Order 2010-12-9

Served: December 6, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 6th day of December, 2010

Essential Air Service at

STAUNTON, VIRGINIA

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

DOCKET DOT-OST-2002-11378

ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSALS

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-year period, with or without 

subsidy, beginning May 1, 2011. (See Appendix A for map.)

Background

By Order 2008-12-29, December 30, 2008, the Department selected Colgan Air, Inc. d/b/a 

US Airways 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 $1,911,466, 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 by 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-year period beginning May 1, 2011. Carriers should file their proposals no 

later than January 19, 2011. Staff will then docket proposals, thereby 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 such 
2

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. 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 preparing 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

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. Specifically 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 community as under Colgan’s 

current service, we would consider proposals offering an additional daily frequency. Such 

service should be provided to Dulles or any other suitable hub with connections to the national 

air transportation system. We encourage proposals 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 possibilities – 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 significantly. Indeed, this market has realized a 72% increase in origin and 

destination passenger enplanements over the past two years (2009 data compared with 2007 

data). For the year ended December 31, 2008, the community generated a total of 14,932 

passengers in the market. And, for the year 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 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 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, respectively. 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 lobbying 

activities, drug-free workplaces and nondiscrimination.3 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.4

Community Comments

Civic officials 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 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).

ACCORDINGLY,

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 copy 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 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).

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 Williams 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) 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

www.regulations.gov
Appendix A

AREA MAP
Appendix B

Historical O&D Traffic and Average Daily Enplanements

at Staunton, Virginia1

___________________

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).

Time Period O&D 

Traffic

Daily Average

Enplanements2

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 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 Department’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, d/b/a Wings Air, Aaron Goerlich Midwest Airlines, David Reeve

Air Wisconsin, 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

American Airlines, Carl Nelson Northwest, Aaron Murray

Bemidji Aviation, Cori Rude Northwest, B. Ebensteiner

Bemidji Aviation, Arlen Rinkenberger Northwest, Sascha Vanderbellen

Cape Air, Andrew Bonney Northwest, Tim McDonald

Cape Air, Dan Wolf NYDC, Henok Araya

Cape Air, J.Flaherty OST, Dennis DeVany

Carribean Sun Airlines, John Rupert OST, Renee Williams

Colgan Air, Mike Colgan Pacific wings, Frank Ford

CommutAir, Andy Price Pacific Wings, Greg Kahlstorf

CommutAir, Joel Raymond Pinnacle Airlines, Joe Williams

Continental, Bruce Keiner Pinnacle Airlines, Phil Reed

Continental, Dan Weiss Public Charters, Jim Gallagher

Continental, Lorry Halloway Salmon Air, Dan Schroeder

Delta, Dan Shuman Salmon Air, JoAnn Wolters

Delta, Joe Esposito Scenic, Mary 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 SkyWest, Eric Christensen

Gulfstream, Dave Hackett SkyWest, 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 Wigmore

Horizon Airlines, Jennifer Thompson United, Alicia Gabriel

Horizon, Jeff Cole United, James Starnes

Kenmore Air, Tim Brooks USAirways, Howard Kass

Mesa Air, Michael Lotz USAirWays, Jason Reisinger

Mesa Air, Mike Holcomb USAirwys, Benjamin Slocum

Mesaba, Bob Weil

Vintage Props and Jets, Nate 

Vallier

Mesaba, John Spanjers Wings of Alaska, Bob Jacobsen

Midwest Airlines, Anthony Intravia Wings of Alaska, Michelle Donohue