ATN International (ATNI) Risk Analysis

Network outages could have a material adverse effect on our business and can be caused by a myriad of incidents, including aging or faulty infrastructure, natural disasters, and third-party outages, such as power loss or subsea cable outage. Much of our underlying physical infrastructure (particularly in Guyana and Alaska), including buildings, fleet vehicles and related systems and equipment, has been in service for an extended period of time. In addition, our aging network exposes us to increased energy consumption and costs may expose us to additional cybersecurity risks  as we maintain out-of-date software to maintain these systems. We may not be able to adequately fund the maintenance and replacement of this infrastructure on a basis timely enough to avoid material outages, accurately predict equipment failure rates, or be able to locate replacement parts or spares to repair existing equipment due to its age. Due to the rural and island locations of our networks, our energy costs tend to be high, and due to the nature of our network on average can be higher than those of our competitors operating in the same markets. We are reliant on the stability of the energy grid in each of our markets to provide services, however, frequent power outages in several of our markets result in our service outages. We are working to shut down certain energy-inefficient parts of our network, such as our copper plants in Guyana, but rising energy costs may offset any efficiencies gained. While generator backups are in place where blackouts are common, generators run on costly fuel which contributes to higher energy costs. Notwithstanding the significant investments that are being made in the US Virgin Islands and in Guyana to upgrade the country's power network, there is no guarantee that the local governments will be able to stabilize the electric infrastructure in the future. Any network outage could negatively impact our operations, including the provision of service to our customers, and could result in adverse effects to our financial condition and reputation.

Alaska Communications is required by the CBA to contribute to the AEPF for benefit programs, including defined benefit pension plans and health benefit plans. Alaska Communications also maintains pension benefits for substantially all of its Alaska-based employees. The AEPF is a multi-employer pension plan to which Alaska Communications makes fixed, per employee, contributions through the CBA, which covers the IBEW represented workforce, and a special agreement, which covers most of its non-represented workforce. Because contribution requirements are fixed, Alaska Communications cannot easily adjust annual plan contributions to address its own financial circumstances. Currently, this plan is not fully funded, which means Alaska Communications may be subject to increased contribution obligations, penalties, and ultimately, it could incur a contingent withdrawal liability should it choose to withdraw from the AEPF for economic reasons.  Alaska Communications' contingent withdrawal liability is an amount based on its pro-rata share among AEPF participants of the value of the funding shortfall. This contingent liability becomes due and payable if Alaska Communications terminates its participation in the AEPF. Moreover, if another participant in the AEPF goes bankrupt, Alaska Communications would become liable for a pro-rata share of the bankrupt participant's vested, but unpaid, liability for accrued benefits for that participant's employees. This could result in a substantial unexpected contribution requirement and making such a contribution could have a material adverse effect on Alaska Communications' cash position and other financial results. These sources of potential liability are difficult to predict. These plans and activities have generated and will likely continue to generate substantial cash requirements for Alaska Communications, and these requirements may increase beyond our expectations in future years based on changing market conditions, which could result in substantial liabilities on our balance sheet. The difference between projected plan obligations and assets, or the funded status of the plans, is a significant factor in determining the net periodic benefit costs of these pension plans and the ongoing funding requirements of those plans. Changes in interest rates, mortality rates, health care costs, early retirement rates, returns on investment and the market value of plan assets can affect the funded status of our defined benefit pension plans and cause volatility in the net periodic benefit cost and future funding requirements of the plans. In the future, we may be required to make additional contributions to our defined benefit plans. Plan liabilities may impair our liquidity, have an unfavorable impact on our ability to obtain financing and place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to some of our competitors who do not have such liabilities and cash requirements. Although we believe that we are in compliance with the requirements of the AEPF, given the complexity of pension-related matters described above we may not, in every instance, be in full compliance with applicable requirements.

In the western United States, we are using government awards to both enable our expanded carrier service initiative and grow the footprint of our network. We receive federal and state universal service revenues to support our wireline operations in high-cost areas in Alaska, the US Virgin Islands, and in the western United States. We receive US government funding and awards from numerous other sources, including E-rate, EACAM, RHC program, Tribal Broadband Connectivity, CAF II, RDOF, and state funding. Each government award or support imposes explicit conditions regarding operational requirements, timelines and deployment of service, and required reporting, each that require strict compliance. Administrative and operational expertise is required to meet the growing number of government award programs that we have been awarded. If we are unable to meet the terms of the awards, our funding may be subject to claw back in addition to other consequences.  For example, on May 8, 2024, we entered into a Consent Decree with the FCC Enforcement Bureau, regarding both the USAC and FCC Enforcement Bureau's investigation with respect to our compliance with Rural Healthcare Program Rules in the 2017 year and agreed to (i) pay a settlement amount of approximately $6.3 million, and (ii) enter into a three-year compliance agreement in connection with Alaska Communication's continued participation in the RHC Program. While we believe that we are in material compliance with the Consent Decree and our ongoing RHC Program obligations, any violation of the Consent Decree or other compliance failures may result in additional penalties. Further, there can be no assurance that we will continue to meet our various government obligations in a capital-efficient manner. For example, if we fail to meet our buildout and service obligations, or if we require substantial additional capital expenditures to meet the obligations under the timeline required, or if the relevant government agencies reduce funding availability, our revenue, results of operations, and liquidity may be materially adversely impacted. Finally, there is uncertainty regarding any future levels of these revenues, as the new US administration may choose to decrease or cease funding certain programs, and the constitutionality of the federal universal service program is currently under judicial review. There can be no assurance that government support will continue at its current levels and decreases, losses, or disruptions in the funding of certain programs may have a materially adverse impact on our revenues.