OGC Says Disputed NAB Ex Parte Is Adequate
The FCC Office of General Counsel decided an NAB ex parte that was the subject of a complaint from the LPTV Spectrum Rights Coalition was “adequate,” according to a letter from the OGC’s office reprinted by the coalition. NAB’s ex…
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.
parte filing covered a meeting among FCC officials, NAB, public TV groups and wireless carriers, but didn’t fully explain the purpose of the meeting, coalition Director Mike Gravino said. “What advantage has now been given to NAB members and APTS [Association of Public Television] members? What do they know to do, to submit, to plan for, that the rest of us do not? Has the Incentive Auction proceeding been compromised?” asked Gravino in an email newsletter on the matter. According to the OGC letter received by Gravino, the meeting's purpose was “to encourage the private stakeholders present to confer among themselves (apart from the Commission) about the challenges associated with repacking and to see whether they could agree on measures that might address these challenges and serve the interests of both broadcasters and carriers,” the letter said. “Arguably, under these circumstances, there was no need to file an ex parte notice of the meeting at all,” the OGC letter said. The FCC and NAB declined to comment on Gravino’s complaints and the OGC letter. “What is the ‘secret deal’ which was struck between these sellers and buyers? Why are they the only ones to know about the secret deal, and party to the secret negotiations?” Gravino asked. “If the FCC suggested an ex parte needed to be filed, then that ex parte needed to have been done in the proper form of full disclosure, as we have pointed out in our complaint,” Gravino said. “It clearly was not, and now the Office of General Counsel is attempting to cover the tracks of the [Incentive Auction Task Force].”