FAIRBANKS, Alaska (KTVF) – Alaska senators, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, as well as Rep. Mary Peltola, have introduced new legislation directing a land exchange between the federal government and Chugach Alaska Corporation for the purpose of resolving conflict.

The Chugach Alaska Land Exchange and Oil Spill Recovery Act would mitigate strife between the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill (EVOS) Trustee Council’s Habitat Protection Program which protects the ecosystems of the EVOS spill areas, and Chugach Alaska Corporation’s (Chugach) responsibilities to its Alaska Native shareholders. The responsibilities to the Alaska Native’s come from the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) which protects the lands that belong to the Native corporation, the same lands the EVOS protection program is working on.

The land exchange conducted by the new legislation would mandate that Chugach trade 231,036 acres of subsurface estate for 65,403 acres of fee simple land owned by the federal government. The land traded by Chugach must be under surface fee and conservation easements on surface land owned by the federal government.

“The 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill forever changed the lives of Alaskans, particularly those living in the Chugach region. Chugach’s subsurface rights were restricted and subjugated to the EVOS Program’s environmental conservation goals, which unfairly prevents Chugach from realizing the economic benefits of its mineral interests under ANCSA,” Senator Murkowski said.

“I helped set this land exchange in motion in 2019 when I authored and shepherded a major lands package, which required the land study, into law. Now we are addressing its findings, permanently conserving EVOS program lands, and providing Chugach and its shareholders a fair resolution of their ANCSA claims,” Murkowski added.

“Since its original passage in 1971, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) has been amended many times to assist emerging needs of Alaska Native communities across the state,” Senator Sullivan stated.

“The Chugach Land Exchange Act should be no exception. This bill facilitates a land exchange for Chugach Alaska Corporation based on a congressionally-mandated study completed by the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service in late 2022. This legislation would provide Chugach with lands that will help create economic sustainability and cultural benefits for thousands of Alaska Native shareholders, as intended under ANCSA,” Sullivan continued.

“35 years after the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill, the conversation on how to best serve the people, environment, and resources of Prince William Sound is still ongoing. A patchwork of conflicting surface and subsurface rights has left everyone unable to effectively use the land,” said Rep. Peltola.

Peltola went on to say, “The Chugach Land Exchange and Oil Spill Recovery Act would free Chugach Alaska Corporation to use their lands for the benefit of their shareholders and give the federal government a clearly defined area to manage. This is a commonsense solution that gives everyone in Prince William Sound a clear understanding of land use and management.”

“Introducing this bill represents a meaningful and long-awaited step on the path towards healing for the Chugach region and shareholders following the devastation of the Exxon Valdez oil spill,” said Chugach Alaska Corporation’s Chairman of the Board Sheri Buretta.

“Resolving the existing split-estate conflicts will empower Chugach to exercise self-determination for its people as intended by ANCSA. We are grateful for Senator Lisa Murkowski’s leadership, as well as the support of Senator Dan Sullivan and Representative Mary Peltola, in their ongoing advocacy for a fair and just land exchange on our behalf,” Buretta added.

For background and history on the Exxon Valdez oil spill and Chugach Region, the full press release is available here.

Copyright 2024 KTVF. All rights reserved.

ARIZONA — The Arizona Cardinals will again see James Conner tote the rock for them in 2024.

If his upcoming season is anything like last year, the Cardinals will again be in business.

Operating under new offensive coordinator Drew Petzing’s scheme – which prioritizes establishing the run – Conner thrived to the tune of his first 1,000-yard rushing season to pair with seven rushing touchdowns while catching two more through the air.

Conner’s impact was felt on a game-to-game basis, and The 33rd Team recently pointed out Conner paced the NFL in yards after contact with a 3.93 average, beating out other prominent names such as Christian McCaffrey and Derrick Henry.

Conner also hit his career-high in yards per carry at 5.0.

The Cardinals have added some weapons to push their offense over the top in 2024, most notably rookie receiver Marvin Harrison Jr. and run-blocking tight end Tip Reiman in the draft. In free agency, Arizona has added receiver Zay Jones and offensive tackle Jonah Williams.

Behind Conner is rookie running back Trey Benson and Michael Carter.

Arizona’s rushing attack was night-and-day different without Conner in the mix, and perhaps that’s why the Cardinals felt the need to make Benson the second rusher off the board in the 2024 NFL Draft.

Conner is also entering the final year of his contract and just turned 29-years-old.

California utility regulators are proposing rejecting a request by AT&T to eliminate its responsibility to provide traditional landline phone service. That could have implications nationwide, a consumer advocate said.

Fewer telephone companies are offering basic landline phone service as the utilities say the copper-wire infrastructure is old and expensive to maintain and demand for landline phone service is low as consumers move to mobile and other services.

But consumer advocates nationwide have cried foul, saying basic landline service is important for the country’s most vulnerable, including senior citizens who don’t want to rely on cell service, consumers who can’t afford cellular service and those in rural areas that may not have good access to cell or broadband internet services.

What happened in California?

Earlier this year, the California Public Utilities Commission opened public comments on an application by AT&T to waive its responsibilities to be what’s called “Carrier of Last Resort” (COLR), meaning the utility has to offer the copper-wire landline service. 

The utility and many of its peers have been petitioning state utility commissions and legislators, asking to be relieved of the task.

On Friday, Administrative Law Judge Thomas J. Glegola wrote a decision proposing that the Caifornia commission reject AT&T’s waiver. The proposal will be voted on by the commission at its June 20 meeting. The judge also proposed that the commission look at the rules outlining the carrier of last resort service obligations.

In a press release announcing the upcoming vote, the commission said public response to AT&T’s request “was extensive with over 5,000 public comments received into the record and eight Public Forums held in-person in three cities and virtually across the state, drawing more than 5,800 attendees.”

The proposed rejection “underscores the critical importance of ensuring universal access to essential telecommunications services for all Californians,” the commission said in its statement. “As the designated COLR, AT&T plays a pivotal role in providing reliable telephone service to communities across the state.”

The commission added that while the communications company said mobile wireless and other services could fill the void, “the CPUC found AT&T did not meet the requirements for COLR withdrawal. Specifically, AT&T failed to demonstrate the availability of replacement providers willing and able to serve as COLR, nor did AT&T prove that alternative providers met the COLR definition.”

Public commenters also highlighted the unreliability of voice alternatives such as cell service or Voice Over Internet Protocol services (VoIp) which are internet phone providers, the commission said.

What is AT&T’s response?

AT&T in a statement said it was disappointed in the proposed rejection. Competition for other more reliable phone alternatives is robust, said Marc Blakeman, president of AT&T California. Blakeman said there are less than 5% of households in California that AT&T serves who still use copper-based landline phone service.

“We are disappointed by the CPUC’s proposed dismissal of our application for relief from Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) regulation, as we’d hoped the commission would allow us the opportunity to demonstrate why the number of options for voice service available to customers make the COLR obligation unnecessary,” Blakeman said.

Not surprisingly, Blakeman said, no providers were interested in bidding on the carrier of last resort service “with a declining number of customers given the competitive options available in today’s marketplace. We remain committed to keeping our customers connected to voice service and will continue working with state leaders on policies that allow us to bring modern communications to Californians.”

AT&T made the request in California for a waiver and has also lobbied successfully for legislative reform in 20 other states, which eliminated the utility’s requirement to provide traditional landline service.  

Blakeman said during climate disasters, when staying connected is essential, AT&T’s fiber network is more reliable “than our outdated copper network” and that old copper cables take significantly longer to repair following weather events, in some cases taking weeks to dry due to damage from extensive rain and flooding.

Consumer advocates point to the need for electricity for most alternatives to traditional landlines and note that when there is no electricity, consumers can still use their landlines.

Is the proposed rejection expected to pass?

While the rejection is a proposal and still needs to be approved by the commission, Regina Costa, telecommunications policy director for The Utility Reform Network (TURN) in California, said she fully expects the board to approve it.

“What AT&T really wants is to stop providing essential telecom service to 99% of its service area, without providing a shred of evidence that there are real alternatives. This includes many areas threatened by wildfires, earthquakes, floods and power shutoffs,” Costa said in a press release. “If AT&T gets its wish, it would significantly jeopardize public safety.”

In an interview with USA TODAY, Costa, who is also chair of the telecommunications committee for the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates, said California’s proposed rejection of the landline waiver is on top of a recent rejection in Utah for another utility to waive its obligation to provide landlines.

“I think it’s very important for consumers nationwide,” Costa said. “I think that would give other states the impetus to look at the same thing.”

Loss of landlines? Phone companies want to eliminate traditional landlines. What’s at stake and who loses?

When deregulation took place in telecom, the assumption was there would be lots of alternatives to landlines, she said.

“I think California and Utah are stepping up to the plate and saying no, we need to think about this carefully,” she said. “We need to make sure that all of our people have service. How do you let the largest carrier in a state walk out the door and the markets that they want to abandon are the ones that are most at risk?”

Betty Lin-Fisher is a consumer reporter for USA TODAY. Reach her at blinfisher@USATODAY.com or follow her on X, Facebook or Instagram @blinfisher. Sign up for our free The Daily Money newsletter, which will include consumer news on Fridays,
here.