Legislature(2019 - 2020)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/26/2019 01:30 PM Senate 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 | |
| SB44 | |
| SJR8 | |
| SB83 | |
| SB52 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | SB 69 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SJR 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 83 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 52 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 44 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 83-TELECOMMUNICATIONS REGULATION/EXEMPTIONS
1:46:18 PM
CHAIR REINBOLD reconvened the meeting and announced that the
next order of business would be SENATE BILL NO. 83, "An Act
relating to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska; relating to the
public utility regulatory cost charge; relating to the
regulation of telecommunications; relating to exemptions,
charges, and rates applicable to telecommunications utilities;
relating to regulation of telephone services; and relating to
alternate operator services."
1:46:27 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO clarified that the original bill was before the
committee.
SENATOR BISHOP objected for purposes of discussion.
1:46:42 PM
SENATOR BIRCH, speaking as sponsor of SB 83, said that he
introduced a similar bill last year that did not quite make it
through the process. He paraphrased the following sponsor
statement:
SB 83 seeks to encourage investment and innovation in
the telecommunication industry by updating the
telecommunication statutes. Rapid changes in
technology and in the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) regulations, render portions of the
existing statutes obsolete and/or inefficient in the
modern telecommunications world.
All of Alaska's telecommunications providers worked
together through the Alaska Telecom Association to
offer the suggested changes made in SB 83. The goal of
was to maintain important consumer protections,
appropriate Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA)
jurisdiction, and consistency with FCC regulations
while at the same time allowing for greater
flexibility to more rapidly take advantage of new
technology.
Some existing RCA regulations are over 25 years old
and focused on landline and traditional long-distance
service. As customers continue to prefer broadband and
mobile services and the demand for landline services
decreases, the outdated regulations are largely
obsolete. Carrier of last resort regulations
needlessly duplicate existing statutory requirements
and alternative operator services are no longer used.
SB83 places service providers on a more level playing
field and will encourage deployment of advanced
technologies and more efficient network design.
SB 83 creates new protections in statute for rural
areas by requiring landline and long-distance rates,
terms and conditions be the same as in larger towns.
SB 83 requires that the Regulatory Cost Charge (RCC)
be assessed and submitted to the RCA by all
telecommunication utilities. Currently the RCC is not
being paid by utilities that are municipally owned or
are cooperatives. All members of the Alaska Telecom
Association support this change. I would appreciate
your support for SB 83.
1:49:01 PM
KIM SKIPPER, Staff, Senator Chris Birch, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, read the sectional analysis for SB 83.
Section 1 Municipal powers and duties. AS
29.35.070(a) This section is amended to maintain
existing exclusion from municipal regulation for
telecommunications companies which are exempted under
new subsection AS 42.05.711(u). (Section 8 below).
Section 2 Alaska Public Utilities Regulatory Act. AS
42.05.141 Adds two new subsections (e) and (f) to the
general powers and duties of the RCA. These
subsections state that the Commission may not
designate a local exchange carrier or an interexchange
carrier as the carrier of last resort, and that the
Commission may designate an eligible
telecommunications carrier consistent with the federal
law that allows for federal subsidies under the
federal Universal Service Fund.
A carrier of last resort is a telecommunications
company that commits (or is required by existing
regulation) to provide service to any customer in a
service area that requests it, even if serving that
customer would not be economically viable at
prevailing rates. There are other protections in this
legislation (Section 7), remaining Alaska statutes and
federal law to ensure rural Alaska continues to
receive telecommunications service.
The federal Universal Service Fund is managed by the
Federal Communications Commission and is intended to
promote universal access to telecommunications
services at reasonable and affordable rates for all
consumers.
1:51:02 PM
MS. SKIPPER read Sections 3 and 4.
Section 3 and 4 Regulatory Cost Charge (RCC). This
section applies the regulatory cost charge to all
certificated telecommunications provider expanding the
assessment base for the charge.
1:51:25 PM
MS. SKIPPER read Sections 5-8.
Section 5 Exempt Utility. AS 42.05.254(i)(2) This
section amends the definition of exempt utility to
apply the Regulatory Cost Charge across all
certificated telecommunications providers.
Section 6 Tariff Filings AS 42.05.361. This section
prohibits the Commission from requiring tariff filings
from telecommunications carriers except by providers
of telecommunications service to prison inmates.
Tariff filings in the competitive telecommunications
industry are outdated, unnecessary and impede the
ability of carriers to respond to what the customer
wants and needs.
Section 7 Rates AS 42.05.381. This section adds new
subsections which require rates, terms, and conditions
of service to be uniform across defined service areas
and the definition of "local exchange carrier" and
"long distance telephone" have the same meaning set
forth in AS 42.05.890.
Section 8 - Exemptions from Alaska Public Utilities
Regulatory Act AS 42.05.711. This section adds new
subsections (u) and (v) which together exempt
telecommunication carriers from the Act except for the
following provisions which will continue to apply:
? AS 42.05.141(e) and (f) New sections in the bill
(Section 2 above)
? AS 42.05.221 Requiring a Certificate of Public
Convenience and Necessity
? AS 42.05.231 Provision for applying for a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
? AS 42.05.241 Conditions of issuing/denial of a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
? AS 42.05.251 Allow public utilities to obtain a
permit for use of streets in municipalities.
? AS 42.05.254 Regulatory cost charge
? AS 42.05.261 Prohibits a public utility from
discontinuing or abandoning service for which a
certificate has been issued
? AS 42.05.271 Allows the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska to amend, modify, suspend, or revoke a
certificate
? AS 42.05.281 Prohibiting a sale, lease, transfer,
or inheritance of a Certificate of Public Convenience
and Necessity without RCA permission
? AS 42.05.296 Requirements for providing telephone
services for certain impaired subscribers
1:54:20 PM
MS. SKIPPER read Sections 5-8.
AS 42.05.306 Allows discounted rates for customers
receiving benefits from a social services assistance
program administered by the state or federal
government
? AS 42.05.381(l) (n) New sections requiring
uniform rates, terms, and conditions (Section 7 above)
AS 42.05.631 Allows a public utility to exercise
the power of eminent domain
? AS 42.05.641 Extends the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska's jurisdiction to public utilities operating in
a municipality
? AS 42.05.661 Requires entities to pay a fee to the
Regulatory Commission of Alaska when applying for a
Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
AS 42.05.820 Municipalities may not regulate
landline providers
? AS 42.05.830 Requires the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska to establish exchange access charges to be paid
by long distance carriers to compensate local exchange
carriers for the cost of originating and terminating
long distance services
? AS 42.05.840 Allows the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska to establish a universal service fund
? AS 42.05.850 Requires local exchange carriers to
form an association to administer access charges
? AS 42.05.860 Prohibits a carrier from restricting
the resale of telecommunications services
1:55:48 PM
MS. SKIPPER read Sections 9 - 12.
Section 9 Municipal Regulation AS 42.05.820. This
section amends AS 42.05.820 to exclude local exchange
carriers which are exempted in whole or in part from
this chapter from being 3 regulated by a municipality.
Section 10 Calculation of Regulatory Cost Charge AS
42.06.286(e). This section is amended to clarify that
all telecommunications providers will continue to be
assessed the Regulatory Cost Charge (RCC).
Section 11 and 12 Alternate Operator Service AS
45.50.473(a). This section is amended to add the
definition of alternate operator service from the
statute that is being repealed in Section 13 (AS
42.05.325)
1:56:38 PM
MS. SKIPPER read Section 13.
Section 13 Repealers. This section repeals the
following provisions:
? AS 42.05.325 Registration and regulation of
alternate operator services. Required providers of
alternate operator services to be registered with and
regulated by the Regulatory Commission of Alaska.
Alternate operator service is obsolete and regulatory
oversight is no longer relevant.
? AS 42.05.810 Long Distance Competition. This
section required the RCA to adopt regulations by
February 1991 to open-up the long-distance market to
competition. The long-distance market has been open to
competition since 1991 and it is a fraction of its
earlier size and continues to shrink as consumers
migrate to alternative services. It is no longer
necessary to require the Commission to open-up the
long-distance market to competition.
1:57:41 PM
CHRISTINE OCONNER, Executive Director, Alaska Telecom
Association, Anchorage, recognized part of the team with her
today, including members from the Alaska Communications, AT&T,
and GCI who could answer questions.
MS. OCONNOR said that SB 83 was solely related to landline
service, including local service and long distance. Modern
telecommunication networks provide an array of advanced
services. She reviewed slide 2, "Unanimous Support." Slide two
listed Alaska Telecom Association members.
Adak Eagle Enterprises, Alaska Communications, Alaska
Telephone Company, Arctic Slope Telephone Association,
Cooperative ASTAC Wireless AT&T, Bettles Telephone,
Bristol Bay Cellular Partnership, Bristol Bay
Telephone Cooperative, Bush-Tell, Copper Valley
Telephone Cooperative, Copper Valley Wireless, Cordova
Telephone Cooperative, Cordova Wireless, GCI, Interior
Telephone, Mukluk Telephone, Ketchikan Public
Utilities, Matanuska Telephone Association, North
Country Telephone, Nushagak Cooperative, OTZ Telephone
Cooperative, OTZ Wireless, Summit Telephone Company,
TelAlaska Cellular, United Utilities, Windy City
Wireless, and Yukon Telephone Company.
She said that these companies are the landline, long distance,
wireless, and broadband companies that serve Alaska, ranging
from small local telephone companies to the statewide providers.
These companies have all agreed that many of Alaska's telecom
statutes were obsolete, imposing unnecessary regulatory burdens
on companies and regulators that do not benefit anyone.
1:59:04 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 3, "Transformation."
• Telecommunications has transformed since many of
Alaska's telecom statutes were adopted in 1970s.
• The federal 1996 Telecom Act transformed the
marketplace and started an evolution toward light-
touch oversight.
• Landline and long-distance use are dramatically
reduced.
• Long distance revenues reduced from $64M to $13M
between 2006-2018.
• 48% of Alaska households have a landline, 4% are
landline only.
• Landline and long-distance services continue.
MS. OCONNOR said that despite the shift to other technologies,
many of the same regulations have remained in place. Tariff
filing requirements use scarce funds that could be better used
to serve customers. These requirements also divert resources
from the regulators that could be better used on other matters.
MS. OCONNOR reviewed slide 4, which showed a color-coded map of
the U.S. She said that 41 states have reduced or eliminated all
telecom regulation. Although the details were varied, these
changes generally allow telephone companies to manage their own
rates. Updating Alaska's statutes would allow Alaska's companies
to take advantage of some of the flexibility that most other
states already experience, while still maintaining regulators'
important role of overseeing provider fitness and the
continuance of landline service.
2:00:34 PM
MS. OCONNOR reviewed slide 5, "AS 42.05 Alaska Public Utilities
Regulatory Act."
? Sections retained
Certificate of Public Convenience & Necessity
Fitness of a provider to serve
Requirement to continue service
?Transfer of certificates
?Enforcement of obligations
?Regulatory Cost Charge (amended)
?Telecommunications Relay Service
?Lifeline
?Interconnection
?Eminent Domain
?Access charges
?Alaska Exchange Carriers Association
?Alaska Universal Service Fund
She said that SB 83 was structured to exempt telecommunication
companies from rate regulation under AS 42.05. She reviewed the
sections retained. Statutes in AS 42.05 that generally apply to
the commission and are not specific to telecommunications would
still be in effect, including requirements for public records,
and the RCA's authority to enforce the statutes that apply to
general and housekeeping provisions.
2:01:21 PM
MS. OCONNOR reviewed slide 6, "Changes to AS 42.05."
• Rate regulation and tariff management adopt
cooperative model, protections for consumers remain.
• Rates are limited by federal rules
• Rates across defined service areas are the same
• Eligible Telecommunications Carriers ("ETC")
designation explicitly authorized by the Regulatory
Commission of Alaska.
• COLR designations for ILECs and IXCs eliminated
• Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
oversight remains
• ETC designation and oversight remains
• Federal USF/ETC obligations to continue service
remain
• New AS 42.05.381(l) protects rural service
• Regulatory Cost Charge
She explained that federal caps and local limits would remain in
place and new provisions would be added to require that rates
across service areas must be the same. Carrier of last resort
(COLR) designations for landline and long-distance companies
would be eliminated. Important protections would remain to
ensure that rural areas continue to have landline and long-
distance services. The certificate (CPCN) authority requires the
RCA to approve both the entry and exit of a provider from a
location, she said.
MS. OCONNOR said that the RCA would oversee those eligible
telecommunications carrier designations or ETC, including annual
reports and certifications to the proper use of funds. Federal
rules prevent discontinuance of landline and long-distance
service without approval by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC). Federal universal service fund rules also
require that providers must provide service upon receipt of a
reasonable request. A new section in the bill would require
providers to provide the same rates, terms, and conditions to
everyone in the service area, which is how Alaska Telecom
Association currently operates. SB 83 would put those practices
into statute, she said. The regulatory cost charge provides the
funding mechanism for the RCA, which is self-funded, she said.
As industry has changed over time, it has become distorted and
inequitable, so SB 83 would fix that mechanism.
2:03:18 PM
CHAIR REINBOLD asked for further clarification on the regulatory
cost charge adjustment.
MS. OCONNER explained that the regulatory cost charges were
covered in statute in some detail. The time spent on activities
at the regulatory commission was calculated and converted into a
percentage. Telephone companies pass on these small charges to
consumers. The statute also states that cooperatives that have
voted to economically deregulate cannot participate in that
mechanism. This meant that charges cannot be placed on their
bills. However, it also meant that the remaining companies were
the only ones assessing these charges. SB 83 would change the
language to state that everyone would be assessed the charge
since the telecom activity was generated by the RCA and these
charges should apply to all users.
2:04:34 PM
MS. OCONNOR reviewed slide 7, "Rate Protections."
• Federal rules limit local landline rates
• New subsection AS 42.05.381(l) requires rates,
terms, and conditions of service to be the same
across defined service areas
• Federal Lifeline program supports low-income
subscribers
Currently federal rules limit local landline rates, which are
certified each year. The federal lifeline program allows low-
income subscribers to receive landlines at a very low cost, she
said.
2:05:15 PM
CHAIR REINBOLD asked whether these changes would affect current
landline households in cities in Alaska. She said she has
landline services and does not want them to be disrupted.
MS. OCONNER answered that the landline network is a robust
system that is especially helpful during emergencies. She
affirmed that these change would not affect the availability of
landlines. It would add a new layer of certainty going forward
to assure that landline service would always be available.
2:05:56 PM
SENATOR BISHOP said the rate protections seem to level the
playing field and close any loopholes for overcharging.
MS. OCONNER agreed that leveling the playing field was one of
the biggest benefits of the bill.
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 8, "Rate Regulation It Depends Who
You Are."
• Cooperatives, with the approval of their members, and
municipal telcoms manage their own tariffs. All other
companies must maintain one or multiple tariffs at the
RCA.
• For other companies review and approval for rate
changes varies, with timelines as long as 420 days.
• This limits the introduction of new offerings due to
the expense of preparing and supporting tariff
filings.
• SB 83 allows all providers to manage their own rates
without costly regulatory filings.
She explained that companies set their rates in varying ways.
The cooperatives manage their own rates, so if customers wish to
buy services they can do so. However, it could take up to 420
days for other companies to change their rates and products.
This change would move everyone to the cooperative model, which
has been successful for many years, but it would still retain
limits on landline rates per the federal rule that would not be
changed.
MS. OCONNER summarized that this bill seeks to put everyone on
the same basis.
2:07:22 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 9," Burden of Rate Regulation."
• Alaska Communications
• "We have 4 local exchange tariffs with a mixture
of tariff rules that apply?Each time we make a
tariff change we must do basically 5 times for
the local exchange since one study area has
different rules to follow. We also have a long-
distance tariff which has even different rules.
When filing 5 different tariffs plus a long-
distance tariff, it simply is not an efficient
business practice especially when these
regulations do not apply across all other
carriers."
- Lisa Phillips, Senior Manager, Regulatory Affairs
and Risk Management
She said that Alaska Communications is one of the largest
companies in Alaska, serving dozens of remote villages as well
as Alaska's urban centers. Alaska Communications must manage
2,500 pages of tariffs, rarely accessed by the public. The
statutes are outdated, and rate regulation consumes resources
that could be better spent serving customers.
2:08:00 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 10, "Eligible Telecommunications
Carrier (ETC)."
• ETC designation qualifies a telecommunications
provider to participate in federal Universal
Service Fund programs.
• Each program requires specific performance and
accountability.
• The Regulatory Commission of Alaska provides
annual certification to the Federal
Communications Commission.
• New subsection AS 42.05.141(f) makes explicit the
RCA's authority to designate a provider an ETC.
She explained that "ETC" [Eligible Telecommunications Carrier]
would remain unchanged. This designation provides the RCA with
an oversight role to provide consumer protection. For example,
companies must report to the RCA on their ETC status. The RCA
designates ETCs, which qualifies companies to receive federal
funding. She said that SB 83 would make the authority to oversee
the ETC process explicit for the RCA.
2:08:37 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 11, "Carrier of Last Resort
Designation (COLR)."
• COLR regulations implemented in 2010
•
• Explicit funding for COLR duties ended Jan. 1,
2019
• COLR is redundant to state statutes and federal
rules
• Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
oversight remains
• Eligible Telecommunications Carrier designation
and oversight remains
• Federal obligations to continue service remain
• New AS 42.05.381(l) requires uniform rates, terms
and conditions
She explained that landline Carrier of Last Resort (COLR)
regulations were implemented in 2010. They were intended to
ensure that landline service remains in an area by offering
financial support to one provider per service area. That
explicit financial support was removed in January 2019. Now the
COLR regulations still remain as a duplicate layer of regulation
that injects regulatory uncertainty into telecommunications,
which SB 83 would eliminate. However, the obligations would
remain since long standing federal and state protections exist.
She read the bullet points, including comments that the RCA has
relied on the power of the certificate authority defined in
statute. This certificate has been effective in requiring
companies to serve in certain locations, she said.
2:10:25 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 12, "Regulatory Cost Charge."
• Funding for telecommunications-related activity at the
RCA is inequitable
• Cooperative members have elected economic
deregulation, resulting in exclusion from RCC statutes
• SB 83 restores fair assessment by applying RCC
statutes to all telecommunications providers
She said that the regulatory cost charge has become distorted by
the statutory age and the changes in the marketplace. She said
that SB 83 would fix the inequity by including all certificated
telecommunication providers in that mechanism. This has been
unanimously supported by the industry, even by the cooperatives
since they recognize it as a matter of fairness.
2:10:53 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 13, "Consumer Protection."
• Strong consumer protections today
• Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity
• (CPCN)
• Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC)
• New 42.05.381(l) rate protection
• Regulatory Affairs and Public Advocacy (RAPA)
• Attorney General Consumer Protection Unit
• FCC Consumer Complaint Center
• SB 83 maintains these protection
She said that when someone files a complaint with the FCC, a
company must respond within a defined time period.
2:11:25 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 14, "Benefits to Consumers."
• Mandates rates in remote areas match rates in larger areas
• Allows companies to respond more quickly to consumer
preferences
• Focuses resources on consumer services
• Corrects existing distorted assessment of regulatory cost
charge
She said that this bill would remove regulatory delay and the
cost of providing new service. It also provides companies with
the same ability across the playing field to respond to consumer
needs.
2:11:50 PM
MS. OCONNER reviewed slide 15, "SB 83 in Summary."
• Updates statutes and streamlines regulations which
only apply to landline-accessed services both local
and long distance
• Exempts from many obsolete statutes
• Reduces cost and delay of regulation
• Maintains oversight of providers and continuance of
service
She said that the Federal 1996 Telecom Act changed
telecommunications, putting everyone on a path toward
competition, innovation, and light-touch regulation instead of a
traditional monopoly-style regulation. She related that 41 other
states have recognized this transformation and the Alaska
Telecom Association proposes that Alaska do the same and tailor
its statutes to ensure that service continues, but to stop
wasting resources on work that is without value, she said. Since
last year, ATA has held multiple discussions with the RCA about
this proposal. It has participated in multiple public meetings
and through those discussions have modified the bill. She
reported that in February 2019, the Regulatory Commission of
Alaska (RCA) voted to support SB 83.
2:14:10 PM
SENATOR COSTELLO reminded members that the legislature
previously heard this bill. She asked whether there was any
opposition to the bill.
MS. OCONNER answered no.
2:14:46 PM
CHAIR REINBOLD opened public testimony on SB 83.
2:15:53 PM
RICK HITTS, Vice-President, GCI, Anchorage, said that he has
worked in telecommunications in Alaska for over 33 years. He
said he is familiar with the statutes and regulations. He
expressed gratitude that the committee would encourage this type
of legislation, especially since it was overdue. The entire
industry is in support of SB 83, he said. Further, the
Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) voted 4-1 to support the
bill. In addition, this bill is consistent with the governor's
goal to reduce unnecessary regulation. He offered his belief
that government was becoming more efficient, with a more
productive industry, and most importantly that better service
would be provided to the end user. SB 83 contains safeguards to
protect places where competition was not as robust, such as in
rural areas. He encouraged members to pass the bill.
2:17:34 PM
CHAIR REINBOLD suggested that this bill provided deregulation.
MR. HITTS agreed it was deregulation but that it retains
necessary regulation.
[SB 83 was held in committee.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB44 Amendment Effective Date Amendment SL&C.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 44 |
| SJR 8 USTR Statement for the Record.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 8 |
| SJR 8 Alaska USMCA and Section 232 Impacts and Benefits.pptx |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 8 |
| SB 83 Version M.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 Supporting Document Myth v Fact Modernizing Alaska's Telecommunications Legislation - Alaska Telecom Assn.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 Supporting Document Modernizing Alaska's Telecommunications Legislation - Alaska Telecom Assn.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 Alaska Telecom Association Presentation.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 83 - Letters of Support.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB83-DCCED-RCA-03-20-19.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 83 |
| SB 52 Version U.PDF |
HL&C 3/11/2020 3:15:00 PM SJUD 4/22/2019 6:00:00 PM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SFIN 2/11/2020 9:00:00 AM SJUD 4/22/2019 6:00:00 PM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Sectional Analysis 2.19.19.pdf |
SJUD 4/22/2019 6:00:00 PM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Title 4 Bill Summary Changes SB 76 (2018) to SB 52 (2019).pdf |
SJUD 4/22/2019 6:00:00 PM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
|
| SB 52 Sectional Analysis v.U.pdf |
SJUD 4/22/2019 6:00:00 PM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Summary of Proposed Penalties.pdf |
SJUD 4/22/2019 6:00:00 PM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Summary of Goals.pdf |
HL&C 3/9/2020 3:15:00 PM SFIN 2/11/2020 9:00:00 AM SJUD 4/22/2019 6:00:00 PM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Title 4 Review Report.pdf |
HFIN 3/24/2020 9:00:00 AM SFIN 2/11/2020 9:00:00 AM SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52 Title4 Letter Support Firetap Alehouse.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Letter of Support ABC Board 2.18.19.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB52 Title4 Resolution Support Firetap Alehouse.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Letter of Support Recover Alaska.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Letter of Support ALPHA 3.25.19.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 Letter of Opposition AK Berries.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB 52 AK Berries Winery Fees Table.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB052-DCCED-AMCO-03-22-19.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB052-DHSS-PS-3-22-2019.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB052-DCCED-CBPL-02-14-19.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SB052-DOR-TAX-3-21-2019.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SB 52 |
| SJR8-SLAC-03-21-19.pdf |
SL&C 3/26/2019 1:30:00 PM |
SJR 8 |