airman 1900:
In my opinion, JAC can be as tough as any AK airport including Juneau, Ketchikan, and Sitka. I believe Alaska Airlines has separate requirements for pilots flying southeast Alaska. At least one MD80, 737, A320, CRJ700, and now the first 757 have gone off the runway at JAC.
I am very familiar with KJAC, and I fail to see the comparsion, especially for the well-equipped air carrier aircraft with RNP AR capability.
ILS with minimums of 200 3/4 to Runway 19 (could be 200 1/2 if the airport and the park service would agree to FAA-compliant ALS). RNP AR 380 and 1 to Runway 01 (could be 380 and 3/4 if the airport authority would make the ALS FAA-compliant.) Those minimums are about as good as many big-city airports.
The airport is a no-brainer for the competent, qualified jet crew when the runway is clean and dry. Runway length comes into play when the runway is contaminated but still not high-risk when the runway is contaminated but sanded and plowed. It is problematic with conditions that existed when AAL overrun, but some (much?) of that can be attributed to the failure of the park service to be concerned about making the airport safer by blocking a runway extension. The topography will permit a longer runway, so the issue is politics, not topography, unlike Eagle, Aspen, and many Alaska locations.