Order 2010-2-5

Served: February 3, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 3rd of February, 2010

Essential Air Service at

ADAK, ALASKA

ATKA, ALASKA

NIKOLSKI, ALASKA

Under 49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq. 

DOCKET OST-2000-8556

DOCKET OST-1995-363

DOCKET OST-1995-363

ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSALS

Summary

By this order, the Department is requesting proposals by March 10, 2010, from carriers 

interested in providing essential air service (EAS) at Adak, Atka, and Nikolski, Alaska,

for a new two-year period, beginning July 1, 2010, with or without subsidy. 

Background

By Order 2008-3-36, March 31, 2008, the Department selected Alaska Airlines, Inc., to 

provide subsidized EAS to Adak, Alaska, through June 30, 2010. Under that order, the 

Department authorized subsidy for Alaska Airlines consisting of two nonstop or one-stop 

round trips per week year round to Anchorage, Alaska (ANC). All of the service was to be 

with 737-400 jet aircraft for an annual subsidy of $1,483,122. 

That order also selected Peninsula Airways, Inc., (PenAir), to provide subsidized EAS to Atka 

and Nikolski, Alaska, through June 30, 2010. Under that order, the subsidy at Nikolski was 

set at $469,786 for two nonstop round trips per week to Dutch Harbor with 9-seat Grumman 

Goose aircraft. At Atka, the Department authorized subsidy for PenAir consisting of four 

nonstop round trips per week with Piper T-1040s -- a 9-seat, unpressurized, turboprop aircraft 

-- to Dutch Harbor for $513,803 annual subsidy. On June 11, 2009, PenAir proposed as an 

alternate schedule for Atka to substitute larger, faster, and pressurized Metro III aircraft and 

reduce the frequency to two round trips per week. On June 23, 2009, the city of Atka 

endorsed PenAir’s alternate service plan with an amended three round trips per week, noting 

the following:

“The Metro-Liner [Metro III] is twice as big, can operate in weather the [T-1040] 

Navajo cannot and is noticeably faster. With service 3 times per week, Atka will 

experience more reliable mail service as well as passenger service. The 
-2-

community of Atka would like to express its full support of this change and the 

continued support of PenAir to communities such as our own.”

By Order 2009-6-28, the Department approved PenAir’s alternate service pattern because it 

was equal to or greater than that determined to be essential, the community did not object, and 

it would not increase the level of subsidy. 

Request for Proposals

As the end of the current rate terms approach, we are hereby requesting proposals from 

carriers interested in providing service at either Adak, Atka and/or Nikolski, with or 

without subsidy, for the two-year period beginning July 1, 2010. Carriers should file 

their proposals by March 10. Staff will then docket proposals, thereby making them 

public, and direct each carrier to serve a copy of its proposal on the civic parties and other 

applicants. Shortly afterwards, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the 

communities and State and ask them to submit their final comments. We will give full 

consideration to all proposals filed in a timely manner.1 

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

proposals will also be their final and only proposals. We retain the discretion to negotiate 

proposals with carriers when we deem it desirable; in such cases, of course, we will give 

all applicants the same opportunity. We also retain the discretion to reject outright all 

unreasonable or unrealistic proposals and solicit a new round of proposals. However, we 

anticipate that negotiation or rejection will remain only occasional exceptions to the rule.

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, welldocumented proposals that will facilitate their evaluation by the affected communities

and the Department. We do not anticipate any change in our selection criteria, or in the 

general provisions governing subsidy payments for essential air service.2

 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 subsidy-free service as proposed.

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

us to consider five 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; (4) community views; and 

(5) experience of the applicant in providing, in Alaska, scheduled air service or significant non-scheduled 

air service. 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-

At Adak, carriers may propose either one or two round trips a week to Anchorage with jet 

aircraft. In addition, we will entertain proposals for more frequent, non-jet service from 

Adak to Anchorage, Dutch Harbor, or Cold Bay. Likewise, carriers may propose service 

at Atka and Nikolski to either Dutch Harbor or Adak. We note that if Atka and/or 

Nikolski connected at Adak instead of Dutch Harbor, all their traffic flowing over Adak 

to Anchorage would defray the expense of Adak’s subsidized jet service. 

In determining which carrier(s) to select at these three communities, we intend to focus 

on the overall subsidy request at all three communities combined.3 We hereby make 

Alaska Airlines and all potential applicants aware of the possibility of additional feed 

from Atka and/or Nikolski, so that they can prepare options that anticipate additional, 

connecting revenue from Atka and Nikolski.

Proposals should provide sufficient capacity to accommodate historical traffic levels at 

reasonable load factors, considering the directional imbalance of freight and mail, and 

some peaking of traffic, as shown in Appendix B. Service for Adak should be to either 

Anchorage or Dutch Harbor, and for Atka and Nikolski to either Cold Bay or Dutch 

Harbor, unless it is linked with Adak’s service to Anchorage. 

At Atka, carriers too may propose service corresponding to the historical service pattern –

three round trips a week with a Metro III. In addition, we request that PenAir submit a 

proposal with two round trips per week as it did on June 11, 2009, when it requested an 

alternate service pattern. It appears that two round trips with a Metro III aircraft would 

accommodate Atka’s historical traffic and may cost considerably less subsidy, and we 

wish to examine that possibility. 

We encourage proposals that meet these requirements in an efficient manner. As we 

have mentioned, carriers are 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, for example – with 

subsidy requirements that remain competitive.

Carriers should be very clear as to whether a specific community’s proposal is on a standalone basis, or whether it is part of a larger, inseparable package with another community

or communities. We encourage the carriers to work with the communities as they are 

preparing their proposals so that they can craft them to best meet the communities’ needs. 

 3 As noted in Order 2006-5-21, footnote 1, Alaska Airlines proposed to reduce its annual subsidy need at 

Adak by $493,831, for the same level of service, if the Department selected a carrier to connect Atka and 

Nikolski with its subsidized jet service at Adak. Because no carrier proposed to connect Atka and Nikolski 

with Adak, such a three-city package was not available for consideration.

3 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 – Governmentwide debarment and suspension (non-procurement) and government-wide requirements for drug-free 

workplace (grants).
-4-

As always, we will fully consider the communities’ views before making a long-term 

carrier-selection decision. 

Historical Traffic

In order to assist carriers in making their traffic and revenue projections, we have 

included historical traffic for the communities in Appendix B. The only two carriers to 

provide scheduled service to these two communities have been PenAir and Alaska 

Airlines.

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 to support 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. All carriers that plan to submit proposals involving subsidy should 

submit the required certifications along with their proposals. Interested carriers requiring 

more detailed information regarding these requirements, as well as copies of the 

certifications, should contact the Office of Aviation Analysis at (202) 366-5903. The 

Department is prohibited from paying subsidy to carriers that do not submit these 

documents.5

Community Comments

Civic officials and the State are welcome to submit comments on the proposals at any 

time. As noted earlier, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the civic parties 

and ask them to submit their final comments shortly after March 10, the due date for 

carrier proposals.

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. The Department requests proposals from carriers interested in providing essential air 

service at Adak, Atka, and/or Nikolski, Alaska. Carriers should submit their proposals, 

with subsidy if necessary, by March 10, 2010. Proposals should include all the data 

required by section 204.4 of the Department’s Regulations (14 CFR 204.4). Proposals 

should be emailed to EAS@dot.gov, with the title “Proposal to Provide Essential Air 

Service at Adak, Atka, and/or Nikolski, Alaska, Dockets DOT-OST-2000-8556 and 

1995-363.” Questions regarding filings may be directed to Kevin Adams at 202-366-1047

or Kevin.Adams@dot.gov;

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

 

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

3. We will serve this order on the service list for these Dockets.

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

Department’s 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 on the World Wide Web at

http://www.regulations.gov
Appendix A

Nonstop, Great Circle Miles

Adak (ADK)

ADK-AKB 106

ADK-DUT 445

ADK-CDB 616

ADK-ANC 1,192

ADK-BET 835

Atka (AKB)

AKB-ADK 106

AKB-IKO 231

AKB-DUT 340

AKB-ANC 1,101

Nikolski (IKO)

IKO-ADK 337

IKO-AKB 231

IKO-DUT 116

IKO-ANC 905
Appendix B

Page 1 of 3

T-100 Market Report, Traffic in Scheduled Passenger Service Reported by Peninsula Airways, Inc.

Adak, Alaska (ADK)

Origin Destination Origin and Destination

Total Total Total

Year Qtr. Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs

2005 4 289 32.9 8.9 330.8 234 217.9 244.1 696.0 523 250.8 253.0 1,026.8

2006 1 346 18.2 17.2 381.4 419 329.1 283.0 1,031.1 765 347.3 300.2 1,412.5

2006 2 405 101.5 18.6 525.1 364 370.8 322.6 1,057.4 769 472.3 341.2 1,582.5

2006 3 622 37.8 15.7 675.5 615 503.5 357.9 1,476.4 1,237 541.3 373.6 2,151.9

Total 1,662 190.4 60.4 1,912.8 1,632 1,421.3 1,207.6 4,260.9 3,294 1,611.7 1,268.0 6,173.7

2006 4 465 90.6 19.6 575.2 390 412.9 390.6 1,193.5 855 503.5 410.2 1,768.7

2007 1 522 21.3 19.4 562.7 705 773.6 194.2 1,672.8 1,227 794.9 213.6 2,235.5

2007 2 512 126.8 24.7 663.5 407 662.3 450.4 1,519.7 919 789.1 475.1 2,183.2

2007 3 642 111.6 24.2 777.8 582 838.8 252.4 1,673.2 1,224 950.4 276.6 2,451.0

Total 2,141 350.3 87.9 2,579.2 2,084 2,687.6 1,287.6 6,059.2 4,225 3,037.9 1,375.5 8,638.4

2007 4 421 95.4 21.9 538.3 342 589.2 344.1 1,275.3 763 684.6 366.0 1,813.6

2008 1 410 30.8 23.7 464.5 514 578.8 308.8 1,401.6 924 609.6 332.5 1,866.1

2008 2 528 41.9 25.8 595.7 573 524.3 523.4 1,620.7 1,101 566.2 549.2 2,216.4

2008 3 626 94.6 85.7 806.3 485 599.2 447.7 1,531.9 1,111 693.8 533.4 2,338.2

Total 1,985 262.7 157.1 2,404.8 1,914 2,291.5 1,624.0 5,829.5 3,899 2,554.2 1,781.1 8,234.3

2008 4 424 115.9 26.6 566.5 347 401.5 261.9 1,010.4 771 517.4 288.5 1,576.9

2009 1 309 66.1 18.6 393.7 462 961.8 269.7 1,693.5 771 1,027.9 288.3 2,087.2

2009 2 507 113.0 13.7 633.7 456 426.2 299.9 1,182.1 963 539.2 313.6 1,815.8

2009 3 601 202.2 29.5 832.7 558 532.5 365.8 1,456.3 1,159 734.7 395.3 2,289.0

Total 1,841 497.2 88.4 2,426.6 1,823 2,322.0 1,197.3 5,342.3 3,664 2,819.2 1,285.7 7,768.9

Note: 200 lbs. of mail or freight is one passenger equivalent, i.e., PEQ.
Appendix B

Page 2 of 3

T-100 Market Report, Traffic in Scheduled Passenger Service Reported by Peninsula Airways, Inc.

Atka, Alaska (AKB)

Origin Destination Origin and Destination

Total Total Total

Year Qtr. Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs

2005 4 86 0 12.2 98.2 72 36 151.8 259.8 158 36 164 358.0

2006 1 53 0.8 5.6 59.4 57 29.2 116.1 202.3 110 30 121.7 261.7

2006 2 75 1.4 11.1 87.5 75 32.8 120.8 228.6 150 34.2 131.9 316.1

2006 3 86 0.2 16 102.2 72 38.1 133.2 243.3 158 38.3 149.2 345.5

Total 300 2.4 44.9 347.3 276 136.1 521.9 934 576 138.5 566.8 1,281.3

2006 4 71 0 10.4 81.4 72 30.7 90.2 192.9 143 30.7 100.6 274.3

2007 1 66 0 6.3 72.3 62 48 118.8 228.8 128 48 125.1 301.1

2007 2 81 0.3 8.1 89.4 80 34.9 112 226.9 161 35.2 120.1 316.3

2007 3 82 1.8 8.8 92.6 83 38.7 134.5 256.2 165 40.5 143.3 348.8

Total 300 2.1 33.6 335.7 297 152.3 455.5 904.8 597 154.4 489.1 1,240.5

2007 4 94 0.1 10.5 104.6 90 67.7 107 264.7 184 67.8 117.5 369.3

2008 1 75 0.4 5.1 80.5 74 21.5 109.8 205.3 149 21.9 114.9 285.8

2008 2 82 0 12.3 94.3 87 53.7 224.1 364.8 169 53.7 236.4 459.1

2008 3 54 1.4 7 62.4 50 29.5 115.3 194.8 104 30.9 122.3 257.2

Total 305 1.9 34.9 341.8 301 172.4 556.2 1029.6 606 174.3 591.1 1,371.4

2008 4 109 4.3 9.8 123.1 92 27.4 137.3 256.7 201 31.7 147.1 379.8

2009 1 47 8.1 5.7 60.8 65 23.2 114.9 203.1 112 31.3 120.6 263.9

2009 2 108 8.8 10.3 127.1 110 28.9 171.3 310.2 218 37.7 181.6 437.3

2009 3 131 6.6 4.1 141.7 124 58.9 163.9 346.8 255 65.5 168 488.5

Total 395 27.8 29.9 452.7 391 138.4 587.4 1,116.8 786 166.2 617.3 1,569.5

Note: 200 lbs. of mail or freight is one passenger equivalent, i.e., PEQ.
Appendix B

Page 3 of 3

T-100 Market Report, Traffic in Scheduled Passenger Service Reported by Peninsula Airways, Inc.

Nikolski, Alaska (IKO)

Origin Destination Origin and Destination

Total Total Total

Year Qtr. Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs Pax. Frt. Mail PEQs

2005 4 72 0.2 6.7 78.9 65 38.6 51.5 155.1 137 38.8 58.2 234.0

2006 1 37 1.9 5.8 44.7 42 35.7 31.4 109.1 79 37.6 37.2 153.8

2006 2 66 4.8 6.0 76.8 59 44.8 57.1 160.9 125 49.6 63.1 237.7

2006 3 73 1.8 10.3 85.1 76 33.1 60.0 169.1 149 34.9 70.3 254.2

Total 248 8.7 28.8 285.5 242 152.2 200.0 594.2 490 160.9 228.8 879.7

2006 4 30 0.0 4.5 34.5 40 43.4 54.4 137.8 70 43.4 58.9 172.3

2007 1 55 0.5 4.0 59.5 60 24.3 47.8 132.1 115 24.8 51.8 191.6

2007 2 93 5.4 20.5 118.9 89 52.3 64.7 206.0 182 57.7 85.2 324.9

2007 3 72 2.9 4.9 79.8 81 28.8 50.2 160.0 153 31.7 55.1 239.8

Total 250 8.8 33.9 292.7 270 148.8 217.1 635.9 520 157.6 251.0 928.6

2007 4 46 2.1 6.0 54.1 47 20.4 59.3 126.7 93 22.5 65.3 180.8

2008 1 35 0.0 8.2 43.2 31 23.8 61.1 115.9 66 23.8 69.3 159.1

2008 2 43 0.5 7.5 51.0 47 16.2 39.0 102.2 90 16.7 46.5 153.2

2008 3 25 2.9 3.5 31.4 32 7.9 39.1 79.0 57 10.8 42.6 110.4

Total 149 5.5 25.2 179.7 157 68.3 198.5 423.8 306 73.8 223.7 603.5

2008 4 60 0.0 5.2 65.2 55 28.1 68.0 151.1 115 28.1 73.2 216.3

2009 1 30 0.9 4.8 35.7 29 35.6 63.6 128.2 59 36.5 68.4 163.9

2009 2 65 1.3 15.6 81.9 68 26.3 55.0 149.3 133 27.6 70.6 231.2

2009 3 49 2.7 8.3 60.0 48 20.2 34.7 102.9 97 22.9 43.0 162.9

Total 204 4.9 33.9 242.8 200 110.2 221.3 531.5 404 115.1 255.2 774.3

Note: 200 lbs. of mail or freight is one passenger equivalent, i.e., PEQ.
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 assured 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.

Funds are not currently available for performance under this solicitation beyond 

September 30, 2010. The Department’s obligation for performance under this solicitation 

beyond September 30, 2010, 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 

September 30, 2010, until funds are made available to the Department for performance.

If funds are not made available for performance beyond September 30, 2010, the carrier 

will receive notice in writing by the Department.

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.

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

provided under this order.
Appendix D

Alaska Bush Distribution List

Adams, Kevin, Work LAB Flying Service, Eric Bennett 

Aero Twin, AACA, Tony Cestnik Larrys Flying, Jean Chenaille

Alaska Air Carriers Association, Joy Journeay Michael Duffy (Michael.Duffy@dhs.gov)

Alaska Airlines, Joe Sprague Myers, Larry (OST)

Alaska Airlines, Sandy Sinick Northern Air cargo, Dave Squier

Alaska Central Express, John Seamon Northern Air Cargo, Keven Schlosstein

Alaska Central Express, Mike Bergt OST, Dennis DeVany

Alaska Central Express, Steve Endlich Pacific Airways, Steve Montanus

Alaska DOT, Christine Klein PenAir Consultant, Patrick Rizzi

Alaska DOT, Rebecca Cronkhite PenAir, Danny Seybert

Alaska DOT-Medicaid Passenger Fares PenAir, Kim Kawaguchi

Alaska Seaplanes, Craig Loken PenAir, Orin Seybert

Alsek Air, Les and Debra Hartley PenAir, Robert Cohn

Arctic Circle, Donald Singsaas PenAir, Scott Bloomquist

Arctic Circle, Kelly Harris PM Air, d/b/a Promech, Marc Sessoms

Arctic Transportation Services (ATS), Wilfred Ryan RITA, Benard Stankus

Arctic Transportation Services, (ATS), Jim Hjelm Salmon Air, Ron Salmon 

Bering Air, Allen Haddadi SeaPort Airlines, Jim Day 

Bering Air, Jim Rowe SeaPort Airlines, Rob McKinney

Bob Stanford (Islairbk@Alaska.com) Servant Air, Wes Osowski

Congressional, Begich, David Ramseur Skagway, Ben Lingle

Congressional, Begich, Megan Foster Smokey Bay Air, Claire McCann

Congressional, Begich, Tiffany Zulkosky Spernak Airways, Mike Spernak

Congressional, Murkowski, Arne Fuglvog Tanana Air Service, Brian Martin

Congressional, Young, Jeremy Price Taquan Air Service, Brien Salazaar

Consultant, Hank Myers Taquan, Beckie Allen

Consultant, Ken Acton Tatonduk, Controller, Tina Paylor

Consultant, Norm Israelson Tatonduk, Marketing, Robert Ragar

Dorato Jets Tatonduk, Owner, Robert Everts

Dorato Jets, Mark McKenna USPS, Greg Garcia 

Ellis Air Taxi, Lynn Ellis USPS, Leonard Kilburn

Era Aviation, Mike Lenorman USPS, Mary Tobias

ERA, David M. Richards USPS, Steve Deaton

Frontier Flying, Bob Hajducovich USPS, Tina Campbell 

Grant Aviation, Bruce McGlasson USPS, William Jones

Hageland, Mike Hageland Warbelows Air Ventures, Art Warbelow

Hageland, Patrick Thurston Ward Air, Ed Kiesel 

Hageland, Steve Wahrnke Wings of Alaska, Mike Steadman 

Harris Air, Fly Hackett Wright Air Service, Bob Bursiel 

Harris Air, Scott Yute, Tim Vottis

Harris Air, Scott Harris

Homer Air, Andy Smircich 

Iliamna Air, Tim LaPorte 

Inland Aviation, Stephen Hill

Island Air, Bob Stanford

Island Air, Jennifer Stanford

Katmai Air, Sonny Peterson