Boutique Air (4B, San Francisco) has announced it is suspending its Las Vegas operations with effect from Monday, February 15 citing what it termed "economic discrimination" on Las Vegas Harry Reid airport's behalf.

In a statement, the Californian scheduled operator accused McCarran airport, as a beneficiary of federal funding, of violating the Airport and Airway Improvement Act by failing to offer flexible rates and standards to accommodate it, as a small air carrier, to operate within a non-sterile area [Ed note: an area of the airport that provides passengers access to boarding aircraft and which is not controlled by TSA].

While its Las Vegas operations had focussed on McCarran initially, Boutique Air was shortly after forced to shift to Las Vegas Henderson after McCarran management began charging it the same rates as a B737 narrow body jet with 150 seats thus rendering its services unviable. Boutique Air connects Merced Regional and Phoenix Sky Harbor to Las Vegas using eight-seater PC-12 turboprops.

"This rate is not economically proportionate or feasible for us with our eight-passenger aircraft. The amount they want to charge us per turn is USD462.50. If we have a 50% load factor of four passengers each paying USD100, our total revenue for a flight might only be USD400, not even covering the turn cost, not to mention our pilots, fuel, maintenance, customer service agents, and the purchase of our airplanes."

"Within this constrained environment, we have tried to negotiate with the airport for space and fees that fit the operational needs of Boutique Air. Their refusal to negotiate upon a reasonable turn fee for the size of our operation is, in our belief, a violation of the grant assurances[..]"

Boutique Air says the shift to Henderson has also forced it to incur additional costs in the form of the hiring of additional staff and the purchase of a shuttle truck needed to ferry connecting passengers from Henderson to McCarran.

As it stands, the airline has now called on the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to intervene and resolve the impasse.

"We believe the airport is in violation of the Airport and Airway Improvement Act, and that as a result, our business model and passengers continue to suffer negative impacts financially while our brand image is tarnished via the denial of economically feasible means of operating at LAS as articulated to us by the airport’s officials."

"It is our request that the FAA intercede at this time in a formal manner, so that we can arrive at a solution that allows our operation feasible and fair access to the McCarran International Airport."