Published on:

By , and

Schools, hospitals, and libraries in poor and rural areas and millions of low-income American consumers can breathe a sigh of relief: they will continue to receive uninterrupted service subsidies through the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) Universal Service Fund (USF or Fund). On June 27, 2025, the US Supreme Court issued a significant decision in FCC v. Consumers’ Research affirming the constitutionality of Congress’s delegation of authority to the FCC to administer the USF, thereby upholding the funding mechanism used to deliver subsidized phone, broadband, and telecommunications service to millions of American consumers and community institutions. By a 6-3 vote, the Court reversed a ruling by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that held both Congress’s delegation of USF authority to the FCC and the FCC’s subsequent delegation of its authority to a private administrator violated the Constitution (read our article on the Fifth Circuit’s July 2024 decision here). The decision also resolved a split in the circuit courts, as the Sixth and Eleventh Circuit Courts of Appeal had decided in favor of the FCC in similar proceedings.

At issue in the case was the application of the “nondelegation doctrine,” a principle of constitutional law that says Congress cannot delegate legislative authority to any other branch of government or to a private entity. Specifically, Consumers’ Research challenged whether the discretionary power granted to the FCC to set and collect the “Contribution Factor”—the mandatory contribution assessed against the interstate end-user revenues of each telecommunication carrier on a quarterly basis—to fund a government initiative amounts to an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority (“public” delegation). Consumers’ Research also asserted that the FCC then committed a further unconstitutional delegation of authority when it conferred its congressionally delegated authority to administer the USF to a private entity, the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) to permanently administer the Fund by calculating contribution rates, collecting contributions, and disbursing those contributions to subsidized projects (“private” delegation). USAC is subordinate to the FCC. Continue reading →

Published on:

By and

Pillsbury’s communications lawyers have published the FCC Enforcement Monitor monthly since 1999 to inform our clients of notable FCC enforcement actions against FCC license holders and others.  This month’s issue includes:

  • CB Radio Operator’s Transmission of Indecipherable Sound Effects Leads to $25,000 Fine
  • Low Power FM Radio Licensee Enters Consent Decree Over Airing of Commercials
  • Interfering Bluetooth Speaker Leads FCC Field Agents to Florida Spa

Unauthorized CB Radio Use Results in $25,000 Fine

An Illinois Citizens Band Radio Service (CB) operator was fined $25,000 for engaging in unauthorized operation of a CB radio and willfully or maliciously causing interference.  Operating a CB radio no longer requires an FCC license, but its operation must still comply with all FCC rules.  Among the activities that are generally prohibited are transmission of one-way verbal communications, music and sound effects, and conversations longer than five minutes.

Section 95.933 of the FCC’s Rules also prohibits CB transmissions that include advertising for political candidates or for goods or services, and also prohibits transmitting live radio or TV broadcasts.  In this case, the violator transmitted nonverbal, indecipherable sound effects for long periods of time.  The resulting Forfeiture Order noted that unauthorized CB operations disrupt proper CB uses like “travelers’ assistance, warnings of hazardous road conditions, reporting accidents, etc.”

In the Notice of Apparent Liability (NAL) that preceded the Forfeiture Order, the FCC detailed the relevant facts, including complaints of transmissions of comedy routines, air raid siren sounds, and digital noises.  A visit to the area by an FCC field agent determined that unintelligible, data-like noises were coming from an antenna on the violator’s home.  The individual failed to respond to an on-scene Notice of Interference to Authorized Radio Stations left by the agent.  After subsequently receiving a Notice of Unlicensed Operation, the individual spoke with the regional office of the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau and claimed that a battery-operated transmitter inside a milk crate had been placed at a corner near his house.  He failed, however, to submit any documentation corroborating the existence of such a device.  On a second visit to the area, the field agent observed a data-like transmission similar to what was observed during the initial site visit but did not observe a transmitting milk crate.

The 2023 NAL described the individual’s history of non-compliance with FCC rules dating back to 1999, including his failure to pay a previous $14,000 fine.  The individual did not respond to the NAL, so the FCC proceeded to issuing a fine.

The FCC’s base fine for each day of unauthorized operation is $10,000, and for each day of interference is $7,000.  The Enforcement Bureau determined that the violations occurred on two days and assessed a fine of $25,000, the highest total fine the Enforcement Bureau is allowed to fine a non-common carrier under its delegated authority.  The individual has 30 days to pay the $25,000 fine, which will be made slightly more difficult by the fact that the FCC limits credit card payments to the agency to $24,999.99.

Low Power FM Station Signs Consent Decree Over Underwriting Violations

A Virginia low power FM (LPFM) radio licensee entered into a Consent Decree with the FCC to resolve issues related to airing commercial advertising.  The LPFM station’s license renewal application drew a Petition to Deny and informal objection making a number of allegations, including that the station participated in a prohibited operating agreement with other parties in violation of Section 73.860(e) of the FCC’s Rules, deviated from the educational purpose stated in the station’s initial construction permit (CP) application, made false certifications in the CP application, and regularly aired commercial announcements in violation of Section 399B of the Communications Act and Sections 73.503(d) and 73.801 of the FCC’s Rules. Continue reading →

Published on:

By , and

June 1 is the deadline for broadcast stations licensed to communities in Arizona, the District of Columbia, Idaho, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming to place their Annual EEO Public File Report in their Public Inspection File and post the report on their station website.

Under the FCC’s EEO Rule, all radio and television station employment units (“SEUs”), regardless of staff size, must afford equal opportunity to all qualified persons and practice nondiscrimination in employment.

In addition, those SEUs with five or more full-time employees (“Nonexempt SEUs”) must also comply with the FCC’s three-prong outreach requirements.  Specifically, Nonexempt SEUs must (i) broadly and inclusively disseminate information about every full-time job opening, except in exigent circumstances, (ii) send notifications of full-time job vacancies to referral organizations that have requested such notification, and (iii) earn a certain minimum number of EEO credits based on participation in various non-vacancy-specific outreach initiatives (“Menu Options”) suggested by the FCC, during each of the two-year segments (four segments total) that comprise a station’s eight-year license term.  These Menu Option initiatives include, for example, sponsoring job fairs, participating in job fairs, and having an internship program.

Nonexempt SEUs must prepare and place their Annual EEO Public File Report in the Public Inspection Files and on the websites of all stations comprising the SEU (if they have a website) by the anniversary date of the filing deadline for that station’s license renewal application.  The Annual EEO Public File Report summarizes the SEU’s EEO activities during the previous 12 months, and the licensee must maintain adequate records to document those activities.

For a detailed description of the EEO Rule and practical assistance in preparing a compliance plan, broadcasters should consult The FCC’s Equal Employment Opportunity Rules and Policies – A Guide for Broadcasters published by Pillsbury’s Communications Practice Group.

Deadline for the Annual EEO Public File Report for Nonexempt Radio and Television SEUs

Consistent with the above, June 1, 2025 is the date by which Nonexempt SEUs of radio and television stations licensed to communities in the states identified above, including Class A television stations, must (i) place their Annual EEO Public File Report in the Public Inspection Files of all stations comprising the SEU, and (ii) post the Report on the websites, if any, of those stations.  Once the new Report is posted on a station’s website, the prior year’s Report may be removed from that website. Continue reading →

Published on:

By and

Pillsbury’s communications lawyers have published the FCC Enforcement Monitor monthly since 1999 to inform our clients of notable FCC enforcement actions against FCC license holders and others.  This month’s issue includes:

  • Virginia Sheriff and FCC Determine Public Safety Interference Caused by Handheld Radio
  • Unauthorized Operation by Puerto Rico AM Station Leads to Notice of Violation
  • Signal Booster Operated by Luxury Apartment Building in Texas Interferes with Local Public Safety System

Virginia Investigation Results in Notice of Unlicensed Operation for Interfering with a Public Safety Communications System

Following an investigation by a Virginia sheriff’s office into interference with the county’s public safety radio communications system, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau conducted its own investigation and issued a Notice of Unlicensed Operation (NOUO) to an individual.

According to the NOUO, the sheriff’s office determined that a handheld Motorola two-way radio was transmitting signals in an attempt to self-authenticate and thereby access the county’s system.  The handheld unit used a unique identification code and had apparently been illegally programmed to operate on the county’s licensed frequencies.  The investigation led to an individual who admitted that he had programmed the radio to operate on the county’s frequencies and that he was the one operating it at the time the device attempted to self-authenticate and gain access to the county’s public safety radio system.

Under Section 301 of the Communications Act, use of radios like the one in question must generally be licensed by the FCC unless they transmit at a sufficiently low level of power to qualify under Part 15 of the FCC’s Rules for unlicensed operation.  The handheld radio in question was not certified as a Part 15 device.

In addition, any person operating a radio transmitter on frequencies exclusively licensed for public safety use needs an FCC license.  The NOUO stated that no such license had been issued to the individual.

Violators of Section 301 are subject to “substantial monetary fines, in rem arrest action against the offending radio equipment, and criminal sanctions including imprisonment.”  The individual has 10 days to respond to the FCC with a description of the steps he is taking to avoid future unlicensed operation and interference.

Puerto Rico AM Station Receives Notice of Violation for Unauthorized Operation

A Puerto Rico AM radio station recently received a Notice of Violation (NOV) from the FCC.  In the NOV, the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau stated that field agents out of its Miami office observed the station operating in violation of its license.  Specifically, the agents reported that the station was operating from a single tower with a non-directional pattern, whereas the station’s license specifies a directional antenna pattern using a two-tower array.  The station had not requested and obtained Special Temporary Authority from the FCC to operate at variance from its licensed parameters.

Within 20 days of the issuance of the NOV, the licensee is required to file a response which “(i) must fully explain each violation, including all relevant surrounding facts and circumstances, (ii) must contain a statement of the specific action(s) taken to correct each violation and preclude recurrence, and (iii) must include a timeline for completion of any pending corrective action(s).”  The licensee must also include “an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury, signed and dated by an authorized officer of [the licensee] with personal knowledge of the representations provided” in its response.  The FCC may then take additional enforcement action once it has the relevant facts in hand. Continue reading →

Published on:

By , and

April 1 is the deadline for broadcast stations licensed to communities in Delaware, Indiana, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas to place their Annual EEO Public File Report in their Public Inspection File and post the report on their station website.

Under the FCC’s EEO Rule, all radio and television station employment units (“SEUs”), regardless of staff size, must afford equal opportunity to all qualified persons and practice nondiscrimination in employment.

In addition, those SEUs with five or more full-time employees (“Nonexempt SEUs”) must also comply with the FCC’s three-prong outreach requirements.  Specifically, Nonexempt SEUs must (i) broadly and inclusively disseminate information about every full-time job opening, except in exigent circumstances, (ii) send notifications of full-time job vacancies to referral organizations that have requested such notification, and (iii) earn a certain minimum number of EEO credits based on participation in various non-vacancy-specific outreach initiatives (“Menu Options”) suggested by the FCC, during each of the two-year segments (four segments total) that comprise a station’s eight-year license term.  These Menu Option initiatives include, for example, sponsoring job fairs, participating in job fairs, and having an internship program.

Nonexempt SEUs must prepare and place their Annual EEO Public File Report in the Public Inspection Files and on the websites of all stations comprising the SEU (if they have a website) by the anniversary date of the filing deadline for that station’s license renewal application.  The Annual EEO Public File Report summarizes the SEU’s EEO activities during the previous 12 months, and the licensee must maintain adequate records to document those activities.

For a detailed description of the EEO Rule and practical assistance in preparing a compliance plan, broadcasters should consult The FCC’s Equal Employment Opportunity Rules and Policies – A Guide for Broadcasters published by Pillsbury’s Communications Practice Group.

Deadline for the Annual EEO Public File Report for Nonexempt Radio and Television SEUs

Consistent with the above, April 1, 2025 is the date by which Nonexempt SEUs of radio and television stations licensed to communities in the states identified above, including Class A television stations, must (i) place their Annual EEO Public File Report in the Public Inspection Files of all stations comprising the SEU, and (ii) post the Report on the websites, if any, of those stations.  Once the new Report is posted on a station’s website, the prior year’s Report may be removed from that website. Continue reading →

Published on:

By and

Pillsbury’s communications lawyers have published the FCC Enforcement Monitor monthly since 1999 to inform our clients of notable FCC enforcement actions against FCC license holders and others.  This month’s issue includes:

  • Seven-Figure Fine Proposed for Robocaller Targeting FCC Staff
  • FCC’s Enforcement Bureau Issues Payola Warning to Broadcasters
  • California Noncommercial TV Station Licensee Enters $25,000 Consent Decree to Wrap Up Investigation Into Multiple Rule Violations

FCC Proposes Seven-Figure Fine for Telecom Company Accused of Allowing Bad Actors to Use Its Network to Intimidate FCC Staff

The FCC proposed a multi-million dollar fine against a voice service provider accused of failing to prevent illegal voice traffic on its network.  Some of the pre-recorded calls targeted FCC staff and their families and purported to be from the FCC’s “Fraud Prevention Team,” which does not exist.  The calls attempted to extract money from the recipients through intimidation.

Under Section 64.1200(n)(4) of the FCC’s Rules, a voice service provider must take “affirmative, effective measures to prevent new and renewing customers from using its network to originate illegal calls, including knowing its customers and exercising due diligence in ensuring that its services are not used to originate illegal traffic.”  The rule gives voice service providers discretion as to how they police their own networks as long as the measures they put in place effectively prevent the origination of illegal traffic and ensure they know their customers.  Knowing your customer involves collecting and verifying customer information, including their corporate records, government identification, and the addresses from which they will be originating their calls.  The FCC has warned providers that high-volume callers merit heightened scrutiny to ensure they will not abuse the provider’s network.

In a redacted Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL), the FCC detailed the parties involved in the alleged scheme, including the voice service provider and two of its customers.  The two customers were accepted as customers on the same day, and while they provided different names and email addresses, they both had the same physical address (a Toronto hotel) and used the same domain name.  According to the NAL, on the same day they were accepted as customers and into the next day, the two entities originated automated calls that reached FCC staff and sought to connect the recipients to a live caller who, in at least one case, demanded $1,000 in gift cards to help the caller avoid jail time for “crimes against the state.”

The FCC worked with the Industry Traceback Group to determine the origin of the suspected illegal robocalls.  The Enforcement Bureau then subpoenaed call records from the voice service provider and learned that the two customers made nearly 2,000 calls over the two days that FCC staff reported receiving calls.  The FCC’s investigation revealed that the information the customers provided to the voice service provider was false and that the voice service provider did not corroborate or independently verify the customers’ information, thereby failing to apply the scrutiny necessary for the company to know its customers.  The FCC noted that the customers paid the provider in untraceable bitcoin, which helped to conceal their identities, but said it was not a factor in the FCC’s finding of apparent rule violations. Continue reading →

Published on:

By , and

Pillsbury’s communications lawyers have published the FCC Enforcement Monitor monthly since 1999 to inform our clients of notable FCC enforcement actions against FCC license holders and others.  This month’s issue includes:

  • Washington State Television Licensee Agrees to $29,000 Consent Decree for Public File Violations
  • Numerous FCC Rule Infractions Lead to Notice of Violation for Virginia AM Station
  • Multinational Media Company Agrees to Consent Decree and $244,952 Penalty to Resolve EAS Violations

Public File Violations by Washington State Television Licensee Yield $29,000 Consent Decree

In the course of processing license renewal applications for three Washington state television stations, the FCC’s Media Bureau noted that the applicant certified that all required documentation had been uploaded to the stations’ Public Inspection Files when required.  According to the Media Bureau, however, the licensee failed to timely upload 40 Quarterly Issues/Programs Lists.

Section 73.3526(e)(11)(i) of the FCC’s Rules requires that every full power commercial television station place in its Public Inspection File “a list of programs that have provided the station’s most significant treatment of community issues during the preceding three month period.”  The list must include a brief narrative of the issues addressed, as well as the date, time, duration, and title of each program aired that addressed those issues.  The list must be placed in the Public Inspection File within 10 days of the end of each calendar quarter.

The Media Bureau noted that the Washington stations had failed to upload some quarterly lists at all, and many others had been uploaded late.  With regard to the licensee’s Spokane station, the FCC stated that three of the lists created during the license term were uploaded more than one year late. Its Richland station uploaded seven lists more than one year late, six lists between one month and one year late, and three lists under one month late. Lastly, its Yakima station uploaded nine lists over one year late, seven lists between one month and one year late, and five lists under one month late.

Compliance with the FCC’s rules requires that all reports be timely uploaded and that any failure to do so be disclosed in making the relevant certification in a station’s license renewal application.  At the request of the FCC, the licensee uploaded the lists that were entirely missing from the stations’ Public Inspection Files and amended the stations’ license renewal applications to change its certifications that “the documentation, required by 47 C.F.R. Section 73.3526 … has been uploaded to the station’s public inspection file when required” from a “Yes” response to a “No.”  The licensee also included attachments in the amendments disclosing the lists that were filed late. Continue reading →

Published on:

By , and

February 1 is the deadline for broadcast stations licensed to communities in Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, and Oklahoma to place their Annual EEO Public File Report in their Public Inspection File and post the report on their station website.

Under the FCC’s EEO Rule, all radio and television station employment units (“SEUs”), regardless of staff size, must afford equal opportunity to all qualified persons and practice nondiscrimination in employment.

In addition, those SEUs with five or more full-time employees (“Nonexempt SEUs”) must also comply with the FCC’s three-prong outreach requirements.  Specifically, Nonexempt SEUs must (i) broadly and inclusively disseminate information about every full-time job opening, except in exigent circumstances, (ii) send notifications of full-time job vacancies to referral organizations that have requested such notification, and (iii) earn a certain minimum number of EEO credits based on participation in various non-vacancy-specific outreach initiatives (“Menu Options”) suggested by the FCC, during each of the two-year segments (four segments total) that comprise a station’s eight-year license term.  These Menu Option initiatives include, for example, sponsoring job fairs, participating in job fairs, and having an internship program.

Nonexempt SEUs must prepare and place their Annual EEO Public File Report in the Public Inspection Files and on the websites of all stations comprising the SEU (if they have a website) by the anniversary date of the filing deadline for that station’s license renewal application.  The Annual EEO Public File Report summarizes the SEU’s EEO activities during the previous 12 months, and the licensee must maintain adequate records to document those activities.

For a detailed description of the EEO Rule and practical assistance in preparing a compliance plan, broadcasters should consult The FCC’s Equal Employment Opportunity Rules and Policies – A Guide for Broadcasters published by Pillsbury’s Communications Practice Group.

Deadline for the Annual EEO Public File Report for Nonexempt Radio and Television SEUs

Consistent with the above, February 1, 2025 is the date by which Nonexempt SEUs of radio and television stations licensed to communities in the states identified above, including Class A television stations, must (i) place their Annual EEO Public File Report in the Public Inspection Files of all stations comprising the SEU, and (ii) post the Report on the websites, if any, of those stations.  Once the new Report is posted on a station’s website, the prior year’s Report may be removed from that website. Continue reading →

Published on:

By , and

Pillsbury’s communications lawyers have published the FCC Enforcement Monitor monthly since 1999 to inform our clients of notable FCC enforcement actions against FCC license holders and others.  This month’s issue includes:

  • Unauthorized Oregon Radio Station Transfers Yield $16,000 Penalty
  • Consent Decree Over Upgrade of EAS Equipment Includes $1.1 Million Payment
  • Chinese Video Doorbell Manufacturer Draws Proposed Fine of $734,872 for Equipment Authorization Rule Violations

All in the Family: Unauthorized Oregon Station Transfers Between Mother, Daughter, and Sisters Result in Consent Decree and $16,000 Civil Penalty

The licensee of an Oregon AM station and its companion FM translator entered into a Consent Decree with the FCC’s Media Bureau to resolve the Bureau’s investigation into unauthorized transfers of control of the stations.  The Consent Decree follows a September 2024 Notice of Apparent Liability for Forfeiture (NAL) and requires the licensee to pay a $16,000 civil penalty.

Under Section 310(d) of the Communications Act and Section 73.3540 of the FCC’s Rules, voluntary transfers of control of a broadcast license require prior approval by the FCC.  To determine whether control of a broadcast license has changed, the FCC considers “actual or legal control, direct or indirect control, negative or affirmative control, and de facto as well as de jure control.”  An analysis of de facto control, which is analyzed by the FCC under a totality of the circumstances test, looks at, among other things, the exercise of control over a station’s programming, personnel, and finances.  Surrendering control over programming, personnel, or finances transfers de facto control of a station.  The de facto control analysis also considers whether the other person or entity in question has held itself out to the public, the station staff, or both as being in control of the station.

In 2014, the sole member of the licensee LLC entered into a purchase agreement to sell the station to her daughter.  The agreement stipulated that the daughter would pay the purchase price through “sweat equity,” defined by the parties as providing accounting and administrative services.  Between September 2016 and February 2021, the daughter delivered enough “sweat equity” services to satisfy the purchase price, after which the licensee LLC filed Articles of Organization with Oregon listing the daughter as the sole member/manager of the licensee LLC.

In October 2021, the mother and daughter amended the purchase agreement to acknowledge that the daughter had fully performed under the agreement, but that “the purpose of the Purchase Agreement has been frustrated by the mutual mistake of the Parties, who acknowledge that the sale and transfer of the FCC licensee and the Station[s’] FCC license[s] should have been subject to the prior approval by the FCC in accordance with 47 U.S.C. § 310 and regulations promulgated thereunder.”  The amendment stated that transfer applications would be filed within ten business days of execution of the purchase agreement amendment, but the applications were not filed until February 2022. Continue reading →

Published on:

By , and

Beginning January 1, 2025, the FCC’s audio description requirements will expand to commercial television stations affiliated with ABC, CBS, FOX, or NBC in 10 additional Nielsen Designated Market Areas (DMAs): Johnson City-Bristol-Kingsport, Reno, Greenville-New Bern-Washington, Davenport-Rock Island-Moline, Tallahassee-Thomasville, Lincoln & Hastings-Kearney, Evansville, Fort Wayne, Johnstown-Altoona-State College, and Augusta-Aiken.  Audio-described programming is intended to make video programming more accessible to blind or visually impaired consumers by inserting “audio narrated descriptions of a television program’s key visual elements into natural pauses between the program’s dialogue.”

In October 2023, the FCC adopted the Audio Description Second Report and Order, which expanded the audio description requirements to all television markets.  As set out in the Order, 10 additional DMAs will be phased in each year through 2035 until all DMAs are subject to the audio description rules.

Under Section 79.3 of the FCC’s Rules, stations subject to the audio description requirements must provide at least 50 hours of audio-described programming per quarter during primetime or children’s programming, and an additional 37.5 hours of programming per quarter aired between 6 a.m. and 11:59 p.m. local time.  The requirement applies to any of a station’s programming streams, whether primary or multicast, if the stream is affiliated with ABC, CBS, FOX, or NBC.

The next deadline, January 1, 2025, will apply to DMAs 101 to 110, with markets 111 to 210 phased in through 2035 according to the below schedule. Continue reading →