Order 2010

- 1 2

- 9 Served: December 6 , 2010


### UNITED STATES OF A MERICA DEPA RTMENT OF TRA NSPORTA TION OFFICE OF THE SECRETA RY WASHINGTON, D.C.
Issued b y the Department of Transportation on the 6 th day

of December, 2010 Essential Air Service at STA UNTON , VIRGINIA Under 49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq
. DOCKET DOT - OST - 2002 - 11378



### ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSA LS Summary By this order, the Department is requesting proposals from carriers interested in providing essential air service (EAS) at Staunton, Virginia , for a new two

- ye ar period, with or without subsidy , beginning May 1, 2011. (See Appendix A for map.) Background By O rder 2008

- 12

- 29, December 30, 2008, the Department selected Colgan Air, Inc. d/b/a US Airway s Express (Colgan), to provide subsidized EAS at Staunton for the two

- year period through April 30, 2011. That order established an annual subsidy rate of $1,911,4 66, for service consisting of 18 nonstop round trips a week to Washington Dulles International Airport with 34

- seat Saab 340 aircraft. The Colgan proposal selected b y the Department also provided service to an upline community

. Request for Proposals As the end of the current rate term approaches, in order to provide sufficient time to complete the carrier

- selection process before the current contract expires, we are here requesting proposals from carriers interested in providing service at Staunton, with or without subsidy support, for the two

- ye ar period beginning May 1, 2011. Carriers should file their proposals no later than January 19, 2011. Staff will then docket proposals, thereb y making them public, and shortly afterwards will provide a summary of the proposals to the communities and ask them for their final comments. We will give full consideration to all proposals filed in a timely manner. 1

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 such2

Interested carriers should prepare their proposals with every expectation that their initial proposals wi ll also be their final and only proposals. 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 prop osals. 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 preparing their proposals, but we will not pre scribe a precise format for their proposals. We expect proposals to adequatel y 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 presen t; 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 strongl y encourage clear, well

- documented proposals that will facilitate their evaluation by

the affected communities and the Department. 2 Proposals should offer service with sufficient capacity to accommodate historical levels of traffic and, at a minimum, should be provided with two

- pilot, twin

- engine aircraft with at least 15 seats. S pecificall y for Staunton, we are requesting proposals for service consisting of three nonstop round trips a day (18 a week) with 19

- seat aircraft or two round trips a day (12 a week) with 34

- seat or larger aircraft. If the flights also serve another communit y as under Colgan’s current service, we would consider proposals offering an additional daily frequency . Such service should be provided to Dulles or an y other suitable hub with connections to the national air transportation s ys tem. We encourage propo sals that meet these requirements in an efficient manner. However, carriers are welcome to propose more than one option, if they choose; they need not limit themselves to these requirements if they envision other, potentially more attractive service possi bilities

– different hubs, for example

– with subsidy requirements that remain competitive. Traffic History In the time since the Department issued its previous Order Requesting Proposals at Staunton (October 31, 2008), passenger traffic in the Staunton / Washington DC

– Dulles market has increased significantl y. Indeed, this market has realized a 72% increase in origin and destination passenger enplanements over the past two y ears (2009 data compared with 2007 data). For the ye ar ended December 31, 2008 , the community generated a total of 14,932 passengers in the market. And, for the ye ar ended December 31, 2009, 16,726 passengers were generated in the market. These figures represent averages of 23.8 and 26.7 daily enplanements
compensation, we do not proceed with the carrier

- selection case. Instead, we sim ply 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 reliabili ty; (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 vie ws. 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 provisi ons governing EAS 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 Staunton, respectivel y. Currently available data for 2010 (Q1 and Q2) indicate that passenger enplanements have increased 20% over the same period in 2009. In first and second quarters of 2010, the community enplaned daily

averages of 24.0 and 34.1 passengers. In order to assist carriers in making 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 lobb yi ng activities, drug

- free wo rkplaces and nondiscrimination. 3 Consequently , all carriers receiving Federal subsid y to support essential air service must certify that they are in compliance with Department regulations regarding drug

- free workplaces and nondiscrimination, and those car riers 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 Analy sis at (202) 366

- 5903. The Department is prohibited from paying subsidy to carriers that do not submit these documents. 4 Community Comments Civic officials are welcome to submit comments on the proposals at an y time. As noted earlier, however, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the c ivic parties and ask them to submit their final comments shortly after January

19, 2011, the due date for carrier proposals. This order is issued under authority delegated by

the Assistant Secretary

for Aviation and International Affairs in 49 CFR 1.56a(f ). AC CORDINGLY, 1. We request that carriers interested in providing essential air service at Staunton, Virginia, submit their proposals, with or without subsidy requests, no later than January 19, 2011. The proposals should be emailed to: EAS@dot.gov with the title “Proposal to Provide Essential Air Service at Staunton, Virginia, Docket DOT

- OST

- 2002

- 11378”; 5 2. Docket DOT

- OST

- 2002

- 11378 will remain open until further order of the Department; and 3. The Department will serve a cop y of this order on the mayor and airport manager of Staunton, Colgan, and the parties listed in Appendix D.

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 disabili ty 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 (non

procurement) and government

- wide requirements for drug

- free workplace (grants). 4 The certifications are also available on the web at http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/index.html. 5 Questions regarding filings in response to this order should be directed to Renée Willi ams at 202

- 366

- 1058, or via email at renee.williams@dot.gov . Parties may call 202

- 366

- 5903 to confirm receipt of their EAS proposals.4

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) day s 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. HOMA N Director Office o f Aviation Analysis (SEAL) An electronic version of this document is available on the World W ide Web at www.regulations.gov

### Appendix A AREA MAP

### Appendix B

Historical O&D Traffic and Average Daily Enplanements

at Staunton, Virginia 1

___________________ 1 Source: USDOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics, TransStats Intermodal Database, Schedule T

- 100. 2 Daily averages are based on 313 annual service days (total O&D traffic divided by 2, then divided by 313 service days). Tim e Period O&D Traffic Daily Average

Enplanements 2 01/10/10

– 06/30/10 1Q10 3,757 24.0 2Q10 5,340 34.1 TOTAL: 9,097 29.1 YE 12/31/09 1Q09 3,428 21.9 2Q09 4,152 26.5 3Q09 4,488 28.7 4Q09 4,658 29.8 TOTAL: 16,726 26.7 YE 12/31/08 1Q08 2,803 17.9 2Q08 4,194 26.8 3Q08 4,056 25.9 4Q08 3,879 24.8 TOTAL: 14,932 23.8 YE 12/31/07 1Q07 2,245 14.4 2Q07 2,273 14.6 3Q07 2,627 16.8 4Q07 2,582 16.6 TOTAL: 9,727 15.5 YE 12/31/06 1Q06 2,606 16.7 2Q06 2,707 17.4 3Q06 2,647 17.0 4Q06 2,664 17.1 TOTAL: 10,624 17.0

### Appendix C
General Terms and Conditions for Essential A ir Service The carrier understands that it may forfeit its compensation for an y 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 an y other significant elements of the required service, without prior approval. The carrier understands that an aircraft take

- off and landing at its scheduled destination const itutes 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 n ot 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 an y such changes beyond the scope of the order during the ap plicable period of these rates, it must first notify the Office of Aviation Analy sis 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 repla cement carrier to provide service on these routes. The carrier must complete all flights that can be safely operated; flights that overfl y points for lack of traffic will not be compensated. In determining whether subsidy payment for a deviating flight s hould 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 sy stem provided to the community

. If the Department unilaterally , either partial ly or completely , terminates or reduces pay ments 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 pay ments in the stipulated amounts or at th e stipulated service levels, the carrier may cease to provide service to that specific location without regard to an y requirement for notice of such cessation. Those adjustments in the levels of subsidy and/or service that are mutuall y agreed to in writin g by the Department and carrier do not constitute a total or partial reduction or cessation of pay ment. Subsidy contracts are subject to, and incorporate by reference, relevant statutes and Department regulations, as they may be amended from time to time. However, an y 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 Department’s obligation for perfor mance under this solicitation beyond [DATE], is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which pay ment for services can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any pay ment 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 pay

ment must be submitted within 60 day s of the last day of service provided under this order.

### Appendix D

Scheduled Air Carriers, Contiguous US and Puerto Rico
Air Greco, d/b/a Wi ngs Air, Aaron Goerlich Midwest Airlines, David Reeve Air W isconsin, Barbara Jones Midwest Airlines, Greg Aretakis Alaska Airlines, Jeff Cole MN Aviation, Jose Maldonado Alaska Airlines, Sandy Sinick Multi Aero, Darnea Allegiant Air, Robert Ashscroft Multi Aero, Shane Storz Am erican Airlines, Carl Nelson Northwest, Aaron Murray Bem idji Aviation, Cori Rude Northwest, B. Ebensteiner Bem idji Aviation, Arlen Rinkenberger Northwest, Sascha Vanderbellen Cape Air, Andrew Bonney Northwest, Tim McDonald Cape Air, Dan Wo lf NY DC, Henok Araya Cape Air, J.Flaherty OST, Dennis DeVany Ca rribean Sun Airlines, John Rupert OST, Renee W illiam s Colgan Air, Mike Colgan Pacific wings, Frank Ford CommutAir, Andy Price Pacific Wi ngs, Greg Kahlstorf CommutAir, Joel Ray mo nd Pinnacle Airlines, Joe W illiams Continental, Bruce Keiner Pinnacle Airlines, Phil Reed Continental, Dan W eiss Public Charters, Jim Gallagher Continental, Lorry Halloway Salm on Air, Dan Schroeder Delta, Dan Shuman Salm on Air, JoAnn W olters Delta, Joe Esposito Scenic, Mar y Schneider Executive Airlines, Kate Soled Scenic, Mitzi Daines Great Lakes, Chuck Howell SeaPort Airlines Great Lakes, Doug Voss Shuttle America, Jerry Balsano Great Lakes, Greg Stephens Sk yW est, Eric Christensen Gulfstream, Dave Hackett Sk yW est, Michael Thompson Gulfstream, Mickey

Bowman Sovereign Air, Bob Karns Gulfstream, T. Cooper Tradewind, Eric Zipkin Homeland Security, Michael Duffy Trans States, Bill Mishk Horizon Airlines, Dan Russo Transtates, Gerry Wi gm ore Horizon Airlines, Jennifer Thompson United, Alicia Gabriel Horizon, J eff Cole United, James Starnes Kenm ore Air, Tim Brooks USAirways, Howard Kass Mesa Air, Michael Lotz USAirW ays, Jason Reisinger Mesa Air, Mike Holcomb USAirwys, Benjamin Slocum Mesaba, Bob W eil Vintage Props and Jets, Nate Vallier Mesaba, John Spanjers Wi ngs of Alaska, Bob Jacobsen Midwest Airlines, Anthony Intravia Wi ngs of Alaska, Michelle Donohue