This Week in Regulation for Broadcasters:  February 24, 2025 to February 28, 2025

Here are some of the regulatory developments of significance to broadcasters from the past week, with links to where you can go to find more information as to how these actions may affect your operations.

• The National Association of Broadcasters filed a Petition for Rulemaking asking the FCC to require that full-power television stations complete the transition to the new ATSC 3.0 transmission standard in two phases.  In the first phase, TV stations in the top 55 markets would have a transition deadline of February 2028.  TV stations in remaining markets would need to transition by February 2030.  The NAB asks for several rule changes to assist with the transition, including requiring that new TV sets sold after February 2028 be capable of receiving ATSC 3.0, and updating the MVPD carriage rules to reflect the mandatory transition dates proposed.  The NAB also proposes that the FCC eliminate the “substantially similar” requirement (requiring that stations’ ATSC 3.0 principal broadcast stream replicate their ATSC 1.0 broadcast) earlier than the current July 17, 2027 sunset date.
• FCC Chairman Carr sent iHeartMedia’s CEO a letter requesting information on how the company will comply with federal payola requirements in connection with its upcoming iHeartCountry Festival ’25 on May 3 in Austin, Texas.  As we discussed here and here, the FCC has renewed its attention to broadcaster’s compliance with federal payola requirements, especially when broadcasters coerce musicians to play “free radio shows” (including “listener appreciation shows” or “charitable concert events”) in exchange for more airplay on stations or by threatening them with less airtime if they don’t participate.  Citing the FCC’s recent Enforcement Advisory about such events, Carr specifically asks iHeart to disclose whether it is forcing musicians to make this choice.  The letter also requests information on the company’s payola and sponsorship identification policies and how iHeart will implement them for the music festival, and on the compensation of the artists playing at the festival and how that compensation compares to what the artists receive for similar performances.
• At its February Open Meeting, the FCC adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing a review of its rules implementing the Commercial Advertisement Loudness Mitigation Act of 2010 (CALM Act) and a Notice of Inquiry regarding expanding use of the upper C-Band (3.98-4.2 GHz), which is currently used by many broadcasters for their earth stations.
  • The Calm Act NPRM seeks comments on whether the FCC should update or change its regulations that are intended to protect viewers from excessively loud TV commercials.  In the NPRM, the FCC seeks comment on the extent to which loud commercials are still problematic and, if so, how the rules should be modified to address these concerns. The Commission notes that many of its recent complaints suggest that loud commercials are also a problem with streaming platforms and asks for confirmation of those concerns and comments on whether the FCC has authority to regulate streaming providers.  It also asks if consumers experience issues with understanding the dialog in streamed programming if such problems particularly affect those with disabilities.  The NPRM notes no regulations are now being proposed for streaming providers – such rules would be considered in a subsequent NPRM, as noted in Commissioner Starks’ statement about his concerns over the FCC’s potential lack of authority to regulate streaming platforms.
  • The C-Band NOI requests comment on whether incumbent band users, including broadcasters’ earth stations, have other alternatives for operating their services, including repacking in-band, relocating out of the band, or sunsetting operations in favor of alternative distribution technologies.  Chairman Carr issued a statement noting the rapid deployment of new uses in the portions of the C-Band already repurposed from satellite to wireless users, and the need for more spectrum for wireless.  He did note, however, that the interests of incumbent band stakeholders must be considered.  Comments and reply comments responding to the NOI are due April 29 and May 29, respectively.
• The FCC also released a Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing to modify how annual FCC regulatory fees are assessed on space and earth stations.  For earth stations, the FCC seeks comment on expanding regulatory fees to non-operational earth stations (those which have a construction permit but are not yet licensed) and creating additional earth station fee categories beyond the current single fee category of transmit/receive and transmit-only earth stations to include, for example, VSAT, mobile-satellite earth stations, and fixed earth stations.  Comments and reply comments responding to the FNPRM are due March 27 and April 11, respectively.
• The FCC announced two proposed fines against pirate radio operators.
  • The FCC proposed a $325,322 fine against a Miami, Florida pirate radio operator based on FCC field agent observations of unauthorized operations on four separate days in 2024 and 2025 and the operator’s history of pirate radio offenses dating back to 2018, including a prior $120,000 fine.
  • The FCC also proposed a $60,000 fine against another Miami, Florida pirate radio operator based on FCC field agent observations of unauthorized operations on three separate days in 2024 and 2025, also noting Facebook posts of the owner of the property from which the pirate was operating promoting the station and showing the owner broadcasting, captioned with language including “the hottest old school jams right here on 89.1 fm.”
• The FCC’s Media Bureau took three actions regarding proposed revisions to the TV and FM Tables of Allotments:
  • The FCC announced that comments and reply comments are due March 17 and March 31, respectively, responding to the Media Bureau’s NPRM seeking comment on a noncommercial TV station’s proposed substitution of UHF channel 29 for VHF channel 13 at Monroe, Louisiana due to the inferior quality of VHF channel signals.  The petition serves as another example of UHF channel superiority for transmitting digital TV signals.
  • The Media Bureau released three NPRMs proposing modifications to the TV Table of Allotments to allow the petitioner TV stations located in Kansas, Kentucky, and Louisiana to remain on their existing channels due their inability to complete construction of new facilities by the expiration dates of their channel-change construction permits: the first NPRM proposes to substitute Channel 12 for Channel 28 at Wichita, Kansas; the second NPRM proposes to substitute Channel 8 for Channel 24 at Monroe, Louisiana; and the third NPRM proposes to substitute Channel 12 for Channel 20 at Hazard, Kentucky.
  • The Media Bureau also granted a petition proposing to amend the FM Table of Allotments by allotting Channel 260C0 at Ethete, Wyoming as a Tribal Allotment.  The Bureau found that Ethete, as a census-designated place located on the Wind River Indian Reservation, was a community for allotment purposes.  The Bureau also found that allotting this channel as a Tribal Allotment served the public interest by providing vital radio service to the Reservation and enabling petitioner, the Northern Arapaho Tribal government, to set its own communications priorities and goals.  The FCC will announce in the future the opening of a filing window for qualifying applicants to file construction permit applications for a new FM station on this allotment.
• The Media Bureau published in the Federal Register a notice of radio stations proposing city of license changes.  Interested parties have until April 25, 2025 to comment on the following proposed station moves: WAPC, from Opp, AL, to Clanton, AL; KSPA, from Ontario, CA, to Colton, CA; WOAM, from Peoria, IL, to Tremont, IL; KQSA, from Batesville, TX, to Pearsall, TX; And KRIX, from Port Isabel, TX, to Los Fresnos, TX.
• The Media Bureau also dismissed two LPFM construction permit applications due to the applicants’ failure to meet the FCC’s LPFM eligibility requirements.  The Bureau dismissed an Arizona LPFM construction permit application for applicant’s failure to meet the FCC’s LPFM localism requirement because the applicant’s headquarters and all of its directors’ residences were located more than 20 miles from the proposed station’s transmitter site (the limit for LPFM applicants outside of the top 50 urban markets).  The Bureau also dismissed a Florida LPFM construction permit application because the applicant failed to demonstrate its eligibility to hold an LPFM license as either an incorporated nonprofit entity or any other recognized nonprofit entity under Florida state law.

On our Broadcast Law Blog, we provided our regular monthly look ahead at the important regulatory dates for broadcasters in March and early April.