Order: 2011-8-18

Served: August 16, 2011

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 16th day of August, 2011

 DOT-OST-1999-6589

ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSALS

Summary

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

essential air service (EAS) at Pueblo, Colorado, for the next two-year period from February 1, 

2012, through January 31, 2014, with or without subsidy. Proposals are due September 14, 

2011. (See Appendix A for an area map.) 

Background

By Order 2009-11-15, November 23, 2009, the Department selected Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd. 

(Great Lakes) to provide 12 nonstop round trips per week to Denver International Airport using 

19-passenger Beech 1900 aircraft, for the two-year period from February 1, 2010, through 

January 31, 2012, at an annual subsidy amount of $1,299,821.

Beginning prior to the current contract, Great Lakes provided one additional daily round trip at 

Pueblo. On June 9, 2011, Great Lakes added a second unsubsidized round trip for a total of 24 

round trips per week, double the amount of service we selected it to provide.

Request for Proposals

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

interested in providing service at Pueblo, with or without subsidy, to be filed no later than 

September 14, 2011. 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

PUEBLO, COLORADO 

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 Pueblo, we ask that carriers submit proposals for two nonstop round trips per day

(12 round trips per week) with 15-seat or larger aircraft or three round trips per day (18 total 

round trips per week) with aircraft seating fewer than 15 seats, to Denver International Airport,

or another suitable hub where numerous connections to the national air transportation system can 

be made. If a proposal offering aircraft with fewer than 15 seats is submitted 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 two-year carrier-selection at hand, i.e. we would 

not assume that the community waives their rights for all time

The community 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 interested in submitting a proposal. 

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.

 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 -

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 ended March 31, 2011, the most recent quarterly period for which traffic 

data are available, Pueblo averaged. 17.1 enplanements per day.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 community 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 September 14, 2011, the due date for 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. We request that carriers interested in providing essential air service at Pueblo, Colorado, for 

the two-year period from February 1, 2012, through January 31, 2014, submit their 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 -

with or without requests for subsidy, no later than September 14, 2011. The proposals should be 

e-mailed to EAS@dot.gov, with the title: “Proposal to Provide EAS at Pueblo, CO (DOT-OST1999-6589);6

2. This docket will remain open until further order of the Department; and

3. We will serve copies of this order on the Mayor of Pueblo, the director of Pueblo Memorial

Airport, 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

 

Traffic History7

Pueblo, CO (PUB)

Year Quarter Stn Uniquecarriername Inbound Pax Outbound Pax Total

2008 1 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 775 800 1,575

2008 2 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 851 803 1,654

2008 3 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 943 959 1,902

2008 4 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 937 959 1,896

2009 1 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 784 728 1,512

2009 2 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 804 863 1,667

2009 3 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 1,029 1,055 2,084

2009 4 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 1,125 1,186 2,311

2010 1 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 1,066 1,080 2,146

2010 2 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 1,227 1,265 2,492

2010 3 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 1,537 1,522 3,059

2010 4 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 1,288 1,292 2,580

2011 1 PUB Great Lakes Airlines 1,315 1,282 2,597

Most recent 12 months of traffic (4/1/10-3/31/11) 10,728

Average daily enplanements at Pueblo (12-months ended 3/31/2011) – 17.18

 

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 (10,728 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 Horizon Air, Jeff Cole

Air Sunshine, Inc. ICEPR, Luis Irizarry

Air Sunshine, Mirmohammad Adili Intrepid Internatl Air, Rick Eyk

Air West, Inc., John Raatz Island Air Charters, Linda House

Air Wisconsin, Annette Daly Jet Air, Daniel Wolford

Air Wisconsin, Jim Rankin Kenmore Air, Tim Brooks

Airline Associates, Bill Mishk McCall Aviation, Dan Scott

Alaska Airlines, Jeff Cole McCall Aviation, Michelle

Alaska Airlines, Sandy Sinick Mesaba, John Spanjers 

Allegiant Air, Brian Davis Mesaba, Max Shemesh

American Airlines, Carl Nelson MidStar Airlines, Jeffrey Fonner

American Eagle, Gary Foss Midwest Airlines, Greg Aretakis

American Eagle, Robert Emrich MN Aviation, Jose Maldonado 

Atlantic Southeast, Jon Lindlief Multi Aero, Darnea

Atlantic Southeast, Roger Weston Multi Aero, Shane Storz

Aviation Technologies/Charter Air Transport Northern Air Cargo, David Karp

Bemidji Aviation, Cori Rude Northern Air Cargo, Eric Van Andel

Bemidji Aviation, Arlen Rinkenberger NYDC, Henok Araya

Cape Air, Andrew Bonney OST, Brian Swanson

Cape Air, Dan Wolf OST, Dennis DeVany

Cape Air, J. Flaherty OST, Kevin Adams

Chautauqua, Josh Pascoe OST, Kevin Schlemmer

Classic Aviation, Tony Henderson OST, Michael Martin 

Colgan Air, Mike Colgan Pacific Aviation Group, Craig Garrick

Colgan Air, Kevin Scott Pacific Aviation Group, Ron Pye

CommutAir, Andy Price Pacific Wings, Frank Ford

CommutAir, Joel Raymond Pacific Wings, Greg Kahlstorf

Consultant, Michael Mooney PenAir, Danny Seybert

Consultant, Robert Silverberg PenAir, Scott Bloomquist

Continental, Bruce Keiner Pinnacle Airlines, Jennifer Gammill

Continental, Dan Weiss Pinnacle Airlines, Megan Rosia 

Continental, Lorry Halloway Pinnacle Airlines, Phil Reed

Delta, Anthony Canitano Planemasters, Inc. John Kessler

Delta, Dan Shuman Planemasters, Inc. Paul Berliner

Delta, Dana Debel Planemasters, Inc. Todd DeSimone

Delta, Jeff Davidman Raytheon, Mike Scheidt

Delta, Jeff Morgan Saab Group, Polly Prelinger

Delta, Joe Esposito Scenic, Mary Schneider

Delta, Kristal Murphy Scenic, Mitzi Daines

Delta, Sascha Vanderbellen Seaborne Airlines, Shawn Lewis

Delta, Stephen A. Hedden SeaPort Airlines, Daniel Helland

DHS, Bill Ragan SeaPort/Wings of Alaska, Rob McKinney

DHS, David Bernier Shuttle America, Jerry Balsano 

Dorado Jets SkyWest, Brad Rawson

Dorado Jets, Mark McKenna SkyWest, Eric Christensen

Era Aviation, Lori Goodman SkyWest, Michael Thompson

Executive Airlines, Kate Soled Sovereign Air, Bob Karns

Frontier Flying, Bob Hajducovich Sovereign Air, Lois R. Barton

Frontier Airlines, Daniel Shurz Tatonduk, Robert Everts

Frontline Aviation Tatonduk, Robert Ragar

Gem Air, Dan Schroeder Tradewind, Eric Zipkin 

Gem Air, JoAnn Wolters TransStates, Fred Oxley 

Great Lakes, Chuck Howell TransStates, Gerry Wigmore

Great Lakes, Doug Voss Transport Azumah, Joel Anabilah-Azumah

Gulfstream, Dave Hackett United, Alicia Gabriel

Gulfstream, Mickey Bowman United, James Starnes

Gulfstream, T. Cooper US Airways, Benjamin Slocum

Horizon Air, Dan Russo US Airways, Howard Kass

Horizon Air, Jennifer Thompson US Airways, Jason Reisinger 

Horizon Air, Mike McQueen Warbelows Air Ventures, Art Warbelow