1 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC Star Marianas Air, Inc., Complainant ,

v. Docket No. _________ A.B. Won Pat International Airport Authority, Guam, Respondent. /
TITLE 14 CFR PART 16 COMPLAIN T Star Marianas Air, Inc. ( “ SMA ”), by and through undersigned counsel, hereby files a Complaint pursuant to Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 16, against the A.B. Won Pat International Airport Authority, Guam (the “Authority” ) and in support thereof, states as follows:
THE PARTIES
1. Complainant SMA is a corporation incorporated in the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands (“CNMI”) , which operates as a Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) certificated air carrier unde r FAA certificate no.: 1SMA230M. A copy of the certificate
is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. SMA is located at Hanger 1, Tinian International Airport, Tinian, MP 96952 and operates air charters between Tinian, Saipan, Rota, and Guam.
2. Respondent Authority is a public corporation incorporated in Guam and is the sponsor of an FAA assisted airport , namely the Guam International Airport (the “Airport ”)

. The Authority is located at P.O. Box 8770 Tamuning, Guam, GU 96931 and may be served through its counsel, Janalynn Cruz Damian, Esq. , Calvo Fisher & Jacob, 259 Martyr Street, Suite 100, Hagatna, Guam 96910 ; e - mail: jdamian@calvofisher.com

.2 JURISDICTION AND STA NDING
3. Jurisdiction to hear this matter is conferred upon the FAA by Congress through the Airport and Airway Improvement Act of 1982 (“AAIA”), 49 U.S.C. § 47101 et seq . The AAIA authorizes the FAA to grant federal funds to public airports for construction and other improvement projects via the AAIA’s Airpo rt Improvement Program (“AIP”). Recipients of such AIP grants must provide written assurances that they will comply with numerous statutory requirements (“Grant Assurances”). 49 U.S.C. § 47107(a ). The FAA has jurisdiction to hear this Complaint and to order the Respondent to comply with its Grant Assuranc es pursuant to 14
C.F.R. Part 16.
NATURE OF THE CASE A ND BACKGROUND
4. In September 1975, Guam Public Law 13

- 57 created the Authority. The Authority was strictly the Guam International Air Terminal facility operator while the U.S. Navy operated the runways and conducted airway operations for all aircraft operators. In 1974, the Authority was granted joint use of the airfield under a Joint Use Agreement with the U.S. Navy. In April 1995, the Base Realignment and Closure Act of 1993 slated the NAS Brewer Fiel d for closure. Upon base closure, all runways became the operating responsibility of the Authority. Furthermore, the Authority became certified as the licensed civil aviation airport operator for Guam. One of the funding programs for the airport is the AIP

. The source of the AIP funds is the Airport and Airway Trust Fund (“AATF”). Congress created the AATF in 1970 to provide funding for aviation capital investment programs. The AIP funds are discretionary and distributed each year by the FAA and are conditi oned upon an airport sponsor’s adherence to the Grant Assurances. 49 U.S.C.A. § 48101, et seq

.3 5. As the sponsor for federal grants received by the Airport as part of the AIP, the Authority is obligated to comply with federal law and related FAA sponsor assur ances. 6. After accepting an AIP grant, the Authority’s assurances are a binding obligation between it and the federal government.
7. The Authority has breached the Grant Assurances by (a ) providing preferential
and exclusive airport property rights to a dir ect competitor of SMA , and (b) making changes to a
FAA

- approved airport layout plan.
SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS
8. The Airport has two terminals, the main terminal , and the commuter terminal (the “Terminal”)

. 9. Cape Air has access to the main terminal at the Airport and is the only commuter
airline providing commuter flights between the CNMI an d Guam, namely routes between Saipan, Rota, and Guam.
10. All seats on Cape Air flights in this region are effectively United Airlines seats, as Cape Air flight reservations for this region can only be made through United Airlines.
11. The Terminal at the Airport is being used by United Airlines’ human resources department, which does not require airside access.
12. While t he FAA

- approved Airpor t Layout Plan (“ALP”) designates the Terminal as a commuter terminal, the Authority has effectively designate d it as office space
. 13. Since 2012, SMA has attempted to gain access to the Airport so it could provide

cargo, on - demand passenger, and commuter fli ghts between Guam and the CNMI

.4 14. SMA is presently limited to cargo and on

- demand passenger flights and must arrange for third party handlers at an extra cost because the Authority has denied it self

- access to the Airport.
15. Without the use of the Terminal, SMA cannot obtain Part 135 commuter operative status because it will not have station facilities as required by PTRS Code 1635.
16. On June 25, 2014, SMA sent a letter to the Authority requesting use of the
T erminal , which set forth, among other things, that the use of the Terminal by United Airlines’ human resources department violates Grant Assurances 22, 23, and 24 , and a request to meet with the Authority to work towards resolving said violation

. A copy of the June 25, 2014 letter is
attached hereto as Exhibit “B ”.
17. On July 22, 2014, SMA sent a second letter to the Authority requesting use of the Terminal, which again set forth the violations and a request to meet to resolve same

. A copy of
the July 22, 2014 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “C ”.
18. On July 25, 2014, the Authority replied to SMA ’s correspondence to organize a meeting. A copy of the July 25, 2014 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “D”.
19. On July 31, 2014, SMA replied in o rder to organize a meeting and to inform the Authority that the use of the Terminal by United Airlines’ human resources department also violates Grant Assurance 29, as the area designated by the Authority for the United Airlines’
human resourc es department is different than the designation set fo rth in the ALP , and the Authority implemented this change without FAA consent

. A copy of the July 31, 2014 letter is
attached hereto as Exhibit “E ”.5 20. On August 5, 2014 , SMA sent a letter to the FAA Airports Division Office requesting that the FAA investigat e the Authority due to its breaches of the Grant Assurances. A copy of the August 5, 2014 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “F ”.
21. On August 19, 2014, SMA and the Authority met to discuss a resolution so that SMA may immediately commence commuter operations from the Airport.
22. On August 20 , 2014, SMA sent the Authority a Notice of Intent to Conduct
Scheduled Commuter and On

- Demand Operation at the A.B. Won Pat International Airport Commuter Terminal, Guam with a detailed proposed flight schedule and requirements for operating facilities. A copy of the August 20, 2014 notice is attached hereto as Exhibit “G ”.
23. On August 28, 2014, the Authority sent SMA a letter stating that SMA can use the Yellow Cargo Building (the “YCB”) as an interim location, but m ade no mention of the
Terminal. A copy of the August 28, 2014 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “H ”.
24. On September 2, 2014, SMA’s reply letter stated that : 1) using the YCB as an interim location still meant space for SMA’s operational facilities is an i ssue as there was no specified resolution timeframe , 2) using the YCB would put SMA at a disadvantage with its competitor Cape Air, and 3) the Authority continues to erroneously allow United Airlines ’ non aeronautical use of the Terminal. A copy of the September 2, 2014 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “I ”.
25. On September 16 , 2014, SMA sent a letter to the FAA Western

- Pacific Region Airports Division requesting that the FAA investigate the Authority due to its breaches of the
Grant Assurances. A copy o f the September 16, 2014 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “J ”.6 26. On September 22, 2014, the Authority sent a letter to SMA stating that the
Terminal was closed for security reasons and no aircraft could be parked on the adjoining apron. A copy of the Sep tember 22, 2014 letter is attached hereto as Exhibit “K ”.
27. Despite this statement, SMA aircraft have been directed to park on the adjoining apron of the Terminal and other third

- party aircraft regularly operate from said apron
. 28. The YCB, a cargo building, does not comply with the requirements for a passenger terminal, including the absence of certain facilities, including but not limited to, access for handicapped persons. See 49 C

. F

. R Part 27.
29. To date, the Authority continues to refuse SMA ’s requests to use the Terminal for
SMA’s aeronautical operations.
30. The Authority also continues to permit United Airlines the exclusive use of
A irport property for non - aeronautical activity in the Te rminal

. 31. SMA is forced to acquire the services of third party ground handlers for all its operations at significant additional cost because the Authority continues to deny SMA self

access at the Airport, while Cape Air has been given self

- access at the main terminal to conduct its operations, including the ground handling of its flights with its own staff.
32. The Authority has thus taken numerous steps, whether by action or inaction, resulting in unfair and discriminatory economic treatment against SMA

. SMA HAS BEEN DIRECTLY AND SUBSTANTIALLY HARMED
33. SMA is entitled to institute this Part 16 Complaint because it was, is and continues to be directly and substantially affected by the Authority’s noncompliance with legal duties under the AIP and applicable federal law.7 COUNT I (Vi olation of Grant Assurance No. 22 : Economic Nondiscrimination )
34. SMA re - alleges paragraphs 1 through 3 3 as if fully set forth herein.
35. Grant Assurance 22 provides that an airport sponsor must provide equal access to all companies providing aircraft services.
36. The Authority is obligat ed, as a sponsor receiving AIP funding, to make the Airport available for public use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautical activities, including commercial aeronautical activities offering ser vices to the public at the airport.
37. The Authority , by allowing the Terminal to be used for United Airlines’ human resources department instead of SMA for an aeronautical use is impeding upon SMA’s right to nondiscriminatory economic competition.
38. The Aut hority, by allowing Cape Air access to the main terminal as the only
commuter airline between the CNMI and Guam is impeding upon SMA’s right to nondiscriminatory economic competition.
39. The Authority, by requiring SMA to use the YCB as a n interim terminal is impeding upon SMA’s right to nondiscriminatory economic competition because the YCB does not comply with the requirements for a passenger terminal, including the absence of certain facilities, including but not limited to, access for handicapp ed persons. See 49 C

. F

. R Part 27.
40. As a result of the Authority’s economic discrimination, SMA’s ability to operate as a competitive and profitable business is suppressed to the benefit of Cape Air and United
Airlines.8 41. The Authority’s failure to allow SMA u se of a passenger terminal while allowing Cape Air and United Airlines access to same is a violation of Grant Assurance 22.
COUNT II (Vio lation of Grant Assurance No. 23 : Exclusive Rights )
42. SMA re - alleges paragraphs 1 through 3 3 as if fully set forth her ein.
43. Grant Assurance 23 provides that an airport sponsor cannot grant any one company the exclusive right to use the airport and its property.
44. The Authority has provided assurances that it would not permit exclusive rights for the use of the Airport by any person providing, or intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public.
45. The Authority may not, either directly or indirectly, grant or permit any person, firm, or corporation, the exclusive right at the Airport to conduct any aeronautical activities.
46. The Authority has denied SMA’s request to use the Terminal for its commuter air
carrier o perations.
47. The Authority has granted special rights or privileges to Cape Air and United Airlines, and has denied this same right to SMA

. 48. The Authority has not demonstrated that the limitation directed at SMA is necessary for the safe operation of the Airport or necessary to serve the civil aviation needs of the public.
49. The Authority’s refusal to permit SMA to use the Terminal at the Airport is a
violation of Grant Assurance No. 23.
COUNT II I (Violation of Grant Assurance No. 29: Airport Layout Plan)
50. SMA re - all eges paragraphs 1 through 3 3 as if fully set forth herein.9 51. Grant Assurance 29 provides that an airport sponsor may not make changes to airport property without the approval of the FAA.
52. The Authority has provided assurances that it would not make or permi t any changes or alterations in the A irport or any of its facilities that are not in conformity with its
FAA

- approved ALP

. 53. FAA Order 5190.6B states that a n FAA

- approved ALP is a prerequisite to the grant of AIP funds for an airport as it reflects the agreement between the FAA and the sponsor regarding the proposed allocation of airport areas to specific operational and support functions

. If the sponsor makes a change in the airport or its facilities that is not reflected in the ALP, and the FAA determines the change will adversely affect the safety, utility, or efficiency of any federally owned or leased or funded property on or off the airport, the FAA may require the airport to
eliminate the adverse effect or bear the cost of recti fying the situation

. 54. The Authority may not erect any structure or make any alteration in conflict with the plan as approved by the FAA as such change may constitute a violation of the federal obligation under Grant Assurance 29 according to FAA Order 5190. 6B

. 55. The Authority has denied SMA’s request to use the Terminal for its air carrier operations.
56. The Terminal is designated for aeronautical use only according to the ALP , yet the Authority has allowed United Airlines’ human resources department, a non

- aero nautical operation with no need for airside access, exclusive use of the Terminal.
57. The Authority’s alteration in the ALP by changing the Terminal to a human
resources office is a violation of Grant Assurance No. 29.10 LIST OF EXHIBITS
58. Pursuant to 14 C.F.R . Section 16.23(b), the documentary support for the allegations contained in this Complaint that is presently available to Complainants, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, are served concurrently with this Complaint, are incorporated herein by refere nce as though fully set forth, and are identified as follows:
Exhibit A : SMA FAA Certificate

. Exhibit B : Correspondence to the Authority, dated June 25, 2014. Exhibit C : Correspondence to the Authority, dated July 22, 2014. Exhibit D: Correspondence from Authority to SMA, dated July 25, 2014. Exhibit E : Correspondence to Counsel for the Authority, dated July 31, 2014. Exhibit F : Correspondence to FAA Airport Divisions Office, dated August 5, 2014. Exhibit G : Notice of Intent to Conduct Scheduled Commu ter and On

- Demand Operation at the A.B. Won Pat International Airport Commuter Terminal, Guam , dated August 20, 2014. Exhibit H : Correspondence from the Authority, dated August 28, 2014. Exhibit I : Correspondence to the Authority, dated September 2, 2014. Exhibit J : Correspondence to FAA Western

- Pacific Region Airports Division, dated September 16, 2014
. Exhibit K : Correspondence from the Authority, dated September 22, 2014.
CORRECTIVE ACTION
59. SMA respectfully requests that the FAA issue an order: (1) deny ing the Authority future federal AIP grants and suspending current grant fund payments for 6 months or until the violations alleged herein are rectified, whichever period is longer; and (2) requiring the Authority, within twenty ( 20 ) days of a n adverse Director’s Determination, to submit a corrective action plan demonstrating how it intends to eliminate the violations.
SECTION 16.21 CERTIF ICATION The undersigned counsel certifies that substantial and reasonable good faith efforts to
resolve thi s disputed matter informally prior to filing this Complaint have been made on behalf
of SMA and there is no reasonable prospect for timely resolution. The extensive efforts taken by
SMA to obtain resolution are detailed above and, among other efforts, incl ude: (1) sending11 numerous letters to the Authority in efforts to resolve the issues; (2) holding meetings with the Authority in efforts to resolve the issues and (3) informally requesting FAA intervention.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I have this 9th day of October 2014 served the foregoing Part 16 complaint on the following pe rsons at the following address by electronic mail :
Janalynn Cruz Damian, Esq. Calvo Fisher & Jacob 259 Martyr Street, Suite 100 Hagatna, Guam 96910 jdamian@calvofisher.com (by consent)
&
FAA Docket Clerk 9

- AWA

- AGC

- Part

- 16@faa.gov

RICHARDS & ASSOCIATES Attorneys for Star Marianas Air, Inc. 232 Andalusia Avenue, Suite 202 Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Telephone: (305) 448

- 2228 Facsimile: (305) 448

- 2229 E

- mail: rrichards@richpa.net E

- mail: jgoldstein@richpa.net

s/Richard L. Richards RICHARD L. RICHARDS Florida Bar No.: 9415 JASON GOLDSTEIN Florida Bar No.: 9111312 

# Exhibit “A”13 

# Exhibit “B”L AW OFFICES 

## R ICHARDS 

## & A SSOCIATES

Richard L. Richards * 232 Andalusia Avenue, Suite 202 Email: rrichards@r ichpa.net Coral Gables, Florida 33134 Jason Goldstein Telephone: (305) 448-2228 Email: jgoldstein@richpa.n et Facsimile: (305) 448-2229 *Board Certified in Av iation Law www.richpa.net June 25, 2014
Via Email & Facsimile No.: (671) 646-8823
A.B. Won Pat Internationa l Airport Authority, Guam c/o Mr. Charles H. Ada II, Executive Manager P.O. Box 8770 Tamuning, GU 96931 Re: Star Marianas Air, Inc. Issues Pertaining to the Non-Compliance with Federal Law regarding the A.B. Won Pat International Airport Authority, Guam
Dear Mr. Ada: This letter revises and replaces the letter se nt earlier today. Star Marianas Air, Inc. (“SMA”) has retained the law firm of Richar ds and Associates regarding its rights under applicable federal law. 1 All communications regarding th is matter should from hereon be delivered upon the undersigned a nd Timothy H. Bellas, Esq.
SMA is the holder of Air Carrier Certifi cate Number 1SMA230M as issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”). A copy of the Air Carrier Certificate is attached as Exhibit “A”. The Air Carrier Certificate allows SMA to conduc t operations including commuter operations in common carriage pursuant to Title 14 Code of Federal Regul ations (CFR) Section 119.21(a)(4) and on demand operations in common carri age pursuant to Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 119.21(a)(5). As you know, the A.B. Won Pat International Ai rport Authority, Guam (the “Authority”) is the sponsor of the international airport (“Guam International Airport”). SMA desires to immediately commence commuter and on demand ope rations at Guam International Airport’s commuter terminal. However, the commuter termin al is currently being used by United Airlines and, rather than being used for its intended purpose as a commuter terminal, it is being used for United Airlines’ human resources department. Th is is obviously problematic in that a human resource department does not require airside access and this use is preventing aeronautical activities at the Guam International Airport.

1 Richards and Associates’ representation of SMA is limited to rights afforded under applicable federal law that are enforceable by the Federal Aviation Administration. All rights of SMA as they may pertain to the laws of the Guam are exclusively represented by Timothy H. Bellas, Es q., who presently serves as SMA’s local counsel.June 25, 2014 Page 2

Moreover, as you know, the FAA provides moneta ry grants to “airpo rt sponsors,” or public agencies that own and ope rate airports, through the FAA's Airport Improvement Program, authorized under the Airport and Airway Im provement Act of 1982 (“AAIA”), 49 U.S.C. § 47101 et seq. Congress has required that grant appl ications contain certai n written assurances that an airport sponsor seeking fe deral funds will abide by a variet y of requirements. 49 U.S.C. § 47107(a). Under the AAIA, the Secretary of Tr ansportation is responsible for ensuring compliance with these assurances, 49 U.S.C. § 47107(g), and is authori zed to approve grant applications only if the airport sponsor's assuranc es are “satisfactory to the Secretary.” 49 U.S.C. § 47107(a). Accordingly, the Secretary of Trans portation has promulgated and revised a set of standardized grant assurances (“Grant Assurances”) , including the three at issue in this case.
The three Grant Assurances of concern are: Grant Assurance 22, entitled “Ec onomic Nondiscrimination”. This grant assurance requires the airpor t sponsor to make its airport available for public use “without unj ust discrimination to all types, kinds and classes of aeronautic al activities.” 64 Fed.Reg. 45,008, 45,011 (Aug. 18, 1999); 62 Fed.Reg. 29,761, 29,766 (June 2, 1997); Grant Assurance 23, entitled “Exclusive Rights,” requires the airport sponsor to assure that “[ i]t will permit no exclusive right for the use of the airport by any pe rson providing, or intending to provide, aeronautical services to the public.” 62 Fed.Reg. at 29,766. Further, the airport sponsor must agree that “it will not, either directly or i ndirectly, grant or permit any person, firm, or corporation, the exclusive right at the airport to conduct any aeronautical activities.” Id .; and Grant Assurance 24, entitled “Fee and Rental Structure,” requires an airport sponsor to assure that it “will maintain a fee and rental structure for the facilities and serv ices at the airport which will make the airport as self-sus taining as possible under the circumstances existing at the partic ular airport, taking into account such factors as the volume of tr affic and economy of collection.” 62 Fed.Reg. at 29,767. The Authority has violated each of these assurances by in effect preventing SMA, a commuter airline, from having airside access through the Guam International Airport’s commuter terminal. The FAA enforces compliance with these and other Grant Assurances by applying procedures delineated in the Rules of Practic e for Federally–Assisted Airport Enforcement Proceedings. 14 C.F.R. § 16.1(a)(1), (5). 14 C. F.R. Part 16 permits a person “directly andJune 25, 2014 Page 3

substantially affected” by an airport sponsor's alleged noncompliance with a Grant Assurance to file a formal complaint with the FAA. 14 C.F.R. § 16.23(a). However, SMA desires to resolve this matter prior to a complaint being filed. Therefore, SMA requests that the Authority grant SMA acce ss to Guam International Airport’s commuter terminal. Moreover, SMA requests a meeting with the Authority in order to have substantial and reasonable good faith efforts to resolve the fore going disputed matters informally pursuant to 14 C.F.R. Section 16.21. SMA reserves all rights, whether in law or equity. We look forward to the Authority’s swift and favorable response. Respectfully submitted,

Richard L. Richards

cc: Mr. Robert Christian, Star Marianas Air, Inc. Mr. Shaun Christian, Star Marianas Air, Inc. Jason Goldstein, Esq. Timothy H. Bellas, Esq. Ms. K.C. Yanamura – Mamager, Honolul u Flight Standards District Office Mr. Gordon Wong - FAA Honolulu Airports District Office Mr. Samuel Iskander, Airports Di vision, FAA Western-P acific RegionJune 25, 2014 Page 4

Exhibit “A”14 

# Exhibit “C”15 

# Exhibit “D”16 

# Exhibit “E”17 

# Exhibit “F”18 

# Exhibit “G”P.O. Box 520461, San Jose Village, Tinian, MP 96952

Tel.: 670

- 433

- 9989 Fax.: 670

- 433

- 9990 Web site: www.starmarianasair.com 

### Marianas Air

August 20, 2014

A.B. WON PAT International Airport Authority, Guam c/o Mr. Charles H. Ada II, Executive Manager P.O. Box 8770 , Tamuning Guam , GU 96931

SENT VIA EMAIL & Facsimile No.: (671) 646

- 8823
Notice of Intent to Conduct Scheduled Commuter and On

- Demand Operation at the A.B. Won Pat International Airport Commuter Terminal, Guam
Dear Mr. Ada : Thank you for taking time to meet with SMA ’s representati ves Tuesday . As discussed, SMA intend s to conduct scheduled commuter and on

- demand flight operati ons to and from A.B. Won Pat International Airport’s Commuter Terminal utilizing PA31

- 350 Super Chieftains; gross take

- off and landing weight 7,300 lbs, 8 or 9 passenger seat configurations

. The initial schedule for flight operations is listed below and SMA would like to commence operations by the 15 th of September at the latest. SMA expects to expand its operations to hourly arrivals and departures within 6 months after commencing operations. Accordingly, SMA will need adequate space at the commuter t erminal to conduct its operation s. Additionally, any other space that will be needed for local requirements, such as customs and agriculture inspection, will also need to be identified so that it can be incorporated into the Station Operations Manual that SMA is required by the FAA to maintain under its authority to conduct operations as an Air Carrier.

PROPOSED SCHEDULE FLIGHT
- EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 15, 2014 ROTA
- GUAM
- ROTA SCHEDULE FLIGHT ROUTES DEPARTURE ARRIVAL FREQUENCY ROP

- GUM 8:00AM 8:30AM Daily GU M

- ROP 9:00AM 9:30AM Daily ROP

- GUM 11:0AM 11:30AM Mon., Tue., Wed., Thur., Fri. GUM

- ROP 12:00NN 12:30NN Mon., Tue., Wed., Thur., Fri. ROP

- GUM 4:00PM 4:30PM Daily GUM

- ROP 5:00PM 5:30PM Daily SAIPAN
- GUAM
- SAIPAN SCHEDULE FLIGHT ROUTES DEPARTURE ARRIVAL FR EQUENCY SPN

- GUM 8:00AM 9:00AM Daily GUM

- SPN 9:30AM 10:30AM Daily SPN

- GUM 4:00PM 5:00PM Daily GUM

- SPN 5:30PM 6:30PM Daily TINIAN
- GUAM
- TINIAN SCHEDULE FLIGHT ROUTES DEPARTURE ARRIVAL FREQUENCY TIQ

- GUM 8:00AM 9:00AM Daily GUM

- TIQ 9:30AM 10:30AM Daily TIQ

- GUM 4:00PM 5:00PM Daily GUM

- TIQ 5:30PM 6:30PM DailyP.O. Box 520461, San Jose Village, Tinian, MP 96952

Tel.: 670

- 433

- 9989 Fax.: 670

- 433

- 9990 Web site: www.starmarianasair.com 

### Marianas Air
Per the FAA’s requirement, the facilities must be adequate to provide safe operating conditions for both aircraft and personnel, and SMA must be able to establish procedures for as sisting handicappe d passengers.
SMA will need access to the following at the terminal in order to meet its requirements:

1. Check

- in counters with weighing scales, electrical outlets to power computers and printers, and telephone /internet connections. 2. Ramp access for loading baggage and cargo as well as passenger boarding and deplaning. 3. An area for delivering arriving baggage 4. Adequate parking for passengers and staff at the commuter terminal SMA will also need preferential use space (approximately 400 sq. feet) to conduct fl ight dependent operations including load control, weather information, flight planning/filing, and other flight dispatch functions. Please contact me if further information would be helpful. Also please let me know when and where we can next meet.

Best regards,

Robert F. Christian Chairman Board of Directors Director of Flight Operations

cc: Mr. Shaun Christian, Star Marianas Air, Inc. Richard L. Richards, Esq. Jason Goldstein, Esq. Timothy H. Bellas, Esq. Janalynn Cruz Damian, Esq. Ms. K.C. Yanamura

– Manager, Honolulu Flight Standards District Office Mr. Ron V. Simpson

– Manager, FAA Airports Division Mr. Frank Atalig19 

# Exhibit “H”20 

# Exhibit “I”

# sr 1e **Marianas Air** 

September 2, 2014

A.B. WON PAT International Airport Authority, Guam c/o Mr. Charles H. Ada II, Executive Manager P.O. Box 8770, Tamuning Guam, GU 96931
Dear Mr. Ada, P.O. Box 520461, San Jose Village, Tinian, MP 96952

First, I want to thank you for working on the issues we have been raising for the past 2 years and most recently in our meeting August 19, regarding access to Guam's airport. SMA supports any initiative presented by GIAA that will allow self-access to conduct its commuter and on-demand air carrier activities at the A.B. Won Pat International Airport without the requirement to use third parties.
Your letter however, confirms that space for our operation remains an issue that continues to require unspecified time to resolve and ambiguous security concerns. Additionally, there is no mention of GIAA's intent to allow the use of the commuter terminal for SMA's operations and instead GIAA mentions the interim use of a portion of a cargo building as a solution.
The use of the cargo building for commuter passenger operations conducted by SMA in its efforts to bring competitive service into the Saipan Guam and Rota Guam markets, which are currently being served exclusively by UA/Cape Air, places SMA at a distinct and obvious disadvantage. SMA's customers are relegated to using a facility designed for cargo while United's Express (Cape Air) has the use of a modern passenger terminal. At the same time, GIAA has leased the commuter passenger terminal (designated on the ALP) to UA's human resources (a non-aeronautical activity) and continues to deny SMA the use of the commuter passenger terminal for its aeronautical use.
SMA recognizes that UA and GIAA have some form of residual-cost financing in place for financing the A.B. Won Pat International Airport but do not believe that the financing issues outweigh the responsibilities to comply with the sponsor's assurances. Therefore, whereas SMA is again thankful for the efforts being made by GIAA to allow SMA to obtain at least some form of self-access to the A.B. Won Pat International Airport, SMA will continue its efforts to seek an objective determination from the FAA regarding its use of the A.B. Won Pat International Airport, and GIAA's compliance with its responsibilities as the airport's sponsor.
Please contact me directly when progress is made regarding the interim use of the cargo building so that we can plan promotion of our service in the communities we serve. Sincerely,

Robert F. Christian Chairman- BOD Director of Flight Operations

Tel.: 670-433-9989 Fax.: 670-433-9990 Web site: www.starmarianasair.com

# sr ;e **Marianas Air**  P.O. Box 520461, San Jose Village, Tinian, MP 96952

cc: Mr

. Shaun Christian, Star Marianas Air, Inc. Richard L. Richards, Esq. Jason Goldstein, Esq. Timothy H. Bellas, Esq. Janalynn Cruz Damian, Esq. Ms. K.C. Yanamura- Manager, Honolulu Flight Standards District Office Mr. Ron V. Simpson- Manager, FAA Airports Division Mr. Frank Atalig

Tel.: 670-433-9989 Fax.: 670-433-9990 Web site: www.starmarianasair.com21 

# Exhibit “J”22 

# Exhibit “K”