Legislature(2021 - 2022)BARNES 124
03/09/2022 03:15 PM House LABOR & COMMERCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB372 | |
| HB363 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 363 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 372 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
BROADBAND: OFFICE, GRANTS, PARITY
3:21:54 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS announced that the final order of business would
be HOUSE BILL NO. 363, "An Act establishing the office of
broadband; creating the broadband parity adjustment fund;
establishing the Statewide Broadband Advisory Board; and
providing for an effective date."
3:22:08 PM
REPRESENTATIVE BRYCE EDGMON, Alaska State Legislature, as the
prime sponsor, introduced HB 363. He stated that HB 363 would
put into place a framework to allow Alaska to compete for an
unprecedented amount of money in broadband that came about
largely through the [Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA) ("Bipartisan Infrastructure Act")], signed into law on
11/15/21 [by President Joe Biden]. The broadband component of
the IIJA is rapidly taking shape, he said. The Governor's Task
Force on Broadband finished its work in early November [2021].
At a hearing before the House Finance Committee [on 2/1/22] it
was decided that a bill was needed that included the task
force's recommendations to put into statute the guidelines that
best position Alaska to be a player, a competitor, with this
unprecedented amount of money. Federal rural broadband programs
are normally about $4 billion annually, he related. The
entirety of IIJA is $65 billion and the Broadband Equity Access
Deployment Act (BEAD Act) is $42 billion and $450 million.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON explained that to do this right, HB 363
proposes to create three things in statute under Title 44: 1)
an [Office of Broadband], 2) a Broadband Parity Adjustment Fund,
and 3) a Statewide Broadband Advisory Board. These three
components would help position Alaska to be at the table when
the first swath of money comes to each state, about $5 million.
He offered his understanding that this money will come through
[the legislature's] appropriations process via a separate bill
from the governor. Through the provisions of HB 363, Alaska
would be positioned to compete for this huge amount of money.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON specified that HB 363 is deliberately not
lengthy, unlike ordinarily when the legislature puts something
into motion that creates a whole new section of law. The bill
would reside in Title 44 between the Alaska Forest Products and
the Alaska Micro-Loan sections of the statute book. Through his
work with Legislative Legal Services, it was ascertained that
there is scant reference to broadband in state statute and no
statutory construct that would allow Alaska the opportunity to
stand up a broadband program, with or without this type of
unprecedented funding. This is also occurring back East as the
National Telecommunication and Information Administration (NTIA)
and others scramble for broadband expertise and broadband
employees to work with the states on putting in place the
various programs.
3:27:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON noted he represents a rural district where
there is adequate broadband in some places, while in other
places like the Aleutians, subsea fiberoptic cable is being laid
that will provide highspeed internet opportunities, where just a
few years ago a text couldn't be sent. The notion of broadband
and the opportunities in Alaska caught his attention, so he
listened to some of the Governor's Task Force on Broadband
hearings to become acquainted.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON related that the bill as currently written
would sunset on 6/30/2030. He said the fiscal note alludes to
federal, not state, funds. The Office of Broadband must be up
and running in some capacity to be the repository for those
federal funds. He stressed that he isn't representing whether
the bill is 80 percent or 100 percent completed because every
bill gets refined as it goes through the process. However, he
further stressed, his office carefully constructed the bill so
it would maintain the broad support that the Governor's Task
Force on Broadband has in its [final] report, including support
in the governor's office. While he will not say that the bill
is universally endorsed by the industry, he continued, it does
have broad support among industry members, nonprofits, and
various other public entities that have said they like the bill
unadorned as it is now. The bill accomplishes the basic
purposes that are needed to position Alaska to receive money by
way of the seven major federal programs and the prescriptive
nature of additional funding that is out there. US Senator Lisa
Murkowski has said Alaska could expect $1.2-$1.5 billion via the
programs that are in place, and that's the floor, not the
ceiling. Representative Edgmon expressed his hope that the
committee will consider the bill in an expedited fashion without
too much change as he thinks it is of a political construct that
can help get Alaska through the process.
3:32:02 PM
AMORY LELAKE, Staff, Representative Bryce Edgmon, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Edgmon, prime sponsor,
presented the sectional analysis of HB 363. She explained that
HB 363 would create a new section of statute [AS 44.33.910] and
is based on the [final] report of the Governor's Task Force on
Broadband and the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
(IIJA). She spoke from the written sectional analysis for
Version 32-LS1527\I of the bill, found in the committee packet,
and which read [original punctuation provided]:
Section 1: Creates a new section, AS 44.33.910, to
establish the Office of Broadband in the Department of
Commerce, Community, and Economic Development (DCCED)
and details the Office of Broadband's purpose, powers,
and duties, to include:
1. Expand broadband access and digital equity in
the state through federal and local partnerships,
while maintaining technological neutrality, with
prioritization of service expansion in the
following order: unserved areas, underserved
areas, and anchor institutions
2. Develop a procedure for adoption of broadband
service maps that incorporates the forthcoming
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) maps in
accordance with the [2020 federal Broadband
Deployment, Accuracy, and Technological
Availability (DATA) Act], and a process to
challenge the accuracy of broadband service maps
used to determine availability and adequacy of
service
3. Streamline permitting processes and encourage
development of in-state workforce to facilitate
expeditious and sustainable infrastructure
deployment
4. Establish a grant program and broadband parity
adjustments
a. AS 44.33.915 establishes the Broadband
Parity Adjustment Fund (BPAF)
b. The BPAF is a separate fund in the
treasury which allows for grants to offset
the costs of broadband services for eligible
consumers
c. Funds can come from money appropriated by
the legislature, federal funds, and interest
earned on the fund balance
5. Review and consideration of the
recommendations of the Statewide Broadband
Advisory Board (The SBAB) established under AS
44.33.920. The board is:
a. Composed of 9 members appointed by the
Governor, and commissioners from DCCED and
the Department of Education & Early
Development (DEED)
b. Created to provide an inclusive process
for a broad number of stakeholder groups
including tribal, local government, school
districts, The University, health care
sector, industry, and consumers
Section 2: This Act sunsets on June 30, 2030
Section 3: Establishes an immediate effective date
under AS 01.10.070(c)
MS. LELAKE noted that: Sections 1(1) and 1(2) come from both
IIJA and the Governor's Task Force on Broadband; Section 1(3)
comes from the task force; and Sections 1(4)(a), (b), and (c)
come from the task force and the governor's office comments to
the National Telecommunication and Information Administration
(NTIA). She further noted that Section 1(5) establishing the
Statewide Broadband Advisory Board (SBAB) is a recommendation of
the task force. A strong requirement of IIJA, she continued, is
community consultation, so the SBAB would be put in place to
help with that community consultation. She said the sunset date
in Section 2 is a recommendation of the task force and allows
time for completing IIJA projects.
3:36:04 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS opened invited testimony on HB 363.
3:36:13 PM
HALLIE BISSETT, Chair, Representative of Alaska Natives,
Governor's Task Force on Broadband, Executive Director, Alaska
Native Village Corporation Association (ANVCA), provided invited
testimony in support of HB 363. She related that the Governor's
Task Force on Broadband met 32 times, involving much hard work
and long hours. She thanked Christine O'Connor and Nils
Andreassen for their work because without them half the work
could not have been done with the report. She stated that a
$1.5 billion baseline coming in for broadband is a good problem
and offered her absolute support for HB 363 as written. The
fund to close the gap of affordability is important, she
continued, and will be required going out to the future once the
infrastructure is in because microwave towers on mountaintops
and other infrastructure must still be maintained over the next
40 years.
3:37:45 PM
NILS ANDREASSEN, Representative of the Alaska Municipal League,
Governor's Task Force on Broadband, Executive Director, Alaska
Municipal League (AML), provided invited testimony in support of
HB 363. He stated that it was a pleasure serving on the task
force and having a role in shaping what emerged out of the
policy side of things, most of which is in HB 363. The bill
gives the state an opportunity to set its own direction [using
federal funding over the next 10 years].
MR. ANDREASSEN said an Office of Broadband is a vehicle to meet
the needs of Alaskans, respond to federal priorities, and see
those implemented at local and statewide levels. It was
important to the policy committee that this office intersect
with, be responsive to, and be engaged with an advisory board
that was truly representative of Alaska and Alaskans. This
major component of the bill goes a long way toward the policy
committee's and the task force's goals of inclusivity and
meeting the diversity of the state.
MR. ANDREASSEN pointed out that the parity adjustment has been a
recommendation of all previous broadband task forces. He said
it builds off some of the same concepts with the Emergency
Connectivity Fund that the federal government has utilized in
the last few years to get funds into the hands of Alaskans who
were paying and continue to pay a lot for these basic needs. He
expressed his hope that it is funded in a meaningful way and is
part of a transition toward greater broadband infrastructure
deployment across Alaska.
MR. ANDREASSEN stated that this first step considers a lot of
unknowns and leaves open the opportunity in future years for
legislators and Alaskans to work together toward meeting other
challenges and opportunities as they emerge. This basic
structure, he added, gives the ability to meet Alaskans' current
needs and the ability to be responsive into the future.
3:41:12 PM
CHRISTINE O'CONNOR, Representative of the Telecommunications
Industry, Governor's Task Force on Broadband, Executive
Director, Alaska Telecom Association (ATA), provided invited
testimony in support of HB 363. She stated that she is a kid
from rural Alaska and that the task force, the infrastructure
fund, and the Office of Broadband are important because everyone
needs broadband, especially in rural Alaska where otherwise a
person cannot do what he or she needs to do. She said she is
pleased to support the bill and is honored to have been a part
of the task force. Many of the task force's 32 public meetings
were two hours long, she continued, but it was time well spent
with passionate voices speaking out for future-proof robust
networks for rural Alaska. She stated that HB 363 is completely
framed from the task force recommendations and aligns with the
[IIJA], so nothing in HB 363 takes a side road where work cannot
begin immediately with the infrastructure bill since those funds
are already headed Alaska's way on the NTIA timeline.
3:43:05 PM
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN remarked that he sees good consumer
representation in the bill but not anything that would drive it
to be competency based. He advised that when looking at a
problem statement and trying to find a solution, the end users'
needs and demands must be understood, but there must also be the
right assortment of people who can accurately assess or future-
proof the solution, choose the right technological solution, and
be sure it is the correct system or combination of systems,
compatibilities, and cost value. He asked whether there's
enough in the bill to ensure [the involvement of] technically
competent people to assure that the right decisions are made.
MS. O'CONNOR agreed the advisory board is made up of various
users who can speak to what is urgently needed. She said the
task force recommended a technical subcommittee, which would be
able to happen under the bill, and that is where the expertise
across industry would be brought in to report to the advisory
board. She offered her belief that the question is really about
project management how to ensure that this is done well. She
said that that will be done through the Office of Broadband in
partnership with NTIA, which is right now writing detailed rules
for how each state must provide a five-year deployment plan with
lots of detail. Before funds are released, she explained, NTIA
reviews and must approve that plan. The [IIJA] allows for a
back-and-forth process between each state and NTIA until the
states are happy and NTIA is satisfied it will be done properly,
like what is being referred to by Representative Kaufman.
3:46:10 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON added that the committee may want to
consider putting language in the bill that refers to a technical
subcommittee which aligns with the question being asked. He
noted the waterfall of agencies involved at the federal level
NTIA, Department of Commerce, Department of Agriculture, Federal
Communications Commission (FCC), General Accounting Office
which are under the auspices of serving unserved and underserved
areas. He said Alaska will have to meet certain metrics that
will also flow through the Office of Broadband, which will be
working with the Statewide Broadband Advisory [Board], as well
as other partners around the state. An 11-member Statewide
Broadband Advisory Board was proposed in the bill because 11 is
a number that isn't too big, he continued, and the committee may
want to contemplate adding to that. The notion was to start
with putting the office together and then building out based on
what the federal law requires the state to do.
3:47:51 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS suggested that Representative Kaufman work with
the sponsor and committee to come to a consensus for submitting
an amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE KAUFMAN offered his appreciation and stated he
thinks it is critical. When working on a project, he said, it
is important at the start to select the right problem and then
come up with the right solution from the many possibilities.
Something that is competency based as well as constituency based
is a stronger package.
3:49:28 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked whether it will be federal or state
funds to capitalize the Broadband Parity Adjustment Fund.
MS. O'CONNOR replied that there is $42 billion in the [federal]
BEAD Act program, which is targeted toward deployment for
unserved areas but also allows flexibility for adoption and
affordability. Also, she continued, there is the Digital Equity
Program that is precisely toward supporting access in a fair
way. So, various programs could be used to support specifically
the Broadband Parity Adjustment Fund. That would have to be
developed and approved through NTIA because the entire plan must
be approved through a grant process between the Office [of
Broadband] and NTIA.
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ noted Alaska's "hyper ruralness" and the
importance of educating federal partners and government about
how costly it is to provide equity and access in the state. She
said a top priority of the Biden Administration is to provide
equitable access to broadband. This is an important part of
Native self-determination in rural Alaska, ensuring economic
diversification of the state, and accessing education and health
care. Folks in Washington, DC, however, don't always understand
what rural means in Alaska and sometimes underestimate a cost,
so it is important to identify as many funding streams for that
equity fund as possible.
3:52:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SNYDER observed the order of prioritization [page
2, lines 6-10] and definition of anchor institutions [page 2,
beginning on line 31] in the bill. She further observed that
the eligible beneficiaries of the Broadband Parity Adjustment
(BPA) Fund do not include school districts, libraries, or health
care facilities [page 3, lines 20-23] which are included in the
definitions of anchor institutions. She inquired about the
rationale behind these provisions.
MS. O'CONNOR responded that the task force said the Broadband
Parity Adjustment is needed. However, schools and health care
clinics were excluded from funding through the BPA because most
of their broadband and connectivity costs are already being paid
for by separate pre-existing federal programs.
3:53:23 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked whether the two commissioners on
the 11-member [Statewide Broadband Advisory Board] would be
voting members.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON answered correct.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY stated that he doesn't see a strong
amount of technologically informed people on this [advisory
board]. He inquired about increasing the number of members to
13, with the two additional members being people or entities in
the industry that represent that technology.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON replied that any end-product is going to
involve the industry, so the industry's participation will have
to be an integral part of this. He said it is a valid point and
that the committee will probably want to look at creating a
technical committee at a minimum.
3:56:35 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY asked what the mapping is called.
MS. O'CONNOR responded that the FCC is calling it the broadband
data collection.
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY offered his understanding that until
those guidelines are received from the federal [government], the
state doesn't have a strong indication of what the Office [of
Broadband] is supposed to be doing or planning. He expressed
concern that the Office [of Broadband] will be established, and
efforts put forth only to find out that the federal guidelines
direct differently.
MS. O'CONNOR answered that the IIJA is quite prescriptive. It
tells states in very strict terms what they will prioritize, and
the first priority is unserved areas. It tells that the states
must have extensive community consultation, and even what some
of their eventual evaluation criteria will be. It tells states
they must have a 5-year deployment plan to reach every unserved
location in the state. Regarding what is the goal, what is the
target, the IIJA says that that is what the state Office of
Broadband must deliver. It is a very big lift. To her
knowledge, she added, there has never been a deployment plan to
reach every location in the state, so that is something that can
easily be worked on while Alaska waits on the mapping.
3:57:35 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS asked about who in Alaska is currently working
on expanding broadband and to what extent are they cooperatives
versus municipal telecoms versus commercial companies.
MS. O'CONNOR replied that the Alaska broadband industry, which
is the telecommunications industry technically, is diverse and
there is much momentum. In the last two years over $100 million
in reconnect grants has been awarded to over half of ATA's
members to build middle mile and last mile infrastructure. Over
half of ATA's members are community owned cooperatives, and the
priorities of the IIJA and the Biden Administration are for that
community touch and particularly for serving tribal and Native
communities. These cooperatives are owned by the communities
they serve, those communities are Native communities, and those
are Native owned telecommunication companies that are already
operating and deploying broadband. That's half of the providers
in the state. Ms. O'Connor said ATA has a municipally owned
provider in Ketchikan, which is a division of the City of
Ketchikan. Also, ATA has an employee-owned company, Alaska
Power and Telephone; a couple smaller family-owned companies;
multiple privately owned companies; and very large carriers that
are enmeshed in the communities they serve, with their
technicians, management, everyone involved in providing service
living in communities in Alaska. She apologized if she left
someone out of her overview and added that it is helpful to put
context around the kind of coordination that the Office of
Broadband will need to do across all these providers.
4:00:32 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ acknowledged that a theme of interest in
technical and industry engagement is rising in the committee
today. She cautioned about the risk of the legislature picking
winners and losers by choosing an artificial number of industry
participants that would be on the advisory board. The committee
needs to ensure it hears from all members of the provider
community and stakeholder community, she said. The Governor's
Task Force on Broadband had a subcommittee that was very broad.
She requested the chair of the task force and/or the chair of
the technical subcommittee to speak about the way that worked
and how that could be applied as a model to this advisory board.
MS. BISSETT responded that the subcommittees were very valuable
because they were separated between the technical and policy,
each of which had two-hour meetings for deep dives into the
technological aspects of broadband and into policy. States with
broadband offices were invited for looking at best practices.
Ms. O'Connor had a very extensive process to look at every type
of technology, whether microwave, satellite, mesh. The task
force got a very broad understanding of the industry, and the
committee structure made it palatable.
MS. O'CONNOR responded that she was the chair of the technical
subgroup, and that model was very effective and could be used
again. She was the only actual telecom person on the technical
subgroup, she said, but the subgroup pulled in all the experts
from across industry who provided information, presentations,
and answered questions. Having that kind of structure to allow
pulling in the expertise as needed is very important and it
contributed to a very good task force product.
4:03:31 PM
MR. ANDREASSEN reflected on the work done by the policy
subcommittee, in which he was integrally involved. He said the
policy side, and really the advisory board's role, is all about
vision and goal setting and how to meet the needs of Alaskans.
That the advisory board is representative of users it's from
users that the challenges faced by Alaskans can be understood.
Also, it would be a mistake to say that users don't have the
technical ability to be expert contributors to the technical
space. Much of what was learned on the policy side was from the
technical subcommittee and it was the university, the health
care system, and people who were very technically able to
understand how their systems benefit from and need to respond to
broadband very generally.
MR. ANDREASSEN said there is a lot of capacity within the
advisory board as structured to be able to contribute technical
expertise. But, he continued, that is not to say that a
technical subcommittee that is dedicated to helping the Office
of Broadband understand how to vet project proposals and
evaluate them effectively wouldn't be a good thing. It is going
to be within the state office that that vetting occurs, so that
is where capability, competency, and capacity is wanted. The
state is not the project proponent, the state is not picking
winners and losers out of this, the state is administering a
program and responding to the technical expertise that is coming
from all the providers out there who are picking up the
challenges in front of them in their communities and advancing
projects in response to federal funding that is coming through
the state. Mr. Andreassen stated that the technical expertise
in Alaska is phenomenal. It is on the ground with those project
proponents within that industry working in partnership with
communities, and all of that is going to feed up and into in
response to offerings from the Office [of Broadband]. From the
policy, the advisory board is going to be thinking about how to
meet all the goals that the legislature and governor have set.
MR. ANDREASSEN further noted that anchor institutions are
integral to the system. He said they have a huge amount of
technical expertise in how this system works, what they can
contribute, and how they can benefit. So, yes, other programs
are in place to meet some of their needs and offset some of
their costs, but the lower those costs can be driven at a
statewide level, the lower the expenses that the state
experiences and some of the challenges overcome along the way.
4:06:47 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS requested Ms. O'Connor to elaborate on the
technical expertise of the local and tribal governments that
have been deploying technology and analyzing different
technologies which may position them to better manage a larger
tranche of funding. He further requested Ms. O'Connor to give
some details about projects that providers or local or tribal
governments have already been working on that will give them the
technical expertise to use this new money most efficiently.
MS. O'CONNOR answered that a time of big promising change is
being seen there. She said the City of Ketchikan is ATA's only
municipal provider. Newly happening is the [Coronavirus
Response and Consolidated Appropriations Act (2021)] where $1
billion was appropriated for the tribal broadband connectivity
program also being managed at NTIA. This was the first time
that tribes had the chance to get funding and choose what they
wanted to do and the broadband space with it. Partnership
projects in this program were proposed and announcement of the
awards is eagerly awaited. There are multiple projects that
would bring massive infrastructure improvements in middle mile
particularly a project to come into Bethel, another project to
come into Bethel from another direction, and a project that if
funded will provide state of the art connectivity across the
entire Bristol Bay. These are all projects with partnerships
with broadband providers existing and tribal entities. A lot of
activity and momentum is being seen, and even more activity will
be seen, because this tribal program has been given $2 billion
more in the infrastructure bill to go alongside with the $42
billion in BEAD funding nationwide, plus the other little pots.
4:09:08 PM
MS. BISSET agreed with Ms. O'Connor's statements. She said the
local cooperatives and local communities themselves are going to
be exercising their self-determination in a way they haven't
been able to in a while. She has been seeing this partnership
between the providers, the cooperatives, the tribes that are
getting the money. There are opportunities to combine programs
that are coming in through this infrastructure bill. If
building roads, doing pipelines, or doing airports permitting
can all be combined into one thing, hopefully through the Office
of Broadband, and this money sent out the door and into the
hands of the providers that are going to be giving the end-user
that service they have been wanting. Over 200 communities in
Alaska are not served at all, so people are looking forward to
this infrastructure going in.
4:10:06 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS noted that the structure of setting up this
Office of Broadband, which will cost a lot of money, and getting
repaid by BEAD have not yet been discussed. He requested an
explanation of how that would work.
MS. O'CONNOR replied that the [IIJA] provides $5 million in
funding to every state to begin this planning process and
requires every state to have an Office of Broadband. Most
states already do, but it prioritizes technical assistance to
states that don't have an office. Also, once the state's plan
is developed and approved and NTIA begins releasing most of the
funds, 2 percent is set aside for administration and that would
be paying for the office.
CO-CHAIR FIELDS stated that it is going to be important to
educate the committee's colleagues that these are going to be
planning costs borne by the federal government.
4:11:36 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY stated he is hearing that there are many
stakeholders across Alaska, with an "orchestration" of things
going on, and funding coming from many different sources for
broadband. He is therefore hearing that this is the plan for
knowing all those different funding streams that are coming in
to conduct this orchestra and ensure that some entities aren't
just getting money and not using it for broadband or broadband
infrastructure purposes.
MS. O'CONNOR responded that multiple agencies are putting major
funding into broadband, which does seem very chaotic. At the
federal level the major agencies have a newly formed interagency
cooperation and coordination agreement, she explained. It is a
priority because they want these funds to go where they are
supposed to go, which is unserved areas. She said she has heard
that NTIA is hiring a liaison person for each state, so NTIA
will have a designated Alaska person which will also help with
coordination. The task force's vision was that the Office of
Broadband would have the responsibility to pull all these pieces
together and know what every federal agency and program is doing
and coordinate that with Alaska's plan it will be a big job.
MR. ANDREASSEN added that currently others are filling that
space, but once an office is in place there will be the ability
of much greater coordination at the state level within Alaska.
Right now, the Alaska Municipal League is working with several
partners on all things infrastructure, including project
development and grant writing support and communication related
to broadband, plus all the other different infrastructure
buckets with AFN which currently has a broadband emphasis with
the Rasmuson Foundation with the Denali Commission. Several
critical stakeholders are trying to do some orchestration and at
least make sure that everybody has the same sheet of music until
such time as the [Office of Broadband] is stood up and the state
can have a stronger role.
4:14:51 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS opened public testimony on HB 363.
4:15:09 PM
MICHAEL ("MAC") MCHALE, Chief Revenue Officer, Quintillion,
provided public testimony during the hearing on HB 363. He
stated that Quintillion is a broadband infrastructure company
that provides service to rural areas within Alaska.
Quintillion's interest, he continued, is technical expertise
associated with managing what is going to be a huge
infrastructure rollout. Technical expertise is important
because there will be competing applications for these dollars
that look at coming at unserved and underserved areas from
different directions. Industry expertise will be needed to
determine what is the most efficient approach, the most
affordable, the most sustainable.
MR. MCHALE offered Quintillion's support for expanding the
advisory board or having a technical subcommittee of the board,
as long as the interest of all providers and all constituents
are considered. He said Quintillion likes to stay neutral in
terms of technologies and focus more on the applications of the
problems to be solved. Quintillion has an extensive fiber
network, operates microwave and a satellite ground station, and
has partnerships with satellite players, so the company thinks
all the technologies are important. It is important to have the
active engagement of expertise in solving the problem of what
those technologies out to be applied to.
4:17:41 PM
MARK SPRINGER, Consultant, provided public testimony during the
hearing on HB 363. He said he is working as a consultant to the
Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta (YKD) Tribal Broadband Consortium, which
currently has a membership of federally recognized tribes by the
Yukon-Kuskokwim rivers. The Yukon-Kuskokwim rivers and Bering
Sea coast are under the leadership of Chief Mike Williams of
Akiak Native Community. The consortium is an applicant to NTIA
for a hybrid middle mile and last mile system to bring broadband
to every home in the consortium's member communities.
MR. SPRINGER thanked the sponsor of HB 363 and said he will
speak to the process that HB 363 would set up to work toward the
goal of bringing real broadband internet service to as many
Alaskan communities and Alaskans as possible with the attendant
economic benefits. He said it is essential that there be a
technical subcommittee because the advisory board will be a
high-level policy making board that writes regulations. This
subcommittee should be comprised of internet service providers,
instate satellite and fiber operators, Alaska telecommunications
businesses, tribal broadband organizations, among others. Mr.
Springer advised that mapping is going to be a big part of this.
He said industry and the state must step up to the plate and
make their [mapping] available either to the Office of Broadband
or directly to the FCC. The companies know where every
millimeter of their plant is, which is what the FCC is looking
for in the served and unserved maps. Perhaps it can be done
legislatively to encourage this to happen so that the FCC's
completed maps can be seen by industry early. Regarding
process, Mr. Springer recommended that advisory board meetings
be convened in, and teleconferenced from, unserved and
underserved areas. He said this would provide a more inclusive
public process and give members and staff a broader view of
rural Alaska's needs. He urged his colleagues across the state
to ensure that tribal broadband efforts have a voice and that
they are successful in a way that everyone can be proud of.
4:21:43 PM
ROBERT HIMSCHOOT, CEO/General Manager, Nushagak Electric and
Telephone Cooperative, testified in support of HB 363, as
written. He stated he has 34 years in telecommunications, 30 of
those years in Southwest Alaska, and all the technologies being
discussed for deployment today he has deployed in Western Alaska
as part of teams building networks. There will be room for all
the technologies, he continued, but looking at scalability will
be critical. He has never seen an opportunity like this to meet
the needs of Alaska in general and the needs of rural areas [in
particular]. Although the needs are here now, scalability is
important because this isn't about the next year, or next three
years, it is about the next 20 or 30 years.
MR. HIMSCHOOT related that Nushagak is a partner in two
different NTIA applications. One is with a local tribal entity
in Dillingham and the other is with 20 tribal entities that are
cosigners on that application. There are good mechanisms in
place right now, he said. There are growing partnerships with
existing providers, and HB 363 sets up the Office of Broadband
leaving its scope to evaluate and support those partnerships and
come out with the best possible outcome with this unique
opportunity.
4:23:55 PM
TOM BRADY, provided public testimony during the hearing on HB
363. He said the first step of the Office of Broadband should
be creating a near-term and long-term strategy for solving
problems. A key part of that strategy is estimating the cost
and the time it will take to get broadband deployed across
Alaska, as well as estimating the operating costs. None of the
federal agencies dealing with broadband today has ever scoped
the magnitude of problems, he stated. Over the last five years
Alaska has received possibly $1.5-$2.0 billion in operating
subsidies to telephone companies to keep the telephone network
operating and deploying broadband in the "LTU cellular service,"
as well as subsidize services for schools, libraries, and health
care. That has only moved the broadband needle about the width
of the needle, he advised, and the problem is mainly
organization.
MR. BRADY said the state is closest to the problem and needs to
step into the role of orchestrating everything going on in
broadband. A key part, he continued, is the economics of
providing broadband in rural Alaska. The decisions must be
guided by how much it is going to cost to do, how much money
there is for doing it, and what it will cost to operate.
Regarding capitalizing the Broadband Parity Adjustment Fund, he
estimated that about $30 billion would be needed to bring parity
to 40,000 subscribers in rural Alaska because of the cost of the
middle mile segment. So, he stressed, economics and a study of
the economics of providing broadband must be a key function of
the Office of Broadband because only by doing that can informed
decisions be made about how to implement and spend the money
that is going to be [coming to Alaska].
4:26:49 PM
CO-CHAIR SPOHNHOLZ asked whether the $30 billion would be the
capital investment or be over a period of years.
MR. BRADY replied that he looked at what the Power Cost
Equalization Fund was able to spend in subsidies for power.
Depending on the price of broadband, upwards of $350-$400
million annually will be needed to get close to parity. So,
about $40 billion will be needed depending on how good the
investments are on an annual basis.
4:27:47 PM
SHAWN WILLIAMS, Vice President of Government Affairs & Strategy,
Pacific Dataport, Inc., provided public testimony during the
hearing on HB 363. He noted that he was formerly the Assistant
Commissioner of the Department of Commerce, Community, and
Economic Development. He said his first of three
recommendations for making the bill stronger for rural Alaskans
is to address Alaska's missing middle mile. A statewide network
is needed with ubiquitous coverage that quickly delivers
broadband speeds and is economically sustainable long term
without more subsidies. This can be done by using new satellite
technologies like low earth orbit (LEO) and geosynchronous
equatorial orbit high throughput satellites (GEO HTS). His
second recommendation, he stated, is to remove terms like
latency and scalable because these terms are often subjective
and not technology neutral, serving only to exclude satellite as
an option later. His third recommendation, he continued, is to
ensure Alaska tribes, tribal consortiums, and non-telecom
providers have access to these funds as eligible grantees.
These organizations are currently deploying broadband to
unserved villages in rural Alaska and the companies they are
hiring have extensive broadband experience in Alaska.
MR. WILLIAMS said the IIJA allows states to customize their
broadband office, awards, and recommendations, so Alaska [can
customize] for its weak area - the missing middle mile. He
urged that this right be exercised, and the bill be shaken over
all of Alaska. He expressed his support for everything stated
by Mr. McHale and Mr. Springer. He said Pacific Dataport
appreciates that the bill prioritizes the unserved and works to
organize Alaska's broadband funding. He added that his company
encourages the spirit of competition and anything that promotes
broadband expansion, efficiencies, and lower prices.
4:30:28 PM
DOUG REDFOX, provided public testimony as a consumer during the
hearing on HB 363. He spoke about the very slow service of the
internet in Emmonak, an underserved area. For example, he
related, today he couldn't get to his e-mail, and it kept timing
out while he was trying to log in. He offered his belief that
Emmonak has a microwave link coming from Bethel, which does not
work as well as it should. He said he believes that the best
route would be to have a fiberoptic cable coming from Nome or
connecting outside the Bering Sea and coming up the Yukon River.
He urged that the tribes along the Yukon River be helped with
this bill.
4:32:15 PM
MICHAEL WILLIAMS SR., Chairman, Yukon-Kuskokwim Tribal Broadband
Consortium, Chief of the Community, Chairman, Akiak
Technologies, provided public testimony during the hearing on HB
363. He advocated that the focus be on building affordable
middle mile, not more ongoing consumer subsidies. He said
criteria should be cost to the customer, time to deployment,
breadth of coverage, and sustainability without further subsidy.
Competition needs to be promoted, he continued, no need to
prioritize certain applicants, all the applicants must be
served. He supported the inclusion of all telecoms, internet
service providers (ISPs), and broadband providers for access to
the funds, and that there should not be exclusion of tribes,
tribal consortiums, satellite last mile providers, or satellite
middle mile providers. He urged [that the bill] remain
technology neutral and that anti-satellite terms like latency,
future-proof, and reliability be removed, along with any other
terms that would eliminate non-fiber options.
MR. WILLIAMS recommended that all telecoms and ISPs be required
to contribute mapping data, prices, speeds offered, and asset
coverage to help come up with a reasonable plan to get
affordable broadband to everyone in rural Alaska now. New
satellite technology, like LEO and GEO HTS, should be used to
cover Alaska, and when fiber arrives to hook it up to the
existing last mile in the community. He said Akiak is fortunate
to currently have highspeed LEO, high speed internet, and is
making improvements. Akiak is the first in rural Alaska and is
helping seventeen other tribes which are unserved in the region
and next summer Akiak will be working with seven tribal
communities. Working in partnership on affordable broadband is
what is needed right now, and if fiber comes along in the future
the communities will be ready.
4:36:10 PM
DANIEL FOOTE, President/CEO, DanTech Services, Inc., provided
public testimony during the hearing on HB 363. He explained
that his company supports end-users in Alaska with computer and
network issues, and that poor connectivity limits his company's
ability to provide quality support. He said he agrees with Mr.
Springer that a broad range of technical expertise is needed for
the subcommittees or committees involved in this process.
Modern technology such as low earth orbit satellites can cover
the vast expanse of Alaska quicker and more efficiently than any
other method, he stated. Plus, it provides an offload point for
what has consistently been an oversubscription model that fails
to adequately deliver what has been promised.
MR. FOOTE said broadband adoption will allow resource
utilization to find its best use by allowing end users a choice
of services through competition, providing stable, quality,
affordable internet access to rural Alaskans, and level the
field when it comes to business, education, medical services,
communication, and the quality of life that the citizens of
Alaska deserve regardless of where they live. He urged that a
bill be presented that is not exclusionary and that keeps the
playing field level to Alaskans where internet access is
concerned. He pointed out that Alaska was built through
communication means that satellite systems provided and
questioned why these systems would be excluded now when they are
needed most. Alaska will be a better state for it as the
current barriers to business and city or village management can
be reduced. There is room for competition and ensuring that
everybody is included in these processes, he added.
4:38:18 PM
PAUL JOHNSON, Nakaani Telecom, LLC, Yakutat Tribe, provided
public testimony during the hearing on HB 363. He stated that
Nakaani Telecom, LLC, represents a couple of Alaska Native
tribes in rural Alaska. He said the [COVID-19] pandemic has
taught that broadband is not a luxury but a necessity for daily
living. He recommended that the advisory board be comprised of
members who live, work, and maintain primary residence in rural
Alaska, given that nearly all underserved and unserved areas are
in rural Alaska. He said he understands the concern for
technical aptitude and noted that technical advisors can be
technology agnostic. But, he continued, a certain level of
knowledge and understanding of the intricacies of infrastructure
within rural Alaska has been one of the biggest barriers.
MR. JOHNSON urged that tribes be included in the definition of
anchor institutions because they are major players within
Alaska's rural communities, sometimes taking over municipal
government activities. He further urged that eligible grantees
include the tribal sector even though they do receive funds from
time to time. He maintained that current providers [should be
required to] provide current service maps as well as details on
what subsidies they receive and how much are they receiving to
provide such services to residents within rural Alaska. Mr.
Johnson related that during a presentation about the IIJA this
morning he learned about the intention toward allocating
broadband funding to states in the form of grants and so forth
that are highly technology agnostic, meaning one approach is not
favored over the other and expediency in addressing the
broadband needs in rural America is the highest priority.
MR. JOHNSON said Nakaani Telecom believes that infrastructure
procured or constructed through the use of public funds should
remain within the domain of public entities, such as state,
tribal, or municipal governments, following IIJA's approach of
open access. This will provide the biggest opportunity for
competition, he continued, and will ensure that Anchorage...
[Due to technical difficulties, 42 seconds of Mr. Johnson's
testimony were not transmitted via teleconference. He testimony
picked up mid-sentence:]
...and fund 229 potential partners for the state to collaborate
with. Regarding development of the Office of Broadband, Mr.
Johnson said there was much confusion during efforts to secure
tribal inclusion in the most recent NTIA funding. Therefore, he
continued, one role of the office should be as a clearinghouse
for assisting and coordinating all applicable broadband funding;
this should be part of the infrastructure and planning map.
When tribes and Native corporations build infrastructure in
areas of education, health care, and transportation, it serves
to benefit all of Alaska, he added.
4:41:30 PM
[The committee took a brief at-ease due to technical issues.]
4:42:47 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS noted the sound system was now back up and
everyone could once again hear the public testimony.
4:43:19 PM
BRITTANY WOODS-ORRISON, Broadband Specialist, Native Movement,
Alaska Public Interest Research Group (AkPIRG), provided public
testimony during the hearing on HB 363. She noted that Native
Movement and AkPIRG are both nonprofits working as the
intersection of public interest with Indigenous communities.
She related that when she began her role seven months ago, she
pursued everything related to broadband in Alaska, such as ISPs,
government documents, nonprofits, and tribal projects. The
search didn't last long, she continued, as she found limited
provider information given few nonprofits are taking on
broadband work. According to the 2014 Alaska Broadband Plan,
she stated, there is minimal communication between stakeholders
and no clear outreach to the unserved communities that are
trying to connect. She therefore started connecting with
national and international organizations to learn from and
collaborate with. She related that these organizations were
horrified to learn that people in communities like Shishmaref
are paying $1,000 or more per month for unreliable service.
MS. WOODS-ORRISON pointed out that thousands of children are
growing up in villages without access to global digital service.
These children witness their older relatives navigating unjust
learning conditions while trying to stay connected to tradition
of the land, each choice a compromise. She shared that she is a
first-generation college graduate and new to this work. She is
finding solutions for her people so the next generation will
have the ability to access education, health care, remote work,
and finding solutions to issues they face. She said she is paid
full-time to do this work and it isn't easy for her to navigate
this world with a college degree. So, she asked, how is it
expected that those with limited time, knowledge, and guidance
can be part of this movement?
MS. WOODS-ORRISON said it isn't a matter of whether Alaskans are
going to get online but a matter of when, and they need the
support to be part of this future. Many unserved communities in
Alaska have the 2.5 gigahertz contiguous spectrum license and
she urged that they be educated on all the technology options so
they can choose what is best for them. Collaboration is needed
to meet them where they are at because as of right now it isn't
online.
4:45:44 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS closed public testimony after ascertaining no
one else wished to testify.
4:46:05 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS noted that some testimony suggested the bill as
written might exclude provision of broadband through satellite.
He asked whether that is accurate.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON answered no. He said the bill was
painstakingly crafted to follow the recommendations of the task
force along with the underlying federal law which requires that
any service provided be technologically neutral and be steered
through the Office of Broadband that works with an advisory
group of Alaskans across the state as well as the federal and
industry partners.
4:47:05 PM
CO-CHAIR FIELDS inquired whether it would be possible for
communities currently without fiber to obtain broadband coverage
through satellite and then obtain faster, cheaper coverage
through fiber as fiber is extended.
MS. O'CONNOR replied yes, that has happened many times in the
past. Satellite service has been an integral part of Alaska's
rural networks for decades and the expectation is that this very
viable service will continue to be used in the most remote areas
for quite some time. Fiber and microwave can provide better,
faster, and most importantly more capacity, so that is what the
technical subgroup and full task force recommended be looked at
with a fresh eye in remote areas considering this infrastructure
funding. These resources have never been had before, so a
reexamination is needed in those areas where it was thought that
fiber would be unlikely.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON added that, as heard from testimony, there
is a need for service now in a lot of areas that don't have
adequate service. Coming from rural Alaska he understands what
it is like being unable to download or send anything or
sometimes get cellular service. So, from his standpoint, the
number one priority once the Office of Broadband is set up and
money starts to flow is getting service to underserved and
unserved areas.
4:49:09 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MCCARTY commented that it is exciting to see this
going on but offered his hope that people will be protected from
exposure to too much electromagnetic influence which can
interrupt sleep.
4:50:32 PM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON thanked the committee for hearing HB 363.
[HB 363 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 363 ver. A 3.8.22.PDF |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Sectional Analysis version A 2.22.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Sponsor Statement 2.22.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Supporting Document - NCSL - State Broadband Task Forces, Commissions, or Authorities 1.31.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Supporting Document - One Pager 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 SWAMC - Membership Resolution FY22-04 HB363 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 MTA Letter of Support 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Letter of Support Alaska Telecom Association 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Letter of Support Alaska Municipal League 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Letter of Support Alaska Communications 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Letter of Support - GCI 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Letter of Support - AK AARP 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Letter - State of Alaska NTIA Comment 2.4.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Public Comment - Shawn Williams 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 363 Fiscal Note DCCED-CO 3.5.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM HL&C 3/16/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 363 |
| HB 372 Amendment #1 3.8.22.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2022 3:15:00 PM |
HB 372 |