Order 2011-7-3

Served: July 5, 2011

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 July, 2011

ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSALS

Summary

By this order, the Department is requesting proposals from carriers interested in providing 

essential air service (EAS) at Vernal and/or Moab, Utah, for a new two-year period, 

beginning January 1, 2012, with or without subsidy. (See Appendix A for a service area 

map). Carriers should file their proposals no later than August 16, 2011.

Background

By Order 2009-12-9, December 14, 2009, the Department selected Great Lakes Aviation,

Ltd. (Great Lakes), to provide subsidized EAS at Vernal and Moab utilizing 19-passenger 

Beech 1900D aircraft, through December 31, 2011. Under that order, Great Lakes

provides 12 weekly nonstop trips from each community to Denver for an annual subsidy 

rate of $1,421,478 at Vernal and $1,798,370 for Moab. The combined annual subsidy 

rate for both communities totals $3,219,848.

Request for Proposals

As the end of the current contract approaches, the Department is requesting proposals 

from carriers interested in providing service at Vernal and/or Moab with or without 

subsidy, for the two-year period beginning January 1, 2012. Carriers should file their 

proposals no later than August 16, 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 that are timely filed.1

 1 In cases where a carrier proposed to basic provide essential air service without subsidy and we determine 

that service can be provided reliably without such compensation, we typically do not proceed with the 

carrier-selection case. Instead, we generally rely on that carrier’s subsidy-free service as proposed.

Essential Air Service at:

VERNAL, UTAH

MOAB, UTAH

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

Docket DOT-OST-1997-2706

Docket DOT-OST-1997-2827
- 2 -

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. We also retain the 

discretion to reject outright all unreasonable or unrealistic proposals and re-solicit 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, welldocumented proposals that will facilitate their evaluation by the affected communities and

the Department.2

With specific respect to the two communities, the Department expects proposals 

consisting of two nonstop or one-stop round trips a day between each community and 

Denver utilizing 19-seat aircraft. Such service is consistent with what the communities 

currently receive. However, we note that while Vernal is guaranteed service with 15-seat 

or larger aircraft by virtue of its historical enplanement levels, Moab is not.3

Nonetheless, in order to attract as broad an array of proposals as possible, we would 

entertain proposals for three round trips a day (18 a week) with eight- or nine-seat 

aircraft. We encourage proposals that meet these guidelines 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.

Service and Traffic History

Great Lakes returned to Vernal and Moab in 2008, and historical traffic is detailed in 

Appendix B. During the year ended December 31, 2010, Vernal averaged 14.0

enplanements a day, and Moab 8.8. Both communities’ enplanements are trending 

upward since the year ended December 31, 2009.

 2 In selecting a carrier to provide subsidized essential air service, 49 U.S.C. 41733(c) (1) directs us to 

consider four factors: (a) scheduled service reliability; (b) contractual and marketing arrangements with a 

larger carrier to ensure service beyond the hub; (c) interline arrangements that the applicant has made with a 

larger carrier at the hub; and (d) community views, giving substantial weight to the views of the elected 

officials representing the users. 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. 3 See 49 U.S.C. § 41732(b)(3).
- 3 -

New Filing Procedures

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

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

Regulations.gov, each page should be formatted to be viewed online.

Other Carrier Requirements

The Department is responsible for implementing various Federal statutes governing 

lobbying activities, drug-free workplaces, and nondiscrimination.4 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 more detailed information regarding these 

requirements should contact the Office of Aviation Analysis at (202) 366-5903.5

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 August 16, the 

end of the deadline for carrier proposals.

This order is issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.56a(f) and re-delegated to the 

Director, Office of Aviation Analysis.

 

4 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; (3) 49 CFR Part 27 --

Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Programs and Activities Receiving or Benefiting from 

Federal Financial Assistance; (4) 14 CFR Part 382 -- Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air 

Travel; and (5) 49 CFR Part 29 -- Government-Wide Debarment and Suspension (Non-Procurement) and 

Government-Wide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants).

5 The certifications are also available on the web at http://ostpxweb.dot.gov/aviation/index.html.
- 4 -

ACCORDINGLY,

1. We request that carriers interested in providing essential air service at Vernal and/or

Moab, Utah, submit their proposals, with or without subsidy requests, no later than 

August 16, 2011. The proposals should be e-mailed to: EAS@dot.gov with the title with 

the title “Proposal to Provide Essential Air Service at Vernal and/or Moab, Utah” with the 

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

order;6

2. These dockets will remain open until further order of the Department; and

3. We will serve copies of this order on the parties listed in Appendix D.

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 http://www.regulations.gov

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

or brian.swanson@dot.gov.
Appendix A

AREA MAP
Appendix B

Notes:

1. Source: US DOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Forms T-100 Market 

Report between each community and DEN, PHX and SLC.

2. Origin-destination passengers divided by two.

3. Average annual enplanements divided by 313 effective annual service days, 

except for annual periods ended 12/31/2000, 12/31/2004, and 12/31/2008 (314 

effective annual service days).

Year Ended

Origin & 

Destination 

Passengers

Annual 

Enplanements2

Average 

Enplanements Per 

Service Day3 

31-Dec-03 4,380 2,190 7.0

31-Dec-05 2,740 1,370 4.4

31-Dec-06 4,007 2,004 6.4

31-Dec-07 5,892 2,946 9.4

31-Dec-08 10,482 5,241 16.7

31-Dec-09 7,572 3,786 12.1

31-Dec-10 8,767 4,384 14.0

Year Ended

Origin & 

Destination 

Passengers

Annual 

Enplanements2

Average 

Enplanements Per 

Service Day3 

31-Dec-03 3,503 1,752 5.6

31-Dec-05 2,572 1,286 4.1

31-Dec-06 3,548 1,774 5.7

31-Dec-07 5,524 2,762 8.8

31-Dec-08 5,788 2,894 9.2

31-Dec-09 3,756 1,878 6.0

31-Dec-10 5,489 2,745 8.8

Historical Enplanements1

Moab, Utah

Historical Enplanements1

Vernal, Utah
Appendix C

Example of 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 D

SERVICE LIST

Air Greco/Wings Air Era Aviation, Lori Goodman Pacific Aviation Group, Craig Garrick

Air Sunshine, Inc. Executive Airlines, Kate Soled Pacific Aviation Group, Ron Rye

Air Sunshine, Mirmohammad Adili Frontier Airlines, Daniel Shurz Pacific Wings, Frank Ford

Air West, Inc., John Raatz Frontier Flying, Bob Hajducovich Pacific Wings, Greg Kahlstorf

Air Wisconsin, Annette Daly Frontline Aviation Penn Air, Danny Seybert

Air Wisconsin, Jim Rankin Gem Air, Dan Schroeder Penn Air, Scott Bloomquist

Airline Associates, Bill Mishk Gem Air, JoAnn Wolters Pinnacle Airlines, Jennifer Gammill

Alaska Airlines, Jeff Cole Great Lakes Airlines, Chuck Howell Pinnacle Airlines, Megan Rosia

Alaska Airlines, Sandy Sinick Great Lakes Airlines, Doug Voss Pinnacle Airlines, Phil Reed

Allegiant Air, Brian Davis Gulfstream, Dave Hackett Planemasters, Inc., John Kessler

American Airlines, Carl Nelson Gulfstream, Mickey Bowman Planemasters, Inc., Paul Berliner

American Eagle, Gary Foss Gulfstream, T. Cooper Planemasters, Inc., Todd DeSimone

American Eagle, Robert Emrich Homeland Security, Bill Ragan Raytheon, Mike Schiedt 

Atlantic Southeast, Jon Lindlief Homeland Security, David Bernier Rectrix, Aviation, Scott LaForge

Atlantic Southeast, Roger Weston Horizon Air, Dan Russo Saab Group, Polly Prelinger

Aviation Technologies/Charter Air Transport, 

Jim Gallagher Horizon Air, Jennifer Thompson Scenic, Mary Schneider

Bemidji Aviation, Arlen Rinkenberger Horizon Air, Mike McQeen Scenic, Mitzi Daines

Bemidji Aviation, Cori Rude Horizon Air, Jeff Cole Seaborne Airlines, Shawn Lewis

Cape Air, Andrew Bonney ICEPR, Luis Irizarry SeaPort Airlines, Daniel Helland

Cape Air, Dan Wolf Intrepid Internatl Air, Rick Eyk SeaPort Airlines. Rob McKinney

Cape Air, J. Flaherty Island Air Charters, Linda House Shuttle America, Jerry Balsano

Chautauqua, Josh Pascoe Jet Air, Daniel Wolford SkyWest, Brad Rawson

Classic Aviation, Tony Henderson Kenmore Air, Tim Brooks SkyWest, Eric Christensen

Colgan Air, Kevin Scott McCall Aviation, Dan Scott SkyWest, Michael Thompson

Colgan Air, Mike Colgan McCall Aviation, Michelle Sovereign Air, Bob Karns

CommutAir, Andy Price Mesaba, John Spanjers Sovereign Air, Lois R. Barton

CommutAir, Joel Raymond Mesaba, Max Shemesh Tatonduk, Robert Everts

Consultant, Mike Mooney Michigan DOT, Matt Brinker Tatonduk, Robert Ragar

Consultant, Robert Silverberg Midstar Airlines, Jeffrey Fonner Tradewind, Eric Zipkin

Continental, Bruce Keiner Republic Air Line, Greg Aretakis Transport Azumah, Joel AnabilahAzumah

Continental, Dan Weiss MN Aviation, Jose Maldonado Trans States, Fred Oxley

Continental, Lorry Halloway Multi Aero, Darnea Trans States, Gerry Wigmore

Delta Air Lines Anthony Canitano Multi Aero, Shane Storz United, Alicia Gabriel

Delta Air Lines, Dan Shuman Northern Air Cargo, David Karp United, James Starnes

Delta Air Lines, Dana Debel Northern Air Cargo, Eric Van Andel US Airways, Benjamin Slocum

Delta Air Lines, Jeff Davidman NYDC, Henok Araya US Airways, Howard Kass

Delta Air Lines, Jeff Morgan OST, Brian Swanson US Airways, Jason Reisinger

Delta Air Lines, Joe Esposito OST, Dennis DeVany Warbelows Air Ventures, Art 

Warbelow

Delta Air Lines, Kristal Murphy OST, Kevin Adams

Delta Air Lines, Sally Veith OST, Kevin Schlemmer

Delta Air Lines, Sascha Vanderbellen OST, Michael Martin

Delta Air Lines, Stephen A. Hedden

Dorado Jets

Dorado Jets, Mark McKenna