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.

  • There was an additional flurry of activity related to the controversial FCC Media Bureau’s Public Notice issued in March which “reminded” broadcasters that Lowest Unit Charges (LUC) apply to advertising bought by political parties and joint fundraising committees when authorized by a federal candidate (see our Broadcast Law Blog articles here and here).  Early in the week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued a ruling granting a mandamus petition by several Democratic candidates compelling the FCC to act, by October 9, on the candidates’ application for review seeking to overturn the Public Notice.  If the FCC acted on the application for review, that might moot the U.S. Supreme Court decision last month that had stayed the Fourth Circuit’s August decision that ads bought by political parties and joint fundraising committees did not get LUC – that the rates applied only to candidates themselves.  The Supreme Court stay was premised on the fact that the Fourth Circuit decision overturned an FCC staff action before the FCC Commissioners had a chance to rule on the merits of that staff decision.  As other courts had found that action by the full Commission was a precondition for judicial review, the Supreme Court thought that the Fourth Circuit decision ignored this precedent (see our articles here and here).  If the full Commission acted on the application for review, as ordered in this week’s decision on the mandamus request, the Fourth Circuit might be able to overcome the procedural issue identified in the Supreme Court stay. However, before the FCC was compelled to act on the application for review as required by the mandamus order, the Supreme Court again intervened and issued a temporary stay, blocking the effect of the mandamus order at least until additional arguments could be heard. The FCC argued to the Supreme Court in its application for stay that it needed more time to consider public comments filed in response to the Democratic candidates’ application for review and on a related application for review of the Public Notice by TVB (see our note here).  It also wanted to avoid uncertainty about the application of LUC in the middle of the campaign period before November’s midterm elections.  The Republican National Committee and associated groups filed an amicus brief supporting the FCC’s pleading, echoing the FCC’s concerns.  The Democratic candidates were ordered to file a responsive brief on October 10 so that the Supreme Court can issue a final ruling on the stay request.  The candidates’ brief, here, argues that the FCC is purposely using delaying tactics to evade judicial review of the legality of the Public Notice.  Watch for a Supreme Court decision soon on whether the stay should remain in effect. 
  • Two petitions were filed with the FCC seeking a stay of its decision to lift the 39% national ownership cap for television.  One petition, filed by several state cable and broadband associations, argues that the Commission’s decision ignored the harms to consumers from the increase in retransmission consent fees that these associations fear will occur should there be more television ownership concentration.  A second petition, filed by public interest and labor organizations, argues that the FCC does not have the authority to lift a cap set by Congress and that the Commission, in finding that lifting the cap would strengthen local stations so that they can better serve the public, ignored arguments that greater consolidation would actually harm broadcast localism.   
  • The FCC released its Quarterly Broadcast Station Totals.  The release shows that compared to the same release from a year ago, there were 85 fewer AM stations and 54 fewer commercial FM stations, but 85 more noncommercial FM stations.  There were also 6 more commercial UHF TV stations but 5 fewer VHF TV stations; 2 more noncommercial UHF TV stations but 2 fewer noncommercial VHF TV stations.
  • The FCC’s Wireless Telecommunications Bureau announced the selection criteria and submission instructions for proposals for parties to serve in the position of the Upper C-Band Clearinghouse (see here).  In July, the FCC adopted rules reconfiguring the upper C-band (3.7-4.2 GHz) for terrestrial wireless use and requiring incumbent operators, including C-band earth stations used by broadcasters for receiving satellite-delivered programming, to clear the band (see our note here).  The Upper C-Band Clearinghouse would be responsible for administering the payment of transition costs, including reviewing and approving the actual cost and lump sum reimbursement claims filed by incumbent earth station operators transitioning out of the band.  Clearinghouse candidates must submit their proposals for the position by November 9. 
  • The Media Bureau released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing the substitution of VHF Channel 11 for UHF Channel 34 at Des Moines, Iowa.  The TV station proposing the substitution seeks to remain on its current Channel 11 after the station determined that it could not build out its Channel 34 facilities by its construction permit’s expiration date. 
  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau issued a Notice of Violation against the licensee of two North Carolina FM translators after the Bureau’s investigation found that the translators were operating while their designated AM primary station was off the air.  The FCC rules prohibit a translator from operating for more than 24 hours after its primary AM station goes silent. The licensee must now explain to the Bureau how it will correct the rule violation and prevent future violations from occurring.

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 FCC released the final text of its Report and Order eliminating the 39% national TV ownership cap – an Order adopted at its August Open Meeting (see our note here).  The FCC will now do a case-by-case review of any proposed TV combination exceeding the 39% cap to see if it is in the public interest by weighing factors including the transaction’s potential benefits (e.g., increased local programing and innovation) and its potential harms (e.g., decreased local programming, increased retransmission consent fees, and loss of jobs of communications workers). By abolishing the cap, the FCC appears to be starting from a position that the cap is no longer necessary so any objections to proposed combinations that would exceed the current cap must provide specific showings why the transaction before the FCC would harm the public interest (e.g., by showing historical tendencies of the acquiring company to engage in conduct that produced negative results).
    • FCC Commissioner Gomez issued a dissenting statement repeating her earlier statements (see our note here) that only Congress could change the cap and that eliminating the cap risks greater consolidation, less independent/local news, reduced viewpoint diversity, and higher retransmission-consent costs. 
  • The FCC released a Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking significantly revising the FCC’s procedures under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for determining if constructing communications facilities, including broadcast towers, affect the environment.  These reforms include limiting the scope of the FCC’s NEPA review, streamlining and expediting the FCC’s NEPA review process, and requiring NEPA review for broadcast activities only if a new tower needs an Antenna Structure Registration.  The FNPRM seeks comment on the FCC’s related National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) framework, including whether the FCC’s licensing procedures trigger NHPA review and whether the FCC should change its NHPA procedures like it did with NEPA. 
  • The FCC released a Memorandum Opinion and Order concluding that a TV station can be a must-carry signal in only one DMA.  This overturns a 2024 Media Bureau decision finding that DISH Network had to accord must carry rights to a station licensed to Opelika, AL in both the DMA where the station is located (the Columbus-Opelika, GA-AL DMA) and the market to which Nielsen assigns it (the Atlanta, GA DMA).  Under the Satellite Home Viewer Improvement Act of 1999 (SHVIA) and the FCC’s satellite carriage rules, satellite TV providers must carry a TV station in its local market upon demand.  This week’s Commission decision concludes that a station will receive must-carry only in the market to which it is assigned (and, if the station’s city of license is outside that market, in the county where its community of license is located).  The FCC accepted DISH’s assertion that the station could choose which of the two DMAs was the one to which it is assigned and ordered the parties to come into compliance with the ruling within 30 days. 
  • The Media Bureau released a Public Notice announcing that it is requesting one more set of comments on the Bureau’s March Public Notice which “reminded” broadcasters that Lowest Unit Charges (LUC) apply to advertising bought by political parties and joint fundraising committees when authorized by a federal candidate (see our article here).  These comments, due by October 12, with replies due October 19, seek comment on TVB’s application for review of the Bureau’s denial of its petition for reconsideration of the Public Notice.  TVB argues that Section 315(b) of the Communications Act of 1934 clearly limits LUC eligibility to federal candidates and their authorized committees, the LUC violates broadcasters’ First Amendment rights by dictating their programming decisions, and the LUC Public Notice harms broadcasters economically.  As the Bureau stated in last month’s Public Notice seeking comment on several Democratic candidates’ application for review of the LUC Public Notice (see our note here), failing to allow public comment on TVB’s application for review could be legally problematic. The opening of this comment period was brought to the attention of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals by the FCC to augment its argument that the Court should not order the FCC to act on the Democratic candidate’s request to force quick Commission action on the requests to review the Public Notice (see our article here on that request), seemingly making any change in the policies announced by the Public Notice before the November elections.
    • Comments and reply comments were also filed in response to the Democratic candidates’ application for review of the LUC Public Notice.  Commenters were split over whether the LUC Public Notice should be rescinded.  Some commenters (see here, here, and here) say that the LUC is limited to federal candidates and their authorized committees, and the LUC’s extension to political parties and joint fundraising committees decreases broadcaster revenues—particularly for smaller stations.  Other commenters (see here, here, here, and here) say that the Bureau’s March LUC guidelines should stay in place as political campaigns and parties have already purchased advertising for the midterm elections, and changing those guidelines now could create legal issues for broadcasters.  The Center for American Rights says that the LUC’s mandate of preferential pricing for only federal candidates and their authorized committees violates the First Amendment
  • The Media Bureau released an Order in the FCC’s ongoing Delete, Delete, Delete proceeding (see our article here) deleting the FCC’s rules requiring broadcasters to file the FCC Form 395-B—an annual report that, in the past, was to be placed in stations’ online public files classifying all their employees by race, gender, and employment position.  The Bureau found that the Form 395-B rules had to be deleted after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled last year that the FCC lacked authority to require broadcasters to file the form (see our article here).  The Bureau said that since the deletion of the rules was a ministerial action, there would not be a public comment period before the deletions take effect. 
  • The FCC and the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau released two items concerning earth station licenses:
    • The Wireless Telecommunications Bureau released a Public Notice seeking comment on the Upper C-band Transition Preliminary Cost Catalog.  In July, the FCC adopted rules reconfiguring the upper C-band (3.7-4.2 GHz) for terrestrial wireless use and requiring incumbent operators to clear the band, including relocated lower C-band earth stations used by broadcasters for receiving satellite-delivered programming (see our note here).  The FCC required new upper C-band licensees to reimburse eligible incumbent earth station operators for their transition costs and directed the Bureau to create a catalog of reimbursable costs.  The Bureau seeks comment on the proposed cost catalog and whether the lower C-band’s reimbursement policies and procedures should be used or adjusted for the upper C-band transition.  Comments and reply comments responding to the Notice are due October 20 and November 9, respectively. 
    • The FCC released an item updating its earth station rules and seeking comment on encouraging new and more intensive satellite communications use in certain spectrum bands.  These changes include placing a filing freeze on new earth station license applications in the 12.7 GHz band, adopting a 10-year sunset period for protected terrestrial earth station operations in the 12.7 GHz band, and limiting earth station deployment opportunities in the 42 GHz band.  The FCC also seeks comment on limiting earth station operations in other bands, including the Ku-Band, the Ka-Band, and the 2360-2395 MHz band, to allow new uses of those bands. 
  • The Media Bureau updated the FM Table of Allotments to resolve short-spacing issues created by 2 vacant FM allotments in Tennessee and Michigan.  The Bureau deleted vacant Channel 288A at Selmer, Tennessee to resolve a short-spacing conflict with a nearby FM station but did not substitute the vacant allotment with another channel because there were no other channels that could resolve the issue.  The Bureau also substituted Channel 258A for vacant Channel 248A at Whitehall, Michigan to resolve short-spacing conflicts to 3 nearby FM stations while keeping a second local service at Whitehall.

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.

  • Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) wrote a letter to the sole Democratic FCC Commissioner, Anna Gomez, highlighting questions about whether it was legal for the FCC to operate with three Republican commissioners.  There has been concern expressed by some that, should the nomination of Danielle Thumann to be the third Republican commissioner be confirmed, the President would fire Gomez, leaving a three-member FCC, with all being Republicans.  While three members of the FCC are all that is necessary for a quorum, Wyden points to language in the Communications Act that states “The maximum number of commissioners who may be members of the same political party shall be a number equal to the least number of commissioners which constitutes a majority of the full membership of the Commission.” An accompanying press release offers the opinion that, if there are three commissioners, this language means that only two can be members of the same political party.  It further suggests that, if all the Commissioners were Republicans, all actions of the Commission could be subject to judicial challenge.  We would anticipate that this issue will come up in any hearing on the nomination of Thumann when the Senate returns after the mid-term elections and Thumann is available following her maternity leave. 
  • FCC Chairman Carr responded to a letter from Democratic Congress members suggesting that the FCC did not have the power to impose content warnings on TV programming that features transgender characters or topics.  As we noted here, the Media Bureau released a Public Notice in April requesting comment on the TV Parental Guidelines ratings system and asking if specific disclosures for shows with transgender and gender non-binary content are needed.  Carr’s response said that the Congressional members opposing such warnings “stake out the radical position that parents have no right to know whether controversial gender identity ideologies are being promoted in children’s television programming,” claiming that there is “a sudden surge in children’s television programming secretly promoting gender ideology to young kids without the knowledge or consent of their parents.”  Carr also said that the position of the representatives who signed the letter was at odds with Congress’ intent in establishing the ratings system “to allow parents to determine the type of TV programming that is appropriate for their children.”
  • FCC Commissioner Gomez released a statement on the settlement between a number of state attorneys general and Paramount which is expected to allow the company’s acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery to be completed.  Gomez said that she was “disappointed that this settlement appears to pave the way for yet another massive media consolidation deal that could raise prices for consumers, reduce content diversity, and weaken editorial independence.”  Gomez also said that the “settlement does nothing to resolve the FCC’s own unprecedented decision to approve near complete and unchecked indirect foreign ownership of one of America’s largest media companies from some of the most repressive governments in the world” (see our note here).
  • The FCC released an Order directing its Media Bureau to complete processing of 5 full-power TV and Class A TV stations’ license renewal applications that the Bureau had referred to the FCC because the stations did not comply with the safe harbor processing guidelines for core children’s programming.  As we discussed here, in 2019, the FCC revised its processing guidelines for stations’ compliance with their children’s programming obligations (which are assessed with stations’ renewals) setting yearly totals of required regularly scheduled children’s programs.  If stations do not meet the quantitative requirements for the safe harbor, their applications are referred to the full Commission for review, where they can demonstrate how they had served the needs of children in other ways.  The stations, in Florida, Indiana, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, each had different reasons for not meeting the safe-harbor requirements, but each put forward reasons that their applications should be granted.  The FCC found that the significant regulatory changes that the stations faced during their license term due to the revised safe harbor guidelines, and significant operational changes due to the Incentive Auction, the COVID-19 pandemic, and for other reasons, warranted departure from the normal safe harbor processing guidelines for each station.  The FCC cautioned that it did not anticipate in the future returning renewals to the Bureau for processing when stations do not comply with the safe harbor processing guidelines. 
  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau issued several Notices of Illegal Pirate Radio Broadcasting to property owners in Brooklyn New York, Bronx, New York, Mount Vernon, New York, and Cleveland, Ohio for allegedly allowing pirates to broadcast from their properties.  The Bureau warned the property owners that the FCC may issue fines of up to $2,453,218 under the PIRATE Radio Act against each owner if they continue allowing pirate radio broadcasting from their properties.
  • The Media Bureau took two actions regarding the Table of TV Allotments:
    • The Bureau released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposing the substitution of UHF Channel 18 for VHF Channel 8 at Savannah, Georgia.  The TV station proposing the substitution states that moving to a UHF channel serves the public interest by improving the community’s access to the station’s locally produced programming due to improved indoor reception, noting VHF channels’ inherent reception issues.
    • The Bureau released a Report and Order adopting the substitution of Channel 10 for Channel 36 at Norwell, Massachusetts.  The Bureau found that the channel substitution was in the public interest because it allows the station proposing the substitution to continue operating on its current Channel 10 after the station determined that it would not build out the Channel 36 facilities authorized by a construction permit.
  • The Media Bureau removed a condition from Bluewater, Arizona FM station’s construction permit prohibiting the station from commencing operations on Channel 230C3 until a Parker, Arizona FM station operating on Channel 230C3 began operating on Channel 224B1.  Even though the Parker station requested and was granted a channel change over 20 years ago, the licensee never implemented that change.  As the FCC considers an FM stations channel to have been changed once it is granted a CP for that new channel, the Parker station’s continued operation on its old channel constituted an “implied STA.” After the Parker station’s channel was changed, the Bluewater station was authorized on the old Parker channel, but its permit was conditioned on it not starting operations until the Parker station moved to its new channel.  Given the length of the delay in the Parker station changing channels, and because that delay impedes the commencement of service by the Bluewater station, the Bureau ordered the Parker station to cease Channel 230C3 operations within the 120 days so that the Bluewater station can commence its operations.
  • The FCC and the Media Bureau took actions concerning new LPFM construction permit applications:
    • The FCC released a Memorandum Opinion and Order affirming the Media Bureau’s tentative selectee determinations in a group of 6 mutually exclusive (MX) Puerto Rico LPFM construction permit applications (applications that cannot all be granted consistent with the FCC’s technical rules).  In May 2025, the Bureau granted 3 of those MX applications on a time-sharing basis.  An applicant whose MX application was dismissed claimed that the Bureau failed to award it an extra point in the point system analysis for having an established community presence and that the time-sharing arrangement removed the applicant from the MX group, thereby permitting its application to be granted.  The FCC rejected the applicant’s arguments, finding that the applicant’s initial application did not include documentation showing that it had an established community presence as a non-profit organization existing for at least 2 years, and the time-sharing arrangement did not create a new opportunity for the applicant to obtain a permit after the comparative process had ended.
    • The Bureau dismissed 36 LPFM construction permit applications filed by a group of commonly controlled applicants after determining that the applicants failed to meet the LPFM localism requirements (either physically headquartered or 75% of its board members resided within 10 miles of the proposed transmitter site for stations in the top 50 urban areas or 20 miles in all other areas).  The Bureau found that the applicants appeared to all be operated and controlled by a national headquarters that was not in any of the proposed LPFM stations’ communities of license, and none of the applicants’ directors resided within those communities.  
    • The Bureau dismissed a Texas LPFM construction permit application after the applicant failed to respond fully to the Bureau’s inquiries regarding the applicant’s eligibility to hold an LPFM authorization and compliance with the FCC’s foreign ownership rules.  The applicant initially listed three directors, two of whom were not US citizens, but claimed that the US citizen had voting control of the non-profit applicant.  When asked to substantiate that the corporate documents permitted directors to have different voting interests, the applicant amended its application to remove the 2 non-U.S. directors, leaving only one director.  As Texas requires a non-profit corporation to have at least three directors, and as the applicant did not substantiate its initial structure, the Bureau dismissed its application finding that it failed to demonstrate its legal existence under state law and failed to respond fully to the Bureau’s inquiries.

On our Broadcast Law Blog, this week we took a look at the important October regulatory dates and deadlines for broadcasters.  These include Quarterly Issues Programs lists and the required filing of ETRS Form One in connection with the upcoming Nationwide EAS Test.  We also discussed the latest developments in the legal proceedings regarding the Media Bureau’s extension of Lowest Unit Rates to political parties and joint fundraising committees and the impact of these proceedings on broadcasters in these weeks before the midterm elections.  Finally, we wrote about the FCC’s posting of FAQs on the new EAS cybersecurity rules taking effect on September 29.

October is another busy month of regulatory dates and deadlines for broadcasters.  Unlike previous years, there is no threat of a federal government shutdown on its October 1 start of the new fiscal year, so the dates and deadlines discussed below should not move on broadcasters.  As we detail below, all stations will need to observe EAS reporting requirements for the filing of ETRS Form One in anticipation of the upcoming Nationwide EAS Test, and all full-power stations need to remember the Quarterly Issues Programs list filing deadline.  While there always can be an October surprise, we take a look below at these and other significant dates and deadlines in the coming month. 

October 1 is the deadline for radio and television station employment units in Alaska, American Samoa, Florida, Guam, Hawaii, Iowa, Missouri, Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Washington with five or more full-time employees to upload their Annual EEO Public File Report to their stations’ Online Public Inspection Files (OPIFs).  A station employment unit is a station or cluster of commonly controlled stations serving the same general geographic area having at least one common employee.  For employment units with five or more full-time employees, the annual report covers hiring and employment outreach activities for the prior year.  A link to the uploaded report must also be included on the home page of each station’s website, if the station has a website.  Be timely getting these reports into your station’s OPIF, as even a single late report has in the past led to significant FCC fines (see our article here about a $26,000 fine for a single late EEO report).

The filing of the Annual EEO Public File Reports triggers the Mid-Term EEO Review beginning October 1 for TV station employment units with five or more employees in Alaska, American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Northern Mariana Islands, Oregon, and Washington.  The Mid-Term EEO Review that analyzes the last two Annual EEO Public File Reports for compliance with the FCC’s EEO requirements.  See our articles here and here on stations’ Mid-Term EEO Review reporting requirements.

Continue Reading October 2026 Regulatory Dates for Broadcasters – Quarterly Issues/Programs Lists; EAS Test Form One; Annual EEO Public File Reports; EEO Audit Responses; Filing Freeze on FM Translators; and more

On September 29, new rules go into effect requiring broadcasters to secure their EAS equipment and other equipment in their program chain that is connected to the internet – the FCC wanting to avoid false emergency alerts being transmitted on broadcast stations (see our articles providing details of this new obligation here and here). The three-point program (requiring stronger passwords, the updating of equipment and software, and the use of firewalls around EAS equipment) has raised many questions among broadcasters and their technical advisors as to exactly what is required.  While the FCC’s Order adopting the rules went into detail about the requirements, as soon as they were published, those in the field had questions that apparently had not been anticipated or addressed.  That left the industry wondering exactly what was required.  But this week, the FCC issued some helpful Frequently Asked Questions – and provided their answers to many of the open questions – the FAQs available here.

These FAQs address many of the questions that I have received at broadcasters’ meetings around the country in the last few months since these rules were adopted.  The FAQs make clear that, if your equipment does not accept the required 15-character passwords, you either need to get new equipment or you need to use one of the alternate security verification options provided in the Order – which include look-up secrets, out-of-band devices, single- or multi-factor one-time passwords, and single- or multi-factor cryptographic authentication.  The FAQs also note that even equipment behind a firewall needs to require these secure passwords.  And each piece of equipment needs to have its own password or verification procedure – the same password should not be used for multiple devices or systems.  The FAQs also clarify the FCC’s prohibition on the use of dictionary words – dictionary words can be part of passwords, but a single dictionary word that is 15 letters or more cannot itself serve as a password because it would be too easy for hackers to crack. 

The FAQs also note that if third parties, including program suppliers, who “route, process, or insert content into the transmission of programming on behalf of an EAS Participant as its agent,” must also abide by these requirements. It appears that the Commission is saying that, if the programmer directly inserts its programming into the program stream, they are subject to the rules.  But if some intervention by the broadcaster is required before the programming goes into the program stream, then they do not. 

Broadcasters need to review these FAQs and study the FCC’s Order.  Make any necessary changes now so you are ready for the September 29 effective date of these new EAS security rules.  If your system is hacked and you have not done what the FCC requires (or, as we suggested in our article on the upcoming nationwide EAS test, if the FCC forms required in connection with that test reveal unsecured EAS equipment) expect that the Commission will not look kindly on your problems. 

On September 4, as we noted in our weekly update of regulatory activity of importance to broadcasters, the Supreme Court seemingly decided that Lowest Unit Rates for this year’s elections would be governed by the Media Bureau’s March Public Notice – the Public Notice announcing that ads from political parties and joint fundraising committees, when approved by a federal candidate, would get those rates. The Supreme Court stayed a decision of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals that had found that ads from these groups did not get LUR, interpreting the law to say that those rates only applied to candidates themselves, not to other groups even if authorized by the candidate (see our article here about the 4th Circuit decision).  As the Supreme Court decision was released on September 4, the first day of the LUR period for the November elections, many assumed that we heard the end of this dispute until the Supreme Court gets around to resolving the substantive issues, a decision unlikely to occur until sometime next year.  But we were wrong, as there was a new flurry of activity this past week. Let’s look at the Supreme Court’s decision and the activity it triggered last week. 

The Supreme Court’s decision never addressed the substance of the issue of whether ads from political parties and joint fundraising committees, when authorized by federal candidates, should get LUC.  Instead, the decision stayed the 4th Circuit decision because the 4th Circuit had ruled on the issue before the full Commission had the opportunity to address challenges to the Media Bureau decision.  As other courts have held that the Commission must first rule on a Bureau decision before a judicial appeal can be brought, the Supreme Court found that the 4th Circuit decision departed from the reasoning of those of other courts.  That procedural conflict as to whether the controversy was ripe for court review had to first be resolved before the substance of the matter could be addressed.  The Supreme Court decision thus stayed the effectiveness of the 4th Circuit decision until the Supreme Court can resolve this conflict.  That resolution would determine whether the 4th Circuit had the power to review the substantive issues about LUC without the Commission having first ruled on challenges to the Media Bureau’s Public Notice.

Continue Reading More Action on Issues About Lowest Unit Rates for Political Parties and Joint Fundraising Committees After Supreme Court Decision – Where Do These Actions Leave the Broadcaster?

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 FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau announced that the FCC, in coordination with FEMA, will conduct a nationwide test of the Emergency Alert System at 2:20 p.m. ET on November 17 (with December 3 as a back-up date if the test must be rescheduled).  All EAS participants, including broadcasters, must participate in the EAS test and must make the required filings in the FCC’s EAS Test Reporting System (ETRS).  The required ETRS filings are as follows: ETRS Form 1s, identifying licensees and their EAS equipment, are due October 30; ETRS Form 2s, reporting on the receipt of the test, are due at 2:20 p.m. ET on November 19 (or at 2:20 p.m. ET on December 5 if the test is rescheduled); and ETRS Form 3s, providing more details about the test reception, are due January 4, 2027 (or on January 18, 2027 if the test is rescheduled).  We provide more details about this nationwide EAS test on our Broadcast Law Blog, here.
  • The House of Representatives passed the AM Radio for Every Vehicle Act.  The bill will now have to be approved by the Senate before the end of the year (which is the end of this session of Congress), and signed by the President, before it becomes law.  We wrote about this bill, which would require that AM radios be in all cars sold in the United States, when it was originally introduced, here, and again when it was reintroduced with some minor changes in the current session of Congress here.
  • The FCC’s Media Bureau released a Public Notice announcing that comments and reply comments are due September 25 and September 30, respectively, on an application for review filed in April by group of Democratic political candidates.  They seek full Commission review of the Bureau’s March Public Notice which “reminded” broadcasters that Lowest Unit Charges (LUC) applied to advertising by joint fundraising committees and political parties if that advertising was authorized by a federal candidate (see our article here).  Noting the prior lack of opportunity for comment on the application for review, the Bureau asks for comment not only on the application for review, but on all issues raised in the Public Notice—which likely includes issues that TVB raised in its separate petition for reconsideration of the Public Notice—which the Bureau dismissed last month (see our note here), and on which TVB also has sought full Commission review.  Earlier this month, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision vacating the Bureau’s Public Notice following a judicial appeal by the same Democratic candidates (see our article here on the 4th Circuit decision).  The Supreme Court’s decision, relying on procedural questions about whether the 4th Circuit was allowed to act before the full Commission had dealt with the application for review, reinstated the Public Notice providing for LUC for these joint fundraising committees and political party ads until the Court can fully consider the merits of the case—likely well after the upcoming election.  However, this week, the Democratic candidates returned to the 4th Circuit asking the Court to force the full Commission to act, which could moot the Supreme Court’s procedural concerns. Look for an article providing more information about these actions on our Broadcast Law Blog tomorrow. 
  • The Media Bureau released a Public Notice announcing that comments and reply comments are due October 19 and November 18, respectively, responding to XGN/X1 Mobile and Tyche Media’s petition for rulemaking requesting that the FCC allow LPTV stations to use the 5G Broadcast transmission standard as an alternative to the ATSC 1.0 and 3.0 transmission standards.  The petition proposes authorizing deployment of the 5G Broadcast standard on a voluntary basis.  The proposal would require that 5G Broadcast stations offer a high-quality linear free-to-air stream, and it would prohibit any LPTV station qualifying for mandatory MVPD carriage from implementing 5G Broadcast operations.
  • The U.S. Senate Commerce Committee postponed the September 17 hearing at which it was to consider the nomination of Danielle Thumann (Severs) for one of the vacant seats on the FCC because Thumann had a baby this past week.  Thumann currently works as Senior Counsel to FCC Chair Brendan Carr.  Earlier in her legal career, in addition to other positions at the FCC, she worked for Crown Castle tower company and the Wilkinson Barker Knauer law firm in Washington.  She has been nominated to fill the vacant Republican seat on the FCC.  The Committee has not set a new hearing date yet.
  • The Media Bureau issued a Declaratory Ruling granting Paramount’s petition to exceed the foreign ownership limits of Section 310(b) of the Communications Act.  Absent FCC approval, Section 310(b) prohibits foreign entities, individuals, and governments from holding ownership interests of more than 20% in an FCC licensee and more than 25% in a U.S. entity directly or indirectly controlling an FCC licensee.  The Bureau granted Paramount’s request for existing and future foreign investors to hold indirect equity interests above the 25% statutory benchmark; and it gave specific investors from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar the ability to hold indirect equity interests of more than 5% and provided advance approval for those investors to hold indirect equity interests up to 20%.  The Bureau found that granting the petition was in the public interest because it would increase the company’s access to capital, allowing it to compete more effectively and improve its investments in local news and journalism.  The Bureau conditioned its approval on Paramount’s compliance with its Letter of Agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice, which prohibits the approved foreign investors from involvement in the company’s management and access to certain non-public company information.  Paramount must also monitor its foreign equity and voting interests; obtain FCC approval for any other foreign investors holding at least 5% (or at least 10% for certain passive investors); obtain FCC approval for any foreign individual or entity holding a controlling interest in Paramount; and promptly disclose any noncompliance with the foreign ownership rules.
  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau issued several Notices of Illegal Pirate Radio Broadcasting to property owners in New York City, Brooklyn, New York, Mount Vernon, New York, the Bronx, New York, and Lake Worth, Florida for allegedly allowing pirates to broadcast from their properties.  The Bureau warned the property owners that the FCC may issue fines of up to $2,453,218 under the PIRATE Radio Act against each owner if they continue allowing pirate radio broadcasting from their properties.
  • The Media Bureau released an Order amending the FM Table of Allotments to reinstate the following allotments as vacant due to the cancellation of station authorizations or the dismissal of applications: Channel 257C1 at Fowler, Colorado; Channel 266A at Parachute, Colorado; Channel 234C3 at Horseshoe Beach, Colorado; Channel 235C2 at Coushatta, Louisiana; Channel 280A at Arcadia, Missouri; Channel 294C2 at Ellington, Missouri; Channel 285C at Ellsworth AFB, South Dakota; and Channel 265C3 at Huntingdon, Tennessee.  The FCC will at a later date announce when applications can be filed for these allotments.
  • The Enforcement Bureau issued a Notice of Violation against a Michigan AM station after the Bureau’s inspection revealed that the station failed to maintain its station log listing EAS test receipts; its EAS receivers were not monitoring the stations specified by the Michigan State EAS Plan; the station was operating at 36.6% above its authorized power level; it was unable to operate within its authorized nighttime parameters; and it was not operating with an antenna monitor as required for AM stations using a directional antenna.  The station must now explain to the Bureau how it will correct the rule violations and prevent future violations from occurring.
  • The Media Bureau acted on two mutually exclusive LPFM construction permit applications (applications that cannot both be granted in compliance with the FCC’s technical rules designed to prevent interference) proposing new LPFM stations in Bartlett and Memphis, Tennessee.  The Bureau dismissed the Bartlett application because the applicant failed to demonstrate that it had reasonable assurance of its proposed tower site’s availability and failed to demonstrate compliance with the LPFM localism requirement (either physically headquartered or 75% of its board members resided within 20 miles of its proposed station’s transmitter site).  The Bureau then granted the Memphis application as it was the sole remaining application in the group. 

The FCC’s Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau this week announced in a Public Notice that, in coordination with FEMA, the FCC will conduct a Nationwide EAS test scheduled for November 17 (with a back-up date of December 3 if there is a real emergency or another reason that the test can’t be conducted on the initial date) – the first such test since 2023.  With a nationwide test now scheduled, broadcasters (and other EAS participants including cable and satellite radio companies) have required filing obligations in the EAS Test Reporting System (ETRS), starting with the filing of ETRS Form One by October 30.  Form One provides basic information about each participating licensee, including a station contact person, information about its EAS equipment and locations, and the primary EAS stations being monitored.

The test will be originated at 2:20 p.m. Eastern Time (ET), on November 17, 2026, using the Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS). That is the Internet-delivered EAS system, so stations should be confirming that their equipment is connected to the Internet and ready to receive the test message.  The test will be distributed in both English and Spanish as a Common Alerting Protocol (CAP) message using the Nationwide Test of the Emergency Alert System (NPT) event code. The test message audio and text, which is designed to be identical to the greatest extent possible, is as follows: “This is a nationwide test of the Emergency Alert System, issued by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, covering the United States from 2:20 to 2:50 hours ET. This is only a test. No action is required by the public.”

After the test, licensees will be required to complete and submit ETRS Forms Two and Three.  Form Two is to be filed within 48 hours of the completion of the test, and it essentially reports whether or not the test was received and transmitted by the station.  Form Three provides more detailed information about the results of the test.  These deadlines were spelled out by the Public Notice as follows:

•  All EAS Participants must submit their annual ETRS Form One for calendar year 2026

no later than October 30, 2026.

•  All EAS Participants must file ETRS Form Two within 48 hours of the nationwide test.  The deadline for Form Two filings is 2:20 pm ET on November 19, 2026, or, if the test is conducted on the alternative date, 2:20 pm ET on December 5, 2026.

•  All EAS Participants must file ETRS Form Three to provide detailed post-test data within 45 days following the nationwide test, which will be on or before January 4, 2027, or, if the test is conducted on the alternative date, on or before January 18, 2027.

ETRS Forms Two and Three will become available in the FCC’s filing system on November 17, 2026, at the time of initiation of the 2026 nationwide test.

The FCC suggests steps to be taken by licensees to prepare for the test, including:

•  Ensuring that a copy of the EAS Operating Handbook is located at normal duty positions, or at any other EAS equipment locations, and is otherwise immediately available to operators;

•  Reviewing the EAS Operating Handbook for the actions to be taken by operators upon

receipt of the test alert, and tailoring any actions as necessary that are specific to the EAS

Participants’ facilities;

•  Reviewing their State EAS Plan for monitoring assignments and ensuring that EAS

equipment is accurately configured to monitor those sources;

•  Updating EAS equipment software and firmware to the most recent version; and

•  Manually synchronizing EAS equipment clocks to the official time provided by the National Institute of Standards and Technology if an EAS Participant’s equipment does not automatically synchronize to an Internet time source.

The FCC’s highlighting of the concern about software and firmware not being updated is tied to the finding in the last test of a significant number of stations that were using outdated equipment that may have interfered with their ability to receive the alert.  As we noted in a number of recent articles (see, for instance, our articles here and here), by September 29, all broadcasters are required to have installed all necessary equipment and software updates as part of the new requirements for EAS security. 

In recent months, as the FCC has rolled out these EAS security obligations, I have been asked how those obligations will be enforced.  One way may be through these nationwide tests – where an alert is not received by a station that has not updated its EAS equipment, that station could be found to be in violation of the new rules.

The Public Notice clarifies who is subject to these requirements (i.e., all broadcasters except those who do not originate any programming) by setting out the following specific information:

All EAS Participants—including Low Power FM stations (LPFM), Class D non-commercial educational FM stations, and EAS Participants that are silent pursuant to a grant of Special Temporary Authority—are required to register and file in ETRS, with the following exceptions:

• Analog and digital low power television (LPTV) stations that operate as television broadcast translator stations that entirely rebroadcast the programming of other broadcast televisions stations are not required to register and file in ETRS.

• FM broadcast booster stations and FM translator stations which entirely rebroadcast the programming of other local FM broadcast stations are not required to register and file in ETRS.

• International broadcast stations are not required to register and file in ETRS.

• Analog and digital broadcast stations that operate as satellites or repeaters of a hub station (or common studio or control point if there is no hub station) and rebroadcast 100 percent of the programming of the hub station (or common studio or control point) are not required to register and file in ETRS. However, the hub station (or common studio or control point) is required to register and file in ETRS.

Broadcasters need to be prepared for this test and take all of their reporting obligations seriously.  In the past, we have warned that, at some point, the FCC will start fining stations that do not participate or who do not timely file the required ETRS forms.  We recently noted an FCC Consent Decree agreeing to a penalty of $27,000 from a Texas TV station that had not participated in recent nationwide tests and had filed incorrect ETRS information.  That penalty was a reduction from an initial fine of $369,190 after the licensee provided the FCC with evidence that it did not have the ability to pay the higher penalty.  The licensee had tried to excuse its incorrect filings by arguing that it did not understand its EAS obligations or the nationwide EAS test system.  The amount of the initial fine shows that the FCC does not accept ignorance as an excuse for EAS noncompliance.  So read the Public Notice and the links that it cites, talk to your engineers and legal advisors, and be prepared to participate in the upcoming nationwide EAS Test and to timely file all of the required ETRS reports. 

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 FCC released a draft Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking which, if adopted at its September 30 regular monthly Open Meeting, would significantly revise the FCC’s procedures under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for determining if constructing communications facilities, including broadcast towers, affect the environment.  These reforms limit the actions subject to FCC environmental review and streamline and expedite the review process for those projects that remain subject to NEPA.  The reforms generally require review of broadcast activities only when the construction of a new tower requires an Antenna Structure Registration.  The Further Notice seeks comment on the FCC’s related National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) framework, including whether the FCC’s spectrum licensing procedures trigger the need for historic preservation review and whether the FCC should undertake changes like those planned for NEPA review that would make the FCC’s NHPA framework more efficient. 
  • The U.S. Senate Commerce Committee announced that it will hold a hearing on September 17 where it will consider the nomination of Danielle Thumann (Severs) for one of the vacant seats on the FCC.  Thumann currently works as Senior Counsel to FCC Chair Brendan Carr.  Earlier in her legal career, in addition to other positions at the FCC, she worked for Crown Castle tower company and the Wilkinson Barker Knauer law firm in Washington.  She has been nominated to fill the vacant Republican seat on the FCC.  As no one has been nominated for the vacant Democratic seat, and as Democratic Commissioner Gomez’ term has expired as well (though she can continue to serve through the end of 2027), there is some speculation that Senate Democrats will try to hold up her confirmation until a Democratic nomination is made.
  • The FCC’s Media Bureau released an updated Media Bureau Fact Sheet correcting the 2026 regulatory fee amount for LPTV, Class A TV, and TV translator stations ($255).  The original Media Bureau Fact Sheet released last week provided an incorrect 2026 fee amount for these stations, and this change matches the fee owed by these stations as set out in the FCC’s August Report and Order, which officially set the 2026 fee amounts.
  • The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed a petition for writ of mandamus filed by several former FCC chairs, commissioners, staff, and public interest groups asking that the Court order the FCC to act on their petition filed in November 2025 seeking an FCC determination that the news distortion policy should be abolished.  As we noted here, the petition was titled a “Petition for Special Relief” and argued that the policy violates the First Amendment because the FCC was using it to suppress viewpoints critical of President Trump and the policy cannot be applied without embroiling the FCC in prohibited content-based decision making.  In June, the Media Bureau dismissed the petition, finding that the FCC’s rules did not explicitly allow a “special relief” petition to be filed to change a Commission policy (see our note here).  The petitioners subsequently argued to the Court that the Bureau’s dismissal was part of a pattern of unreasonable delay by the Commission in acting on their petition, while the alleged pattern of abuse of the news distortion policy continued to suppress the First Amendment rights of broadcasters and journalists.  The Court rejected the petitioners’ request in a very short order, finding that they failed to show that they could not obtain review of the Bureau’s dismissal of their petition by the full Commission before appealing the decision to a federal court.
  • The Media Bureau released a Public Notice announcing that October 11 is the deadline for all U.S.-based “foreign media outlets” classified as “an agent of a foreign government” under the Foreign Agents Registration Act to notify the FCC of their relationship to, and whether the outlet receives any funding from, a foreign government or political party.  This requirement applies to companies providing video programming to cable and satellite television systems.  The FCC must report to Congress every 6 months on the operations of U.S.-based foreign media outlets, with the next report due on or before November 11.
  • FCC Commissioner Gomez issued a statement after late-night ABC host Jimmy Kimmel announced that his interview with Democratic Texas State Representative James Talarico—who is also a candidate for the Texas U.S. Senate seat—will not air on ABC network TV stations due to the FCC’s alleged pressure campaign against ABC.  Gomez said that the decision “shows just how far this Administration’s campaign of censorship and control has gone.” Gomez also said that “any attempt to pressure broadcasters into self-censorship undermines both press freedom and the public’s right to hear from candidates in their communities seeking public office,” and that “the FCC has no lawful authority to threaten broadcast licenses over guest bookings or editorial decisions.” 
  • The Media Bureau released a Memorandum Opinion and Order granting a Washington TV translator licensee’s petition requesting reconsideration of the Bureau’s 2023 Forfeiture Order fining the licensee $4,500 for filing its 3 translators’ license renewal applications over 2 months late.  In the Forfeiture Order, the Bureau found that the licensee failed to timely respond to the underlying Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL), by paying the proposed fine or seeking its reduction or cancellation.  The Bureau found that while the licensee did not timely respond to the NAL, it was in the public interest to reduce the fine to $600 due to the licensee’s documented inability to pay the fine. 
  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau issued a Notice of Violation against a Texas broadcaster because the top beacon on the broadcaster’s tower was not lit as required by its Antenna Structure Registration and the beacon had not been repaired after several Bureau inquiries.  The broadcaster must now explain to the Bureau how it will correct the rule violations and prevent future violations from occurring.

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 FCC announced that September 24 is the deadline for paying the 2026 annual regulatory fees which were set by the FCC’s August Report and Order announcing the amounts of those fees.  The FCC and its Bureaus also released the following guides and fact sheets providing details for filing and paying the 2026 regulatory fees: Media Bureau Fact Sheet (for broadcast station fees), Full-Service TV Station Fees (listing each full-power TV station’s fee), Space Bureau Fact Sheet (for earth station fees), Payment Methods and Procedures Public Notice (detailing use of the CORES database to pay fees by wire transfer, ACH, or credit card—checks and money orders cannot be used to pay fees) Waiver, Reduction, Deferral, and Installment Payment Requests Public Notice (explaining how to request a fee waiver or deferral or an installment payment plan due to financial hardship), and Regulatory Fee Exemptions Public Notice (noting fee exemptions, including the de minimis exemption for entities with total fees less than $1,000 and the noncommercial station exemption).  The FCC also opened its 2026 fee lookup database where radio broadcasters can check their stations’ fees.  See our Broadcast Law Blog article here for more on broadcasters’ 2026 regulatory fees.
    • As a reminder of the importance of timely paying regulatory fees, the FCC’s Media Bureau and Office of Managing Director revoked a Montana FM station’s license for its failure to pay its delinquent regulatory fees or to show cause why payment should be waived or deferred.  In April, the station was issued an Order to Pay or Show Cause requiring the station, within 60 days, to either pay its delinquent regulatory fees or explain why it cannot pay the fees.  The station’s license was revoked after it neither timely responded to the Order nor paid its delinquent fees.  The station has an unpaid regulatory fee debt totaling $6,754.80 for fiscal years 2021, 2022, and 2023.  The Bureau noted that the station’s license revocation did not relieve it of its obligation to pay its delinquent fees (as the FCC could pursue collection of these fees).
  • The US Supreme Court issued a short decision staying the recent decision of the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, which had rejected the FCC Media Bureau’s Public Notice that extended LUC to political parties and joint fundraising committees.  The 4th Circuit had found that, under the law, only candidates were entitled to those rates (we wrote about the 4th Circuit decision on our Blog, here).  The Supreme Court found that the Republican campaign committees that had sought the stay of the 4th Circuit decision had met the requirements for a stay, largely on procedural grounds.  The Supreme Court found that the 4th Circuit decision allowed the consideration of an appeal from an FCC staff decision, before the full Commission had considered it, which is in conflict with decisions of other Courts of Appeal that have held that full Commission review was a prerequisite to consideration of any judicial appeal.  Because of this conflict, the Supreme Court may have to review the case to resolve this conflict.  The Supreme Court also found that the Republican committees had satisfied the requirement for a stay that they show irreparable harm if a stay is not granted as the Republican groups would be harmed by having to pay more for advertising if the Public Notice was not in effect.  By granting the stay, the Public Notice’s interpretation of the application of LUC applies, so it appears that political party advertising and that of joint fundraising committees, if authorized by a federal candidate, is now subject to LUC until the Supreme Court can fully consider the merits of the case, likely well after the upcoming election.
  • The National Association of Broadcasters applauded the decision of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise to schedule a vote of the full House of Representatives on the AM Radio For Every Vehicle Act.  The vote is scheduled to occur during the week of September 14.  If approved by the House, the bill will have to be approved by the Senate before the end of the year (which is the end of this session of Congress), and signed by the President, before it becomes law. We wrote about this bill, which would require that AM radios be in all cars sold in the United States, when it was originally introduced, here, and again when it was reintroduced with some minor changes in the current session of Congress here. 
  • The FCC moved to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Disney/ABC seeking to block the FCC’s early consideration of the ABC stations’ license renewal applications.  As we noted here, Disney has argued that the early consideration of the license renewals was politically motivated and violated its First Amendment rights.  The FCC’s motion argues that the Court does not have jurisdiction to consider procedural actions of the Bureau staff which, it alleges, were motivated by a review of Disney’s EEO practices, not questions about its speech.
  • The Media Bureau announced pleading deadlines for Spanish Broadcasting System’s (SBS) transfer of control applications proposing SBS’ post-bankruptcy organization plan and its associated foreign ownership petition.  SBS proposes to emerge from Chapter 11 as a reorganized entity with its existing stock cancelled in exchange for new stock and notes.  SBS also filed a petition seeking FCC approval of its new and existing foreign investors’ ownership interests pursuant to Section 310(b) of the Communications Act.  Absent FCC approval, Section 310(b) prohibits foreign ownership interests greater than 20% in an FCC licensee and foreign ownership interests greater than 25% in a U.S. entity directly or indirectly controlling an FCC licensee.  SBS seeks approval for its foreign ownership interests to exceed the 25% statutory benchmark, specific approval for certain foreign investors to hold greater than 5% ownership interests, and advance approval for its foreign investors to increase their ownership interests in the future up to a non-controlling 49.99%.  Petitions to deny the transfer applications and the foreign ownership petition are due October 2, oppositions to any petitions to deny filed are due October 19, and replies to any oppositions filed are due October 26.
  • The FCC’s Enforcement Bureau issued a Notice of Violation against a Michigan FM translator station’s licensee after the Bureau’s inspection revealed that the licensee failed to file a minor modification application for changes to the translator’s antenna system and because the translator was operating at 394% of its authorized transmitter power output.  The licensee must now explain to the Bureau how it will correct the rule violations and prevent future violations from occurring.