BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, DC

) In the matter ofthe application of ) ) WINGS AIRWAYS INC. ) DOCKET DOT-OST-2010-0023 ) For a certificate ofpublic convenience) And necessity under 49 USC 41102 )

REPLY OF WINGS AIRWAYS INC. TO CORRESPONDENCE OF AIR EXCURSIONS, LLC and ALASKA SEAPLANE SERVICES LLC. DATED MARCH 15,2010

Communications with respect to this document should be addressed to: Holly Johnson Wings Airways 2 Marine Way #175

Juneau, AK 99801 (907) 586-6275 holly@wingsairways.com

March 29, 2010BEFORE THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, DC
) In the matter ofthe application of ) ) WINGS AIRWAYS ) DOCKET DOT-OST-2010-0023 ) For a certificate ofpublic convenience) And necessity under 49 USC 41102 ) )

I REPLY OF WINGS AIRWAYS INC. TO CORRESPONDENCE OF AIR EXCURSIONS, LLC and ALASKA SEAPLANE SERVICES DATED MARCH 15,2010

Wings Airways, (Airways), hereby replies once again to the untimely, unsubstantiated and dilatory objections written by HankMyers and purportedly submitted by Craig Loken ofAlaska Seaplane Service, LLC, (ASS), and Michael Loverink ofAirExcursions, LLC, (AirX). Furthermore, Airways objects to the Department's acceptance ofMyer's untimely petitions and objections. None ofthe four objections filed by Myers in this docket, two on behalfofASS and two on behalfofAirX, have been submitted in a timely fashion and none ofthe four objections have been signed by those persons purporting to have submittedthem. Furthermore, Airways has not received copies the two most recent objections; but had to find them on the www.regulations.gov website. BothASS and AirX provide poor excuses for the late-filed objections and then neither signatory authored, signed nor submitted the objections. We are submitting our comments within a 10 day period ofdiscovering the second objections onthe above website. The Department has rules and guidelines in these proceedings and all parties offering comment should follow those rules.

It is obvious to Airway's owners and should be obvious to the Department that Hank Myers has authored and submitted all four ofthe dilatory objections. Myer's name appears as the author/submitter on each ofthe pdfdocuments filed. Airway's owners, being familiar with Myers, having worked both sides ofregulatory issues with him and knowing he enjoys beingpaid by the word, objects to the unwarranted claims, the conspiracy theories and unsubstantiated allegations Myers has written on behalfofhis clients. Airways will provide some examples.

Inthe first paragraph ofthe AirX objection Myers states, "In its answer to the Application of Airways, AirEx showedthatAirways does not have access to thefive aircraft it claims in its application

... " 

### And again, in the second paragraph ofthe ASS objection Myers states, "To begin with, Seaplanes' concern thatAirwaysdoes nothavepossession andcontrol of aircraft listed in their application is true. AlthoughAirways certified underpenalty of perjury they that have five specific wheeledaircraft in their fleet, it now agrees that it doesn'tpossess or control those aircraft. "
Myers cannot show the Department that Airways "claimed it had" or "possessed and controlled five wheeled aircraft" in its fleet as Myers purports and misconstrues. In its initial application, Airways was and continues to be forthright with the Department. (See Airways' Application 

### # f., 

### #j., 

### # n., Appendix F and Appendix L) What Airways clearly said was, "The reasoning and purpose behind this application

... is multi-facetedand in largepart a defensive strategy toprotect the current markets servedbyAJA shoulda disruption occur, toprotect the jobs of current Wings of Alaska employees shoulda disruption occur, to keep thefive Wings Airline Services Capstone equippedaircraftserving the markets shoulda disruption occur and

... Theprevious owners of AJA are also owners ofWings Airline Services

... that owns and leases to AlA the entire fleet of aircraft currently utilizedby Wings of Alaska in SoutheastAlaska. The aircraft leases betweenAJA and Wings Airline Services are scheduledto terminate March 31, 2010.
Myers assertions in both objections that Airways "claimed" it controlled and possessed five wheeled aircraft under "penalty ofperjury" is typical Myers sophistry at its highest and should be summarily dismissed by the Department.

As Myers speculates on the relations between the companies identified in the Airways' application, he continues to make statements and allegations that have no basis in fact. For example Myers states, "When theAirways certificate application wasfiled, Wings Airline Services was negotiating a new aircraft lease deal withAlaskaJuneauAeronautics." Myers has absolutely NO knowledge to make such an allegation. In fact Airways is told by the principal

owner ofWings Airline Services, a party to any negotiations between AJA and Airline Services, that Myer's statement is not factual. Myers goes on to have a problem with Airways' Appendix K and L, stating, "The application goes so far as to list thefinancials of Airline Services as a supporting document. The Departmentshouldrequire a list of shareholders ofWings Airline Services, not only to comply with 204 requirements, buttojudge the veracity of Airways
statement that, "WingsAirwavs is notprivy to copies of current lease agreements [between Airline Services andAJA " as they are between two private entities. "Once again, Myers is attempting his dilatory tactics requesting the Department to expand the requirements of204.3(f)(5) and 204.3(g)(4)(ii). 

### In its initial application, Airways went well beyond what is required in 204.3(f) and (g) as respects shareholders, directors, officers, key personnel, experience, expertise, responsibilities and identifying the only Airways' shareholder who owns a substantial interest in another business engaged in aeronautics.
Meyer spends nearly halfhis 8 page AirX objection raising conspiracy theories and then argues with himselfover the probability or validity ofthe theories he has raised. He raises similar issues in the ASS objection stating, "Next, the Department must determine what collusive or control relationships exist betweenAirways andAJA." 

### In the AirX objection Myers states, "The lack of definitive information about the three-way relationship among the applicantAirways, the already certificatedcarrierAJA, andthe aircraft leasing businessAirline Services leads to a couple of plausible motivations. The timing of theAirways application, and its repeated reference to the stallednegotiations betweenAirline Services andAJA, andthe contingent nature of its request wouldleadone to believe that the realpurpose of the application is to gain better lease terms for commonly ownedAirline Servicesfrom AJA." And then Meyer argues against that theory by stating, "The fact thatAJA has denied it is giving up the five aircraft, combined with the continued pursuitof certification byAirways seems to weigh against this theory. "
Wings Airways and Wings Airline Services can assure the Department that the real purpose of the Application is as stated in the initial Application and NOT to gain better lease terms. Nor do any ofMyers speculative theories have any basis in fact. Airways can also assure the Department, under "penalty ofperjury", that there are absolutely no "collusive or control relationships" existing between Airways and AJA. They are two very distinct, separately managed entities.

Then Meyer goes on to offer yet another speculative theory which holds absolutely no merit; "An alternatepossibility is that this application is simply the result of cooperation among Airways, AJA andAirlines Services toprovide a lowest costresolution of all of the claims, counter-claims andbusinessplans of the three entities. According to statements made by Airways, Airline Services leases aircraft toAJA, butwouldlike to lease the same aircraft to Airways 

### if AJA ceases service in Juneau. AJA serves Juneau, but itsprimarypool of business is in the lower-48, includingEssentialAir Service in three states. Aprincipal investor inAJA owns the Juneau hangar jointly usedbyAJA andAirways. Airline Services has suedAJA over the
terms of its current leases, andone of the aircraft was returned. A third Caravan usedbyAJA

was returned to its leaseholder (Kenmore Aviation). It appears thatAJA is scaling back its operations in Juneau andmay bepreparing to abandon service there. Byhaving apreferred
successor, AJA can coordinate a changeover of service. Airlines Services wouldhave its preferredlease, andapossible settlement to the law suits between AJA andAirline Services. This theory of cooperation among the three entities is underscoredby the increasednumber of AJA employees who have left to assistAirways inpreparation for certification, andthefact thatAJA has not objectedto the certification of Airways. "It's difficult to even address Myers' manage-a-tois theory. No matter, this theory is profoundly false. As Airways stated in its Application, there are disagreements between the parties. Airways can assure the Department there is NOT any collusive, clandestine, or cooperative agreement to ease Airways into and AJA out ofthe Southeast Alaska market as Myers theorizes. These are challenging times for all parties involved, primarily resulting from the Bankruptcy filing in Oregon discussed in Airways' initial application. There are a number ofgood, longterm and valuable employees who have left Wings ofAlaska and their departure is a significant loss to the commuter operations ofSoutheast Alaska. As Airways stated in its Application, ifthe operations ofAJA experience a service disruption due to lack ofaircraft, employees or both, Airways, with timely certification, will be able to fill that significant void, which will occur in the markets, as well as protecting a significant number ofvaluablejobs.
Airways has reviewed the projections objected to by Myers, believes they are very attainable and stands by them. Given the current environment, Airways anticipates the traffic and revenue projected in its application to be realistic. Furthermore, Airways has analyzed and accurately depicted its anticipated expenses in its initial application as the current and expected expense on airport float docks, downtown waterfront, hangar expense, accounting, computer, drug program, etc have been identified. Airways' owners are not paid by the word to refute Myers speculative theories, unsubstantiated allegations and dilatory maneuvers. Airways has provided the Department complete and
accurate data addressing all requirements set forth in paragraphs (a) through (v) ofsection 204.3. Through its application, Airways has clearly demonstrated it has exceptional expertise in its ownership and key personnel. Over the last seven years, Airways has proven it can operate a safe and profitable airline. Airways has the fmancial fitness and demonstrated responsibility to successfully operate a commuter airline inthe markets proposed, markets the Wings Airways'

owners have served safely and successfully for many years. Because Myers and his clients want to delay Airways certification should not be reason for further delay. Should the Department require additional or clarifying data to support a fitness determination; Airways will provide 

### itto the Department, immediately upon request. The Department may also contact Robert Jacobsen, principal owner ofWings Airline Services for additional data to support a fitness determination.

This reply to Hank Myers' objections on behalfofhis clients Alaska Seaplane Service, LLC and Air Excursions, LLC has been written by and submitted on behalfofWings Airways owners.Wherefore. Wings Airways respectfully requests the Department make a fmal determination in this proceeding by awarding Wings Airways certification for commuter air carrier authority.
Respectfully submitted,

Holly A. Johnson, President
Wings Airways Inc 2 Marine Way, Suite 175 Juneau, Alaska 99801 (907) 586-6275 holly@wingsairways.comCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify a copy ofthe foregoing reply ofWings Airways Inc has been served this 29th day ofMarch 2010, upon all persons listed on the Certificate ofService within the Wings Airways Inc. application.

Holly A. Johnson