Tourism & Gaming:

So what got into Nevada 's gaming regulators last week?

Members of the state Gaming Control Board spent more than two hours on three separate licensing requests, sending one of them forward to the Nevada Gaming Commission with a split vote recommending approval, one with a unanimous recommendation of denial and a third referred back to its staff before members could make what in all likelihood would have been a no vote.

Although it was painful to watch, the three-member board of Chairman Dennis Neilander and members Mark Clayton and Randall Sayre got it right based on the reactions of most meeting observers. And that speaks well of a board that has come under some fire for not intervening on some other high-profile controversies like the management of the Tropicana.

The three cases the board reviewed last week didn't have high profiles, but they did involve some philosophical discussions worthy of note.

One case involved Francis Yiu Ming Wat , who was seeking a license to be an independent agent to operate junkets to visit Nevada casinos. The Control Board normally lists and approves independent agents, posting them as information items on each agenda, but the chairman can call any individual forward if there's any indication of past trouble.

For Wat , trouble seemed to follow him like a losing streak.

With every question posed by regulators to the Hong Kong native who operates Taipan Vacations Inc., there was a response that troubled board members.

Those who have been through the thorough application and investigation process say it is one of the most exhausting ordeals they've ever experienced. Attorneys recommend that any past indiscretions be disclosed by applicants because eventually the investigators will find them. A failure to disclose arouses suspicion and becomes part of a record that could be indicative of deceit.

During Wat 's appearance, the three board members found license suspensions from other gaming venues, unresolved lawsuits, unpaid tax complaints and past legal trouble involving his wife. During the hearing, regulators told Wat something about his wife that he didn't even know – that she had been accused of diverting money from a customer to her personal bank account.

Wat responded that he didn't understand some of the details the investigators were asking for.

"In my three decades with the Control Board," Sayre said, "I have never seen a more problematic application as this."

The board unanimously recommended denial.

The other case involved Angelo Stamis, a food and beverage manager at Jerry's Nugget, a family-owned casino in North Las Vegas .

Stamis , now 73, was licensed as a key employee at Jerry's Nugget in the 1960s. But in 1975, he admitted that he was part of a group that tried to cheat at blackjack at Caesars Palace by using prearranged card decks.

Stamis admitted his role and authorities revoked his license.

Five years later, regulators allowed Stamis to manage a restaurant at Jerry's Nugget and by 1988 he worked his way up food and beverage manager. Two years later, he had the confidence to seek reinstatement of his gaming license. The Control Board voted 2-1 to recommend reinstatement, but it was clear that the five-member Nevada Gaming Commission had reservations. Rather than risk being rejected, Stamis asked that regulators withhold the request.

That's where things have stood for 18 years. Until last Thursday.

With longtime gaming attorney and former regulator Frank Schreck at his side, Stamis made his case for the return of his gaming license. And just like in 1990, the Control Board voted 2-1 in his favor with Clayton voting in opposition.

The decision boiled down to a philosophical question: Can somebody who has committed the ultimate sin against the industry – attempting to cheat a fellow licensee – be rehabilitated and trusted? Or, is it once a cheat, always a cheat?

Both Clayton and Sayre noted their misgivings.

"This was a tough one," Sayre said. "This was a dangerous application to file and it took courage to move forward on it. Now, I'm going to put my faith in your last 30 years."

Clayton wasn't convinced, noting that cheating a fellow licensee was the ultimate infraction and a mistake that couldn't be forgiven.

Now, it will be up to a different five-member board to determine whether Stamis will get his license back, something he wants so that he can coach his sons who are ready to inherit the family business.

The third request involved Henderson -based Coxman Gaming with manager Chet Cox seeking a slot machine route license to manage a collection of seven restricted locations, those that have 15 or fewer slot machines in convenience stores and bars.

Regulators have said there is a vast chasm in the amount of information that needs to be disclosed between the restricted and the nonrestricted license and Cox , who has been a restricted licensee for several years, found out just how knowledgeable you have to be about the regulatory process to go for the nonrestricted license.

When the board seemed poised to reject Cox 's request, they offered him an out – to request that the matter be referred back to staff so that he could update his application and have it considered at a later date.

In Other Tourism News:

Las Vegas -specific news coming out of the airline that is the second-busiest carrier at McCarran International Airport.Low among priorities: If you read through last week's report on US Airways Media Day, you didn't see a lot of

Probably the biggest reason is that since the old US Airways and America West Airlines merged in 2005, the company has de-emphasized some of the hubs the two carriers had.

Phoenix was always the center of America West's universe, but Las Vegas received plenty of attention because the airline would use its fleet during the day in Phoenix and, taking advantage of Southern Nevada 's 24-hour lifestyle, fly to McCarran at night.

The old US Airways hubs were Charlotte, N.C. ; Philadelphia and Pittsburgh . When the companies merged, the new US Airways said it would keep all five hubs in play.

Three years later, the company has pulled back considerably from Pittsburgh and has placed less focus on Las Vegas . Not only were several flights cut at Pittsburgh but the company transferred hundreds of employees from there. Today, Pittsburgh isn't too happy with US Airways.

Las Vegas shouldn't be either.

US Airways is pulling back Las Vegas flights at a dramatic rate. From January to February, the airline reduced flights in and out of McCarran by 3.8 percent, with an average of 8 1/2 daily flights stricken from the schedule. It's been part of a disturbing trend that has occurred gradually over the last year.

In February, there were 17.3 percent fewer flights and 19 percent fewer seats on those flights than there were in February 2007. That's an average 45 flights a day less than there were a year ago.

When asked about the decline, US Airways executives said the decision to cut flights was the result of higher fuel costs. In essence, the company is saying they can do better not flying some of its night schedule than coming into Las Vegas partially empty.

Meanwhile, US Airways is plowing ahead with the development of its international routes, banking on them being more profitable because of the abundance of low-cost competition flying domestically.

Airline executives have decided that Philadelphia will be the company's primary gateway to Europe but there would be a few flights from Charlotte . They reasoned that since most of their customers are west of Philadelphia customers would be willing to connect through the Philadelphia airport, where US Airways has had notorious baggage handling problems and delays. That, they said, makes more sense than routing passengers back through Phoenix or Las Vegas .

OK, fair enough. Using that logic, one would think it also would make sense for flights to Asia to be routed through Phoenix or Las Vegas .

But that won't be the case. When US Airways received permission last year to fly to China , it announced a route between Philadelphia and Beijing , betting on East Coast business travelers to buy most of the tickets.

Executives also said they may consider flights to Europe or Asia from Phoenix in the future, but that probably won't happen until at least 2010 after US Airways starts taking delivery of some new long-range jets.

Although executives said they would look at Las Vegas in the future, it's clear that the company considers it a low priority.

One would think that with all the appeal Las Vegas has as an international tourism destination — especially with the weakness of the dollar giving foreign visitors more bang for their buck in the United States — that an airline with such an established presence here like US Airways would want to take advantage.

With all the international marketing the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority will be doing, filling planes with conventioneers and leisure travelers or with curious visitors wanting to get a look at Las Vegas before they head to the East Coast should make plenty of money.

Federal Aviation Administration announced a record Southwest Airlines for operating 46 of its jets without performing mandatory inspections for fuselage metal fatigue cracks, Southwest immediately went on the defensive.Southwest on the defensive: When the $10.2 million fine was going to be leveled against

Chief executive Gary Kelly said he ordered an investigation to determine exactly what happened, but here's what occurred based on comments by Kelly and the FAA:

In 2004, the FAA issued an airworthiness directive after a flight attendant on an Aloha Airlines Boeing 737 jet was killed when an inflight depressurization through a metal fatigue crack tore the skin off the plane on April 28, 1988. The jet made a miraculous emergency landing in Maui saving the lives of the 94 people on board.

The airworthiness directive requires that some Boeing 737 models be inspected every 4,500 flight cycles, which for Southwest usually runs about a year and a half.

Southwest has 194 Boeing 737-300 jets that, as of Dec. 31, had an average age of 16.7 years.

Last March, Southwest discovered through an internal audit that it had not inspected 46 of its jets on time, and the company reported itself to the FAA. After the error was discovered, Kelly said the airline hired a Boeing consultant and went back and inspected the 46 planes. The inspection, which took eight days, found six planes with cracks that needed repairs. The Boeing expert said the cracks were minimal and that at no time did Southwest operate any planes unsafely.

But the FAA said Southwest continued to operate some of those 46 planes on an additional 1,451 flights after it knew the planes had to be inspected and that, the agency said, justified a $10 million fine. The other $200,000 in fines was assessed for missing the deadline in the first place.

What remains unclear is why the FAA didn't demand that the 46 planes be grounded until the inspections were completed. That issue may be a part of a bigger problem involving the question of whether FAA regulators are too cozy with the airlines they oversee. Congressional subcommittees are expected to take up that issue in the weeks ahead.

Kelly said the FAA concurred with Southwest's plan once the matter was reported and airline officials figured the issue was resolved. He said he was surprised to learn about the proposed FAA procedures allow.$10.2 million fine and it's expected the airline will appeal it within the 30-day window

"Again, our interpretation of the guidance that we got from the FAA at the time was that we were in compliance with all laws and regulations," Kelly said in a prepared statement. "I think the FAA has a different view of that today. That's something that we're investigating as well, but the important point is that at no time were we operating in an unsafe manner and I think our history proves that."