The FCC’s negative Alaskan coefficient for capital expenditure
The FCC’s negative Alaskan coefficient for capital expenditure leads to a result that’s “both unsupportable and illogical,” the Arctic Slope Telephone Association Cooperative and Copper Valley Telephone Cooperative told the Wireline Bureau in comments Tuesday (http://bit.ly/12dUPtQ). It leads to a…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
quantile regression analysis model that punishes Alaskan carriers that provide service “in some of the harshest climates and most challenging environments in the country,” they said. The groups were commenting in support of a petition by the Matanuska Telephone Association to correct the variable (CD Aug 30 p11). “There is unanimity among FCC Commissioners that the Alaska coefficient used in the Model was supposed to, or should, account for the high costs of deploying broadband in Alaska,” they said, quoting Matanuska’s petition. “We respectfully request the Commissioners interject a dose of common sense and logic into the debate on the Alaska CapEx coefficient.” Commenters in June unanimously urged the FCC to correct the errors; Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, wondered aloud during a hearing of the Natural Resources Subcommittee whether agency officials were “smoking pot” when they approved the model that finds it’s cheaper to build in Alaska than the rest of the country (CD June 19 p8).