Neb. PSC Lone Democrat Grills Staff on Broadband Program
Proposed challenge process changes don’t seem like enough to fix problems with the Nebraska Public Service Commission’s broadband grant program, Commissioner Crystal Rhoades said at a partially virtual hearing Tuesday. The PSC awarded about $18 million in grants last year under the $40 million Nebraska Broadband Bridge Program, with Rhoades dissenting (see 2201040050).
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.
The Nebraska PSC recessed about an hour into the hearing after Senior Counsel Sallie Dietrich cut off Rhoades during the five-member commission’s lone Democrat's questions about a Windstream issue. The docket is “directly related,” said Rhoades. “What we are doing here is revising the application process based on problems in the 2021 cycle, of which there were many.”
Rhoades wasn’t in her seat when the commission returned from break and continued with the hearing. She returned about eight minutes later, complaining that the hearing had resumed without her. Commissioner Tim Schram, leading the hearing, apologized and told Rhoades there would be a transcript of what she missed. Rhoades called her colleagues’ behavior “shameful.” Rhoades told us she had been waiting for the legal counsel to return to her office, but the counsel didn't show.
The number of challenges deemed credible in the first funding round impeded the PSC’s ability to give out all available funding, Nebraska PSC Telecom Director Cullen Robbins said earlier in the hearing. The PSC proposed Feb. 1 in docket C-5368 to require challengers to submit more detailed information, including polygon shape files and speed tests showing in what parts of contested applications they provide 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload speeds. Staff also proposed requiring applicants to modify applications if part of the proposed area was challenged, since it was “all or nothing” last year, said Robbins.
The PSC should do more than let challengers “pinky swear” they serve areas, and it should have an engineer to verify technical claims, said Rhoades. She asked how staff’s proposed changes would address a 2021 problem where challengers didn’t provide all the information the commission sought. “If the problem was that they didn't submit it ... how do we prevent that in this next round?"
Requiring shape files and speed tests in the next round would help the commission verify challenges, said Robbins. But the PSC would still have to trust the challenger to provide accurate speed tests, responded Rhoades. Robbins said the company would have to provide an attestation to the information’s accuracy, but the commissioner said she didn’t think that was enough accountability.
Rhoades questioned the legality of requiring applicants to modify applications before the commission determines a challenge is credible. “That may be a real problem legally" and "seems out of order to me,” she said. Otherwise, the PSC is believing the challenger and not allowing the applicant to provide more evidence refuting the challenge, said Rhoades: People might not get service as a result.
Schram asked if the PSC would be preventing companies from using their own money to build out areas that were challenged and removed from their applications. Robbins said the PSC wouldn’t be stopping them. The hearing continued after our deadline.