Colorado PUC limits Routt County’s power to bar Alpine Express from airport
The commission said the county may enforce airport rules and temporarily suspend the carrier for noncompliance, but cannot permanently exclude it without further commission or court action.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission said Wednesday that Routt County may enforce reasonable, nondiscriminatory rules, fees and safety requirements at Yampa Valley Regional Airport — including temporarily suspending Alpine Express’ access for noncompliance — but may not permanently bar the carrier without commission or judicial relief.
The action came as the commission considered the county’s exceptions to recommended decision R26-0287 in proceeding 25D-0435CP, a dispute involving Alpine Taxi and Limo Inc., identified in the proceeding as Alpine Express, and the county-operated airport. The PUC meeting record shows all three commissioners agreeing in substance with staff counsel’s recommendation to grant the county’s exceptions in part and deny its request for oral argument.
Staff counsel said the county’s authority may include airport-use fees, contracts, operating rules and safety protocols. The county also may temporarily suspend access while a carrier addresses noncompliance, staff said.
The commission drew a line at permanent exclusion. Because Alpine is regulated by the PUC under a certificate of public convenience and necessity, staff said the county could not unilaterally prevent it from serving the airport indefinitely. A permanent bar would require relief from the commission or a court. One commissioner described the distinction between temporary and permanent exclusion as “a nice middle ground.”
The record describes the underlying conflict as a disagreement over airport-use fees that the county alleged Alpine owed. It also refers generally to allegations that Alpine failed to comply with county rules, regulations, contractual requirements or safety laws. The record does not identify a particular violation, contract provision or unpaid-fee amount, and the commission did not find that Alpine committed a specific violation.
Alpine argued that a 2025 ski-season exclusion prevented it from fulfilling obligations under its PUC certificate and that alleged violations should have been addressed through the appropriate regulatory or legal process. The meeting record presents those points as Alpine’s arguments, not commission findings.
The PUC said its action was limited to whether Yampa Valley Regional Airport could bar this commission-regulated carrier from providing pickup and drop-off service. It was not a generally applicable rule for every Colorado airport.
The available meeting record does not establish whether the commission has issued a signed final order or whether either party has sought rehearing, reconsideration, judicial review or other relief.