BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Essential Air Service at 

VICTORIA, TEXAS 

Under 49 U.S.C. § 41731, et seq.

Docket DOT-OST-2005-20454 

ANSWER OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON 

AND THE GREATER HOUSTON PARTNERSHIP

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to: 

Mario C. Diaz 

Director 

Ian Wadsworth 

Chief Commercial Officer 

Department of Aviation 

CITY OF HOUSTON 

16930 John F. Kennedy Blvd. 

Houston, TX 77032 

(281) 233-3000 

(281) 233-1859 (fax) 

Jeff Moseley 

Chief Executive Officer 

GREATER HOUSTON PARTNERSHIP 

1200 Smith Street, Suite 700 

Houston, TX 77002 

(713) 844-3600 

(713) 844-0200 (fax) 

Rachel B. Trinder 

Jol A. Silversmith 

ZUCKERT, SCOUTT & 

RASENBERGER, L.L.P. 

888 Seventeenth Street, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20006-3309 

(202) 973-7927 

(202) 342-0683 (fax) 

rbtrinder@zsrlaw.com

jasilversmith@zsrlaw.com

Counsel for the City of Houston 

 and the Greater Houston Partnership 

Dated: April 5, 2011
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Essential Air Service at 

VICTORIA, TEXAS 

Under 49 U.S.C. § 41731, et seq.

Docket DOT-OST-2005-20454 

ANSWER OF THE CITY OF HOUSTON 

AND THE GREATER HOUSTON PARTNERSHIP

The City of Houston and the Greater Houston Partnership (collectively, “Houston” 

or the “Houston Parties”) respectfully submit this answer in strong support of the 

proposal of Colgan Air, Inc. (“Colgan”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pinnacle Airlines 

Corp. and regional partner of Continental, to continue to provide essential air service 

(“EAS”) pursuant to 49 U.S.C. § 41731, et seq. between Victoria Regional Airport 

(“VCT”) in Victoria, Texas and Houston’s George Bush Intercontinental Airport (“IAH”). 

As the Department is aware, IAH is Houston’s flagship airport, and one of the 

nation’s premier international gateways. It now ranks as the seventh-busiest airport in 

the U.S., measured by passenger enplanements. In 2010, IAH handled more than 40.4 

million passengers, including more than 8.5 million international passengers – increases 

of 1.2% and 8.9%, respectively, over the prior year, despite the challenging economy. 

Today IAH is the largest hub for the world’s largest airline, the combined 

Continental/United, offering a wide array of fast and efficient connections throughout the 

United States and internationally. Indeed, in 2012 – once the carrier has begun its 

previously-announced services between Houston and both Lagos, Nigeria and 
Answer of the City of Houston and 

the Greater Houston Partnership 

Page 2

Auckland, New Zealand – Houston will be the only U.S. city (and just one of four 

worldwide) to offer flights to all six inhabited continents. In total, IAH is served by 17 

scheduled passenger carriers, numerous charter and cargo carriers, and offers 

scheduled passenger flights to a total of 176 domestic and international points. Indeed, 

despite the challenging economy, the past year has been a period of expansion at IAH, 

with new or enhanced services to destinations ranging from Cedar Rapids to Dubai. 

Beneficiaries of the many connecting opportunities at IAH include the city and 

county of Victoria, which for more than two decades have been linked to Houston by 

regional partners of Continental. Through its existing essential air service to IAH, 

Colgan offers Victoria an unmatched gateway to the world for its passengers, 

businesses and cargo. Colgan’s nonstop service to Houston offers the Victoria 

community direct access to the nation’s fourth-largest city as well as the U.S.’s sixthlargest Metropolitan Statistical Area (“MSA”), with a population of more than 5.9 million. 

Houston is a dynamic economic powerhouse and award-winning international city, with 

a highly diverse global business community offering assets such as world-class facilities 

for medical research and treatment (including the world’s largest medical center), 

aerospace manufacturing, a worldwide energy production community, major financial 

investment houses, large-scale international conferences, and cargo transportation and 

distribution. Among the many indexes that demonstrate Houston’s significance are the 

number of Fortune 500 companies that are headquartered in Houston (25, the third 

highest total in the U.S.) and the concentration of foreign consular and trade offices in 

Houston (94, also the third highest total in the U.S.). Indeed, Houston has been 
Answer of the City of Houston and 

the Greater Houston Partnership 

Page 3

recognized repeatedly as a leading location in which to live and do business – recent 

examples being its designation as the top U.S. manufacturing city by Manufacturers’ 

News; the best city in which to start a new career by the Daily Beast; and the best city 

for young professionals by Forbes.

Conversely, the current essential air service provided by Colgan also enables 

direct access from Houston to Victoria, the economic hub of the “golden crescent” 

region of Texas. Victoria is an important multi-modal transportation hub; for example, 

the shallow-draft Port of Victoria has since 2005 had an agreement with the Port of 

Houston to coordinate barge traffic, which in addition to its commercial benefits also has 

the added environmental benefit of reducing highway traffic and emissions. Victoria is 

also a regional manufacturing center that is continuing to expand; notably, Caterpillar is 

constructing a new plant to manufacture hydraulic excavators in Victoria, which when 

completed in 2012 will support 500 new jobs. Other examples of major corporations 

with significant facilities in Victoria that attract air traffic from Houston and points beyond 

include Alcoa, Dow Chemical, and Formosa Plastics. 

Colgan’s proposal in this proceeding is by far the superior choice for Victoria. In 

contrast, the competing proposal would link Victoria to an airport that still has limited 

access to the national air transportation system due to continuing Wright Amendmentbased restrictions. SeaPort’s proposal not only would fail to enable the vast array of 

domestic connections that are possible through Colgan’s service, but also would not 

enable any online domestic connections or any international connections. In contrast, 
Answer of the City of Houston and 

the Greater Houston Partnership 

Page 4

as a Continental Connection carrier at IAH, Colgan enables a wide array of domestic 

and international online opportunities for its passengers.1

Further, in contrast to Colgan’s 34-seat Saab aircraft, SeaPort proposes to 

operate nine-seat Pilatus PC-12 aircraft, which not only lack the basic facilities that 

Victoria passengers have come to expect – such as a lavatory2

 – but also would result 

in a 56% loss of market capacity, based on its operational plan. Yet SeaPort asks the 

Department for an initial annual subsidy that is 8.4% greater than that requested by 

Colgan for each contract year – an unjustifiable expenditure given the general 

budgetary pressures facing the Department, the specific deficiencies of SeaPort’s 

proposal, and Congress’ mandate codifying the Department’s longstanding policy that 

the relative subsidy requirements of applications must be a decisional factor in EAS 

cases – a factor which clearly favors Colgan.3

Other long-standing statutory factors in EAS cases also favor Colgan, namely 

whether an applicant has contractual/marketing and interline arrangements with a larger 

carrier at the hub to be served.4

 These factors plainly support the selection of Colgan’s 

 

1 It also is unclear whether SeaPort’s proposal would enable any interline connections. The 

only carrier with which SeaPort’s proposal states that it has an interline agreement does not 

serve DAL. Thus, it appears that SeaPort passengers bound for or originating from anywhere 

but Dallas would be required to re-claim their baggage, check-in again, and re-clear security. 

2 Likewise, should SeaPort be selected, passengers with disabilities would discover that 

SeaPort is not required to comply with many of the access requirements set forth in 14 C.F.R. 

Part 382 with which they may have become familiar, such as that boarding lifts be available to 

assist in deplaning and enplaning aircraft and that the carrier make available Complaints 

Resolution Officials. 

3

 Order 2011-1-11, at 2 n.1, citing the most recent codification of the subsidy decisional factor in 

the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008, Public Law 110-161, 121 Stat. at 2377. 

4 49 U.S.C. § 41733(c)(1)(B) - (C). 
Answer of the City of Houston and 

the Greater Houston Partnership 

Page 5

IAH proposal, as discussed supra. Another historic statutory factor is the preference of 

actual and potential users, with special attention to the voices of their representatives.5 

In this case, as reported to the Department on April 4, 2011, the Victoria Regional 

Airport Commission unanimously has recommended – based on public meetings and 

input as well as Colgan’s willingness to address issues of ongoing concern to Victoria – 

that their community continue to be served by Colgan. Additionally, Victoria specifically 

has not waived the community’s right to be served by an aircraft with 15 or more seats.6

The selection of Colgan in this proceeding thus would not only be fully consistent with 

DOT precedent, but in fact is the only course of action consistent with the law and the 

instituting order in this case. Notably, DOT recently denied a similar SeaPort 

application which lacked community support and was incompatible with the unwaived 

right of the community at issue to continue to receive service with 15+ seat aircraft.7

WHEREFORE, the Houston Parties urge the Department to promptly approve 

Colgan’s proposal for continued essential air service between Victoria and Houston. 

 

5

 49 U.S.C. § 41733(c)(1)(D). 

6 49 U.S.C. § 41732(b)(3)(B). 

7

 Essential Air Service at Muscle Shoals, Alabama, Order 2011-3-26, at 3. Cf. Essential Air 

Service at Athens, Georgia and Macon, Georgia, Order 2008-5-43, at 4 (selecting carrier with 

community support and interline arrangements, even though competing bid proposed more 

frequencies); Essential Air Service at Manhattan, Kansas and Salina, Kansas, Order 2006-3-15, 

at 4 (selecting carrier with community support, interline and code-share arrangements, and 

lowest subsidy request, as well as disqualifying proposal that would use aircraft with less than 

15 seats). 
Answer of the City of Houston and 

the Greater Houston Partnership 

Page 6

Respectfully submitted, 

Rachel B. Trinder 

Jol A. Silversmith 

ZUCKERT, SCOUTT & 

RASENBERGER, L.L.P. 

888 Seventeenth Street, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20006-3309 

(202) 973-7927 

(202) 342-0683 (fax) 

rbtrinder@zsrlaw.com

jasilversmith@zsrlaw.com

Counsel for the City of Houston 

 and the Greater Houston Partnership 

Dated: April 5, 2011 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on this 5th day of April 2011, a copy of the foregoing was served on 

the parties named below in accordance with the Department’s Rules of Practice. 

Jol A. Silversmith 

Jason Milewski 

Victoria Regional Airport 

jmilewski@prautes.com

The Honorable Judge David R. Pozzi 

Victoria County, Texas

dpozzi@vctx.org

Brian T. Hunt 

Megan Rae Rosia 

Pinnacle Airlines 

bthunt@pncl.com

mrosia@pncl.com

Rob McKinney 

Charles Hill 

SeaPort Airlines 

rob@seaportair.com

chuck@seaportair.com

Hershel I. Kamen 

Dan Weiss 

Continental Airlines

hkamen@coair.com

dan.weiss@coair.com

R. Bruce Keiner, Jr. 

Lorraine B. Halloway 

Counsel for Continental Airlines

rbkeiner@crowell.com

lhalloway@crowell.com

Jeffrey Manley 

United Airlines 

jeffrey.manley@united.com

Esta Rosenberg 

Dennis DeVany 

Michael Martin 

Department of Transportation

esta.rosenberg@dot.gov

dennis.devany@dot.gov

michael.f.martin@dot.gov

John M. Allen 

Federal Aviation Administration 

john.allen@faa.gov