The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has released a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend the Table of TV Allotments under 47 CFR Part 73. This proposal seeks to substitute channel 10 for channel 36 for television station WWDP-TV in Norwell, Massachusetts. The change comes in response to a petition filed by RNN Boston License Co., LLC, the station's licensee. Published in the Federal Register on February 10, 2026, the proposal aims to allow the station to maintain its operations and service to viewers in the area. This development reflects ongoing efforts by the FCC to manage broadcast spectrum efficiently, particularly in the wake of previous spectrum repacking initiatives. If adopted, the rule would update the allotments table to reflect the new channel assignment, ensuring compliance with coverage and technical requirements.
Background on the Petition and FCC's Role
The petition for rulemaking was submitted by RNN Boston License Co., LLC (RNN), the licensee of WWDP-TV, which currently operates on channel 10 but is listed in the allotments table as channel 36. According to the Federal Register notice, RNN seeks this substitution to keep the station on the air and continue providing service to its viewers. The FCC's Media Bureau, responsible for overseeing broadcast services, reviewed the petition and found it compliant with principal community coverage and technical rules. The agency notes that RNN plans to use its existing licensed parameters, which minimizes potential disruptions.
The FCC maintains the Table of TV Allotments to organize channel assignments for television stations across the United States. This table ensures efficient use of the radio spectrum and prevents interference between stations. Channel substitutions like this one often arise from technical necessities, such as resolving interference issues or adapting to changes in the broadcast landscape. For instance, the 2017 spectrum auction and subsequent repacking process led to numerous similar adjustments, where stations were reassigned channels to free up spectrum for wireless broadband. While the notice does not specify the exact reason for RNN's request beyond service continuity, it aligns with the FCC's broader mandate under the Communications Act of 1934 to promote the public interest in broadcasting.
Key Players and Process
RNN Boston License Co., LLC, a subsidiary of RNN National, operates WWDP-TV, which serves the Boston designated market area from Norwell. The station has a history of channel changes, including a previous shift during the post-auction repack. The FCC's notice, docketed as MB Docket No. 26-29 and RM-12016, was adopted on February 5, 2026, and released under delegated authority (DA 26-118). Key contacts include Shaun Maher and Mark Colombo from the Media Bureau, who can provide further information.
The rulemaking process invites public input, with comments due by March 12, 2026, and reply comments by March 27, 2026. Submissions can be made electronically via the FCC's Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS) or by paper filing to specified addresses. This public comment period allows stakeholders, including other broadcasters, viewers, and industry groups, to weigh in on potential impacts. The notice emphasizes compliance with ex parte rules, prohibiting certain communications during the proceeding to maintain fairness.
Technical and Regulatory Considerations
The proposed substitution involves revising Section 73.622(j) of the FCC's rules, specifically the entry for Norwell, Massachusetts, to list channel 10 instead of 36. The FCC states that this change meets all technical requirements, including principal community coverage, which ensures the station's signal adequately reaches its city of license. No new construction or modifications are proposed, as RNN intends to operate with current parameters.
From a regulatory perspective, this proposal adheres to the FCC's standards for channel allotments, drawing on precedents like the 2019 rulemaking for channel changes in various markets post-repack. For example, in FCC 19-128, the Commission approved similar substitutions to resolve interference complaints. Perspectives on such changes vary: broadcasters often support them for operational stability, while spectrum advocates may view them as opportunities to optimize bandwidth. Consumer groups might emphasize the importance of uninterrupted local programming, whereas competitors could raise concerns about market dominance. The notice does not indicate opposition at this stage, but the comment period could reveal differing views.
Implications for Broadcasting and Spectrum Management
In the short term, approving this substitution would enable WWDP-TV to continue broadcasting without interruption, preserving access to its content for viewers in eastern Massachusetts. This is particularly relevant in a media environment where over-the-air television remains a key source of local news and information, especially for underserved communities.
Longer-term implications include the ongoing evolution of the UHF and VHF bands. Channel 10 is in the VHF band (channels 2-13), which can offer better propagation but sometimes faces reception challenges compared to UHF channels like 36. The FCC's action here underscores its commitment to flexible spectrum management, potentially setting a model for future petitions. However, it also highlights challenges in balancing legacy broadcast needs with demands for spectrum reallocation, as seen in debates over the 600 MHz band. Different stakeholders offer varied takes: industry analysts might see this as a minor adjustment in a stable regulatory framework, while policymakers could debate its alignment with goals like broadband expansion.
The proposal is exempt from certain regulatory burdens, such as those under the Paperwork Reduction Act, and does not trigger a regulatory flexibility analysis, indicating minimal impact on small businesses. It also complies with the Providing Accountability Through Transparency Act by offering a plain-language summary online.
In summary, this FCC proposal addresses a specific channel allotment issue while fitting into broader patterns of broadcast regulation. Potential next steps include reviewing public comments and possibly adopting a final rule. Ongoing debates may center on spectrum efficiency and the role of television in a digital age, with challenges arising from technological shifts and competing spectrum uses. Stakeholders will monitor how this proceeding unfolds, as it could influence similar requests elsewhere.
