Order: 2010-6-4

Served: June 4, 2010

 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

 WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 1st day of June, 2010

ORDER RE-SELECTING CARRIER, SETTING FINAL SUBSIDY RATES AND 

REQUESTING PROPOSALS

Summary

By this order, the Department is: (a) re-selecting Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Mesaba 

Airlines (Mesaba), doing business as Delta Connection, utilizing 34-seat Saab 340 aircraft to 

provide subsidized essential air service (EAS) at Iron Mountain/Kingsford and Escanaba,

Michigan, for a new two-year period, at a combined annual subsidy rate of $4,181,068;1 and 

(b) requesting proposals by July 6 from carriers interested in providing EAS at Ironwood, 

Michigan/Ashland, Wisconsin, and/or Manistee/Ludington, Michigan, only, for a new twoyear term. (See Appendix A for a map.)

Background

On August 14, 2008, the Department issued Order 2008-8-14, reselecting Mesaba Aviation, 

Inc., d/b/a Mesaba Airlines (Mesaba), operating as Northwest Airlink, utilizing 34-seat 

Saab 340 aircraft to provide subsidized EAS at Iron Mountain/Kingsford and Escanaba for a 

new two-year period, beginning August 15, 2008, through August 31, 2010. Under that

order, Mesaba provides seven one-stop or nonstop round trips each week between each 

community and both Detroit and Minneapolis (28 weekly flights per community) for a 

combined annual subsidy rate of $2,870,236.

 1 Such subsidy is calculated and distributed on a fiscal year basis, subject to the availability of funds.

Essential Air Service at

IRON MOUNTAIN/KINGSFORD, MICHIGAN

IRONWOOD, MICHIGAN/ASHLAND, WISCONSIN

MANISTEE/LUNDINGTON, MICHIGAN

ESCANABA, MICHIGAN

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

Docket DOT-OST-1999-5175

Docket DOT-OST-1996-1266

Docket DOT-OST-1996-1711

Docket DOT-OST-2003-15128
- 2 -

Similarly, by Order 2008-4-10, April 7, 2008, the Department selected Great Lakes Aviation, 

Ltd. (Great Lakes), to provide subsidized EAS at Ironwood/Ashland and Manistee/Ludington 

utilizing 19-seat Beech 1900D aircraft for a new two-year term beginning when it 

inaugurated full service. Under that order, Great Lakes provides Ironwood/Ashland with two 

daily one-stop (at Rhinelander, Wisconsin) round trips for an annual subsidy rate of 

$1,492,865. Great Lakes also provides Manistee/Ludington with two daily nonstop round 

trips, for an annual subsidy of $1,799,395, or combined annual subsidy rate of $3,292,260. 

Great Lakes commenced service at the two communities on May 5, 2008, meaning that the 

contract was originally scheduled to expire on May 31, 2010.

In anticipation of the end of the rate terms and in order to attract as many applicants as 

possible, the Department issued Order 2010-2-18 on February 19, 2010, synchronizing the 

contract end dates at all four communities to August 31, 2010, and soliciting proposals to 

provide efficient EAS, with subsidy support if necessary, at any or all four of the 

communities.

Proposals

In response to Order 2010-2-18, the incumbent carriers (Mesaba and Great Lakes), along 

with Charter Air Transport, Inc. (Charter Air) and Sovereign Air, Inc. (Sovereign) submitted

proposals.

Copies of the proposals and community comments may be accessed online through the 

Federal Docket Management System at: http://www.regulations.gov, by doing a search on 

the dockets listed on the first page. Each carrier’s proposal is briefly summarized below.

Mesaba

Mesaba, d/b/a Delta Connection, submitted a proposal with three service/subsidy options, all 

utilizing 34-passenger Saab 340 aircraft, to provide EAS at Iron Mountain/Kingsford and

Escanaba only. Options 1 (Escanaba only) and 2 (Iron Mountain/Kingsford only) can be 

combined for an annual subsidy rate of approximately $4.485 million, as shown in the table 

below.

Option 

# Community Weekly round trips

Hub 

Served

Annual 

Subsidy 

Requirement

1 Escanaba 14 (nonstop) Detroit $2.310 M

2 Iron Mountain/

Kingsford 14 (nonstop) Minneapolis $2.176 M

3 Escanaba and Iron 

Mountain/Kingsford

21 (one-stop & 

nonstop)

Detroit and 

Minneapolis $4.181 M

Great Lakes

Great Lakes submitted a four-community package bid (all or nothing) for service to 

Milwaukee (where it will utilize its code-share agreement with Frontier Airlines) with 19-

passenger Beech 1900D aircraft. Its proposed service levels for each community and annual 

subsidy requirement are summarized below
- 3 -

Community Weekly 

round trips Service pattern notes

Escanaba 18 no restrictions upline

Iron Mountain/Kingsford 18 no restrictions upline

Ironwood/Ashland 14 one-stop authority over Iron Mountain, 

Escanaba, or Rhinelander, Wisconsin.

Manistee/Ludington 14 no restrictions upline

Annual Subsidy Requirement $6.471 M

Charter Air

Charter Air submitted a proposal with seven options. Each option stands on its own and can 

be combined with other options utilizing additional aircraft. Its proposed service levels for 

each community and annual subsidy requirements are summarized below.

Option

# Community

Aircraft type

(passenger

seats) –

upline service

Weekly 

round 

trips

Hub

Served

Annual 

Subsidy 

Requirement

1

Escanaba Embraer 120 (30) –

shared with Manistee

18

(one-stop 

& nonstop)

Milwaukee

$3.477 M

Manistee/ 

Ludington

Embraer 120 (30) –

shared with Escanaba

12

(one-stop 

& nonstop)

2

Ironwood/ 

Ashland

Embraer 120 (30) –

shared with Iron 

Mountain

12

(one-stop 

& nonstop) $3.173 M

Iron Mountain/ 

Kingsford

Embraer 120 (30) –

shared with Ironwood

12

(one-stop 

& nonstop)

3 Escanaba Embraer 120

(30)

12

(nonstop) Milwaukee

$2.254 M

4 Manistee/ 

Ludington

BAE 3200 Jetstream

(19)

12

(nonstop) $1.746 M

5 Manistee/ 

Ludington

BAE 3200 Jetstream

(19)

12

(nonstop)

Chicago -

Midway $1.899 M

6 Ironwood/ 

Ashland

BAE 3200 Jetstream

(19)

12

(nonstop) Milwaukee

$1.918 M

7 Iron Mountain/ 

Kingsford

Embraer 120

(30)

12

(nonstop) $2.254 M

Sovereign

Sovereign’s proposal comprises two, two-community packages, both utilizing King Air 350 

aircraft configured with 12 seats (it can accommodate 15 seats), with service to ChicagoO’Hare. Escanaba and Manistee/Ludington are combined as one package, and 

Ironwood/Ashland and Iron Mountain/Kingsford is the other. The service level and subsidy 

rate for each package is summarized in the table below.
- 4 -

Community Weekly round trips

Annual 

Subsidy 

Requirement

Escanaba 28

(one-stop & nonstop) $2.462 M

Manistee/Ludington 28

(one-stop & nonstop)

Ironwood/Ashland 28

(one-stop & nonstop) $2.147 M Iron Mountain/

Kingsford

28

(one-stop & nonstop)

Community Comments

On March 30, 2010, the Department solicited the views of the airport managers and civic 

officials at the four communities, and the Michigan State Department of Transportation.

Escanaba and Iron Mountain/Kingsford strongly support Mesaba’s option servicing 

Minneapolis/St. Paul and Detroit. Specifically, the Delta County Airport Board and the Delta 

County Board of Commissioners (representing Escanaba) believe that Mesaba’s three-roundtrip-a-day proposal serving both Minneapolis and Detroit will better serve local customers. 

The Dickinson County Board of Commissioners (representing Iron Mountain/Kingsford)

supports Mesaba’s Option #3, stating that, “access to major hubs and the convenience of 

single-carrier connections is an asset to this community.”

Manistee/Ludington and Ironwood/Ashland recommend Great Lakes. The Manistee County 

Blacker Airport Authority, in a close vote, “chose Great Lakes with its experience,” however; 

it also made a back-up recommendation for Charter Air’s Chicago Midway service option if 

the Great Lakes proposal was not selectable because of the all-or-nothing nature of Great 

Lakes’ proposal. The Gogebic-Iron County Airport Board (representing Ironwood/Ashland) 

voted to recommend retaining Great Lakes.

The Assistant Administrator, Aviation Services Division, Bureau of Aeronautics & Freight 

Services, Michigan Department of Transportation, supported the community preferences as 

summarized above, but also requested that the Department and Great Lakes “negotiate a 

prorated award to reflect service to only Ironwood and Manistee,” because Great Lakes’ 

proposal was a four-community, all-or-nothing package.

Decision on Carrier Selection

After careful consideration, we have decided to: (a) select Mesaba’s Option #3 at Escanaba 

and Iron Mountain/Kingsford; and (b) re-solicit proposals for EAS at Ironwood/Ashland 

and/or Manistee/Kingsford by June 23.

Escanaba and Iron Mountain/Kingsford

The carrier-selection decision here is rather straightforward. Mesaba meets all four of the 

statutorily mandated selection criteria. Mesaba, operating as Delta Connection, would 

provide seamless service beyond the hub, and its interline arrangements allow for passengers 

to travel on one reservation, ticket and baggage check-in. Mesaba has years of experience 

providing scheduled air service and has the full support of both communities.
- 5 -

Regarding which of Mesaba’s options to select, the communities support Option #3 and that 

is the least expensive option, so we will select it. Mesaba will utilize 34-seat Saab 340 

aircraft and provide Escanaba 14 weekly nonstop round trips to Detroit and 7 weekly onestop (at Iron Mountain/Kingsford) round trips to Minneapolis/St. Paul. Similarly, Iron 

Mountain/Kingsford will receive 7 weekly nonstop flights to Minneapolis/St. Paul and 14 

weekly one-stop (at Escanaba) round trips to Detroit. The combined annual subsidy rate is 

$4,181,068 compared to nearly $4.5 million to serve the communities individually with two 

round trips a day.2

The Department will make this selection at these two communities contingent upon the 

Department’s receiving properly executed certifications from Mesaba that it is in compliance 

with the Department’s regulations regarding drug-free workplaces and nondiscrimination, as 

well as the regulations governing lobbying activities.

Ironwood/Ashland and Manistee/Ludington

In order to respond to the Michigan Department of Transportation’s request and to accede to 

Ironwood/Ashland’s and Manistee/Kingsford’s carrier preferences, we are providing for a second 

round of proposals from all interested carriers for EAS at Ironwood/Ashland and/or 

Manistee/Kingsford, while also retaining all of the proposals that are not linked to Iron 

Mountain/Kingsford or Escanaba. Because we are selecting Mesaba to provide subsidized EAS 

at Escanaba and Iron Mountain/Kingsford, we are requesting proposals for Ironwood/Ashland 

and/or Manistee/Kingsford only.

As discussed above, Great Lakes’ current proposal is a four-community package bid (all or 

nothing) and therefore is not selectable. Sovereign’s proposal is similarly unselectable due to 

aircraft sharing or routing. In the proposal, the Manistee/Ludington option is linked to 

Escanaba and Ironwood/Ashland to Iron Mountain/Kingsford. Additionally, Sovereign does 

not currently have the requisite operating authority from either the Department or the Federal 

Aviation Administration to provide scheduled air service, its aircraft would not meet the 15-

seat standard (49 U.S.C. § 41732(b)(3), and it has no community support. In evaluating 

Charter Air’s service options at the two communities, we note that combining the least 

expensive of its service option at Manistee/Ludington (~$1.7 million) with the stand-alone 

option for Ironwood/Ashland would result in an annual subsidy requirement of 

approximately $3.7 million, which is greater than the EAS program average. Further, while 

Charter Air notes that it continues to work with other airlines for interline and ticketing 

agreements, none are specifically identified, and therefore its proposal does not meet this 

important selection criterion. Moreover, neither community recommended Charter Air as its first 

choice. Based on all of the above, we find that good cause exists to request a second-round of 

proposals.3

Carrier Fitness

49 U.S.C. 41737(b) and 41738 require that we find an air carrier fit, willing and able to 

provide reliable service before we may compensate it for essential air service. Mesaba is

 2 Because all three round trips a day serve both communities, and the seats are thus shared, the capacity level 

does not exceed the program’s 67-seat maximum capacity guarantee. See 14 CFR 398.6.

3 Charter Air should provide written confirmation of its continuing interest in participating in the second-round 

of this carrier selection case at Ironwood/Ashland and/or Manistee/Kingsford or submit a revised proposal.
- 6 -

subject to the Department’s continuing fitness monitoring, and no information has come to 

our attention that would cause us to question the carrier’s fitness at this time. We have 

contacted the Federal Aviation Administration, and it has raised no concerns that would 

negatively affect our fitness findings. We therefore conclude that Mesaba remains fit to 

conduct the operations proposed here.

Request for Proposals

As noted above, we are re-soliciting proposals from all carriers, including Mesaba, Great 

Lakes, Charter Air and Sovereign, interested in providing service at Ironwood/Ashland 

and/or Manistee/Ludington only, with or without subsidy, for the two-year period beginning 

when the carrier inaugurates full service. Carriers should file their proposals no later than 

July 6. Staff will then docket the proposals, thereby making them public, and direct each 

carrier to serve a copy of its proposal on the civic parties and other applicants. Shortly 

afterwards, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the communities and ask them to 

submit their final comments. We will give full consideration to all proposals that are timely 

filed.4

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; in such cases, of course, we will 

give all applicants the same opportunity. We also retain the discretion to reject outright all 

unreasonable or unrealistic proposals and resolicit a new round of proposals. However, 

negotiation and rejection are only occasional exceptions to the rule.

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.5

With specific respect to Ironwood/Ashland and Manistee/Ludington, the Department expects

proposals consisting of service with 19-passenger or larger aircraft and offering two round 

trips a day (12 a week) between each community and Milwaukee, Detroit, Minneapolis, or 

 4 Carriers should not expect the Department to accept late fillings. 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.

5 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.
- 7 -

any other hub that provides good access to the national air transportation system.. We would 

also entertain proposals with smaller aircraft, offering three round trips a day (18 a week), 

subject to the concurrence of the communities. Such service is generally consistent with 

what the communities currently receive, and fully satisfies their essential air service 

requirements.

Communities 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 requirements of the airline interested in submitting a proposal. In addition, 

carriers should be very clear as to whether their proposals are for both Ironwood/Ashland and 

Manistee/Kingsford as an inseparable package, or whether they would serve either 

community individually.

We encourage proposals that meet those 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, for example -- with subsidy requirements that remain 

competitive.

New Filing Procedures

Carrier proposals should be submitted to the Department with all materials merged into a 

single document. In addition, because the document will be published on Regulations.gov, 

each page should be formatted to be viewed online.

Service and Traffic History

Historical traffic for Ironwood/Ashland and Manistee/Ludington is detailed in Appendix D. 

During the year ended December 31, 2009, Ironwood/Ashland averaged 3.1 enplanements a 

day, and Manistee/Ludington 7.5.

Other Carrier Requirements

The Department is responsible for implementing various Federal statutes governing lobbying 

activities, drug-free workplaces, and nondiscrimination.6

 6 The regulations applicable to these areas are: (1) 49 CFR Part 20 -- New restrictions on lobbying; 

 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 

(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 (non-procurement) and government-wide requirements for drugfree workplace (grants).
- 8 -

more detailed information regarding these requirements should contact the Office of Aviation 

Analysis at (202) 366-5903.7

Community and State Comments

The communities and State are welcome to submit comments at any time. We encourage 

prospective applicants to contact the communities before they submit their proposals so that 

they can tailor them to the communities’ needs, as they will not be able to amend them after 

the due date. As noted earlier, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the civic 

parties and ask them to submit their final comments shortly after July 6.

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 select Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Delta Connection, to provide essential air service 

at Iron Mountain/Kingsford and Escanaba, Michigan, as described in Appendix C, for the 

two-year period, beginning September, 1, 2010, through August 31, 2012;

2. The Department directs Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Delta Connection, to retain all 

books, records, and other source and summary documentation to support claims for payment, 

and to preserve and maintain such documentation in a manner that readily permits its audit 

and examination by representatives of the Department. Such documentation shall be retained 

for seven years or until the Department indicates that the records may be destroyed, 

whichever comes first. Copies of flight logs for aircraft sold or disposed of must be retained. 

The carrier may forfeit its compensation for any claim that is not supported under the terms 

of this order;

3. We find that Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Delta Connection, continues to be fit, willing 

and able to operate as a certificated air carrier and capable of providing reliable essential air 

service at Iron Mountain/Kingsford and Escanaba, Michigan;

4. We request that carriers interested in providing essential air service at Ironwood, 

Michigan/Ashland, Wisconsin and/or Manistee/Ludington, Michigan, submit their proposals, 

with or without subsidy requests, no later than July 6, 2010. The proposals should be emailed to: EAS@dot.gov with the title with the title “Proposal to Provide Essential Air 

Service at Ironwood, Michigan/Ashland, Wisconsin and/or Manistee/Ludington, Michigan,” 

with the docket numbers corresponding to the communities as shown on the first page of this 

order;8

5. These Dockets will remain open until further order of the Department; and

 7 The certifications are also available on the web at http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/index.html.

8 Questions regarding filings in response to this order may be directed to Brian Swanson at (202) 366-5392 or 

brian.swanson@dot.gov.
- 9 -

6. We will serve copies of this order on the parties listed in Appendix E.

By:

SUSAN L. KURLAND 

Assistant Secretary for

Aviation and International Affairs

(SEAL)

An electronic version of this document is available in the Federal Docket Management 

System (FDMS) at http://www.regulations.gov
Appendix A

AREA MAP
Appendix B

Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Mesaba Airlines

Provision of Essential Air Service at Iron Mountain/Kingsford and Escanaba, Michigan

Calculation of Compensation Requirement

Option #3

EAS Stations ESC & IMT

Hubs DTW & MSP

Round trips per week 21

Completion Factor 97%

Total Passengers 29,740

Total Block Hours 4,212

Passenger Revenue $2,444,361

Other Revenue $296,030

Total Revenue $2,740,392

Pilots $1,006,369

Fuel $1,008,215

Maintenance $1,511,699

Aircraft $872,057

Total Direct Costs $4,398,340

Total Indirect Costs $2,146,775

Total Operating $6,545,115

Inflation Rate Allowance @0.75 % $49,088

Profit @ 5.0% $327,256

Economic Cost $6,921,459

Required Annual Subsidy Rate $4,181,068
Appendix C

Page 1 of 2

Mesaba Aviation, Inc., d/b/a Mesaba Airlines

Provision of Essential Air Service at Iron Mountain/Kingsford and Escanaba, 

Michigan

Summary of Service To Be Provided

Effective Period: September 1, 2010 through August 31, 2012.

Scheduled Service: Iron Mountain/Kingsford: 7 weekly nonstop round trips to 

Minneapolis/St. Paul and 14 weekly one-stop (at Escanaba) to 

Detroit.

Escanaba: 14 weekly nonstop round trips to Detroit and 7 

weekly one-stop (at Iron Mountain/Kingsford) to Minneapolis/St. 

Paul

No service to any other point is contemplated under the terms of 

the carrier’s proposal; accordingly, no such service may be 

provided on subsidized flights without prior Department 

approval.

Additional Intermediate Stops 

and upline service:

Aircraft type: Saab 340 (34 passenger seats).

Timing of flights: Flights must be well-timed and well-spaced in order to ensure 

full compensation.

Annual compensation: $4,181,068

This rate assumes an annual completion factor of 97 percent. A 

compensation ceiling is to be applied per calendar week such that 

service above that ceiling in one week cannot make up for 

service shortfalls in another week.

Subsidy Rate per Flight: $986.801

Weekly Compensation Ceiling 

per Community:

per arrival from or departure to Minneapolis or Detroit.

$41,445.602

 1 $4,181,068 divided by 4,237 annual departures: 3 arrivals/departures per day x 2 communities x 7 days per week 

x 52 weeks x .97 (completion factor) = 4,237.

2 21 flights per week per community multiplied by $986.80 per flight.
Appendix C

Page 2 of 2

NOTE:

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 order beyond September 30, 2010. 

The Department’s obligation for performance under this order beyond September 30, 2010, is 

subject to 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 September 30, 2010, until funds are made available to the Department 

for performance. If funds are not made available for performance beyond September 30, 2010, 

the Department will provide notice in writing to the carrier.

All claims for payment must be submitted within 60 days of the last day of service provided 

under this order.
Appendix D

Page 1 of 2

Historical Enplanements1

Ironwood/Ashland

Year 

Ended

Total 

Scheduled 

Passengers

Annual 

Enplanements2

Average 

Enplanements 

Per Day3 

31-Dec-03 4,574 2,287 6.3

31-Dec-04 5,769 2,885 7.9

31-Dec-05 6,405 3,203 8.8

31-Dec-06 6,622 3,311 9.1

31-Dec-07 5,826 2,913 8.0

31-Dec-08 2,905 1,453 4.0

31-Dec-09 2,290 1,145 3.1

Manistee/Ludington

Year 

Ended

Total 

Scheduled 

Passengers

Annual 

Enplanements2

Average 

Enplanements 

Per Day3 

31-Dec-03 2,917 1,459 4.0

31-Dec-04 3,941 1,971 5.4

31-Dec-05 3,951 1,976 5.4

31-Dec-06 5,551 2,776 7.6

31-Dec-07 6,004 3,002 8.2

31-Dec-08 4,044 2,022 5.5

31-Dec-09 5,472 2,736 7.5

Notes:

1. Source: http://mdotwas1.mdot.state.mi.us/public/airportstats/

2. Total scheduled passengers divided by two.

3. Average annual enplanements divided by 365 service days, except for 

annual periods ended 12/31/2004 and 12/31/2008 (366 service days).
Appendix D

Page 2 of 2

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 Department 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 E

SERVICE LIST

Mr. Thomas Baldini

District Director

Congressman Bart Stupak

1229 W. Washington Street

Marquette, Michigan 49855

Mr. Duane DuRay

Manager

Gogebic - Iron County Airport

E5560 Airport Road

Ironwood, Michigan 49938

Mr. Gerald E. Edwards

Assistant Administrator, Aviation Services 

Division

Bureau of Aeronautics & Freight Services

Michigan Department of Transportation

Aeronautics Building

2700 Port Lansing Road

Lansing, Michigan 48906

The Honorable Thomas C. Elegeert

Chairman

Delta County Board of Commissioners

Administration Office

310 Ludington Street

Escanaba, Michigan 49829

Mr. Tim Howen

Manager

Ford Airport

PO Box 609

Iron Mountain Michigan 49801

Mr. Barry Lind

Manager

Manistee County Blacker Airport

2323 Airport Road

Manistee, Michigan 49960

Ms. Connie Ness

Airport and Parks Manager

Delta County

3300 Airport Road

Escanaba, Michigan 49829

Mr. John G. Spanjers

President and Chief Operating Officer

Mesaba Airlines

1000 Blue Gentian Road, Suite 200

Eagan, Minnesota 55121

The Honorable Henry Wender

Chairman

Board of Commissioners

Dickinson County, Michigan

Courthouse

P.O. Box 609

Iron Mountain, Michigan 49801

Mr. David Woodworth

Vice Chairman

Delta County Airport Board

3300 Airport Road

Escanaba, Michigan 49829