Swanson, Brian (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Swanson, Brian (OST) 

Monday, August 29, 2011 1 :37 PM 

Swanson, Brian (OST) 

J)OT .. O&T- ~C\'\1- ·2~ 

bo\-~- lq~~-2~~1 

Subject: FW: Soliciting Comments and Prefereneces QO f=A$ pr!?l,l,OS~ at,ye.rn1al and Moab, UtahDue September 28, 2011 ... · · )} :C..: - !.· U 

From: Swanson, Brian (OST) 

Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 1:26 PM 

To: 'cbaird@grand.utah.gov'; 'wmjgroff@hotmail.com'; 'jdnyland@grand.utah.gov'; 'MelindaBrimhall@grand.utah.gov'; 

'kbraun@grand.utah.gov'; 'mmckee@co.uintah.ut.us'; 'gshowalter@vernalcity.gov' 

Cc: 'Chuck Howell'; 'Tim Sieber'; Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Subject: Soliciting Comments and Prefereneces on EAS proposals at Vernal and Moab, Utah- Due September 28, 2011 

All: 

I would like to update you on the Essential Air Service (EAS) situation at Vernal and Moab and give you an 

opportunity to submit comments if you wish. 

In anticipation of the end of Great Lakes' current contract on January 1, 2012, the Department issued 

Order 2011-7-3 on July 1, 2011, to solicit proposals from all interested air carriers to provide EAS a~ Vernal 

and/or Moab, for a new two-year term. In response to that order, Great Lakes and SeaPort Airlines, Inc. 

(SeaPort) submitted proposals. 

We have directed each carrier to serve its proposal on you. Copies of the proposals may also be accessed online 

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

DOT-OST-1997-2827 (Moab) or DOT-OST-1997-2706 (Vernal). For your convenience, each carrier's 

proposal is briefly summarized below. 

Before summarizing each carrier's proposal, we would like to remind you of several important statutory 

requirements in the EAS Program. First, both communities are guaranteed to receive air service with two-pilot, 

twin-engine aircraft. Second, Vernal is guaranteed service with at least 15-passengers aircraft by virtue of the 

fact that it generated more than 11 enplanements per day in any calendar year from 1976-1986. Third, we are 

prohibited from paying subsidy for EAS at any community where the per-passenger rate exceeds $200, unless 

the community is greater than 210 highway miles from the nearest large or medium hub. In this case, Vernal is 

clearly fewer than 210 highway miles from Salt Lake City and, therefore, is subject to the $200 subsidy-perpassenger ceiling. Moab is farther than 210 miles from the nearest large or medium hub and, thus, is exempt 

from the $200 per passenger cap. 

Great Lakes, operating as a United Airlines and Frontier Airlines code-share partner, submitted "stand-alone" 

service options to provide EAS at both communities. Great Lakes would provide twelve nonstop round trips a 

week from each Vernal and Moab to Denver, utilizing 19-passenger Beech 1900D aircraft. The annual subsidy 

requirement at Vernal is $1,299,194 and for Moab, $1,816,486. 

SeaPort submitted a proposal for each community on a "stand-alone" basis. SeaPort would utilize pressurized 

Pilatus PC-12 aircraft configured for 9-passengers with three service options at each community with all service 

being nonstop, as summarized below. 

1 
Service Annual Subsidy 

Option Proposed Service Required 

# Vernal Moab 

1 18 round trips a week to Salt Lake City (SLC) $1,566,015 $2,074,620 

2 11 round trips a week to Denver (DEN); and $1,855,925 $2,278,580 7 round trips a week to SLC 

3 7 round trips a week to DEN; and $1,701,407 $2,197,787 11 round trips a week to SLC 

SeaPort's options do not meet the 15-seat requirement for Vernal identified above, and the Department would 

not select SeaPort at Vernal unless we receive written community support. Based on the historical passenger 

traffic included in Order 2011-7-3, SeaPort's per-passenger subsidy requirements for service options #s 1 and 3 

are below the statutory cap at Vernal, but service option #3 is not. 

Please note that the average passenger fares shown in each proposal do not necessarily reflect the average local 

fare passengers would actually pay, but, rather, reflect a prorated portion of the total ticket price (e.g., the 

Vernal - Salt Lake City portion of a Vernal- Salt Lake City- San Francisco ticket) that the subsidized carrier 

would realize. Also, the fare shown is net of certain charges such as Federal transportation security fees, excise 

or ticket taxes, and Passenger Facility Charges. Of course, carriers have the discretion to charge fares they 

deem appropriate, and the passenger fares presented in their proposals have been developed for subsidy rate 

computation purposes only. Based on the cost elements incorporated in the carriers' computation summaries, 

the carriers would have to realize passenger fares comparable to the averages shown in their proposals in order 

to achieve break-even or profitable operations without subsidy. 

You should also note that the carriers' schedules may change to reflect changing conditions (e.g., to better meet 

shifting connecting bank times at the hub). The Department does expect subsidized air carriers to maintain 

well-timed and well-spaced flights in order to ensure full compensation. 

We request that you submit any comments you may have as soon as possible, but in any case no later than 

September 28, 2011. Please send your comments by fax to 202-366-7638 or by email to both 

dennis.devany@dot.gov and bric.m.swanson@dot.gov. Our rules require that you send your comments to both 

applicants as well. If you have any questions, or need more time to reply, please feel free to contact Brian 

Swanson of my staff at 202-366-5392. 

Sincerely, 

Dennis J. DeVany 

Chief, Essential Air Service Division, X-53 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

2