The FCC is inclined to allow KGW-TV Portland, Ore., to change from a VHF to a UHF, but is seeking input on that inclination.

It has given commenters until 25 days after publication of Wednesday's (Oct. 14) petition for rulemaking in the Federal Register, which usually takes a couple of weeks.

There has been a freeze on such changes for almost a decade, dating from when the FCC first started to prepare for the 2016 broadcast incentive auction.

KGW-TV is seeking a waiver of that freeze so it can move from channel 8 to channel 26 and thus from VHF to UHF and better serve its viewers given that UHF is the stronger signal in digital, as VHF was in analog.

KGW-TV licensee Sander Operating Co. said that ever since the 2009 digital switch, it has gotten "a steady stream of complaints from viewers unable to receive the station’s over-the-air signal, despite being able to receive signals from other local stations.”

Sander said it has determined that its move to a UHF channel, including the equipment vendors involved, will not impede any repack-related efforts by other stations in its market.

In response to the request, the FCC said: "We believe that a waiver of the channel substitution freeze would serve the public interest." One thing arguing in favor of the waiver, the FCC suggested, would be that relatively few viewers would be adversely impacted. "[T]he Commission has found that population loss of less than 500 persons is de minimis,18 and the predicted population loss is only 417 persons who would not otherwise be well-served," it said.

The FCC has set the deadlines for comment on whether it is overstating the reach of VHF TV broadcasters and should lower their regulatory fees accordingly. 

That is because its Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking teeing up that issue has finally been published in the Federal Register. The FCC adopted the item Aug. 15. 

Related: Broadcasters Say Leave Satellite TV Fees Alone 

The FCC pays for its ongoing operations through fees to regulated entities. 

Comments are due Nov. 22 and reply comments Dec. 23. Those dates were dependent on when the item was published (Oct. 23) because the FCC had said back in August that the comment and reply dates would be 30 and 60 days after publication, respectively. 

That Dec. 23 date could wind up being pushed given its proximity to Christmas, one of the reasons the FCC often moves such dates if asked to. 

Broadcasters have argued that the FCC's methodology overstates the population VHF stations actually reach, a reach on which the fee is based, and wants the FCC to lower the fees. They cite terrain blockage, for example, which may limit the population reach but is not factored into the FCC's calculation.  

The FCC wants to know if that overstatement is the case and, if so, how it should reflect that in the fee calculation.