Sinclair Lacks Standing to Challenge Auction Order Repacking Deadline, FCC Says
The TVStudy software is necessary to conduct the incentive auction and Sinclair lacks standing to challenge the repacking process, the FCC said in a legal brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in response to…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
Sinclair and NAB’s petition for review against the incentive auction order. The congressional requirement that the FCC use the OET-69 methodology is not violated by the commission’s plan to use TVStudy, the FCC said in response to NAB. “Software and data are not methodology,” the agency said. The commission also responded to NAB’s argument that the order violated its legislative mandate by failing to preserve broadcast contours. The order preserves the coverage area and populations served of repacked stations by trying to ensure that a station's signals after the auction will reach “substantially the same geographic area at the same signal strength” and the same viewers as it did before, the FCC said. Sinclair, separate from NAB, challenged the FCC’s 39-month deadline for stations to cease broadcasting on their old channels after the auction. However, since Sinclair doesn’t yet know if it has stations that will be affected by the repacking, it doesn’t have standing to challenge that aspect of the rule, the FCC said. FCC rules give new licensees 36 months to build a new station, the FCC said. “The modifications that existing stations will have to make to their facilities following the auction are, at worst, no more complicated than those faced by new licensees constructing new stations,” the commission said. The petitions for review should be denied, the FCC said.