f^ 

US.D«partnw<nl of 

Ttansportcition 

Office of the Se^ rtetory 

ofTronsportatioi 

rfiiptH/MiONS-

- ' 0 'c' O U: U'M 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

September 1I2OII 

Mark Lovin 

Director of Alviation 

Pueblo Memorial 

31201 Bryan 

Pueblo, CO 81001 

Airport 

Circle 

Dear Mr. Lo\ m: 

I would lilie to update you on the essential air service situation at Pueblo and give you 

an opportunity to submit any comments if you wish. In anticipation of the end of Great 

Lakes' currert contract on January 31, 2012, the Department issued Order 2011-8-18, 

August 16, 2{ 11, to solicit proposals from all interested air carriers to provide EAS at 

Pueblo for a rew two-year term begirming February 1. At this stage, we would normally 

ask for your f references for various carrier and service options. However, in response to 

that order. Great Lakes, the incumbent, was the only carrier to submit a proposal. 

Nonetheless, we want to give you an opportunity to submit any final comments for the 

record that you may have. A copy of Great Lakes' proposal may be accessed online at: 

http://www.re gulations.gov by entering DOT-OST-1999-6589 in the "Enter Keyword or 

ID" section. 

Great Lakes' proposal offers two options, each for a two-year period. The first option 

is two nonsto]) round trips each weekday and weekend to Denver (12 per week), the level 

of service thai the Department is currently subsidizing, for a proposed annual subsidy of 

$1,592,276, oimpared to the current annual subsidy of $1,299,821. The second option is 

three nonstop round trips each weekday and weekend to Denver (18 per week), for an 

annual subsidy of $1,988,345. We are Currently reviewing Great Lakes' compensation 

requirements. Order 2011-8-18 requested 12 nonstop round trips per week with 15-seat 

or larger aircraft or 18 nonstop round trips per week on aircraft with less than 15 

passenger seal s. Great Lakes' three- round-trip pattern exceeds our requested level of 

service. 

Please note 

reflect the aver 

prorated porticpn 

that the average passenger fares shown in the proposal do not necessarily 

age local fare Pueblo pdssengers would actually pay. but, rather, reflect a 

of the total ticket price, e.g.. the Pueblo - Denver portion of a Pueblo -
Denver - Washington, D.C. ticket that Great Lakes would realize. Also, the fare shown 

is net of ceitain charges such as Federal transportation security fees, excise or ticket 

taxes, and Passenger Facility Charges. Of course, carriers have the discretion to charge 

fares they deem appropriate, and the passenger fares presented in this proposal have been 

developed ibr subsidy rate computation purposes only. 

that 

You 

only, and 

better meet 

subsidized 

full comperjsation 

should also note that the schedules that the carrier has submitted are illustrative 

they may make schedule changes to reflect changing conditions, e.g., to 

shifting connecting bank times at the hub. The Department expects 

air carriers to maintain well-timed and well-spaced flights in order to ensure 

kevin.schle 

We ask that you submit any comments you may have as soon as possible, but in any 

case no late • than October 12, 2011. We will carefully consider your comments before 

we submit a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for a decision. Should you have 

any questions or need additional time to draft your comments, please let us know. 

Please send your comments via e-mail to EAS@dot.gov or by fax to 202-366-7638. 

you have any questions, please feel free to contact Kevin Schlemmer of my staff at 

imer@dot.gov or 202-366-3176. 

If 

131 

A similai letter has been sent to the Pueblo City Manager. 

Sincerely, 

Dennis J. DeVany 

Chief, Essential Air Service