BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Essential Air Service at 

EXCURSION INLET, ALASKA 

KAKE, ALASKA 

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

September 21, 2012 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 

Docket DOT -OST -2008-0217 

PETITION OF SEAPORT AIRLINES, INC D/8/A WINGS OF ALASKA 

FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE SELECTION OF AIR EXCURSIONS TO PROVIDE 

ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE AT KAKE AND EXCURSION INLET, ALASKA 

SeaPort Airlines, Inc., doing business as "Wings of Alaska" in Southeast Alaska 

(hereafter referred to as "SeaPort") respectfully requests that the Department of Transportation 

(hereafter referr.ed to as "the Department") reconsider its selection of Air Excursions, LLC 

(hereafter referred to as "Air Excursions") and for the reasons outlined herein, that the 

Department select SeaPort to provide Essential Air Service (EAS) at Excursion Inlet and Kake, 

Alaska. 1 

Specifically, SeaPort believes that the basis for selecting Air Excursions as explained in 

Order 2012-9-8 includes facts that are incorrect, incomplete, or mischaracterized. Equally as 

important, four months elapsed between carrier submission of proposals on May 8, 2012 and 

selection of Air Excursions in Order 2012-9-8 on September 8, 2012. During this period, 

significant events occurred that were not reflected in carrier proposals, and therefore 

communities were unable to comment on. In SeaPort's view, these events are materially 

sufficient such that the communities should be provided the opportunity to comment and those 

comments should be considered by the Department in its carrier selection for EAS at Kake and 

Excursion Inlet. 

In support of its request, SeaPort states the following: 

1 Order 2012-9-8 
Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 & Docket DOT-OST-2008-0217 

Page 2 

Community Support in Kake Favors SeaPort 

In Order 2012-9-8, the Department explained the selection of Air Excursion to provide 

EAS at Kake by stating: "After carefully reviewing all of the civic comments, it appears that the 

preponderance of community views support Air Excursions. Therefore, we will re-select Air 

Excursions at Kake." 

SeaPort reviewed every comment submitted to the Docket and calculated that support in 

Kake actually favored SeaPort over Air Excursions. 2 

Summary of Kake Community Comments Submitted to OST-2008-0217 

SUBMITIED COMMENTS SUPPORTING: 

Date Submitted by Air Excursions SeaPort Non-Committal 

5/6/2012 Nancy Hyke X 

5/7/2012 John Parton X 

5/16/2012 City of Kake X 

5/29/2012 Kake City School District X 

5/31/2012 Kake Tribal Corporation X 

6/1/2012 Organized Village of Kake (OVK) X 

6/4/2012 State of Alaska, DOT 4 X 

6/14/2012 City Manager, City of Kake X 

7/3/2012 Margaret Mach X 

7/3/2012 Bonita Friday X 

7/6/2012 Loren Jackson, Sr X 

7/6/2012 Carol Ann Williams X 

7/6/2012 Wanda Friday X 

7/9/2012 Brienna Friday X 

TOTAL 5 7 2 

Note~''fh~t support for SeaPort at Kake spiked in early July, shortly after the beach 

landing of an Air Excursions aircraft on June 25, 2012 classified by the NTSB as an accident. In 

total, since the deadline for both communities to submit their comments on carrier proposals, 

aircraft operated by Air Excursions have been involved in two accidents and one incident (see 

discussion below). This has galvanized support for selection of SeaPort, in Kake, including 

entities that earlier supported Air Excursions. 

2 On May 16, the City of Kake supported the selection of SeaPort to provide EAS. Subsequently, the City of Kake 

filed a letter that did not withdraw support for SeaPort, but acknowledged support for Air Excursions by the Organized 

Village of Kake and Kake City School District. 
Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 & Docket DOT-OST-2008-0217 

Page 3 

To this point, discussions with Kake City Council, Kake Community School District, and 

Kake Tribal Corporation have indicated they will reaffirm existing §upport for SeaPort or 

withdraw support for Air Excursions in favor of SeaPort. It is anticipated that each will shortly 

file comments with the Department in this regard. Discussions with the Organized Village of 

Kake (OVK) indicate that it too is likely to shift support to SeaPort, however this will be subject 

to formal discussion at the next Tribal Council meeting in a few weeks. Given the shift in 

community sentiment and with the tabulation of support for SeaPort on the table above, we 

believe that the Department should reconsider its selection of Air Excursions and instead select 

SeaPort to provide EAS at Kake and Excursion Inlet. 

The Department Mischaracterized an Accident Involving an Air Excursions 

Aircraft and Excluded Mention of Another Accident and an 

Incident Involving Air Excursions Aircrafts 

In Order 2012-9-8, footnote #4 states: The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) 

and the FAA are currently in the preliminary states of an investigation of an Air Excursions 

incident on August 3, 2012. Should the investigation final reports reveal findings adverse to the 

air carrier, we would reassess the air carrier's fitness in light of those findings. 3 

The footnote's characterization of the August 2, 2012 event as an "incident" is incorrect. 

Destruction of the aircraft and fatality of the pilot (who was the only occupant) is not an 

"incident" but rather is an "accident" as defined by the National Transportation Safety Board 

(NTSB) and, SeaPort believes, this difference is significant enough to warrant correction of 

footnote #4. 4 

More importantly, however, the August 2 accident is not a single event. Within a 45 day 

period, aircraft operated by Air Excursions were involved in a total of two accidents and one 

incident, summarized as follows: 

3 The Department states the accident occurred on August 3, however NTSB and local media reports have the event 

occurring on August 2. 

4 www. ntsb.gov/report referenced on September 14, 2012 states: "An accident is defined as an occurrence 

associated with the operation of an aircraft that takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the 

intention of flight and all such persons have disembarked, and in which any person suffers death or serious injury, 

or in which the aircraft receives substantial damage. An incident is an occurrence other than an accident that 

affects or could .affect the safety of operations." 
Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 & Docket DOT-OST-2008-0217 

Page 4 

• June 25, 2012: An Air Excursions flight with one pilot and three passengers experienced 

a loss of engine power and the aircraft experienced shaking. The pilot performed a 

forced landing on beach approximately 9 miles from Gustavus Airport. There were no 

injuries but the aircraft sustained substantial damage. 5 This is defined by the NTSB as 

an accident. 

• July 12, 2012: An Air Excursions flight with one pilot and five passengers completed an 

engine-out landing at Gustavus Airport that had been preceded by a loss of all oil 

pressure. The pilot and five passengers evacuated safely. 6 This is defined by the NTSB 

as an incident. 

• August 2, 2012: An Air Excursions flight operating between Juneau and Gustavus with 

one pilot and no passengers was reported overdue. Approximately six hours later the 

wreckage of the aircraft and body of the pilot was located in a densely wood area along 

the airplane's route to its destination. The pilot has not reported any mechanical 

anomalies and the cause of the accident is under investigation. 7 This is defined by the 

NTSB as an accident. 

In SeaPort's view, the occurrence of two accidents (one being fatal) and one incident 

between submission of carrier proposals and carrier selection constitutes a material change to 

the information on which communities were ·asked to comment. Accordingly, we believe that the 

Department should reconsider its selection of Air Excursions and that this reconsideration 

should include information contained in this petition as well as comments that SeaPort expects 

the Department will receive shortly from entities and citizens representing Kake and, potentially, 

Excursion lnlet. 8 

The Department's Statement Regarding Reliability of Air Excursions Glosses 

Over the High Number of Flights Operated with Small Aircraft 

In Order 2012-9-8, the Department stated: "Air Excursions is an experienced EAS air 

carrier in Alaska with a proven record of reliability." 

5 NTSB Preliminary Report 10: ANC12LA05B 

6 FAA ASIAS Brief Report No. 2012071204S291 

7 NTSB Preliminary Report ID: ANC12FA083 

8 For the record, SeaPort would like to state that discussion of another carrier's safety record as among the reasons 

to request the Department reconsider its carrier selection is not an action that was taken lightly or without 

considerable thought. We are aware of the challenges inherent to operating in Southeast Alaska and, like many of 

our competitors, have committed significant resources to safety programs such as Medallion Foundation. Finally, 

while the search was conducted for the Air Excursions aircraft on August 2, SeaPort employees stood with their 

colleagues from Air Excursions providing whatever assistance and support they reasonably could. 
Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 & Docket DOT-OST-2008-0217 

Page 5 

A review by SeaPort of T-100 data from September 2010 ,through December 2011 

indicates that Air Excursions did indeed achieve a 100% completion .factor at Kake. As 

SeaPort's EAS proposal submitted on May 8, 2012 noted, l:lowever, this same data indicates 

only 12% of Air Excursions flights at Kake during the same period were operated using twinengine Piper Chieftain aircraft. This is despite the fact in its 2010 proposal Air Excursions went 

to great lengths positioning the Piper Chieftain as supposedly superior to the modern, turbinepowered Cessna Caravan proposed by SeaPort. 9 

SeaPort believes that if the Department wishes to rely on completion factor for its 

selection of Air Excursions at Kake, equal weight should be given to that fact 88% of flights were 

operated with smaller Piper Cherokee aircraft. This is particularly relevant given citizen 

comments filed to the Docket that mention aircraft size: 

"I feel that Wings has more to offer to our community and we would benefit vety 

much having them as our air carrier. A lot of our mail will be delivered sooner and 

luggage would be on the same plane. "

10 

"They [AIR EXCURSIONS] also only use their small crafts. "

11 

While there are periods during the year when demand at Kake does not economically 

justify the larger Piper Chieftain, it is highly questionable whether this was true 88% of the time 

between September 2010 and December 2011. SeaPort believes the Department and 

community are entitled to clarification from Air Excursions as to the reason for such a low 

percentage of flights being operated with the Piper Chieftain. 

In addition and anecdotally, SeaPort has been told that Air Excursions operated its 

single Piper Chieftain very infrequently to Kake (if at all) during summer 2012 because it was 

deployed to support a contract with a tour operator. If true, this would mean that Air Excursions 

was unable to provide service promised to the Kake community and contracted by the 

Department during the previous EAS cycle because it had committed the asset to another (and 

9 Proposal of SeaPort Airlines to Provide Essential Air Service at Kake and Excursion Inlet, Alaska, pg.3 

1

° Comments of Brienr.1a Friday, DOT-OST-2008-0217-0043 

11 Comments of Carol Ann Williams, DOT-OST-2008-0217-0045 
. Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 & Docket DOT-OST-2008-0217 

Page 6 

potentially more lucrative) contract. 12 Such a reality would not be in the spirit of the EAS 

program and call into question characterization of Air Excursions as a having "a proven record 

of reliability." 

Given the typical delay in release of T-1 00 data to the public, SeaPort cannot provide the 

Department with summer 2012 data to verify what it has been told. However, the Department 

has access to T-100 data and, therefore, is able to conduct analysis that would a) determine 

how often the Piper Chieftain was used on flights at Kake and b) whether a pattern existed for 

Piper Chieftain operations elsewhere (scheduled and non-scheduled) that would either support 

or invalidate information provided to SeaPort that the aircraft was used primarily to serve a tour 

operator contract at the expense of EAS obligations. 13 

Air Excursions Is Not A "Locally Owned" Airline 

In Order 2012-9-8 selecting Air Excursions for EAS at Excursion Inlet, the Department 

notes comments submitted on behalf of Excursion Inlet residents by Mr. Bruce Gordon. These 

comments did not support any one carrier but did state a preference that the carrier be locally 

owned and operated. In the Order, the Department states: "Of the three air carriers that 

submitted proposals at Excursion Inlet, Air Excursions and Ward Air are locally owned." 

The Department's statement that Air Excursions is locally owned is incorrect. Of the 

three carriers that submitted proposals, only Ward Air can claim that it is locally owned. 

With respect to Air Excursions, that carrier was purchased earlier this year by the same 

group which in April 2011 purchased Alaska Seaplanes Service. The largest interest in that 

group is believed to be held by Graford Aviation Investments which, according to the Linkedln 

profile of Kent Graford, is headquartered in Portland, Oregon. 14 

Air Excursions can only be characterized as locally owned is to ignore Mr. Graford's 

recent purchase of the carrier and the fact that the base of his business activities is 1 ,017 miles 

12 Order 2010-8-9 

13 We would caution against claim that demand during the peak summer months did not warrant use of the Piper 

Chieftain and, therefore, Kake flights were operated using smaller Piper Cherokees and the Piper Chieftain 

redeployed elsewhere. Demand can easily be suppressed by simply by limiting booking levels (i.e., "lower the lid") to 

those of the smaller aircraft and allowing the Piper Chieftain to be deployed elsewhere. 

14 Portland, OR was listed as the location of Graford Aviation Investments as of September 15, 2012 on Kent . 

Graford's Linkedln profile page. Mr. Graford was the founding President & CEO of SeaPort Airlines 
Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT -OST -2002-12014 & Docket DOT -OST -2008-0217 

Page 7 

away in Portland, Oregon. Simply, Air Excursions is no more locally owned (i.e., Southeast 

Alaska) than is SeaPort. 

With regard to ownership and management of SeaPort, for a number of years the 

company has been structured so as to provide operations from our base in Juneau with relative 

autonomy, including by a Regional Manager - Alaska who is empowered by headquarters to 

ensure operations are conducted in a manner that meets the unique operating environment and 

customer requirements in Southeast Alaska. Among this person's responsibilities are acting as 

the primary liaison with community leaders, tribal governments, U.S. Postal Service, and major 

tour operators and lodges; overseeing the reservation activities (1 00% of calls are answered in 

Southeast Alaska); and analyzing customer service failures, ensuring resolution to the 

customer's satisfaction, and implementing policies and procedure that to avoid reoccurrence 

and which will be effective in Southeast Alaska. 

Therefore, if preference by Excursion Inlet for a locally-owned airline assumes a nonlocal company would be unresponsive to the needs of customers in Southeast Alaska, SeaPort 

has in place an effective structure that addresses these concerns. Therefore, and with the other 

factors surrounding Air Excursion operations are considered, SeaPort respectfully requests that 

the Department reconsider and reselect SeaPort Airlines to provide EAS at Excursion Inlet. 

Summation 

In summary, the accidents and incident involving aircraft operated by Air Excursions 

represent a major change from the proposals submitted by carriers four months ago and on 

which comments were sought from the communities of Kake and Excursion Inlet. The 

galvanization of support for SeaPort, particularly in Kake, following the Department's selection 

of Air Excursions strongly indicates community sentiment echoing that of SeaPort in in this 

petition. 

In addition, there are factual points in Order 2012-9-8 that SeaPort believes to be 

incorrect or incomplete and, when considered along the operational issues of Air Excursions, 

should be clarified and corrected for the benefit of the communities that depend on EAS for 

access to services and businesses in Juneau, delivery of mail and cargo, and connectivity to the 

national air transportation system. 
Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 & Docket DOT-OST-2008-0217 

Page 8 

For the foregoing reasons, SeaPort respectfully urges the Department to reconsider its 

selection of Air Excursions to provide EAS at Kake and Excursion Inlet, Alaska and instead 

select SeaPort. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Timothy F Sieber 

Vice President- Commercial 

SEAPORT AIRLINES, INC. D/B/A WINGS OF ALASKA 

7505 NE Airport Way 

Portland International Airport 

Portland, Oregon 97218 

(971) 340-1716 

Email: tsieber@seagortair.com 

September 21 , 2012 
Petition of SeaPort Airlines, Inc. for Reconsideration 

Docket DOT-OST-2002-12014 & Docket DOT-OST-2008-0217 

Page 9 

PETITION OF SEAPORT AIRLINES, INC D/8/A WINGS OF ALASKA 

FOR THE DEPARTMENT TO RECONSIDER SELECTION OF AIR EXCURSIONS TO 

PROVIDE ESSENTIAL AIR SERVICE AT KAKE AND EXCURSION INLET, ALASKA 

City Manager, City of Kake 

citymanager@cityofkake.org 

Mr. Gary Williams 

SERVICE LIST 

Executive Director, Organized Village of Kake 

gewilliams@kakefirstnation.org 

Vicki Wolfe 

President & CEO, 

Kake Tribal Corporation 

vicki.wolfe@kaketribalcorg.com 

Mr. Bruce Gordon, Excursion Inlet 

bruce@btpost.net 

Ward Air Inc. 

tom@WardAir.com 

U.S. Department of Transportation, Essential Air Service Division 

dennis.devany@dotgov 

michaeL f. martin@dotgov