Home | Search | Help
OST by Number | OST by Order | OST by Carrier | OST by Subject | OST by Day
OIA by Carrier/Subject | OIA by Day | FAA by Number | FAA by Subject | FAA by Day
Carrier Financials | Charter Office | Answer/Reply Calendar

OST-1997-2401

http://www.northwestaero.com/airport.html - Enid Woodring Municipal Airport

Emergency Request for Proposals

By this order, the Department places Exec Express II, d/b/a Aspen Mountain Air (AMA, formerly Lone Star Airlines) on notice that it may not suspend essential air service (EAS) at the communities captioned above until it has first fully complied with the 90 day notice provision of 49 U.S.C. 41734, and then only when a replacement carrier actually begins service. We also request proposals to provide emergency replacement service at the seven communities.

By:  Linda Prete, 202.366.1051

By this order, the Department approves the transfer of essential air service responsibilities and the accompanying subsidy rates for El Dorado/Camden (E1 Dorado),Jonesboro, Harrison, and Hot Springs, Arkansas; Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma; and Brownwood, Texas, from Exec Express II, d/b/a Aspen Mountain Air (AMA, formerly LoneStar Airlines) to Big Sky Airlines, effective when replacement service actually begins. (See Appendix A for a map.)

By:  Charles Hunnicutt

By:  Bradley Mims

By:  Bradley Mims

Because a $50 million budget can no longer cover the program's current commitments, the Administration's budget proposal also includes a proposal to revise some of the standards under which communities are ineligible for subsidy-supported scheduled air service. Under the proposed revisions, communities would not be eligible if they are:

• Located within 100 highway miles of the nearest large or medium hub airport² The current standard is 70 highway miles for both large and medium hubs. Located within 70 highway miles of the nearest small hub airport. There is no current standard addressing communities' proximity to small hub airports.
• Located within 50 highway miles of the nearest non-hub airport offering jet service. There is no current standard addressing communities' proximity to non-hub jet service.

The statutory prohibition against continuing to subsidize communities requiring subsidy of more than $200 per passenger, except for exceptionally isolated points, would remain unchanged.  The proposed revisions would allow the Department to continue to meet its core obligation of ensuring that truly isolated communities continue to receive at least a minimum level of scheduled air service and thereby remain connected to the national air transportation system. At the same time, it would curtail spending for local service at communities that are within reasonable driving distances of service at other airports.

In light of the program's current spending rate and the Administration's budget proposal, we have decided to issue this statement of proposed policy now, to give the communities and carriers ample notice of the program reductions that we will implement in the event that Congress enacts them into law. Those reductions will result in the termination of subsidy at the 17 communities listed below as of October 1, 2001 -- the first day of fiscal year 2002 -- and will allow the carriers providing subsidized service at those communities to discontinue service on the same date, if they choose, without the need to provide individual notice. Implementation of the reductions at the very outset of the next fiscal year is necessary for program spending to remain within the proposed $50 million budget. Waiting to initiate the process until Congress has already acted could delay implementation of the reductions and require us to make even deeper program cuts, affecting more communities, in order to remain within our budgetary constraints.

By:  Susan McDermott

By:  City of Enid, Donald Cornell

By:  Randall Bennett

By this order, the Department is tentatively reselecting Big Sky Transportation Co., d/b/a Big Sky Airlines, to provide essential air service at the seven communities named above for the two-year period beginning December l, 2001, at annualized subsidy rates totaling $8,146,535 for the first 6 months of the period, through May 31, 2002, and $7,781,317 for the remaining 18 months, through November 30, 2003. The order also provides for objections or competing proposals from other interested carriers.

By:  Read Van de Water

By:  Corporate Airlines

As you know Mesa Air Group, Inc., on behalf of its wholly-owned subsidiary Air Midwest, Inc., recently filed a response to your show cause order for competitive bids in the matter of essential air service at Enid and Ponca City Oklahoma. We submitted a proposal that provided each community two nonstop and two one-stop trips to Dallas- Fort Worth International Airport.

After discussions with the two communities, they communicated their desire to continue the amended service pattern established under DOT Order 99-12-28 (and restated in Order 2002-2-9) which allowed Big Sky Airlines to serve Denver with one daily roundtrip flight from both communities in exchange for eliminating one DFW roundtrip. The exception was granted with the understanding that no additional subsidy would be paid for the DEN service beyond that already established for DFW.

Mesa Air Group herby officially amends its proposal as submitted to DOT on March 5, 2002 to substitute one DFW roundtrip for a DEN roundtrip due to strong community support for this service. We are willing to accept the same terms as imposed on Big Sky for this service as there would be no additional subsidy paid for this market above that awarded for the DFW service.

By:  Mesa Air Group, George Murnane

By:  Gus Carbonell

By:  Gus Carbonell

By:  Dennis DeVany

By:  Dennis DeVany

By:  Dennis DeVany

By:  City of Enid, Doug Frantz

While Big Sky has generally performed at a level commensurate with our expectations, some have concerns about the reliability of its service with resulting cancellations and late arrivals. A portion of these incidents could be explained due to mechanical problems or weather. However, we do not have adequate information to assess the causes of these incidents. In addition, there is concern about the age of the fleet and resulting diminished convenience to passengers. My principal concern deals with the Mesa/Air Midwest offer which proposes a subsidy of about $1,000,000 less than that of Big Sky Airlines. Their annual expenses and average revenue per passenger are identical to Big Sky's. Therefore, the lower subsidy is a result of increased passenger traffic. Mesa is therefore simply projecting increased passenger traffic at each of the service locations of 20% - 30%. We are concerned that Mesa will not be able to develop the increased passenger numbers and ask for relief from USDOT thus posing the risk of interruption of service and uncertainty about which carrier would service our community.

By:  City of Ponca City, Tom Leonard

By Order 2002-2-9, February 11, 2002, the Department tentatively reselected Big Sky to provide subsidized service at seven communities in Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas for the two-year period beginning December 1, 2001, at annualized subsidy rates totaling $8,146,535 during the first 6 months and $7,781,317 during the remaining 18 months. Under the terms of that order, Big Sky was authorized to continue providing the following services with 19-seat Metro III or Metro 23 aircraft: 12 Jonesboro-El Dorado/Camden-Dallas/Ft. Worth and 6 El Dorado/Camden-Dallas/Ft. Worth round trips a week; 18 Harrison-Hot Springs-Dallas/Ft. Worth round trips a week; 17 Enid-Ponca City-Dallas/Ft. Worth and 7 Enid-Ponca City-Denver round trips a week; and 18 Brownwood-Dallas/Ft. Worth round trips a week.

We have also traditionally given considerable weight to the amount of subsidy required by each applicant. In this regard, Air Midwest's proposal again stands foremost. Air Midwest proposes services identical to those already authorized for the incumbent, Big Sky, but would require about $1.1 million a year less subsidy than Big Sky. The difference in subsidy requirements between Air Midwest and Corporate is even greater. Corporate's least expensive service package, Option B, is nearly $170,000 a year above Air Midwest's proposal, but does not reflect the additional subsidy that would be required in our selecting another carrier to serve Enid and Brownwood, which are not included in Corporate's proposal at all. Moreover, Corporate's Option B would provide El Dorado/Camden, Harrison and Hot Springs with less service than Air Midwest's proposal -- 12 round trips a week rather than 18.

By:  Read Van de Water

The Department's failure to scrutinize Air Midwest's proposal despite the serious issues raised about not only threatens continued service in the affected communities but also encourages other airlines to submit unrealistic proposals and use similar tactics to secure community support in future Essential Air Service proceedings. The Department should reconsider its decision in this case and, upon reconsideration, select Big Sky to continue subsidized service in the affected markets.

Counsel:  Crowell Morning, Lorraine Halloway, 202.624.2538

Contrary to Big Sky's assertion, Air Midwest properly filed a proposal to provide essential air service with the Department on March 5, 2002, one day prior to the due date. Upon subsequent request by the Department, Air Midwest resubmitted its proposal within twenty-four hours of such request, with minor revisions. Air Midwest cannot be faulted for the actions or requests of the Department.  There is no basis for re-opening the record to second-guess the Department's thorough evaluation of Air Midwest's proposal and subsidy requirements. The Department's Office of Aviation Analysis staff is highly experienced in reviewing EAS service proposals, traffic forecasts and subsidy amounts. Big Sky's efforts to re-draft Air Midwest's proposal based on different assumptions are without merit and should be rejected.

By:  Air Midwest, Brian Gillman

After fully considering the issues raised by Big Sky and the answers from Ponca City and Mesa, we have decided to deny Big Sky's petition for reconsideration and motion for a stays. As Mesa correctly notes, it has been our consistent practice to accept late-filed proposals to the extent practicable. In our orders requesting proposals for essential air service, including Order 2002-2-9, we routinely note the availability to interested carriers of an explanatory document called "Air Carrier Selection Procedures" that describes our process for handling carrier replacement cases and discusses in detail the process of requesting proposals, conducting reviews of applicants, and selecting a replacement carrier. That document is also included in the package of information we regularly furnish to carriers newly interested in the program generally.

We remain comfortable with the prospect that Mesa will be able to sustain service at its proposed subsidy rate. We disagree that the traffic projections in Mesa's proposal are unrealistic. For example, Big Sky notes that Mesa's traffic projections are 36 percent above what Big Sky achieved in calendar year 2001. However, in view of the dissatisfaction with Big Sky's reliability expressed by several of the communities, we find it entirely reasonable that a competing carrier would demonstrate confidence in its own ability to provide more reliable service by forecasting an improvement in ridership. A 36-percent traffic improvement over Big Sky's performance might seem substantial at first glance, but the markets at issue are very thin: a 36-percent increase in markets that averaged only 8.2 enplanements a day during calendar year 2001 amounts to an improvement of just 3.0 enplanements a day per community. And such an improvement must also be viewed in the context of total local demand for scheduled air service. Improving traffic at a community's local airport by 3.0 enplanements a day does not require a major shift in the proportion of local travelers using that airport versus those driving to other airports.

By:  Read Van de Water

Order 04-06-12
OST-97-2935
OST-97-2401
OST-97-2402

Issued June 14, 2004 | Served June 17, 2004

Order to Show Cause - Tentatively Terminating Subsidy Eligibility and Allowing Suspension of Service

By this order, the Department is requesting interested persons to show cause why we should not terminate the essential air service subsidy eligibility of Jonesboro, Arkansas, Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, and Brownwood, Texas, and allow Air Midwest to suspend its subsidized services at those communities as of October 1, 2004, when the current rate term expires. Objections to the Department's tentative decision are due within 30 days of the service date of this order.

With the end of the current rate term approaching, we have conducted a review of the communities' traffic results in anticipation of requesting carrier proposals for a new rate term beginning October 1. During calendar year 2003, the most recent 12-month period for which data are available, El Dorado/Camden averaged 5.9 enplanements a day, Jonesboro 6.5, Harrison 9.4, Hot Springs 9.1, Enid 6.4, Ponca City 4.2 and Brownwood 5.8. None of the seven communities have attained the traffic levels projected by Mesa/Air Midwest in its subsidy proposal. Only Harrison and Hot Springs have even approached those projections, whereas the other five communities' traffic levels range from 21 to 70 percent below the projections. In view of the below-projected traffic results and increasing carrier costs, particularly with respect to fuel, it is very likely that the subsidy necessary to support the communities' services beyond the current rate term will be substantially higher.

By: Karan Bhatia

Order 04-07-02
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

Order to Show Cause | Word

By Order 2004-6-12, June 14, 2004, the Department requested interested persons to show cause why it should not terminate the essential air service subsidy eligibility of Jonesboro, Arkansas, Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, and Brownwood, Texas, as of October 1, 2004, and allow Air Midwest, Inc., to suspend its subsidized services at those four communities as of the same date. The Department’s tentative decision was based on a review indicating that subsidy at the four communities exceeds the statutory ceiling of $200 per passenger; that those four communities are located within 210 miles of the nearest large or medium hub; and that, consequently, they are no longer eligible for subsidy to support their scheduled service. Objections to the Department’s tentative decision are due no later than July 19.

By: Karan Bhatia

OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

July 1, 2004

Re: City of Brownwood Request for a 90-Day Extension

The City of Brownwood hereby requests a 90-day extension of time within which to respond to Show Cause Order 2004-6-12 in the above referenced docket. We have found inaccuracies in the Department’s passenger count numbers for Brownwood and need additional time to validate and provide corrected information to the Department of Transportation.

Further, the two-year contract period for MESA Airlines does not expire until September 30 of this year, so it would appear we could be granted additional time. Additionally, the 30-day window to provide objections to the Order does not allow us time to adequately prepare show cause information.

By: Bert Massey II

Order 04-07-06
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

Issued July 9, 2004 | Served July 14, 2004

Order Extending Time For Filing of Objections | Word

By Order 2004-6-12, June 14, 2004, the Department requested interested persons to show cause why it should not terminate the essential air service subsidy eligibility of Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, and Brownwood, Texas, as of October 1, 2004, and allow Air Midwest, Inc., to suspend its subsidized services at those communities as of the same date. The Department’s tentative decision was based on a review indicating that subsidy at the three communities exceeds the statutory ceiling of $200 per passenger; that those three communities are located within 210 miles of the nearest large or medium hub; and that, consequently, they are no longer eligible for subsidy to support their scheduled service. Under Order 2004-6-12, objections to the Department’s tentative decision are due no later than 30 days after the order’s service date -- i.e., by July 19.

By: Randall Bennett

June 23, 2004

Re: The Greater Enid Chamber of Commerce Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Jon Blankenship

June 29, 2004

Re: The Greater Enid Chamber of Commerce Letter in Support of Extension of Time

By: Jon Blankenship

June 30, 2004

Re: Consumer Credit Counseling Service Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Brenda Hancock

June 30, 2004

Re: St. Mary's Regional Medical Center Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Frank Lopez

July 1, 2004

Re: Evans and Associates Enterprises Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Bruce Evans

July 1, 2004

Re: Autry Technology Center Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: James Strate

July 1, 2004

Re: Van Cleave & Associates Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Chuck Van Cleave

July 1, 2004

Re: Oklahoma Natural Gas Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Martie Oyler

July 1, 2004

Re: Perry Chamber of Commerce Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Carolyn Briegge

July 2, 2004

Re: City of Ponca City Public Works Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Craig Stephenson

July 9, 2004

Re: Home National Bank Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Mark Detten

July 9, 2004

Re: City of Ponca City Letter in Support of Essential Air Service

By: Marc LaBossiere

July 6, 2004

Re: The Honorable Ernie Currier Letter in Support of EAS at Enid, OK

By: Ernie Currier

July 22, 2004

Re: Letters in Support of EAS at Enid, OK

By: Roy Camp, Dale Kosted, Robert J. Lines, and Mel Shipley

OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

July 23, 2004

Re: Petition for Review of Order

The two-week extension granted by the Department in the Extension Order still does not provide the City adequate time to secure an alternative operating carrier prepared to submit credible service proposals tor a new rate term with subsidy requirements of less than $200.00 per passenger as required by the Show Cause Order. Since the Show Cause Order was issued, the City has been diligently working with Mesa Airlines to address the issues raised in the Show Cause Order and to ascertain their intent as to providing essential air services with subsidy requirements of less than $200.00 per passenger. As an alternative, the City has been seeking other carriers who are willing to provide air service within the $200.00 per passenger subsidy cap. The City is currently working with Mr. Richard A. Bauer, President and CEO of AirCap Partners, LLC, to secure a qualified carrier prepared to submit a proposal with subsidy requirements of less than $200.00 per passenger. As indicated by Mr. Bauer's letter to the City attached hereto as Exhibit "A," he is diligently working towards securing the alternative carriers who may be eligible for the EAS subsidy, but needs at least until August 20, 2004 to gather and provide this information to the City, and a few days to finalize all details before submitting the actual hid to the Department. The City has pressed Mr. Bauer for details as to which carriers he may be presenting to the City, but he is not at liberty to provide that information as of yet. Therefore, the City respectfully requests that the Department grant the City an additional twenty five (25) days, until August 27, 2004, to file objections to the Show Cause Order so that the City may provide the Department with alternative carriers who are willing to provide air service within the $200.00 per passenger subsidy cap.

By: Bert Massey

July 23, 2004

Re: Advance Food Company Letter in Support of EAS at Enid, OK

By: Brian Hayden

Order 04-07-30
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

Issued July 30, 2004 | Served August 4, 2004

Order Extending Time For Filing Objections | Word

We have decided to extend the time for the filing of objections until August 13. Interested persons have already been given nearly seven weeks for preparing objections and/or proposals. That period goes well beyond the usual allowances of 20 days for objections or 30 days for carrier proposals. However, we want to ensure that the affected communities will have had every reasonable opportunity to respond to Order 2004-6-12. We will therefore give interested persons a short while longer to prepare their objections and/or to develop proposals in conjunction with bona fide operating carriers.

By: Karan Bhatia

July 29, 2004

Re: Official Resolution Requesting Continuance of EAS

The resolution contains the salient points. Please note that it includes two references to an action plan to rebuild ridership lost in our market as a result of a “perfect storm” of market changes and air carrier changes which both occurred in the immediate aftermath of September 11, 2001.

We strongly believe that we can rebuild ridership through an active partnership between the existing air carrier and the community. We have attached a draft plan that we are working with the carrier to finalize. It includes community investment and systematic changes to insure that the goals of EAS are met.

The continuation of EAS to Ponca City is not a matter of convenience but rather a matter of economic survival. Earlier this week, for example, we began working with a company on expanding and adding 200 good paying jobs in Ponca City. That company made it clear that commercial air service was a requirement for their growth in our area. In today's global economy, this is becoming far more the norm.

By: David Myers

July 26, 2004

Re: Letter Objecting to the Elimination of EAS at Ponca City, OK

We currently have a significant number of high value passengers who fly between the markets of Enid, Dallas and Denver, connecting to business locations throughout the world and providing significant business opportunities for our area. In addition, the people who work at our airport and the services provided by airport businesses rely upon our commercial service as the economic generator for this important job center.

Our community is working with Mesa Airlines to build our customer base, and recent trends indicate these efforts will be successful. I strongly urge you to consider these positive customer trends and the impact to our local and regional economy and keep essential air service in Ponca City.

By: Gary Martin

OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

August 12, 2004

Re: Request for Extension of Time

Therefore, the City respectfully requests that the Department grant the City an additional ten (10) days, until August 23, 2004, to file objections to the Show Cause Order so that the City and all cities affected may lawfully meet to consider the revised proposal of Mesa and to complete negotiations on the proposal.

The City files this Request not for delay, but so that it may obtain additional information to provide the Department in making a decision that will be critical to the economic stability of the City. The City has been receiving an EAS subsidy for approximately 25 years and the subsidy has been critical to the growth and economic success of the City and Brown County.

By: Bert V. Massey, II

August 12, 2004

Re: The Greater Enid Chamber of Commerce Letter in Support of EAS at Enid, OK

By: Jon Blankenship

Order 04-08-15

Issued August 13, 2004 | Served August 18, 2004

Order Extending Time for Filing Objections | Word

Accordingly, We extend the due date for the filing of objections to Order 2004-6-12 until August 23,2004. These dockets will remain open until further order of the Department; and We will serve copies of this order on the mayors and airport managers of El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Harrison and Hot Springs, Arkansas, Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, and Brownwood, Texas, and on Air Midwest, Inc.

By: Karan Bhatia

OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

August 23, 2004

Proposal of Mesa Air Group d/b/a Air Midwest to Provide EAS

Proposes to provide the revised Essential Air Service schedules at Enid, Ponca City and Brownwood. Mesa plans to operate pressurized turboprop Beech 1 900Ds with 19 seats roundtrip from Dallas Fort-Worth as Mesa Airlines (YV).

Mesa has created two options that have been sent to the Department of Transportation proposing service to Enid, Ponca City and Brownwood. Option 1 (one) combines Enid, Ponca City and Brownwood into one cost efficient group, which Mesa is prepared to serve on a breakeven basis. Option 2 (two) combines Hot Springs, Harrison, Jonesboro, and El Dorado, Arkansas with Brownwood, Texas. Both of these options are contingent upon being selected for the other Arkansas markets

By: Mesa, Linda Larsen

Order 04-09-10
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

Issued September 9, 2004 | Served September 14, 2004

Order Requesting Proposals, Reducing Authorized Service Levels, and Establishing Final Subsidy Rates

By this order, the Department is (a) deferring action with respect to its tentative decision to terminate the subsidy eligibility of Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, and Brownwood, Texas, as of October 1,2004, (b) requesting proposals from carriers interested in providing essential air service at those three communities as well as at El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Harrison and Hot Springs, Arkansas, for a new rate term, and (c) reducing the authorized service levels and establishing a final subsidy rate for the ongoing service being provided by Air Midwest, Inc., at Enid, Ponca City and Brownwood from October 1 , 2004, until further Department action.

For all seven communities, we expect proposals consisting of service with two‑pilot, twin‑engine aircraft with at least 15 passenger seats. We have already discussed at length our specific expectations regarding proposals for service at Enid, Ponca City and Brownwood. Insofar as the four Arkansas communities are concerned, we expect proposals offering 12 round trips a week from El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro and Hot Springs, and 18 from Harrison, to Dallas/Ft. Worth.

By: Karan Bhatia

OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

October 14, 2004

Proposal of Corporate Airlines d/b/a American Connection

By: Corporate Airlines, Inc. d/b/a American Connection

October 14, 2004

Proposal of Great Lakes Aviation

This contains the response of Great Lakes Aviation, LTD. to Order Requesting Proposals, Reducing Authorized Service Levels, and Establishing Final Subsidy Rates 2004-9-10.

Great lakes Aviation, ltd. is pleased to submit these proposals to provide essential air transportation at these points in Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas.

In the recent successful bids for service points in Wyoming, Nebraska, Colorado and South Dakota, Great Lakes bid to provide service in the local markets to Denver as Great Lakes Airlines, and scheduled the service to connect with our code-share partners Frontier Airlines and United Airlines. Great Lakes will provide service at these Arkansas, Oklahoma and Texas points as Great Lakes Airlines to DFW, and with our interline agreements with all the Major airlines, will be able to offer connecting bag service through the Dallas/Ft. Worth hub. In addition we will endeavor to extend our code-share arrangement with Frontier and United, who both service the Dallas - Denver market, to allow seamless service through Dallas and Denver to all the destinations served by our partners.

By: Dave Thomas and Charles Howell

October 14, 2004

Proposal of Mesa Airlines

In response to Order 2004-9-10, Mesa Air Group, Inc. d/b/a Air Midwest proposes to provide Essential Air Service at El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Harrison, and Hot Springs, Arkansas; Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma; and Brownwood, Texas. Mesa would plan to operate pressurized turboprop Beech l900Ds with 19 seats roundtrip from Dallas-Fort Worth as Mesa Airlines (YV).

When the Order to Show Cause was sent to Ponca City, Enid, and Brownwood in June 2004, Mesa united with the communities and political leaders to maintain Essential Air Service. Coupled with the support from the Arkansas cities, these communities were given a chance to continue with the economic development and recruitment opportunities that arise from scheduled air service. Mesa has created a partnership with the communities and intends to continue with the positive momentum.

As requested in the Order, service patterns in Enid, Ponca City and Brownwood have been adjusted to efficiently utilize costs. Since the schedule adjustments, October 1st ridership from the four Arkansas communities has held steady. Unfortunately, ridership from Enid, Ponca City and Brownwood has experienced a significant decline; therefore we have selectively adjusted our revenue assumptions accordingly.

By: Linda Larsen

October 12, 2004

Proposal of Multi-Aero, Inc. d/b/a Air Choice One, Inc. (Jonesboro, AK)

Multi-Aero, Inc. d/b/a Air Choice One, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal to provide Essential Air Service to the community of Jonesboro, Arkansas.

Included in this proposal are several options for the community and DOT to consider. The bids Multi-Aero is submitting have varying levels of frequency and link the community in different service patterns.

By: Shane Storz

OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Dick Stone, Mayor of the City of Ponca City

By: Dennis DeVany

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Bert Massey II, Mayor of the City of Brownwood

By: Dennis DeVany

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Ernie Currier, Mayor of the City of Enid

By: Dennis DeVany

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Robert Reynolds, Mayor of Harrison

By: Dennis DeVany

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Mike Bush, Mayor of the City of Hot Springs

By: Dennis DeVany

OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Hubert Brodell, Mayor of the City of Jonesboro

By: Dennis DeVany

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Chris Claybaker, Mayor of the City of Camden

By: Dennis DeVany

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Bobby Beard, Mayor of the City of El Dorado

By: Dennis DeVany

October 26, 2004

Re: Request for Comments of Gary Ness, North Dakota Aeronautics Commission

By: Dennis DeVany

OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Bobby Beard, Mayor of the City of El Dorado

As a result of our second review, several other options have come into play. In addition, recent traffic declines at Brownwood would eliminate Corporate's Option 1 because Corporate's proposed subsidy per passenger for Brownwood, based on updated traffic figures, now exceeds the $200 ceiling. However, Corporate's Option 1 fully complies with the $200 ceiling based on the calendar year 2003 traffic data that the Department published in Order 2004‑9‑10, and it is entirely reasonable that the carrier relied on those data. Moreover, considering the borderline nature of Brownwood's status, we have decided to take the broader view and keep Brownwood in play. Please note, however, that Corporate's Option 1 is the only selectable option that includes Brownwood.

By: Dennis DeVany

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Chris Claybaker, Mayor of the City of Camden

By: Dennis DeVany

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Hubert Brodell, Mayor of the City of Jonesboro

By: Dennis DeVany

OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Robert Reynolds, Mayor of the City of Harrison

As a result of our second review, several other options have come into play. In addition, recent traffic declines at Brownwood would eliminate Corporate's Option 1 because Corporate's proposed subsidy per passenger for Brownwood, based on updated traffic figures, now exceeds the $200 ceiling. However, Corporate's Option 1 fully complies with the $200 ceiling based on the calendar year 2003 traffic data that the Department published in Order 2004‑9‑10, and it is entirely reasonable that the carrier relied on those data. Moreover, considering the borderline nature of Brownwood's status, we have decided to take the broader view and keep Brownwood in play. Please note, however, that Corporate's Option 1 is the only selectable option that includes Brownwood.

By: Dennis DeVany

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Mike Bush, Mayor of the City of Hot Springs

By: Dennis DeVany

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Ernie Currier, Mayor of the City of Enid

By: Dennis DeVany

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Dick Stone, Mayor of the City of Ponca

By: Dennis DeVany

November 1, 2004

Re: Follow up Letter to Request for Comments from Bert Massey II, Mayor of the City of Brownwood

By: Dennis DeVany

November 5, 2004

Re: The City of Enid Letter in Support of Great Lakes Aviation

By: Ernie Currier

November 5, 2004

Re: The City of Ponca City Letter in Support of Great Lakes Aviation

By: Richard Stone

Order 2005-01-14
OST-97-2935 - Essential Air Service at Harrison, Hot Springs, El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Arkansas
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-97-2402 - Essential Air Service at Brownwood, Texas

Issued January 19, 2005 | Served January 25, 2005

Order Selecting Carriers, Establishing Subsidy Rates, Terminating Subsidy Eligibility, and Allowing the Suspension of Service

By this order, the Department is (a) selecting Air Midwest, Inc., to provide essential air service at El Dorado/Camden, Jonesboro, Harrison and Hot Springs, Arkansas, at a subsidy rate of $4,155,550 annually for a two-year rate term, (b) selecting Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., to provide essential air service at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, at a subsidy rate of $1,272,557 annually for a two-year rate term, and (c) terminating the subsidy eligibility of Brownwood, Texas, and allowing Air Midwest to discontinue its service there, if it chooses to do so.

By: Karan Bhatia

OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-98-3502 - EAS at Dodge City, KS
OST-98-3503 - EAS at Garden City, KS
OST-98-3498 - EAS at Liberal, KS

February 28, 2005

Re: Request for a Subsidy Rate (Great Lakes)

The benefits of this service will allow each Oklahoma community to have direct service to Denver with a one-stop as well as better connectivity with the hub schedules in Denver, resulting in improved access to the national air transportation network. Service for Ponca City flying through Dodge City, Kansas and End flying through Liberal, Kansas will allow this to happen which leads us to believe the service will be well received by the communities.

We have been in communication as well with the three Kansas communities we currently serve (LBL, GCK, & DDC) since they will be affected by the proposed schedule. You should have received letters from each of these communities by now authorizing this request. Dodge City and Liberal's schedules to and from Denver will be improved, with a greater number of non-stop flights as opposed to one-stop. For the time period between March 13th and March 31 Liberal will be reduced by one flight, Saturday only. We will reinstate this flight with our first of April schedule change.

Garden City will also be affected by these changes as we wish to fly the route over Liberal one time a day in a circle trip pattern. The benefits of this service to the community include better timed, nonstop service to Denver in the morning and early afternoon. All three trips from Denver will continue to be non-stop, and the morning departure from Denver, which becomes the early afternoon trip back to Denver, will no longer go on to Liberal, allowing our Garden City travelers access to more seats at this popular time. By allowing this one late afternoon trip to fly through Liberal, Kansas, which will add a total of 35 minutes to the trip, the total quality of our service will improve, which leads us to believe the service will be well received by the community.

Having determined this overall improved service to Denver is very attractive for each of these cites and with their full support, we request the DOT allow the transition from Dallas service to Denver for the same subsidy rate as agreed in the Order issued 2005-1-14, as well as the changes of service mentioned above far the three Kansas points

By: Charles Howell IV

OST-98-3498 - EAS at Liberal, KS
OST-98-3502 - EAS at Dodge City, KS
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, OK

February 4, 2005

Re: Comments of The City of Enid

We have been in communication with Great Lakes regarding Denver service. Upon our request, Great Lakes reviewed their current financial proposal for Dallas service and determined they can offer equivalent or better service to their Denver hub for the same subsidy amount as their proposal to the Dallas/Fort Worth airport.

The benefits of this service would include code shares with United and Frontier Airlines as well as connectivity with their hub schedules in Denver, resulting in improved access to the national air transportation network. Great Lakes' proposal would provide our community one-stop service to the Denver hub. Our city would have an overnight aircraft with an early morning departure with Enid flying through Liberal, Kansas.

By: Ernie Currier

http://www.northwestaero.com/airport.html

February 9, 2005

Re: Comments of The City of Liberal

Recently, we have been in communication with Great Lakes Airlines regarding their request to change our Denver service pattern. They have informed us that in order to provide service between Enid, Oklahoma and Denver, they wish to flow the route over Liberal.

The benefits of this service for our community include well-timed, direct service to Denver, with only one one-stop flight between Denver and Liberal, down from the current three. Improved connectivity with their hub schedules in Denver will result in improved access for Liberal to the national air transportation network. By allowing this service for Enid to fly through Liberal, Kansas, the quality of our service will improve, which leads us to believe the service will be well received by the community.

By: Debra Giskie

http://www.cityofliberal.com/aboutliberal/government/departments/airport/

February 14, 2005

Re: Comments of The City of Dodge City

Based on the information provided, it appears that the Great Lakes proposal will maintain Dodge City's current schedule of two round trips Monday through Friday and three round trips over the weekend, with only minor adjustments in departure and arrival times. It further appears, however, that all but one weekend flight will provide Dodge City with non‑stop service to and from Denver. It is also our understanding that Great Lakes is forecasting that Ponca City will have about 2.5 passengers per flight for the Ponca/Dodge City/Denver connection, which should not adversely impact seat availability for Dodge City, at least at the present time.

By: Ken Strobel

http://www.dodgecity.org/content/airpremo.html

February 3, 2005

Re: Comments of The City of Ponca City

Ponca City has been in recent communication with Great Lakes regarding service to Denver. Upon our request, Great Lakes reviewed their current financial proposal for Dallas service and determined they can offer equivalent or better service to their Denver hub for the same subsidy amount as their proposal to the Dallas/ Fort Worth airport.

The benefits of this service would include code shares with United and Frontier Airlines as well as connectivity with their hub schedules in Denver, resulting in better and improved access to the national air transportation network. Great Lakes' proposal would provide our community one-stop service to the Denver hub. Great Lakes Airlines will have an overnight aircraft in Ponca City with an early morning departure from Ponca City flying through Dodge City, Kansas and on to Denver.

By: Richard Stone

http://www.northwestaero.com/airport.html

Order 2005-03-12
OST-97-2401 - EAS at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma
OST-98-3502 - EAS at Dodge City, KS
OST-98-3503 - EAS at Garden City, KS
OST-98-3498 - EAS at Liberal, KS

Issued March 8, 2005 | Served March 11, 2005

Order Approving Alternative Service Pattern

In a letter dated February 28, Great Lakes requests that it be permitted to implement an alternate service pattern for Enid and Ponca City by operating their services to Denver, rather than Dallas/Ft. Worth as originally proposed, at the subsidy rate authorized by Order 2005‑1‑14. Great Lakes intends operating Enid's service to Denver via Liberal, Kansas, and Ponca City's service to Denver via Dodge City, Kansas. Great Lakes' service at Garden City, Kansas, would also he affected.2 Great Lakes intends to implement the alternate service pattern on March 13.

We will approve Great Lakes' proposal, which meets the three conditions necessary for approval under authority assigned under 14 CFR 395.12(k)(3) of the Department's Regulations: (1) the alternate service pattern is equal to or greater than that determined to be essential; (2) the communities do not object to the alternate service pattern; and (3) the alternate service pattern will not increase Great Lakes' subsidy.

By: Randall Bennett

Order 2006-6-19
OST-1997-2401

Issued June 16, 2006 | Served June 21, 2006

Order to Show Cause Tentatively Terminating Subsidy and Allowing Suspension of Service

By Orders 2005-1-14, January 19, 2005, and 2005-3-12, March 8, 2005, the Department selected Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., to provide essential air service at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, for a two-year period. Specifically, the Department authorized Great Lakes to operate 12 round trips a week between the two communities and Denver via Liberal or Dodge City, Kansas, with 19-seat Beech 1900 aircraft at a subsidy of $1,272,557 annually. Great Lakes began service on March 13, 2005.

In selecting Great Lakes, however, we noted that the subsidy necessary to support Enid’s and Ponca City’s service by Great Lakes’ predecessor. Air Midwest, Inc., exceeded the essential air service program’s statutory ceiling of $200 per passenger.

We have now reviewed the Communities’ traffic results for the first 12 full months of Great Lakes’ tenure. During the year ended March 31, 2006, Enid registered 2,746 and Ponca City 1,878 origin-and-destination passengers -- only 4.4 and 3.0 enplanements a day, respectively.

Based on those traffic results, Enid’s and Ponca City’s subsidies per passenger are now $231.71 and $338.81, respectively, and thus remain above the $200 ceiling Consequently, we tentatively find that the communities are no longer eligible for subsidy under the essential air service program, and we have tentatively decided to terminate subsidy for their service as of September 1 and to allow Great Lakes to suspend service as of that date, if it chooses.

By this order, the Department is requesting interested persons to show cause why we should not terminate subsidy for essential air service at Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, and allow Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., to suspend service at the communities as of September 1, 2006. Objections to the Department’s tentative decision are due within 20 days of the service date of this order.

By: Michael Reynolds

July 6, 2006

30-day Extension Request

We respectfully request a 30-day extension to the July 11, 2006 deadline for responses to the referenced Order 2006-6-19 to Show Cause Tentatively Terminating Subsidy and Allowing Suspension of Service served to Ponca City, Oklahoma on June 21, 2006.

We plan to make a response but need more time due to the Independence Day Holiday and related community activities.

By: City of Ponca City, Mayor Richard Stone

Order 2006-7-11
OST-1997-2401

Issued July 10, 2006 | Served July 13, 2006

Order Extending Time for Filing Responses

Under Order 2006-6-19, objections to the Department’s tentative decision are due no later than 20 days after the order’s service date -- i.e., no later than July 11.

On July 7, the Mayor of Ponca City requested a 30-day extension in the time for the filing of objections “due to the Independence Day Holiday and related community activities.”

We will extend the period for the filing of objections by seven days. The additional seven days easily compensates for the holiday, and the total period for such objections, which thus becomes 27 days, is more than ample to give all interested persons every opportunity to prepare and submit objections. Objections will therefore be due no later than July 18.

By: Michael Reynolds

July 7, 2006

Objection of City of Enid to Order 2006-6-19

The conclusion of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission assured the permanency of Vance Air Force Base. Planned new missions will add approximately 100 military and civilian personnel to the base. The Air Force has recently added Great Lakes Aviation to their approved air carrier listing.

Oklahoma's first two major ethanol plants have committed to Enid, and are in the planning stages with anticipation of being completed within twenty-four months. In addition to the 80-100 primary sector jobs that will be created by the plants, the City of Enid anticipates several related businesses to follow these expansions.

Clearly, these activities are positive to the growth of Enid. These events also illustrate that the presence of air service and accessibility to the nation's air system is vital to our city, and give us confidence that the ridership on Great Lakes will continue to increase.

We strongly urge the DOT to review and reconsider this matter for continuation of their original commitment to Air Service for Enid, OK.

By: Mayor Ernie Currie

July 11, 2006

Objection of City of Ponca City to Order 2006-6-19

Shortly after the transition from Mesa to Great Lakes, the Ponca City Regional Airport closed the runway for three weeks for repairs that were already scheduled. In essence this negated any momentum Great Lakes had created by the change in carrier and hub. It has taken the past six to nine months to get that momentum back; and as you can see by the past three months, the passenger count is climbing.

We strongly urge the DOT to review and reconsider this matter for continuation of their original commitment to Air Service for Ponca City and Enid, OK.

By: Mayor Richard Stone

July 12, 2006

Comments of City of Enid

The City of Enid received Order 2006 -7-11, Docket OST-1997-2401 dated July 13, 2006, extending the time for response to this case.

Our letter of July 7, 2006, addresses the major issues and concerns to the City.

It is our strong belief that if the Department will allow the contract to run for the full two years, that the required passenger ceiling will be achieved.

By: Mayor Ernie Currier

July 18, 2006

Objections of City of Dodge City, KS

I am writing on behalf of the cities of Dodge City and Liberal, Kansas, in response to the above-captioned Show Cause Order, to register the cities objection to the proposed Order to suspend subsidized service at Ponca City and Enid, Oklahoma as of September 1, 2006.

We would strongly encourage the Department to at the very least allow the program to mature during the full term of the Oklahoma subsidy contract before making any final determination which could have significant adverse impact not only on the Oklahoma communities involved, but the two involved Kansas communities as well.

Counsel: Ken Strobel

July 25, 2006

Objections of Regional Aviation Partners - Bookmarked

Regional Aviation Partners objects to the Department of Transportation’s tentative decision to terminate the EAS subsidy at Enid and Ponca City, OK and asks the DOT to vacate Order 2006-6-19.

If, as the DOT asserts, OKC is the nearest “medium” hub, then the question is whether OKC meets the definition of a medium hub.

Alternatively, even if OKC is finally determined to be a medium hub, RAP would argue consistent with the submission of Dodge City, KS on July 18, 2006 that the per passenger subsidy rate under the new service plan does not exceed the $200 per passenger subsidy cap and would further argue that the DOT’s approval of the alternate service pattern resulted in program savings of at least $700K to the Oklahoma communities and an undetermined amount for the Kansas communities.

RAP concludes the DOT’s current application of AASCRC data for purposes of determining EAS eligibility/hub designations is unreliable at best and does not reflect the true objective(s) and intent of the program.

RAP believes the DOT must re-assess its hub determination at OKC and factor in passenger data from “scheduled” commercial operations only and find that OKC is a small hub based on the most recent boarding/enplanement data. As the Department has so aptly pointed out . . . that to consider non-scheduled/charter boarding data into the equation does not benefit the DOT’s goal of ensuring access to the national air transportation system for EAS communities.

By: Maurice Parker

Order 2006-7-25
OST-1997-2401

Issued July 27, 2006 | Served August 1, 2006

Final Order Terminating Subsidy Eligibility and Allowing Suspension of Service

After giving careful consideration to the objections and all other relevant information, we have decided to finalize our tentative decision in Order 2006-6-19 to terminate the subsidy eligibility of Enid and Ponca City as of September 1, and to allow Great Lakes to suspend service at the two communities as of the same date, if it chooses.

As we have explained, we are legally bound to discontinue subsidy for the communities’ service because the subsidy required to maintain their service exceeds the statutory ceiling of $200 per passenger. We first raised our concern about the communities’ eligibility status more than two years ago (see Order 2004-6-12), and our final decision here comes only after an extraordinary effort to redeem the situation by recruiting a new carrier willing to offer less expensive service and giving that carrier a chance.

After reviewing a year’s worth of Great Lakes’ results, however, we cannot justify a continuation of such an effort at an ongoing cost to the program of about $100,000 a month.

By this order, the Department is terminating the essential air service subsidy eligibility of Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma, and allowing Great Lakes Aviation, Ltd., to suspend service at the two communities as of September 1, 2006, if it chooses.

By: Michael Reynolds

August 3, 2006

Regional Aviation Partners Opposition to OKC Designation as a Medium Hub

Regional Aviation Partners challenges the Department of Transportation’s designation of OKC as a medium hub airport for EAS eligibility purposes.

It is our position that the Department’s current method of determining the hub status of any airport to an EAS point is conflicting, ambiguous and arbitrary in its application of the statute and falls short of fulfilling the DOT’s stated goal of ensuring small communities with connectivity to the National Air Transportation System.

By: Maurice Parker

September 12, 2006

Re: Addendum to Regional Aviation Partners' Objections Filed on August 3, 2006

Since that time additional information has come to light which we believe further strengthens our argument that Enid and Ponca City, Oklahoma should not lose their essential air service eligibility based solely on their proximity to a medium hub airport; i.e., Oklahoma City.

We understand the DOT is concerned that accepting our argument at Enid and Ponca City could have wide ranging implications on the continued eligibility of communities throughout the entire EAS program. To alleviate this concern, RAP has analyzed the impact of our proposal, which considers only schedule passenger data, at every small and medium hub airport in the United States and found that OKC is the only hub impacted by our proposal. No other hub airport experiences a change in status and therefore, only Enid and Ponca City would be the only EAS communities impacted.

By: RAP, Maurice Parker

November 28, 2006

Comments of Oklahoma Congressmen asking DOT to Reconsider Termination of Subsidy:

• Senator James Inhofe
• Congressman Frank Lucas / Enid Mayor Ernie Currier / Ponca City Mayor Richard Stone

Response of DOT to Request for Reconsideration:

• Denial of Request by Maria Cino

Home | OST Filings by Number | OST Orders and Notices | OST Filings by Carrier
OST Filings by Proceeding | OST Filings by Day | Office of Intl Aviation Filings by Carrier | Office of Intl Filings by Day