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 10th day of August, 2012

ORDER REQUESTING PROPOSALS

Summary

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

Essential Air Service (EAS) at Pendleton, Oregon, for a new contract period, beginning 

January 1, 2013, 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 2010-10-18, October 26, 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 of $1,463,681 and $1,502,521 for the 

second.

Request for Proposals

As the end of the current contract approaches, we are requesting proposals from carriers 

interested in providing service at Pendleton, with or without subsidy, for a new contract period 

beginning January 1, 2013. 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 other applicants. Shortly afterwards, we will 

provide a summary of the proposals to the community 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 proceed 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 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 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 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.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 aircraft3 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 

frequencies if Pendleton would be served in conjunction with another community. Such service 

is generally consistent with what the community currently receives, and fully satisfies its EAS

requirements.

The community 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 

need of the airline interested 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 attractive 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 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 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.

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 single 

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, 2011, 

Pendleton averaged 15.8 enplanements a day, which have increased slightly since 2009.

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 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 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 community’s 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 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. This docket will remain open until further order of the Department; and

3. We will serve copies of this Order on the community 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) 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

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

PENDLETON, OREGON

AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES
Appendix B

Historical Enplanements1

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 annual 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 

Enplanements2

Average 

Enplanements 

Per Service Day3 

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-114 9,877 4,939 15.8
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 order beyond [DATE]. The 

Department’s obligation for performance under 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 to 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 service provided 

under 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 ExpressJet, 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, Brad 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 SeaPort 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 Mooney 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 AnabilahAzumah

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 Dalrymple

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