Gates go up at Montrose airport

MONTROSE — Months after JetAway Aviation’s on-airport access was indefinitely suspended, a fence and gate to physically restrict access (and to meet federal standards) has been installed.

Commissioners revoked the access in March, after thrice temporarily suspending it. The decision came after JetAway didn’t submit the access application required by the county, and tried to pay $250 for access. The county said JetAway’s letter of application was not an appropriate substitute for the access permit application.

It also claims JetAway must pay far more for an access permit agreement (about $75,000), to bring it more in line with what comparable on-airport businesses pay — something JetAway disputes.

In March, the board of commissioners opened bidding for the fence, because, Montrose Regional Airport’s aviation director said at the time, of Transportation Security Administration requirements that the county control access to the air operations area.

The fence was completed June 24, the county said. Access is via key.

Another business, Western Skyways, operates on the same property as JetAway. The commissioners did not revoke Western Skyways’ access, but said that company needed to also obtain an access permit.

Montrose County Commissioner Gary Ellis said he did not believe allowing Western Skyways access while denying it to JetAway was unfair.

“Western Skyways has a different operation entirely,” Ellis said. “Their access is based on their access as an entity. ... They stand alone. That is how the off-airport agreement is written.”

Ellis said access permit negotiations with Western Skyways were ongoing.

“The county really wants to resolve this. We think it’s important they be operating with their access agreement in place. As long as they’re in the process and working in good faith, we give them temporary access,” he said.

The county sent a letter to the Federal Aviation Administration last Friday with a proposed access fee for Western Skyways. Ellis said the county is seeking FAA comments on the letter.