hal l local , stat e an dfederal requfrement s i n orde r t o continu e th e privileg e o f

bein g abl e t o d o busines s at Norwoo dAirport . Indeed , th e Marc h24 , 200 9 "afte r

hours " security breac hinciden t involvin g Heliop s coul dhav e bee n prevente di f

Heliop s ha dabusines s presenc e at NorwoodAirport . Significantly , th e FA A ha s determine dtha t offic e spac e requfrement s ar e reasonabl e an dcommo n industry practice . Se e Roge r Leonar dCardinals ' Pilo t Shop . Inc . V . Chesapeak e Airport

Auth. . F/ ^ Docke t

No . 16-01-0 6 (Oct . 22 , 2002 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) . "Th e FA A agree s tha t i t i s reasonabl e to expec t

acompan y representativ e t o b e easil y accessibl e t o th e public. " Roge r Leonar dCardinals ' Pilo t Shop . Inc . V

. Chesapeak e Airpor t

Auth. . FA A Docke t

No . 16-01-0 6 (Oct . 22 , 2002 ) (Director' s Determination) . I n fact . Appendi x O (Sampl e Minimu mStandard s for

2 8Commercia l Aeronautica l Activities ) t o FA A Orde r 5190.6 B include s arequfremen t for suitabl e offic e spac e for

provider s o f

specialize dcommercia l af r activitie s suc ha s aeria l photography , survey , an dothe r operation s exclude dfromPart 135 . Th e offic e spac e requiremen t constitute s areasonabl e obligatio n for commercia l operator s similarl y situate dt o maintai n abusines s presenc e o n o r i n prescribe dclos e proximit y t o Norwoo dAirport . Th e Airpor t Commissio n doe s no t

leas e offic e space . However , th e Airport

Commissio n doe s ente r

int o groimdleases , i f

requeste dan dspace permitting , throug hwhic hlessee s ca n mak e offic e spac e availabl e o n Norwoo dAirport proper . Commercia l operator s ma y obtai n suitabl e offic e spac e o n o r withi n walkin g distanc e o f

Norwoo dAirport , a n are atha t include s privat e commercia l spac e an da nearb y busines s park . I n addition , Heliop s i s onl y requfre dt o hav e tw o (200 ) hundre d squar e feet

o f space , whic hcomprise s arelativel y smal l area . Althoug hHeliop s suggest s tha t thi s i s afinancia l deterrent , suc hconcem s mus t b e viewe dagains t

th e commercia l natur e o f it s operation s out

o f Norwoo dAirport ; Heliop s offer s a"Bosto n Tour " out o f Norwoo dAirport

at acos t o f $299.0 0 pe r

person , wit hatw o (2 ) perso n minimum . (Ex . D. ) Th e hangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirement s are designe dfo r safet y purpose s an dinvolv e th e ver y afrcraf t tha t acommercia l operate s render s availabl e for publi c use . A hangar/commercia l tie-down allow s Norwoo dAirport staf f t o mak e sur e tha t

th e afrcraf t i s visible , saf

e an dreliable . Otherwise , SASO s similarl y situate dt o Heliop s coul db e fransporting th e genera l publi c at thei r peril . Complianc e wit hth e Minimu mStandard s i s aprerequisit e for Heliop s t o obtai n th e necessar y commercia l permit . I n turn , acommercia l permi t relate s t o th e securit y

2 9badge s requfre db y th e Securit y Plan , whic hwas adopte db y th e Airport Commissio n becaus e o f

MA C Agenc y Dfrectiv e MA C A D - 001 a("MA C Security Directive") , issue d i n respons e t o th e event s o f Septembe r

11 , 200 1 .^"

^ (Ex . M at

1 ; se e als o Ex . N. ) Specifically , th e MA C Security Dfrectiv e sough t t o "establis hminimu mairport security standard s fo r

public-us e airport s locate di n th e Commonwealtho f Massachusett s [and ] provid e [ ] guidanc e t o airpor t sponsor s for

implementin g th e security standard s recommende d[t]herein. " (Ex . M at 1. ) Becaus e i t

i s apubli c us e airport , Norwoo d Airport i s subjec t

t o certai n minimu msecurity standard s containe di n th e MA C Security Dfrective . (I dEx . N. ) Th e MA C directe dall public-us e airport sponsor s i n Massachusett s t o create , implemen t an dperiodicall y update an airport sectirity pla n incorporatin g th e applicabl e securit y standard s an dguidanc e containe dmth e MA C Security Dfrective . (Ex . Ma t 2 , 5. ) Th e Security Pla n wa s th e first suc hpla n approve d b y th e MAC , whic happrova l occurre di n Januar y 2002 . (Id. ) Th e MA C Security Directiv e mandate s tha t airport sponsor s "tak e necessar y step s t o preven t

unauthorize dacces s o f

person s an dgroun dvehicle s int o unauthorize darea s o n airport property. " (Id . at

2. ) "Thi s includes , amon g othe r things , preventin g imauthorized acces s int o th e AO A [Afrcraf t Operatin g Area] , movin g betwee n area s withi n th e AOA , an dseparating/segregatin g person s an dgroim dvehicle s fromaircraft , fuelin g facilities , an dothe r area s o f concer n withi n th e AOA. " (Id . at 2-3. ) Th e M[A C Securit y Dfrectiv e mandate s th e us e o f security identificatio n badge s for anyon e seekin g acces s t o th e AO A an dt o manag e th e movemen t o f person s withi n

' " Th e MA C Security Directiv e wa s prompte db y th e MAC' s recognitio n that "[o] n Septembe r

11 , 2001 , th e Unite dState s o f

Americ aexperience daserie s o f terroris t attack s tha t

involve dth e mid-ai r

highjackin g an dsubsequen t

destructio n o f

fou r commercia l passenge r

jets , thei r

occupants , an dnearl y 5,00 0 peopl e o n th e ground . Mos t

horrifi c o f

al l wa s th e intentiona l us e o f th e airplane s a s weapons. " (Ex . M at 1. ) 3 0th e AOA . (Id . a t 3 ; Ex . N. ) Thi s security badg e requfremen t applie s t o al l public-us e airport s i n th e Commonwealtho f Massachusetts , includin g Norwoo dAirport . (Ex . M at 3 ; Ex . N. ) Th e Security Plan , i n cormectio n withth e MA C Security Dfrective , specificall y addresse s securit y identificatio n badg e use r profile s an deligibility requfrements . A perso n withou t

aprope r securit y identificatio n badg e "mus t b e escorte dat

all time s whil e i n resfricte darea s o f

th e AO A b y anothe r

perso n withth e prope r

I D badge. " (Ex . M at 3. ) Th e Securit y Pla n define s a n acceptabl e escor t a s on e i n whic h"visibl e an d responsibl e confrol " i s administere db y a n escortin g part y holdin g an activ e security identificatio n badge . Ther e ar e five (5 ) securit y identificatio n badg e applican t use r profile s unde r

th e Security Plan . Eac ho f thes e applican t

use r profile s i s subjec t

t o specifi c eligibilit y requirements . (Id. ) Th e annua l permi t

require dfor

commercia l operator s i s connecte dt o th e security badg e requirement . Commercia l permi t holders , an dcertai n persormel , ar e eligibl e for security badges . O n th e othe r hand , individual s canno t b e presen t

i n th e secure dacces s area s o f Norwoo dAirpor t

absen t security badges , unles s the y ar e escorte db y abadg e holder . O f

particula r

concer n i s tha t

Heliops ' activitie s at

Norwoo dAirport , absen t a commercia l permi t

an dth e correspondin g securit y badge , creat e an dexploi t asecurity loophole . Heliop s customer s mus t b e escorte dwithi n th e secure dacces s area . Becaus e Heliop s doe s no t

hav e acommercia l permit , it s personne l ar e ineligibl e for asecurity badg e an dmus t

b e escorte da s well . Significantly , Mr . Verkaar t represente dt o Mr . Maguir e tha t

Heliop s regularl y use dth e fransient parkin g apro n an dFlightLevel' s

3 1passenge r termina l for

it s business , whic haugment s th e probability o f asecurit y breac h at Norwoo dAirport . Heliops ' volum e o f business , an dit s relianc e upo n thfrdpartie s with securit y badges , onl y heighten s securit y concem s an draise s th e ris k o f unauthorize d individual s presen t

i n th e secure dacces s zon e vi aasecurity breach , whethe r i t b e Heliop s persorme l and/o r

it s clients . A t n o tun e ha s Heliop s eve r formall y applie dfor

a"tihrough-the-fence " arrangemen t

an dit s correspondin g argument s shoul db e dismisse da s premature . Eve n i f Heliop s eve r

mad e suc haformal application , i t woul db e doin g s o a s amean s o f evadin g complianc e wit hth e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations , notabl y th e offic e space , hangar/commercia l tie-down , an dcommercia l permi t requirements . A n airport sponso r i s unde r n o obligatio n t o authoriz e a"through-the-fence " arrangement . A C 150/5190- 7 at

7 . I n fact , th e FA A ha s cautione dagains t "through-the-fence " arrangement s becaus e the y "coul dundermin e an airport' s minimu mstandard s . . . . " A C 150/5190- 7 at

7 . "Through-the-fenc e arrangement s can plac e a n encumbranc e upo n th e airport propert y an dreduc e th e airport' s abilit y t o mee t it s Federa l obligations. " A C 150/5190- 7 at

7 . Clearly , "through-the-fence " arrangement s ar e disfavored . Nevertheless , an di n ligh t o f it s concem s fo

r th e operatio n o f

Norwoo dAirport

an dth e genera l public , th e Airpor t Commissio n decide dt o objectively an duniforml y appl y th e Minimu mStandards , includin g th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirements , t o Heliops . Th e Airport

Commissio n canno t

compromis e th e purpose s o f th e Minimu mStandards , Genera l Regulations , an dth e Security Pla n o n accoun t o f th e allege dfinancia l conditio n o f Heliops , acommercia l operator .

3 2C . Th e FA A shoul ddismis s Heliops ' clai mo f an allege dviolatio n o f

th e so calle ddorman t

Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite dState s Constitutio n a s exceedin g th e scop e o f

revie w i n a1 4 C.F.R . Par t 1 6 proceeding . Heliop s allege s tha t

th e Norwoo dAirpor t

an dAirport

Commission' s "policies " benefi t locally-base doperators , burde n interstat e commerce , an dviolat e th e so-calle d dorman t Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite dState s Constitution . However , Heliops ' argumen t overlook s th e limite dnatur e o f revie w for

th e FA A i n th e adminisfrativ e complain t proces s o f

1 4 C.F.R . Par t

16 . A n FAA' s 1 4 C.F.R . Part 1 6 proceedin g i s specificall y restricte dt o th e followin g matters :

• "4 9 U.S.C . 40103(e) , prohibitin g th e gran t o f exclusiv e rights fo r

th e us e o f an y landin g are ao r

af r navigatio n facility o n whic hFedera l fund s hav e bee n expende d(formerl y sectio n 30 8 o f th e Federa l Aviatio n Ac t o f 1958 , a s amended)" ; • "Requirement s o f

tiie Anti-Hea dTax Act , 4 9 U.S.C . 40116" ; • "Th e assurance s containe di n grant-in-ai dagreement s issue dunde r th e Federa l Airport

Ac t o f 1946 , 4 9 U.S.C . 110 1 e t se q(repeale d1970)" ; • "Th e assurance s containe di n grant-in-ai dagreement s issue dimde r th e Airpor t an dAirwa y Developmen t Ac t o f 1970 , a s amended , 4 9 U.S.C . 170 1 e t seq. " • "Th e assurance s containe di n grant-in-ai dagreement s issue dunde r th e Airpor t an dAirwa y Improvemen t Ac t o f 198 2 (AAIA) , a s amended , 4 9 U.S.C . 4710 1 e t

seq. , specificall y sectio n 511(a) , 4 9 U.S.C . 47107(a ) an d(b)" ; • "Sectio n 505(d ) o f

th e Airport

an dAirway Improvemen t Ac t o f 1982 , a s amended , 4 9 U.S.C . 47113" ; • "Obligation s containe di n propert y deed s for propert y transferre d pursuan t t o sectio n 1 6 o f

th e Federa l Airport

Ac t (4 9 U.S.C . 1115) , sectio n 2 3 o f

th e Aiipor t

an dAirwa y Developmen t Ac t (4 9 U.S.C . 1723) , o r sectio n 51 6 o f

th e Airpor t

an dAirwa y Improvemen t Ac t (4 9 U.S.C . 47125" ; an d • "Obligation s containe di n propert y deed s for propert y transferre dimder th e Surplu s Propert y Ac t (4 9 U.S.C . 47151-47153)" .

3 31 4 C.F.R . 16. 1 (2009) ; Ashto n v . Concord . FA A Docke t No . 16-00-0 1 (Oct . 16 , 2000 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) , afT dby . FA A Docke t No . 16-00-0 1 (Apr . 17 , 2001 ) (Final Decisio n an dOrder) . Conspicuousl y absen t

fro mth e scop e o f

a1 4 C.F.R . Part

1 6 proceedin g ar e federal constitutiona l issues . Indeed , th e FA A ha s routinel y decline dt o addres s constitutiona l issue s i n th e contex t o f a1 4 C.F.R . Part

1 6 proceeding . Ashto n v . Concord . FA A Docke t

No . 16-02-0 1 (Aug . 22 , 2003 ) (Director' s Determination) ; Ashto n V . Concord . FA A Docke t

No . 16-00-0 1 (Oct . 16 , 2000 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) , afT d by , FA A Docke t

No . 16-00-0 1 (Apr . 17 , 2001 ) (Fina l Decisio n an dOrder) ; Marti n v . Prescott . FA A Docke t

No . 16-97-0 1 (Jun e 23 , 1997 ) (Recor do f Determination) , aff dby . FA A Docke t

No . 16-97-0 1 (Oct . 7 , 1997 ) (Fina l Decisio n an dOrder) . Courts , rathe r tha n th e FAA , ar e th e prope r

foru mfo r constitutiona l claim s becaus e th e FA A lack s specia l expertis e i n suc hissues . Ashto n v . Concord . FA A Docke t No . 16-00-0 1 (Oct . 16 , 2000 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) , affdby , FA A Docke t No . 16-00-0 1 (Apr . 17 , 2001 ) (Final Decisio n an dOrder) ; Marti n v . Prescott . FA A Docke t No . 16-97-0 1 (Jun e 23,1997 ) (Recor do f

Detemunation) , afP dby . FA A Docke t No . 16-97-0 1 (Oct . 7 , 1997 ) (Fina l Decisio n an dOrder) . A s th e FA A ha s explained , "[wjhil e i t i s ofte n impossibl e t o entirel y separat e out constitutiona l issue s fromrelate dfindings o n reasonabl e access , th e FA A i s not th e appropriat e foru mfor

th e adjudicatio n o f

aviolatio n o f

aconstitutiona l right , a s adiscret e claim , eve n i f

airport acces s i s involved. " Ashto n v . Concord . FA A Docke t No . 16-02-0 1 (Aug . 22 , 2003 ) (Director' s Determination ) (emphasi s added) . Rather , th e FA A shoul d addres s issue s involvin g gran t assurance , rathe r

tha n stand-alon e allegation s o f

3 4constittitiona l rights. Ashto n v . Concord . FA A Docke t No . 16-02-0 1 (Aug . 22 , 2003 ) (Dfrector' s Determination) . B y allegin g aviolatio n o f th e so-calle ddorman t

Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite d State s Constitution , Heliop s attempt s t o infroduc e th e typ e o f constitutiona l clai mtha t

i s outsid e th e scop e o f

th e FAA' s jurisdictio n unde r 1 4 C.F.R . 16.1 . Consequently , th e FA A shoul ddeclin e t o entertai n Heliops ' dorman t Commerc e Claus e claim , give n tha t suc ha n issu e i s mor e appropriat e for acour t an dnot th e FAA . D . Requirin g Heliop s t o compl y wit hth e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulations , includin g th e offic e space , hangar/commercia l tie-dow n an d commercia l permi t

requirements , doe s not

violat e th e so-calle ddorman t Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite dState s Constitution . Assumin g arguend o tha t

th e FA A ha s jurisdictio n unde r 1 4 C.F.R . Part

16 , Heliops ' clai mo f

aviolatio n o f

th e so-calle ddorman t

Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite d State s Constitutio n ar e unfounded . Pursuan t t o th e Commerc e Clause , "th e Congres s shal l hav e Powe r

.. . t o regulat e Commerc e . . . amon g th e severa l States. " Art . I , § 8 , cl . 3 . fri turn , th e "dormant " aspec t o f th e Commerc e Claus e amount s t o adenia l o f authorit y t o loca l an dstat e government s t o "th e powe r imjustifiabl y t o discriminat e agains t o r burde n th e interstat e flow o f article s o f

commerce. " Or . Wast e Sys. . Inc . v . Dep' t o f Envtl . Ouality . 51 1 U.S . 93 , 9 8 (1994) . Th e dorman t Commerc e Claus e effectivel y proscribe s economi c protectio n favorin g in-stat e economi c concem s throug h burdenin g out-of-stat e competition . Nat' l Bus . Aviatio n Ass'n . Inc . v . Naple s Airport Auth. , 16 2 F . Supp . 2 d134 3 (M.D . Fl . 2001) . "Th e centra l rational e for tiie ml e agafris t discriminatio n i s t o prohibi t stat e o r municipa l law s whos e objec t i s loca l economi c protectionism , law s tha t

woul dexcit e thos e jealousie s an dretaliatory measure s th e

3 5Constitutio n wa s designe dt o prevent. " C& A Carbone . Inc . v . Clarkstown . 51 1 U.S . 383 ,

39 0 (1994) . However , th e dorman t

Commerc e Claus e i s restricte dt o action s take n b y astat e o r loca l governmen t

a s amarke t

regulator . Reeves . Inc . v . Stake . 44 7 U.S . 42 9 (1980) . I f astat e o r loca l governmen t

acts a s amarke t

participant , i t

i s no t subjec t t o th e consfriction s o f

th e dorman t

Commerc e Clause . S.-Cent . Timbe r Dev . V . Wunnicke . 46 7 U.S . 82 , 9 3 (1984) . Here , th e Airport Commissio n ha s acte da s th e proprieto r o f th e Norwoo dAirpor t

b y restrictin g th e term s an dcondition s o f us e o f Norwoo dAirport

b y commercia l operators . Se e E . Hampto n Airpor t Prop . Owner s Ass'n . Inc . v . Tow n Bd . o f E . Hampton . 7 2 F . Supp . 2 d139 , 14 9 (E.D.N . Y . 1999) . I f th e Airport

Commissio n i s viewe da s amarke t

participant , the n i t

i s no t subjec t t o th e dorman t

Commerc e Claus e an dHeliops ' correspondin g argument s mus t fail . I f th e Airport

Commissio n i s regarde da s amarke t regulator , however , astartin g poin t i n th e analysi s i s whethe r it s action s "regulate [ ] evenhandedl y wit honl y 'incidental ' effect s o n interstat e commerce , o r discriminate s agains t

interstat e commerce. " Fulto n Corp . v . Faulkner . 51 6 U.S . 325 . 33 0 (1996) . "Discrimination " refer s t o "differentia l freatment o f in-stat e an dout-of-stat e economi c interest s tha t benefit s th e forme r

an dburden s th e latter. " Or . Wast e Sys. , 51 1 U.S . at 99 . A governmen t

regulatio n tha t

faciall y discriminate s agains t interstat e commerc e i s pe r s e invalid , unles s i t

"advance s alegitimat e loca l purpos e tha t canno t b e adequatel y serve d b y reasonabl e nondiscriminator y altematives . Id. ; Or . Wast e Sys. . Inc . v . Dep' t o f Envtl . Quality . 51 1 U.S . at

101 . B y comparison , agovernmen t regulatio n "tha t

impose[s ] th e

3 6sam e burde n o n bothin-stat e an dout-of-stat e interest s ... . usuall y d o no t violat e th e Commerc e Clause. " Nat' l Bus . Aviatio n Ass'n . 16 2 F . Supp . 2 da t 1348 . Th e tes t for afaciall y nondiscriminator y regulatio n i s a s follows : Wher e th e statut e regulate s even-handedl y t o effectuate alegitimat e loca l publi c interest , an dit s effect s o n interstat e commerc e ar e onl y incidental , i t

wil l b e uphel dunles s th e burde n impose do n suc h commerc e i s clearl y excessiv e i n relatio n t o th e putativ e loca l benefits . I f alegitimat e loca l purpos e i s found , the n th e questio n become s on e o f degree . An dth e exten t

o f th e burde n tha t

wil l b e tolerate dwil l o f cours e depen do n th e natur e o f th e loca l interes t

involved , an do n whethe r i t coul db e promote da s wel l withalesse r impac t o n interstat e activities . Pik e V . Bruc e Church , fric. 39 7 U.S . 137 , 14 2 (1970) . Th e Minimvu n Standard s an dGenera l Regulations , includin g th e subjec t offic e space , hangar/commercia l tie-down , an dcommercia l permi t requfrements , ar e faciall y nondiscriminator y becaus e the y appl y wit hequa l forc e t o in-stat e an dout-of-stat e economi c interests . Fo r

example , an in-stat e commercia l operato r similarl y situate dt o Heliops , suc ha s a n SAS O basedou t o f Beverl y Airpor t

o r Plymout hAirport , i s subjec t t o th e sam e requfrement s fo r offic e space , ahangar/commercia l tie-down , an dcommercia l permit , a s out-of-stat e economi c interests . Regardles s o f wher e acommercia l operato r i s based , th e subjec t

Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s requir e aphysica l presenc e at

o r i n th e clos e prescribe dvicinit y o f Norwoo dAirpor t

i n th e for mo f offic e space , ahangar/commercia l tie-down , an dcommercia l permi t i n orde r t o operat e ou t

o f Norwoo dAirport . Th e Minimu mStandard s clearl y hav e legitimat e loca l purpose s a s th e Airpor t Commissio n ha s adopte dan dimplemente dminimu mrequirement s for commercia l operator s doin g busines s ou t o f Norwoo dAirport , pursuan t t o an dconsisten t

withit s

3 7authorit y unde r FAA-issue dA C 150/5190-7 . Specifically , th e Minimu mStandard s an d Genera l Regulation s at

issu e i n thi s matte r

serv e th e purpose s o f

safety , accountability , security , reliability , accessibility , reputabilit y an dtrustworthiness , a s explaine di n Sectio n III. B supra . I n th e contex t o f avery activ e genera l aviatio n publi c us e airport i n clos e proximit y t o th e Cit y o f

Boston , an dth e impac t

upo n th e genera l public , thes e loca l concem s are substantial . Moreover , th e Airport

Cormnissio n ha s tailore dth e Minimu mStandard s t o includ e genera l requfrement s applicabl e t o al l commercia l operator s an dspecifi c requirement s dependen t

upo n th e typ e o f

aeronautica l service(s ) involved . Notably , th e offic e spac e an dhangar/commercia l tie-dow n requirement s at issu e i n th e presen t

matte r ar e tailore dt o Heliops ' activitie s a s acommercia l operato r providin g sightseeing , aeria l photography , and/o r

surveyin g services . Thes e heightene dconcem s canno t b e promote d withalesse r

impac t o n interstat e activities , withou t imjustifiabl y compromisin g safety , accountability , security , reliability , accessibilit y an dtrustworthines s concems . Becaus e th e Minimu mStandard s an dGenera l Regulation s ar e consisten t withth e Pik e balancin g test , th e existenc e an dapplicatio n o f suc hrequirement s t o Heliop s doe s not violat e th e so-calle ddorman t

Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite dState s Constitution . IV , AFFIRMATFV ^ DEFENSE S FIRS T AFFIRMATFV^ E DEFENS E Heliops ' Complain t

doe s no t establis hareasonabl e basi s for further investigatio n b y tiie FAA . SECON D AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Heliop s doe s no t

hav e standin g t o pursu e aComplain t unde r 1 4 C.F.R . Par t

1 6 becaus e i t

ha s neve r

submitte dacomplete dcommercia l permi t applicatio n t o th e Airpor t Commission , o r

provide dal l informatio n require db y th e Minimu mStandards . 3 8THIR D AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Heliop s doe s no t

hav e standin g t o pursu e aComplain t unde r 1 4 C.F.R . Part

1 6 relativ e t o a"through-the-fence " arrangemen t becaus e i t

ha s neve r

mad e aformal reques t t o th e Airpor t

Commissio n for

suc han arrangement . FOURT H AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Th e FA A doe s no t

hav e subjec t

matte r jurisdictio n imde r

1 4 C.F.R . Par t

1 6 for Heliops ' constitutiona l claim , whic hconsist s o f an allege dviolatio n o f

th e so-calle d dorman t Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite dState s Constitution . FIFT H AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Heliops ' Complain t

doe s not contai n sufficient

evidenc e t o mee t

Heliops ' burde n o f proo f t o establis htha t

th e Respondent s hav e violate dGran t Assuranc e 22 . SIXT H AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Th e Airpor t

Commission' s Minimu mStandard s ar e reasonabl e an dno t unjustl y discriminatory . SEVENT H AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Heliops ' allegation s o f

aviolatio n o f

Gran t Assuranc e 2 2 fail , a s amatte r o f law , t o stat e aviolatio n o f

federal la w o r

applicabl e gran t

assurance s upo n whic hrelie f ca n b e grante dunde r

1 4 C.F.R . Part

16 . EIGHT H AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Heliops ' Complain t

doe s not contai n sufficient

evidenc e t o mee t

Heliops ' burde n o f proo f t o establis htha t

th e Airport

Commission' s reason s for denyin g acommercia l permi t o r waive r ar e untenable . NINT H AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Heliops ' Complain t

doe s not contai n sufficient

evidenc e t o mee t

Heliops ' burde n o f proo f t o establis htha t

th e Airpor t

Commission' s policies , includin g th e Minimu m Standards , violat e th e Commerc e Claus e o f th e Unite dState s Constitution . TENT H AFFIRMATIV E DEFENS E Th e FA A lack s authorit y unde r 1 4 C.F.R . Part

1 6 o r otherwis e t o gran t

th e relie f sough t b y Heliops .

3 9V , CONCLUSIO N Th e Respondent s respectfull y reques t tha t th e FA A dismis s Heliops ' constitutiona l clai ma s exceedin g th e scop e o f revie w unde r

1 4 C.F.R . Par t

16 . I n addition , th e Respondent s respectfull y reques t tha t th e FA A determin e tha t

th e applicatio n o f

th e Minimu mStandard s t o Heliop s doe s no t violat e Gran t

Assuranc e 2 2 {Economi c Nondiscrimination) , tha t thes e Minimu mStandard s are reasonabl e an d justified , and , i f

jurisdictio n exists , tha t

th e Minimu mStandard s d o no t violat e th e so calle ddorman t

Commerc e Claus e o f

th e Unite dState s Constitution . Dated : October/^ , 200 9 Respectfiill y submitted . Th e Re^ondents , B y TJleir/Attorneys ^ Michae l C . Lehane , BBO #29252 0 mlehane(a),mhtl . co m Brando n H . Moss , BBO #65746 1 bmoss@mhtl.co m Murphy , Hesse , Toome y & Lehane , LL P 30 0 Crow n Colon y Drive , Suit e 41 0 Qumcy , M A 0216 9 (617)479-500 0

4 0CERTIFICAT E O FSERVIC E I , Michae l C . Lehane , hereb y certif y tha t I hav e thi s day serve dth e foregoin g Answer , Partia l Motio n t o Dismiss , an dAffirmativ e Defense s o n th e followin g person s at th e followin g addresse s an dviath e followin g methods : Vi aFirs t Clas s Mail . Postag e Prepaid : Attorney s fo r

th e Complainant , Heliops , LL C Kevi n C . Cain , Esqufre Timoth y M . Pomarole , Esquir e Peabod y & Amol dLL P Federa l Reserv e Plaz a 60 0 Atlanti c Avenu e Boston , M A 02210-226 1 Vi aOvernigh t

Delivery : Offic e o f Chie f Counse l FA A Part 1 6 Airport

Proceeding s Docke t AGC-61 0 Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Ave. , S W Roo m#92 5 Washington , D C 2059 1

Dat e Michae l C . Lehan e

520351v l 4 1

# EXHIBI T AUNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N FtDERA LAVIATIO N ADMINISTRATIO N

WASHINGTON . D C HELIOPS . LLC ,

Complainant , v . NORWOO D MEMOIUA LAIRPOR T an d NORWOO D AIRPOR T COMMISSION ,

Respondents . Docke t No . 16-09-1 0

AFFIDAVI T O FAIRPOR T MANAGE RRUS S MAGUIR E 1 . Rus s Maguire , hereb y stal e a s follows : ) . T amth e Manage r

o f th e NorwoodMemoria l Airport . 2 . I hav e serve da s Manage r o f tli e Afrpor

t sinc e 1995 , unde r

th e directio n o f

th e Norwoo dAfrpor

t Commission , whic hi s an agenc y o f th e municipa l government . 3 . 1 hav e persona l knowledg e o f th e fact s state di n Section s I I an d11 1 o f

th e Respondents ' Answer , Motio n t o Dismiss , an dAftirmativ e Defense s i n th e above-reference ddocket . Signe dunde r

th e pain s an dpenaltie s o f perjur y thi s J'' ^ day o f

October , 2009 . 

# I £2>2

^ ^ - Rus s Maguir e Manage r o f th e Norwoo dMemoria l Airport

5205?7v l

# EXHIBI T B

# NORWOO D MEMORIA L AIRPOR T

Minimu m Standard s

I n accordanc e wit

hFA A Advisor y Circula r

150/5190- 7

# Norwoo dAirpor t Minimu mStandard s Genera l Polic y Th e Norwoo dAirpor t

Commissio n (NAC ) recognize s it s responsibilit y t o th e afrporf s user s a s wel l a s t o th e genera l public , t o conduc t an dt o operat e th e airpor t wit hprudenc e an dsoun djudgment , fo r

th e socia l an deconomi c wel l bein g o f th e Tow n o f

Norwood . Fo r th e airport' s commerciall y permitte dbusines s community , ou r minimu mstandard s ar e intende dt o promot e feir competitio n b y "levelin g th e playin g field. " Fo r th e genera l public , th e enforcemen t o f minimu mstandard s als o discourage s sub-standar dand/o r unsaf e would-b e servic e providers

—thereb y protectin g th e interest s o f ou r airport patrons . Th e NA C may , a s needed , solici t fo r acommercia l operato r

i n th e even t

tha t additiona l operator s ar e needed . Th e NA C require s commercia l operator s t o compl y withal l appropriat e local , stat e an d federal law s an dregulation s regardin g th e commercia l operatio n i n question . Th e NA C require s tha t eac hcommercia l operato r maintai n withth e Commissio n a pennanen t

file o f plan s an das-built s regardin g th e respectiv e operation . Th e Commissio n may , upo n writte n application , gran t a n exemption(s ) t o th e applicatio n o f th e standards , whe n a

n examinatio n o f

th e circumstance s supportin g th e reques t for a n exemptio n indicat e tha t th e publi c interes t

wil l b e bes t

serve db y grantin g suc han exwnption . Definition s Minimun dstandards ; Th e qualification s establishe db y th e NA C a s th e minimu m requirement s t o b e me t

for th e right t o conduc t

acommercia l actlvity~u n tli e Nofwoo d Airport . Commercia l activity : Th e followin g activitie s commonl y condiKte do n airport s ar c deeme d'commercial ' withi n thi s definition : charte r operations , flight

training , aircraf

t renta l an dlea.sing , sighteeeing , aeria l photography , aeria l advertism g an dsurvey , ai r carrie r operations , aircraf

t sales , aircraf

t servicing , aircraf

t fueling ; an dan y othe r

activit y deeme db y th e NA C which , becaus e o f it s direc t relalionslii p t o tli e operatio n o f aircraf t can appropriatel y b e regarde da s acommercia l activity .Commercia l operator : An y company/perso n tha t offer s an y commercia l activit y o r servic e fo r

compensation . Fixed-bas e operator ; Onl y thos e commercia l operator s tha t oflfe r th e ful l spectru mo f commercia l activitie s including , bu t no t limite dto : transien t

aircraf t parking , passenge r waitin g area , lin e service , ftjel> ai r charter , flight , traixiing , aircraf t servicing , an dothe r .•^rvice s normall y a.<wjociate dwit hafiiU-service, fixed-bas e operator , a s determine db y th e NAC . Spac e requirements : Al l squar e footag e requirement s fo r th e variou s categorie s o f commercia l operations . Tli e requirement s ar e i n cumxilativ e figures . Th e spac e require d mus t b e owned , leased , o r

sub-lease dt o th e commercia l operator , exclusively , an dnot share dwit hanothe r

commercia l operato r

and/o r othe r companies . Th e entranc e t o th e spac e mus t

hav e permanen t

signag e notin g th e compan y nam e an dhour s o f operation . Genera l Requirement s

• Compan y organization . Th e followin g documentatio n i s require db y NAC , an dwil l remai n o n file: acertificat e o f incorporation , o r

ad.b.a . certificate , o r othe r verificatio n o f

th e company' s organizatio n an dta x statu s i n th e stat e o f Massachusetts .

• Office/hanga r

space . Th e followin g documentatio n i s require db y NAC , an dwil l remai n o n file: acop y o f th e applicant' s leas e o r certificat e o f

title , fo r lease do r owne dspac e locate do n th e airport , o r adjacen t t o th e Airport' s nortti/sout hpropert y line , alon g Acces s Road ; als o required , i f necessary , i s acop y o f

th e floo r plan .

• Insurance . Th e followin g insuranc e polic y documentatio n i s require db y NAC , an d wil l remai n o n file: 1 ) a n insuranc e certificat e i n th e amoun t require d(a s stated , below ) o r

greater , listin g a s additionall y insured : th e Tow n o f Norwood , th e Norwoo dAirpor t

Commission , an dth e Norwoo dAirpor t management ; 2 ) insuranc e for al l leased/owne daircraft ; an d3 ) aworkmen' s compensatio n polic y coverin g ai l employees . Initia l Applicatio n —Additiona l Requirement s Ciirren t financial statemen t Proo f o f minimu mo f

thre e month' s operatin g expense s Two-yea r busines s pla n fo r

th e propose doperatio n Previou s histor y o f

paymen t Thre e credi t

reference s Ta x identificatio n numbe r Ta x re-sal e numbe r Copie s o f an y an dall pertinen t

certificate s (e.g. , FA RPar t 13 5 certificate ) an d licenses , relativ e t o th e propose doperatio nCommercia l Activities/Minimu mStandard s

I . Fligh t

Operations , Par t

13 5 Charte r A n operato r

engage di n charterin g flight operation s wil l b e require dt o provid e th e following: 1 . A wel l li t

an dheate dollic e an dreceptio n roo mare ao f at leas t 20 0 squar e feet , leased , rente do r

owned . Thi s are ai s t o b e locate dwithi n walkin g distanc e o f

th e company' s aircraft , on , o r adjacen t t o th e .Airport , or , o n Acces s Roa dbetwee n th e nort han dsout hairpor t boundaries . 2 . A telephon e liste dunde r th e compan y nam e an dattende ddurin g norma l busines s hom^ . 3 . Premis e liabilit y insuranc e o f $1,000,00 0 combine dsingl e limit , bodil y injury an dpropert y dainage ; an dcommercia l aircraf t liabilit y insuranc e o f S 1,000,00 0 combine dsingle-limit , bodil y injury an dpropert y damage , wit hSlOOfOO

O minimu mpe r

passenger ; als o namin g a s additionall y insure dth e Tow n o f

Norwood , th e Norwoo dAirpor t Commission , an dth e Norwoo dAirpor t

management . 4 . A n ongoing , demonstrate dabilit y t o mee t th e certificatio n requirement s o f th e FAA , stat e an dlocal authorities . 5 . No t

les s tha n on e license dairworth y aircraf t fo r Par t 13 5 charte r operations . 6 . Full-tim e persorme l durin g norma l busines s hours , seve n day s aweek , 7 . Suitabl e tie-dow n o r hangar spac e fo r all compan y aircraft , S . A forma l an ddocumente dprogra mtha t educate s al l compan y pilot s regardin g th e Airport' s nois e abatemen t an dsafety procedures .

II . Commute r

Ai r Carrier^Schedule dAi r Tax i Servic e Corrunutc r

ai r carriers/schedule dai r

tax i servic e operator s usin g th e Airpor t wil l b e expecte dt o mee t

eigh t requirement s (above) , plii s th e following : 1 . Mus t

sho w al l evidence , a s ma y b e necessary , t o suppor t th e nee dfo

r suc h service , t o includ e amarketin g study , th e busines s communit y support , a pla n o f propose doperations , schedulin g an dpassenge r forecasts , a nenvironmenta l impac t assessmen t

for th e propose dschedule , an dth e approva l o f

destinatio n airports . 2 . Mus t

sho w th e availabilit y o f

facilitie s t o accommodat e publi c user s i n th e number s forecast . Sai dfacilitie s shoul dinclud e automobil e parking , waitin g areas , baggag e handling , ticketing , enplanin g ^m ddeplanin g procedmes . 3 . Mus t

sho w flight

schedulmg , whic hwil l b e subjec t t o th e NAC' s approval , 4 . Mus t

sho w monthl y report s o r dail y manifes t

copie s tha t

sho w th e numbe r o f enplanin g an ddeplanin g passenger s a t th e Airport .

m . Fligh t

Instruction , Aircraft

RenUl , Sales ; an dSightseein g Flight s Fligh t operation s wil l includ e aircraf t tha t ar c rented , lea.">ed

, lease dback , o r

owned . Th e commercia l operato r

wil l provid e th e following ; 1 . A wel l li t

an dheate doffic e an dclassroo mo f at lea.s t 20 0 squar e feet , lease do r

owned , wit htfainin g equipmen t suc ha s mock-up s an d instrumen t

trainin g aids . Thi s are ai s t o b e locate dwithi n walkin g distanc e o f

th e compan y aircraft , on , o r adjacen t t o th e aiiport , o r

o n Acces s Roa dbetwee n th e nort han dsout hairpor t boundar y ends . 2 . StJitabl e commercia l tie-dow n of hanga r spac e fo r al l compan y aircraft . 3 . Fo r

flight instruction , aminimu mo f tw o aircraft . 4 . A telephon e liste dunde r th e compan y nam e an dattende ddurin g norma l busines s hours . 5 . A n ongoing , demonstrate dability t o mee t th e certificaiio n requirement s o f FAA . stat e an dloca l authorities . 6 . Premis e liabilit y insuranc e o f 51,000,00 0 combine dsingl e limit , bodil y iiuur y an dpropert y damage ; an dcommercia l aircraf t liabilit y insuranc e o f $l»OOO,00

0 combine dsingl e limi t

bodil y injury an dpropfrt y df>mage_foL

al l aircraf t ovwied , leased , lease dbac k o r rented , wit h$100,00 0 minimu m pe r passenger , als o namin g th e Tow n o f Norwood , Norwoo dAirpor t Conunission , an dth e Norwoo dAirpor t Managemen t

a s additionall y insured . 7 . Fo r

flight instruction , aformal an ddocumente dprogra mtlia t wil l educat e al l student s an dinstructo r pilot s regardin g th e Airport' s nois e abatemen t an dsafety procedures .Specia l note : Transien t commercia l fligh t

operator s ar e no t

authorize dt o us e th e airpor t a s abas e o f

operation s t o pic k

u p student s o r

clients ; t o advertis e and/o r us e th e airpor t

a s apoin t o f origi n o r

destinatio n withou t

first obtairun g firomth e NA C acomniercia l permit . TV . Groun dOperations , Aircraft Servicing , Avionic s Servicin g A commercia l operato r

engage di n groun doperation s wil l provid e th e following : 1 . A wel l li t

an dheate dwaitin g roo mo f a t leas t 20 0 squar e fee t

an dhanga r spac e o f a t leas t 2,00 0 squar e feet , lease do r owned . Thi s are ai s t o b e locate dwithi n walkin g distanc e o f th e aircraft , on , o r

adjacen t t o th e Airport , or , o n Acces s Roa dbetwee n th e nort hein dsouthend s o f

th e Airpor t boundary , 2 . A liste dtelq>hon e numbe r imde r th e compan y name , an dattende ddurin g norma l busines s hours . 3 . Liabilit y insuranc e o f at leas t $1,000,00 0 namin g th e Tow n o f Norwood , Norwoo dAirpor t

Commission , an dNorwoo dAirpor t managemen t

a s addifionall y insured . 4 . A t

leas t tw o full-time , license dmechanic s o n duty durin g norma l busines s hours , five day s aweek . 5 . Minimtu n equipment , including , bu t no t limite dto : jack s an dlift s fo r both high

- an dlow-winge daircraft ; an dengin e testin g equipment . 6 . A mlnimim i stoc k o f spor e part s peculia r

t o th e typj e o f

aircraf t maintaine d a t th e facility . 7 . Suitabl e facilitie s fo r washin g an dcleanin g aircraft. 8 . A servic e t o remov e an y non-airworth y aircraf t fro mth e Airpor t

withi n a reasonabl e time . 9-. A plan , flppTr>v'^dthp . Norwon dFir e Departmen t an dAirpor t

Manager , fo r th e storag e an dremova l o f an y an dall wast e aircraf t fluids o r

cleanin g materials . y . Fue l Storag e an dDispensin g A n operato r

engage di n th e storag e and/o r dispensin g o f

fiiel wil l b o expecte dt o provide : 1 . A heate dwaitin g roo mfo r passenger s an dcre w o f transien t

aircraft , comprisin g a t

leas t 20 0 squar e feet , wit hacces s withi n th e buildin g t o res t room s an dapubli c telephone . Thi s are ai s t o b e locate dwithi n walkin gdistanc e o f aircraft , on , o r

adjacen t t o th e Airport , o r

o n Acces s Roa d betwee n th e nort han dsouthend s o f th e Airpor t

boundary , 2 . A liste dtelephone , unde r th e compan y name , an dattende ddurin g operatin g hours . 3 . Liabilit y insuranc e o f at leas t SS,000,000 , namin g th e Tow n o f Norwood . Norwoo dAirpor t

Commission , an dNorwoo dAirpor t managemen t

a s additionall y insured . 4 . Approve dstorag e tanks , locate do n th e Airport , withaminimu mcapacit y o f 10,00 0 gallon s o f

Je t A an d10,00 0 gallon s o f 10 0 lo w lea dfuel . 5 . Prope r

spac e t o servic e th e type s o f aircraf t usin g th e Airport , 6 . Fixe dan dmobile , metere dpumpin g equipmen t capabl e o f

re-fiielin g th e larges t aircraf t likel y t o b e fuele dat

th e Airport . 7 . Approve dgroundin g cable s an dfuel nozzle s t o eliminat e stati c electricit y hazards . 8 . Auxiliar y equipmen t includin g a t

leas t on e pre-heater , on e battery cart , on e compresse dai r

dispenser , an dothe r

equipmen t

tha t ma y b e require dt o serv e aircraf

t usin g di e Airport . 9 . Fuelin g service s b y uniforme dpersorme l seve n day s aweek , at leas t from 7 a.m . t o 7 p.m . 10 . A forma l trainin g program , approve db y bot hth e Fir e Departmen t an dth e Airpor t Manager , for

lin e personne l engage di n aircraf t re-fueling . 11 . A forma l an ddocimiente dprocedur e fo r th e maintenanc e an dinspectio n o f th e fuelin g facility an dacommitmen t t o kee p th e fUeling are aclea n an d free o f snow , debri s an dhazardou s conditions . ^V t Uniqu e Scryicc a A n operato r

engage din , bu t

no t limite dto , aeria l photography , advertising , surveying , o r othe r suc hservice s mus t

provid e th e following : 1 , A wel l li t

an dheate doffic e o f

at leas t 20 0 squar e feet , lease do r owned . Thi s are ai s t o b e locate dwithi n walkin g distanc e o f th e aircraft , on , o r adjacen t t o th e Airport , or , o n Acces s Roa dbetwee n th e nort han dsout h end s o f th e Airpor t

boimdary . 2 . License s and/o r

authorizatio n t o d o busines s i n th e stat e o f Massachusetts .3 . A liste dtelephon e numbe r tmde r th e compan y nam e an dmanne ddmin g norma l busines s hours . 4 . Premis e liabilit y insuranc e o f $1,000,00 0 combine dsingl e limit , bodil y injury an dpropert y damage ; an dcommercia l aircraf t liabilit y insuranc e o f $1,000,00 0 minimim i pe r passenger , als o namin g th e Tow n o f Norwood , th e Norwoo dAirpor t

Commission , an dNorwoo dAirpor t Managemen t

a s additionall y insured . 5 . A suitabl e commercia l tie-down .

# EXHIBI T C

# i (5y:c«^ p ^^-^



# Norwoo d Memoria l Airpor t



# Genera l Regulation s

(w/ o attachments )



# 4 1 Revised : Octobe r 200 8T H E COMMONWEALT H O F MASSACHUSETT S EXECUTIV E OFFIC E O F TRANSPORTATIO N MASSACHUSETT S AERONAUTIC S COMMISSIO N

DEVA L L . PATRIC K GOVERNO R TIMOTH Y P . MURRA Y LIEUTENAN T GOVERNO R BERNAR D COHE N SECRETAR Y AN D CHAI R Novembe r

7 , 200 8 Rus s Maguire , Manage r Norwoo dMunicipa l Airport 125 Acces s Roa d Norwood, MA 02062-004 0 Re : Norwoo dAirport

Commissio n Genera l Regulation s Dea r Russ : MA C ha s receive dyou r

revise dAirport

Regulatio n an dhereb y approv e them . Th e Airport' s previou s Regulation s wer e als o approve don Marc h15 , 2006 . Th e MA C wil l retai n th e recen t Regulation s fo

r ou r files. Sincerel y yours , Wayn e Kerchne r

TE N PARK.PLAZA , ROO M 3190 , BOSTON , MA 02116-396 9 TELEPHONE : (617 ) 973-818 1 • TELEFAX : (617 ) 973-888 9 • WWW.MASSAERONAUTICS.OR G

# I I * I I NORWOO D AIRPOR T COMMISSIO N 

# I I I NORWOO D MEMORIA L AIRPOR T 

## I (OWD ) 

# k # GENERA L REGULATION S FO R

REVISE D Septembe r10 , 200 8

Issue d b yth e 

# I Norwoo d Airpor t Commissio n Norwood , IVIassachusett sFORWAR D

Th e Norwoo dAirpor t

Commission , actin g by"*virtu e o f th e power s grante dt o i t b y th e provision s o f

Massachusett s Genera l Law s (M.G.L.) , Chapte r 90 , Sectio n 51 J an

d amendment s thereto , hereb y establishe s genera l regulation s for implementatio n a

t Norwoo dMemoria l Airport , operate db y th e Norwoo dAirport Commission . Thes e regulations :

• Seek t o ensur e tha t

th e publi c receive s responsible , saf e an dadequat e servic e fi-om thos e businesse s conductin g permitte dactivitie s a t th e Norwoo dMemoria l Airport

• Seek t o ensur e tha t

al l airport

users an dcommercia l operator s ar e treate dfairl y

• Seek t o ensur e tha t

al l operation s ar e conducte din conformity withal l applicabl e stat e andfederal regulation s



# feJ Th e Norwoo dAirpor t Commissio n reserve s th e righ t t o amend , supplement , revise , alter , rescin do r

ad dt o thes e regulation s eithe r i n part , or , i n thei r

entirety . I f

an y section , sub-section , sentence , claus e o r phras e o f

thes e rule s andregulation s ar e for an y reaso n hel dt o b e invali do r

unconstitutiona l b y any court o f law , suc hdecisio n shal l no t effec t o r impai r an y o f th e remainin g provisions . Th e Airport

Manage r at Norwoo dMemoria l Airport , or his/he r assistant , actin g unde r th e authority o f

th e Norwoo dAirpor t

Commission , i s directe dt o enforc e th e regulation s containe dherein . An y person(s ) penalize dfor violatio n o f

thes e regulation s wil l b e give n writte n notificatio n b y th e Airpor t Manage r

an dmay , withi n te n (10 ) day s o f th e notification , appeal th e penalt y i n writin g t o th e Norwoo dAirport Commission . Thes e regulation s approve dthi s day : Octobe r 21 , 200 8 B y th e NORWOO D AIRPOR T COMMISSION :

, Chairma n

, Vic e Chairma n

, SecretaryDEFINITION S AJS D ABBREVIATION S t Whe n use di n thes e regulations , th e followin g term s shal l hav e th e meaning s indicate dbelow , unles s th e contex t clearl y indicate s otherwise : Aeronautica l Activit y - Shal l mean any busines s activity commonl y conducte d a t o r on th e Airport

whic hinvolves , make s possibl e or i s require dfor

th e operatio n o f

aircraft . Thes e activitie s include , but are no t limite dto : aircraf t management , aircraf

t charte r operations , flight

training , aircraf

t renting , sight-seeing , aeria l photography , cro p dusting , aeria l advertising , aeria l surveying , air

carrie r operations , aircraf

t sale s an dservicing , th e sal e o f aviatio n petroleu mproducts , th e repai r an dmaintenanc e o f

aircraft , or th e sal e o f

aircraf t part s AG L- Shal l mea n abov e groun dlevel . Aircraf t - Shal l mean an dinclud e an y an dal l contrivance s no w o r hereafte r use d for th e navigatio n of

, o r flight in , ai r o r space , including , bu t

no t limite dto airplanes , airships , dirigibles , helicopters , gliders , amphibians , and seaplane s Airpor t - Shal l mean th e lan dan ddevelopment s owned , controlled , operate dand maintaine dunder

th e purvie w o f

th e Norwoo dAirport

Commission , includin g bu t

no t limite dt o th e runways , taxiways , rights-of-way, hangars , facilities , contro l towe r

grounds , ramps , aprons , parkin g an dstorag e areas , improvements , utilities , o r othe r real property , necessary , convenien t or desirabl e for

th e landing, take-off

, accommodation , an dservicin g of aircraf t o r th e general publi c Airpor t Commissio n - Shal l mea n th e Norwoo dAirport Commission , th e body consistin g o f

no t les s tha n thre e an dnot

mor e tha n 1 1 members , appointe d b y th e NorwoodBoar do f Selectmen , servin g athree-year term , charge d withpolicy-makin g decision s relativ e t o th e Airport' s operation s and development , an dotherwis e authorize dt o ac t pursuan t t o M.G.L . c . 90 . Airpor t Maimgp r

- Shal l mean th e Airport Manager , o r

his/he r designee , under hir e o f an dexecutiv e office

r t o th e Norwoo dAirport Commission ; license db y th e Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n an dcharge dwit h th e overall , day-to-da y conduc t o f th e Airport ; an dresponsibl e fo r administerin g polices , procedure s an dbes t managemen t

practice s fo

r th e safe , secur e an defficient

operatio n o f

th e Airport AI M - Shal l mean th e Aeronautica l Informatio n Manual , publishe db y th e FAA an damende dfromtim e t o time , an dcontainin g flight informatio n and procedure s for

aircraf t operator sAircraf t Operatin g Are a(AOA ) - Shal l mean a n are ao f th e Airport

used , o r A designatedt o b e used , for th e landing, take-of

f o r surfac e maneuverin g o f aircraft , includin g th e associated^ilangar s an dnavigational/communicatio n facilitie s Airsid e - Shal l mea n thos e operationa l area s involve di n an y aircraf t movemen t o r operation , includin g bu t no t limite dto , runways , taxiways , helicopte r parkin g an dlandin g areas , ramps , tie-dow n areas , hangar area s

' Applican t - Shal l mea n an y person , corporation , compan y o r entity who , o r which , applies t o th e Commissio n fo r permissio n t o conduc t

busines s o n I o r at th e Airpor t Apro n o r

Ram p - Shal l mea n adefine dare awithi n th e Airport , intende dt o accommodat e aircraf

t for th e purpos e o f

parking , loadin g o r

unloadin g passenger s o r

cargo , o r

for re-fueling , pre-fligh t

check s and/o r

pre-fligh t warm-u p AT C - Shal l mea n ai r

traffi c contro l personnel , whos e responsibilitie s includ e bu t ar e no t limite dt o th e safet

y an dmanagemen t

o f al l ai r traffi c withi n th e controlle dsurface s (movemen t area s an dClas s D surfac e area ) o f th e Airport l^i- j A Authorit y - Se e Airpor t Commissio n o r

Commissio n Commercia l Activit y - Shal l mea n any activity conducte dat , on , fromor i n conjunctio n wit hth e Airpor t b y an y person , partnership , join t venture , corporation , o r

company o r

othe r entity intende dt o resul t i n revenue producin g and/o r

monetary gai n fo

r th e party conductin g suc hactivity Commissio n - Shal l mea n th e Norwoo dAirport Commissio n Contro l Towe r

- Shal l mea n th e Airport' s ai r traffi c contro l tower , operatin g unde r FA A guidelines , whos e responsibilitie s includ e th e safet y an d management"o f

al l traffi c withi n th e controlle dsurface s o f th e Airport

and th e Clas s D surfac e are a Emergenc y Vehicl e - Shal l mea n avehicl e o f th e Polic e o r

Fir e Department , or an y vehicl e conveyin g a n Airpor t official o r

Airpor t employe e i n respons e t o an Airport

emergenc y Entit y - Shal l mea n aperson , firm, corporatio n o r partnershi p Fe e - Shal l mea n apayment , charg e o r reimbursemen t

t o th e Airport

for acces s privileges , or , th e us e o f

th e Airport' s asset s1 2

II . INTRODUCTION : Thes e regulations , whic hsupersed e th e " ^ 1*98 3 regulations , hav e bee n adopte di n complianc e withM.G.L. , Chapte r 90 , Sectio n 5 1 b y th e NORWOO D AIRPOR T COMMISSION , hereinafte r referre dt o a s th e Commission . III . COMMERCIA LAERONAUTICA LOPERATIONS : A . N o person , firm, corporatio n o r entity (includin g non-profi t organizations ) shal l us e th e Airpor t

o r an y portio n thereo f

a s a n FBO , SAS O o r

otherwis e for revenue-producin g commercial , busines s o r aeronautica l activitie s withou t first obtainin g consen t

an dawritte n permi t

for suc hactivitie s fro mth e Commissio n an denterin g int o suc hwritte n lease s an dother agreement s a s prescribe db y th e Commission . B . Commercia l permi t applicant s mus t

mee t al l o f th e applicabl e minimu m standard s (se e Attachmen t A : MinimumStandards) , o r b e grante din writin g fromth e Commissio n a n exemptio n t o aminimu mstandard(s) . C . Al l FBO s an dSASO s are require dt o obtai n a n annua l permi t

b y Jul y 1^

' o f eac hyear

fro mth e Commission . Th e armual permi t fe e shal l b e establishe daimuall y b y aCommissio n vote . Th e Commissio n may waiv e th e permi t

fee for non-profi t

organizations . D . A n FB O o r

SAS O i s abusines s entity whic hperform s o r conduct s any on e o r al l o f th e followin g activities : 1 . Th e operatio n o f

aflight school , whic hshal l mean an y perso n o r person s or

corporatio n engage di n givin g o r offerin g to giv e instructio n i n aeronautics , eithe r i n th e flying o f

aircraf t o r i n groun daviatio n subjects , o r both , for

hir e o r reward ; and/o r employ s othe r

persons for

suc hpurposes . 2 . Th e operatio n o f aircraf t for hire , whic hshal l mea n hir e t o th e genera l publi c o r

member s o r

classe s thereof

, an dshal l no t

includ e suc hoperation s a s ar e incidenta l t o th e carryin g o n o f th e general busines s o f

th e aircraf

t owner s engage di n abusines s othe r than aeronautics . 3 . A perso n o r

persons engage di n th e busines s o f buying , sellin g or exchangin g aircraft . 4 . Th e demonstratio n o r renta l o f aircraft , th e sal e o f

aircraf t part s and supplies , includin g th e sal e o f aircraf t ftael an doil , o r

th e servicin g o f aircraf t withfiael an doil .1 3 5 . Th e maintenanc e an drepai r o f aircraf t an dappurtenances , excep t person s engage di n mi-nb r maintenanc e i n aircraf t owne do r operate db y them , a s authorize dunde r FA RPart

43 . 6 . Aircraf

t radi o sede s o r

service. 7 . Aircraf

t managemen t

suc ha s fractional ownership . 8 . Th e fijmishing o f aircraf t storage , hangar s o r

fie-downs. 9 . Th e givin g o f

sightseein g rides; o r

th e performin g o f

aerial photography ; o r

aeria l advertising ; aeria l surveying ; aerial patrol ; th e operatio n o f

air ambulance ; o r

carg o services . 10 . An y othe r

activit y tha t

involves , make s possible , or i s require dt o involv e th e operatio n o f aircraft , o r

th e Airport , o r

whic h contribute s to , o r

i s require dfor

th e safety o f

suc hoperation . E . Th e foregoin g i s not intende dt

o includ e anyon e landin g at th e Airport

fo r th e purpos e o f

securin g servic e o r

makin g avisit , an dshal l no t includ e thos e transien t

user s operatin g unde r

FA RPart

135 , Ai r Taxi . IV . FE E AN D RENTA LSTRUCTUR E Th e Commissio n wil l maintai n afee an drenta l structur e for facilitie s an d service s a t th e Airpor t

designe dto mak e th e Airport a s financiall y self-sustainin g a s possible . V . GENERA LREOUIREMENT S - COMMERCIA LOPERATION S A . Mus t

b e i n conformanc e withcurren t FAA , NTSB , local an d Massachusett s aeronautica l regulation s an dan y othe r applicabl e requirements . B . Mus t

demonstrat e financial stability , credi t ratin g an dcurtenc y with respec t t o paymen t

o f al l taxes , fee s an dothe r

agree dcharges . C . Mus t

demonstrate , wher e applicable , a n initia l investmen t

i n buildings , equipment , fiimiture, fixtures , tool s an dothe r asset s pertainin g t o th e operatio n o n o r

a t th e Airport

that meet s th e approva l o f

th e Commission . D . Mus t

agre e t o indemnif

y an ddefen dth e TOW N O FNORWOOD , th e Commission , an dAirport management , backe db y liability insuranc e an d

# EXHIBI T DSa\t-<- 4 a 111' ; v-Y I i ' :.: • .-•: . •

i ^ ^ » 

### ^ 8 # ',

• 9f... - •'•*,-y''f->. . - 'W W J'. ' •'•!....>.-.I . -T.-j:-. ^ •

^iMi * a|!pS&:.:i., i *i:~* ^



## ^days'a^es k

b yReservatio n Bas e 781-934-7079 ) Cel l 617-571-611 7

Hetipp s ©Verizon.ne t 

# Spectacula rview s Ne wquie t & smoot h Eurocopter s Fantasti cPhot o opportunitie s

Li e 22 6 Sout h Meado wRoa d Plymout h Airport , M A0236 0 locate d jus l beyon d gat e 1 

## www.heliops.u sV ^^^ S



### Ipepan s From : Marshfiel d o rNorwoo d 

# Sout h Shor e Tou r2

5 Mi n MriiriirfiTrkT3ciJP^Iffii^iffif^y ^ O n a clea rda yyo u ca n se e th e Bpsto h SiQriJn e an d Provincetow n a t th e ti p o f Cap e Cod . Enjo yPlymout h Harboraind__

__^ ^ famou s MayftowelrTepiicafro m th e air / B e sur e t o brin g you rcamer a fo rth e phot o opportunit yo f a lifetime . $18 5 pe rperso n ( 2 perso n minimum ) 

### Depart s From : Plymout h 

## Custo m Tou rContac t u s Desig n you row n tou ran d mak e you rflyin g dream s com e true . W e wil l wor k wit h yo u t o mak e you rtou rth e highligh t o f you rtrip ! Depart s From : You rchoic e AL L TOURS : N o carry-o n bag s o n tou rflights . Persona l camera s an d vide o camera s allowe d afte rcleare d throug h security . 1 8 an d unde rmus t b e accompanie d bya n adult . Weigh t restriction s apply . Passenger s mus t hav e vali d phot o ID . (ie . Passport o rDrive rLicense ) Visa , MC , America n Express , Discover , cash , chec kHeliop s - Helicopte r Tour s an dRide s for

Boston , Cap e Cod , Martha' s Vineyar dNantucke.. . Pag e 1 o f 2 

# I ) LL C

*- [ Surpris e Someon e Wit hA Gif t Certificat e ] Hom e Tour s Charte r Photo . Vide o & Surve y Security Bosto n Tou r

3 5 Minute s Onc e yo u hav e settle dint o th e comfortabl e seat s yo u wil l float

u p fromth e groun dunti l yo u se e th e Bosto n skylin e com e int o view . Yo u wil l the n b e smoothl y whiske dove r th e "mode l villages " belo w t o Bosto n withclos e u p view s o f th e city' s wonderfii l mi x o f

ne w an dhistori c buildings . Glid e pas t

th e riggin g o f

th e US S Constitution , ove r th e ne w Zaki mBridg e an du p th e Charle s Rive r pas t Harvar dan dMI T an dove r th e famou s Fenway Stadium , hom e o f th e Bosto n Re dSox . Yo u wil l se e Bosto n i n away yo u wil l alway s remember . Rat e $29 9 pe r perso n ( 2 perso n minimum ) Depart s Fro m Marshfiel do r Norwoo d

Sout hShor e Tou r

2 5 Minute s Th e super-quie t

Eurocopte r

wil l b e you r

magi c carpe t rid e for spectacular

view s alon g th e South Shor e wit hit s lovel y ligh t houses , shor e birds , fishin g boat s an dsand y beaches . O n clea r day s yo u ca n se e th e Bosto n skylin e an dProvincetown ! Enjo y Plymouthharbo r

an dth e famou s Mayflowe r

replic afro mth e air . Yo u wil l easil y se e wh y th e earl y settler s chos e PlymouthHarbo r Rat e $18 5 pe r perso n ( 2 perso n minimum ) Depart s Fro m a s thei r idea l landin g spot . Fo r

somethin g differen t an dextr aspecial , thi s tou r i s als o availabl e a s asunse t

flight. Plymout h

Custo mTou r Fee l free t o desig n you r

ow n tou r an dselec t

th e site s yo u wan t

t o see . Yo u wil l hav e exclusiv e us e o f th e helicopter . W e wil l work withyo u t o mak e thi s you r bes t tou r experience . Rat e $75 0 pe r 1/ 2 hou r wit h1/ 2 hou r minimu m Depart s Fro m http://heliops.us/Tours.htm l 10/9/200 9

# EXHIBI T EWindow s Liv e Hotmai l Prin t Messag e http://by l ISw.bay l 15.mail.live.com/mail/PrintSheIl.aspx?type=mes. , Prin t Clos e 

### Inciden t 9 P

M / 2 4 Ma r200 9 From : Le n Carrol l (len_carroll@hotmail.com ) Sent : We d3/25/0 9 11:1 0 A M To : Russ Maguir e (rmaguire@ci.norwood.ma.us ) Hell o Russ . Upo n openin g thi s morning , th e Lin e guy s advise d m e o f a n inciden t o n th e fron t ram p a t jus t abou t closin g time . Fro m wha t the ytol d me , a "Ra p Group " wa s filmin g a productio n o n th e ram p wit h th e helicopte rfro m Heliop s fro m Plymouth . Th e storyget s better... . Wit h thi s grou p wa s a coupl e guy s (rappers ) i n th e parkin g lo t wit h th e moto r running . I t appear s tha t Taso s wa s concerne d abou t thi s mysteriou s goin g o n an d calle d th e Norwoo d Police , wh o di d respond . The ywer e filmin g som e sor t o f vide o production . I caile d We s a t Heliop s an d informe d the m tha t thi s wa s inappropriate , an d thi s typ e o f situatio n require s advanc e approva l fro m thi s offic e an d advisemen t t o you roffice . I wa s no t m yusua l cheerfu l self , an d wa s ver / aggressiv e o n complianc e i n th e future . I haven, t see n th e Polic e Report... , an d I hop e i t doesn' t ge t i n th e loca l papers . /// / Le n Carrol l FB

O - Manage r Hotmail ®

i s u p t o 70 % faster . No wgoo d new s travel s reall yfast . Fin d ou t more .

Qf ] 3/25/200 9 11-.0 8 AN '

# EXHIBI T FNorwoo d Airpor t Commissio n Regula rBusines s Meetin g ' " Ma y13 , 2p0 9 Present : Airpor t Commissioners : Mari e Ryan , Kevi n Shaughnessy , Mart yOdstrchel , Thoma s Wynn e

Airpor t Manager : Rus

s Maguir e Quoru m bein g present , th e meetin g wa s calle d t o orde rb yth e Chairma n Mark : Rya n a t 5:0 0 PM . Recen t Commissio n Appointment s Mar k Rya n an d Les LeBlan cwer e reappointe d t o th e Commissio n b yth e Boar d o f Selectmen . Mart yOdstrche l wa s newl yappointe d t o th e Commissio n b yth e Board . Mr . Odstrche l wil l tak e ove rforme rCommissione rBrya n Corbett' s term , whic h wil l b e ove ri n Ma y 201 0 Motio n mad e b yMr . Shaughness yan d seconde d b yMr . Wynn e t o hav e Mr . Rya n t o continu e hi s rol e a s Chairman . Voted : 3 i n favor . (Mr . Rya n abstained ) Motio n mad e b yMr . Shaughness yan d seconde d b yMr . Odstrche l t o appoin t Mr . Wynn e Vic e Chairman . Voted : 4- 0 i n favor . Motio n mad e b yMr . Rya n an d seconde d b yMr . Wynn e t o appoin t Mr . Shaughness yCommissio n Clerk . Voted : 4- 0 i n favor . Minute s Motio n mad e b yMr . Wynn e an d seconde d b yMr . Shaughness yt o accep t minute s o f th e regula rsessio n o f th e Apri l meeting . Voted : 4- 0 i n favor . Motio n mad e b yMr . Wynn e an d seconde d b yMr . Shaughness yt o accep t minute s o f th e Executiv e Sessio n o f th e Apri l meeting . Voted ; 4- 0 i n favor . Manager' s Report Manage rwil l le t writte n recor d stan d barrin g question s fro m th e Commission . Th e Manage rreporte d n o furthe rincident s a t th e airpor t involvin g Mrs . Grasss o Durin g th e mont h o f April , a woma n trie d t o acces s th e airport . Sh e ha d rock s an d brick s tryin g t o brea k th e gat e locks . Polic e wer e calle d an d sh e brok e throug h securit ygat e - polic e restraine d he ran d paramedic s cam e i n an d pu t he ro n a bac k board . Sh e lia d ben t a pi n an d force d th e gat e open . Th e woma n wa s sectione d (hospitalize d fo rpsychiatri cevaluation ) s o ther e i s questio n as t o whethe rsh e ca n b e charge d fo rth e damage. Th e polic e ha d reportedl ybee n lookin g fo rthi s woma n al l day . Mr . Wynn e raise d a questio n concernin g th e SR E buildin g . Th e Constructio n fence s hav e no t bee n take n dow n ye t becaus e ther e Hit ^ slil l iM'i Kli-H'tt itfTT" - ""f-t-Tnfl'n cipi-lndin g fnm e mino rcrackin g inside , hil l need s reseedin g etc . Whe n al l th e wor k I s done , th e constructio n fence s wil l b e take n down . Th e gras s wil l hav e t o b e watere d an d th e Manage rwil l reac h Bil l Olive ro rbar ySchore fro m DP W t o arrang e fo rthis . Motio n mad e b yMr . Shaughness yan d seconde d b yMr . Odstrche l t o accep t Manager' s Repor t wit h th e provisio n tha t Mr . Mors e i s o n th e agend a fo rth e nex t meeting . Vote d 4- 0 i n favor . M rWe s Verkaar t Hel i Op s woul d lik e t o ru n a satellit e operatio n ou t o f Norwoo d Airport . Thei rbas e i s i n Plymouth . I t i s a sightseein g tou rcompany . Th e applican t ha s bee n mad e awar e o f th e minimu m standard s fo ra Commercia l Permit . Th e owne rhas bee n flyin g i n an d ou t o f Norwoo d fo rfiv e years . Th e Compan yoperate s ou t o f 1 2 airport s an d heliports . The yd o no t wan t a bas e here . I n regar d t o th e provisio n fo ra n exceptio n bein g granted , th e positio n o f Hel i Op s i s tha t the yca n tak e 4 passengers . The yca n carr ymuc h mor e weigh t tha n othe rcopter s o n thi s airport . The yals o hav e a differen t pric e poin t - i t i s clos e t o $30 0 fo ra passenge ro n a Hel i Op s flight . I n 200 8 approximatel y2 0 operation s wer e ru n ou t o f Norwoo d Airport . Hel i Op s als o take s handicappe d an d olde rpeople . Ther e i s a ho t weathe roptio n becaus e th e aircraf t ar e equippe d wit h ai rconditioning .I n regar d t o th e vide o portio n o f th e operation , th e compan yals o doe s surve ywork . The yus e th e ove rwate rpo p ou t float . Ther e i s

a lo t o f par t 9 1 surve ywork . Th e kin d o f thing s Hel i Op s doe s an d th e numbe ro f operation s ar e no t a competitiv e facto ri n Mr . Verkaart' s opinion . . j-, , , - ^ • i • Manager' s ha s concern s includin g security . I n Marc h o f thi s yea rther e wa s a securit yviolatio n o n th e par t o f Hel i Op s involvin g a perso n bein g droppe d of f o n a transien t ram p an d activatin g th e pedestria n crosswalk . Man ypeopl e withou t badge s ende d u p o n th e airpor t an d th e polic e wer e called . A t thi s poin t i n th e meetin g i t wa s note d tha t Pau l Shaughness ywa s i n possessio n o f a camer a an d wa s talkin g photograph s durin g th e meeting . H e wa s tol d b yChairma n Rya n tha t wa s no t allowe d Mr . Shaughness ydi d pu t th e camer a awa yafte r a brie f argument . As fa ra s minimu m standards , thi s Commissio n hold s othe rFBO' s t o th e minimu m standards . Manage rexpresse d oppositio n t o exception s t o minimu m standards . Chairma n agree d statin g th e Commissio n ha s bee n ver yconsisten t i n requirin g minimu m standard s - includin g othe rcompanie s wh o d o busines s a t othe rairport s - w e hol d the m al l t o th e minimu m standards . M rVerkaart' s respons e wa s tha t h e wa s applyin g fo ra permi t fo ra throug h th e fenc e operator , bu t the n th e Manage rtoo k i t i n anothe rdirectio n an d talke d abou t a particula rincident-th e vide o shoot . H e (Mr . Verkaarts ) ha d peopl e com e u p fro m Ne w Yor k cit yt o shoo t video - th e rid e wa s lon g etc . an d 2 o f th e guy s wer e sittin g th e lo t wit h light s of f an d engin e runnin g . Th e polic e wer e calle d an d responded . Office rO'Nei l cam e an d di d no t fil e a polic e repor t . Chairma n Rya n directe d Th e Manage ran d Mr . Verkaar t dea l wit h tha t issu e involvin g th e vide o shoo t betwee n themselves . Th e issu e befor e thi s Commissio n i s th e Commercia l Permi t Application . Th e Airpor t Manage rspok e wit h hea d o f MA C an d h e di d suppor t Norwood' s minimu m standards . Mr . Shaughness ycommente d tha t i n hi s tim e o n thi s Commissio n ther e ha s bee n consistenc ywit h wha t i s aske d fo rfro m commercia l permi t applicant s Mr . Verkaar t state d tha t th e NA C minimu m standard s sayexception s ca n b e granted . Mr . Shaughness yexplaine d agai n tha t thi s Commissio n doe s no t d o that . Chairma n recommende d mor e fac t findin g . Mr . Verkaar t wa s aske d t o pu t togethe ra summar yo f wha t th e othe rairport s ar e havin g hi m do . Manage rexplaine d tha t som e o f thes e othe rairport s ar e on e busines s airport s unlik e Norwoo d whic h i s 3 flight s school s an d 2 charte roperations , etc . Ever yairpor t i s differen t an d s o ar e th e minimu m standards . Mr . Verkaar t thanke d th e Commissioner s fo rthei rtime . Ne wbusines s HenryMansou r, . . » . n . s + M rMansou rhas aircraf t base d Norwoo d tha t hav e bee n her e sinc e 197 6 - no whav e twi n Cessn a base d here . Mr . Mansou rwant s t o tal k abou t FO D an d h e brough t pictures . Ther e i s a fue l far m nea rhi s ti e dow n tha t i s grave l an d no t paved , an d differen t -machine s sprea d thes e stooeyet rarnim d th e aiqaort . H e ha s ha d damag e t o hi s plane . O n Monday , afte rsi xmonth s o f complaining , som e o f th e stone s wer e picke d up . Fligh t Leve l ha s blocke d of f on e sid e an d i s educatin g thei rdriver s o n ho wt o a^ ^ causin g thi s debris . Th e Manage rexplaine d tha t bul k fue l tanker s com e i n an d dro p fue l int o fue l th e far m an d sometime s pul l th e grave l ou t an d ont o th e are a M rMansou ri s talkin g about . Whe n th e wes t apro n wa s pave d i n 2006 , th e pavin g wa s extende d a littl e close rt o th e fue l far m itself . Th e airpor t propert yi s paved . O n th e 110 0 foo t strip , wher e th e fue l far m is , i s lease d b yBM Aan d sublease d t o Fligh t Level . Mr . Mansou rwoul d lik e th e are a pave d t o eliminat e th e problem . , , , ^ . , . . , Pete rEichlayspok e o n behal f o f Fligh t Level . Ther e i s a fue l deliver yabou t ever ytw o weeks . H e ha s tol d th e driver s t o b e careful , bu t ha s als o tol d Mr . Mansou rtha t i t i s cos t prohibitiv e fo rFligh t Leve l t o pav e th e area . Mr . Eichla yals o informe d Mr . Mansou r tha t whe n h e i s plannin g a fligh t the ywil l com e i n an d swee p of f th e are a fo rhim . Mr . Eichlayagree d t o mak e cleanin g u p th e are a afte ral l deliverie s standar d procedure .

# EXHIBI T GNorwoo d Airpor t Commissio n Repor t Augus t 12 , 200 9 Present : Chairma n Mar k Ryan , Vice-Chairma n Thoma S Wynne , Cler k Kevi n Shaughnessy , Le s LeBlanc ; Airpor t Manager , Rus

s Maguire ; Assistan t Manager , Mar k Raymon d Absent : Marti n Odstrche l Th e meetin g wa s calle d t o orde ra t 5:0 0 p.m . Appointments : non e Minute s fro m Jul y8 , 2009 . Mr . Shaughness yrequeste d clarificatio n o f som e item s fro m th e minute s o f th e previou s meeting . Chairma n Rya n clarifie d th e item s i n question . Chairma n addresse d th e boar d i f ther e wer e an yquestio n fro m th e minutes . Mr . LeBlan c mad e a motio n t o accep t th e minutes ; Mr . Wynn e seconde d th e motion . Th e boar d vote d unanimousl yi n fayo ro f th e motion . Airpor t Manager s Report : Mr . Maguir e submitte d th e manager' s repor t wit h highlight s fro m th e writte n report . TaxiwayCrac k

Sea l Project - Bid s wil l ope n o n Augus t 2 0 whic h wil l addres s taxiwa yareas . RunwayMarking s Projec t - Mr . Maguir e wa s abl e t o encumbe rfunding , an d thi s projec t i s t o b e advertise d o n Septembe r4 . SR E Phase 1 - Mr . Maguir e i s stil l waitin g t o submi t a fina l close-ou t payment . Federa l an d stat e gran t monie s have bee n received , an d loca l fundin g ha s bee n budgeted . Ther e i s a n issu e wit h wate rleakag e i n th e glass panel s whic h i s minor . However , thi s doe s hav e t o b e addresse d an d wante d t o addres s th e issu e whil e th e buildin g i s stil l unde rwarranty . Asub-contractor , J& R Glass , i s schedule d t o addres s thi s issu e o n Augus t 13 . Mr . Wynn e questione d i f i t jus t neede d t o b e re-sealed . Mr . Maguir e state d tha t th e genera l contracto rha d addresse d thi s befor e an d i t wa s assume d tha t thi s issu e wa s fixed ; bu t th e buildin g i s stil l leaking . Chairma n Rya n questione d whethe rth e genera l contracto rha d bee n notifie d o f th e issue . Mr . Maguir e state d the yha d an d wer e schedule d t o b e ther e th e nex t dayt o investigat e th e problem . Mr . Wynn e aske d abou t th e crac k sea l coating . Mr . Maguir e explaine d that , pe rth e advertisin g spec , th e awarde d bi d contracto ri s goin g t o remov e th e existin g materia l i n larg e cracks an d replac e wit h ne w bondin g material . H e als o state d th e a runwa yrndfkiiig s project , lon g overdue , wil l b e performe d this — fal l a s well . Mr . Maguir e ha d bee n waitin g o n fundin g fro m th e stat e aeronautic s commission , since Norwoo d Airpor t ha d tentativel ybee n programme d byth e stat e fo ra crac k sea l project . Stat e fundin g neve rmaterialized . S

o th e airpor t manage ri s plannin g t o us e encumbere d fund s t o addres s threshol d markings , center-lin e marking s an d aimin g point s fo rRunwa y35 . Th e advertisemen t indicate s industry specifi creflectiv e paint s t o b e use d o n th e project , Th e Colling s Foundatio n wil l b e a t th e airpor t Octobe r2 - Octobe r5 , wit h th e followin g Worl d Wa rI I aircraft : a P-5 1 Mustang , a B-2 4 Liberato ran d a B-1 7 Flyin g Fortress . Mr . LeBlan c questione d whethe rthi s even t wa s t o b e o n Norwoo d Day . Mr . Maguir e replie d no ; Norwoo d Da yi s schedule d fo r Septembe r19 ; an d th e Airpor t Departmen t wil l sponso rtrolle ytour s throug h th e airport. ' Mr . Maguir e i s requirin g th e Colling s Foundatio n t o put'th e tow n o f Norwood , Norwoo d Airpor t Commissio n an d Norwoo d Airpor t managemen t o n it s certificat e o f insurance , an d t o provide—i f necessary-additiona l securit ya t th e airport' s Gat e 1 . Chairma n Rya n suggeste d advertisin g th e even t o n NPA- V a s wel l a s th e tow n we b page , specificall yo n th e scrollin g marque e an d calendar . Mr . Maguir e agree d an d state d ther e wil l b e a pres s ki t an d pres s releas e tha t wil l follow . Th e ai rtraffi ccontro l towe ri s stil l slate d fo ra federall yfunde d securit yfenc e project , an d thi s i s schedule d fo rth e spring . Th e fenc e wil l completel yenclos e th e contro l tower' s bas e building . Al l leve l 1 towers , suc h a

s th e on e at Norwood , ar e bein g require d t o hav e securit yfencin g wit h barbe d wire ; however , Mr . Maguir e doesn' t believ e thi s wil l affec t th e public' s abilit yt o utiliz e th e airpor t par k an d it s viewin g areas . Mr . Wynn e questione d th e charge s i n th e lette rfro m Mr . Bacari , th e attorne yfo rBosto n Ai rCharte r (BAG) . Mr . Maguir e responde d tha t whe n th e tow n starte d negotiatin g wit h SA C o n it s interes t t o instal l a fuelin g facilit ya t th e Norwoo d airport , BA C claime d tha t i t ha d alread yinveste d mone yi n tw o 12,000 - gallo n fue l tank s prio rt o a n agree d upo n an d execute d leas e wit h th e Airpor t Commission . Norwoo d Tow n Counse l state d tha t thi s wa s no t necessaril ya goo d busines s decisio n fo rBAC , t o inves t i n thi s fuelin g equipmen t prio rt o signin g a lease . Tow n Counse l has state d tha t wa s BAC' s busines s decision , an d th e airpor t i s no t liable . Initially , BA C ha d approache d th e Airpor t Commissio n fo ra commercia l sel f fuelin g facility , whic h th e compan ywa s expectin g t o deriv e revenue s from . Thi s facilit ywoul d b e simila r t o a n automobil e self-fuelin g station . However , whe n BA C file d thei rcomplain t wit h th e FAA , th e compan yemphasize d it s inabilit yt o self-fue l it s ow n aircraft , wit h tittl e o rn o mentio n o f it s origina l proposa l t o th e Airpor t Commissio n tha t i t b e permitte d t o instal l a commercia l self-fuelin g facility . Mr . Shaughnesse yreference d lette rfro m Attorne yLehan e whic h state d tha t Tow n Counse l i s stil l waitin g fo ra lette rfro m th e BA C attorney , Matthe wWatsky , fo ra summar yo f proposa l whic h woul d stat e wha t BAC' s propose d plan s are , t o includ e th e draf t term s o f it s leas e wit h th e Airpor t Commission . Mr . Maguir e state d shoul d BA C presen t a proposa l tha t include s a commercia l self-fuelin g operatio n a s oppose d t o a self-servic e o f it s aircraf t only , th e FA Ashoul d b e kep t informe d o f this . Mr . LeBlan cquestione d i f ther e wer e an yrules/regulation s o n th e distanc e t o ti e dow n aircraf t fro m fuel . Mr . Maguir e State d doesn' t recal l wheLhe rther e are an yrequire d sel-backs , thoug h ther e are FA A advisor ycircular s an d Nationa l Fire Protectio n Associatio n standard s fo raviatio n fuelin g areas . Chairma n Rya n questione d i f boar d ha d an yadditio n questions . Mr . Shaughness ymad e a motio n t o accep t th e managers ' report , Mr . LeBlan c seconde d th e motion . Th e boar d vote d unanimousl yi n favo r o f th e motion . Ol d Busines s Heli-Op s waive rreques t fo rF Y 201 0 commercia l permit :Mr . Maguir e state d h e ha s a certificat e o f insuranc e whic h list s th e tow n an d Airpor t Commissio n a s additionall yinsured . Chairma n Rya n questione d whethe rth e lette rfro m Heli-Op s wa s t o reques t a waive ro f th e airport' s minimu m standard s fo ra commercia l permit . Mr . Maguir e state d yes . Mr . LeBlan cwante d t o kno wwh yHeli-Op s ha s gon e throug h this . M rMaguir e explaine d tha t Heli-Op s ha s bee n marketin g th e Norwoo d Airpor t fo rsom e tim e a s a bas e o f operations . Th e compan yha s als o bee n usin g th e airpor t a

s a bas e o f operation s fo rit s sightseein g business-withou t th e require d permit . Heli Ops canno t us e th e Fligh t Leve l passenge rtermina l a s a securit yloophol e t o channe l it s customer s through , an d ou t ont o th e restricte d acces s aircraf t parkin g aprons-withou t a commercia l permit . Severa l month s ago , Heli-Op s go t caugh t doin g thi s durin g a pai d phot o shoot , whic h conclude d wit h th e Heli-Op s pilo t droppin g of f it s customer s insid e th e securit yfenc e afte rhours , whe n Fligh t Leve l lin e servic e personne l wer e no t ther e t o accoun t fo rthe m an d giv e the m a prope rescort . Ther e the n wa s a securit yconcer n ou t i n th e airpor t parkin g lot , involvin g person s fro m th e Heli-Op s phot o shoot . Bu t th e Heli-Op s pilo t wa s alread ygone , flyin g bac k t o th e company' s physica l bas e o f operation s a t th e Plymout h Airport . Mr , Maguir e state d tha t sightseein g i s liste d i n th e Norwoo d Airpor t minimu m standard s a s a commercia l aeronautica l activity . Mr . Shaughnessystate d ther e ar e minimu m standar d requirement s i f yo u wan t a bas e suc h a n operatio n a t Norwood , an d i t i s no t fai rt o requir e othe rsimila rcompanie s t o stic k wit h thes e standards , an d the n make a n exceptio n fo ron e company . H e state d tha t i f a compan ywante d a bas e o f operation s a t th e airport , the n i t shoul d hav e t o hav e a presenc e o n th e airport , wit h a staffe d offic e an d aircraf t ti e downs , Mr . Shaughnesse ymad e a motio n t o den yth e application . Mr . Wynn e seconde d th e motion . Th e boar d vote d unanimousl yi n favo ro f th e motion . Ne wBusines s Five-yea rCapita l Improvemen t Progra m Chairma n Rya n presente d a spreadshee t fo rth e boar d t o review . H e questione d i f th e board' s interes t wa s i n maintainin g th e sam e multi-yea rcapita l plannin g a s before . Mr . Maguir e state d wit h clarification ; th e Al P fundin g i s federa l fundin g only , an d loca l fundin g o n th e spreadshee t include s bot h stat e an d loca l fundin g shares . Th e boar d discusse d variou s schedule d improvement/reconstructio n -project s o n r-wtways Chairma n Rya n questione d i f th e schedule d meetin g wa s wit h th e Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n (MAC ) wa s t o discus s this . Mr . Maguir e replie d yes , th e meetin g i s schedule d fo rSeptembe r 8' \ @ 1:0 0 p.m . An ymembe ro f th e Norwoo d Airpor t Commissio n i s welcom e t o attend . Chairma n Rya n questione d whethe rth e boar d recommende d an yadjustment s t o th e spreadsheet , an d the n requeste d a motio n t o accept . Mr . Wynn e questione d wha t equipmen t wa s t o b e purchased ; Mr . Maguir e replied a sande ran d sweeper . Th e boar d discusse d variou s percentage s o f fundin g fo r propose d projects . Mr . Maguir e reminde d th e boar d tha t h e has receive d a lette rfro m th e FA Awhic h

# EXHIBI T HNorwoo d Airpor t Cpmmissio n Regula rBusines s Meetin g Jun e 10,200 9 Presen t fo rth e Commission : Mar k Ryan , Chairman ; Thoma s Wynne , Vic e Chairman ; Le s LeBlanc ; Kevi n Shaughnessy Rus s Maguire , Mar k

Raymon d Ol d Busines s Hel i Op s Th e Manage rintroduce d Mr . We s Verkaar t representin g Hel i Ops . Mr . Verkaar t i s comin g befor e th e Commissio n i n regar d t o a commercia l permit , bu t withou t meetin g som e o f th e minimu m standard s require d fo ra tha t permit . H e doe s no t hav e offic e spac e o ra lease . Mr . Verkaart' s statemen t wa s tha t Hel i Op s ha s n o intentio n o f havin g a bas e i n Norwood . The ywoul d lik e t o com e an d d o par t 9 1 busines s i n Norwood , a s the yd o a t othe rairports . H e ha d t o tal k t o a lawye rabou t thi s are a o f th e la wa s i t i s complicated . Hi s claim , though , i s tha t Norwoo d ha s n o legitimat e reaso n t o ge t a Commercia l Permi t fro m Hel i Op s excep t t o collec t fee s an d tha t Norwoo d ha s th e righ t t o impos e regulation s bu t the ymus t b e balance d o n interstat e commerce . Man y customer s ar e ou t o f stat e o rcountry , so ther e i s a n effec t o n interstat e commerc e whic h i s regulate d withi n federa l law . H e continue d tha t th e NA C i s no t actin g withi n thei rauthorit yi n regar d t o interstat e commerce . Minimu m standard s privileg e loca l operator s fo rmaintainin g busines s i n Norwood , an d burden s thos e wh o onl yperiodicall yus e th e airport . Th e burde n o n interstat e commerc e outweigh s everythin g else . Mr . Verkaar t state d tha t th e Norwoo d minimu m standard s foreg o th e requiremen t fo r par t 135 , s o wh yno t fo rpar t 91 . Mr . Verkaar t continue d tha t i f a permi t i s denie d becaus e Norwoo d alread yha s tha t busines s o n th e airport , tha t i s unfair . Businesse s tha t hav e secure d th e righ t t o us e Norwoo d Airpor t hav e n o mor e jjghtjo^us e tha t airpor t tha n Hel i Ops . Thi s i s discriminatio n agains t Hel i Ops . Thi s practic e coul d lea d t o violations , accordin g t o Mr . Verkaa^rt , one^ t whic n bein g (jcan l Asburdnce-is^ides—ecoftoffi k discrimination . H e wen t o n t o saygeneratin g revenu e i s fin e bu t grantin g exclusiv e right s o r discriminatin g i s not .

Th e Airpor t Managerha s spoke n wit h Donn a Witty , i n charg e o f gran t assurances . Bot h FA Aan d MAC agre e th e Airpor t ha s th e righ t t o impos e minimu m standard s o n businesse s o n th e airport . Gran tassuranc e # 22 , Economi cDiscrimijnation- , provide s tha t a sponso rma yestablis h reasonabl e an d no t

unjustl ydiscriminator ylimit s -... . Onc e th e airpor t ha s establishe d minimu m standards , the yshoul d appl ythe m t o al l applicants . I f th e standard s ar e no t applie d uniforml ythe n ther e i s a ris k o f economi c discrimination . Th e Chairma n reiterated , Norwoo d Airpor t ha s establishe d standard s an d ha s no t wavere d fro m them . Mr . Wynn e wil l rea d th e lega l opinio n tha t Mr . Verkaar t i s referrin g t o an d als o pas s i t alon g t o Town Counsel . Mr . Shaughness yagrees . Th e Norwoo d Airpor t securit ypla n ha s bee n approve d b yth e state . Th e minimu m standard s ar e a par t o f th e regulations . Th e Chairma n explaine d tha t NA C i s no t preventin g Hel i Op s fro m bein g o n th e airport . Hel i Op s i s askin g fo ra waive rfo rminimu m standard s an d thi s Commissio n doe s no t d o that . Mr . Verkaar t wa s encourage d t o com e o n t o th e airpor t an d als o t o adher e t o th e minimu m standard s A s fa ra s landin g fees , tha t i s no t goin g t o happen . That i s somethin g tha t occur s a t airport s tha t hav e th e staf f t o coun t th e landing s an d d o billing . Th e Manage rclarifie d fo rth e Commission , Mr . Verkaar t i s no t tryin g t o ru n a commercia l operatio n ou t o f Logan , h e i s tryin g t o ru n a commercia l operatio n ou t o f Norwood . Th e advertisin g state s Norwoo d a s a bas e o f operations . Mr . Verkaar t ha s gon e t o bot h FA Aan d MA C an d thos e agencies , i n turn , hav e contacte d th e Manage rdirectl yan d assure d hi m NA C i s no t i n violation . Mr . Shaughness yadde d tha t thi s Commissio n woul d no t b e backin g th e peopl e wh o d o busines s o n thi s airpor t i f the yallowe d Hel i Op s t o com e i n an d d o busines s withou t a presenc e o n th e airport . Motio n mad e b yThoma s Wynn e an d seconde d b yLe s LeBlan c t o forwar d t o Attorne yLeha n th e document s tha t wer e submitte d byMr . Verkaart . Voted : 4- 0 i n favor . Mr . Mors e wa s presen t t o discus s hi s securit ybadg e request . Th e Manage rexplaine d tha t Mr . Mors e wa s a on e tim e badg e holde ro n airport , an d h e owne d a n aircraft . H e ha s sinc e sol d hi s plane . H e ha s remaine d a s a n authorize d pilot . Unde rou rsecurit ypla n -t^pfp^wt-a-micahp rn f <;itiiat>nn< ; tha t ;^||o wa perso n t o b e a badg e holder . I n Mr . Morse' s case , h e n o longe rfit s th e profile , an d pe rou rsecurit ypla n h e ca n n o longe rge t a badge . H e i s no t barre d fro m th e airport . H e i s welcom e t o com e ont o th e airport , bu t h e mus t hav e a n escor t t o d o so . Tow n Counse l reviewe d th e situation . The ysen t a t lette rt o th e Boar d o f Selectmen . Mr . Mors e als o submitte d a lette rt o th e Boar d o f Selectme n i n whic h h e objecte d t o th e denial , bu t Tow n Counse l i s backin g th e Manager' s an d Commission' s decision . Th e Manage rals o spok e wit h tw o simila rairport s an d learne d tha t the yals o don' t issu e badge s t o peopl e i n simila rsituatio n a s Mr . Morse . W e ar e require d t o follo wth e securit ypla n onc e i t i s approve d i t mus t b e implemented .

# EXHIBI T INorwoo d Airpor t Commissio n

Regula rBusines s Meetin g Jul y8 , 200 9

I n attendance : Mar k

Ryan , Chairman , Thoma s Wynne , Vic e Chairman , Commissioner s Le s LeBlanc , Kevi n Shaughnessyan d Mart yOdstrche l

Minute s Ma yan d Jun e Meeting s

\ Comments/Amendment s Attorne yLehane' s nam e i s misspelle d o n pag e 2 . Motio n mad e byLe

s LeBlan can d seconde d b yThoma s Wynn e t o accep t th e minute s o f th e Jun e meetin g wit h th e amendment s discussed . Voted : 4- 0 i n favo r(Mart yOdstrche l abstained ) Motio n mad e b

yThoma s Wynn e an d seconde d byMart yOdstrche l t o accep t th e minute s o f th e Ma y is'*'meeting . Voted : 4- 0 i n favo r(Les LeBlan c abstained ) Motio n mad e b yKevi n Shaughness yan d seconde d b yThoma s Wynn e t o accep t th e Jun e Executiv e Sessio n Minutes . Voted : 4- 0 i n favor . (Mart yOdstrche l abstained ) Manager' s Repor t Awindo wi n th e SR

E buildin g wa s damageA^/he n i t wa s struc k b yth e win g o f a n aircraft . I t wil l nee d t o b e replaced . Th e cos t i s $1,620 . Th e bil l wil l b e pai d b yth e owne ro f th e Horizo n fligh t schoo l whos e plan e collide d wit h th e building . Th e pric e wil l includ e remova l o f th e window . Motio n mad e byKevi n Shaughness yan d second-b yLe s LeB^af^€-to-dtrec

t the-Manager-tei3foceed-w4t^^ — directin g Horizo n t o payfo rth e window . Voted : 5- 0 i n favo r Duboi s & Kin g Enginee rJeff Adie rwa s presen t a t th e meetin g t o discus s paymen t arrangements . Pe rth e Town Accountant , th e remainde ro f th e monie s owe d wil l b e pai d ou t o f a F Y 201 0 su b accoun t t o b e replenishe d whe n th e Treasure rborrow s tha t Fisca l Yea rmoney . Th e paymen t t o Duboi s an d Kin g has alread ybee n processed . A t th e Tow n Accountant' s request , th e paymen t wa s pu t i n mem o for m t ocreat e a pape rtrail , includin g engineerin g cos t fo rreconstructio n o f th e runwa yan d th e sno wremova l

equipment . Th e Chairma n thanke d th e Managerfo rarrangin g th e ^ yove rfo rth e Jul y4'* ^ parade . I t wa s impressive . Fligh t Leve l ha s communicate d wit h Horizo n t o ensur e tha t th e inciden t involvin g th e plan e comin g i n contac t wit h th e SR

E buildin g doe s no t happe n again . Fro m no wo n th e plane s wil l b e taxie d i n a differen t manner . Motio n mad e byKevi n Shaughness yan d seconde d b yLe s LeBlan c t o accep t th e Manager' s Report . Voted : 5- 0 i n favor . Ol d Busines s Hel i Ops wa s presen t a t th e meetin g i n regar d t o th e reques t fo ra commercia l permit . Th e Commissio n ha s determine d ther e mus t b e a n applicatio n befor e an ydiscussio n o f waiver s ca n take place . Th e applican t mus

^ provid e evidence o f offic e spac e an d eithe ra hanga ro rti e dow n leas e becaus e h e ha s t o bas e th e aircraf t a t Norwoo d an d hav e th e operatio n base d her e also . Th e Commissio n mus t b e consisten t wit h ho wthes e application s ar e deal t wit h an d wit h th e requiremen t t o mee t al l th e minimu m standards , includin g offic e spac e an d ti e dow n o rhangar . I n suppor t o f thi s ther e i s a Tow n Counse l lette rstatin g ther e shoul d hav e bee n a permi t applicatio n first . Th e Manage rha

s confirme d wit h MA C tha t Hel i Op s has no t bee n give n a permi t becaus e th e applican t i s unabl e t o mee t th e minimu m standards . Motio n mad e byKevi n Shaughness yan d seconde d byThoma s Wynn e t o direc t th e Manage rt o sen d a lette rt o Hel i Op s informin g the m tha t i n orde rt o qualif yfo ra commercia l permi t the ynee d t o mee t th e minimu m standard s whic h includ e havin g a n offic e an d ti e dow n . I f the ydisagre e thei rapplicatio n shoul d stat e clearl ywha t waiver s the yar e lookin g for . Voted : 5- 0 i n favor . M rMors e has mad e multipl e request s fo ra securit ybadge . Th e Commissio n wil l suppor t th e Airpor t Manager . Althoug h tni s Commsisio n understand s Mr . Morse' s situation , t o deviat e fro m th e standar d woul d no t b e right . Motio n mad e b yThoma s Wynn e an d seconde d byMart yOdstrche l t o den yMr . Morse' s reques t fo ra securit ybadg e o n th e ground s tha t h e doe s no t mee t th e securit yrequirement s becaus e h e i s no t a n aircraf t owne ran d h e i s no t a n authorize d pilo t t o a base d aircraf t owner ; i n orde rt o d o tha t yo u nee d a lette ro f authorization . Voted : 5- 0 i n favor . Ne wBusines s Fligh t Leve l reques t t o begi n leas e negotiation s - w e ar e no t obligate d t o d o this , na c coul d tak e i t ove r themselve s - ther e doe s no t hav e t o b e a n rf p - nacca n star t negotiation s i f the ywis h to .

# EXHIBI T J; . ' , ,-,;• < . f •! , -. * %

H J i^' . 1 -^

i $ „ 'i j .• • T-,i ; ^ ,i ' >, , ,„^ \\" : VI ' } i t ^ ^ ' V J^r . t ? *;, '

OFFIC E ADDRES S 125 Acces s Roa d Norwood , M

A 0206 2 Cornmonu)cah] \o f KUniachusni: . 

## Norwoo dMemoria l Airpor t Rus s Maguire , A.A.E. , ACE , Airpor t Manage r MAILIN GADDRES S 125 Acces s Road Norwood , M

A 0206 2

Jul y 15 , 200 9 Heli-Op s Helicopte r

Toiir s Attn : We s Verkaart , Owne r 22 6 Sout hMeado w Roa d Plymouth , M A 0236 0 Dea r Wes : A t it s monthl y meetin g hel do n Jul y 8 , th e Norwoo dAirpor t Commissio n (NAC ) vote dt o notif y you i n writin g regardin g your commercial permi t

request . Specifically , to receiv e a permi t t o conduc t commercia l operation s o n th e Norwoo dAirport , Heli-Op s i s bein g require db y th e boardt o mee t th e NorwoodAirpor

t minimu mstaindards . Thes e includ e havin g aNorwoo dAirport-base doffice , plu s aNorwoo dAirport-base dhanga r leas e and/o r aircraf t tie-dow n lease . I f Heli-Op s canno t

mee t th e minimu mstandards , andstil l wishe s t o appl y fo

r a commercial permit , th e compan y mus t stat e clearl y i

n writin g what

waiver(s ) i

t i s seekin g fi-o mth e NAC . Sincerely , 

# '^2^:1 Rus s Maguire , Manage r Norwoo dMemorial Airport

CC : Norwoo dA irpor t

Commissio n

»-ngn7';S-S(^lfi/Fax:C78n255-561 7 / Email : rmaguire@ci.norwood.ma.u s / VOICE/TT Y - Us e Phon e Rela y

# EXHIBI T K

# Hel i LL C Norwoo dAirport

Commissio n & Rus s Maguire ; Airport

Manage r 12 5 Acces s Roa d Norwood , M A 0206 2 7/22/0 9 Subject : Writte n Waive r

Applicatio n Heliop s LL C ha s aBas e o f Operation s at

PlymouthAirport

an dconduct s bothPart

9 1 andPart 13 5 helicopte r

operation s fro mal

l ove r th e Commonwealthandals o i n othe r states . Heliop s ha s bot hDO T an

dFA A authority for

all suc hoperations . I t

i s unrealisti c fo

r Heliop s o r

an y other commercial operato r

t o hav e aBas e o f

Operation s a

t ever y locatio n the y d o operation s from. Heliop s ha s no intention s o f establishin g aBas e o f

Operation s a

t Norwoo dMemorial Airport an d w e believ e i

t unreasonabl e andillegal fo r th e NA C t o requir e acommercial operato r withou t a Bas e o f Operation s at

NorwoodMemorial Airport t o mee t th e same minimu mstandard s a s commercial operator s base da t Norwoo di

n orde r t o conduc t

commercia l Part : 9 1 flight s (sightseein g & photography ) whic horiginat e a t Norwood , A s Norwoo dha s n o formal procedur e whereb y non-base dcommercia l operator s ma y appl y fo

r a permi t or waive r t o conduc t

commercial Part

9 1 operation s fromNorwood , Heliop s LL C herb y formall y applie s fo r awritte n waive r

fromth e Norwoo dAirport Commissio n whic hwil l allo w Heliop s LL C t o conduc t commercial Part

9 1 flight s whic h originat e fro

mNorwoo dMemorial Airport a s anon-base dcommercia l operator . Grantin g o f

thi s waive r

wil l brin g th e NA C int o complianc e withexistin g Federal Laws . Heliop s LL C ha s liste dth e Tow n o f Norwoo d, th e Norwoo dAirport Commission , and Norwoo dAirport

Managemen t

a s als o insure don it s aircraf t liability polic y (cop y attached) . Whil e a t Norwood, Heliop s LL C woul doperat e unde r al l Federal Law s an dSafet

y Guideline s applicabl e t o rotorcraf

t usin g FA A funde dairports . Heliop s estimate s i t woul dconduc t approximatel y 2 0 commercia l Part 9 1 flight per year from NorwoodMemorial Airport . For Par t 9 1 commercia l operations , Heliop s LL C personne l woul dmee t passenger s a

t a n FB O (Flight Leve l o r other ) an descr^r t the mt o th e aircraft . Fo r loadin g an dunloading , th e helicopte r woul db e parke deithe r

a t th e designate dhelicopte r parkin g circle s or , wit

hprio r landin g permission , th e designate dairport helipa do r

FB O ramp area . Pleas e respon dwithi n 1 5 day s withawritte n Approva l o r Denial o f

thi s Waive r

Applicatio n (wit hreason s clearl y stated ) to : Wesle y H , Verkaart Heliop s LL C Bas e o f

Operation s 22 6 Sout hMeado w Roa d Plymouth , M A 0236 0 

# /(j^rh,^ ^

Heliop s LLC , 22 6 Sout h Meado wRoad , Plymouth , M A0236 0 617-571-611 7 heliops@verizon.ne tApr-21-200 J 02:53pi « From-USSl C AVIATIO N +972447209 3 T-1B 7 p.002/00 2 F-06 0

Pfiscrjptiv e Schaaul e Name< 3 insured : Addres s o f lnsure<3 : Company : Potk: vNumbe r Effectiv e Data : Expiratio n Date : Airoaf t Covered : AIRCRAF TCERTIFICAT E O F INSURANC E Pate : , 04/2i/200 9 HELIOPS , LL C 1 5 MOUNP S DITC H LAN E DUXeuRY . M A0233 2 U.S , SPECIALT YINSURANC E COMPAN Y RW0Q144077-0 5 04/16/200 9 02/27/201 0 N41SAE ; 2000 . EUROCOPTE R EC120 B AIRCRAF TLIABILIT Y

COVERAGE S A-Bodil yInJuiyl-iaWllt y Exclut^lnf i Pawenaer * B - Pas««n8e rBcx^ll yInjur y C - Propert yDamaa » M«bilJt y D - Singl e Umi t Bodil yInjur y/ Propert y Damaa a Liabilit yP8«»«n<iei » D L - Singl e Limi t Bodil yNm y/ Propert yDamac^ e Umfte d Passenger s LIMIT S O F UABILIT Y « 1 « %

> « Eac h Occurrenc e

Eac h passenge r ^cl ^ Occvrrenc e Eac h Occurrenc e Eac h Occurrenc e 250,00 0 Eac h Passenge r 2,000,00 0 Eac h Occurrenc e AIRCRAF TPHYSICA L DAMAG E F - Al l Risk s Whil e No t I n Motio n G - Al l Risk s Whil e I n Motio n » f Les s S

Les s S deductibl e deductibl e Paymen t fo raircraf t physica l damag e unde rCoverag e F o rG wil l t> e mad e t o th e Name d Insure d and : (Absenc e o f a n entr ymean s 'n o exception' ) Thi s Cenificat a I s issue d to : Additiona l Insure d Se e Polic yCondition s Fo rDetail s T(W N O F NORWOOD . NORVWO D AIRPOR TCOMMISSIO

N NORWOO D AIRPOR TMANAGEMEN

T 56 6 WASHINGTO

N STREE T NORWOOD , M

A0206 2 Wit h wno m w e agrw , i f possible , t o notif yIflLday s befor e dat e o f cancellatio n i f polic yshoul d b e cancelled , bu t th e Compan ysnai l no f b e liabl e i n an ywa yfo rfailur e t o giv e suc h notic e Th e atiQvf l cnvarane s ar o aubjor t t o atl-polic yterrogT-coffditiQflg-^n^^-oxoJ^w^flg^

Approve d SA U 1012GA(01/91 )

# EXHIBI T L

## Norwoo dMemoria l A irpor t Rus s Maguire , A.A.E, , ACE , Airpor t Manage r OFFIC E ADDRES S MAILIN GADUKhs, s 12 5 ,Acces s Road1 2 5 Acces s Ro;\^- : Norwood , M

A 0206 2 Norwood , M A Li2(Jc> : Augus t 13 , 200 9 Heli-Op s LLC Ann : Wesley H , Verkaar

t 22 6 Sout hMeado w Roa

d Plymouth , M

A 0236 0 Dea r Wes : A t its publi c meetin g Augus t 12 , th e Norwoo dAirpor t Commissio n (NAC ) reviewe dyou r July 22"' ' letter requestin g awaive r

o f the Norwoo dAirpor

t minimu mstandards . Fo r acommercial sightseein g operator , Heli-Op s wa s require dt o mee t th e followin g standards , which , as yo u noted i n your Jul y 22"" * letter , yo

u woul dno

t attemp t t o meet , an

dwere therefore requestin g awaiver of :

• A wel l li

t an dheate doffic e o f

a t leas t 20 0 square feet , lease do r owned , withi n walkin g distanc e o f

the compan y aircraft , o n o r adjacent t o the airport , o

r o n Acces s Roa

d betwee n th e nort

han dsout hairpor t boundar y end s

• Suitabl e commercial tie-dow n or hanga r spac e fo r all compan y aircraf

t .Afte r some consideration , th e NA C votedt o den y your

request . Its decisio n wa s base dprimaril ) o n the board' s effort s t

o appl y its standard s fairly an duniformly . A s context ; Th e Norwoo d Airpor t i s presentl y home bas e to severa l commercial permitte dsightseein g tour operators , al

l of whichmeet

th e minimumstandards , th e sam e standard s w e hav e require dof Heli-Ops , i.e. , t

o have aphysical presenc e o n th e Norwoo dAirport . i n closing , fo

r ou r tenant busines s community , th e minimu mstandard s aimt o promote fciu

competitio n b

y "levelin g th e playin g field. " Whil e fo r th e general public , the enforcement o f ou r minimu mstandard s discourage s sub-standardand/o r unsaf e would-b e servic e providers—thereb ) protectin g th e interest s o f Norwoo dAirport' s patrons . Sincerely , Rus s Maguire , Manager Norwoo dMemorial Airpor t CC : Norwoo dAirport

Commissio n

Phone:(78i)255-561 6 / Fax:(781)255-561 7 /

Email : rmaguire@ci.nonvood.ma.u s / VOICE/TT Y - Us e Phon e Rela s

# EXHIBI T M

# ^ ^ Th e Commonwealt ho f Massachusett s AERONAUTIC S COMMISSIO N AGENC Y DIRECTIV E Date : 11/14/200 1 TITLE : AIRPOR T SECURIT Y MACAD-OOl a PURPOSE . Th e purpos e o f thi s DIRECTIVE i s t o establis hminimumairpor t securit y standard s fo

r public-usf

r airport s locate di n th e Commonwealt ho f Massachusetts . Thi s DIRECTIVE als o provide s guidanc e t o airpor t sponsor s fo

r implementin g th e securit

y standard s recommende dherein . APPLICABILITY . Thi s DIRECTIVE applie s t o all public-us e airport s locate di n th e Commonwealt

h o f Massachusetts . Howeve r i t i s no t intende dt o replac e o r

supercede airpor

t securit y standard s require db y th e FAA under FA RPar t 10 7 or airlin e securit

y standard s require db v FARPar t 108 . Therefore , an

y par t o f thi s DIRECTIVE foun

dto b e inconsistent

with , o r contrar y to . th e securit

y standard s require dby th e FA A shal l b e deeme dinapplicable . CANCELLATION . Thi s DIRECTIVE hereb y cancel s an dreplace s th e emergency DIRECTIVE , datedOctobe r 2 , 200 1 title d"Jmplementaiio n o f Airport Security Measures " that

wa s issue dby th e Commissio n under emergenc y condition s i n respons e t o th e Septembe r 11 * terroris t

attacks . BACKGROUND . O n September 11 , 2001 , th e Unite dState s o f Americ aexperience dascrie s o f terroris t attack s tha

t involve dth e mid-ai r

highjackin g an dsubsequent destructio n o f

fou r commercia

l passenger

jets , their occupants , an

dnearly 5,00 0 peopl e o n th e ground . Mos t horrifi c of

all wa s th e intentional us e o f th e airplane s a s weapons . All fou r plane s involve din th e attack s originate dfrommajor air carrier airport s subjec t

to FA A securit y regulations . In th e immediate wak e o f

th e terroris t

attacks , government

regulator s andairpor

t professional s alike assesse dth e vulnerabilit y o f airpor t security acros s th e country . Sensitiv e t o th e fact that aircraf t were useda s weapons , th e Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n issue dth e initia l DIRECTIVE o n October 2,2001 . DEFINITIONS . Th e followin g term s use din thi s document shall b e defmeda s follows : AO A shall mea

n Aircraf t Operatin g Are a-. . . Commissio n shal l mea

n th e Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n DIRECTIV

E shall mea

n thi s AGENCY DIRECTTV E FA A shall mean th e Federa

l Aviatio n Administratio n FA Rshall mea

n Federal Aviatio n Regulatio n FB O shal l mean Fixe dBas e Operator FD A shall mea

n th e federa

l Foo dan dDru g Administratio n G A shal l mean Genera

l Aviation , referrin g t

o atyp e o f

airpor t o r operational characteristi c Restricte dare ashal l mean an y are adesignate do n th e airpor t securit y pla n a s requirin g I D cardacces s Sponso r shal l mean th e lega

l owne r and/or operator o f apublic-us e airpor

t Tenan t shal l mea n an y perso n o

r lega l entit y t o receiv e writte n permissio n t o establis h aleasehol da

t th e airpor t 1 . AIRPOR T CLASSIFICATIO N I he publicMiJj e aiipu i [j . i

n MasMachasettsH^ange-i

n siz e from-smalLrural G

A facilitie s wit

h only afe

w basedaircraf

t operatin g under visual flight

rul e condition s t o larg e commercia l servic e airport s accommodatin g je t aircraf t operatmg i

n all-weattie

r flight conditions . I

t i s generall y accepte dtha

t smal l airport s which ca

n only accommodat

e single-engin e aircraf

t pos e much les s o f asecurity risk

tha n larg e airport s offerin g schedule dairlin e passenger servic e usin g je t

aircraft . Recognizin g th e difficult y o f developin g on e standar

dt o suit all airports , th e followin g airpor t categorie s arc define dt o accommodat e th e varie dleve l o f

(security ) risk

posedb y each facility . Clas s 1 - Airport s wit

hschedule dairlin e passenger servic e Clas s 2 —Municipally ownedairport s withou t schedule dairlin e passenger servic e Clas s 3 —Privatel y ownedairport s The above-note dairpor

t classification s wil l b e reference dthroughou t thi s DIRECTIVE , an

dminimumsecurit

y standard s will b e developed , an

dshal l b e enforced , fo

r eac hclassification . MACAEt-OOl aA irpor t Securit y Pag e 1 o f £2 . SECURIT Y STANDARD S

Regardles s o f

th e siz e or

operational characteristic s o f aparticula

r facility , th e Commissio n hereby direct s tha t all public-us e airpor t sponsor s i n Massachusett s adopt reasonabl e securit

y standard s t o (a) monito r an dprotec t airpor t user s an dairpor t propert y includin g buildings , facilitie s andequipment , (b ) contro l th e movement o f person s an

dgroun dvehicle s o

n airpor t property , especiall y i

n th e AOA . (c ) preven

t unauthorize dacces s o f

person s an

dgroundvehicle s into unauthorize darea s o n airpor t property , especiall y int o th e AOA , (d ) detec t an dprevent

unauthorize ddeadly o r

dangerou s weapon s or

device s from bein g transferre dinto th e AO A o r ont o aircraft , an

d(e ) prevent

th e thef t an dsubsequent

illega l operatio n o f

aircraft . Th e followin g guidanc e applie s t o Clas s 1, 2 an d3 Airport s excep t a s note dbelow : a . Monitorin g & Protectin g Airpor t User s an dProperty . Airpor t sponsor s shal l take reasonabl e measure s t o monito r andprotec t

airpor t users , visitor s andguests , andairpor t propert y includin g buildings , facilitie s and equipment . Dependin g on th e clas s o f airport , reasonabl e measure s ma y includ e th e following : i ) Installatio n o f

securit y fencb g t o protec t

agains t inadverten t

or unauthorize dacces s to th e AOA . ii ) Closin g vehicula

r andpedestria

n gate s leadin g int o th e AOA an dlocking themwhe

n no t i n use . iii ) Installin g acces s contro l device s on gate s t o manag e andcontro l th e movement o f peopl e into th e AOA . iv ) Periodicall y changin g acces s code s an dlock s t o vehicula

r an dpedestria

n gate s leading into th e AOA . v) Installin g lock s on fue l cabinets , fill hatche s andpumps , an dpower shutof f switche s on fueling facilities . vi ) Installin g lock s o n airfieldelectrica l vault s an

dothe r electrical systems , includin g (non-FAA) NAVAIDS , vii ) Installin g barrier s t o protec t fueling facilities , HazMa

t storag e area s andother

area s o f concern . viii)Installin g sufGcien

t outside lightin g fixtures t o illuminate buildings , walkways , aircraf t ramp s an daprons . ix ) Monitorin g airpor

t propert y by performin g regula

r inspections , an db y mean s o f vide o s urvcillanc c i f

warranted . x ) Requestin g periodi c inspection s / patrol s o f th e airpor t b y loca l la w enforcement

ofiiccrs . xi ) I f warranted , employment

o f local la w enforcement

officer s on aregula

r o r par t time basis . xii ) Developin g a

n airpor t securit y pla n an dupdatin g th e pla

n periodically . xiii)Requirin g tenant s t o develop their own securit

y plan an dt o comply wit

h th e sponsor' s airpor

t securit y plan . EXCEPTIONS : None . b . Controllin g Movemen t o n th e Airport . Airpor

t sponsor s shal l take reasonabl e step s t o contro l th e movemen t o f persons , aircraf

t an dgroun dvehicle s on airpor t propert y b y instsilling airpor

t user signs , aircraf

t guidanc e signs , airfiel dlight s andmarkers , an dpavement

markings , a s appropriate . Airpor t sponsor s sheill : - • i ) Manag e an

doperate their

airpor t facilit y i n asaf e an defficien

t marme r pursuant t o all laws , rules , regulations , directives , order s an dadvisorie s o f applicabl e federal , state an dlocal authorities . T o thi s end , sponsor s ar e expecte dto utiliz e a

n adequate number

o f peopl e to contro l an

ddirec t th e movement

o f people , aircraf

t and groun dvehicle s o n aiipor t propert y includin g airsid e an

dlandside . Thi s ma

y b e accomplishe db

y an y combinatio n o f

qualifie dairpor

t staff , leas e or contrac t employees , or

volunteer staff . ii ) Instal l sign s t o direc t

th e movement

o f peopl e an dinfor

mpatron s o f

pertinent informatio n regardin g th e saf e an defScient

us e an doperatio n o f

th e facility . Thi s ma

y include , bu t

i s no t limitedto , parkin g anddirectiona l signs , informationa

l signs , do-not-enter

signs , warnin g signs , etc . Whateve r th e sig n type , it

shoul d corrmiunicate th e proper

messag e t o th e appropriate party a t th e right time an dplace . iii ) Instal l airfiel dguidanc e sign s an dairfiel dlight s andmarkers , a s appropriate , t o direc t an dcontro l th e movement o f aircraf t an dgroun dvehicle s within th e AOA . Th e installatio n an doperatio n o f

airfieldguidanc e sign s an d airfiel dlight s an dmarker s shoul db e accomplishe dpursuant t o applicabl e FAA standards . rv ) Instal l pavement

marking s t

o direc t an dcontro l th e movement

o f aircraf t andgroundvehicle s o

n airpor t property . Th e installatio n o f pavement

marking s i n th e AOA an delsewher

e o n th e airfiel dshoul db e accomplishe dpursuant

to applicabl e FA Astandards . Pavement marking s usedto-control-groun dvehicle s that

operat e on airpor

t propert y bu t of f the airfieldshoul dmee t

applicable'Highwa

y Dep Lstandards . EXCEPTIONS : A s notedbelow . ' iii ) Aircraf

t guidanc e sign s an

dairfieldlights/marker s shoul db e installe da t Clas s 3 Airport s a s fimding permits . Aircraf t guidanc e sign s an

dairfieldlights/marker s are no t require dfo

r Clas s 3 Airport s tha

t posses s aMA

C issue dAirport

Operatin g Certificate wit

h th e followin g limitation(s) : Day VF ROnly . c . Preventin g Unanthorize dAccess . Airpor t sponsor s shal l tak e necessar y step s t o preven

t unauthorize dacces s o f person s an

dgroun dvehicle s int

o unauthorize darea s on airpor t property . Thi s includes , amon g other things , preventin g unauthorize dacces s into th e AOA , moving between area s withi n the AOA , an dseparatin g /'segregatin g

MACAIXOO U Airpor t Securit y PaEeToFe "person s an dgroun dvehicle s fro maircraft , fuelin g fecilities, an dothe r area s o f concer n withi n th e AOA . Airpor t sponsor s shall : i ) Instal l securit y fencing , an dacces s gate s wher e appropriate , t o enclos e th e AO A an dt o protec t othe r sensitiv e area s o n airpor t

propert y includin g al l fiie i &rm s an dHazMa t storag e areas . Wheneve r possible , di e sponso r shoul denclos e fiie l &rm s wit h sufficien t fencin g t o includ e parkin g space s fo r al l fue l trucks . Unti l suc h tim e a s th e entir e AO A i s enclosed , priorit y shoul db e give n t o area s wher e eas y publi c acces s t o th e AO A i s o f mos t concern , sparmin g ope n area s wit hfenc e an dusin g terrain , existin g vegetativ e cove r an denviroimienta l condition s a s natura l barriers . Fencin g specification s shoul dmee t th e followin g standard : eigh t foo t chain-link

fence , blac k

vinyl-coated , wit hon e foo t o f barbe dwir e o n top , installe dpe r manufacturer' s recommendations . Barbe dwir e i s no t

reconmiende dfo r

fencin g locate di n th e immediat e vicinit y o f th e aiipor t

termina l building . Th e locatio n an dheigh t

o f fencin g shoul dno t

violat e applicabl e airspac e standard s o r negat e airpor t

maste r pla n improvements . Securit y fencin g shoul dreceiv e hig h priorit y i n a n airport' s Capita l Improvemen t Plan . ii ) Discourag e uimecessar y pedestria n an dvehicula r acces s to , an dmovemen t within , th e AOA . Fo r example , aircraf t owner s shoul dpar k

thei r car s outsid e th e AO A an dwal k t o thei r planes . iii ) Restric t

pedestria n an dvehicula r acces s int o th e AO A t o a s fis w location s a s possible , balancin g th e nee dfo r acces s b y emergency , safet y an dmaintenanc e personne l insid e an doutsid e th e AOA . iv ) Instal l acces s contro l device s (e.g . car dreaders , mechanica l pi n latc hmechanisms , etc. ) o n fenc e gate s leadin g int o th e AOA , wher e appropriate . v ) Instal l vide o surveillanc e & detectio n equipment . Th e Commissio n recommend s installin g vide o camera s t o monito r acces s gate s leadin g int o th e AOA , wher e appropriate . Clas s 1 airport s shoul dals o conside r installin g vide o camera s t o monito r area s i n th e termina l building , wher e appropriate . vi ) Instal l heavy-dut y barrier s t o protec t fue l farmarea s an dothe r area s o f specia l concer n fl'orainadverten t o r deliberat e damag e b y groun dvehicle s o r aircraf t Concret e bollard s ar e th e preferre dmetho dfo r protectin g abov e groun dfuelin g facilities . An y combinatio n o f jerse y barriers , concret e blocks , larg e boulders , telephon e pole s an dheav y dut y chain s ma y als o suffic e fo r protectin g o r

blockin g acces s t o othe r area s o f concern . vii ) Requir e th e us e o f

identificatio n (ID ) badge s fo r allowin g acces s t o anyon e wishin g t o ente r th e AO A an dfo r controllin g th e movemen t o f person s withi n th e AOA , Sponsor s shal l als o implemen t procedure s fo r challengin g person s wh o ar e no t displayin g th e prope r

identification . An y perso n authorize dt o ente r th e AO A o r mov e withi n th e AO A shal l displa y astandar dI D badg e wit h sufficien t informatio n t o clearl y identif y th e individua l an dascertai n th e leve l o f securit y authorization . Anyon e withou t th e prope r

identificatio n mus t

b e escorte dat

al l time s whil e i n restricte darea s o f th e AO A b y anothe r

perso n wit hth e prope r

I D badge . Application s fo r

I D badge s shoul db e submitte dt o the-Commissio n b y Decembe r 31 , 2001 . Wit happrova l fro mth e Commission , sponsor s ma y develo p thei r ow n distinc t

I D badg e format . Upo n request , th e Commissio n wil l suppl y eac h airpor t sponso r wit h asufticien t

numbe r o f I D badge s fo r

us e a t thei r facility , a t n o cos t t o th e sponsor . EXCEPTIONS : A s note dbelow . i ) Othe r

types o f fencin g ma y b e substitute dfo r standar dsecurit y fencin g recommende db y th e Commission . Example s o f

thi s includ e th e us e o f

woode n o r

plasti c fencin g withi n th e critica l are ao f aNAVAI D facility , o r th e us e o f

wildlif e fencin g require db y environmenta l regulator s t o allo w fo r th e migratio n o f

smal l mammals . Clas s 3 airport s ar c exemp t fromth e standar dspecificatio n fo r eight-foo t

chain-link-fenc e wit hbarbe dwir e du e t o th e lengt ho f

th e runway , siz e o f

th e aircraf

t an dtype o f

operatio n a t

thes e facilities . Instead , th e Commissio n recommend s tha t

Clas s 3 airport s instal l fou r foot fencing , either: , blac k

vinyl-coale dchainrlink-fenoe , woode n fencin g (pos t

& rail , spli t

rail , etc. ) o r

som e othe r

type o f low-profil e fencin g tha t i s functiona l (i.e . prevent s unaathoriaed-vehiculaiLacces s int o di e AOA ) bu t no t to o obtrusive . rv ) Clas s 3 airport s ar e exemp t fromthi s requirement . Clas s 2 airport s shoul dcompl y a s fimding permits . v ) Clas s 2 an d3 airport s ar e exemp t fromthi s requirement , howeve r Clas s 2 airport s ar e encourage dt o comply . vii ) Operator s o f

transien t aircraf t an dthei r

guest s ar e no t

expected , an dthu s no t

required , t o posses s th e standar d [ D badge . Nevertheless , th e requiremen t fo r escortin g unidentifie dindividual s whil e i n th e AO A stil l applies . Notwithstandin g th e requiremen t t o posses s an ddispla y th e prope r I D Badg e t o ente r

an dmov e abou t

withi n th e AOA i th e sponso r

ma y authoriz e unescorte dacces s t o th e followin g individuals : a n employe e o f federa l an d stat e governmen t

agencie s includin g th e FA A an dth e Commissio n who , b y jo b function , ar e require dt o wor k insid e th e AOA . MACAIXOOI aAirpor t Securit y Pag e 3 o f <d . Detectin g an dPreventin g Weapon s int o th e ADA . Th e FA A impose s federa l screenin g requirement s o n certai n airline s unde r

FA RPar t

10 8 title d"Airplan e Operato r Security" . Mor e specifically , FA RPar t 10 8 applie s t o th e operation s o f

holder s o f

FA A ai r

carrie r operatin g certificate s o r operatin g certificate s engagin g i n schedule d passenge r

operation s o r

publi c charte r

passenge r

operations . Notwithstandin g FA A securit y requirement s o n airport s unde r

FA RPar t

10 7 o r airline s unde r

FA RPar t

108 , th e Commissio n recommend s tha t Clas s 1 airport s tak e reasonabl e measure s t o detec t an dpreven t

th e transfe r

o f unauthorize ddeadl y o r

dangerou s weapons ' o r

device s int o th e AO A o r

ont o aircraf

t carryin g tickete dpassenger s fo r al l regularl y schedule dairlin e flights. Accordingly , th e Commissio n recommend s tha t Clas s 1 airport s voluntaril y scree n al l passengers , al l checke dbaggag e an dal l carry o n baggag e fo r

ever y perso n intendin g t o boar daregularl y schedule dairlin e flight. I n lie u o f

an y federa l screenin g requirement s fo r Clas s 1 Airport s tha t

ar e no t subjec t t o FA RPar t

107 , th e Commissio n offer s th e followin g guidanc e fo r consideration : i ) Electroni c meta l detectio n equipmen t an dcabinet-X-ra y machine s shoul db e installe dfo r detectin g unauthorize d guns , knive s £in

dothe r deadl y o r

dangerou s weapon s bein g carrie db y an y perso n prio r t o enterin g th e AO A i n advanc e o f

boardin g adepartin g aircraf t o f aregularl y schedule dairlin e flight. Onl y equipmen t approve db y th e FD A fo r

thi s intende dus e shoul db e installed . Th e sponso r shoul dassur e tha t

suc hequipmen t

meet s o r exceed s th e curren t

standard s for

installation , operatio n an dperformanc e establishe db y th e FDA . Th e equipmen t

shoul db e subjec t

t o regula r

testin g i n orde r

t o maintai n operationa l an dperformanc e standard s se t b y th e FDA . Al l record s o f installatio n an dtestin g shoul db e mad e availabl e fo r inspectio n b y th e Commission , th e FA A an dth e FDA . ii ) Th e sponso r

shoul ddevelo p aprogra mfo r initia l an drecurren t

trainin g o f

staf f responsibl e fo r

th e safe , efficien t an dprope r

us e an doperatio n o f

th e screenin g equipment . iii ) Appropriat e signag e shoul db e conspicuousl y locate dt o notif y th e genera l publi c o f

screenin g operations . ry ) A loca l la w enforcemen t ofQcer shoul db e statione dat

al l screenin g chec k

point s t o monito r

an dassis t

airpor t securit y personne l durin g th e so-eenin g process . v ) Al l baggage , whethe r carrie do n boar db y crewmember s o r passenger s o r

destine dfo r

storag e a s cargo , shoul d b e screene db y electroni c mean s fo r detectin g unauthorize dguns , knive s an dothe r deadl y o r

dangerou s weapon s prio r

t o enterin g steril e passenge r holdin g area s o r

th e AOA . vi ) Al l crewmember s an dpassenger s o f adepartin g (schedule dairline ) aircraf t shoul db e subjec t

t o meta l detectio n screening , questioning , an dt o bodil y searc hi f necessary , fo r

reasonabl e caus e o r

suspicio n o f

attemptin g t o transfe r a n unauthorize ddeadl y o r dangerou s weapo n int o th e AO A o r ont o th e aircraft . vii ) Al l unauthorize dguns , knive s an dothe r deadl y o r

dangerou s weapon s foun do n aperso n o r i n baggag e shoul d b e confiscate db y th e loca l la w enforcemen t office r statione da t

th e screenin g checkpoint . Airpor t securit y personne l shal l complet e adetaile dlo g o f informatio n abou t

th e confiscatio n includin g th e location , dat e an d tim e o f th e event , th e person' s name , addres s an dphon e number , an dadetaile ddescriptio n o f th e confiscate d weapon . A cop y o f

th e even t

lo g shal l b e supplie dt o an y o f th e followin g representative s upo n writte n request : th e Commission , th e FA A o r an y federal , stat e o r

loca l la w enforcemen t

official . viii ) An y perso n refusin g t o consen t t o th e sponsor' s screenin g progra mshoul db e refuse dpermissio n t o ente r th e AO A an dt o boar dan y departin g aircraft . I f suc ha n even t

occurs , airpor t

securit y personne l shoul dcomplet e a detaile dlo g o f

th e event . I f

warranted , loca l polic e shoul db e calle dfo r assistance . ix ) Boardin g procedure s shoul db e establishe dfo r segregatin g screene dpassenger s fro mthos e wh o hav e no t bee n screene ds o a s t o kee p screene dpassenger s isolate di n asteril e environmen t whil e waitin g t o board , an ddurin g boarding , adepartin g aircraft . x ) Airpor t

sponsor s shoul dimplemen t othe r securit y screenin g procedure s an dsystem s tha t the y believ e ar e necessar y fo r

detectin g unauthorize ddeadl y o r dangerou s weapon s bein g carrie db y an y perso n prio r t o enterin g th e AO A throug hairlin e passenge r screenin g chec k

point s i n advanc e o f

boardin g adepartin g aircraft . EXCEPTIONS : A s note dbelow . i-x ) Clas s 2 an d3 airport s ar e exemp t (b y definition ) fromthi s requirement . vii ) La w enforcemen t

officers , governmen t

official s an dothe r

individual s possessin g lega l authorizatio n t o carr y gun s o r othe r weapon s ar e exemp t

fromconfiscatio n bu t

shal l notit y airpor t

securit y personne l i n advanc e o f passin g throug hscreenin g procedures . e . Preve n tin g Thef t

an dIllega l Operatio n o f Aircr aft . Airpor t

sponsor s shal l requir e tha t al l base daircraf

t owner s tak e reasonabl e measure s o f preventin g th e thef

t an dillega l operatio n o f thei r aircraft . Conside r

th e following : i ) Aircraf

t owner s shoul dinstal l einti-thef t device s o n thei r

aircraf t whe n no t

i n use . ii ) Aircraf

t owner s shoul dinstal l device s t o loc k aircraf t flight contro l surface s whe n no t i n use : iii ) Aircraf

t owner s shoul dremov e th e key s t o thei r aircraft , i f

applicable , an dloc k

al l door s whe n no t

i n use . MACAD-OOl aAirpor t Securit y Pagc<lor 6rv ) Aircraf t owner s shoul dconside r lockabl e device s t o secur e thei r aircraft . v ) Door s o n aircraf

t storag e hangar s shoul db e kep t locke da t

al l time s whe n no t

i n use . vi ) Aircraf

t owner s an dpilot s shoul drepor t suspiciou s activit y t o airpor t managemen t

o r othe r authorities . vii ) Airpor t

sponsor s an dtenant s shoul dinstal l sufficien t lightin g equipmen t

t o illuminat e aircraf

t ramp s an daprons . EXCEPTIONS : None . 3 . AIRPOR T SECURIT Y PLAN S Th e Commissio n hereb y direct s tha t al l public-us e airpor t

sponsor s i n Massachusett s creat e a n Airpor t Securit y Fla n incorporatin g th e applicabl e securit y standard s note di n Sectio n 2 above . However , creatin g an dimplementin g suc ha pla n wil l tak e atea meffort ^ requirin g alo t

o f coordinatio n an dcooperatio n o f local , stat e an dfedera l authoritie s a s wel l a s privat e en dusers . Therefor e th e Commissio n als o direct s tha t sponsor s assembl e a n Airpor t Securit y Tea mt o advis e th e sponso r

i n developin g it s Airpor t Securit y Plan . a . Airpor t

Securit y Team . Sponsor s shal l assembl e a n Airpor t Securit y Tea m(AST) . Th e AS T shoul db e mad e u p o f representative s fromth e airport , airpor t tenant s an duser s includin g base daircraf t owners , loca l publi c safet y official s (police , fire, etc.) , loca l emergenc y managemen t personnel , an drepresentatio n o f othe r appropriat e parties . Th e purpos e o f

th e AS T i s t o advis e th e sponso r regardin g issue s t o conside r i n plannin g fo r

securit y improvements . Goo dcommunicatio n an dcooperatio n betwee n al l partie s i s essentia ] fo r balancin g th e desir e fo r publi c acces s an d utilit y agains t

th e nee dfo r

publi c safet y an dsecurity . Th e AS T shall : i ) Lis t an dclearl y defin e th e differen t types o f airpor t users . Th e lis t

ma y includ e airlines , FBOs , maintenanc e facilities , fuelin g operators , fligh t schools , base daircraf

t owners , restaurants , etc . Base daircraf t owner s ca n b e considere da s ause r

group , ii ) Documen t

th e hour s o f

operatio n fo r

eac huse r

liste dabove . Aircraf

t owner s ca n b e considere da s on e group , iii ) Discus s th e acces s requirement s fo r eac h specifi c user , wit hparticula r emphasi s o n thos e tha t

requir e acces s t o th e AOA . Acces s t o th e AO A b y employees , visitor s an dguests , an dmai l & packag e delivet y requirement s shoul db e discusse di n detail , rv) Discus s th e securit y requirement s fo r eac h user . Aircraf

t owner s ca n b e considere da s agroup , v ) Discus s emergenc y respons e issues , vi ) Advis e th e sponso r o n al l securit y requirement s recommende dfo r inclusio n o n th e Airpor t Securit y Plan . b . Airpor t

Securit y Plan . Base do n inpu t fromth e Airpor t

Securit y Team , Sponsor s shal l creat e a n Airpor t Securit y Pla n tha t incorporate s th e applicabl e securit y standard s an dguidanc e provide di n thi s DIRECTTVE . Thi s requiremen t i s no t intende dt o replac e an y suc h requiremen t promulgate db y th e FA A o r othe r federa l authority . I n fact , FA A

. mandate dsecurit y plan s ma y b e substitute dfo r thi s stat e requirement , howeve r thes e airport s ar e stil l encourage dt o creat e an Airpor t

Securit y Tea mt o advis e airpor t managemen t

o n airpor t

securit y issues . Th e airpor t

sponso r shal l develo p awritte n Airpor t Securit y Pla n pursuan t

t o th e followin g guidance : i ) Referenc e th e lis t

o f airpor t user s develope db y th e AST . Revie w i t fo r accuracy , updat e a s necessary , an d incorporat e th e lis t

int o th e plan . Th e lis t

shoul dinclud e ever y base daircraf t owner . Briefl y describ e th e type o f operatio n fo r

eac huser . Specia l consideratio n shoul db e give n t o agricultura l sprayin g operations , aeria l demonstrations , blim p operations , banne r tower s an dsite-seein g operations . ii ) Documen t

th e norma l hour s o f

operatio n fo r

eac h use r

liste dabove . iii ) Documen t

th e locatio n an dacces s requirement s fo r eac hspecifi c user , wit hparticula r emphasi s o n thos e tha t requir e acces s t o th e AOA . Incorporatin g ascale dairpor t ma p ma y b e helpfiil . Aircraf t owner s ca n b e locate d b y apro n o r

hanga r i n lie u o f

showin g eac hon e individually . iv ) Documen t

th e securit y requirement s fo r eac huser . Aircraf

t own^is-carrb e considered~afa^crap r v ) Documen t

th e likel y AO A acces s point s fo r eac h user . vi ) Incorjjorat e th e securit y standard s an dapplicabl e guidanc e fro mSectio n 2 . vii ) Incorporat e procedure s fo r reportin g suspiciou s activit y fromSectio n 4 . viii)Incorporat e emergenc y respons e consideration s recommende db y th e AS T an dfromSectio n 5 . ix ) Periodicall y revie w th e plan , consultin g wit h th e AST , an dupdat e a s necessary . Give n th e sensitiv e natur e o f thi s issue , th e Commissio n advise s agains t distribution , disclosur e an davailabilit y o f an y sensitiv e informatio n tha t coul dcompromis e airpor t security . Th e sponso r

shoul dconside r

seekin g lega l advic e regardin g applicabl e publi c disclosur e laws .

MACAD-OOl aAirpor t Securit y PagcSof 64 . REPORTIN GSUSPICIOU S ACTIVIT Y Airpor t sponsor s shal l implemen t procedure s fo r

reportin g unusua l o r

suspiciou s activit y t o th e prope r authorities : a . Develo p alis t

o f unusua l o r

suspiciou s activit y tha t

warrant s particula r

attention , suc has : i ) Aircraf

t wit h unusua l o r

unauthorize dmodifications . ii ) Person s loiterin g fo r extende dperiod s o f

time i n th e vicinit y o f

parke dsiircraf

t o r elsewher e u i th e AOA . iii ) Pilot s wh o appea r

t o b e unde r

th e contro l o f

othe r persons . iv ) Person s wishin g t o obtai n aircraf t withou t presentin g prope r

credential s o r

person s wh o presen t

apparenfl y vali d credential s bu t

d o no t hav e acorrespondin g leve l o f aviatio n knowledge , v ) Witnessin g deadl y o r dangerou s weapon s o r

explosive s bein g loade dont o a n aircraft , vi ) Anythin g tha t

doesn' t loo k right suc ha s event s o r

circumstance s tha t

doe s no t fit th e patter n o f

norma l lawfu l activit y a t

th e airpor t b . Includ e th e follovWn g 2 4 hou r phon e number s o n thei r contac t list : i ) Airpor t

Manage r

(<W# ) ###-#### ii ) Loca l Polic e Departmen t (if#lf ) iffti t lllllit t iii ) Massachusett s Stat e Polic e Headquarter s (508)820-212 1 rv ) Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n (508)301-211 8 v ) Federa l Burea u o f

Investigatio n (FBI) , Bosto n Fiel dOffic e (617 ) 742-553 3 vi ) FAA . Regiona l Comman dCente r (781)238-700 1 c . Develo p aproces s t o facilitat e determinin g who mt o call . d . Ad dan y othe r

appropriat e contac t

number s t o th e list . e . Circulat e thes e reportin g procedure s t o al l tenant s an dother s wh o hav e aregula r presenc e o n th e airpor t f . Encoxuag e al l tenant s an dbase daircraf t owner s t o compl y wit hth e sponsor' s reportin g procedures . 5 . EMERGENC Y RESPONS E PROCEDURE S Airpor t sponsor s shal l develo p an dimplemen t emergenc y procedure s t o respon dt o regiona l disasters , act s o f terrorism , an dothe r situation s deeme dt o b e a n emergenc y b y stat e o r federa l authorities . Airpor t sponsor s shall : a . Develo p alis t

o f reasonabl y potentia l emergenc y situation s tha t coul dinvolv e th e airpor t eithe r directl y o r

indirectly . b . Addres s way s t o adequatel y respon dt o eac h emergenc y situatio n note dabove , includin g th e developmen t o f a "communicatio n tree " fo r prioritizin g th e prope r

authoritie s t o contac t

i n emergenc y situations . c . Designat e aprimar y (airport ) responden t an dtw o alternate s t o respon dt o emergenc y situation s a t th e airport . d . Maintai n alis t

o f contac t dat afo r al l designate drespondent s an dothe r potentia l person s likel y t o b e involve di n emergenc y situation s includin g thei r names , variou s phon e number s (home , work , cell , pager , etc.) , fax number s an d emai l addresses . e . Shar e th e informatio n note dabov e wit h th e Commission , FAA , MEM A (Massachusett s Emergenc y Managemen t Agency) , an dothe r

local , State and"federa l authorities"aBTieces5ary . f . Periodicall y revie w th e procedure s note dabov e an dupdat e a s necessary . 6 . STAT E FUNDIN GO FAIRPOR T SECURIT Y IMPROVEMENT S Th e Commissio n consider s airpor t securit y t o b e ahig h priorit y objective . Eligibilit y fo r stat e fundin g assistanc e wil l b e subjec t t o a n approve dAirpor t Securit y Pla n consisten t wit hth e guidanc e containe dherein .

Executiv e Director , Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n MACADWl aAirpor t Securit y Pag e 6 o f 6

# EXHIBI T N

# ^ ^ in e L^ommonweaun u j iviuaciUi^fLuo^i^i

o Massachusett s Aeronautic s Commissio n 1 0 Par k Plaza , Roo

m662 0 Boston , Massachusett s 02116-396 6

MEMORANDU M To : Massachusetts ' Public-Us e Airport Manager s & Airport

Commissio n Chair s From : Rober t

J . Mallard , P.E. , MA C Executiv e Directo r OjA ^ Re : Ne w MA C Airpor t Securit y Directiv e Date : Novembe r 16 , 200 1 At th e Novembe r

14 , 200 1 Commissio n Meetin g th e MA C approve dane w Airpor t Securit y Directive . Attache di s acop y o f thi s ne w Directive . I t

i s als o availabl e o n MAC' s we b sit e at th e followin g address : www.massaeronautics.org . G o to Fil e Transfer s - Downloa dMA C Files , an dchoos e th e fil e labele dMA C AD-001a.pdf. Thi s ne w Directiv e i s intende dt o cance l an dreplac e th e on e issue db y th e MA C o n Octobe r 2 , 2001 . It

wa s initiate dafte

r receivin g commen t

fromijian y o f

yo u at th e specia l Airport

Security meetin g conducte db y th e MA C o n Octobe r 10 , 2001 . A s promise db y m e durin g tha t meeting , I me t

withth e Massachusett s Airport Manager s Assobiatio n (MAMA ) an d severa l othe r

representative s includin g AOP A t o develo p thi s ne w document . Pleas e rea dth e documen t carefully . On e o f

th e bigges t

change s fromth e ol don e i s that airport s hav e bee n classifie dint o on e o f thre e categories . Dependin g o n th e clas s o f airport , you wil l se e tha t som e securit y measure s ar e mandatory , whil e other s ar e onl y recommended , an dsom e other s ma y no t b e require dat

all . On e ite mrequire dfor

al l airport s i s th e us e o f

I D badge s for

anyon e base dat

th e airpor t

tha t i s authorize dt o ente r

th e Aircraf t Operatin g Are a(AOA) . Pleas e not e tha t th e MA C wil l provid e eac hairport wit hI D badges , i f

needed , at

n o cos i t o th e airport . Th e MA C staf f i s currentl y worldngwitl j tbe.MAMA, ^ develo p astandar dE D badg e format . Onc e completed , th e MA C wil l cont^(jt}eSeh-.'airpbr t an dbegi n th e "badging " process . I n th e meantim e yo u wil l receive , unde r

separat e coyer , a n applicatio n fo r requestin g th e MA C t o develo p I D Badge s fo r you r airport . Th e applicatio n wil l requir e you , t o attac halis t o f base daircraf

t owners . A s yo u know , thi s lis t i s alread y require dby MA C regulation s [70 2 CM R5.04:(3)(f)] . Pleas e b e read y t o submi t a n update dcop y o f

thi s base daircraf

t lis t with you r application . Th e deadlin e fo r submittin g th e applicatio n i s Decembe r 31 , 2001 . If yo u hav e an y question s o r comments , pleas e cal l m e at (617 ) 973-8881 .