Order: 2010-11-9

Served: November 10, 2010

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 10th day of November, 2010

 DOT-OST-1996-1902

DOT-OST-1996-1903

ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSALS

Summary

By this order, the Department is requesting proposals from carriers interested in providing 

essential air service (EAS) at Clovis and Silver City/Hurley/Deming, New Mexico (Silver City), 

for the next two-year period from May 1, 2011, through April 30, 2013, with or without subsidy. 

Proposals are due December 8, 2010. (See Appendix A for an area map.) 

Background

By Order 2009-3-3, March 6, 2009, the Department selected Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd. (Great 

Lakes) to provide 12 nonstop round trips per week from Clovis to Albuquerque or Dallas and 12 

nonstop round trips per week from Silver City to Albuquerque or Phoenix using 19-passenger 

Beech 1900-D aircraft, from May 1, 2009, through April 30, 2011, at a combined annual subsidy

rate of $2,959,451 ($1,517,277 for Clovis and $1,442,174 for Silver City). Great Lakes has 

served both communities from Albuquerque International Sunport during the entire rate term.

Request for Proposals

As the end of the current rate term approaches, we are here requesting proposals from carriers 

interested in providing service at Clovis and Silver City, with or without subsidy, to be filed no later 

than December 8, 2010. After that date, our staff will docket the proposals, thereby making them 

public. Shortly afterwards, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the communities and ask 

Essential Air Service at

CLOVIS, NEW MEXICO

SILVER CITY/HURLEY/DEMING, NEW MEXICO 

under 49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq.
- 2 -

them to submit their final comments. We will give full consideration to all proposals that are timely 

filed.1 

Interested carriers should prepare their proposals with every expectation that their initial proposals 

will represent their final and only proposals. However, we retain the discretion to negotiate 

proposals with carriers when we deem it desirable. We also retain the discretion to reject outright all 

unreasonable or unrealistic proposals and solicit a new round of proposals.

We are here providing interested carriers with some basic information to serve as guidance when 

they prepare their proposals, but we will not prescribe a precise format for their proposals. We 

expect proposals to adequately describe the service being proposed and the annual amount of 

subsidy being requested. The applicants can make their own judgments as to the level of detail 

they wish to present; however, they might want to include proposed schedules as well as 

supporting data for their subsidy requests, such as projected block hours, revenues and expenses. 

We strongly encourage clear, well-documented proposals that will facilitate their evaluation by

the affected communities and the Department.2

With respect to Clovis and Silver City, we ask that carriers submit proposals for two round trips 

per day (12 round trips per week) with 15-seat or larger aircraft to Albuquerque, Dallas/Fort 

Worth, Denver, Phoenix, or another suitable hub where numerous connections to the national air 

transportation system can be made. Service to nearby hubs should be nonstop while service to 

Denver, for example, can be nonstop or one-stop.

Both communities are guaranteed service with 15-seat or larger aircraft; however, we would also 

entertain proposals for eight- or nine-seat aircraft with an additional frequency (18 nonstop round 

trips per week) for either or both communities. If the Department receives proposals for eightor nine-seat, and the community ultimately supports the service, in effect waiving their right to 

15-seat or larger aircraft, we would consider the waiver to apply only to the carrier-selection at 

hand, i.e. we would not assume that the community would waive their rights for all time. As 

always, we will formally solicit the communities’ views on any service options we receive 

before making a long-term carrier selection decision. 

The communities and air carriers are encouraged to work together in advance of the due date for 

proposals to craft a service pattern that is desirable to the community and meets the operational 

needs of the airline. In addition, carriers should be very clear as to whether a specific 

 

1 Carriers should not expect the Department to accept late filings. In cases where a carrier proposes to provide 

essential air service without subsidy and we determine that service can be reliably provided without such 

compensation, we do not proceed with the carrier-selection case. Instead, we simply rely on that carrier’s subsidyfree service as proposed.

2 In selecting a carrier to provide subsidized essential air service, 49 U.S.C. 41733(c) (1) directs us to consider four 

factors: (1) service reliability; (2) contractual and marketing arrangements with a larger carrier at the hub; (3) 

interline arrangements with a larger carrier at the hub; and (4) community views. In addition, the Consolidated 

Appropriations Act, 2008, Public Law 110-161, provides that when selecting a carrier to provide EAS, the 

Department may consider the relative subsidy requirements, thus codifying a factor that we have considered since 

the inception of the program. Interested carriers should also be aware that our general provisions governing 

essential air service will be included in the selection order as part of our authorization of subsidy for the selected

service. Appendix C of this order contains those general provisions. 
- 3 -

community’s proposal is on a stand-alone basis, or whether it is part of a larger, inseparable 

package with other communities.

We encourage proposals that meet these requirements in an efficient manner. Carriers are also 

welcome to propose more than one service option, if they choose; they need not limit themselves 

to those requirements if they envision other, potentially more attractive service possibilities --

different hubs or length of service terms, for example -- with subsidy requirements that remain 

competitive.

New Filing Procedures

Carrier proposals should be submitted to the Department with all materials merged into a single 

document. The document will be published on Regulations.gov and each page should be 

formatted to be viewed online. 

Service and Traffic History

For the 12-month period ending August 31, 2010, the most recent period for which traffic data are 

available, Clovis averaged 6.8 enplanements per day and Silver City averaged 5.1.

3 In order to assist 

carriers in making their traffic and revenue forecasts, we have included historical traffic data in 

Appendix B.

Other Carrier Requirements

The Department is responsible for implementing various Federal statutes governing lobbying 

activities, drug-free workplaces, and nondiscrimination.4 Consequently, all carriers receiving 

Federal subsidy for essential air service must certify that they are in compliance with Department 

regulations regarding drug-free workplaces and nondiscrimination, and those carriers whose 

subsidies exceed $100,000 over the life of the rate term must also certify that they are in 

compliance with the regulations governing lobbying activities. Because the Department is 

prohibited from paying subsidy to carriers that do not submit these documents, all carriers that 

plan to submit proposals involving subsidy should be aware that the selected carrier will be 

required to complete the required certifications. Interested carriers requiring more detailed 

information regarding these requirements should contact the Office of Aviation Analysis at 

(202) 366-5903.5

Community and State Comments

The communities and state are welcome to submit comments on the proposals at any time. As 

noted earlier, however, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the civic parties and ask 

them to submit their final comments shortly after December 8, 2010, the due date for proposals.

 

3 See Appendix B for historical traffic data. Enplanements represent one-half of total origin-and-destination traffic, 

and average enplanements per day are based on 77 weekdays and weekends each quarter, except as noted.

4 The regulations applicable to these areas are: (1) 49 CFR Part 20 – New restrictions on lobbying; (2) 49 CFR Part 

21 – Nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation – Effectuation of title VI 

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964; 49 CFR Part 27 – Nondiscrimination on the basis of disability in programs and 

activities receiving or benefiting from Federal financial assistance; and 14 CFR Part 382 – Nondiscrimination on the 

basis of disability in air travel; and (3) 49 CFR Part 29 – Government-wide debarment and suspension (nonprocurement) and government-wide requirements for drug-free workplace (grants).

5 The certifications are also available on the web at http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/index.html.
- 4 -

This order is issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.56a(f) and re-delegated to the 

Director, Office of Aviation Analysis. 

ACCORDINGLY,

1. We request that carriers interested in providing essential air service at Clovis and Silver 

City/Hurley/Deming, New Mexico, for the two-year period from May 1, 2011, through April 30, 

2013, submit their proposals, with or without requests for subsidy, no later than December 8, 

2010. The proposals should be e-mailed to EAS@dot.gov, with the title: “Proposal to Provide 

Essential Air Service at Clovis (Docket DOT-OST-1996-1902) and/or Silver 

City/Hurley/Deming, New Mexico (Docket DOT-OST-1996-1903);

6

2. These dockets will remain open until further order of the Department; and

3. We will serve copies of this order on the Mayors of Clovis, Silver City, Deming, and Hurley,

the managers of Clovis Municipal Airport and Grant County Airport (serving Silver City, 

Deming, and Hurley), and the parties listed in Appendix D. 

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of this order under the Department’s 

Aviation Economic Regulations, 14 CFR 385.50, must file such petitions within ten (10) days 

after the date of service of this order.

This order will be effective immediately, and the filing of a petition for review shall not preclude 

its effectiveness.

By:

TODD M. HOMAN

Director

Office of Aviation Analysis

(SEAL)

An electronic version of this document is available at http://www.regulations.gov

 

6 Questions regarding filings in response to this order may be directed via electronic mail to Kevin Schlemmer at 

kevin.schlemmer@dot.gov or via phone at (202) 366-3176.
Appendix A

AREA MAP

This map is provided by Sabre® AirVisionTM Profit Essentials and is being used with express permission of the 

copyright holder, Sabre Airline Solutions®.
 Appendix B

 Page 1 of 2

Traffic History7

Clovis, NM (CVN)

Year Month Quarter Outbound Inbound Total

2008 9 3 191 206 397

2008 10 4 170 192 362

2008 11 4 177 175 352

2008 12 4 181 204 385

2009 1 1 163 133 296

2009 2 1 162 161 323

2009 3 1 173 177 350

2009 4 2 152 150 302

2009 5 2 146 156 302

2009 6 2 222 186 408

2009 7 3 217 208 425

2009 8 3 176 170 346

4,248

2009 9 3 159 162 321

2009 10 4 183 173 356

2009 11 4 157 175 332

2009 12 4 173 177 350

2010 1 1 176 138 314

2010 2 1 174 154 328

2010 3 1 167 149 316

2010 4 2 172 193 365

2010 5 2 213 215 428

2010 6 2 154 137 291

2010 7 3 210 194 404

2010 8 3 218 215 433

4,238

Average daily enplanements at Clovis (12-months ending 8/31/2010) – 6.88

 

7 Source – T-100 Market Report, Passengers in Scheduled Passenger Service. Great Lakes Airlines service only.

8 Average daily enplanements= total traffic for the most recent 12-month period (4,238 passengers) divided by 313 

service days divided by 2.
Appendix B

Page 2 of 2

Silver City, NM (SVC) 9

Year Month Quarter Inbound Outbound Total

2008 9 3 229 242 471

2008 10 4 243 225 468

2008 11 4 163 167 330

2008 12 4 179 178 357

2009 1 1 170 151 321

2009 2 1 143 147 290

2009 3 1 155 153 308

2009 4 2 172 162 334

2009 5 2 158 164 322

2009 6 2 150 166 316

2009 7 3 153 137 290

2009 8 3 167 179 346

4,153

2009 9 3 145 152 297

2009 10 4 153 158 311

2009 11 4 115 118 233

2009 12 4 143 136 279

2010 1 1 124 120 244

2010 2 1 122 121 243

2010 3 1 113 104 217

2010 4 2 141 127 268

2010 5 2 152 149 301

2010 6 2 136 113 249

2010 7 3 148 163 311

2010 8 3 108 116 224

3,177

Average daily enplanements at Silver City (12-months ending 8/31/2010) – 5.110

 

9 Source – T-100 Market Report, Passengers in Scheduled Passenger Service. Great Lakes Airlines service only.

10 Average daily enplanements= total traffic for the most recent 12-month period (3,177 passengers) divided by 313 

service days divided by 2.
Appendix C

Example of General Terms and Conditions for Essential Air Service

The carrier understands that it may forfeit its compensation for any flights that it does not 

operate in conformance with the terms and stipulations of the rate order, including the 

service plans outlined in the order and any other significant elements of the required 

service, without prior approval. The carrier understands that an aircraft take-off and 

landing at its scheduled destination constitutes a completed flight; absent an explanation 

supporting subsidy eligibility for a flight that has not been completed, such as certain 

weather cancellations, only completed flights are considered eligible for subsidy. In 

addition, if the carrier does not schedule or operate its flights in full conformance with the 

order for a significant period, it may jeopardize its entire subsidy claim for the period in 

question. If the carrier contemplates any such changes beyond the scope of the order 

during the applicable period of these rates, it must first notify the Office of Aviation 

Analysis in writing and receive written approval from the Department to be ensured of 

full compensation. Should circumstances warrant, the Department may locate and select 

a replacement carrier to provide service on these routes. The carrier must complete all 

flights that can be safely operated; flights that overfly points for lack of traffic will not be 

compensated. In determining whether subsidy payment for a deviating flight should be 

adjusted or disallowed, the Department will consider the extent to which the goals of the 

program are met and the extent of access to the national air transportation system 

provided to the community.

If the Department unilaterally, either partially or completely, terminates or reduces payments for 

service or changes service requirements at a specific location provided for under this order, then, 

at the end of the period for which the Department does make payments in the stipulated amounts 

or at the stipulated service levels, the carrier may cease to provide service to that specific location 

without regard to any requirement for notice of such cessation. Those adjustments in the levels of 

subsidy and/or service that are mutually agreed to in writing by the Department and carrier do not 

constitute a total or partial reduction or cessation of payment.

Subsidy contracts are subject to, and incorporate by reference, relevant statutes and 

Department regulations, as they may be amended from time to time. However, any such 

statutes, regulations, or amendments thereto shall not operate to controvert the foregoing 

paragraph.

Funds are not currently available for performance under this solicitation beyond [DATE]. 

The Government’s obligation for performance under this solicitation beyond [DATE], is 

contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for services 

can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment may arise 

for performance under this order beyond [DATE], until funds are made available to the 

Department for performance. If funds are not made available for performance beyond 

[DATE], the carrier will receive notice in writing by the Department.

All claims for payment must be submitted within 60 days of the last day of service 

provided under this order.
Appendix D

Scheduled Air Carriers, Contiguous US and Puerto Rico

Air Greco/Wings Air McCall Aviation, Michelle

Air Sunshine, Inc. Mesa Air, Michael Lotz

Air Sunshine, Mirmohammad Adili Mesaba, John Spanjers 

Air West, Inc., John Raatz Mesaba, Max Shemesh

Air Wisconsin, Annette Daly MidStar Airlines, Jeffrey Fonner

Air Wisconsin, Jim Rankin Midwest Airlines, Greg Aretakis

Airline Associates, Bill Mishk MN Aviation, Jose Maldonado 

Alaska Airlines, Jeff Cole Multi Aero, Darnea

Alaska Airlines, Sandy Sinick Multi Aero, Shane Storz

Allegiant Air, Brian Davis Northern Air Cargo, David Karp

American Airlines, Carl Nelson Northern Air Cargo, Eric Van Andel

American Eagle, Jeffrey Hartz Northwest, Tim McDonald 

Atlantic Southeast, Jon Lindlief Northwest, Aaron Murray

Atlantis Southeast, Roger Weston NYDC, Henok Araya

Aviation Technologies/Charter Air Transport OST, Brian Swanson

Bemidji Aviation, Cori Rude OST, Dennis DeVany

Bemidji Aviation, Arlen Rinkenberger OST, Kevin Adams

Cape Air, Andrew Bonney OST, Kevin Schlemmer

Cape Air, Dan Wolf OST, Michael Martin 

Cape Air, J. Flaherty OST, Renee Williams

Classic Aviation, Tony Henderson Pacific Aviation Group, Craig Garrick

Colgan Air, Mike Colgan Pacific Aviation Group, Ron Pye

Colgan Air, Kevin Scott Pacific Wings, Frank Ford

CommutAir, Andy Price Pacific Wings, Greg Kahlstorf

CommutAir, Joel Raymond PenAir, Danny Seybert

Consultant, Robert Silverberg PenAir, Scott Bloomquist

Continental, Bruce Keiner Pinnacle Airlines, Joe Williams 

Continental, Dan Weiss Pinnacle Airlines, Phil Reed

Continental, Lorry Halloway Planemasters, Inc. John Kessler

Delta, Anthony Canitano Planemasters, Inc. Paul Berliner

Delta, Dan Shuman Planemasters, Inc. Todd DeSimone

Delta, Jeff Morgan Raytheon, Mike Scheidt

Delta, Joe Esposito Saab Group, Polly Prelinger

Delta, Karen Zachary Scenic, Mary Schneider

Delta, Kristal Murphy Scenic, Mitzi Daines

Delta, Sascha Vanderbellen Seaborne Airlines, Shawn Lewis

DHS, Bill Ragan SeaPort Airlines, Daniel Helland

DHS, David Bernier SeaPort/Wings of Alaska, Jim Day

Dorado Jets SeaPort/Wings of Alaska, Nate Vallier

Dorado Jets, Mark McKenna SeaPort/Wings of Alaska, Rob McKinney

Era Aviation, Lori Goodman Shuttle America, Jerry Balsano 

Executive Airlines, Kate Soled SkyWest, Brad Rawson

Frontier Flying, Bob Hajducovich SkyWest, Eric Christensen

Frontline Aviation SkyWest, Michael Thompson

Gem Air, Dan Schroeder Sovereign Air, Bob Karns

Gem Air, JoAnn Wolters Sovereign Air, Lois R. Barton

Great Lakes, Chuck Howell Tatonduk, Robert Everts

Great Lakes, Doug Voss Tatonduk, Robert Ragar

Gulfstream, Dave Hackett Tradewind, Eric Zipkin 

Gulfstream, Mickey Bowman TransStates, Fred Oxley 

Gulfstream, T. Cooper TransStates, Gerry Wigmore

Horizon Air, Dan Russo Transport Azumah, Joel Anabilah-Azumah

Horizon Air, Jennifer Thompson United, Alicia Gabriel

Horizon Air, Mike McQueen United, James Starnes

Horizon Air, Jeff Cole US Airways, Benjamin Slocum

ICEPR, Luis Irizarry US Airways, Howard Kass

Intrepid Internatl Air, Rick Eyk US Airways, Jason Reisinger 

Island Air Charters, Linda House Warbelows Air Ventures, Art Warbelow

Jet Air, Daniel Wolford

Kenmore Air, Tim Brooks

McCall Aviation, Dan Scott