Broadcasters, Trade Groups Critical of Forest Service Fee

and undermines the public interest,” said NAB. The rule will undermine access to broadcasts in rural areas because it disproportionally affects rural TV translator stations, NAB said, saying “there is no statutory justification” for the USFS to apply the fee to existing users. If the proposal moves forward, it should allow for a “phase-in” period so existing users can make adjustments, NAB said. NAB also suggested an alternative fee that would assess fees based on market size and higher value uses. The rule would affect numerous public broadcasters that have prioritized universal access, said NPR, America’s Public Television Stations and PBS in joint comments. The USFS should revise the rule to include a discretionary waiver for nonprofit and governmental organizations, the public broadcasters said. The vast bulk of the over 700 comments in the docket came from amateur radio operators and related organizations and almost universally opposed the fees. Amateur radio operators provide “valuable communications services for the government and citizens during major emergencies” in areas that have little cellular service, said the Staunton, Virginia-based Valley Amateur Radio Association.Since amateur radio operators are prevented by law from charging for their services, the repeaters and other facilities they use are privately owned, the group said. “The only recourse the owners of the radio repeater resource have to cover any additional expense levied on them is directly out of pocket or additional donations.” The National Rural Electric Cooperative Association said the fee should be one time instead of annual. Georgia-based Blue Ridge Mountain Electric Membership Corporation said the fee would jeopardize the private radio network its employees use to communicate while restoring electrical and broadband services during weather events. “If we can't afford to break even on these services we will likely be forced to discontinue them, which will impair both BRMEMC services as well as the USFS.” CTIA said the fee appears to overlap with other fees already charged by the agency, and the USFS should revise the fee to prevent redundant charges. CTIA also argued the fees should lead to a streamlining of the broadband deployment process on USFS lands: “CTIA urges the FS to endeavor to reduce its current timeframes to act on communications use applications, particularly those proposing modifications to existing facilities.”