Order 2012

- 8

- 13 Served: August 10 , 2012



### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 10 th day of August , 2012

ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSALS

Summary By this O rder, the Department is requesting proposals from ca rriers interested in providing

Essential Air S ervice (EAS) at Pendleton, Oregon, for a new contract period, beginning January 1, 201 3

, with or without subsidy. (See Appendix A for a service area map )

. Carriers should file their proposals no later than September 19

, 2012

.

Background By Order 20 10

- 10

- 18

, October 2 6, 2010 , the Department selected Alaska Juneau Aeronautics, Inc., d/b/a SeaPort Airlines (SeaPort) , to provide three nonstop round trips a day (21 a week)

between Pendleton and Portland with 9

- seat Pilatus

- PC

- 12 aircraft

, for the two

- year period ending December 31, 2012 , for a first year subsidy rate o f $1, 463,681 and $1,502,521 for the

second

.

Request for Proposals As the end of the current contract approach es , we are requesting proposals from carriers interested in providing service at Pendleton

, with or without subsidy, for a new contract period beginning January 1, 201 3 . Carriers should file their proposals no later than September 19

, 2012

. 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 o ther applicants. Shortly afterwards, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the communit y and ask them to submit their final

comments

. We will give full consideration to all proposals that are timely filed. 1

1 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 typically do not pr oceed with the carrier

- selection case. Instead, we simply rely on that carrier’s subsidy

- free service as proposed.

Essential Air Service at

PENDLETON, OREGON

Under 49 U.S.C. 41731 et seq

. Docket DOT

- OST

- 2004

- 19934- 2

-

Interested carriers should prepare the ir 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 outr ight all unreasonable or unrealistic proposals and re

- solicit a new round of proposals. However, negotiation or rejection are only an occasional exception 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 th eir 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 cle ar, well

- documented proposals that will facilitate their evaluation by the affected communities and the Department. 2

With specific respect to Pendleton , the Department expects proposals consisting of three nonstop round trips a day (21 a week) with 8

- or 9

- passenger aircraft or two daily round trips (12 a week)

with larger aircraft 3 to Portland , the hub that the community has historically preferred . We

would also entertain proposals to a different hub such as Seattle or San Francisco, or additional freque ncies if Pendleton would be served in conj unction with another community

. Such service is generally consistent with what the communit y currently receive s , and fully satisfies its EAS requirements.

The community and air carriers are encouraged to work tog ether in advance of the due date for proposals to craft a service pattern that is desirable to the community and meets the operational

need of the airline intere sted in submitting a proposal.

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 at tractive service possibilities

-- different hubs, or length of contract, for example

-- with subsidy requirements that remain competitive.

2 In selecting a carrier to provide subsidized EAS , 49 U.S.C. § 41733(c) (1) directs us to consider four factors: (a)

scheduled service rel iability; (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 c odifying a factor that we 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 se rvice. Appendix C of this order contains those general provisions.

3 Previously, most EAS communities were entitled to service with 15

- seat or larger aircraft. However, for FY 2012, Congress revoked the minimum requirement that basic EAS include service with at least 15

- seat or larger aircraft. See Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, P.L. 112

- 55, November 18, 2011. Communities are

still entitled to service with twin

- engine aircraft.- 3

-

New Filing Procedures Carrier proposals should be submitted to the Department with all materials compiled into a sin gle document. In addition, because the document will be published on http://www.regulations.gov/

, each page should be formatted to be viewed online and for easy printing.

Service and Traffic History

In order to assist carriers in making their passenger and revenue forecasts, we have included historical traffic for Pendleton in Appendix B. During the year ended December 31, 20 11

, Pendleton averaged 15.8 enplanements a day, which have increased slightly since 200 9.

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 EAS 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 regulatio ns 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 requi red 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 community and State are welcome to submit comments at any time. We encourage prospective applicants to contact the community before they submit their proposals so that they

can tailor them to the communit y ’ s needs, as they will not be able to amend them after the due

date. As n oted earlier, we will provide a summary of the proposals to the civic parties and ask them to submit their final comments shortly after September 19

, 2012, the deadline for carrier proposals.

This Order is issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR 1.56a( f).

ACCORDINGLY, 1. We request that carriers interested in providing EAS at Pendleton, Oregon , submit their proposals, with or without subsidy requests, no later than September 19

, 2012

. The proposals

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; 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 drug

- free workplace (grants).

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

-

should be e

- mailed to: EAS@dot.gov with the title “Proposal to Provide Essential Air Service at Pendleton, Oregon

, Docket DOT

- OST

- 2004

- 19934 ”; 6

2. Th is docket will remain open until further order of the Department; and

3. We will serve copies of this O rder on the communit y and the parties listed in Appendix D.

Persons entitled to petition the Department for review of this order under the Department’s Regulations, 14 CFR Part 385.50, must file such petitions within ten (10) d ays after the date of

service of this order.

This O rder 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

at http://www.regulations.gov

6 Questions rega rding filings in response to this order may be directed to Brian Swanson at (202) 366

- 5392 or brian.swanson@dot.gov

.Appendix A



### PENDLETON, OREGON
AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIESAppendix B

Historical Enplanements 1 Pendleton, Oregon

Notes: 1. Source: USDOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Form T

- 100. 2. Origin

- destination passengers divided by two. 3. Average annual enplanements divided by 313 effective annual service days, except for annu al periods ended 12/31/2000, 2004 and 2008 (314 effective annual service days). 4. Includes service to Boise, Idaho. Year Ended Recorded Passengers Average Annual

Enplanements 2 Average Enplanements

Per Service Day 3

31-Dec-00 27,395 13,698 43.6

31-Dec-01 26,555 13,278 42.4

31-Dec-02 20,742 10,371 33.1

31-Dec-03 17,518 8,759 28.0

31-Dec-04 8,836 4,418 14.1

31-Dec-05 11,428 5,714 18.3

31-Dec-06 12,429 6,215 19.9

31-Dec-07 12,459 6,230 19.9

31-Dec-08 14,451 7,226 23.0

31-Dec-09 7,531 3,766 12.0

31-Dec-10 9,745 4,873 15.6

31-Dec-11 4 9,877 4,939 15.8Appendix 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 o rder 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 el igibility 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

Avi ation 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 c omplete 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 exte nt 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 complete ly , terminates or reduces payments for service or change s 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 r eduction 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 [DATE] . The Department’s obligation for performance unde r this order beyond [DATE] , 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 [DATE] , until funds are made available t o the Department for performance. If funds are not made available for performance beyond [DATE] , 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 se rvice provided

und er this order.Appendix D

SERVICE LIST

Air Choice One Airlines, Shane Storz Delta Air Lines, Stephen A. Hedden Pacific Aviation Group, Craig Garrick

Air Greco/Wings Air Dorado Jets Pacific Aviation Group, Ron Rye

Air Sunshine, Inc. Dorado Jets, Mark McKenna Pacific Wings, Frank Ford

Air Sunshine, Mirmohammad Adili Era Aviation, Lori Goodman Pacific Wings, Greg Kahlstorf

Air West, Inc., John Raatz Executive Airlines, Kate Soled Penn Air, Danny Seybert

Air Wisconsin, Annette Daly Ex pressJet, Jon Lindlief Penn Air, Scott Bloomquist

Air Wisconsin, Jim Rankin ExpressJet, Roger Weston Pinnacle Airlines, Jennifer Gammill

Airline Associates, Bill Mishk Frontier Airlines, Daniel Shurz Pinnacle Airlines, Megan Rosia

Alaska Airlines, Jeff Cole Frontier Flying, Bob Hajducovich Pinnacle Airlines, Phil Reed

Alaska Airlines, Sandy Sinick Frontline Aviation Planemasters, Inc., John Kessler

American Airlines, Carl Nelson Gem Air, Dan Schroeder Planemasters, Inc., Paul Berliner

American Eagle, Gary Foss Gem Air, JoAnn Wolters Planemasters, Inc., Todd DeSimone

American Eagle, Robert Emrich Great Lakes Airlines, Chuck Howell RAA, Faye Balck

American Eagle, Patrick Swift Great Lakes Airlines, Doug Voss Raytheon, Mike Schiedt

Aviation Express, B rad Shriner Homeland Security, Bill Ragan Rectrix, Aviation, Scott LaForge
Aviation Technologies/Charter Air Transport, Jim Gallagher Homeland Security, David Bernier Saab Group, Polly Prelinger

Bemidji Aviation, Arlen Rinkenberger Horizon Air, Jennifer Thompson Scenic, Mary Schneider

Bemidji Aviation, Cori Rude Horizon Air, Mike McQeen Scenic, Mitzi Daines

Cape Air, Andrew Bonney Horizon Air, Jeff Cole Seaborne Airlines, Shawn Lewis

Cape Air, Dan Wolf ICEPR, Luis Irizarry SeaP ort Airlines

, EAS Mailbox

Cape Air, J. Flaherty Intrepid Internatl Air, Rick Eyk SeaPort Airlines. Rob McKinney

Capital Aviation, Mike Colgan Island Air Charters, Linda House Shuttle America, Jerry Balsano

Chautauqua, Josh Pascoe Jet Air, Daniel Wolford Silver Airways, Darrell Richardson

Classic Aviation, Tony Henderson Kenmore Air, Tim Brooks Silver Airways, Mickey Bowman

Colgan Air, Kevin Scott McCall Aviation, Dan Scott SkyWest, Brad Rawson

Colgan Air, Mike Colgan McCall Aviation, Michelle SkyWest, Eric Christensen

CommutAir, Andy Price Mesaba, John Spanjers SkyWest, Michael Thompson

CommutAir, Joel Raymond Mesaba, Max Shemesh Sovereign Air, Bob Karns

Consultant, Jeff Hartz Michigan DOT, Matt Brinker Tailwind International, Michele

Wilkinson

Consultant, Mike Moone y Midstar Airlines, Jeffrey Fonner Tatonduk, Robert Everts

Consultant, Robert Silverberg Republic Air Line , Greg Aretakis Tatonduk, Robert Ragar

Consultant, Ron McNeil MN Aviation, Jose Maldonado Tradewind, Eric Zipkin

Continental, Bruce Keiner Multi Aero, Darnea Transport Azumah, Joel Anabilah

Azumah

Continental, Dan Weiss Multi Aero, Shane Storz Trans States, Fred Oxley

Continental, Lorry Halloway Northern Air Cargo, David Karp Trans States, Gerry Wigmore

Delta Air Lines Anthony Canitano Northern Air Cargo, Eric Van Andel Trans States, Warren Crotty

Delta Air Lines, Dan Shuman NYDC, Henok Araya United, Alicia Gabriel

Delta Air Lines, Dana Debel OST, Brian Swanson United, James Starnes

Delta Air Lines, Jeff Davidman OST, Brooke Chapman US Airways, Benjamin Slocum

Delta Air Lines, Jeff Morgan OST, Dennis DeVany US Airways, Howard Kass

Delta Air Lines, Joe Esposito OST, Kevin Adams US Airways, Jason Reisinger

Delta Air Lines, Kristal Murphy OST, Kevin Schlemmer Warbelows Air Ventures, Art

Warbelow
Delta Air Lines, Sally Veith OST, Michael Martin PDT, Larry Da l r ymple

Delta Air Lines, Sascha Vanderbellen OST, Scott Faulk City of Pendleton, Phillip Houk