Order: 20 1 1

- 8

- 18

Served: August 16 , 20 1 1



### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 16 th day of August, 2011

DO T

- 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

, 201 1

. ( See Appendix A for an area map.)

Background By Order 200 9

- 11

- 15

, November 23, 2009 , the Department selected Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd. (Great Lakes) to provide 1 2 nonstop round trips per week to Denver International Airport using

19

- p assenger 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 Lak es provided one additional daily round tri p 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 Prop osals 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 file d no later than September 14 , 2011

. A fter that date, our staff will docket the proposals, thereby making them public. Shortly afterwards, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the communit ies 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

Interest ed 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 sol icit 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 no t 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 pre sent; 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 eval uation by the affected communities and the Department. 2

With respect to Pueblo

, w e ask that carriers submit proposals for t wo nonstop round trips per day (12 round trips per week) with 15

- seat or larger aircraf t 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 t han 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 c ommunit y 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 op erational

needs of the airline inter ested 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 thems elves 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 subsidy

free 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 i nception 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 ord er contains those general provisions.- 3

-

New Filing Procedures Carrier proposals s hould be s ubmitted 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 end ed March 31 , 201 1

, th e 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 Appe ndix 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 o ver 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 Av iation Analysis at (202) 366

- 5903. 5

Community and State Comments

The communit y 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 tha t 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 n oted.

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 Rig hts 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) 4 9 CFR Part 29

– Government

- wide debarment and suspension (non

procurement) 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 E AS at Pueblo

, CO (DOT

- OST

1999

- 6589 ) ; 6

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

3 . We will serve co pies of this order on the Mayor of P ueblo

, 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 ® AirVision TM Profit Essentials and is being used with express permission of the copyright holder, Sabre Airline Solutions®.Appendix B

Traffic History 7

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 end ed 3 /31/201 1 )

– 1 7. 1 8

7 Source

– T

- 100 Market Report, Passenger s 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.Appen dix 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 e ligibility 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 Av iation 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 ext ent 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 chang es 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 perform ance under this solicitation beyond [DATE] , is contingent upon the av ailability 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 p erformance. 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 McCal l 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 Wing s, 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