e 

bor-osrr-1<\<\(/ - If (I 

US.D«partmei1t of Assistant Secretary 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Ihinspoilatlo n Washington, DC 20590 

Office Of the Secretary o. 

of Transportation 

KOVO 8 2010 n 

~\ ..<c 

rn^ m 

The Honorable Russell D. Feingold > :i2^, 5 

United States Senate -.- ?^O Q 

Washington, DC 20510 

Dear Senator Feingold: 

en 

Thank you for your letter of October 4 to Mr. Roderick Hall of the Federal Aviation 

Administration transmitting the Gogebic-Iron County Airport Manager's concerns about 

the Essential Air Service (EAS) carrier-selection. The EAS program is administered in 

the Department's Office of the Secretary and falls under my pui-view. 

As you know, by Order 2010-9-26, September 27 the U.S. Department of Transportation 

determined that the two applicants that submitted bids did not have the requisite 

operating authority necessary to provide EAS. As a result, the Department requested 

another round of proposals from air can'iers interested in providing EAS at the two 

communities for a third time, due no later than October 18. At the request of one 

applicant and with support from the communities, the due date for proposals was 

extended until October 25. 

In response to the most recent request for proposals, we have received a total of five 

proposals, briefly outlined below: 

• Charter Air Transport to serve Milwaukee, Wisconsin, with 30-seat, pressurized 

turboprop aircraft; 

• Gulfstream International Airlines to serve Milwaukee utilizing 19-seat, 

pressurized turboprop aircraft; 

• Air Choice One, two options, to serve Chicago O'Hare International Airport 

utilizing 9-seat turboprop aircraft; 

• Seaport Airlines, two options depending on the hub served (Minneapolis and 

Milwaukee or Minneapolis and Detroit) utilizing 9-seat, pressurized turboprop 

aircraft; and 

• Chautauqua Airlines, d/b/a Frontier Airlines, to serve Milwaukee utiUzing 37-seat 

jet aircraft. 

On October 26 my staff shared the details of the proposals with Mr. DuRay and solicited 

community comments and preferences. We are aware that their preliminaiy position now 

is to favor Frontier Airlines. However, as the carrier-selection proceeding is competitive 
XI-l()l()26-()()4 

The Honorable Russell D. Feingold 

Page 2 

and is currently under review by the Department, I am sure you understand that I cannot 

comment on the merits of the proposals. I assure you, however, that the Department, will 

fully consider all of the proposals, and malce its awai-d based on the selection criteria 

detailed in the governing statutes, including community views. I share the Airport 

Manager's interests in finding a replacement carrier in a timely manner. However, rest 

assured that our overall goal is to find the best fit for the community. 

As is our normal practice, I am placing a copy of your letter and my response in Docket 

DOT-OST-1996-1266 as a contact outside the record of this proceeding. If I can 

provide further information or assistance, please feel free to call me. 

Sincerely yours. 

Assistant Secretary for 

Aviation and International Affairs 

Cc: Mr. Duane DuRay, Gogebic-Iron County Airport 

Ms. Katie Crawley, U.S. Senator Russell D. Feingold's Office, Middleton, WI 
Xl-10l026-()()4 

Federal Aviation 

Adminisfration 

Memorandum 

Date: October 21, 2010 

From: Office of Government and Industry Affairs (AGI) 

To: EAS and Domestic Analysis Division (X-53) 

Subject: Congressional Letter Transfer 

The attached letter(s) is forwarded to your office for appropriate action. If I can be of further 

assistance, please contact me at (202) 267-3277. This letter was also faxed to your main office. 

Marvel A. Gardner 

Congressional Liaison Specialist 

Attachment (1): 

The Honorable Russell Feingold 
10/04/2010 16:57 FAX 608 828 1203 FEINGOLD-MIDD XI-l()l()26-()()4 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD 

WISCONSIN 

t I I 

EDS HART SENATE Ofnct BUILSINS 

WAWINOTON, DC SOStO 

(ZOZI SSI4-S323 

|Z02) 224-1210ITDDJ 

talnooUljKnalegov 

lanitoJ ^tatEB Senate 

WASHINGTON, DC 20510-4904 

CcUMTTTtE ON THE BUDCbl 

COMMiriet ON FcUUI>9N REVAT1QNC 

CDKiKirrra ON THE JuDini>Ky 

ScLccrCoMMnrrlE ON iNTELUQEriCfe 

OEMaCRAlK; POUCY COMMITTEe 

October 4,2010 

Mr. Roderick Hall 

Assistant Administrator for 

Federal Aviation Admijris^tion 

800 Independcnc^v^rt^ SW, Room 1022 

Washington. pez0591-0004 

ent and Indu: 

^ 

3 

:airs 

DcarMi;<4lall: 

I write on behalf of my constituents in Northern Wisconsin who utihze the Gogcbiolron County 

Airport. As you can see from the enclosed correspondence fi:om Airport Manager D\iane 

DuRay, the service to the airport is greatly diminished as the result of a delay m the awarding of 

a service contract to a carrier for the facility, Mr. DuRay reports that airiine boardings have 

dropped over fifty percent as a result of this delay. 

Onbehalf of my constituents I am asking that you oversee an inquiry into Mi. DuRay's 

concerns. Please direct your response to him and keep Katie Crawley of my Middleton, 

Wisconsin office apprised as to the status of this inquiry. 

Thank you in advance for your prompt consideration of this matter. 

Sincerely, 

•f^**4^'^c^XfM 

Russell D, Feingold 

United States Senator 

RDF/kac 

Enclosure 

Cc Duane DuRay 

O 1S0D AiivN COMMAS 

ROOM lOa 

MiooinoN,vyi63H3 

60S) BZ&-120a 

(sroj a2s-i2is rrooj 

Si 1 EAST WISCONSIN ta^nuf. 

ROOM <0S 

MILWAUKEE, WI lawi 

414)276-721?, 

O 401S»HST«Er 

BDIIM^IO 

WAUSAU. WI S4'103 

(71518U-5fiB0 

WINTEO ON RECVaED fAPER 

O 425 STATE SmecT 

ROOM 223 

UCnasei>.WlMeoi 

(6aa)7B2-ss«s 

O 1640 MAIN STAEE-r 

an£ENBAV,WI$4302 

(S20)i4l!i'7!iN 
10/04/2010 16:57 FAX 608 828 1203 

Sep ar-1 0 ll:D7 a Manager/FBO 

FEINGOLD-MIDD 

30e-g'32'-4401 

Xl-l()l()26-()()4 

p.2 

Gogebic-Iron C6unty Airport 

GOGEBIC-IRON AIRPORT BOARD 

JeseptiBonovetei Chwnnan 

Robert Berg Jim Oliver 

LeRoy Kangas Donna Seorse 

Bob Mon'n Sttan Tarro 

Paul Mullard John Wilta 

E5560 Airport Road 

Ironwood, Michigan 49936 

Phone: 806-932-3121 

FAX: 906-932-4401 

e-mail; iwcl@chartermi.net 

Duane R. DuRay, Manager 

Mindy Prendarvllle, Aclmin.Asst. 

Septemba:27,2010 

Senator Feingold 

506 Hart Senate OiBcc Bujldinjg ! 

Washington, DC 20510-4904 

Dear Senator Feingold: 

I'm writing this letter to your office requesting any assistancej available. As you may 

know, our airport is provided fligjits througji the Essential Air Service (EAS) program 

and we are currently addressing issues related to our latest EAS bid. I feel the very 

survival of our aurport relies on the outcome of this situation. 

A brief synopsis: 

Back in February 2010, the DOT put out a request for proposals (RFP) asking for bids to 

provide air service fbr Ironwood/Ashland, Wi., Iron Mountain, Manistee, and Escanaba, 

Michigan. In this request the DOT also synchronized these four airports with the belief of 

a single air canicr providing a bid to support all four aiiportsi Four companies had 

provided bids in response to the DOT'S RFP, Charter Air Tr^isport (CAT) / Public 

Charter, Inc. (PI), Great Lakes Airlines and Sovereign Air; bids reflected servdee for all 

four cities while the remaining company, Mesaba Airlines oitly supported Escaoaba and 

Iron Mountain with flints. Iron Mountain emd Escanaba aocqpted the proposal from 

Mesaba Airlines and tlie DOT awarded the contract but Ironwood/Ashland and Manistee 

were still in need of a proposal to provide air service. With this scenario, the DOT had to 

request for new bids covering only Ironwood/Ashland and Manistee. 

I 

June 4,2010, the DOT requested proposals to provide air seryice for Ironwood/Ashland 

and Manistee airporte and had received only two proposals, from CAT / PI and 

Sovereign Air, With nmch deliberation from bonwood/Ashland and Manistee, both 

communities had requested the DOT accept the proposal provided through Charter Air 

Transport. 

As the DOT was prqsaiing to award the two year contract for air service to CAT / PI, 

CSreat Lakes Airlines had informed Mr. Dramis DeVany (DOtT) of possible issues relating 

to CAT / PI and their legal ability to perform EAS flints. CK T /PI has vigorously 

debated the issues the DOT and the FAA have raised regarding EAS scheduled flints. 
10/04/2010 16:58 FAX 608 828 1203 FEINGOLD-MIDD 

S i ^ 27* 10 11:07a Manager,^FBO 906-932-440 1 p7 ^ Xl-}{)H)26-(H) 4 

These continued delays with contract awarding and our cutrent flight schedule in 

) Ironwood has caused our airlines boardings to drop over fifty percent. Both Ironwood and 

• Manistee have continued to siqjport the CAT / P1 proposal knowing we need a change 

I from our current situation. Our communities believe the needs, desires, and growth 

potential will be met under the service CAT /PI would provide as a public charter. I feel 

the EAS system is struggling to maintain the current straoture and they should be willing 

to look a.t the CAT / PI proposal as a possible fix to some of the problems cuireatly 

plagomg this program. Included in this packet are other documents that will further 

explain the structure of this proposal and how it would provide service that complies with 

ail of the EAS requirements for your review, 

I As asked earlier, we are requesting assistance with this issue. I would like to request a 

i personal call from Senator Feingold, if possible, to; 

Ms. Christa Fomarotto (DOT) Phone: 202-366-4451; Email; chfista.fomarotto@dot.gov 

She is the political appointee who I am told is being briefed on flhis issue and I believe 

she would be the roost logical person who deals with EAS. 

Ms. Susan Kurland (DOT) Phone: 202-366-8822; Email: susan.kiu:land(5).dot.gov 

She is the tjext higher level "policy" person. She is a lawyer with an airports background 

and she worked aviation issues for die Obama campaign so she is going to be sensitive to 

political aspects. 

Wfr. Robert Rivkin, General Counsel Pbone: 202-366-4702 or 4713.. He was a Chicago 

director of transit and close personally to President Obama. We believe Mr. Rivkin may 

not be familiar enough in aviation regulatory law to critically evaluate what his staff 

presents him. Mr. Rivkin needs to hear the legal arguments that should be made in favor 

of a concept with potentially great economic value to EAS communiiics, at the same time 

would reduce tire {federal budgetary costs. 

I would not be requesting such attention if I did not believe this to be in a critical stage 

for the communities affected. 

Thank you for your immediate attention of this urgent issue. 

Sincerely, 

Duaae R. DuRay 

Airport Manager 

GogebiC'-Iron County Airport 
10/04/2010 16:58 FAX 608 828 1203 FEINGOLD-MIDD 

•ooi" ^ r xu H'.ua a Man^gerxFBQ 306-932-440 1 

X1-1()1()26-(H)4 

P - 5 

49 us e Title VII SUBCHAPTER E-SMALL COMMUMTY AIR SEPLVICE 

Sec. 41732. Basic essential air service 

(a) General.—Baeic essential dir service provided under section 

41733 of this title is scheduled air transportation of passengers and 

cargo— 

(1) to a hub airport that has convenient connecting or singleplane air service to a substantial n.Lunbe;r of destinations beyond 

that airporr; or 

(2) to a small hub or nonhub airport, when in Alaslta or when the 

nearest hub airpoT-t is more than 400 miles from an eligible place. 

tb) Mirtimuro Requirements.—Basic essential air service shall include 

at least the following: 

(1)(A) for a place not in Alaska, 2 daily round trips 6 days a 

week, with not more than one intermadiate stop on each flight; or 

(S) for a place in Alaska, a level of service at least equal to 

that provided in 1976 or 2 round trips a week, whichever i« greater, 

except that the SEcretary of Transportation and the appropriate 

State authority of Alaska may agree to a different level of service 

after consci3ting with the affected community. 

(2} flights at reasonable citnes considering the needs cf 

passengers with connecting flighza at the airporr and at prices that 

are not axcessive coinp^jred to the generally prevailing priced of 

other air carriers for like service between similar places. 

(3) for a place not in Alaska, service provided in an aircraft 

with an effective capacity of at least 15 passengers if the average 

daily boardings at the place in any calendar year from 1976-1986 

were more than 11 passengers unless— 

(A) that level-of-service requirement would require paying 

compensation in a fiscal year under section 41733(d) or 41734(d) or 

(e) of this title for the place when compensation otherwise would not 

(B) the affected community agrees with the Secretary in 

writing to the use of smaller aircraft to provide service to the 

place. 

(4) service accommodating the estimated passenger and property 

traffic at an average load factor, for each class of traffic 

Considffiring seasonal demands for the service, of not more than^" 

(A) 50 percent; or 

(B) 60 percent when service is provided by aircraft with 

more than 14 passenger seats. 

(5) service provided in aircraft with at least 2 engines and 

using 2 pilots, unless scheduled air transportation has not been 

provided to the place in aircraft with at least 2 engines and using 

2 pilots for at least 60 consecutive operating days at any time 

since October 31, 1978. 

(6) service provided by pressurized aircraft when the service is 

provided by aircraft that regularly fly above 8,000 feet in 

altitude. 

(Piib. L. 103-272, Sec. 1(e), July 5, 1994, 109 Scat. 1144.) 
^0/t?4/2010 16:59 FAX 808 828 1203 FEINGOLD-MIDD Xl-l()l()26-()()4 

CTiarter Air Transport (CAT) and Public C^iartere, Inc. (PI) have presented proposals to Irxsnwood and Mariistee 

airports in Michigan to provide twice daily weelcday service (vtirth one daily roundtrlp an weahends) on a 30 seat 

Embraer Brasilia Turtioprop aircraft incluOlng full flight attendant sajCrlcea and prfvste airline lavatories. These 

services are supetlor to the incumbant carrier thai Is receiving subsidy .tinder the Eesenb'al Air Service Program 

(EAS), which has submitted a "no bi'd' for continued service with these cotnmuru'lies which would enable them to be 

"held in" by DOT on a "cost plus" basis if they can enminale any other qualified oarrler. Charter Air Transport is a 

qualfffed carrier that cur;ently twicedaiiy service into Atlantic City airport, without faderal subsidy. DOT found thai 

CAT was *fjt" to provide these "schedulad services." 

Both Ironwood dnd Manistee support the proposal made by Charter Air Transport snd Public Charters, Inc. to provide 

the intended service at each of the airports bacausa It will linK the communities to the hub airport Milwaukee (MKE) 

served tiy Southwest and Frontier Airlines. The proposed flights would be marketed as "public charters" in the same 

w ^ as CATs non-subsidized servlcas. P1 has a revolutionary capability to sell tickets through the Global 

Distribution System (GOS), the automated ticket distribution outlets used by travel agents and onl'me internet 

providens like Traveloclty, 

This unique ticketing capability would provide passengers from EAS communitios with an ability to buy tickets and 

construct travel it/nerajlas that a n indistlnguishabla Ifom ticiteting options avaftable from "scheduled air carriers" (hat 

operate large alKiaft and long ago dropped out of EAS markets, Congress intendad that EAS subsidies provide the 

means for eligible communities to rnaintain their cortneoticn to the national air transportation system. The Charter AJr 

Transport / Public Charters, Inc. proposal provides multiple dally fraquancles at Hxsd times by an air earner DOT has 

found fit to provide "scheduled services.' The EAS proposal meets all the specific aircraft and service crilerta that 

Congress specified fbr EAS subeldired sonrices. (see attached 409 U.S.C. §41732). 

But because it would be marketed under public charter regulations, DOT is being told by Great Lakes Airlines, the 

incumbant carrier, that public charters do not meet the intent of "scheduled air transportation service." The inoumbent 

EAS cam'ar wants to block a public charter sarvice option so it can confinue to get federal money on a "cost plus' 

basis that will increase the costs of the federal subsidy. The cunrent EAS operator is providing less than adequate 

service with delays and cancellations without service for up to 2 consecutive days at a tirne. 

Common sense says "scheduled afrtransporlatlon" refers to any offenng to transport passengers in accordance with 

a published schedule that is held out to the public in advance for sale—something that is a shensd characteristic of 

airlines' "schedules" or "flight schedules" offered as public charters." The only considerations that should maa^r is 

whfch prbposal best satisfies the elements that Congress identified as defining the attributes of minimum EAS service 

eligible for subsidy. 

In this regard, the CAT/PC1 Proposal is cleariy superior and could be provided at a lower cost than the kinds of 

Inferior services for which DOT has been paying EAS subsidies. Unless DOT exercises Its legal prerogatives to 

promote innovative EAS service proposals, the future of EAS is bleak. A number of communitres are now served with 

9 seat aircraft that do not meet the statutory definition for minimum EAS sewlce (whtch expressly requires use of 

aircraft with 15 seats or more) because the community was forced to waive tjeceus© there was no other willfng 

service provider. Thew small aircraft opeirate under lass stringent safety standards. DOT also permits EAS oarrieis 

to deliver passengers to FBOs (general aviation tenninals virithoot TSA screening)—not even connecCng them with 

the airport terminate. Several cunnent EAS operators sell tickets only on their own websites, providing no access to 

the traditional scheduled service ticketing outlets that Charter Air Transport and Public Charters, Inc. can provide, 

DOT should exercise Its legal interpretive discretion to aulhoriie public charter service that exceeds the statutory 

minimum and provides a level of service that the communities regard as a superior fomi of "scheduled sanrice." EAS 

communities should have the right to decide that a proposed service meets their needs. We oppose legal 

maneuvering by Incumbent carriers to perpetuate higher costs and bad sarvica—that Is not the kind of support our 

communities want from DOT. 
*10/04/2010 16:57 FAX 608 828 1203 FEINGOLD-MIDD i-OcjfXrJ 

RUSSELL D. FEINGOLD 

WISCONSIN 

505 tUHT SENATS affK6 BUIUMC 

wuHiNtereti, DC 20510 

lzia)33*-s3a 

1202) 234-12*0 0001 

(•iiiSDliLsnMte.00* 

"BmtzA States Senate 

WASHINGTON, DC 20510^904 

Xl-l()l()26-()()4 

CoMHttTSE ON THt BUDGET 

CoMuma Oh FoneiGN ReATtoNS 

CwiMiTTCE ON -na JUOICUUnr 

SELECT CiwiMnnrEE ON INTELUOEMCC 

DEMOQUTIC POUC/ COMMITTEE 

FAX 

TO: 

FAX#: 

FROM: c:?^^- ^ t^<^^*</^^ > 

^ 

I 

MEMO: 

U.S. Senator Russ Feingold 

1600 Aspen Commons, Room 100 

Middleton, WI 53562 

(608) 828-1200 

FAX: (608) 828-1203 

DATE: /^/"///O TOTAL PAGES • ^ 

(including cover iSAii) 

leOO AtMN CuHIHONt 

ROOM 100 

•MloeiCnN,WIS3E82 

(Booiatf-'lzoo 

M ( «Z>-1Z1B(TDD) 

517 EAST WQCONEIN AV«HUE 

ROOu40a 

MILWAUKEE, WIEUOZ 

wi«)»e-7a2 

O WSTHSmKT 

ROOM 410 

WAUBAU,WI944ai 

t716|84ft.$«60 

PRINTED ON RECYCUD PAPER 

O 425 STATE STDEET 

H00M2ZS 

UCnoEIE.WIG4«0l 

(6D8J7IIZ-GEB5 

1«40MAINSTIIECT 

eilE»BAV,Wl 54302 

|S20)46$-7SDB