# Review of the Commission's Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2026

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2026-18778

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Rule
- **Published:** September 14, 2026
- **Citation:** 91 FR 58258

## Text

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 1
[MD Docket No. 26-94; FCC 26-59; FR ID 366139]
Review of the Commission's Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2026

AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

In this document, the Federal Communications Commission (Commission or FCC) adopts its regulatory fee schedule to assess and collect regulatory fees for Fiscal Year 2026 (FY 26).

DATES:

Effective September 14, 2026. To avoid penalties and interest, regulatory fees should be paid by the due date of September 24, 2026.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patrick Brogan, Office of Economics and Analytics,
Patrick.Brogan@fcc.gov
or 202-418-7378.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

This is a summary of the Commission's Report and Order in MD Docket No. 26-94, FCC 26-59, adopted on August 26, 2026, and released on August 27, 2026. The full text of this document is available at
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-59A1.pdf.
To request materials in accessible formats for people with disabilities (Braille, large print, electronic files, audio format), send an email to
fcc504@fcc.gov
or call the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau at 202-418-0530 (voice).

Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, as amended (RFA), requires that an agency prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for notice and comment rulemakings, unless the agency certifies that “the rule will not, if promulgated, have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.” Accordingly, the Commission has prepared a final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA) concerning the potential impact of rule and policy changes contained in the
FY 2026 Regulatory Fees Report and Order.
The FRFA is set forth below.

Congressional Review Act.
The Commission has determined, and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, concurs that this rule is non-major under the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Commission will send a copy of this Report and Order to Congress and the Government Accountability Office pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A).

Final Paperwork Reduction Act.
This document does not contain any proposed new or substantively modified information collections subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA), Public Law 104-13. In addition, therefore, it does not contain any new or modified information collection burden for small business concerns with fewer than 25 employees, pursuant to the Small Business Paperwork Relief Act of 2002, Public Law 107-198, see 44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(4).

I. Introduction

1. Each fiscal year (FY), the Commission must adopt a schedule of regulatory fees to be assessed and collected by the end of September in an amount that reasonably can be expected to total the Commission's annual salaries and expenses (S&E) appropriation. Pursuant to the Commission's statutory obligation in section 9 of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended, (Act or Communications Act) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2026, the Commission adopts a regulatory fee schedule for fiscal year (FY) 2026 to assess and collect $416,112,000, which is an amount that reasonably can be expected to total the Commission's FY 2026 salaries and expenses (S&E) appropriation. By statute, the Commission must collect these regulatory fees by the end of September.

2. In April, the Commission proposed a regulatory fee schedule for FY 2026. Consistent with the Commission's longstanding regulatory fee methodology and the record gathered, the Commission adopts most of the proposals in the
FY 2026 NPRM,
91 FR 25268, May 8, 2026, to increase the number of full time equivalents (FTEs) allocated directly to the core licensing bureaus for FY 2026. In particular, the Commission adopts the proposals to reallocate 61 FTEs from the Office of General Counsel, the Office of Economics and Analytics, and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau as direct FTEs to the Commission's core licensing bureaus because the work of those FTEs is sufficiently linked to the oversight and regulation of regulatory fee payors such that the burden of that work should be considered in applying the Commission regulatory fee methodology. But, after careful review, the Commission declines to adopt the
FY 2026 NPRM
proposal to subtract two FTEs from the Media Bureau's direct allocation and also concludes it is appropriate to reallocate one additional FTE from the Office of General Counsel as direct to the Media Bureau. The Commission will, however, continue to treat all FTEs in the Office of Engineering and Technology, Enforcement Bureau, and Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau as indirect. The Commission also adopts its proposal for the calculation of television broadcaster regulatory fees, as adjusted, and where appropriate, adjusts its appendices in response to company- and industry-specific facts put forward by certain commenters. The Commission implements these determinations and adopts a schedule of regulatory fees, as set forth in Tables 3 and 4.

3. Finally, the Commission declines to adopt any of the commenters' various proposals to depart from its well-established assessment methodology to lessen fees for regulatees in certain industry sectors, which would unfairly shift the burden of regulatory fees to other fee payors, or to implement new fee categories that were largely considered and rejected by the Commission as recently as last year, particularly since commenters have provided no basis to change the Commission's prior determinations. The Commission does not alter the data source used for assessing regulatory fees on Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) providers, and the Commission also declines to change the de minimis threshold of $1,000.

II. Background

4. FY 2026 started on October 1, 2025, and ends on September 30, 2026. The regulatory fee collection is guided by both the statutory authority in sections 6 and 9 of the Act and the explicit language of each fiscal year's S&E appropriation directing the amount to be collected as an offsetting collection. Pursuant to Section 9 of the Act and the Commission's FY 2026 S&E appropriation, the Commission is required to collect $416,112,000, in regulatory fees. The Act requires the Commission to assess and collect regulatory fees to recover the costs of carrying out its activities in the total amounts provided for in Appropriations Act. Regulatory fees must therefore cover the Commission's non-auctions direct, indirect, and support costs, including costs to cover statutorily required tasks that do not directly equate with oversight and regulation of a particular fee payor, but instead benefit the Commission and the industry as a whole. Direct costs are those such as salaries and expenses; indirect costs are those such as overhead functions, and support costs

include those such as rent, utilities, and equipment. Since regulatory fees must recover the total amount of the Commission's S&E appropriation for the fiscal year, they also must cover the costs incurred in oversight and regulation of: (1) entities that are statutorily exempt from paying regulatory fees; (2) entities whose total assessed annual regulatory fees fall below the annual de minimis threshold; and (3) entities whose regulatory fees are waived. The Commission has previously observed that it is consistent with the Act to include those costs that are attributable to the fee paying and exempt regulatees in the revenue requirement because all of the regulatees in that fee category, whether they pay regulatory fees or not, benefit from the oversight and regulation of that bureau. The Commission's annual de minimis threshold remains at $1,000. The Commission takes into consideration the relatively small amount of waivers, exemptions, and non-payors in the Commission calculations each year so that it can recover the full amount of the Commission S&E appropriation. The Commission has no discretion regarding the amount of fees to be collected in any given fiscal year.

5. Congress has prescribed a method for the Commission to collect the full S&E appropriation by keying the Commission's regulatory fee assessment to its FTE burden. One FTE, a “Full Time Equivalent” or “Full Time Employee,” is a unit of measure equal to the work performed annually by a full-time person (working a 40-hr work week for a full year) assigned to the particular job, and subject to agency personnel staffing limitations established by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget. In this proceeding, if the Commission states 1.5 FTEs work on a particular subject matter, that might mean three individuals spend 50% of their time on that area. Moreover, in the
FY 2026 Regulatory Fees Report and Order,
when the Commission discusses FTEs and any change in allocation, it is solely for regulatory fee purposes and does not reflect proposals for the change of personnel in the various organizational work units. The methodology for assessing regulatory fees must “reflect the full-time equivalent number of employees within the bureaus and offices of the Commission, adjusted to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the benefits provided to the payor of the fee by the Commission's activities.” Thus, the fee assigned to each regulatory fee category relates to the FTE burden associated with oversight and regulation of each regulatory fee category by the relevant core bureaus (
i.e.,
the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, the Media Bureau, most of the Wireline Competition Bureau, part of the Office of International Affairs, and most of the Space Bureau). The Commission has previously concluded that allocating the work of FTEs in the Wireline Competition Bureau devoted to non-high-cost Universal Service Fund programs as indirect FTEs is consistent with how FTEs working for programs that benefit consumers and the American public are treated elsewhere in the Commission. Moreover, in the non-high-cost universal service fund programs, the E-Rate, Lifeline, and Rural Healthcare programs tie funding eligibility to the beneficiary,
i.e.,
a school, a library, a low-income individual or family, or a rural healthcare provider and not to Commission regulatory fee payors. Thus, the burden of FTE time devoted to non-high-cost Universal Service Fund programs is properly categorized as indirect. As part of this determination, the Commission has also excluded broadcasters from the fee burden associated with these indirect FTEs because broadcasters do not directly participate in the universal service program. Thus, in its annual analysis of FTE time, after deducting the burden of this indirect FTE work from the calculation of the direct FTEs allocated to the Wireline Competition Bureau, the Commission apportions these FTEs as indirect among all fee payors except broadcasters. The Commission has also explained that most of the work of the Office of International Affairs, including the work of the Global Strategies and Negotiation Division, does not benefit a specific fee payor, but rather the government as a whole, and is therefore appropriately categorized as indirect. However, the Commission continues to categorize as direct the FTE work of the Office of International Affairs concerning international bearer circuit issues, including the services provided over submarine cables, determining that there are eight FTEs within the Office of International Affairs whose work was direct on that basis.

6. The total amount of the offsetting collection generally changes each fiscal year. Therefore, the regulatory fees due from fee payors also typically change as a mathematical consequence of the total amount that needs to be collected, the number of FTEs, and the projected unit estimates for each regulatory fee category. For example, if the number of units in a regulatory fee category increase, the amount due per unit may decrease, depending on other factors. This would also include proportionate increases in a given fee category to reflect an overall increase in the annual FY appropriation. Insofar as the Communication Act's explicit language requires that fees must reflect FTEs, the Commission has consistently concluded that FTE counts are the most administrable starting point for regulatory fee allocations, and the Commission regulatory fees are based on the direct FTEs in core bureaus. Thus, when considering changes, additions, or deletions to the regulatory fee schedule, the Commission focus on the direct FTE cost burden related to the regulatory fee category at issue within each of the core licensing bureaus.

7. FTEs are not assigned within a bureau to specific fee categories “by rote or at random, but rather in a manner that reflects the time spent by FTEs on a regulatory fee category, which is in itself a reflection of `benefit' to the fee category.” The Commission apportions regulatory fees across fee categories based on the number of direct FTEs in each core bureau to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the payors' benefits. The Commission has stated that Section 9 of the Act is clear, however, that regulatory fee assessments are based on the burden imposed on the Commission, not benefits realized by regulatees. The Commission apportions regulatory fees across fee categories based on the number of direct FTEs in each core bureau to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the payors' benefits. Any decrease to the fees paid by one category of regulatory fee payors necessitates an increase in fees paid by other categories of regulatory fee payors, which means the collection of the Commission's regulatory fees is a zero-sum exercise.

8. The Commission allocates FTEs according to the nature of the work performed by its different organizational units. If FTE work directly relates to the oversight and regulation of a regulatory fee category in one of the five core licensing bureaus then it is considered to be direct. Work that cannot be allocated to one of those regulatory fee categories is counted as indirect FTE time.

9. Indirect FTE time covers a wide range of issues that include services that are not specifically correlated with one core bureau, let alone one specific category of regulatory fee payors. Indirect FTE work also includes matters that are not specific to any regulatory fee category, and many Commission attorneys, economists, engineers,

analysts, and other staff perform work during a single fiscal year, which generally benefits the telecommunications industry and the public as opposed to matters that are specific to any regulatory fee category. The Commission has categorized FTE work conducted in the Enforcement, Consumer and Governmental Affairs, and Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureaus along with some of the work in the Wireline Competition Bureau, the Space Bureau, and the Office of International Affairs as well as the work of those in the Office of the Chair and the Commissioners' Offices and in the Offices of the Managing Director, General Counsel, Inspector General, Communications Business Opportunities, Engineering and Technology, Legislative Affairs, Workplace Diversity, Media Relations, Economics and Analytics, and Administrative Law Judges as indirect for regulatory fee purposes.

10. Following this framework, the Commission assesses the allocation of FTEs to regulatory fee payors by first determining the number of direct non-auctions FTEs in each of the Commission's core bureaus. Other factors the Commission takes into consideration include the annual S&E appropriation and the projected unit estimates. Early in each fiscal year, the Human Resources Management office identifies FTEs at the core bureau level. The Commission then validates that data through consultation with the bureaus and offices to determine the number of direct FTEs allocated to each of the five core bureaus. Those numbers are then used to calculate the corresponding percentage of the total amount of regulatory fees to be collected for a given fiscal year from the fee payors of each core bureau. The percentage for each core bureau is the number of direct non-auction FTEs within the core bureau divided by the total number of direct non-auction FTEs in the Commission.

11. This means fees are apportioned across the regulatory fee categories based on the number of direct FTEs in each core bureau whose time is focused on a particular industry segment and are adjusted “to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the benefits provided to the payor of the fee by the Commission's activities.” Specifically, the Commission allocates appropriated amounts to be recovered proportionally based on the number of direct FTEs within each core bureau. Those proportions are then subdivided and apportioned within each core bureau into fee categories among those served based on the time spent on each fee category. Finally, within each regulatory fee category, the amount to be collected is divided by a unit count that allocates the regulatory fee payor's proportionate share based on an objective measure. As a general matter, there is no additional calculation to attribute indirect costs.

12. The FTE time devoted to developing and implementing the Commission's spectrum auctions is not included in the calculation of regulatory fees and is not offset by the collection of regulatory fees. Thus, the Commission's methodology excludes all spectrum auction-related FTEs and their overhead from the regulatory fee calculations. To the extent that FTEs within the core bureaus spend a portion of their time on auctions issues and a portion of their time on other issues, their time is split and only the non-auctions portion of their time is reflected in the relevant core bureau's direct FTE count.

13. In order to collect regulatory fees in the amount required by the Commission annual S&E appropriation, the Commission conducts a rulemaking proceeding each year to consider any necessary increases or decreases in the number of units subject to the payment of such fees and to reflect any adjustments needed to the prior year's fees schedule. For example, if the number of units in a regulatory fee category increases, the amount due per unit may decrease. This would also include proportionate increases in a given fee category to reflect an overall increase in the annual FY appropriation. Such changes are rarely the subject of dispute and are usually addressed in the more ministerial changes to the fee schedule. As necessary, the Commission will also propose amendments to the fee schedule “if it determines that changes are necessary for the fees to reflect the full-time equivalent number of employees within the bureaus and offices of the Commission, adjusted to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the benefits provided to the payor of the fee by the Commission's activities.” Pursuant to the Act, the Commission must notify Congress immediately upon adoption of any adjustment. The Act also requires the Commission to notify Congress at least 90 days prior to making effective any amendments to the regulatory fee schedule.

14. The Commission considers the adoption of a new regulatory fee category or a change in an existing regulatory fee category only when it develops a sufficient basis for making the change, ensuring that the Commission assessment of regulatory fees is fair, administrable, and sustainable. The Commission will adopt new regulatory fee categories and new methodologies for calculating regulatory fees when there is a sufficient basis for doing so based on the record, and under the relevant statutory provisions and precedent.

III. Discussion

15. The Commission received 12 comments and four reply comments in response to the Commission's
FY 2026 NPRM.
As generally supported by the record, the Commission adopts the Commission's proposals in the
FY 2026 NPRM
to reallocate 61 FTEs from the Office of General Counsel, the Office of Economics and Analytics, and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau as direct FTEs to the Commission's core licensing bureaus. The Commission bases these reallocations on its determination with reasonable certainty for the fiscal year 2026 that the work of those FTEs is sufficiently linked to the oversight and regulation of regulatory fee payors such that the burden of that work should be considered in applying the Commission regulatory fee methodology. After further review, and based on those same determinations, the Commission also declines to adopt the
FY 2026 NPRM
proposal to reallocate two direct FTEs from Media Bureau as indirect and concludes it is appropriate to reallocate one additional FTE from the Office of General Counsel as direct to the Media Bureau.

16. Additionally, the Commission adopts its proposal to continue to calculate television broadcaster regulatory fees using the Commission's methodology of population-based full-service broadcast television regulatory fees. Furthermore, the Commission will continue using Numbering Resource Utilization Forecast (NRUF) assigned number data as the basis for assessing regulatory fees on Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) providers. The Commission also adjusts its tables in response to company- and industry-specific facts put forward by certain commenters. Finally, the Commission will continue to utilize a $1,000 de minimis threshold because it concludes the Commission's average cost of collections do not exceed that amount.

17. Consistent with the Commission's past practice, however, the Commission declines to reallocate other FTE work performed in the non-core bureaus, and the Commission concludes such work is appropriately considered to be indirect. Moreover, commenters have presented no new arguments for the Commission consideration to support their

suggestions to adopt new fee categories, and the Commission therefore reaffirms its repeated conclusion that additional proposed fee categories are not workable or logistically feasible at this time. The Commission will also continue its current approach to assessing space and earth station regulatory fees until the newly adopted Part 100 rules become effective and replace the existing rules governing satellite communications contained in Part 25, and until the Commission has had an opportunity to seek notice and comment on how those rules should be considered in applying its regulatory fee methodology.

18. Accordingly, using the Commission's historical methodology for allocating FTEs, the Commission adopts a regulatory fee schedule for FY 2026 as set forth in Tables 3 and 4 to assess and collect $416,112,000, which is an amount that reasonably can be expected to total the Commission's annual S&E FY 2026 appropriation.

A. Assessment of Regulatory Fees

1. Methodology for Assessing Regulatory Fees

19. Section 9 of the Communications Act requires the Commission to set regulatory fees to “reflect the full-time equivalent number of employees within the bureaus and offices of the Commission adjusted to take into account factors that are reasonably related to the benefits provided to the payor of the fee by the Commission's activities.” As a general matter, the Commission's methodology to establish its regulatory fee schedule is to first identify changes from the prior fiscal year regulatory fee proceeding,
e.g.,
changes in the (i) FY S&E appropriation, (ii) FTE levels, and (iii) relevant unit measures for each regulatory fee category. After that, the Commission identifies the number of direct non-auction FTEs in each core bureau for purposes of the regulatory fee calculation. The remaining non-auction FTEs are considered indirect and are not part of the regulatory fee calculation. Once the Commission determines the number of direct FTEs for each core bureau, the Commission calculates the percentage of regulatory fees that it will need to collect for the given fiscal year from each regulatory fee category within each core bureau. These proportional calculations allocate all Commission non-auction related costs across all regulatory fee categories.

2. FTE Allocations

20. For FY 2026, the Commission implements the same methodology that the Commission has historically used to allocate FTEs. To conduct its annual review of regulatory fees for FY 2026, the Commission began by evaluating the work being performed by Commission FTEs. According to information provided by the Commission's Human Resources Management office, at the start of FY 2026, there were 317.5 direct non-auctions FTEs distributed among the core licensing bureaus. With respect to other bureaus and offices within the Commission, staff next conducted a high-level, yet comprehensive, analysis of the work being performed by non-auctions FTEs in the Office of Economics and Analytics, Office of General Counsel, and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau as well as the Office of Engineering and Technology, the Enforcement Bureau, and the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau (and other bureaus and offices) in order to determine whether with reasonable certainty for the fiscal year 2026 any identifiable time of the FTEs in those organizational units is directly related to the oversight and regulation of fee payors such that it should be considered in applying the Commission's fee methodology. In other words, the Commission examined and validated the FTE data through consultation with the bureaus and offices to determine whether in applying the Commission's regulatory fee methodology any FTE time in the non-core bureaus and offices should be considered to be reallocated as direct FTE time to a core bureau.

3. Adjustments of Reallocations of Certain Indirect FTEs as Direct FTEs

21. Although the Commission continues to conclude that much of the work of the FTEs in the Office of Economics and Analytics, the Office of General Counsel, and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau is appropriately considered indirect, in validating the FTE count for FY 2026, it again finds the data support a conclusion that there is measurable FTE time devoted to work that is sufficiently linked to the oversight and regulation of regulatory fee payors such that the burden of that work should be allocated as direct to a core bureau for regulatory fee purposes. Moreover, commenters generally support the Commission's efforts to ensure that regulatory fees reflect the work performed by Commission FTEs that benefits fee payors. Likewise, no commenter objects to the Commission's proposed reallocations from Office of Economics and Analytics, the Office of General Counsel, and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau. The Commission therefore adopts most of its proposals to reallocate 61 FTEs from the Office of Economics and Analytics, the Office of General Counsel, and the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau as direct FTEs to core bureaus because the nature of their work has been determined to be primarily related to the oversight and regulation of fee payors. With respect to the Office of General Counsel, however, the Commission concludes that one additional FTE should be allocated as direct. Additionally, the Commission declines to adopt the
FY 2026 NPRM
proposal to reallocate two direct FTEs from Media Bureau as indirect. These reallocations result in an increase of 62 FTEs being reallocated as direct FTEs to core bureaus.

22. In the
FY 2026 NPRM,
the Commission proposed to reallocate two FTEs as indirect from the Media Bureau because such FTE work is devoted to enforcement responsibilities. The Commission's proposal was based on a rationale first articulated in 2023. This rationale, however, acknowledged that the enforcement actions taken by the Media Bureau are associated with the Bureau's administration of the licensing programs for television and radio, rather than from an enforcement investigation. On review, the Commission finds that this work directly benefits the Media Bureau fee payors. As a result, reallocation of such FTE time as indirect would not be consistent with the statute nor with the Commission's overarching goals that its regulatory framework is fair, administrable, and sustainable. Furthermore, in reviewing the Commission's FTE allocations, it was presented with the fact that the Media Bureau has experienced staff reductions that required changes in work priorities which in turn made the measurement of this work to a degree of accuracy extremely difficult. That conclusion coupled with a fresh look at the nature of the work lead to the conclusion that the Commission lacks a basis for making the reallocation. Therefore, the Commission declines to adopt its proposal.

23. Additionally, because the amount of work of FTEs in the Office of General Counsel devoted to Media Bureau matters has increased in this fiscal year, the Commission reallocates an additional FTE to the Media Bureau as direct for this fiscal year. The Commission believes that this adjustment is fully consistent with its longstanding methodology, while offering a more precise and thus more equitable assessment of fees. Although the Commission makes this adjustment based on staff validation of the data regarding FTE utilization, it notes that it

is in accordance with the State Broadcasters Associations' “urg[ing] the Commission to conduct even more searching reviews of indirect FTE work going forward.”

24. Specifically, for FY 2026, the Commission reallocates 31 FTEs from the Office of Economics and Analytics as direct to a core bureau for regulatory fee purposes as follows: three to the Space Bureau, one to the Office of International Affairs, eight to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, 17 to the Wireline Competition Bureau, and two to the Media Bureau. Similarly, as explained above, the Commission reallocates four FTEs from the Office of General Counsel as direct FTEs to a core bureaus as follows: one to the Wireline Competition Bureau, one to the Space Bureau, and two to the Media Bureau. Likewise, the Commission reallocates 27 FTEs in the Public Safety and Homeland Security Bureau as direct to a core bureau as follows: 13 to the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau, eight to the Wireline Competition Bureau, and six to the Media Bureau.

25. The Commission bases these reallocations on staff's validation of the data and an analysis similar to the last three fiscal years evaluating whether measurable FTE time is primarily being spent on the regulation and oversight of regulatory fee payors such that it should be considered as direct to a core bureau. As the Commission has previously explained, in discussing FTEs, it is not referring to any particular employee at the Commission but rather an amount of work performed annually by a full time employee or employees. In analyzing the work of FTEs, the Commission's staff applies conservative estimates so as not to imply a false sense of precision in the reallocations. Specifically, where the amount of work under consideration for reallocation of an indirect FTE is half an FTE or less, the Commission rounds down, and it only implements reallocations in full FTE increments.

26. As represented below, FTE time associated with these reallocations is added to the direct FTE totals of the relevant core bureau. In other words, these reallocations increase the number of direct FTEs in a core bureau and reduce the total number of indirect FTEs within the Commission. Because the Commission's underlying methodology for calculating regulatory fees remains unchanged, it concludes that its regulatory fee calculation continues to be consistent with section 9 of the Communications Act, which requires the Commission to base its methodology on the number of FTEs.

27. Table 1 below shows the percentage of regulatory fees allocated to each core bureau based on the reallocation of a net increase of 62 FTEs as direct to a core bureau. These reallocations result in a 19.53% increase in the Commission overall direct FTE count for the fiscal year. These reallocations are proportionally distributed within the core bureau and are reflected in Tables 3 and 4, which are based on the Commission's existing methodology and incorporate these reallocations.

Table 1—Core Bureau Direct FTEs and Percentages for FY 2025 and FY 2026 With Reallocations of Indirect FTEs

Core bureau/office
FY 2025 FTE reallocations

Total # of

direct FY 2025 FTEs
with

FTE
reallocations

FY 2025% after reallocation

Total # of direct FY 2026 FTEs
without
FTE reallocations

FY 2026 FTE reallocations

Total # of

direct FY 2026 FTEs
with

proposed FTE
reallocations

FY 2026% after proposed
reallocations

Office of International Affairs (Submarine Cable and International Bearer Circuits)
0
8
1.80
8

+1 from OEA
+0 from OGC
Total additional FTEs +1

9
2.38

Space Bureau (Space and Earth Stations)

+1 from OEA
+1 from OGC
Total additional FTEs +2

51
11.50
44

+3 from OEA
+1 from OGC
Total additional FTEs +4

48
12.70

Wireless Telecommunications Bureau

+8 from OEA
+1 from OGC
+14 from PSHSB
Total additional FTEs +23

120
27.06
81

+8 from OEA
+0 from OGC
+13 from PSHSB
Total additional FTEs +21

102
26.99

Wireline Competition Bureau

+13 from OEA
+1 from OGC
+9 from PSHSB
Total additional FTEs +23

132.5
29.88
81.5

+17 from OEA
+1 from OGC
+8 from PSHSB
Total additional FTEs +26

107.5
28.45

Media Bureau

+7 from OEA
+1 from OGC
+7 from PSHSB
−2 from MB Reallocated as Indirect
Total additional FTEs +13

134
29.76
103

+2 from OEA
+2 from OGC
+6 from PSHSB
Total additional FTEs +10

113
29.48

Total
61
445.50
100
317.50
62
379.50
100

28. As reflected in Table 1 above, based on these reallocations and after adjustments are made to the direct FTE counts to implement Commission precedent, the Commission has a total of 379.5 non-auctions direct FTEs for FY 2026. Accordingly, as shown in Table 2 below, the Commission will collect approximately $9.909 million (2.38%) in fees from the Office of International Affairs regulatory fee payors; $52.851 million (12.70%) in fees from the Space Bureau regulatory fee payors; $112.308 million (26.99%) in fees from Wireless Telecommunications Bureau regulatory fee payors; $118.363 million (28.45%) in fees from Wireline Competition Bureau regulatory fee payors; and

$122.681 million (29.48%) in fees from Media Bureau regulatory fee payors.

Table 2—Core Bureau FTE Percentages and Amounts for FY 2025 and FY 2026 With FTE Reallocation Adjustments

Core bureau
FY 2025 FTE % with FTE reallocations

FY 2025 amount with FTE
reallocations
(millions)

FY 2025
Appropriation was $390.192

FY 2026 FTE % with adjusted FTE reallocations

FY 2026 amount with FTE
reallocations
(millions)

FY 2026
Appropriation
is $416.112

Wireline Bureau
29.88
$116.580
28.45
$118.363

Media Bureau
29.76
116.119
29.48
122.681

Media Bureau; subcategory Broadcasters
13.14
51.286
13.04
54.263

Media Bureau; subcategory Cable
16.62
64.833
16.44
68.418

Wireless Bureau
27.06
105.582
26.99
112.308

Office of International Affairs
1.80
7.039
2.38
9.909

Space Bureau
11.50
44.872
12.70
52.851

29. The Commission rejects requests to adjust its FTE analysis solely to benefit one category of regulatory fee payors and shift the fee burden to the other categories in the absence of reliable data upon which to base such a change. In particular, Kepler and SES express concern about the increase in fees from FY 2025 for regulatees of the Space Bureau and ask the Commission “to place a moratorium on increasing the FY 2026 fees relative to those collected for FY 2025” or to “buffer increases” of the fees. Similarly, SCC and NASCA assert that the fee increase for regulatees of the Office of International Affairs is excessive and propose that the Commission “reduce the proposed submarine cable fees to a level commensurate with economic reality and the statutory boundaries the Commission must abide by” or “cap any increase at no more than 10 percent for FY 2026, with the revenue requirement in excess of the amount represented by the cap treated as the equivalent of indirect FTEs.” Furthermore, NAB contends that the Commission should reduce the fee burden for earth stations by capping their fees to no more than $2,500 per earth station license, contending that such a result would be fair because broadcasters pay earth station regulatory fees in addition to the fees assessed for their broadcasting licenses, which unfairly compounds the financial burden on broadcasters. NAB recommends that the Commission shift the burden to other Space Bureau regulatory fee payors, namely NGSO satellite operators.

30. Although the Commission is mindful of concerns raised by these commenters that its regulatory fees need to be predictable and not prone to excessive fluctuation, requests for special accommodation are not consistent with the Commission's statutory obligation to collect the its entire appropriation this fiscal year. Such requests, as the Commission has previously explained, are in essence requests to shift fees from one category of regulatory fee payors to other regulatory fee payors based not on the relative FTE burden, but on policy rationales. In FY 2024 in the context of rejecting similar requests, the Commission explained and distinguished adjustments undertaken over a decade before that were necessary to address validation flaws identified by GAO. Specifically, in 2012, GAO reported that the Commission used FTE data that was 13 years out of date. In 2013, the Commission implemented a “multi-year program of reform” agency-wide “correcting the extraordinary error on the Commission's part in applying a stale FTE count.” Commenters' requests for accommodations in this fiscal year are therefore not analogous to that situation. Instead, here, as the Commission explained in detail above, the FTE counts are validated annually and the regulatory fee increases for FY 2026 are due to the roughly 6.6% increase in its overall fiscal year 2026 appropriation, changes in the direct FTEs working on space and earth station matters and submarine cable matters, and/or changes in the units of measure for these fee categories. Thus, the FY 2026 regulatory fee increase is attributable directly to the requirements of following the Commission statutory methodology—which include the benefit of oversight and regulation of its regulatory fee payors as measured by FTE levels. NAB itself recognizes that the increase in fees for earth station fee payors is a function of the Commission's methodology and the fact that the number of earth stations decreased while the percentage of the Commission's appropriation attributable to the Space Bureau increased.

31. As the Commission observed the last time it was asked to implement such measures, “because [the Commission] must collect the full amount of the appropriation as an offsetting collection, decreasing the fee on any one category must be offset with an increased collection in another category.” Section 9 of the Act prescribes a method of collecting an amount equal to the full S&E appropriation by keying the regulatory fee assessment to the Commission's FTE burden. As a result, the fee assigned to each regulatory fee category relates to the FTE burden associated with oversight and regulation of each regulatory fee category by the relevant core bureaus. Section 9 does not provide any other basis for assessing regulatory fees or any basis for capping fees for a particular fiscal year, or phasing in increases in fees over several fiscal years, for a particular category or categories of fee payors. The Commission therefore declines to implement commenters' suggestions in circumstances such as these where regulatory fees are based on direct FTEs to a core bureau, are consistent with its statutory congressional direction under section 9 of the Communications Act, and no other special extenuating circumstances for consideration exist.

4. Other FTEs of the Non-Core Bureaus and Offices Remain Indirect

32. After analyzing the data for FY 2026 as well as the record in this proceeding, the Commission affirms the its prior conclusion that the majority of FTE work being performed in the non-core bureaus and offices should be categorized as indirect because it benefits the Commission and the entire telecommunications industry generally and does not specifically focus on regulatory fee payors. The Commission reaches this conclusion based on both the staff's high level review of the work of FTEs in the non-core bureaus and offices and because no commenter provided any insight into its questions in the
FY 2026 NPRM
whether there had been any significant developments in the communications industry, changes in law, and/or substantial shifts in Commission policy and workload over the past year that demonstrates measurable FTE work is being performed in these organizational units that directly benefits a specific category of fee payors. Notably, no commenter provided any examples of changes in the specific work performed by Commission staff that would necessitate a reevaluation of the Commission's repeated determination that the work being performed by these FTEs is indirect. Instead, commenters advocating for additional reallocations of FTEs from the non-core bureaus and offices simply repeat the same reasons that the Commission has previously rejected.

33. NAB's contention that the Commission should reallocate FTEs in non-core bureaus as direct even when those FTEs work on matters that also pertain to non-fee payors fails to consider the Commission's repeated explanation that it takes a conservative approach to analyzing the workload of its FTEs and only reallocates an FTE as direct where the amount of work under consideration is more than half of an FTE. NAB's conclusory statements without any analysis do not warrant further examination by the Commission. In sum, NAB offers no reasons why the Commission should expand its methodology to include FTEs that work primarily on matters that pertain to non-fee payors and provides no solutions regarding how to do so.

34. NAB also renews its criticism of the Commission's well-established decision to treat FTEs working on non-high cost universal service fund issues, but fails to dispute the Commission's long-held conclusion that such treatment is consistent with how it treats FTEs working for programs that benefit consumers and the American public elsewhere in the Commission. Likewise, NAB's repetition of its 2022 comments arguing that the Commission should not include broadcasters in the allocation of FTEs associated with the Commission's broadband data mapping work under the Broadband DATA Act offers no new reasoning other than NAB's continued disagreement with the Commission's decision that the unique change in its methodology in 2021 to exclude Media Services licensees from their share in such costs was based on the one-time nature of a congressional earmark and had nothing to do with the Commission making a finding that “any group of regulatees do not benefit from broadband-related activities.”

35. Finally, the Commission disagrees with NAB's more general complaint that its FTE allocations are “opaque.” While NAB applauds the Commission's continued efforts to modernize its regulatory fee methodology, it nonetheless maintains that commenters are unable to participate in the Commission's reallocation decisions. Contrary to NAB's criticism, however, the Commission has made clear how commenters can contribute to the Commission's assessment of annual regulatory fees and the basis for why the Commission may reallocate an FTE as direct to a core bureau. In particular, the Commission specifically invites commenters, as it did again this year, “to offer any new or current reasons why the Commission should reexamine the nature of the work being performed by FTEs in its non-core bureaus and offices” and seeks specific input in the record regarding whether there have been “any significant developments in the communications industry, changes in law, and/or substantial shifts in Commission policy and workload over the past year” that reflect measurable FTE work being performed in the non-core bureaus and offices that may not have been considered.

36. Moreover, the claim that without more transparency, commenters cannot offer contributions that will impact the regulatory fee assessment process does not withstand scrutiny. Indeed, the State Broadcasters Associations' assertion “that the Commission imposes conditions upon commenters that cannot be met” is belied by its own reference to past instances where its comments affected the Commission's allocations of FTEs. At the same time the State Broadcasters Associations complain that the Commission “demands that outside commenters bring evidence to it that they simply do not possess and will not possess unless it is provided to them by the Commission,” they trumpet their success in 2021 convincing the Commission to adjust its proposed FTE allocations due to the congressional earmark for the Broadband Data Act.

37. As previously noted, the Commission strives to make the regulatory fee process, including the reallocations of FTEs in its methodology, fair, sustainable, and administrable. The delegated authority of the Commission's bureau and offices is well understood and documented, the regulatory work of these organizational units is both public and easily reviewed, and the Commission includes significant information about its performance, budgets, and policy objectives in the information it releases to satisfy numerous reporting requirements. Thus, commenters have access to both resources and data to challenge the Commission's FTE allocations. Rather than stepping into the Commission's shoes to evaluate the Commission's analysis of its own FTE data, commenters can contribute to the process by offering responses to the questions posed in the NPRM and evaluating issues the Commission should factor into its reallocation considerations. In this regard, the Commission finds it notable that no commenter offered any insight into new or current reasons to reevaluate its
FY 2026 NPRM
FTE reallocation proposals. Nevertheless, as a routine part of its annual proceeding, the Commission makes any necessary adjustments to its proposals to ensure that the final fiscal year FTE reallocations reflect, as accurately as possible, the work being done for the benefit of fee payors.

38. In sum, the Commission concludes that NAB's and the State Broadcasters Associations' general requests to have more information from the Commission regarding the Commission's FTE data seeks to impose a level of precision on the Commission's reallocation process that does not align with the Commission's methodology. Each year in proposing FTE reallocations from indirect to direct, the Commission has provided notice of what organizational unit the FTE burden is being reallocated to and from. Moreover, commenters have historical and detailed insight into the type of measurable FTE work the Commission has found warranted the reallocation of FTEs as direct to a core bureau. The Commission therefore concludes, as it has in the past, that amending its methodology to include “added granularity” to its process like NAB and the State Broadcasters Associations request would not “change the overall result, or improve the Commission's

regulatory fee methodology, but would simply consume more staff resources and increase the indirect FTE time devoted to regulatory fee administration.” Instead, the Commission's analysis is “most accurate when we look at the work of a larger group such as a division, office, or bureau, consistent with the language of section 9 of the Act to ensure that `fees reflect the full-time equivalent number of employees within the bureaus and offices of the Commission.' ”

39. The Commission also rejects the claims of commenters that it must find ways to reduce the burden of indirect FTEs on fee payors that are based on arguments that the Commission has previously, and thoroughly, rejected. In particular, SES argues that the Commission should create new fee categories for “experimental licenses, unlicensed use, and automated frequency coordination systems” and even goes so far as to suggest the Commission should designate the Office of Engineering and Technology as a new core bureau—all without offering a single new reason for the Commission to consider doing so. As the Commission explicitly explained in the
FY 2026 NPRM,
commenters were asked to provide “detailed evidence of materially changed circumstances, rather than reiterate[d] arguments that the Commission has historically declined to adopt.” Instead, SES along with its supporting reply commenters—
i.e.,
the State Broadcasters Associations and One Ministries—either repeat or slightly recast old arguments and fail to provide any material changed circumstances in support of their arguments.

40. For example, the State Broadcasters Associations suggest that the Commission should adopt a new fee category for equipment certification labs because they contend such a category would be “remarkably similar to the `holds an FCC-issued authorization' criterion that has served as the basis for charging regulatory fees to broadcasters and other legacy fee payors for the past several decades.” But, in making this argument, the State Broadcasters Associations notably avoid the more apt comparison to equipment authorizations—a category that the Commission has repeatedly declined to adopt. It seems that having failed to convince the Commission that equipment authorizations should be added to the regulatory fees categories, the State Broadcasters Associations now try to convince us that a regulatory fee should apply to the test labs that provide equipment certifications to those seeking such authorizations from the Commission. This would essentially backdoor the addition of equipment authorizations to the regulatory fee categories as testing labs would presumably pass those fees onto the manufacturers of the equipment they certify. The State Broadcasters Associations provide no explanation for why the Commission's reasoning in declining to adopt a fee category for equipment authorizations is not equally applicable to laboratories that perform measurements of equipment subject to an equipment authorization (
i.e.,
the State Broadcasters Associations' “equipment certification labs”). Although laboratories involved in the testing of equipment for Certification under the equipment authorization rules are subject to accreditation, recognition, and periodic reassessment, there is no correlation between these steps and how many devices a testing laboratory actually tests or, once those devices are certified by a Telecommunications Certification Body, how many units are actually produced. Moreover, the State Broadcasters Associations provide no cognizable rationale why only testing laboratories and not the other entities involved in the equipment authorization process (
e.g.,
the laboratory accreditation bodies that accredit a laboratory with a scope covering the measurements required for the types of equipment that it will test, and the Telecommunications Certification Bodies that are authorized to issue Certifications) would be subject to a fee payor classification, if such a classification were warranted for equipment authorization-related activities. Thus, in neither instance would the Commission be able to credit FTE resources to such issues.

41. Moreover, the State Broadcasters Associations do not address the very minimal nature of the Commission's FTE work related to the recognition process for laboratories that perform measurements of equipment subject to an equipment authorization. Although the Commission acknowledges that in establishing certain rules related to these labs, some FTE time is devoted to adopting regulations that allow such labs to perform their functions for certain Commission licensees as well as other permittees, these efforts are limited and do not result in the work of FTEs being sufficient to subsequently assess fees year after year based on such a limited FTE burden. Furthermore, such work represents only a subcomponent of the larger equipment authorization workstream. For example, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and not the Commission manages the process of test lab accrediting and designating Telecommunications Certification Bodies in the U.S., whereas, the designation of third-party certification bodies located outside the U.S. are a matter of bi-lateral or multi-lateral international agreements, which would make requiring such entities to pay regulatory fees an international policy concern (were the Commission to find a basis to subject equipment authorization activities to regulatory fees). The Commission adopts a new regulatory fee category only when there is a sufficient legal and factual basis to conclude that significant FTE time is used in the oversight and regulation of a regulatee such that adoption of a fee category and designation of fee would satisfy the requirements of Section 9 of the Communications Act and the Commission's overarching goals that its regulatory framework is fair, administrable, and sustainable. Because the State Broadcasters Associations have not offered a framework by which it could assess laboratories involved in the testing of equipment for Certification with regulatory fees consistent with the Commission's methodology and policy goals, the Commission declines to do so.

42. One Ministries, which argues in a single sentence that the Commission should consider virtual MVPD providers as equivalent to cable service providers and assess them with the same regulatory fees, likewise offers no support or basis for how to do so. Specifically, this suggestion is provided without a factual or legal justification for how the agency could do so within the Commission's statutory authority and prior decision-making.

43. Additionally, because the Commission fully considered and rejected the suggestion to convene “stake holder roundtables” in 2023, for the same reasons the previously articulated, the Commission will not revisit the State Broadcasters Associations' suggestion to do so in FY 2026. Although the Commission recognizes the incentives for some commenters to continue to seek to expand the pool of entities subject to the Commission's regulatory fee process, repeatedly offering the same suggestions, without more factual or legal support for doing so, does not improve the Commission's regulatory fee process or satisfy the Commission's obligation to collect its full appropriation as dictated by section 9 of the Act. On the other hand, the Commission is encouraged by CTIA's agreement with the Commission's assessment that the work of FTEs in the non-core bureaus and offices should remain indirect as well as CTIA's

observation that the Commission proposes reallocations only “after performing considerable analysis and finding the clearest case for reassignment.”

44. As the Commission has explained for many years, the work of FTEs in the Office of Engineering and Technology, the Enforcement Bureau and the Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau benefits the agency as a whole and the American public, and not one particular group of regulatory fee payors. In light of CTIA's support and in the absence of evidence to depart from the Commission's previously articulated reasons for treating its FTEs in the non-core bureau and offices, and more specifically, the FTEs in the Office of Engineering and Technology, Enforcement Bureau, and Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, as indirect, the Commission affirms its past conclusion that it is not equitable for any one regulatory fee group of payors to shoulder the FTE burden of such indirect work.

45. As part of the Commission's ongoing efforts to modernize the assessment of regulatory fees, the Commission will continue its annual evaluation of whether any FTEs in the non-core bureaus and offices should be reallocated for regulatory fee purposes and exercise its discretion regarding where to focus its analytical efforts each year to best respond to changes in its substantive work and organization and changes in the telecommunications industry itself. In so doing, the Commission will look for additional ways in which it can ensure that it conducts its annual review and analysis of the FTE data in a manner that is fair, administrable, and sustainable.

B. Broadcast Television Stations

46. The Commission adopts its proposal, which was supported by NAB in the record, to continue to assess fees for full-power broadcast television stations based on the population covered by a full-service broadcast television station's contour as the Commission has since 2020. The population-based methodology conforms with the service authorized here—broadcasting television to the American people. The Commission will also continue the Commission's use of 2020 U.S. Census data to assess fees for full-power broadcast television stations, as the Commission traditionally has over the last few years. The population data for broadcasters' service areas are determined using the TVStudy software and the Licensing and Management System (LMS) database, based on a station's projected noise-limited service contour. However, consistent with the Commission's decision in FY 2024, the Commission will base assessments on limiting the population count of full-power television stations that rely on satellite television stations to reach terrain-limited areas in Puerto Rico. The Commission adopts a factor of $.007090 per population served for the FY 2026 full-power broadcast television station fee. The population data for each licensee and the population-based fee (population multiplied by $.007090 for each full-power broadcast television station) are listed in Table 8.

C. CMRS and Mobile Services Assessments

47. The Commission concludes that it will continue to assess regulatory fees for providers of CMRS and Mobile Services using a unit measure methodology based on the count of “assigned numbers” reported in providers' biannual Numbering Resource Utilization Forecast (NRUF) filings.

48. CTIA was the only commenter to address the questions the Commission posed in the
FY 2026 NPRM
regarding whether using a different unit measure to apportion regulatory fees for CMRS providers would better reflect the FTE burden of oversight of such fee payors. CTIA correctly points out that the Commission has utilized NRUF data since FY 2004 and cautions us to take more time to fully evaluate any options before amending the Commission's methodology for assessing regulatory fees for the CMRS fee category. CTIA further advises that until the Commission determines whether and how it may change NRUF reporting, “it is unclear how NRUF data will compare to other data sources for purposes of allocating regulatory fees among CMRS providers.”

49. The Commission agrees with CTIA that the Commission should not make any changes at this time. Given the lack of record support to change the Commission's existing methodology, the Commission concludes that NRUF assigned numbers data, which serve as a proxy for a provider's subscriber count, remain a reliable reflection of the FTE burden of the Commission's oversight of CMRS and mobile service providers and continue to meet the Commission's goals that the regulatory fee methodology is fair, sustainable, and administrable.

D. Space Station, Earth Station and Submarine Cable Assessments

50. The Commission also declines to act on the requests of commenters to amend the Commission's methodology for assessing regulatory fees in this fiscal year based on issues raised in the
Space Modernization
proceeding. While the Commission appreciates that the adoption of licensing decisions reached in
Space Modernization
proceeding may necessitate the consideration of amendments to the methodology for the Commission's annual assessment of regulatory fees, the Commission concludes that none of the issues raised by commenters in this current regulatory fee rulemaking are ripe for resolution in FY 2026 as those licensing decisions were not reached prior the release of the
FY 2026 NPRM.
As the Commission just explained in denying Kinéis's petition for reconsideration of the
FY 2025 Report and Order,
“[i]n plain terms, whether any of the proposed changes, if adopted, will materially alter FTE resources devoted to the oversight and regulation of space stations sufficient to merit the Commission proposing changes to fee categories or methodologies is premature at this time.” Rather, as CSF observed, as the Commission implements licensing changes adopted in the
Space Modernization
proceeding, the Commission will consider how those changes may impact the category of fee payors and the allocation of FTE benefits among fee categories in the assessment of regulatory fees in FY 2027 and in future years.

51. For similar reasons, the Commission also declines the request of NAB to reduce the regulatory fees on Transmit/Receive and Transmit only earth stations and shift such burdens to non-GSO space station fee payors because NAB claims those fee payors “appear to be the focus of the Space Bureau's priorities.” While NAB makes an effort to support its proposal for a fee reduction by generally pointing to the Space Bureau's recent work associated with the
Space Modernization
proceeding, it does not provide, nor does the record otherwise contain, sufficient evidence to support a conclusion that the Commission should shift FTEs from earth station payors to NGSO space station payors based on FTE workloads benefitting one fee category over another in FY 2026. As discussed above, the Commission will not implement fee reductions or fee caps to mitigate fee increases that result from the Commission's well-established fee assessment methodology. Additionally, as observed above, changes adopted
Space Modernization
proceeding may necessitate a comprehensive look at regulatory fees due to possible re-allocation of FTEs as a result of those change becoming

effective and any measurable changes in FTE utilization becomes apparent. NAB would have the opportunity to provide input on this issue as part of that proceeding.

52. The Commission does, however, make the necessary corrections to its
FY 2026 NPRM
proposals where the record supports such actions. In particular, NASCA asks us to revise the payment units for the submarine cable system fee based on actual data reported in the annual circuit capacity filings, rather than the projections the Commission used to formulate its proposals in the
FY 2026 NPRM.
Given the limited time the Commission has to initiate and conclude its annual regulatory fee proceeding, for the NPRM, the Commission must rely on historical data and projected trends to determine the unit count for submarine cables, as well as a number of other fee categories. Following the release of the NPRM, however, any new or updated data that are made available to the Commission by stakeholders in the record or otherwise obtained or updated by the Commission will become part of the Commission's analysis of unit counts to be used in the assessment of regulatory fees in the annual report and order. Making such adjustments during this process of the rulemaking proceeding is consistent with the Commission's rules and existing methodology, as outlined in Table 5. In accordance with the Commission's standard process and based on the Commission's verification of the additional information on circuit capacity data provided by NASCA as well as an updated review of Commission data, the Commission increases the unit count of submarine cables from 79 to 88, thus reducing the per unit fee from what the Commission proposed in the
FY 2026 NPRM
to $106,975.

53. Additionally, after review of the relevant Commission data and consistent with comments from SES, Spire, and Eutelsat, the Commission corrects Table 7 of the
FY 2026 NPRM
to more accurately reflect the list of space station satellites that were authorized as of October 1, 2025, and subject to regulatory fees. SES proposed the addition of one Geostationary Orbit U.S.-Licensed Space Station and the removal of three Geostationary Orbit U.S.-Licensed Space Stations and two Geostationary Orbit Non-U.S.-Licensed Space Stations with Market Access Through Earth Stations. Spire proposed the removal of one Non-Geostationary Orbit Small Constellation and the modification of a second Non-Geostationary Orbit Small Constellation. Eutelsat proposed the modification of one Non-Geostationary Large Constellation, which reclassifies the remaining affected call sign to the Non-Geostationary Small Constellation category. Consistent with the Commission's efforts to adjust fee rates to reflect information about actual authorized satellites as of October 1, 2025, which becomes available after the release of a regulatory fee NPRM, the Commission concludes that such modifications are appropriate.

E. De Minimis Threshold

54. Section 9(e)(2) of the Act permits the Commission to exempt a party from paying regulatory fees if “in the judgment of the Commission, the cost of collecting a regulatory fee established under this section from a party would exceed the amount collected from such party.” As explained below, after a careful review of the Commission's costs for the collection of delinquent regulatory fees, the Commission declines NAB's request to increase the de minimis threshold amount to $1,200.

55. By statute, a determination to raise the de minimis threshold for the payment of regulatory fees narrowly rests upon the Commission's cost of collections. At the outset, the Commission notes that the Commission's Debt Collection Improvement Act (DCIA) implementation, including adoption of the red-light rule, minimizes regulatory fee delinquent debt. In the limited circumstances where the Commission must pursue delinquent regulatory fees, the Commission has explained that its administrative process includes various functions, such as gathering data and validating data from the bureaus and external sources; validating delinquent bills; preparing delinquency bills for transfer to collection agent for processing; and processing payments received from collection (
e.g.,
U.S. Department of the Treasury). Moreover, generally, delinquent debt is transferred to the Department of Treasury within 120 days after the date of delinquency.

56. The Commission calculates its collection costs for purposes of determining the de minimis threshold by estimating the number of FTE hours spent on each collection task multiplied by the value of FTE time expended on the task, to arrive at the estimated total cost of each task. The totals for each task are then added together to determine the total estimated cost of collection. The total estimated cost of collection divided by the estimated number of delinquent regulatory fee debts for that fiscal year yields the average cost of collecting an unpaid regulatory fee. The Commission's review of the estimated amount of FTE time devoted to collecting delinquent regulatory fees as well as the hourly rate of a Commission FTE assigned to such tasks reveals that the Commission's costs have not increased above the existing de minimis threshold.

57. Accordingly, NAB's and the State Broadcasters Associations' inferences to the contrary both fail to validate a different result. In particular, NAB reasons that since the Commission's staff salaries have increased since 2022, the Commission's cost of collections has “likely increased.” The State Broadcasters Associations support NAB's request and further maintain that since some fee payors' regulatory fees have now increased above the $1,000 de minimis threshold, it must follow that the Commission's cost of collections “have similarly climbed.” But an increase in the regulatory fees of certain regulatees to levels above the $1,000 de minimis threshold does not cause—or even directly correlate to—an increase in FCC's cost of collection of delinquent regulatory fees. In other words, because the methodologies for calculating regulatory fees and the cost of collections expenses differ, a rise in regulatory fees does not necessarily reflect or result in an increased cost of collections. And, while FTE salaries are one input into the Commission's cost of collection of delinquent debt, higher salaries without a significant increase in FTE time devoted to collections does not alone justify a 20% increase in the threshold.

58. Unlike the variable amount of regulatory fees that must be collected on an annual basis, the cost of the Commission's collections is less prone to fluctuations. It is merely one small aspect in the agency implementation of a vigorous debt collection process. Thus, it is not surprising that the cost has remained below the existing threshold.

59. Additionally, because regulatory fees are a zero-sum game, a higher de minimis threshold means that in order to collect the Commission's entire appropriation, regulatees with fee obligations above the threshold must cover the shortfall of regulatory fees that fall below it. Consequently, raising the de minimis threshold to benefit some regulatory fee payors over others, in the absence of an increase in costs of collection, is not supported by the Commission's statutory authority and is contrary to the goals of a fair, sustainable, and administrable regulatory framework. And, while NAB is correct that the Commission does not provide its internal collection calculations for review by commenters,

the results would be no different if the Commission did. The Commission has no reason to artificially deflate the de minimis threshold as the calculus dictated by the statute requires us to use the Commission's predictive judgment to determine whether the cost of collections outweighs the Commission's efforts in what will be collected.

60. Moreover, due to the limited nature of the fee exemptions expressly provided by statute, the Commission cannot implement NAB's suggestion to cap the regulatory fee assessment for classes of stations that fell below the de minimis threshold last year. Establishing the de minimis threshold on such a basis would result in exempting classes or categories of fee payors, which would necessarily result in another set of entities shouldering the fee burden. As the Commission explained the last time it entertained NAB's request to raise the threshold amount, although the de minimis threshold “has the collateral effect of providing financial relief to some regulatees” that does not mean that a regulatee's de minimis status provides it with a permanent exemption from regulatory fees. Furthermore, as the Commission has previously explained, pursuant to the wording of section 9(e)(2) of the Act, “providing relief for financially strapped regulatees is not a factor for Commission consideration in setting this threshold.” Nothing in the text of the statute supports using policy factors outside the cost of collection in establishing the de minimis threshold, and any regulatee with a financial hardship may seek a waiver, reduction, or deferral of its regulatory fees through the Commission's well-established process. Accordingly, after an internal evaluation of the Commission's costs, the Commission again concludes that the cost of collecting regulatory fees does not justify an increase to the existing $1,000 de minimis threshold.

IV. Procedural Matters

61. Included below are procedural items as well as our current payment and collection methods. The Commission includes these payments and collection procedures here as a useful way of reminding regulatory fee payers and the public about these aspects of the annual regulatory fee collection process.

62.
Commission's Registration System.
To increase efficiency, the Commission is using an all-electronic payment system for regulatory fees, which is contained within the Commission's Registration System (CORES). Before using CORES for the first time, you must obtain an FCC Username through the FCC User Registration System, and subsequently use it to access CORES and either register an FCC Registration Number (FRN) or associate an existing FRN to your Username. If you are unable to register electronically, you may fax your application for a Registration Number (FCC Form 160) to the CORES Helpdesk at (202) 418-7869 for filing procedures.

63.
Credit Card Transaction Levels.
In accordance with
Treasury Financial Manual,
Volume I, Part 5, Chapter 7000, Section 7065.20a—
Credit Card Collections,
the total daily credit card transactions processed from a single customer can be no more than $24,999.99 (hereinafter the “Maximum Daily Limit”) and the total monthly transactions processed from a single customer (based on a rolling 30-day period) can be no more than $100,000.00 (hereinafter the “Maximum Monthly Limit”). Transactions greater than the Maximum Limits will be rejected. If a customer initiates multiple transactions on the same day with the same credit card, those transactions causing the total charge to exceed the Maximum Limits will also be rejected. This applies to single payments or bundled payments of more than one bill. Multiple transactions to a single agency in one day may be aggregated and treated as a single transaction subject to the $24,999.99 limit. Customers who wish to pay an amount greater than $24,999.99 should consider available electronic alternatives such as debit cards, Automates Clearing House (ACH) debits from a bank account, and wire transfers. Each of these payment options is available after filing regulatory fee information in the Commission's Registration System (CORES). Further details will be provided regarding payment methods and procedures at the time of FY 2026 regulatory fee collection in Fact Sheets,
https://www.fcc.gov/regfees.

64.
Payment Methods.
During the fee season for collecting regulatory fees, regulatees can pay their fees by credit card through
Pay.gov
, ACH, debit card, or by wire transfer. Additional payment instructions are posted on the Commission's website at
https://www.fcc.gov/licensing-databases/fees/wire-transfer.
The receiving bank for all wire payments is the U.S. Treasury, New York, NY (TREAS NYC). Any other form of payment (
e.g.,
checks, cashier's checks, or money orders) will be rejected. For payments by wire, an FCC Form 159-E should still be transmitted via fax so that the Commission can associate the wire payment with the correct regulatory fee information. The fax should be sent to the Commission at (202) 418-2843 at least one hour before initiating the wire transfer (but on the same business day) so as not to delay crediting their account. Regulatees should discuss arrangements (including bank closing schedules) with their bankers several days before they plan to make the wire transfer to allow sufficient time for the transfer to be initiated and completed before the deadline. Complete instructions for making wire payments are posted at
https://www.fcc.gov/licensing-databases/fees/wire-transfer.

65.
De Minimis Regulatory Fees, Section 9(e)(2) Exemption.
Under the de minimis rule, and pursuant to the Commission's analysis under section 9(e)(2) of the Act, a regulatee is exempt from paying regulatory fees if the sum total of all of its annual regulatory fee liabilities is $1,000 or less for the fiscal year. The de minimis threshold applies only to filers of annual regulatory fees, not regulatory fees paid through multi-year filings, and it is not a permanent exemption. Each regulatee will need to reevaluate the total annual fee liability each fiscal year to determine whether it meets the de minimis exemption.

66.
Standard Fee Calculations and Payment Dates.
The Commission will accept fee payments made in advance of the window for the payment of regulatory fees. The responsibility for payment of fees by service category is as follows:

•
Media Services:
Regulatory fees must be paid for initial construction permits that were granted on or before October 1, 2025 for AM/FM radio stations, full-power VHF/UHF broadcast television stations, and satellite television stations. Regulatory fees must be paid for all broadcast facility licenses granted on or before October 1, 2025.

•
Wireline (Common Carrier) Services:
Regulatory fees must be paid for authorizations that were granted on or before October 1, 2025. In instances where an authorization is transferred or assigned after October 1, 2025, responsibility for payment rests with the holder of the authorization as of the fee due date. Audio bridging service providers are included in this category. For Responsible Organizations (RespOrgs) that manage Toll Free Numbers (TFN), regulatory fees should be paid on all working, assigned, and reserved toll free numbers as well as toll free numbers in any other status as defined in § 52.103 of the Commission's rules. The unit count should be based on toll free numbers managed by RespOrgs on or about December 31, 2025.

•
Wireless Services:
Commercial Mobile Radio Service (CMRS) cellular,

mobile, and messaging services (fees based on number of subscribers or telephone number count): Regulatory fees must be paid for authorizations that were granted on or before October 1, 2025. The number of subscribers, units, or telephone numbers on December 31, 2025 will be used as the basis from which to calculate the fee payment. In instances where a permit or license is transferred or assigned after October 1, 2025, responsibility for payment rests with the holder of the permit or license as of the fee due date.

•
Wireless Services, Multi-year fees:
The first eight regulatory fee categories in the Commission's Schedule of Regulatory Fees (Table 4) (first seven in the Commission's Calculation of Fees (Table 3) pay “small multi-year wireless regulatory fees.” Entities pay these regulatory fees in advance for the entire amount period covered by the five-year or ten-year terms of their initial licenses and pay regulatory fees again only when the license is renewed, or a new license is obtained. The Commission includes these fee categories in its rulemaking to publicize its estimates of the number of “small multi-year wireless” licenses that will be renewed or newly obtained in FY 2026.

•
Multichannel Video Programming Distributor (MVPD) Services (cable television operators, Cable Television Relay Service (CARS) licensees, DBS, and IPTV):
Regulatory fees must be paid for the number of basic cable television subscribers as of December 31, 2025. Regulatory fees also must be paid for CARS licenses that were granted on or before October 1, 2025. In instances where a permit or license is transferred or assigned after October 1, 2025, responsibility for payment rests with the holder of the permit or license as of the fee due date. For providers of DBS service and IPTV-based MVPDs, regulatory fees should be paid based on a subscriber count on or about December 31, 2025. In instances where a permit or license is transferred or assigned after October 1, 2025, responsibility for payment rests with the holder of the permit or license as of the fee due date.

•
Space Services:
Regulatory fees must be paid for earth stations that were licensed (or authorized) on or before October 1, 2025. Regulatory fees must also be paid for geostationary orbit space stations (GSO) and non-geostationary orbit satellite systems (NGSO), and the two NGSO subcategories “Small Constellations ” and “Large Constellations,” that were authorized or granted U.S. market access on or before October 1, 2025. Licensees of small satellites and RPO, OOS, and OTV space stations that were authorized or granted U.S. market access on or before October 1, 2025 must also pay regulatory fees. In instances where a permit or license is transferred or assigned after October 1, 2025, responsibility for payment rests with the holder of the authorization as of the fee due date.

•
International Services
(
Submarine Cable Systems, Terrestrial and Satellite Services):
Regulatory fees for submarine cable systems are to be paid on a per cable landing license basis based on lit circuit capacity as of December 31, 2025. Regulatory fees for terrestrial and satellite IBCs are to be paid based on active (used or leased) international bearer circuits as of December 31, 2025, in any terrestrial or satellite transmission facility for the provision of service to an end user or resale carrier. When calculating the number of such active circuits, entities must include circuits used by themselves or their affiliates. For these purposes, “active circuits” include backup and redundant circuits as of December 31, 2025. Whether circuits are used specifically for voice or data is not relevant for purposes of determining that they are active circuits. In instances where a permit or license is transferred or assigned after October 1, 2025, responsibility for payment rests with the holder of the permit or license as of the fee due date.

67.
CMRS and Mobile Services Assessments.
The Commission will compile data from the Numbering Resource Utilization Forecast (NRUF) report that is based on “assigned” telephone number (subscriber) counts that have been adjusted for porting to net Type 0 ports (“in” and “out”). The Commission has included non-geographic numbers in the calculation of the number of subscribers for each CMRS provider in Table 3 and the CMRS regulatory fee factor proposed in Table 4. CMRS provider regulatory fees will be calculated and should be paid based on the inclusion of non-geographic numbers. CMRS providers can adjust the total number of subscribers, if needed. This information of telephone numbers (subscriber count) will be posted on CORES along with the carrier's Operating Company Numbers (OCNs).

68. A carrier wishing to revise its telephone number (subscriber) count can do so by accessing CORES and following the prompts to revise their telephone number counts. Any revisions to the telephone number counts should be accompanied by an explanation. The Commission will then review the revised count and supporting explanation, if any, and either approve or disapprove the submission in CORES. If the submission is disapproved, the Commission will contact the provider to afford the provider an opportunity to discuss its revised subscriber count and/or provide supporting documentation. If the Commission receives no response from the provider, or the Commission does not reverse its initial disapproval of the provider's revised count submission, the fee payment must be based on the number of subscribers listed initially in CORES. Once the timeframe for revision has passed, the telephone number counts are final and are the basis upon which CMRS regulatory fees are to be paid. Providers can view their final telephone counts online in CORES.

69. Because some carriers do not file the NRUF report, they may not see their telephone number counts in CORES. In these instances, the carriers should compute their fee payment using the standard methodology that is currently in place for CMRS Wireless services (
i.e.,
compute their telephone number counts as of December 31, 2025), and submit their fee payment accordingly. Whether a carrier reviews its telephone number counts in CORES or not, the Commission reserves the right to audit the number of telephone numbers for which regulatory fees are paid. If the Commission determines that a carrier paid CMRS or mobile services regulatory fees based on an incorrect number of telephone numbers, the Commission will bill the carrier for the difference between what was paid and what should have been paid.

Table 3—Calculation of FY 2026 Revenue Requirements and Pro-Rata Fees
[Regulatory fees for the first seven categories, identified with an *, are collected by the Commission in advance to cover the term of the license and are submitted at the time the application is filed]

Fee category

FY 2026
payment units

Years

FY 2025
revenue
estimate
($)

FY 2026
revenue
requirement
($)

Computed
FY 2026
regulatory
fee
($)

Rounded
FY 2026
regulatory
fee
($)

Expected
FY 2026
Rrevenue
($)

*PLMRS (Exclusive Use)
1,400
10
320,000
350,000
25
25
350,000

*PLMRS (Shared use)
23,000
10
2,600,000
2,300,000
10
10
2,300,000

*Microwave
11,000
10
2,600,000
2,750,000
25
25
2,750,000

*Marine (Ship)
7,400
10
1,080,000
1,110,000
15
15
1,110,000

*Aviation (Aircraft)
6,000
10
590,000
600,000
10
10
600,000

*Marine (Coast)
330
10
144,000
132,000
40
40
132,000

*Aviation (Ground)
400
10
76,000
80,000
20
20
80,000

AM Class A
1

60
1
266,220
281,748
4,696
4,695
281,700

AM Class B
1

1,330
1
3,316,680
3,508,878
2,638
2,640
3,511,200

AM Class C
1

780
1
1,184,400
1,253,782
1,607
1,605
1,251,900

AM Class D
1

1,375
1
3,921,960
4,152,783
3,020
3,020
4,152,500

FM Classes A, B1 & C3
1

3,105
1
8,273,900
8,748,274
2,817
2,815
8,740,575

FM Classes B, C, C0, C1 & C2
1

3,125
1
10,128,640
10,716,357
3,429
3,430
10,718,750

AM Construction Permits
2

1
1
570
585
585
585
585

FM Construction Permits
2

15
1
15,000
15,375
1,025
1,025
15,375

Digital Television
5
(including Satellite TV)

3.498 billion population
1
23,412,392
24,801,183
0.007090
0.007090
24,800,820

Digital TV Construction Permits
2

1
1
41,600
5,300
5,300
5,300
5,300

LPTV/Class A/Translators FM Trans/Boosters
6,300
1
1,512,500
1,606,598
255
255
1,606,500

CARS Stations
105
1
194,500
205,336
1,956
1,955
205,275

Cable TV Systems, including IPTV & DBS
42,600,000
1
64,680,000
68,212,762
1.6012
1.60
68,160,000

Interstate Telecommunication Service Providers
$20,800,000,000
1
112,750,000
114,431,448
0.005502
0.005500
114,400,000

Toll Free Numbers
40,000,000
1
3,900,000
3,931,916
0.098298
0.10
4,000,000

CMRS Mobile Services (Cellular/Public Mobile)
637,500,000
1
98,352,000
103,662,178
0.1626
0.163
103,912,500

CMRS Messaging Services
580,000
1
44,800
46,400
0.08
0.08
46,400

BRS/
3

1,230
1
919,600
978,625
796
800
984,000

LMDS
375
1
281,200
298,361
796
800
300,000

Per Gbps circuit Int'l Bearer Circuits
Terrestrial (Common & Non-Common) & Satellite (Common & Non-Common)

36,000
1
364,000
495,475
13.76
14
504,000

Submarine Cable Providers (See chart at bottom of Appendix B)
4

88
1
6,686,863
9,414,016
106,977
106,975
9,413,800

Earth Stations
3,270
1
8,240,000
9,708,659
2,969
2,970
9,711,900

Space Stations (Geostationary)
141
1
21,977,450
25,886,233
183,590
183,590
25,886,190

Space Stations (Non-Geostationary, Small Constellation)
23
1
8,628,220
10,153,028
441,436
441,435
10,153,005

Space Stations (Non-Geostationary, Large Constellation)
2
1
5,752,170
6,768,685
3,384,343
3,384,345
6,768,690

Space Stations (Non-Geostationary, Small Satellite)
23
1
271,260
334,014
14,522
14,520
333,960

* * ** * * Total Estimated Revenue to be Collected

391,734,169
416,940,000

417,186,925

* * ** * * Total Revenue Requirement

390,192,000
416,112,000

416,112,000

Difference

1,542,258
828,000

1,074,925

Notes on Table 3

1
The fee amounts listed in the column entitled “Rounded FY 2026 Reg. Fee” are the result of dividing the revenue requirement by the payment units of each radio class category. The actual FY 2026 regulatory fees for AM/FM radio station are listed on a grid located at the end of Table 4.

2
The AM and FM Construction Permit revenues and the full-power (VHF/UHF) Construction Permit revenues were adjusted, respectively, to set the regulatory fee to an amount no higher than the lowest licensed fee for that class of service based on the threshold 10,001-25,000, the traditional basis for identifying the lowest licensed fee. Reductions in the full-power (VHF/UHF) Construction Permit revenues, and in the AM and FM Construction Permit revenues, were offset by increases in the revenue totals for full-power television stations by market size, and in the AM and FM radio stations by class size and population served, respectively.

3
The MDS/MMDS category was renamed Broadband Radio Service (BRS).
See Amendment of Parts 1, 21, 73, 74 and 101 of the Commission's Rules to Facilitate the Provision of Fixed and Mobile Broadband Access, Educational and Other Advanced Services in the 2150-2162 and 2500-2690 MHz Bands,
Report & Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 19 FCC Rcd 14165, 14169, para. 6 (2004).

4
The chart at the end of Table 4 lists the submarine cable bearer circuit regulatory fees (common and non-common carrier basis) that resulted from the adoption of the
Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2008,
Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 24 FCC Rcd 6388 (2008) and
Assessment and Collection of Regulatory Fees for Fiscal Year 2008,
Second Report and Order, 24 FCC Rcd 4208 (2009). The Submarine Cable fee in Table 3 is a weighted average of the various fee payers in the chart at the end of Table 4.

5
The actual full-power television regulatory fees to be paid by call sign are identified in Table 8.

Table 4—FY 2026 Schedule of Regulatory Fees
[Regulatory fees for the first eight categories listed, identified with an *, are collected by the Commission in advance to cover the term of the license and are submitted at the time the application is filed]

Fee category

Annual
regulatory Fee
($)

*PLMRS (per license) (Exclusive Use) (47 CFR part 90)
25.

*Microwave (per license) (47 CFR part 101)
25.

*Marine (Ship) (per station) (47 CFR part 80)
15.

*Marine (Coast) (per license) (47 CFR part 80)
40.

*Rural Radio (47 CFR part 22) (previously listed under the Land Mobile category)
10.

*PLMRS (Shared Use) (per license) (47 CFR part 90)
10.

*Aviation (Aircraft) (per station) (47 CFR part 87)
10.

*Aviation (Ground) (per license) (47 CFR part 87)
20.

CMRS Mobile/Cellular Services (per unit) (47 CFR parts 20, 22, 24, 27, 80 and 90) (Includes Non-Geographic telephone numbers)
0.163.

CMRS Messaging Services (per unit) (47 CFR parts 20, 22, 24 and 90)
0.08.

Broadband Radio Service (formerly MMDS/MDS) (per license) (47 CFR part 27)
800.

Local Multipoint Distribution Service (per call sign) (47 CFR, part 101)
800.

AM Radio Construction Permits
585.

FM Radio Construction Permits
1,025.

AM and FM Broadcast Radio Station Fees
See Table Below.

Digital TV (47 CFR part 73) VHF and UHF Commercial Fee Factor

See Appendix F for fee amounts due, also available at
https://www.fcc.gov/licensing-databases/fees/regulatory-fees

0.007090.

Digital TV Construction Permits
5,300.

Low Power TV, Class A TV, TV/FM Translators & FM Boosters (47 CFR
part 74)

255.

CARS (47 CFR part 78)
1,955.

Cable Television Systems (per subscriber) (47 CFR part 76), Including IPTV and Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS)
1.60.

Interstate Telecommunication Service Providers (per revenue dollar)
0.0055.

Toll Free (per toll free subscriber) (47 CFR 52.101 (f) of the rules)
0.10.

Earth Stations: Transmit/Receive & Transmit only (per authorization or registration)
2,970.

Space Stations (per authorized station in geostationary orbit) (47 CFR part 25)
183,590.

Space Stations (per authorized system in non-geostationary orbit) (47 CFR part 25)—Small Constellation (fewer than 1000 authorized space stations)
441,435.

Space Stations (per authorized system in non-geostationary orbit) (47 CFR part 25)—Large Constellation (1000 or more authorized space stations)
3,384,345.

Space Stations (per license/call sign in non-geostationary orbit) (47 CFR part 25) (Small Satellite)
14,520.

International Bearer Circuits—Terrestrial/Satellites (per Gbps circuit)
14.

Submarine Cable Landing Licenses Fee (per cable system)
See Table Below.

FY 2026 Radio Station Regulatory Fees

Population
served

AM Class A
AM Class B
AM Class C
AM Class D

FM Classes
A, B1 & C3

FM Classes
B, C, C0, C1 & C2

<=10,000
$560
$405
$350
$385
$615
$700

10,001-25,000
935
675
585
645
1,025
1,170

25,001-75,000
1,405
1,015
880
970
1,540
1,755

75,001-150,000
2,105
1,520
1,315
1,450
2,305
2,635

150,001-500,000
3,160
2,280
1,975
2,180
3,465
3,955

500,001-1,200,000
4,730
3,415
2,960
3,265
5,185
5,920

1,200,001-3,000,000
7,105
5,130
4,445
4,900
7,790
8,890

3,000,001-6,000,000
10,650
7,690
6,665
7,345
11,675
13,325

>6,000,000
15,980
11,535
10,000
11,025
17,515
19,995

FY 2026 International Bearer Circuits—Submarine Cable Systems

Submarine cable systems
(capacity as of December 31, 2025)

Fee ratio

FY 2026
regulatory
fees

Less than 50 Gbps
0.0625 Units
$6,685

50 Gbps or greater, but less than 250 Gbps
0.125 Units
13,370

250 Gbps or greater, but less than 1,500 Gbps
0.25 Units
26,745

1,500 Gbps or greater, but less than 3,500 Gbps
0.5 Units
53,490

3,500 Gbps or greater, but less than 6,500 Gbps
1.0 Unit
106,975

6,500 Gbps or greater
2.0 Units
213,955

Table 5—Sources of Payment Unit Estimates for FY 2026

In order to calculate individual service fees for FY 2026, the Commission adjusted FY 2025 payment units for each service to more accurately reflect expected FY 2026 payment liabilities. The Commission obtained its updated estimates through a variety of means and sources. For example, the Commission used Commission licensee databases, actual prior year payment records, and industry and trade association projections, where available. The databases the Commission consulted include the Commission's Universal Licensing System (ULS), International Communications Filing System (ICFS), Licensing and Management System (LMS), and Cable Operations and Licensing System (COALS), as well as reports generated within the Commission such as the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau's
Numbering Resource Utilization Forecast.
Regulatory fee payment units are not all the same for all fee categories. For most fee categories, the term “units” reflect licenses or permits that have been issued, but for other fee categories, the term “units” reflect quantities such as subscribers, population counts, circuit counts, telephone numbers, and revenues. As more current data are received after the
NPRM
is released, the Commission sometimes adjusts the NPRM fee rates to reflect the new information in the
Report and Order.
This is intended to make sure that the fee rates in the
Report and Order
reflect more recent and accurate information. The Commission realizes that by adjusting the unit counts as more accurate information is received may adjust the fee rates for certain regulatory fee categories. Certain entities that collect the fees from customers in advance in order to pay the Commission, such as Cable and DBS companies, ITSP providers, Cell Phone and Toll-Free providers, may need to adjust their billings to customers as the Commission adjusts its fee rates. As a result, the Commission understands that these adjustments are necessary so that these regulatees can recover their fee obligations from their customers.

The Commission sought verification for these estimates from multiple sources and, in all cases, the Commission compared FY 2026 estimates with actual FY 2025 payment units to ensure that its revised estimates were reasonable. Where appropriate, the Commission adjusted and/or rounded its final estimates to take into consideration the fact that certain variables that impact on the number of payment units cannot yet be estimated with sufficient accuracy. These include an unknown number of waivers and/or exemptions that may occur in FY 2026 and the fact that, in many services, the number of actual licensees or station operators fluctuates over time due to economic, technical, or other reasons. When the Commission notes, for example, that its estimated FY 2026 payment units are based on FY 2025 actual payment units, it does not necessarily mean that the Commission's FY 2026 projection is exactly the same number as in FY 2025. The Commission has either rounded the FY 2026 number or adjusted it slightly to account for these variables.

Fee category
Sources of payment unit estimates

Land Mobile (All), Microwave, Marine (Ship & Coast), Aviation (Aircraft & Ground), Domestic Public Fixed
Based on Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (WTB) information as well as prior year payment information. Estimates have been adjusted to take into consideration the licensing of portions of these services.

CMRS Cellular/Mobile Services
Based on WTB projection reports, and FY 2025 payment data.

CMRS Messaging Services
Based on WTB reports, and FY 2025 payment data.

AM/FM Radio Stations
Based on downloaded LMS data, adjusted for exemptions, and actual FY 2025 payment units.

Digital TV Stations (Combined VHF/UHF units)
Based on LMS data, fee rate adjusted for exemptions, and population figures are calculated based on individual station parameters.

AM/FM/TV Construction Permits
Based on LMS data, adjusted for exemptions, and actual FY 2025 payment units.

LPTV, Translators and Boosters, Class A Television
Based on LMS data, adjusted for exemptions, and actual FY 2025 payment units.

BRS (formerly MDS/MMDS)
LMDS

Based on WTB reports and actual FY 2025 payment units.
Based on WTB reports and actual FY 2025 payment units.

Cable Television Relay Service (CARS) Stations
Based on cable trend data, data from the Media Bureau's COALS database, and actual FY 2025 payment units.

Cable Television System Subscribers, Including IPTV Subscribers
Based on publicly available data sources for estimated subscriber counts, trend information from past payment data, and actual FY 2025 payment units.

Interstate Telecommunication Service Providers
Based on FCC Form 499-A worksheets due in April 2026, and any data assistance provided by the Wireline Competition Bureau.

Earth Stations
Based on Space Bureau licensing data and actual FY 2025 payment units.

Space Stations (GSOs & NGSOs)
Based on Space Bureau data reports and actual FY 2025 payment units.

International Bearer Circuits
Based on assistance provided by the Office of International Affairs, any data submissions by licensees, adjusted as necessary, and actual FY 2025 payment units.

Submarine Cable Licenses
Based on Office of International Affairs license information, and actual FY 2025 payment units.

Table 6—Factors, Measurements, and Calculations That Determine Signal Contours and Associated Population Coverages

AM Stations

For stations with nondirectional daytime antennas, the theoretical radiation was used at all azimuths. For stations with directional daytime antennas, specific information on each day tower, including field ratio, phase, spacing, and orientation was retrieved, as well as the theoretical pattern root-mean-square of the radiation in all directions in the horizontal plane (RMS) figure (milliVolt per meter (mV/m) @1 km) for the antenna system. The standard, or augmented standard if pertinent, horizontal plane radiation pattern was calculated using techniques and methods specified in §§ 73.150 and 73.152 of the Commission's rules. Radiation values were calculated for each of 360 radials around the transmitter site. Next, estimated soil conductivity data was retrieved from a database representing the information in FCC Figure R3. Using the calculated horizontal radiation values, and the retrieved soil conductivity data, the

distance to the principal community (5 mV/m) contour was predicted for each of the 360 radials. The resulting distance to principal community contours were used to form a geographical polygon. Population counting was accomplished by determining which 2020 block centroids were contained in the polygon. (A block centroid is the center point of a small area containing population as computed by the U.S. Census Bureau.) The sum of the population figures for all enclosed blocks represents the total population for the predicted principal community coverage area.

FM Stations

The greater of the horizontal or vertical effective radiated power (ERP) (kW) and respective height above average terrain (HAAT) (m) combination was used. Where the antenna height above mean sea level (HAMSL) was available, it was used in lieu of the average HAAT figure to calculate specific HAAT figures for each of 360 radials under study. Any available directional pattern information was applied as well, to produce a radial-specific ERP figure. The HAAT and ERP figures were used in conjunction with the Field Strength (50-50) propagation curves specified in 47 CFR 73.313 of the Commission's rules to predict the distance to the principal community (70 dBu (decibel above 1 microVolt per meter) or 3.17 mV/m) contour for each of the 360 radials. The resulting distance to principal community contours were used to form a geographical polygon. Population counting was accomplished by determining which 2020 block centroids were contained in the polygon. The sum of the population figures for all enclosed blocks represents the total population for the predicted principal community coverage area.

Table 7—Space Station Satellite Charts for FY 2026 Regulatory Fees Space Stations (Geostationary Orbit): U.S.-Licensed Space Stations

Licensee
Call sign
Satellite name
Type

1.
Astranis Projects USA LLC
S3092
ARCTURUS
GSO.

2.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2632
DIRECTV D8
GSO.

3.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2640
DIRECTV D11
GSO.

4.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2641
DIRECTV D10
GSO.

5.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2669
DIRECTV D9S
GSO.

6.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2673
DIRECTV D5
GSO.

7.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2797
DIRECTV D12
GSO.

8.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2869
DIRECTV D14
GSO.

9.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S2930
DIRECTV D15
GSO.

10.
DIRECTV Enterprises, LLC
S3039
DIRECTV D16
GSO.

11.
DISH Operating L.L.C.
S2694
ECHOSTAR 10
GSO.

12.
DISH Operating L.L.C.
S2738
ECHOSTAR 11
GSO.

13.
DISH Operating L.L.C.
S2790
ECHOSTAR 14
GSO.

14.
DISH Operating L.L.C.
S2931
ECHOSTAR 18
GSO.

15.
EchoStar Satellite Operating Corporation
S2811
ECHOSTAR 15
GSO.

16.
EchoStar Satellite Operating Corporation
S2844
ECHOSTAR 16
GSO.

17.
EchoStar Satellite Services L.L.C.
S2179
ECHOSTAR 9
GSO.

18.
EchoStar BSS Corp
S3093
ECHOSTAR 23
GSO.

19.
ES 172 LLC
S2610
EUTELSAT 174A
GSO.

20.
ES 172 LLC
S3021
EUTELSAT 172B
GSO.

21.
Horizon-3 Satellite LLC
S2947
HORIZONS-3e
GSO.

22.
Hughes Network Systems, LLC
S2753
ECHOSTAR XVII
GSO.

23
Hughes Network Systems, LLC
S2834
ECHOSTAR 19
GSO.

24.
Hughes Network Systems, LLC
S3017
ECHOSTAR 24 (JUPITER 3)
GSO.

25.
Intelsat License LLC/Viasat, Inc.
S2160
GALAXY 28
GSO.

26.
Intelsat License LLC
S2381
GALAXY 3C
GSO.

27.
Intelsat License LLC
S2382
INTELSAT 10
GSO.

28.
Intelsat License LLC
S2386
GALAXY 13/Horizons 1
GSO.

29.
Intelsat License LLC
S2406
INTELSAT 902
GSO.

30.
Intelsat License LLC
S2408
INTELSAT 904
GSO.

31.
Intelsat License LLC
S2409
INTELSAT 905
GSO.

32.
Intelsat License LLC
S2410
INTELSAT 906
GSO.

33.
Intelsat License LLC
S2414
INTELSAT 10-02
GSO.

34.
Intelsat License LLC
S2423
HORIZONS 2
GSO.

35.
Intelsat License LLC
S2647
GALAXY 19
GSO.

36.
Intelsat License LLC
S2687
GALAXY 16
GSO.

37.
Intelsat License LLC
S2715
GALAXY 17
GSO.

38.
Intelsat License LLC
S2733
GALAXY 18
GSO.

39.
Intelsat License LLC
S2750
INTELSAT 16
GSO.

40.
Intelsat License LLC
S2751
INTELSAT 28
GSO.

41.
Intelsat License LLC
S2785
INTELSAT 14
GSO.

42.
Intelsat License LLC
S2804
INTELSAT 25
GSO.

43.
Intelsat License LLC
S2817
INTELSAT 18
GSO.

44.
Intelsat License LLC
S2831
INTELSAT 23
GSO.

45.
Intelsat License LLC
S2846
INTELSAT 22
GSO.

46.
Intelsat License LLC
S2847
INTELSAT 20
GSO.

47.
Intelsat License LLC
S2850
INTELSAT 19
GSO.

48.
Intelsat License LLC
S2863
INTELSAT 21
GSO.

49.
Intelsat License LLC
S2789
INTELSAT 15
GSO.

50.
Intelsat License LLC
S2814
INTELSAT 17
GSO.

51.
Intelsat License LLC
S2887
INTELSAT 30
GSO.

52.
Intelsat License LLC
S2915
INTELSAT 34
GSO.

53.
Intelsat License LLC
S2924
INTELSAT 31
GSO.

54.
Intelsat License LLC
S2948
INTELSAT 36
GSO.

55.
Intelsat License LLC
S2959
INTELSAT 35e
GSO.

56.
Intelsat License LLC
S2972
INTELSAT 37e
GSO.

57.
Intelsat License LLC
S3015
GALAXY 33
GSO.

58.
Intelsat License LLC
S3016
GALAXY 30
GSO.

59.
Intelsat License LLC
S3023
INTELSAT 39
GSO.

60.
Intelsat License LLC
S3066
INTELSAT 40e
GSO.

61.
Intelsat License LLC
S3076
GALAXY 31
GSO.

62.
Intelsat License LLC
S3078
GALAXY 32
GSO.

63.
Intelsat License LLC
S3083
GALAXY 34
GSO.

64.
Intelsat License LLC
S3143
GALAXY 35
GSO.

65.
Intelsat License LLC
S3148
GALAXY 36
GSO.

66.
Intelsat License LLC
S3164
GALAXY 37
GSO.

67.
Ligado Networks Subsidiary, LLC
S2358
SKYTERRA-1
GSO.

68.
Novavision Group, Inc.
S2861
DIRECTV KU-79W
GSO.

69.
Open Plaza Corp./DIRECTV Latin America, LLC
S2922
SKY-B1
GSO.

70.
Satellite CD Radio LLC
S2812
FM-6
GSO.

71.
SES Americom, Inc.
S2162
AMC-3
GSO.

72.
SES Americom, Inc.
S2180
AMC-15
GSO.

73.
SES Americom, Inc.
S2347
AMC-6
GSO.

74.
SES Americom, Inc.
S2415
NSS-10
GSO.

75.
SES Americom, Inc.
S2826
SES-2
GSO.

76.
SES Americom, Inc.
S2807
SES-1
GSO.

77.
SES Americom, Inc.
S2892
SES-3
GSO.

78.
SES Americom, Inc.
S3097
SES-19
GSO.

79.
SES Americom, Inc.
S3138
SES-22
GSO.

80.
SES Americom, Inc.
S3096
SES-18
GSO.

81.
SES Americom, Inc.
S3098
SES-20
GSO.

82.
SES Americom, Inc.
S3099
SES-21
GSO.

83.
Silkwave Africa, LLC
S3074
AsiaStar
GSO.

84.
Sirius XM Radio Inc.
S2710
FM-5
GSO.

85.
Sirius XM Radio Inc.
S3033
SXM-7
GSO.

86.
Sirius XM Radio Inc.
S3034
SXM-8
GSO.

87.
Sirius XM Radio Inc.
S3166
SXM-9
GSO.

88.
Sirius XM Radio Inc.
S3167
SXM-10
GSO.

89.
Skynet Satellite Corp.
S2933
TELSTAR 12V
GSO.

90.
Skynet Satellite Corporation
S2357
TELSTAR 11N
GSO.

91.
Telesat Canada
S2433
ANIK F4 (AMC-11)
GSO.

92.
Viasat, Inc.
S2747
VIASAT-1
GSO.

93.
Viasat, Inc.
S2917
VIASAT-3
GSO.

94.
Viasat, Inc.
S3050
VIASAT-89US
GSO.

95.
XM Radio LLC
S2786
XM-5
GSO.

Space Stations (Geostationary Orbit): Non-U.S.-Licensed Space Stations—Market Access Through Petition for Declaratory Ruling

Grantee
Call sign
Satellite name
Type

96.
Avanti Hylas 2 Lt.
S3130
HYLAS-4
GSO.

97.
DBSD Services Ltd
S2651
DBSD G1
GSO.

98.
Embratel TVSAT Telecomunicacoes S.A
S3142
Star One D2
GSO.

99.
Embratel TVSAT Telecomunicacoes S.A
S3192
Star One C4
GSO.

100.
Empresa Argentina de Soluciones Satelitales S.A
S2956
ARSAT-2
GSO.

101.
Embratel Tvsat Telecommunicacoes S.A
S2678
STAR ONE C2
GSO.

102.
Embratel Tvsat Telecommunicacoes S.A
S2845
STAR ONE C3
GSO.

103.
Eutelsat do Brasil Ltda
S3226
EUTELSAT 65 West A
GSO.

104.
Eutelsat S.A
S3055
EUTELSAT 139 WEST A
GSO.

105.
Eutelsat S.A
S3056
EUTELSAT 8 WEST B
GSO.

106.
Gamma Acquisition L.L.C
S2633
TerreStar 1
GSO.

107.
Hispamar Satélites, S.A
S2886
AMAZONAS-3
GSO.

108.
Hispamar Satélites, S.A
S3086
AMAZONAS NEXUS
GSO.

109.
Hispasat, S.A
S2969
HISPASAT 30W-6
GSO.

110.
Horizons-4 Satellite LLC
S3180
Horizon-4
GSO.

111.
Inmarsat PLC
S2932
Inmarsat-4 F3
GSO.

112.
Inmarsat PLC
S2949
Inmarsat-3 F5
GSO.

113.
Inmarsat PLC
S3205
Inmarsat 4-F2
GSO.

114.
New Skies Satellites B.V
S2756
NSS-9
GSO.

115.
New Skies Satellites B.V
S2828
SES-4
GSO.

116.
New Skies Satellites B.V
S2870
SES-6
GSO.

117.
New Skies Satellites B.V
S2950
SES-10
GSO.

118.
Satelites Mexicanos, S.A. de C.V
S2873
EUTELSAT 117 WEST A
GSO.

119.
Satelites Mexicanos, S.A. de C.V
S2926
EUTELSAT 117 WEST B
GSO.

120.
Satelites Mexicanos, S.A. de C.V
S2938
EUTELSAT 115 WEST B
GSO.

121.
SES Satellites (Gibraltar) Ltd
S2676
AMC 21
GSO.

122.
SES Satellites (Gibraltar) Ltd
S2951
SES-15
GSO.

123.
SES Americom, Inc
S2964
SES-11
GSO.

124.
SES Americom, Inc
S3037
NSS-11
GSO.

125.
SES DTH do Brasil Ltda
S2974
SES-14
GSO.

126.
SES-17 S.a.r.l
S3043
SES-17
GSO.

127.
Spacing Guild UK Limited
S3150
NuView Bravo
GSO.

128.
Spacing Guild UK Limited
S3151
NuView Alpha
GSO.

129.
Telesat Brasil Capacidade de Satelites Ltda
S2821
ESTRELA DO SUL 2
GSO.

130.
Telesat Canada
S2674
ANIK F1R
GSO.

131.
Telesat Canada
S2703
ANIK F3
GSO.

132.
Telesat Canada
S2472
ANIK F2
GSO.

133.
Telesat International Ltd
S2955
TELSTAR 19 VANTAGE
GSO.

134.
Viasat, Inc
S2902
VIASAT-2
GSO.

Space Stations (Geostationary Orbit): Non-U.S.-Licensed Space Stations—Market Access Through Earth Station Licenses

ITU or operator name
(if available)

Call sign
Common name
Type

135.
AUSSAT B 152E
M221170
OPTUS D2
GSO.

136.
Ciel Satellite Group
E050029
Ciel-2
GSO.

137.
Ciel Satellite Group
E140100
Ciel-6i
GSO.

138.
QuetzSat, S.de R.L. de C.V
E090020
Quetzsat-1
GSO.

139.
Eutelsat 65 West A
E160081
Eutelsat 65 West A
GSO.

140.
INMARSAT 5F2
E120072
INMARSAT 5F2
GSO.

141.
INMARSAT 5F3
E150028
INMARSAT 5F3
GSO.

142.
JCSAT-2B
M174163
JCSAT-2B
GSO.

143.
NIMIQ 5
E080107
NIMIQ 5
GSO.

144.
WILDBLUE-1
E040213
WILDBLUE-1
GSO.

145.
APT Satellite Holdings
M161190
APSTAR 6C
GSO.

146.
APT Satellite Holdings
M246190
APSTAR 6D
GSO.

Space Stations
[Per license/call sign in non-geostationary orbit]
[Small satellite]

Licensee/grantee
Call sign
Satellite name
Type

1.
Aethero Space Inc
S3189
Deimos
Small Satellite.

2.
Capella Space Corp
S3162
Acadia-1&2
Small Satellite.

3.
ICEYE US, Inc
S3082
ICEYE
Small Satellite.

4.
ICEYE US, Inc
S3165
ICEYE Second Tranche
Small Satellite.

5.
ICEYE US, Inc
S3224
ICEYE Third Tranche
Small Satellite.

6.
Impulse Space
S3194
Impulse-2
Small Satellite.

7.
Impulse Space
S3228
Impulse-3
Small Satellite.

8.
Loft Orbital Solutions Inc
S3072
YAM-3
Small Satellite.

9.
Loft Orbital Solutions Inc
S3147
YAM-5
Small Satellite.

10.
Loft Orbital Solutions, Inc
S3170
YAM-6
Small Satellite.

11.
Loft Orbital Solutions, Inc
S3184
YAM-7
Small Satellite.

12.
Loft Orbital Solutions, Inc
S3199
YAM-8
Small Satellite.

13.
Loft Orbital Solutions, Inc
S3227
YAM-9
Small Satellite.

14.
Lynk Global, Inc
S3087
Lynk Towers
Small Satellite.

15.
Space Logistics, LLC
S2990
Mission Extension Vehicle-1
RPO/OOS.

16.
Space Logistics, LLC
S3059
Mission Extension Vehicle-2
RPO/OOS.

17.
Space Sciences & Engineering LLC
S3153
GNOMES-4
Small Satellite.

18.
Space Sciences & Engineering LLC
S3185
GNOMES-5
Small Satellite.

19.
Turion Space Corp
S3146
DROID.001
Small Satellite.

20.
Turion Space Corp
S3198
DROID.002
Small Satellite.

21.
Umbra Lab Inc
S3095
Umbra SAR
Small Satellite.

22.
Umbra Lab Inc
S3168
Umbra Block Two SAR Constellation
Small Satellite.

23.
Umbra Lab Inc
S3186
Umbra Block 2.1 SAR Constellation
Small Satellite.

24.
Xona Space Systems, Inc
S3215
IOV
Small Satellite.

25.
XPLORE, Inc
S3193
XCUBE-1
Small Satellite.

Space Stations (Non-Geostationary Orbit)—Small Constellations

Licensee/grantee
Call sign
Satellite/system name

Authorized
stations

1.
Albedo Space Inc
S3208
Clarity-1
1

2.
AST & Science, LLC
S3065
Bluebird Block 1
5

3.
BlackSky Global, LLC
S3032
Global
16

4.
Capella Space Corp.
S3178
Acadia-3, Acadia-4, Acadia-5, Acadia-6
4

5.
Globalstar License LLC
S2115
GLOBALSTAR
96

6.
Hawkeye 360
S3042
HE360
174

7.
Iridium Constellation LLC
S2110
IRIDIUM
99

8.
Kepler Communications, Inc
S2981
KEPLER
140

9.
Kineis
S3054
KINEIS
25

10.
Loft Orbital Solutions, Inc
S3181
YAC-1
10

11.
Maxar License, Inc., DG Consents Sub, Inc
S2129/S2348
WorldView 1, 2 & 3, GeoEye-1, Worldview Legion
15

12.
Muon Space, Inc
S3173
MuSat-2, MuSat-3
2

13.
Myriota Pty. Ltd
S3047
MYRIOTA
26

14.
O3b Limited
S2935
O3b
42

15.
ORBCOMM License Corp
S2103
ORBCOMM
72

16.
Orbital Sidekick, Inc
S3139
GHOSt
6

17.
Planet Labs PBC
S2912/S3152
Flock/Skysats/Tanager 1/Tanager 2
578

18.
Pixxel Space Technologies, Inc
S3200
FLYY
3

19.
Sidus Space, Inc
S3175
LizzieSat-2, LizzieSat-3, LizzieSat-4, LizzieSat-5
4

20.
Sierra Nevada Company, LLC
S3214
Vindler Constellation
3

21.
Space Norway AS
S2978
ARCTIC SATELLITE BROADBAND MISSION
2

22.
Spire Global, Inc
S3213/S3045/S3182
LEMUR-4 & MINAS & HUBBLE
175

23.
Telesat LEO Inc
S2976
TELESAT Ku/Ka-Band
117

24.
The Tomorrow Companies, Inc
S3156
Tomorrow.io Weather Constellation
4

25.
WorldVu Satellites Ltd
S2963
ONEWEB Ku-/Ka-/V-BAND
716

Space Stations (Non-Geostationary)—Large Constellations

Licensee/grantee
Call sign

Satellite/
system name

Authorized
stations

1.
Kuiper Systems LLC
S3051
KUIPER
3,232

2.
Space Exploration Holdings, LLC
S2983/S3018/S2992/S3069/S3041
SPACEX/Ku-/Ka-/V-band/Gen 2/Swarm
19.408

Table 8—FY 2026 Full-Service Broadcast Television Stations By Call Sign

Facility Id
Call sign

Service area
population

Terrain-limited
population

Terrain-limited
fee amount
($)

3246
KAAH-TV
1,018,897
939,246
$6,659

18285
KAAL
605,222
580,564
4,116

11912
KAAS-TV
243,984
243,947
1,730

56528
KABB
3,017,860
3,000,477
21,273

282
KABC-TV
18,303,336
17,670,502
125,284

1236
KACV-TV
383,228
383,071
2,716

33261
KADN-TV
889,583
889,583
6,307

8263
KAEF-TV
139,510
124,133
880

2728
KAET
4,867,739
4,836,434
34,290

2767
KAFT
1,294,492
1,218,670
8,640

62442
KAID
864,547
857,276
6,078

4145
KAII-TV
203,698
179,435
1,272

67494
KAIL
2,091,288
2,061,175
14,614

13988
KAIT
594,090
583,749
4,139

40517
KAJB
393,654
393,355
2,789

65522
KAKE
821,488
816,811
5,791

804
KAKM
397,237
395,241
2,802

148
KAKW-DT
3,350,876
3,242,159
22,987

51598
KALB-TV
933,915
932,500
6,611

51241
KALO
1,018,088
971,631
6,889

40820
KAMC
411,973
411,949
2,921

8523
KAMR-TV
377,485
377,410
2,676

65301
KAMU-TV
395,784
392,044
2,780

2506
KAPP
337,194
298,159
2,114

3658
KARD
680,743
678,724
4,812

23079
KARE
4,243,145
4,234,439
30,022

33440
KARK-TV
1,243,813
1,230,366
8,723

37005
KARZ-TV
1,153,588
1,134,221
8,042

32311
KASA-TV
1,198,361
1,159,350
8,220

41212
KASN
1,200,705
1,185,725
8,407

7143
KASW
4,828,272
4,813,078
34,125

55049
KASY-TV
1,182,887
1,143,258
8,106

33471
KATC
1,376,057
1,376,057
9,756

13813
KATN
95,520
95,197
675

21649
KATU
3,400,708
3,238,560
22,961

33543
KATV
1,285,451
1,265,986
8,976

50182
KAUT-TV
1,826,857
1,825,132
12,940

21488
KAUU
398,876
396,486
2,811

6864
KAUZ-TV
366,943
365,162
2,589

73101
KAVU-TV
323,202
322,961
2,290

49579
KAWB
193,767
193,705
1,373

49578
KAWE
139,854
137,788
977

58684
KAYU-TV
925,282
861,276
6,106

29234
KAZA-TV
15,481,136
14,233,993
100,919

17433
KAZD
8,087,952
8,085,339
57,325

776273
KAZF
253,785
188,057
1,333

1151
KAZQ
1,137,703
1,126,947
7,990

776268
KAZS
396,796
390,474
2,768

35811
KAZT-TV
495,353
409,112
2,901

4148
KBAK-TV
1,626,532
1,363,867
9,670

16940
KBCA
465,218
465,157
3,298

53586
KBCB
1,510,168
1,478,647
10,484

22685
KBDI-TV
4,731,715
4,335,180
30,736

65395
KBFD-DT
1,016,508
887,671
6,294

169030
KBGS-TV
176,271
173,911
1,233

61068
KBHE-TV
153,390
144,914
1,027

48556
KBIM-TV
226,233
226,194
1,604

29108
KBIN-TV
1,014,918
1,013,041
7,182

33658
KBJR-TV
278,564
274,572
1,947

83306
KBLN-TV
322,286
145,745
1,033

63768
KBLR
2,280,730
2,220,879
15,746

53324
KBME-TV
146,149
146,082
1,036

10150
KBMT
799,217
798,262
5,660

22121
KBMY
142,682
142,622
1,011

49760
KBOI-TV
872,030
863,497
6,122

55370
KBRR
154,408
154,405
1,095

66414
KBSD-DT
151,986
151,901
1,077

66415
KBSH-DT
97,884
95,916
680

19593
KBSI
730,259
728,325
5,164

66416
KBSL-DT
47,462
46,328
328

4939
KBSV
1,535,281
1,424,913
10,103

62469
KBTC-TV
4,319,699
4,228,861
29,983

61214
KBTV-TV
771,692
771,692
5,471

6669
KBTX-TV
5,354,551
5,351,089
37,939

35909
KBVO
1,911,833
1,684,206
11,941

58618
KBVU
136,908
121,846
864

776229
KBWT
2,672
2,667
19

6823
KBYU-TV
2,838,181
2,620,447
18,579

33756
KBZK
153,764
141,054
1,000

21422
KCAL-TV
18,258,912
17,586,821
124,691

11265
KCAU-TV
769,096
754,352
5,348

14867
KCBA
3,334,176
2,557,080
18,130

27507
KCBD
426,315
426,302
3,022

9628
KCBS-TV
18,628,137
17,359,665
123,080

776213
KCBU
28,971
23,368
166

49750
KCBY-TV
92,825
77,624
550

33710
KCCI
1,216,146
1,209,219
8,573

9640
KCCW-TV
294,831
287,246
2,037

63158
KCDO-TV
3,305,368
3,160,730
22,410

62424
KCDT
807,726
762,258
5,404

83913
KCEB
446,377
445,850
3,161

57219
KCEC
4,497,531
4,237,580
30,044

10245
KCEN-TV
2,224,490
2,174,193
15,415

13058
KCET
17,868,933
16,310,676
115,643

18079
KCFW-TV
196,292
157,001
1,113

132606
KCGE
129,876
129,876
921

60793
KCHF
1,175,596
1,148,137
8,140

33722
KCIT
392,243
391,646
2,777

62468
KCKA
1,082,723
906,771
6,429

41969
KCLO-TV
150,949
145,392
1,031

47903
KCNC-TV
4,460,509
4,175,114
29,602

71586
KCNS
9,007,762
8,012,556
56,809

33742
KCOP-TV
18,134,022
17,318,605
122,789

19117
KCOS
1,092,982
1,092,792
7,748

63165
KCOY-TV
700,154
478,768
3,394

33894
KCPQ
5,131,164
4,985,829
35,350

53843
KCPT
2,690,171
2,688,808
19,064

33875
KCRA-TV
11,608,107
7,153,845
50,721

9719
KCRG-TV
1,143,055
1,130,704
8,017

60728
KCSD-TV
323,237
323,093
2,291

59494
KCSG
229,899
220,818
1,566

33749
KCTS-TV
4,848,434
4,778,758
33,881

41230
KCTV
2,732,197
2,730,443
19,359

58605
KCVU
700,745
689,702
4,890

10036
KCWC-DT
42,872
38,501
273

64444
KCWE
2,642,880
2,641,432
18,728

51502
KCWI-TV
1,152,163
1,151,070
8,161

42008
KCWO-TV
55,411
55,383
393

166511
KCWV
210,633
210,626
1,493

24316
KCWX
4,897,780
4,890,042
34,670

68713
KCWY-DT
85,085
84,715
601

22201
KDAF
7,951,276
7,949,040
56,359

33764
KDBC-TV
1,101,513
1,097,028
7,778

79258
KDCK
43,010
42,993
305

166332
KDCU-DT
773,823
773,808
5,486

38375
KDEN-TV
3,973,266
3,942,210
27,950

17037
KDFI
7,990,955
7,989,287
56,644

33770
KDFW
7,962,141
7,959,855
56,435

29102
KDIN-TV
1,193,740
1,189,191
8,431

25454
KDKA-TV
3,569,162
3,428,192
24,306

60740
KDKF
73,619
66,137
469

4691
KDLH
267,326
264,686
1,877

41975
KDLO-TV
214,001
213,796
1,516

55379
KDLT-TV
700,230
689,305
4,887

55375
KDLV-TV
98,101
97,673
693

25221
KDMD
394,250
391,278
2,774

78915
KDMI
1,248,443
1,247,337
8,844

56524
KDNL-TV
3,013,924
3,009,244
21,336

24518
KDOC-TV
18,264,021
17,379,123
123,218

1005
KDOR-TV
1,180,603
1,177,894
8,351

60736
KDRV
551,809
469,537
3,329

61064
KDSD-TV
65,355
60,171
427

53329
KDSE
52,777
51,188
363

56527
KDSM-TV
1,202,702
1,201,866
8,521

49326
KDTN
7,901,133
7,898,922
56,003

83491
KDTP
25,965
23,729
168

33778
KDTV-DT
8,697,794
7,750,134
54,948

67910
KDTX-TV
7,985,188
7,983,676
56,604

126
KDVR
4,301,541
4,144,268
29,383

18084
KECI-TV
228,161
210,560
1,493

51208
KECY-TV
407,175
403,848
2,863

791767
KEDB
105,050
97,963
695

791702
KEDS
2,594,159
2,593,835
18,390

58408
KEDT
527,343
527,343
3,739

55435
KEET
181,333
161,389
1,144

41983
KELO-TV
767,130
715,437
5,072

34440
KEMO-TV
9,007,762
8,012,556
56,809

776162
KEMS
55,920
54,847
389

2777
KEMV
634,060
576,758
4,089

26304
KENS
3,091,086
3,077,749
21,821

63845
KENV-DT
52,294
45,932
326

18338
KENW
85,762
85,762
608

50591
KEPB-TV
680,317
618,277
4,384

56029
KEPR-TV
529,602
519,486
3,683

49324
KERA-TV
7,984,381
7,981,440
56,588

40878
KERO-TV
1,387,245
1,257,683
8,917

61067
KESD-TV
172,302
165,214
1,171

25577
KESQ-TV
1,487,393
615,803
4,366

50205
KETA-TV
1,874,445
1,860,161
13,189

62182
KETC
2,945,200
2,942,622
20,863

37101
KETD
3,918,776
3,879,692
27,507

2768
KETG
421,357
403,179
2,859

12895
KETH-TV
7,293,196
7,293,115
51,708

55643
KETK-TV
1,072,485
1,071,097
7,594

2770
KETS
1,209,518
1,191,713
8,449

53903
KETV
1,491,674
1,486,408
10,539

92872
KETZ
505,102
502,310
3,561

68853
KEYC-TV
553,554
539,853
3,828

33691
KEYE-TV
3,533,479
3,444,549
24,422

60637
KEYT-TV
1,466,777
1,275,243
9,041

83715
KEYU
366,142
366,071
2,595

34406
KEZI
1,221,893
1,166,907
8,273

73701
KFAA-TV
7,987,157
7,983,918
56,606

34412
KFBB-TV
96,782
95,488
677

125
KFCT
967,548
960,099
6,807

51466
KFDA-TV
394,744
393,695
2,791

22589
KFDM
770,621
770,609
5,464

48521
KFDR
672,350
657,307
4,660

65370
KFDX-TV
367,320
366,583
2,599

49264
KFFV
4,674,758
4,634,964
32,862

12729
KFFX-TV
467,787
463,006
3,283

83992
KFJX
709,125
679,797
4,820

42122
KFMB-TV
4,239,135
3,914,207
27,752

53321
KFME
442,176
441,664
3,131

74256
KFNB
84,543
83,990
595

21613
KFNE
53,059
52,392
371

21612
KFNR
9,724
9,457
67

66222
KFOR-TV
1,813,323
1,811,723
12,845

33716
KFOX-TV
1,107,424
1,097,251
7,780

41517
KFPH-DT
385,474
313,720
2,224

81509
KFPX-TV
1,072,290
1,072,222
7,602

31597
KFQX
197,918
173,495
1,230

59013
KFRE-TV
1,8

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A2026-18778. Public record. Not legal advice.