KAY R. HAGAN
NORTH CAROLINA
'lanitcd ~tate5 ~cnatc
WASHINGTON. DC 20510
May 1,2012
The Honorable Julius Genachowski
Chainnan
Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street, SW
Washington, DC 20554
Dear Chainnan Genachowski:
SUITE SD-521
DIRKSEN BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 20510
(2021224-&42
We understand that the Commission has before it a small number of rulemaking
petitions seeking to change television stations' allocations from digital VHF to UHF
channels. To infonn review of these petitions, we would like to draw your attention to a
provision in the recently adopted spectrum provisions of the Middle Class Tax Relief
and Job Creation Act of 20 12 and the legislative history that preceded its adoption.
Section 6403(g)(I)(B) of the Act prohibits the Federal Communications
Commission, beginning on the date of enactment and proceeding until a reverse
spectrum auction is completed or certain findings related to auction revenue are made,
from reassigning a broadcast television license from a VHF channel to a UHF channel
unless (i) such reassignment would not decrease the amount of UHF spectrum available
for reallocation through auction or (ii) a request for such reassignment was pending
before the FCC on May 31, 2011. On that date, the FCC had issued a public notice
"freezing" the filing of VHF-to-UHF reallocation petitions.
Earlier versions of the statute had not included this exception for requests
pending as of the imposition of the "freeze." Prior to adoption of the final Act, the
bipartisan conferees included the exception for requests pending as of the "freeze" date.
This change was inserted to allow those broadcasters who had invested the time and
resources necessary to file reallocation petitions to have their petitions considered in
accordance with existing Commission standards and processes.
Since adoption of the legislation, we understand that there may be some
reluctance on the part of your staff to process the remaining reallocation petitions filed
before the "freeze."
0569
b Ii that u h a po ition i unt r both to the p ifi 1 gi lati int nt
b hind inclusion of th "freeze" e ception and to principles of faim that entitle
parti . who ha e pr d d in accordanc \ ith rul and d adlin . not to ha
th ir rights truncat d un p tedl.
Thank ou ti r ur art ntion to thi matt r.
Vry trul our.
)
•