RESTORE Policy Recommendations

The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) currently administers two primary programs aimed at supporting small communities to maintain a minimum level of scheduled air service: Essential Air Service and Small Community Air Service Development Program.

Essential Air Service (EAS):

Established as part of airline deregulation in 1978, EAS provides direct subsidies to airlines to ensure air service to small communities that would otherwise lack viable commercial routes. The airports participating in the program have been steadily shrinking—from around 400 eligible airports in 1978 to just over 100 today. However, the cost per EAS-supported route has increased and currently ranges from $4 million to $8 million annually, with total program funding at approximately $500 million per year.

Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP):

Created in 2000, SCASDP provides competitive grants directly to airports for use in recruiting air service. SCASDP can be used for a range of purposes, but is most often used for marketing or to develop Minimum Revenue Guarantees (MRGs) to attract airline service. However, SCASDP funding is limited—recently increased from $10 million to $15 million annually, despite demand far exceeding available funds. The program receives around 80 applications per year and awards approximately 40 grants. Given that regional carriers, especially regional jet carriers (e.g., SkyWest, Contour, Denver Air), are commanding upwards of $8 million per route per year, the program is woefully inadequate.

Unfortunately, many rural airports fall into a “donut hole” where small airports that have lost EAS eligibility (mostly due to language in the 2012 FAA Reauthorization Act)—and where SCASDP grants are insufficient—struggle to maintain commercial air service in the absence of a sustainable federal funding support mechanism to create an attractive or sustainable MRG.  

Another problem that occurs at smaller regional airports with large declines or complete losses of daily air service is that their “enplanement” totals go down.  If an airport drops below 10,000 annual enplanements, it has a significant drop in federal infrastructure funding it may be eligible for through the traditional Airport Infrastructure Program (AIP).  

Congress should establish a new grant program to provide multi-year funding (3–5 years) to small regional airports for marketing and air service development, as well as to support various infrastructure projects, especially for airports that fall below AIP eligibility thresholds. The grant would be known as the Regional Airport Marketing & Modernization Program (RAMMP).  The marketing program would be structured similarly to SCASDP but would offer more substantial, sustained funding that can be scaled independently of annual appropriations and that would remain budget neutral.​

Key features of our proposal include:

• Eligibility: Airports not receiving EAS funding but struggling to attract or maintain commercial service.  Can also demonstrate at least a significant loss of daily air service since 2021, and preference for airports that have lost ALL daily air service.  Should also be limited to non-hub regional airports—similar eligibility rules to the SCASDP program. This would also include airports not on the original 1978 EAS list.

• Grant Structure: For Marketing: Multi-year grants to offer business predictability, local investment, and sustainable service rather than unreliable and insufficient one-time funding—3-to-5-year grants.  As opposed to SCASDP, which is a 1-time funding opportunity per route/project. For Infrastructure Projects—similar project rules as AIP, but without enplanement thresholds, especially focused on airports with under 10,000 annual enplanements. These grants would be “discretionary”, not formulaic.

• Local Buy-In: Airports or communities would contribute a minimum of of 5% to 20% in match, ensuring local investment.  If the airport has lost ALL daily air service, a match is not required.

• Funding Mechanism: A new revenue-neutral surcharge on international travelers entering the U.S.

A small surcharge on international travelers entering the U.S. of $5 per passenger could easily generate the necessary revenue to implement this program without requiring new congressional appropriations. Several existing international travel fees—such as the International Arrival Fee ($22), Customs User Fee ($7.20), or Immigration User Fee ($7.00)—could be modestly increased, or a new $5 fee could be introduced to fund the program.  This new fee increase would only be paid by foreign nationals—not by US citizens.    

According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, in 2024, there were 72 million international arrivals to the U.S. (foreign nationals). If the $5 increase to the program had been in place that year, projected revenue would have been $360 million, providing a key lifeline to rural communities and the airports that serve them. A $3 increase could generate $216 million. This increase would range from 18x to 30x the current appropriation to SCASDP and would rely on no federal funding increase (revenue-neutral).   

Total Foreign Nationals Entering USA (according to the Commerce Department):

2025                   51M

2024                   72M

2023                   66M

2022                   51M

An alternative could be to tap into the Federal Excise Tax (FET) on air transportation.  It is the 7.5% tax that all air travelers traveling in the domestic United States pay and generates billions annually.  Although a viable alternative worth exploring, it may be politically difficult, as those funds are widely used for airport infrastructure.